The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutReport 1, ! ~ sr >, i ~-~ ~ ~ 2!F i C r-"'m 0." ..... '1;<;1 Q !;;~ I ~ h. \ V Y I I I 10 I I "I '" "I "I ~, ;,,1 ml ,£1 ;1 ~I cOl.! I I I . , .~ I l .. __ g : i ~ := ~~ q P Oil; .. I i!! c '" !" .I I I I I I / I I '--------~--------------- '!rJ rn I i1 J f I I I ~~~~i~~~:J iii 0"1 ~ ~>~ ~I ~ mzz b~> ~ ~ ~~i I " • zZm -4 =I 1 I . , I .1 L,i I 1 .'C, ( 11' 'I~ • lilllf!C "'lIt; P ( I 2" I c> f" 1735wes11 ..... _flQl\h, ."~. 200 . ..,oItIe . .w98100 2OO_:)651n~ I ...... g'''Jpard1 com t1 grouparchitect r ..... ..... / / / ~n, 0' 5: ~~ n'll ,. ... ~~ .. ~ ~ J z , i ( , , i 1 , ~ ~ ~ " ! E ,- ! .. p i! ~>, ~ ~~~ (! :; ~~ ~ ! ~ ~Z~ I z a ,. ;z o ~)Io ~ ! i!! ~ ilC~ " I m~8 . " .rn !i=lm I Itlhet i~II' I [] -~, i~ : 1 : 1 : I : 1 i 1 , I~ ~ >: m rn I~ I'" 1 !!I ---ci..-lJI. ~ _----"-1! 1 1 0; 1 ---W'lII,1 _~~"I ---LJ'11 1 --H>~111 1 1735wes11ak8"""""&north,"LRto 200 "aHle, ... 98109 206.3651m I ww...grl>JparcI'J.com grouparchitect r-.... N 1 • • • • • .......•.........•........... <I 1'1 'I ~a ~'i' I, '! ---------------1' , Ii I ! ! ! ! " . --; Ii I ;! -----I; i il " j , ! ~ , I ;!!Iiil , ill" II! i I •••• 1 i 1n5_ke IM!IIUI! ruth.iUilt200, oeuIIIe, ... 98109 206.365.1230 I _,~.com fl grouparchitect f /; ~ " 11 ( 1/ ) / . / " .. ' 1 'z. -. " ., , ~. ' ... " , " ! 1 j / , ! "'''"nn • ! Ii! ~! » > ~Q~ii~ i ! ,.- ! ,,-U! z .... ~;;1 "" ! ! 0 z~ 2i! I ! c 0 I '" ~ '" !! r r Ii; 51 !I c " ,I' II " ~ U .~ ~ m ~ ,z ~ I! I ! I tl, I I' ~ c "'tI >!i '" ~"" "I "" ,.-,"zz 5~> ! "tIo2!2 ;0:<=8 ~:::cl"l"l -<~ ------ / f \ 1735 wesIIake ovenue nc<th, atit<t 200. oea1IIe, WI Bl!100 206.365.1230 I _.groopardloom il grouparchitect SW 1/4 SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 2J N, RANGE 5 £, w'M. AVANARIDGE ',-- .-----------'--.. _. -'-, ~::'C~C~~~~~;i~~' '~ LECENO "" ~ I ,.",';;1","'" __ 0 ""'''' ,.....r" ~'N '}u'" "·f ... "",,,,,,,' . ..-.. ,,, ., ~ 'I'~ .,.".", ,- '. J ..... ,,,-, "" ---,", ".,,_. iIIIlIlJ ,...,.,.,," "",-" . .lL ....... . , I)"" c.o ," ......... 0.,._. , ... "", 811 _'-'r ............... c..- (O....,.~_ ~~,---:"'-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~<'",,~ , .... D_R. STRONG '.....:, '~ CONSULTING ENGINEERS "",,~,-,--... ...., 0 ...... ''''''' ..... ., ... , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~l / / / ~ / ~ """ I ",Tk"'-";=-EK 12:.~~:-1 '>;"""", _ • .'.~-~;*":m ~ M~= '-'co: '--.., / ~ -J" J I-~~-j L __ _ IL " , .' -·ti"" ;~--!~t~;L L '/ 'I __ ~ M ,~t/' ",1'",' .. ,~ ;1 ~I COl ' _i'-"""'~" I / , / @ NORTH (;I>.o.I'HIC'LAlt I" [', ',H I-.'f-i'-J!():'l , ' .' , IIfClNlTY MAP PRMCT INFQRUA nON: ""'" '"~''''' ~ ' ... .,,, ,r.""",,,,,_,~ , ... ""'''' "'""",., -~.I."....,..."""."','-.0',."" .,,, •• ",,','1 "''''''('''''''''''! " I""'" ,,,",'. ....., ... ,,~,~""""''' "-,-",,r ...,....., ... ""''''''<> ",''''''J <"'<M" ~/~,', ',',_1,;'.;'" PROJECT CONTACTS: """''''''''' / 0_' ::.";'t"',.-M:;. ... ,,:, 1;,-" ~'" '''' "'=~''"'--">'"""~,"",,, . f3f~;'-i/;.,,,~~::, .. ,,,,, c, .. ,,,, r"_""'~"·,~,~,·." ,~ •. ,'jJ ..... ..... ~ .... '"',""""',""" {m)."".J.:O} ,"~ • .cl ".1> ,,,"1<£,, .. ,. "'.-c("'N""".) .. ~Cc'" :~E:~~,~::;"'"' '" ~~},~~,=,;:' < ,.""",,,,,,,,,', '7)> .. ,,', .. ,,' ".,,'" , ... '" >,', "'" · .. "H, ....... ''!,,, .. ,.,. ,,,,-.., """.,." ... ,,,,,,, ',",i<~" U",. .. 0"""' ..... 'O ...... """"'"''-''."'.~ ,,~.,' """ "f,,' ''''", <,,,-~IC "M'L' r.o~"""'9.,,,,, ,:'-:<;;"""0>-."""" CO"",," """""'-'.""~ ,-.. "'....",'-"' .... ,.,., BASIS OF BEAf?lNGS; .... ,,',u·, ",.".,"~~" ,'" .",,,, ,,''''''''''''-W-y",-" ''','' " ''''"' , ... ,,,,J""",,." l-£R77CAL OAlIJirI BENCHMARK; '"l'''''"'''''JdIO>''''''''''''' .... "'·".""'-"'n:_,,',..'''''-I/_'~ •• ''n'''''' ,,_, ...... "" OL" '.oc""",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,',,>,,.,.-,,. tICAL D£SCRIP77ON: ")!,,, ""'" ,,"""'if 'm"", ."",ot """.'· ... "'0 'u. "" ~,-,r.~h"'~~~;r:.~~;,,'i:',:.,""""#R<· .... ~·' "" SHEET INDEX, ~~ !f~ ~3~t£: .. ,·· I AI/ANA RIDGE: PUD COV£RSHEET &. SITE PLAN lZ.2i.l~ .. , .. "-,""-,<.,,,;.,,.0,_ P",.,,,,,, x x x x I x, x x w " SW 1/4 SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 23 N, RANGE 5 £, AVANARIDGE I * K(M, ------, E! I" -'-,_'_R d7;rkip'-~~~~#.1 -=-~-I I I ;:'~ ..• }«* --X );!(Q(_~. ~ ------,': ~ , ~ ~~ ~ --x::: ~--. --'t >'1'. "'"x ><;';" .~. I) ))ii )8()8( '-I :.;,; \ ........... '%" \ ( .-;-, ~ -J I / " 2 " > " '" / ~ ~ ::s:../;-><~, )8( ";~~~< ~ v, >< ,I "X)()(, ,." ' I --_. X" I I 'I ' ~:"l.!:_~II~lll~illl~IIII~',~~ / / ~ ~ TESC LEGEND ."."".-r.",._,. & """" ~"",.,," """""""""."",,,0 ''"'" ){. X """,O .... ~e"" (".-:; (:) :~~::' "t ... :::::::! '~;J "_~_"" co ""'--.'< "" • ,~"." '.<.h<" .. ...,."' .... ·.~i 45 o ~~ .C,"'''':;,:::;-,'· TREE RETENTION CIILCiJLAnONS 'e'''' """ '''', ",,,.~~ ... ".,,,,", .. ,, " . ., "'n ~ ",'~, '.-oM, ';';;;::-'~,;':'-;:; ',;::;,' J~"-:':~-~1:'" '7;;::' ::: :i:::;::," ~~~~~", c .. , '':~'D''-;Bo;;'-;;';;Ob 611 ..-..-",_Loo_"""' .. (O,lIT,NJ,oo. ... 1.l '" :1' (i)","" e " ~ ~'" ~~',r --""'<,;, ~ ~ ~ ~ "'II f1'II'X J~ --.. ~~#\ ~I )8(-~,~, ""f<1I', " (i, , I I , N --)i!\J X -)8( ,-"""\ "1'1'\lj·)l( / \\ .. I 111/ ", 'I ,1"j~ -l%~1)!: I * " X.' ... - - -. ""t' l!:".' -,'<:c ". '~" J ,_ "',iJj'C'f V, ~ " ! I jC-' "',.-,DO-".-.-, -." '." 'I . .._, __ "_I ~f . '" \ "" "' .. n';.i;b~" ."! '. . '~L, i ,. ~I" Cl,! '~0;Y-/ A~\9-)$)"::;)!·· \~~i);/~~~1~)) I~#,L\ S;~fr-./ ~ ~ ,·h ~ i' ••• r, II",!" I".",',;", i 0 fl" i, '_.' . "-."'"'-' ,.,e" .. ,IJ).' 'i~, '};:;.\. ; l~"J.:k'\l:, PI : ,t1,~ I> \{~,(.(_:,!. t. e". 'S~.', • / "" L '1-'"-'\. ""~-"",,,, J>v,X.",.!~,_, W,'U 01"'i);,'~W --)CFJ'c '-K )(, "",,' _~,~ ,h ',' 1 "'<i"-;');'.,))"" .••..• /1 \~~".)8( ~:':;~;;;f'i., . ' ;'<A'1!j '19, " \ '" ~J<Xy'ij<-:t:~\""',,/ ' .:. ;'"'1":,:,~-\., /)8( , ~;t9 / ,7"- ·':7(/,.r;, x" )8( ,~ ./ ~. ""'~ '-7~ --....... /(;>~ , "'q,. ~. ""~ ~, )8( ~'f~){)8( x.. »(, /--; J .. ' '~-:i( . »( .2$: '" ' ~<. ~-.' ",)8(. ,j."", "\X --' . A-~-' ", ...... ' ."'\7;'0:> "'-'} .~ .• ':~\oI{..b.::~" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ / ~ ~-AVANA RIDGE PUD ! / @ NORTH """""'"C$(.O.L< ;.~._u~ IVIII.IS DR STRONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS ~ ~ CI ~ T ,JF "21-1-1 I U!·~ lREE RElENTION oS lAND ClEARING PlAN -p'·,o' .",,-~. '",no.'>',O'" ,,,,', CO," c'll_j, ..,,,, ........ --, ... ..,., ~ ..... ,-,-.""" w " o " « z '" « ~ PREUMmARY SJ'Tf: vtXUJ.I£,CAIC/NAPON5 CIII""""" 10"",,, ""'0,, "-,,,,, ..... (','''''1 "I' "'-,.." '" "' .. (W ... ~ AM) "" "D~"'O 'Of' 1"-1'11'''''''' i'YRPt'-<' IN" ",,,,,,,,,-r "~'" "".", m ,,,'""" ""."'.<. ""- ~E~::€?~:;~;~:;:;; ;:.;;:." GfNfR,IlI NQ!E 9'" .". :~::;: ;; ,I.'::: :';:,"1 , ••• < ""I>"" '" ,,~,_, ff"'~r, s ..... '" "'-_~" "".,.-:~',;' "M" ,..v """ "' "'~O",,~, ...-=lrr:."",,,, lEGEND = sw ------------' ---- SE 172NO STREET ~., "-, ,:;---1'\ CONS8i1i:a~INEERS SECTION 29. TOWNSHIP 23 N. RANGE 5 C, w.M. -l AVANARIDGE / "- "- '-', '-" "- "-, I l--------~ ---...'>;) ~,.f'~r :-.r·J·--::\~ -'-. .L ---------- AVANA RIDGE PUO CONCEPTUAl GRADING PLAN ~s PRo..ECT MO. 15068 @ NORTH """"H,C<O", " . w " o & <t Z " <t ~ ~ ---- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ SE 172ND STREET Ih -' ".~ T"----.--.~~.--~~.- ~ ~ ~ "'" "'-..... "'{s "'-I:(s.«:;; , <-oq. ~ %~ '~., DR. STRONG CONSUL TING ENGINEERS '~ ~ EAST BUILDING ~ ~ ~ ',',-. IS\ \ ~\. ~ / (XI 1 1-.'I-I',I';r·1 ""'-'/0-,',". ""0'" "," e,.,_, ,rf/ f~~' / ---I / / / I I / / . , .1/ / / / / / @ , / NORTH AVANA RIDGE PUD tRAlNAGE CONTROL PI..MI NO, 15068 I SW 1/4 SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 23 N. RANGE 5 E, W.M. x x x x , x ~, AVANARIDGE -- ~I, ---~ 71~' __ i=,_:::'i TREET ---'. -'-:'""-:-,-!'-~-___ " _ . ___ ,_-,~ -'\ -,'-_ ... ..L __ !,-J __ , ,~> ~"""70 t"'-'r'-'-, 'L_ ~-Ji22?¥+~-t '-, "' '" o 0' <{ I', z '" > <{ ". '-, ". J:L ____ , __ _ C .. '_Do,. ........ '''''"10 811 _"",",.,..,....,L--...""""'" 1I> .... ,>o,'"'-wl.) ~ ~ ~ (1)"\'.,' J~' , ~ -', --- ~ ~ ~ ~ ''-, D.R STRONG CONSI.JI. TING ENGINEERS ..,.,.....""""", .. -..-.- "'n~ .......... __ ......... ""'-_ .... ",..., I ""~ ~,'~~, ~,,%~ ", ~ '-, ~ ",~ EAST BUILDING / ~ ~ ~ ~ '~c.: ~-'ClIC L_rr '--.., \\ . " ----------- \ I, , -----7 / I / / / '1/ ,/ , i J ' .... / / '~-""""'-'"\:'''' I' , I " ~', '"7' ,p"" i 1tI;,.:;rii~4r~~~~-·~.:.------'-------·" '--:>----:--j' ... q,,'<;;JiJt .... ~~r::io"mtJRJ;,,') ,,', /v _\: \ --~ \ \ ) ./-- ( 1,'1> // '/~. /,/,.-,,., /' / " / 1/£/ /Y / --.. ;:---/-,-" / / @ / / NORTH -",,l,e_ ~-,~':;:"..;f,."",., ;R I_f i ()j-j AVANA RIDGE PUD GENER.AJ..lZED UTlUTY PlAN lZ-ZII1~ I :.:~t.3i. 1 ® , ! , , .(..4.Q90. REfUSE AND RECYCLING STANDARDS ... ' .. " ....... """'_ .. ", ~t.F£~~§'=:;:.;:="!;=JEr~;-","''''",.-..... :i'.t!\H~!E===:::E.@,5:~!:F!,.:.::L .,,,,,,,.,=,,,,,,,,,,, .. _,,,,,. ~:;:~~:':.';,':'!~'*'~="" _'''='''''"'' __ <>:~==':''~<'''''''.'lD MATERIALS SCHEDULE [';;rr::::.t'~"'j~:':=-o-. I, ..... .:..;:~:;:';:::, •• ,> __ : SOLID WASTEIRECYClABLE REQUIREMENTS ''''''''"",,, ..... ,--"""""'" """.,,--",,,'.,,,,,.-. .. ""' ..... _, lIm'U '."" "'c:IIJ' .... ,,_. I'_~J . .. ------------- , If_' // f " \fflOiiioffl-1' .. -+-c"') i JrrfTf II iT' r 'r"7;"-;;;;'- " II .,"" .. ....... ~"""--J j" : " I ,. I " I " I " I ,. I REfUSElRECYCLE ENet OSUR[ _ WESULE't _ ITl SOH1I4'.qr ~ R£f!.lSfJRfCVCLE ENCLOSURE· SOUJH [LEV Ql OCPU ''''.1'-11' "'''. ~.~k'(C_lUIi::LOSURE.I'LAtL ____ +_"'~-_j I i ~ " I " . . _J ~ ~ REFUSFlRFCYC! F FNCLOSUR[ _ fASUlEV r -3l 5C.OJ.~IJ<·_"-O' ~ ~I;FVSImfCYCLE ENCLOSURE· NORTH FlEV ZJ sc.ou' ,w.,'-II' ~ ~~l~~_l_QSURU.EY PLAN --~---ffi "" .. "-"."''''.'' -,,, .... _------------ ~ i it H , ! ~ i; ,~ j; j 8 ~=,,------ ...... u QJ ...... .J:: u "-ro D. :::J o '- br raJ AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBA~ DEVELOPMENT 11)616SE172nd STREET, RENTOO. WA -, AVANA RIDGE, Ll "'-'-' .... ,."'..-l_., ,""'" .......... -'","" REFUSEIRECYCL ENCLOSURE DETAILS "'" f\ANN[DUReMU'i"lUIlI'IIIIl1 AO.08 I~ ,---- I I ---. ----'l i (~) ~ ~~; ~ __ J''! _ .... __ _ .!!: _. ___ ~----9J-_<--'!-,! KEYNOTES rc"\ \.'/ eO ---+--L!1'r-----f-4- LEVEL 1 AREA SUI.IMRY f .. ":!., • .d "".-1 y~ § ~j(?) ".~ I .'-.... -+""$- ~~~-~'U'-[~__<__-~, BUllDWG ENVELOPE NOTES ,""""' .... " .. "'._........,'11 •• "'.''''' u .. ,",.,,_ ;;""':i""":''''''"''''''''"''''''-- '_'--""..0<,"""""",,,, '--'''' ......... '''''''''''NWC ........ ... ,,- .",,,_,00''''''''",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, .. -"', ..... , .. ,,"''''''''''''-' ''''.,-''''''........,,,-'''''''''''' <O>< .... '!OI""III.""'''''''''' =""""" ..... ~,."" ... """ . ...""..,"""..-"""" .... , .. ,"'" ""''''"'''''''''''''"'''''''''''''''''rn.;o. ..."" ... ""' ...... ".,"'- f51 (E) (r) o I (.) _~ .. _. __ ~ I ® iJ I 0 ~@ ~~I fLOOR PLAN GENERAL NOlES .,,,,-~-,,,-.. -,,,,,, ... I! fhTIITI ..... -.vtU,.,.,.",,"''''' ........... ..-.... _-""--"' .. ",,'" ,.. .. , ... -- !T"'_~*_Tll ____ ""-'''' ........ """" __ """ ... """_ ,,,,,, .. rrooo-"_"""""'O''''':.'''''''''' .... -..... , "'''''',,...--..... ,",_..-"" ....... """' ..................... ,"'._ .... , _"' .......... -..' .. 1IIOLHT ... .--... """"""' __ .. _'00 ,""""" ... -... ,~-.", .... -" ,,,,,,--... ,,,,, ...... _......,.,-,- """-''''''' .. ,'-'''''''' ...... '''-~.'."""".~"""."IT_"""O&J:& ,""""'~<I ... ,-.,,"'.""''' ..... n.''......, ............... ,""" .. ~ ... ' .. ~ '--""'"""'-''''''''''''''--''''' ...... _''''''"'''''''''''"'''' ... '''', ..... =~~:::E:+:;:B::~'" '''''---...,. .... ,-'''''''''''''''''' ""'_'0' ......... _'"'''' ._"' ..... _0" .. _'..,""00 ......... ' "--..LKHII:It'''''''''' ..... .".",.,'O_ PLANLEGEtfl ~} ~ .. ·~I (~ ,-"-"--, , \--.-.--~-i If "' .......... "'-~,~. !m:C[1\I( WAfEl<'SPRItI\lH: S1Ml~ --- ,~--'7 '-I ~I,~) II . . r ~ " -. 'J J;;;. @D @)\ b' c-.__ ',"" ,'. -----;tl:::--~t~r'-L' ~"";ITf'!":" ~'" CORIIII)I)l $-""-~ L.;U H' ~ '''/ --. ------.-----. l@ r--~ / I~ 1111~.J '----' 1/'11": -'~ ----+, (> ,'" _"""oo~, "~1"0"l/ ,,,,,~, ~ ;1 ' '.Y _ ! f.l$S . : 0 0 ... i "TeTT ~ ~ ~ i ., L, I[J,J,:~:'~ .. 1 '. , -I .J L ~~T1AI~!,Lf'NG . lEVU J FLOOR PLAN CD .... ,",., .,,"' ,-= ......... ---- ~! ....... u ~i QJ i~ ....... ~! ..c .- U 'e g L-,0 I'll !~ Cl. t :::J ~ 0 "- btl ral AVANA RIDGE ~s; PLANNED URBAN I DEVELOPMENT . (3) 1(l616 SE 17200 STREET, RENTON, WA \ (41 9005' , "'/ -t-t9 I 1 '5) AVANA RIDGE, lL! .j ", \.j • ';-(61 ------- , ~ i .. ..., ..... ""''''' ..... ' ,.,..,,, '1 _ ...... , , ... ~" j") 0 ~ (9) @ WEST BUilDING -lEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN "'" ........w ........ ,.,,'U"""'''' A2.01-W KEYNOTES CE) I~ (!) c~> e§ ~ ..... ,_'lU'~-+ __ '" ~Lr ~! ~." I ~(0 I :D (,~ 0 l-/~) 0' e;- I 71 :i 0-) g, .tA , . [jIJ :: :~ -' ...... " / Q) ,~l ,I~)(~ , Ii~ Ii--C'~' I I > '" ....... LJ" + •• ,. " j l 0 .. . ". ",. ---_.------ _"""">0"'"''''',,,-,,,,,''' l,"",,"'~""'" LEVEL 2 AREA SUWMRY F.-:::.:! ~~". BtJILDWG ENVELOPE HOTES 1 ....... _ .. l ... _"""""".I~"""'_ ....... """-.. ' __ TJIO""'''''''''''''''''''-OO- ==ri!:l~~:;~'::::..., ''''''_''''1'''''''''_''''",,"_ ""'''''''''W_""" '~EII_,,,,.,...,., __ ,, -.. "''''''''''' .. '.'' .... ...., ''''''''''-'",,',''''-'''''''1'''''''''''''' ~ ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''-=........, .... ",.'"'_ ... " ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,-,,,,,-,.,,,,,,, '"''''"''''J<aII'TA''''''''''''''''",",''''''' "-""".., .. , ....... ,,,,,- "r § (c~(o) IoSi '-~ CD (F) -Ll"" ---f ''1--".E. ~·l.J.W __ .. ,,'" 0 , 0 0 :~ ., .. ~ I ... . -i, i l,\.. J;J ! ,~ *",."'. [TIl i\j [:J ""1:':Ji , , .~1, :~ 0 , 'f'0 " j 0 I _,~' H" .. ..J L fLOOR PlAN GENERAL NOTES ' ... _ •.. " .. ,,, .. _"'."",, ... ,, .... , ..... , ...... _'" __ ."""'1''''''''''''''''''' -""--""-"'" ...... ",,~ """"""'--, ... _."', ........... ....,..,_00<,"', .,.,...."',""-_ ........... ,--~ t:~if¥~~;!!fE~~ .-, .. "'-"..-~ .... """"'-,,., :~=.~:,~~:~:::: :='~,::~:;:""'w:.;;:'''(f ... - '''''''''''-''I_~~'''_TQ'· "'''''''~''''-..... ~ ... '''',....,. ""'''''"''10 ........... ''''''''''''' ... ,_"' .. "'"." .... "'-ua<,'''''"'"'O''''_~lJ.·_''''' ~...:;,:..-r<" .. h"'-"'_' ::;:~==:"""Tao:T"'''''''''''' '''''''''''''' ...... '''''''''''' ..... '.''..:Dor''' ........ ' ;::~'='''--'' ..... _''..- " " {·i't I - 1;;, 1:7 I, " "' , . i~ " . IF-61 u ------ ~PlANlfGEND .~ ;:::::::: I ""',", .. "'-, i (0\ '--=~ [I ~~ , 2 ',..' (?) (41 'C/ : 1 (5) (6) ,OJ (7) I "; ! ffi J-" ( 9 :t , @ ~iT~'W~-~~-NG lEVEL 2 fLOOR PLAN ED l'! it !~ ~ ! .- 'i'l ,~ ,. !~ i s ..... U QJ ..... ..c u l.-ra D. ::J o '- bl1 ral ;':"7-"-"-----"'-"=='- AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 11J616SE172nc! ~;~;ET, RENTct4, WA -" AVANA RIDGE, lU =:.="'''''''''''00T "_" WEST BUilDING -lEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN ''''"' "--EOUillNiOOlllOl'lWlf A2.02·W ------ -, KEYOOTES lEVEL 3 AREA SUMMARV ~~ <!' ~ 1) r BUILDING ENVElOJlE NOTES ,,,.,.,.. ....... _ ............. "_ .... ...... ' .. ,,- :...~...:::: __ , ....... ~-'- ,_""""' .. """'.1'_ ..... ,..,'00 :'::'r.:=:"'''''''''-'''''' .. '''....- , ..... _""'_1'.-001< ..... .., """"'''"'''''''''''-'' , .. ",--."".......,..-."""' .. ""'''''' ... ,'''',,'''', ..... ) :.:',._"""""" ....... _'''''''''' , ... ,Itl ........ "'''''" ... Il_ =""""" ........... 1""'''''' :=~".:!..~i:'...:.;;:= ..... " .. ".".-."""- FLOOR PLAN GENERAl NOTES ,""_.~""".1O'.,"."""'..,.""' ... ~ ==--..=.:;:,:,,,,"",,,~,, "".~""'--, ... -,~,",,,,,,,,,o,,,,,, ... _ .... ,,,,-\,,, ........... _-""' ..... ""_ .... '_ .. n' _____ n".:""',,""'" L.I&>......-... ,."" •• """',"' ... ".,"""' ...... .......... """' ... """ .... ' ............ ,~LH! ...... ON~" ........... """"' .. ,,~,_ -""""'''-''-'''" ."""" ... -,~""' .... "'"'"-' .. ,_ ..... "" ...... """ ...... _,-,-"""""''''.'''''''" .. ,,''' .. _'''''' .. -........ "",0:.,8).''''''''.'''1_'_...".. ,.."... __ ..... ...-' .. 1",.." .. "....",., _ .... """' .. """" .. _001 ._-,.",,"""',"""""" ... _, ...... , III"""'--__ , ..... ~ .. """',., """', .... ,."""-".,,,.,,.,...._., ........ D""""-""""''''''''''''''', •• ,,'''''_ .... =="-.r<"'''[~''''''''''_' ::;:::::==.~"'IO"""'" '''''''''''_H<I<'I"" .. _' .... '''''...-' " .. """"""'"""",-,..-",-~ ...... ,,-__ '<"'0i1"''''~ C~) ,rs; 'C __ :0) 0:~@ @-:~ I~~~ '~DJ <D ".~ \?~51 (Ej U o ~.~ CD ~-~ , --~·~· __ ~_'~'~·_11'-'4' -~~-.-"" 'f"' ~~~~~ ~~,~"''-+,-=~-~~--' t .---- r---.!!.'l:, ".------~-",-":1",,' "' -..,-p o @ @ co) ® ;:v 0 Yd .. ~ ~, col' f', -~' :1 f--.~l 10- , [ , TJI ~1l $~" cb @! ® -h ;2 \lE5TIBUlE , :, W£STlOO8Y J,\. I D.1 \J" U (II! ! 0 ~ , ,I~~ ~I '~H " , ~ ! . L-'!' SlM'!,",,(', ! I 0 1° ® I ® 1 0 I I., . .~_.,," _ ," '" ., '-l--~ P'" '". _~_ _ ______ _ ...J ... WEST Bllil DING lEVEL 3 FlOOR PlAN SOil ,or '1'-0' PlAH lEGEND (GJ- • ~0 o (f) (D (2~'1 CIl C<) ~ (5) (~~, o (8) (:) ® "i .... ", W '0 f~ OJ ~! .... ~: £ f~ w ..... " !~ ro t CL i :::J ~ 0 ..... bIl r.J AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10616 SE 172nd STREET, RENTON, WA 9805' ce." AVANA RIDGE, Ll( ..-,.,..."'".-'" ..... _" ... ' WEST BUILDING -LEVEL 3 FLOOR PLAN """F\AIIfj(DlJIIBNjlml(l>lUl A2.03-W r~-- 1 ______ _ --_ .. _-- KEYNOITS LEVEl. AREA SLNMARY ~-: .. J BlILDING ENVELOPE NOTES '-~""-,""""""-'" ,_-""""_ • .....,... •• -:;Iff-"" ''''''- ''''''"''.....,M'''''''~_"'''''''' OOJ<II'I!'''''''''''''-''''''''''''''"''' ... ,,- flOOR PLAN GENERAL NOTES :::?a~::..l;:.r,~:, ~,l~: "OR ::~:=: I ,fA'. "" @ (9) @ @(C~ .t-_'~.~ ~ ~----j. •• .,. f'" t--, ~-"". 0 @ r I '" .."., ® ./"@ '!' .L-b= o il Q.c 1'il , <f1> £6', rC~a. (0 ..... 1 '.j '<":J ... ___ "~-f"-"$-- r"i) '" @ U . "'''-"'''_.,, ...... ,''''''''"'''' ..... , ... "'.,"",""'''''" ''''''-, ... '''''''''' ........ .-.-.." _ ... ,,*,,,,,,,,,''',''''., :.:'"~''''''''''''''''''''-''''''' ="-........... ,_ ... ,' ....... " .. " ........ CQJJO"""" ... -"'"_''''=~''_''''''''''''''"c'''-''' """"" ... ,", •.. " .. ,,- ''0--:-51 '(. '\E' (F) , ... _.""""."'..."......., .. u."",>U ....,.0;00""''''' __ '''''''''''''''_ ,-.. """,-,.-"""~,~"" .. ",,," ''''_'''''',00 __ ''''''' __ __ •• ,. ... "'''"'"_no:.''''''''"'''''''._,~'''. ....., .. ..:tW~,_"""_""' ... ,_ -'''''''"'''''''''''''-._ ... -..... """'-""",,_ .. '''''-'-''''''''">1'"",_,.",,,,-,-,,_ ~i:~":;:'::'?"~=,=_ ,_"""',.,.-''',....''''01 ...... ..... 1ORI.O'fl .. "" ..... " ...... ~ '_-"""""""'~IlI' •• """ "''''''',-.,..,---... ..,'''' .. ""'~_'o""", .. "".""""""._'" ,,,.,, .. ,,. __ """''''''' ....... ''''c-'''' '.Nl.'O"''''_,n<yt","""""" ... ", .. , :::=,:==:=',.."'''''''''' , .. ,,, .. "' ... ,,,-..,,, .. .....,'"""""" ....... , ,,----.."""""~oc ..... _"o_ --", .......... ;f3'1 -j It0 (G) L_~2.2.·~ ......... __ !L_': ___ +---__ " • gc~--..... --+---____ ._'''T_~ (S (0 ... 1- , .. ® -----j-", , '" I L= "l""'--' _' I I $., "'"ch :: '" -; " --i j !I! I~ " L: I L ". '" "_' l 0 '" [I ' " , " ,.. O.o'! 0 _--=::.::::==:,:::o~.~. ! '" .~~ "Q' E 0 f0 --. 1[', o ct· '" ",,"_ " c _'.!L!.l" ~~TI:~-J.jlING ____ ~LEVEL 4. FLOOR PlAN ED ~ 1'1) (:Z-"I ?-< \ 3 ! .j t ~-. . '.4' \,-", r-,-', ~~ J (5) ~ .,' "\ 1,6) (7 \, j (6~-1 '-( (9) ,~, 1,,1_~) ~, it ,~ ~! i; Ii' o~ '" I" t ~ ..... u w ..... .c u I- m D. ::J o '- br riJ ''''~""","~'---= AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBA~ DEVELOPMENT 10616 SE 172nd STREET, RENTON. WA '8055 ." AVANA RIDGE, LI ...-.......... " ... ,,, -_ .. .... WEST BUILDING -LEVEL 4 FLOOR PLAN """ ",-_UUR9A/IDMIOPU£I A2.04-W (A) (6' +-. '"v \..:>' ",.r ~_ ~~ t ,.~. 1 ,.~ , 0 '11 r :J - j '" , , I D 0 J1 ; 0 Jl ~). ; I 0 '. 10 [0 I .. ,,-~ _"'E""~"""'" ~Ol""'~===C------- KEYNOTES LEV[lS ARtA SlIMMAAY .... "'f~ 91' (c) f~f~ (§' @~~)~) BUILDING fNVElOP[ NOTES '-~"''''''''-."-''''''''''-'''' ~-... ,,- ~~"::::""'-'''''''''''-''''''"'' ,-,._""""",,,"""" ... '''' ~.",""-"" .... ,-..."-,,,,",, ... ,,-.... ,,-,"' .... ,,~"" ...... "" """"'."r""""....,' '''' ........... ,''''''''''''''''"-'''''' .. " "", ... """""""",,,,,-. ~"'-"I-"""'-"'" ._.,,,,""" ......... """''' .... ''.'00 ..... ,."""'~" .. ,"."""''''''''''''-''' """ .... , ..... _.,. .. ,""""" I~-~' eE) CD FLOOR PlAN GENERAL NOTES '''''_ ... , ... ,"" •. ,'''''''''-''''' .... , " ... """ ........... , ..... """""~ =-.:.:::,:::::;""_ .. '" ~, ... ""~ , __ " ........ "...,. .... "" .. LI,..'~' ,....-, ... ' ... _""" ...... ""---"" ... m __ .. _...,.H'O' .... """""'" , .. ,"""""'''''''''''''''',''''''''''''''',._ ...... ........... ,._~"" .. ,. ... "."H""h"""~1Nl _ .. "' .. "'uu_ .... ".".",,,_ -"""""""'''-- '"""""'''''''''''~~Fl'''''''·'''' , __ " ........ ''''''_~ ...... ,-..: ... """-'''''.""''-''' .... ,,, ....... :::-""""""",,,,"<m'_,_"''''' ,,.,,,.."'C!"',-.c..,,....,.",._~.01 .. "'" _"_""=, .. ,,,,,,n,,,., ._-""",.-,,,."""""-""" "'-'_'''''_''~''''''''~'' """'''''''''' .... < ... ,-''''"'''-" .", .... " .. _"""""' ... "'''' . ...."...,,,-,.,, ~.""~, .. ,....,.,.,."'<F".""tJ." ... """'" ',-"''''''''''-'''''"'''''''''''''''''''''''' """""'.". ...... ,,'"""", .. ..., '_""" __ 0lI0''''''''~'''''''' "~""""",....~-",,,.).,,m......-. _" ... ,ro" ... " 03.) IF 6) , ' PLAN L£GEND @ ....... ~~. i" ,to -+ ~ ..... J-'-"$._~~~_ \!~~ '-'--"-"~" --,~-. ~"'-.----. --" ~ ... 0 0 :oJ @ I' (0) ,/J" , 1~ I i i. chL Iii. CD ~ORRIOOII l\j .. ~ ~ ~ ~ n .... W!~ ~ n :~ - ('; 0 :) <:21 ,,-,~ t """ I " .• " . ,,,.,,.,. ..I L , 0~(~ I -- '" :J. t i (~ , Yd, 0 51"''''1 j - M ,/ 1'J. fi: $.'" cb 1 'CJ1 17" III H <i y./ (0) 1/ " ~ 0 0 '" L ,_ H • ""_ I ." L"" L -- ~~~!.~~NG lEVEL 5 flOOR PLAN en (1- (2 )-( l_~) ~l~ ~. } (~~, 1n: t (~-~) C~) , -, ',-8 ,/ 7, " "-" ~ C~-~) ---' 1'1 ..... ", w •• t~ QJ ~! ..... i; .s:::: ~:; w .' "- !'" ro I D. ::J g 0 '- b1i raJ .... --.,~ ~-,.- ~---- AVANA RIDGE PLANNED URBAII DEVELOPMENT 10616SEl72nd STREET. RENTON, WA ""'" AVANA RIDGE, U ...-....-"' .. '"""' .. -_ .. - WEST BUILDING • LEVEL, FLOOR PLAN ' ..... f'tAII!Pil]IIIWIDlI'l!Df'III!l A2.05-W I BUILDING ENVELOPE NOTES· ROOf 0) f?J ,', , B' " (1', ""T >-< , 2 ' (,'1 8) .-- ~, l!;J , 0 1 (7) I I L '~D (9) ® CA) 6:~ ® I l_m_.,_ "'" ROOF PLAN MOTES , """"".IIICl<-...,.. ...... """""or ........... '"' ....... ~ ---, .. "" • ....,. .. "., ....... _ .. ~""'""t""_" ....... mo"'".""' ...... ,.. (0) §(j) ROOf V£NTllAnJN CALCULATIONS ~H~ i 'f f~ .~~(D) .. L'.!!1:--t' '" £-I"'" f '''I " ,.. @ '":\ ,-.., '~~>' ~~) ,,~ (F_~ ~_ ,'.!lO: ~_c'<' C" _-+-_ -'-'-'''··'--1 ... """'.' .. ~~'""' .. ,.,.''''-~-==.:,,~'=:::,'=;':';:;.':'~=~~~'" ,.,.,~""~-.---".-,-'" .. "., "" .. .,,,,,., ... " ..... .,.."'--, ... ~ _'"'''''''''' ... m ...-,""""'....., "'~ .,,,,,,. __ .. ,,,,,, '''''''1.',", 0;"""'"'''''''' _._""" ...... "oor''"'", :"' .... "," ~', ,G' .j • __ .--..r-,."a .... ,--------- ~~--rl""'~'~ -, I I I illr " -1 ~" (1-i (,) (i) !Xl : I -1 '---~ rrrrrcr~c- ~ ® 1€3' i§ o (C~(0 .J L il ~3 D[ (:0 I , CD 6) WEST ROOf PLAN SCALE-I~ • r.cr 11 r r= --- .II '\ @ (0) '" 'V t (~) v :~5) (61 ,j (7) "8\ , ' io' "'~ \ 10; '.j ~! "1l '. I~ ~ ! ~- ~ ! I s ..... u QJ ..... .J::: u L- nJ 0- ::J o L- OtI r.J -".!""=". -.~..,.~.""" AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBM DEVELOPMENT 10616 SE 172nd STREET, RENTON, WI< '0055 AVANA RIDGE, Ll ....-; ...... "' ..... " ... " --" ... , -,,,,,,, <-" WEST BUILDING • ROOF PLAN ,,, ... i'U!ljmLf<BNll)[\I[lDfWI A2.06-W I +:1 ! I l' ,;- -, -, KEYNOTES 41 I "l'fi)(H=~}l (H~ CD @> (Ji (';.21 (a, '--/ ~./ '-7 t--" .",. " "". >r.'!,!..,/-_ .. ''"~ , "'''t , .. j"'T -' lElWlT STlIRAGE ~ ...;;, ((:IRI(;<)EAAR( , ~ ~ ~ ~ I-I , ru,~ I $~' ~. [~r Lli"-l I i RmlOR ,.. . ~ <& ,~ 9IIIESIClR.'.GE [@J -__ fill /@ ~1 I \s> "-"':. ~ § ;: I I ,-/ 0 ilr ..... TERSP,:UliIIl£ll I' <& VESTIBULE !~I _I. 'L". 1 .. 1,·1 :::=:::JI 7 <& :1 <& . '" ",." -,."," .. ..J LEVU 1 AREA SlINMARY ~-.... ::-';" --~ ',....,,,,,,,, "" .. ' := -,::i-! I~ --:=-':E (Js) '-.... r 'JB\/'"K\ 'Z."')~_j "'-'!'1 __ f- L aUllOING ENVELOPE NOTES , ............. ,,"""''', ........... ,,'' """""",......,,,,,,, .. WOI"·"''''''''''' ,,"'-" ."'''-.'''''...,,.,0......,''''_ "'T"'TU'O"~_' , ... "-''''......,,,-'''''''''''' _ ... "(II<1>QJ,,, ........... , '''''''_F'''' ....... ''~ ... ''''·L ...... , ..... ,...-""""", ... ,,-= .......... "".".""""' ... " .""""'" .. "--"'""',, .... """"" ... ,,-..,,-~.,-"'~"'''''' .............. _ .... ,- ri{'51 \..~/ ,., ; l ' " CM) FLOOR PlAN GENERAL NOTES ""_'''''.''''0''_'''_''''''·'''' """,,, ... ,,--.-.,,,,,,,,,,,,-="..:::'':'::'''''''''''''''' M("""'~ ''''-'''''''''''''''''''''''"''''''''' :f:'''''--''"''''''-- )('.( ... n[ ........ _ .... ", ....... ~"'"'" ~~"""'~,:.:::::.;,':':c::.:~-= =,~"~=:;:.':i. .. ""'- :='='::,,~=~":,"" ~..:::,':?'~~',"u'i!:,~_ , ..... "'''''''-, .. --''' .... "." ... ''''' --"""", .. --._-,""" .... "'""",.",,-, .. ,, .~"""_""''''''''''''' __ •• ''N'.' =-:;',,~o;::;.:-,.;:;:',:..~=u'&...._ ~~,: .. _',."' .. ,U"_X_ ... D >,.'_ .... _ .. .,...,"''' ... "." ..... -, ... """ ... _ .. .. ,---""-""""""""",-,,,,-,~<,,,,,,,,,,, "~'''--'''''~'''''''"'''''''''''' .... P<."''' ...... ~ ~: C@ PLAN lEGEND .. (\ i _,;. _ ,-.""~~ ... , c~) •. _J...!!~. __ ". t ~I j (1 ) ;;t; l/;; ~ -- (~) (5) j \.~) 'I .... t':D~ I ", . 8 , :1 K ± \ 9) ,'101 \~ SCALE'~·~1·.q \II EAST BUllDlNl' ~ LI'!~11 flpoRRlNL ____ rf, _ ei ..... ", w •• QJ Ii' I ~ ..... ~ ! ..c .-~r:3 w Ie '-.~ !e ro ~ Cl i :::l E' 0 '- btl raJ AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBM DEVELOPMENT 10616 SE 172nd STREET, RENTON, WA """ c>,'" AVANA RIDGE, Ll ,,_ ...... "' ............ "'l_""" -- """0 EAST BUILDING - LEVELl FLOOR PLAN ..... P<AIfI(Dll'IBNIIlI'VELlPlI" A2.31·E KEYNOTES , (Hl (H f' (H~3) IH6' ...,~/ "-.' '-~ '-----/ (0 (i.~ (J'I (.111 (.J.3\ _./ '--' ,_/ ~-'-'--------------~=--------+-"'-""'----------~"'~.~' ~t'I'·""·-~ t LEVEL 2 AREA 5UWARY C:::...I ~ •• r (J5 ~~(~) BUILDING ENVELOPE NOTES , ........... ,.,,""""_ ....... "....,.,.., .... " ... "- '''''''''''".....,~''"'''''' ......... '''''' """", ...... _"." .. _., .. ",""""' .... ,-.. . ~, .. _""'Od'.""''''',"",_ "-'!""~''''ro,_ ... " , .... ,-""'....,....--,~" """""""""''''''''''''"..-, ,~,,,-",,~,,,,,-....... ,,,,,,,,",,,-. ~ ="--~ ... " .. '''''>'' ... '' ~=.:;~=~=!,: _ .. Go, .. '''.....,~'''_ (K-~ CLl I'M) '_. +_K!"-'f' .. .;.~=-~~. fLOOR PlAN GENERAL Nons ,· ... _."' ... '00 .. ""''''' ........ ''', ... " ~ .... ,_ .. __ ...... !O""'..,"""""" ....... ""-" ... "'-.. "'~'''''''''~ ''''' ... '''''--' __ '''''''''''''''',,-"''''''_00<,''' ....... ,""""«->< ............ r<:-_"" ,_",n,"" __ -.,.",,,","""""'" ''''-'''''~'''--''''''."",",,'''''' ... ,.,..",-.. "" .. "-,,.,.,,,,.,,,,,,~,,", .... "' .... 11"" ....... _ .. "",_ -''''''''''-''-- .-"""-"~-,,,<,,,,,-.,, :"::Tii,:':i.==: ,...,... .. ""'"""'-"..-",, ...... _ .. ",....."-""', .. ""..".,,, 1 __ ~""ON<t" ..... ""U_''''''' ~'_L_'''''_''''''''''''''''"'''' «UoT<""''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''_OO ''''" .. "'',, .... \ ... ;'''.,,'''''.''''''''''''-'''' =':;"'_,,,,,,,,,,a,,,,,,,,,, .. ,,,,,"-,, ;::.::,":;;::;==''''''''..".. ~~===~:= (N-\' \ __ / 0:~ ~----, ''-~ ~---+ PlAN LEGEND (6) 'L~ __ --+ I }----+------':--4 (0) (0) " >< '" l >--'-'''--'---''<-__ ---Io-------'t_"--------~ I o OJ r-0 (0) (i) 0) , f'-'" f-Js, , .--- I .~r :1 " Jl ;i Yl I c-) I \'E5TlIMf F-, "",''''''''', 51MHZ -i;: . " , JI ;, , i' "' , -4 I J;;.c :1\ s;,.. .1: . /1, ,. ~) o o .' I '+ ~ ,.v, cb !i . I ,".' [7! D i'J1 D YJ, ~, flEW.1OR o --tr:: , , , --, o.""",~,, I; l Jl ,~~~ 1 [: Y~~, :;~ I' 0 I L I ":. I--'j?/ -- /",.-.",,/ j "' i (0) "'. 0 J,~. , r-w--(0) ,~,---L:. I (0) (0) i I , . , ' ,,,. I "'" .. no' • I "I ".,. j r , t~ (<) r .J I.. ~TJl!'~.?NG LEVEL 2 F~09R PlAN cD _ . ...,wn""" .. ..,..,"',,"',.lli,,-C,== ... ---------------------- :1 f:~ ; (3\ (4 ') ,~ j I (,-, . ~ -(6) " ., l "'-"'-, I,.~ (9 1 X , 10: '-_./ ~, it " I" ~! .-'" IF ". i~ ~ j g .:~.=.o_~ -"", ..... u OJ ..... .s::::. u L.. rtl Q ~ 0 '- br1 raJ AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBM DEVELOPMENT 10616SEmod STREET. RENTON, WA 98055 AVANA RIDGE, Ll "'"nn' EAST BUILDlNG- LEVEL lFLOOR PLAN -. ~tOInMOt<tI.(AlE' A2,32-E KI:YNOTES LEVEL J AREA SlMAARY BUllDr.lG ENVELOPE NOTES flOOR PLAN GENERAL NOTES PLAN LEGElfD --~~ ,-",., .. , ...... "--~-.., ._".,,-, ..... _ • .,"""mltil...","'_""' ..... , ,,,,,..., .... --["".'""""""-_"-" __ .,,_ ..... , .. ,'"m • I '[ _ [. i __ ,_'''" ....... , , f ,-""',,.,,,.,, .... ,........,,,-""'" " .. ,-, .................. ""'''''", .. , .... ',,'''' -.... .. -.""''''',,..,..,.,,.,.,, . ...., .,.. ............ '00'_'.....-""....-'''' .... ''' .. '''-'''',. ''''''''_'''''''''''''"_'''''''~'' _, ... """""".<>S ...... ~, :.=........, ..... ~~''"'-... '' , ......... " ... <c,"'"""""""",,_,.....,.. """'''''"""""",,,,,,,,,,,,,",,,,r.,w. """"" ..... ...., ... ,'- (H31 , ~ (I) @ (.i,)(K) 051 j (I) ~~I@" (K~51 / (Li ~61 j ~,,-. '" I" ,., ,,,.~,.,, ",","''" ". : H HH ',' ",_ <---"-"'_ , ,. • '~f; -.. , @ " _",.,IIT .. "T ..L...........+~- (9 G '" (oj '" (i) I (.) ,,,,,",,,,,--- =1F:::=''I:''''::~~:;:'~' '_""""'_"_-""l<';'''''~'''''' , .... '...,..,. .... ""'"""""'""'''"'''«_ ..... "" ...... O'''' .. ''''~''' .. ''"'"'''''""'''.''''~~ ... =.::.~::;:.':. .. ""'- ._ ... "'P,." .. ~'"'"'O"<I<>,"' ..... _ ... ~=,=~,;:;,.".~=,;:.:,."" =","""LO<Am.',,,,,.,,,'_'_"'_ ==:::'~~..::.."!""" .. " .... "" • .",..-....'r:"'·_I~U,..,"" ... ~~=~;:~=K> ;::::,:===''''''.",.. :=:,:==":"'~i:i::;:= eN':, ,ilS) '-~ (0\ \~' " ,~. '-"-" 'IY , " , --~ ® ::P) (0 S---r II' , I 0 :~ II , .~ I-::"" q ! Ik;, ~~ up ! t-jL~ r t1a' ~, rxt--kl", $-'" r:!b "tIl I ~ r~ ® " .. , I " "" ( ~ :iJ y~1, k--r",,-I Y1 ,~l r "--4 I-- '" -I". I". I 0., ~~ I ~ .f.----!-l"" ~ .... -,. ~ _ ~ I 0,' I ,) ----L-" ,'. I o ~ Jl ® (0) ("0 u. I "c I ., j ..J L EAST.jj,UILDING LEVEL 3 fl OOR PLAN so.u: '!I!"' roC" ---B:l _-",,"~'''I!'''TE " ~I ~ " 1 •• ,1) :l Cs I : ~:~, " ! '51 • 1-:-_-: (6) '" -J9 , 7 \ \,J , ~ ~:~ I~?) l ! ~! ..... ., U , . QJ i~ ..... ~ ! ..c ~;; g U '-i~ III t D. :::J S 0 '- b1l raJ AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10616 SE 172nd STREET. RENTON, WA - "'" AVANA RIDGE, Ll "--'--"'''''-" ... u •• ,,., ... , "- EAST BUILDlNG- LEVEL 3FLOOR PLAN ,~ Pl~fPU_~l(H.) A2,33-E I IT , " ~ t- ~ .. l~ 'H"l'H-i" \-j',--.>' f .~ , " "C C!J . " ® j 0 ''r- (;, '--\., ~ ." .. n ~3 • , J " ," , " ,. (OJ l---'--~ _'W'l(~"'.' I ""tJ.~ " •• ""!~"'~ .. 9 (I) ;;:;6\ ':./ ",.".: ___ ".J,.. ""!:'L_._ ~ _ .J!:.l'''" :" '" I i , !.Q. r "I; II'] , ., i~ I I '" oj i .. I -"'.~ -! KEYNOTES LEVEL 4 AR£A SUMMARY ------Eo"::.,., '-"'l;;;J r 0.) ~:\ ,.-, r:-:1 \ J) '\~_~:'I,~~) ,~.;:-. '----'·r.., lt~ ~~,,!S, -----"" __ ~_. r --f---.r#-~..--L!!'LLf'~"l"- BUIlDING ENVElOl'[ NOTES ....... _,"',"'-."-"'-.., .. " ..... ,,-,--"",,,,,,,,.-.,-,,,,,, "'''-, ....... """""." .. """ ... , ... '"'''' .-. ..... ""'''''' .. _".,,'''-'''"''' ... "- ''''''_'''''''''''''''''''''''00'''''''''' '~I""""'",-... " ,.""-,,,,,-~ ..... ~ .. ,, "'""""""'''''''''''''IOI>W .",.,_""~"",,,,_.lIoCU'I ="......,.""~ .. '''''''.'''''''., ._" .. ",.......,"""'., .... ""' .... ""t .. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,",,,",,, ...,..,,"" .. ,..-. ..... - CK3 CL~\ ~~'I FLOOR PLAN GENERAL NOTES ... _."" .... " .. FUBI<E" ..... "~ ... 'E ~"I..,"_ .. '"'_, ... "'O""' ... """"' .. -'''''-",.".''_ .... ~, ... '''~ ' .... , ...... _'''''' ''''''_'~'''''''O_'''''''''',",~'''''''' "'-, ... __ ........... ,"'--. a~~~~!~~":. ~:~T:::;,~~~¥.:€,~" -'''''-'''''-''-=~.:'~"." ... "."' '''''''''_''IXT<OD''''lR'I<'ll_'''''' "",""l_' __ "_"",,,,,' """""''''''''~ __ '''''''''_TO =;::;;;,~'::-~~'~~'O< ""'''''''''-'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' ""''-Em,...", .. """,,,,,,, ,...".,...,."""..,.,.,--,..",,""'''''''''', "-~""""",~"_"",,,,,,,-"".,," ...... IN\ ,~ I~~) PLAN LEGEND CO~I 'LHT _ ~. C' ~''''-~ __ ~ --~-""~.~~~ " ,,', .. 'L~_ ..,. :~r:1"" "" ,'"~--.. -~, (;) '" '" C ® (oj ., ~-11l~ '~~ (1- 1 --. .~~ :~:, " J;.. .J;;\. , (\' -'fI =~ $ ... I'" '17 "" 17 [LE~~'OIt ~ -~~"'H1 ~~ , ...: , I ., "" I-- (OJ ® I ~" I (;) , " "." .. .. " L , ;1 t I ''1'' I: h~ ri l!iJ i"I' L, "" I (, W _ ~"O: " "'" _ ----- ('J f-"--, ~~ ~-'(": "- .h? :~ 15J n , ., I-;§- (OJ '" -iC<..) (;) (;) -J '! (~>I ../ (61 ./ I,! .. ) ~ "--", .:r ',8! ~~ (9'1 ..... ri \!?) ~-,. I =--1-." . --+ --Bj fAST BIll! PING _ I EVEl4 FlOOR. PlAN SCAle ~·I'.(I" ~, ..... it u i~ OJ ...... ~! i~ .!:: ~. U '-," !~ ro I D. :::J g 0 '- bIl r.J .~-""~ ~-,~-=0----- AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBA~ DEVELOPMENT 10616 SE 17200 STREET, RENTON, WA 98055 AVANA RIDGE, LL "--""' .. "'"~,, ..... _ ..... ' EAST BUILOING ~ LEVEL 4FLOOR PLAN ·""PllllilOlJt!NIOC\I[J.~ A2.34-E KEYNOTES LEVEL 5 AREA SLJt.IMI.RY I :.::".I"1:~ , r I 'H \'(H1] ',--," , E--~ @ ~ ,,) ,Ii) (i) G3)\e (J] 0~~(~) BUllDfllG ENVELOPE NOTES ''''''''''''AA_''''''''''''''''''''~''''' ~",--"","",,,,,, ........ .""E_' .. '_~'O'''< .. _ RJJ .... "'"~_""''' ,~"'-'''''''''"''~'''''''-,." --''''''''''''''' ..... ., :.:'"-''''''' .. " ........... _.''''''' ='''''''''~-~ .. '"'''''' ... '' , ...... " .. ".......,«WO.T .... """"" ' ... ' .. L..,,_~.' .. ""'''''''' ..... ''''""''' """"; ..... ""--.~.,, - ,~]) (c' '~, I'M') u FLOOR PI..AH GEJtERAL P«)lES ~:,,§,~E:T:lV.~~:" " ... _.N1 .... '''' __ ......... ~( :o,;""'ttMOo""'.-",,- =..;#.~~it~~':. ~~;;~~l-5:: ''''''''' .... '' ... _-,,,''-'',,, .... '''''' ....... _ ... ,""' ... _"'" ._-",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,-,,,,,,, """""',-.""_ ............. ,..., "'"~-.,-...:--'''''''''-" ~_n"~ ... ,"""" ..... oo.,.o«(M\"U_"" '''''' ..... _'·'~ .. n'''_~ ....... , ---,,."-,,,-,,,,-",,,,,,*-"--'''''''''''-"'''' .-.,.--",..-'''''~''''''-, "_'onooo.'''-''_''''''''"''''"''''''' -"-"".,, .... ~ "N'1 ,~ (~-~i PLAN lEGEND (0) f .~ ~- '" '",,"' .. ~~ "'~-' ".," I' 'I ~ __ r_ ,,,... 'I""" I • '-'''' -.r ~ y~--, ~ or, -+ , ,. '",-____ -----+_ • '"T " '!' ,-~-+-~ I r " IL t- !I o o C9 Ci) ri. ~. '. I (~ .. ' -.' , I 3 I .~. ; :, (,~-./' :0 llL lJ o @ o (0) (0 @J 1 "l r t. , -- I ;i,l , :~:, :;.:, " i I ¥l i l .~' " IX ~ .. Y1 , ."",'1 :, i 1;,"-,lId, J.:\ ,., £\ ' , Ii, I cp ,~-~""" :ill I, I: T "'. U , D 'C"f" 'Cl EJ~!iOll i Y), , I C --)~r :~ ~ ~~ J:,~ I " ~ I -I I '''', "". I -, -0 L 0 I 0 0 0 , (0; 0 0 0 J.-"2.j ~~ "· __ nO< --1>11'-_.'"._---Of [ --~'-,~--I " [ I ' (6) 0 I I ~ . (71 ,_/ 1 ':.') : (9) ,'10 I \j rb C0 '.J .J L EAST BVD_QlNG LEVELS FLOOR P!-!tN ~1~"''''' ill _,"""~1(,~",,,,"""''' ,.,..",-",. ...... ----------- ~§ ..... 'it u .~ ClJ ~ ! ..... ~; ..c f" u !~ L.. I'D t D. ::J ~ 0 '- ~ raJ ;;;:;,;;-;--- AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBA~ DEVELOPMENT 10516 SE 172nd STREET, RENTON, WA 98055 AVANA RIDGE, LI ==-'-'" EAST BUILDING· LEVEL 5 FLOOR PlAN .... lVIII'o..-oc.UClVr A2.35-E BUILDING ENVElOPE NOtES, ROOF ROOf PLAN NOTES ROOF VErm.ATKlN CAlCULATKlNS ",." ..... ~F""""_"""'" "" ... _ .... _~"""""""""'_= , "',"'._ .. ,-.-._ .... ."""",,"'," .. " "'_"'~T .. 'm: ..... _ ~" I::. .. " ~~!,'e',;:",:",~ ,~"_~'''''_TO ... '......., ""'."""'~""''''''''('-'-'' .... _ ~1&"""'''''_'TaI'T1'''' C!)y @ ~t ~~ 0 0~,~t, "'-'I'" ,_-------4--",_+_ '" ~_-----jo ""~-~----';;'" Q'l}i ", 1'-' .-'~. -., ... 1"" "'" I'-'r' ' ... "I ___ ~'_~ c'),y '~"" "". ,. H I ."-I I ' .. I ... II _ 'tfjffi-, 'I-~ II frr i ,r-, -- ir':::I I I I I, @ (l) (?I 0"-~ (MI ,------(0) (~) " 2 \ >3~ , -_/ / ~, l .. ~) ~ (~) ~ (6', \. J I'U) ~J "',, ~ I.,~ . .' ""9 " '-oj (0; 0 tJ ~ II L1 CJ [ ,I ]ill ~ i \ j hm -I , I ,--I 'N5" (il) C~) , , @(K) ,~~ C~) ED EAST @9F PLAN 8 CI)J (J) [ ScALE ,.e' .1-0" (H)8·ll L _'"'F:" .... ~"'...-F·_"'O'" (;-; &t .----/ lr~:;_ ' ',j (~~I I , 1 -, J '\.~ .')t (6~\ ,-, I (7';V -~ , , ,,(~ I ! (~) l :t 0~:: ~, ..... it u u OJ I" ..... ~! .s::. ,- Olg U ~~ -. '-i~ ro I 0- j :J i" 0 '- bIl raJ AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBM DEVELOPMENT l00t6SE172nd STREET, RENTON, WA 98055 AVANA RIDGE, LL ...-""""""'" ..... " ,.,.,. -"""" '''''''' EAST BUILDING· ROOF PLAN ..... ~DU_IIt¥lL"'" A2.36-E ------- ,'-. / , ..-----, , ,A) (t'.~ (,~) "0'., ("tS,' (~) _"""" "-,,,-,~01["" I,.....,'"~''''' 8» <J~C:. r.,' -,T, _. ~ /-, ,G~*H~~(DJj (E)l~ \'5' , -" r-----.i 1:V ~ ~Pl~,~VERA"l'l<E"LE"Y.A"T~"' ____________ __ r" /----..., 1l~1 ~ CHjS® (@ J@ oJ @ , <E Rl>:. s E , ... _J-'-'~ ... J" ~ (!X'@ @@'K)@ ~. '.:J ~;_I I.. g;~ \Sl -; J -~l , __ J : , ,-, P'l ~~ (s'(~ \'?' ~~(~~I OVERAll SITE· SOUTH HEVAlI!:m _ _ 1-2 I sc.oLEUli"·'"-C" ~ 'M"Il'i'l 1, __ .,/ "-/ C -I'§)Y' c-,y,cvc) r\K_~J.~K)~·~·e' ~_'~A:S\: ~ "( @ (0 @ lH3 if<~i)(~:, :~ f~ 03 (FXE) r1;-~t. - -~.~D~(C~OOXD (B) @CAi ,--I 0 CJ C] 11 l~ oJ I.. ___________________ J!W~"'~R~,~~l.l~o ~~,,~T~E~N~DR~TJHll;:\lAT!OK l_~! _~ ~, ..... tl u CIJ f· ..... ~ ! ..s:: .-'g u ll:: I-". re '~ <iF! I ! D. t ::J 1! 0 '- bIl raJ AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10616SEl72nd I STREET,RENTON,WA 9005' ! ic-ffi:: t:±ft'd: , AVANA RIDGE. LU "-"-'-""" ..... '" """.", """'"''''''''' 1m<l11" OVERALL PROJECT ELEVATIONS ' ..... """"":D\I<&OIIOEV£UlPIIDII A3.01 [----- I l~" .. "",.', 0\0;"''' "-.,..",,,~,. .. " H/H.~; (H3) (101 -';'(6 'i C./'-/',~ (9 (~)(5) (~J:l ;-00:» '" '" 01 .~ '" ,', '-v-:;yC, ",-~j \ 3)., ~1..J EAST OLOO· .. ~~HT,--'!»-S EA~L~W. ~.~ lSI 1 !!t3' n_ -' ,---...,lliT ;.~E,"i\~ tSI ~) EAST ~L.E;:\~ IS :v _ L~T :_\";'.' ~ tSI II '"! d Go' Go II? I' """"', lASTSIOC-AVG ~ . ~~~~~~ " ',~_~'I 4j I_~I.J I r 11.5 I '-' E~..sT BlDG' fASI ElEVATION 5C.o\I..E l~_r-{l" (0 /-, ~-.. \8H~:.1 [LJ ~~ ~" ----,,-\ \J_B \....K I I j fXTfRlOR WA TERlALS SCHEDULE .oorr"fIBO<"""",",_ -1 '-'~':""".'-I BUILDING ENVElOl'£ NOTES· ElEVA lIONS KEVNOTES ..... _""'""""',.,,"" .. _""""""'""''' =::::::==:-:"'===:'~=II""'" i~iS~~::=~- @ \,S, ~-:, eNI ~5: ./ c?) ,_EAST-"!;~ ,-~-~.~:t~ -~-~~ ~, [-' -'-, ---, ---' -, ---~'~~_l;tSI EAS.I BLDG -SOIlTH EL.E.'lAIlON sc.ou 1M" ~ r-e--.Gkj I ~! .j.J ", W •• i~ QJ ~! .j.J ~; ..c ~' w • ..... ," !~ ro t D.. ::J ~ 0 ..... bIl r.J AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10616SE172nd STREET, RENTON, WA ">;5 , dffi t::fffi! • AVANA RIDGE. LU -_. ...-_omt_., """'"''' -- EAST BUILDING ELEVATIONS ..... PU*ID_DMlOPlDI ------------------------' A3.10-E (0 " (1 Y"i I3-\' ./ -_./'-j C' \,4/' ('5) ,/6'\ ,"---'" \~-G:" [(7 .. , ~~C~~?) ,\~ ~) T ---;-~--l-®-r~ CO) -----'. eN .! CM) c, (L) ! EMT a.lO!i· _WEST ELEVATION SOd.f1I!'=1'-V b' 41,) ,,--~ '~~' 'I ,@. @PJ0'0 0 ~~6) j ------------_._---- ..I ....,,, ... ,~"';"-"-;;,.'" ~".-..~ ,_\,,~,. ... EAST BLDG H~~,~'r'k~ -_._ESlT~ i-~ __ 'p...ll:J-.~E1f.--S _EAST . l~~\1-6l _..EAST-li:'~ __ EAST L:;:'t& EASTBLDG.A0 18T-~~ ~U:;:!gl-S m @il CD EXTERIOR MATERIAlS SCHEDULE " @ 1 8 (H~~ @ -~--." ..... "'rn .. ,..." ........ -r-~ .. _ .. m~ __ _ ....., ......... ---- -''''" .. ~,.' KEYNOTES @@ EASTBLOO -~~~,~~ tAST~~~~ .,~I~-$'~ • ,., .. <§ -EAST· Lf,1l; S L -fM.T· ~~;-6l ~ ~r_: L::'-¥-S EASTBLOOG~.--JICi J.!I'-1Jr.l.? " , 7 _ ---l.-__ E'\ST~ -~.L~I,J.61 ::!_E,J.illI,!lST EAST BUIL~I!:LE1.E.v..AllQ .. I-·f-] SCAlE ' .. ··f.(l' 'i~-'!! ~i ...... ,t u i~ QJ ~! ...... r ..c: ~~ u •• .... i~ ro i D. :::J ~ 0 '- b11 raJ ;7r'.' .. mK~ AVANARIOGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10616 SE mod STREET. RENTON, WA 98055 ',,' I ." (.Hs:t 'i:'T..UIJu AVANA RIDGE, LU 1'lAIIIIIC ......... ,"""" . ___ ._ -",",,' ,...,." """ .. It EAST BUILDING ELEVATIONS ' ..... ~_DlV[lOPIIDIT A3.11·E l,. ____ _ ,~-,.."""'~,,, ... , i A) ~5 _. __ I I~~~i., :0 --,- 1'0 'C') 1-_1_1 ~_~ I"" .--'- '8 1..0: (1-0')(9'(8"1 "j'"j',-_.' 1'6':(5) ,~ . g' l' C.) (3X2)(1) (2) '" jfJl-+%t-.·1Jt •. -.. ~~ ~. (C) f~1 "c~3', '6' "--' __ ,_J - - --l',UL-~o~ __ -~l-l:t~~; ~ .-~ ...... i--i---WEST -~~3~ S WEST-l!:.~E~ ~~ --~~;.~~ -- ~11'~ ~T~ fASli!.IVA~nruO~N ___ . ·lrJ €~ ~) ~. 0-81 CO) (§-~ -r . CE) -] T: ia ... ' ...... "'m ... 1 I KEYNOTES " @ f~ (~ \!) _ I'.6T -J,~~~~ l~ ~ ri1! ~4J. ;)--~-~~;-& WEST -..\1\1'.' ~ 6l .- • ____ WEST -..\~~; ~ mT BLOG -SQUnl E~(\LALlgJL ____ ... ' '.·.·.1 'm'.,'f! ~ J ~, ...... ~l u t· OJ ~! ...... i; ..c to: u "" L- !" I'D • D. 1 ::J ~ a L- bIl r.J ~--'-.~ AVANA RIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT l0016$E 172nd STREET, RENTON, WA 98055 ~.l..lLWL 'i __ -\.A.L..i LJJ[JI[: AVANA RIDGE, Ll( == .. ,,""'"'"'::= WEST BUILDING ELEVATIONS ..... PINOIO£DURIIIijIl(1l[lOi'MUj[ A3.20-W (G) _""-,-",;,,,~-."--'-;:.O'''''' 'f' ~." (4'1 " __ J C1~) (2~:(;-," '" (;"\(6", '--j ,_/ 0! I 10 17-' '--j (8):o)@ WEST BlDG- HE'GIi:~~ "1'~" ----=----1'1E§1~~1~ o __ H -6-_'=-±-d:=+di-__ L -.l.-_ ~ _INEST-lt~_oS (,) 81 I '" U o H r,) I,,) J2c= G) 'i ----j)-~ LI J_ C!) U,,"' i- (f.3:: \,-~) (F-," (FS'! , " (,) ~-J-.;i-------~-if9~ (,) 'M;~T_· Lfe~E:\~ oS ... ~~-~-_'f;J~~ . ""'ST_AVG J71"~~\~ WEST'lf\ll'~ -Jw-'- F- WES.l~.1QG-WESTELEVATION-!!E~$OOOR __ Ii--I sc.ou W~".Q" ~ <$ (D~ I ~' ,- r--' --;:;, ,.---~ ", ~ ,~'-~' I~~) o '0 @. ;0 L @J@ (c) EXTERIOR MATERIALS SCHEDULE KEYHOTES CB 'A_51 ,~ CA) "'g-j ~STRDQF!'~~ ~_ .~= 409'"·S3/8" - - -~T-!fu~7\~ oS _~_ • i#~ --_IM:ST.~~.'{~ -~.~~ -~~:-!$~~; oS ~'~' ,,-31"-'3/' _ WEST-~;~l61 WfSJ,fQG.NORTH£lEVATIPN.:_SImNltST Ill, 1 S<:N.o1·~".q-~~ ... --j ~! ...... h u j" QJ ~! ...... !J; ..c ~::: u '-" !~ I'1J .! D. J ::J ~ 0 '- OIl raJ ;:;;--,--- AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10616 SE 172nd STREET,RENTON. WA 90055 ..-.-.. .. vu-..' _ ..... ' WEST BUILDING ELEVATIONS ..... PI.-n ....... DMlOPllENT A3.21-W ~ , ! I j i U , , , ~ I ~ ! I , ; ! , ~ ! , , , • i , , , § ~ i ~ I ~ ~ , ! ! i ! , , ! i , , , ! ! , , ! I , i ~ § , , ! ! i ! ! , • , i I , , .. ·a· U ~~H~ .. Ii ji;".::1 'i ~~ ',' ;;"a~8 ~§ ~a~ ;6~i ~~ ~! iii q I " ~i ~~~l !>~ ~~ :: .. ! '\ I" !! ,,-~i ~'H ~na § " 0, !, 1 08 8[! l{l'i~ [h ~~~Il , I! " !" , ~~ z:i ~~H ~ ,8 ii °'1 '"':: ~i~~ " n l( ~h ~~h , " ~~ ," ~I: ; " " !, " ~!it~~ I ., " " " ~~ Ii " ~~ ,,~~~ ,I ~~ , ~j~~ ~ 'I ~I'~~ \, <, , 'i~i~ : :i~ g r i jc::~~ ~ "~ § ~§id~ iim'l i~~~j§ ,II!!! li:ii2~~Z !iiiiji IIi _ .,", I-l 'j'!l, f-lIL'I! i I a~8"~ . .,,;!, , ~~Ui~l "i"'j S~,,8Q~ !it"jo~~~i ~!it~g!it..,;; ~~~~~r § b'z 'i~IO~~ ~ ~",!li,,;;1 :J ~ I0I'l :~;!I .. :: 0" :;::;: ~e. Iii ~ N z:e.ij" , ;:g.? ... n i 0 2 ~ ~ 1 c ;) ! 0 , Z , ~ m IJ c m Z n "' .. m 2 m ~ ~ Z '1 !<l ~~~~ !!: 3 i!:?;:li05 .. !W l; '" I rz~a 0 ~~~~ 2 !~ie .. !::~~ ~ ~:s8~ .. Ii Z ~~~~ ~ :~~~ !<' %ll1~c W!~~ ~~i ." I~~ , ! 1\ 101 .. , .... .. , CRITICAL AREA MITIGATION PLAN Avana Ridge PUD R~nton, Wijjh,nston PNW HOLDINGS, LLC 9675 SE 36th Street -Mercer 1~land. WA 98040 *"tal '. " ,~ '" ,~ ~ ,~ , Sewall Wetl<Jnd Consulting.. In(. I' n ... m ;,.~ ;: ::ii' ~!i ~ H H 0 " ,~,j > " Ii -< ~i~ ;; 1!! ,-" n ~ ~j is H z ,-" 1-m ~~ '" U c ;; I: m '. H ~~ ;: m i~ 'il'> z " ;;I " ~i< '" , ,. , Ii ~~ 'I ~ TC ;; z -I-... ~~ '" , c > ; < " z -I-~ " i~ ~~ ~ iii ~"" pS ,j i~:; c '-I-~ "'~~ ~H . " E ~~ IH 0 Hi ~~ §~ z !<' ~H !.l: !i; '-"oS! , ~-,:- i ,j Eii: i' i' 'I , I ~~~~li t e ; ! I ." ! I! 1 ~I' ii~i !ll~ _~ I' ' ,. ~§ ~~~ ,. ~ii ". '1 ~H J§n ,I ~ni 8~8 " ~ J! ~~ii ~;~~ , i~~ !;1:~a , ~:lla ~;; ~ iii! '" i Ol ~ ~ ! ! ~~~~ ! ! U ;;~;S;8 ! i h~;\ , \, ! ag~! !l!:6 ;;;,,~ -. , ~~li! !~~ , . 'Hi ~~s ilill ~8 ;;;;; '" ~ ~i U ~H ., '~I ~, , " ~i H~ ~~ ~~g '=~~ '. ;§ ;;l~ ~ ,,~ 0 ~>lol: ~~ fH "''"' Ui ~~ ~~ :::,.; n ~i " I Ii Ii f' , ! I ""-"'0, ~ ! , ! , ! ; ! ...... : ..... i ,> !! ~~ " ~~ ~~ !i Ii 11 .. 5; 1 1 ~ jl ~~ '/ ~~ " " I-"1; ~~ ,; ,i ,! U ~~ " U g~ ! H~~ ~~H 2~ -, iii I -~ i I!~! ~ "'2~!' ~ "I-~ ~h~ ~ ~~i':~ , ~8i~ 0 ~ ~hi \ ,.! ~ ~~ ~ -, , ~ ;~;:s " i~~ ., II 3~_~ .65 ~~~ I Ii!., i"'S , H~ ~ i~~ "00 ! 'So I,; i ~j;i~ h; ~r ~ , :;;p; I ~2~ , ., ~'H ~~i , i i>~i ! CRITICAL AREA MITIGATION PLAN Avana Ridge PUD Renton, WashingtOrl .,. PNW HOLDINGS, lie 9675 SE 36th Slref'l-Mercer Island, WA 98040 r ni~ ~.;; g I~ ~~~ =ii §~ ~ I~·~ ;H n , ~~~ ! ~i~ .~~Z ~H n f ! H~ i f a~ '0, I ! ~!i ~§ ~~ , '! • b~ 1 n -, II ;: .' ~~~ I H " 0 at z ~~ n a "'~ ~d !! " i~~~ :;§g " p Iii! ~2 z ~i ~§ ~~ ~~ " ~ , " ;; .1 l , z i I .. mm ~H~~ ;: ! " .. ~~~ ~I! ~18i' ~ !'!~li ~B!~~ ! 5~~ !,I! z ! "I I' ~~ iI: ! Hh~ ! gH ... ;lie;: !iI -<§~ i sr! m U";{~Q ~~ ~ n~ z 00' lillil ~i ~ , i~ i~1 ~~~ > ! z iH :::~~ i~~ ~ I "! ~~I . , ;~~ ~ 11"'''' Q6~ Ei i~~ :;:~ "I Ii, > U~~ ;! ~li 3~~ z !5~~ £5 2 '" ;!5~~;; H 3S~ l(jl~ p§~i ·1 "~I ~~H~~ 'I HH ~il;! . " ~~~ '''t II ~~i~ ~ i. ~ l!i~~~ I! ~~!; ~aU ~~i ~~~~J , ;~ !If i' ~~~ Q .. ~~ ~~ i _0 !:,r " sewall Wetland Consulting. Int.. ~,~ ~ < 0 w'," Q) ~ ,~ :::l W '" Q) ;0 Ul ;;0 Ci m <D 15: ,m " <C " '" r ~ -0 r 0, 0 (f) '" ~ :::l :::l it '" c, ;0 c: rn :::l ~ 0 = ,~ CJ '" ~ <: '" 0 ill '0 '" 0 3 '" '" '" 3, if, n > r ~ Z '" N cO C c ::Y = 6 0 3-e e L, 0, " 0 '" N ~ :) C c ;;: ~ '" 0,-, '0 (I)~ =i~ i m~ " » >: I z .... " I <= " 1" ;P , II ~ ~ / ./ [] grouparchitect • I I I .~ ----------J (f) m [] Q"rouparchitect PROJECT ANALYSIS ~""'",,' '~'''O"''''''_'J ""' ... "" ,.",.. .. ; ,,~, ",.. "~C"'" ,,~"'''' """ "'" c;~cl"" M~'''''' ".'""" ,'.'", '.~~ .~" ~'_E""-""'"',"",-_ """,,,,, "'''' .... ..,.0'''''''''< ~""""'B~ .. ""'-',"",.''',_ ~'''''~< .. "ru .... '''''_''"-'"' t"'-'.'""_"~" ",-"""""-""""",,, ~''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''<1'''''''''_~"""",~, .... "",~.,"' /) "" ~,,,,,><,,,,,",~, 't:<'""~r""' .. "",,,,"" , ""j47C1 \. \<' '''-'~ tWA ' Y///,,1 ::::, \\\'"::::::~:~.:-.:cl=--= -: _~ __ \[lI1MlSmm I!illi&l ~~<\~ -1'" '~ ,-~--il,;:: f, ; [',," ""',:,' "', '~~\~'~' Lc_.~--, = bJ:;o, \ • ',',~' "~"~--' I .,"'"'_ " I PROPOsm~srol .. ~~ \ , -_., .• : "~~~'?:::;~~'--J ';-"N~ ~~~'i£w:~":;;; ii,ilii~IIIII~llllll -B.'.~, ·N-'-< .. ~",,"~ -~-"" ",,.,.'\;0"-';"- " "'"', /"';1& :&1 ~~ .. " --./\ " ,~\.C" ' I I ,~ " " I ,/' l/l" "'-',. "f: , PARKING: SIT[ PLAN NOTES: ?~~~~m!i~ "F£Il"""""'~"""'"'","'"""' ... _'''' ''''''''''''",""."' .. ,,,,,,,,_ .. ,,-,,,,,.,, "'~"'''''''""'''''",'~'''''w, .. """'''",,,,,~ """-""_,,.~,,,,,,,c._"""'_":;''''''-'''''''_''''·'''~ __ '''' SEt""''''' "'''E" ~~'''''''-"''''''''''<l':;·''''''''''' "'''''~F''''''''''''''''''''''_~'''",_' "''''''''"''''"'"''''''='''''''''''''''''''''-''''''''''''''>~-'''''''' "'......"".; ,-_""'~ I.E,'''''''' lWJ.P_''''',.,."OO:'' ~ KEYNOTES: ,~..., .. ",." ~,,"~~.-, / "''''C"'';'''"'''''''''-~''''''''''''''''''''''''~'''''''''' i ./ODJ."CFNT,Cl I ~CFm;)(l591'6 / ,l / SITE PLAN 5CAU ,.,~-<)' /-~! (; ..,.,"'''''" ill /1 el ~1i I, . , 1° ol g • ~~ 0", !~ ! t s ....., u OJ ....., ..c u "-ro a. ::J o "- bl1 raJ AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10016$E172nd STREET, RENTON, WA 98055 AVANA RIDGE, LL( ,'--'''''''"'''''', ..... " ",...,., ",,_0._1 ,_~" ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN """ f>L\/jNED"""EWoDnIf'ON'"' A1.00 / IIlIilll I , § , r-..... o I I I I I / ! / I I ;' : : / ! ! / / / groupareh" Iteet " r-..... .... / / / I / DD[D~ ~ 'il~ I! ~~ ~,; , ' .' ., " c:~ ~~ ! , • W!I!r "'I ,» . ' "' d 03 ...... r! §, , 0 e 11J~ ~s~ake ave<l\Je no~r,. ,"'Ie 2Gc, ~'"tIe, wa 9a1a9 206.3651230 I _group.rd,oorn [] grouparchitect B ~® ~~ B 18 ~I £ ,0 0 r ! m "&It + -_: : -I ; ~ (+0 c~ o " -0 .~.~ 1 C ~, ffi I ~ _ z ., 0 " " ~ I~ m 0 m < 1; z " m ~ " z j~ , I n'l q " m ~ ~ ~ , m \: ~ , " ;j , ~ , z ~ ~ ,ii:.: \1 ! !~ ~ ~ ! -0' , -z ~ ~ 'I ! , ,,".:;; , " " l ., i z " \ i" '. !i' !! ----------------------------~~ ~ -- ' Ii , !:: ~>~ !" P , I r '", ~ ~ i§~ i P I i ! Fi;;: z r rm '" mo ..... .. ~ ! '" N C "Om '" ~ _m z I .... iu l o ~ c-a.~; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I mzz .z 5~Ja> I ~ "O~ " ",,,,, mzG> • ~=lm ,i !~I'! I' 1;,1 -. "I ~ ~~ .. i-, 'Ii II B ~: ~ oj C1 ~i is .; :5 Ie , w ~ " m m , \: z ~ z " o .CS! ,q" ! ! ! I! I h, , , HI !II ~ f ~ ! ' , ! , II :0' ~ I! , , , , , , ! 63 o • i l H ! ' x S ~ I ~ ~ 9 ~ ~ ~ , i ! j -! ! ii!li! -I ' ~'l ~. ~ .,x~~ !! j "~fn \" , ~.,~~ ,I : iii' i;l ~ r~ , 8 • • 0 z z > • m '135 w.'~"ke avenue oarth. ""lie 200. seatIie. wa 9.'11()9 206,:l65123C I lIIWW,groupord'l<llm [l grouparchitect x x x x , x x x '" SW 1/4 SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 23 N, RANGE 5 E, WoW. AVANARIDG E ~I'"'' ~ ~'-~1 o ii' " z " > " ,1L "~'-~ .. "-'-.,. ~'EPnND~E~. --~---tm ..•. ,., .' -~"-"-~.--. -i:'---C:'1-:~~-~> , = -C~_~-_"C, ::C;":':fi-Ic=-: -'-___ ~ _._ -~ ".--------(:;--;L:j;~il ~"-d _, ---I '7-;;-9<',", I --, t _. '_' =_.~~ . :' ~ '"'' .~~h;2'-p_~;J I ~r :'~~I;tI'~i7t~;;i:;:. n_. U --~~t,f~.- -r----j , "::'<,1". J. ~,*:1Jt""" ~,-~n- '" ".:"""Fi;f='rC!"¥'-----,\-,~, "-.;, ", ["'~'.'::' '1:;/. h ' . - ' \'" ,,~,w'C /' ci:<ft "" ''--, , " "~ s-:.-'%, '~ ~~ LEGEND '--.' .. lY " ". : ;.' ~:-i'::"'" '--', ''', '--, .,-",.",,,",.', r;iUlil "" "''',, milS"""" "',-'"" /' \ '~ i '~;;,/:.' iJ "'.., ~' " , / ~-+:"'~.;; ,<~'-.. i),,,,,, . . " c .. ,_' ... "' ...... ~e'''"''''' ~ ~ '= , 'J' DR STRONG 'I ;:--L~-' c,' "1 CONSUiTINGENGINEERS 811 UIlIIIoo ............... L~ ..... C ..... \O),<fW,OOW.! _,,;-.':;. \ c' > "-~';; L ~-" J " .~:,-,~;, :;;:._';"~:;: -"= / / \~ "',,,." 0: "'",' ~; - m.;:/, SJTE~;l '" ~ ~.' , " , -'i II ;, / i! '~' , !ACway MAP / -. PROJECT INFORIJA nON: jWe "":.:':';'~',:, " '~;, "",", PRo,gT CONTACTS ''-u,',,', ""oFF ".,,' ~ ." .,",--,,""-''"' .'>"" ('""",.,-,,, -"""C' <'r', 'u, ., ..... ''",-~-.. -.,~'"-,.''' 8ASJS OF BEARINGS: """",,', .~, ".0"'," VERTICAL DATUM ,""~ ,,,,,,,,-,,,.,.,",,.,,'.' @ ~,~""",,/ '" .. ,,", .", lj ",'~. -"" ". ,,,~, NORTH SH££T INDEX.- '1 i.' -,,,,, ,.~~ "" .. ", "., "!'>i ",.",.,,,,,- AVANA RIDGE PUD COVER SHEET & SITE F'lAN ~,; ~; 'l.211_1~ x x x x , x x x w " o ii' "' z « > « SW 1/4 SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 23 N. RANGE 5 £ W.M. _ _ __ AVANA RIDGE . '~ _ SE >12ND 50REEr I -~----~ ---~.-.-_._-'-~--------------~. x*--' __ ,_ _ ,~~><i , * I ( \. *>(' ___ . _________ y-'..;r-'M-----------. _' ~)O(. '><A--J ' , .... ,_I A )8(;,0: x"'" " (,\ ,~ ~, \..~.~--... "-, / ""'.1 l' I ..... e' '!.. / "' ....... '!-.~ , 'X , ""'-,~ ""'_ X ~ "~ V ~X~. ':" '~~' , """"X.' ~ IX' , lR ' , . )a('X ,-""'*1 , , "X~." ,·iNX.X X '" ~, )8( X ~ .. " 2£. "'. ~_" '.' U G""~ )8( .' ,X'-.~ ,~ \s1 '[ ~. i.' ~.7 ~)f( ' .... '.: .. '. J!:.'.X.·' I J<i<i X ;0: TESC LEGEND ·,A'·", __ .". \i' '.,' /,-/, ,,- 1,-\ /-1 ""~w.- \_-'/\'-...-.1 "-"'<'" u ""'A ,"",,<"'<' ~)-o ';_,_";,,;~'"'-"'"c -.,.-,. ,~, . ttL'-·-..... C .. ,,,,,,,,,,D.,.EIor,,,.,,, .. ,,,,, 811 ..-'-'-7"'"' <=.-c ...... <D>fT~~w'l ~ ~ ''', '-', K;'/ \ ,r ,-",.."~: _. G -~."2-j '. ":'-<,~,;I"~.:,, ,.. . '~{ o '" " " ",.e G} " OR STRONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS ~k' .,.--.,. """""'"' .... ,,,' ....... ............,""""'" .,"'.., . .,.,'"'-',,,,''' '~ ~s . "" ", ~ ", """-1-". %h .. 0 '-, • '::-J "" e· "'." c) ---'-,.c. o , r ~J" , \ -,,-.c.', ",:;~, ,_ .-- "" ... '\). t·"'" '\ '"~, ~,_~'J,~ 4 ~ -/ ~~ 'X ... 'C' _L "" ,_~,\ ."'. ~C, ,T ~". \/1 .::-. .. '. ~ or .. ~ \ 6 " (i;;-,:4_L..'I.M II , :.. . e .. -' ': ,,~-)' , /Vg \,--)8( ,,' -~', ~-:; ,-,::/-,'.;".\-,?(.---".,' 'I _J) XX)( "'>: ..... -i',. ""-~;;' "~~~i{~:;;:"}j.iG ... \ \~.'.')-' ~. '.' ..•... -~.',~.T.~:,-.'~'~ .. · x .. ~ -_ f...,~ _ "/-r-",i:?>'--"''J'Y~ . I X . 1''7.'" I':' \ -I j ·,r '-. --X :{:' ,\C:;:N.1~X X X ~J\r~ j .'1- '-, , ~'" ~ )i()8( X i".., . . ~)8( x.~c.'Y / ",- " ~-\ \X .1/ :ic ~r:'1V'dY /;:A~ t,'y··} .~= ~ / ;R / / / ':..'-. / ~ I 1/ l/ <t;/ / AVANA RIDGE PUD , ---I' ! j / / ,/ @ NORTH 12.N.1S TREE RETENTION <1 LAND CLEARlNG PlAN DRS PRO..ECT NO. 15088 w " o " "' z "" > "" ---, ~'- PRDlMINARY 51lf VOi!/Mf CA/Gli/AVONS ,c"m_, ", "',WI .:~p.-""',,,, c''','. ",,"H"""'''',''','''-~N "'",-_,p,,-.", ,~,o ... ,'(WIR"O'Ul"'" ",,~ ",,,, """","0""'-""-,'-_"., "",.,, ,,'",~''' ~'""' " ","'"",.,, •• ,,,,,,,, '.,W,," ,.,,'" .'.""" ,,,,",,,,~,,, ,n" ',,"" 'w "'N' '" G[N[RAL NOTES . """,", "J,'" _" ,,~, " ",,"''''" """~" .• ' p .", 'w ". '" H,'''''''''''' ,-,,'"'_,,""" LEGEND c.:r:=:t _.A:L_",,~_,"~ ~ .. '''''''''' 811 ..-- ",",L""."""O ---~"'a..WM SE /72NDSTREET c:-_~-_ ~~l> "'-. SW 1/4 SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 23 N. RANGE 5 E. AVANARIDGE ~M. I I , ',- '-'- '. ~i.~.' ' ./. -~----'-.. -.. }i ''', .. ' 'ii~ " ._ ~ 'I. J·;.l ..... " ..... " .. ' .1 .'. . "v-ir/ -",.",-. -+~\~-.•. _ ... '.--" '>,,,,,;F \\ '. r7i'~4 \,. - \,./ ',- '", '''-- -/ . " / / / AVANA RIDGE PUO CONCEPTUAL GRADING PlAN DRS PROJECT NO, 15088 ---, / / @ NORTH x x x x I x x x ---- ","~, / ~;"';""''''''''- SW 1/4 SECTlDN 29, TOWNSHIP 23 N, RANGE 5 AVANARIDGE E. w.M. 1,-, ~-.~----'.--t'- j : ~ ~-~~~1~---_ _ ___ ~ _~~7~r __ '" \\, 1\, ::.--=~~~--- ----,--", ~'\. '-' '~ 0 ~',o' \ o ' . ,'--/ -iY _ _ .-,-~' . ," ;" ),_L",~_' \ -' , ,,-.'.-,,~---~---'--'........--.- .-.:, ' ,----- '" . ---~~: .---', /. Z \ ' i ,---r--. ---~-,--,. _.- '" \ \ ' '" \ I ~\ ,.\. ".),'.: :.\ _'. WEST BUILDING . EAST BUILDING \ r. \. "".\"mw~" '< --'--\1 I'>',,,:,'\;;' / ~ I' ""~"A""'''' '\ r'\"'-~ ..... ~.\-"__ _, ~,\ \ ' ' j "",,",0. n~~.~~-:i'-:=:1 '" ' .,' \ \ 1; ~-.-'\ i ~}~~\~~\}if~.?~~;i~\_ , ,~I \ ": ~ '" ''''''- ~1' ~'s % , 'Vuo ~, "<lp.." , 0 ~ . "'"',,, -::c-cA . I, 0 '\'-\-.. (I,~;,,:: .. ,,~;~~;;,~i-), I~ ""'i{:ill/;' ,// ,f:: ....•. /1 ········\L·1;,~ "'" . ~,y// '.'" ~ / , .. , ,. ,,~~' ~c:./ IO~~/ .. ~.' ,c;~{! 1 ! ! "'/1" / -'-'----1/ / / ~~ "'>-,/f" . / ... "" '~,,~--:---,,~."_~ / NORTH ,/ ".',,' "" "L ' " CONsBL1IJJ~~EERS ":.: -""'NOTW I···~"-" I ~ I I>;,~~NA RIDGE PUD "":H."''' :::~::. ..:::.:;:: _'_ ' : _ 1 ---' ' """,-,'.".,, .. " """-',,' "'", G)/"O:',." . " -< .', ';:', " .,~' 1fL_ c .. ,_·...,"" ....... "'.' ... ov 811 _~ ..... ,~ • ...,c..o.. \o.ur,~".! DRS PRo..ECT NO, 15088 x x X X I x SW 7/4 sEcnoAYjANJ,H'RtbGEANGE 5 E, w.M. " ~ I", '--" '-"'-"'-';;'---~;:-~-J" _ SE 172, STREET ---'------,-------HF \ -"<---- -, -+,'" w '" o 00 "' Z "' > "' ----~\-,'.c' .:s:::~~~ \:'~-'\ ---~~ ~=-".---,.:-:~:.X -- .... !----, ___ 1_. j. " '. l_~_d_ L._ll_' ___ L i! Ii ' -, ·~~Do""""'.'''''''' 811 ....-...-,."""L.o<._c..-. ... 'DU1>Da.WA) "---;-".----i ' ... ~ \ \ .\ ~ .. ' ~<~~ "'", i)',"'"'.' .. ''' --" ",~. ~ .,~ . "'", " il -~;-~ )', ,;-:-.~II ,'-) i 11,1'1', __ •. EAST BUILDING WEST BUILDING / / = \. \ \ \ ( ,§' \ " \ '\ I = ~~--T":'-+~--f -\ I i\ \, \ I" / ,I c'-':r:~-'--'\.:,:..;.~-·'-'--cf:--'--1-\ ~--\--"-'-+---1_" "'-:.,/' 1 ,'I \ -.. \, --<~''''.---:;:-:'.:-I--'~ t~~-:-:::-'. \ -\ \ \ \ ~'.'.i \ --~'-"""---....... ~ \ .j ;, ---~ (---• 'I.~-~ ~ u_-u -~ , • \ \ t. ,'" , .-.. . $-.,~ -..... {.:-~ 1. ,,' . . -'---/ ,)' , "'1' oS.-:sl'& "'->", ~. "'-%,., '~ ~' " "",.,",c'£'~~"i~!!lliff ';<:/ // ~ ... tlJ,r ".../ '..-'/ , .. # . , /" / ;;Z / .. / <pf/ .ry c"; " // / / / I / @ ... ", / DR. STRONG CONSUL TlNG ENGINEERS .. """',, .... -,-~-" O'"~·''',.,,_ .. -''''' '," ''"'"Os: ""'"", "'" .- L --.~.;:',-.' .. ~ ® AVANA RIDGE PUD GENERALIZED UTILITY PLAN NORTH -- lZ19_1~ " :1 z l~ 0 ~ X , §ii 0 • c ~ 1 ~~ ~ ~ ~~ " ~ ~~ m ! ~! o~ m , ~~ ;~ " ~ .., ~ 0 , ;:; z 0 " ~~ .... , ~ J~ " '" ~ i ~ • , " , ~ " m ~E ; @ 8 , H j '" ~ I :i m i! ;:: , ~ -~ m Z j l }~ :~ .... B ~:;: "' , I j~ " ! , I " ~ i! ! , .; , , l! ", , ! ! , il~ ! II ! i ~ , g , ~ j J , ~§ ! c, I ~DI ,~ ~ -z .. --r-! .., n ~ , 0 § z , ~ ~ I ~ " ~i c , ~ !:i G" l 0 0 i~ , , ~ z ~ ~ " , ~ m g~ t:J , c U , m ~ Z ~ , ~ , e ;: ! , , , ~ , ~ ! " " ~ l I'.i , ,. m 8 8' i n i~ z U m ! g ! " , ~ ,E1 " 1" , g !?: ~~ -;'~ ! z , ~ ~i " !:l ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ m " ~ 1'~ i .' "' , I" , ~i ; , " , ~-; , i ~~ • j ., ~ ~i ! , i~ , ~ ii , '0 " ~ , n 0 ~~ 8 E 5~ ~~ ~ ! , ;:: ;:: ::; :; Gi " ~ ~ 0 0 z z ~ i ~ S; S; z z z ~ !:l , '" m m ~ "' z " m ~ CRITICAL AREA MITIGATION PLAN A\lana Ridge PUD Renton, Washington ~~ ~ilil Wetland Consulting, Inc. ", ...... ·'."Oto,'.""" ..... "_,. ....... ·m-llll-<l'" PNW HOLDINGS, LLC 9675 SE ~61h SlrH'! -Mercer Island, Wr.. 98040 ill , , III Ii! ~i~ iI 'I N N ~ 'I" ); ~~ z !Ii' 1l\' n~ Cli '" ~il' :;: 0, "'i:::;: ~~ ", 10 1 0 ~i ~,-~ ~~ ~Q ~ ~ ~~ ~ " i Ii' UI ~ ;~-~ ,-a §H ~~ ~H 0 e m 9 1\i .. m " 0 " !: .. z Q ~ z " .. " Ii! 0 l!! Iii ~ ~1: 9 ~; < ~ " -~ ~~ '1 .. ~ in ~ ~~ ~ 0 " " -"I~8 ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ n ~ z n ~ ~ z " ~ ! ~ " ~ ~ • ~ ~ , , " , I i ! I o. r Hi ,. ~o ~ .!:~ ~~ ~H H §' n ~Ia ~; m .;:~ H u ~~ H ~; p ~" ;1 ~g " ,- ~~ ~ ~i 0' i~ 6~;:; ~~~ ~.,~ .1 1 ~~ n i 6n~~:: m~ii : il ~ ~~ ! , ;~ H i .!i ~s ~~!'iLz ; ~~ .i: ~.;i ~~ u rrli ~ ~~ ~ , ~~ , -, § n 0;5 J ~: ;3 ~! oc~~~ ~ zi ~~ ill!l! II! I~ ~ ,- ~~ ~ ~§ ~': !, ~:: n " ~~ " i~l~li 8~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~: lI~a~ ~ " ~:!i ~~ P !g~~~ " ! ~---------------------------- &n"'[J()"'Oon~~o n & & 3 n a a 0 0 ~ & & () 3 n 0;::1 3 ~ ~ ~ &3&OO"'Ca~o~::: ~nbbnnir~~OI "'0 "'[J Q () 3 a 0 ~ ~ ~ "'0 () a "'[J "'C 0;::1 ~ 0;::1 ~ 0 'O"O()"O()"'O~o3~ () () 0 "'C "'0 ~ 3 ~ ~ 0 ~ ,-----I , I i i CRITICAL AREA MITIGATION PLAN Avana Ridge PUD ;: o z il " z C> ~ ~ .. ;: ,. ~ z ~ n m ~ Z Renton, Washington ~ Sewall Wetlilnd Consulting, Inc. PNW HOLDINGS, LtC 9675 SE 36th Street· Mercer Island, WA 98040 II 'I _ ---1:' ct t ;1 rl ,I KEYNOTES lEVEL 1 AREA SUMWARV ."::.. .': •• J ~"'.~ , '( , A AS.' : B ' Ie ;C3:~'~; C~" ~,B"I D ~------"--"---, "':-+':~ ~ "',"'--+-'-'-'J --,~ > __ "1: ~r _~ 'J1' !'--.'..!L --'-'---"" (i) i... l'-" ir 1·· 1 J I I'" . 1,') : "~ ::'!: y;,; BUILDING ENVELOPE NOTES ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~:>.<,,,,,,, .... ,,,,.,,,,," _""""""""~'"M'''''~'';''''''''' '~'<>""."'''''''''''' 'l' -V""""'''''''~'' I~E'"_"""'''>L''H''''''''''''''''''~'' ~N(",-""-",,-'X''''''~ 05 E i _----'l:...1: ,,-" 1 1 FLOOR PLAN GENERAl ooTE5 ',._~""""l""'''"''~'_'', .... ~.".>" ·,,· .... , ... ,,_""" .. ·"1<0"4"""""'-"" """""'''' ...... "." ... ''''''"~~ ~" .. '''~ ,"' .. ,,, .... _.,, ... ,,~_"""""""'''''''_'''''''''CflC''' ''''''~' ''''''''''"~.''''':: .. '''' ........... ''''''.'''' .... "'.""""''''~''''''''''',",'','''''''O>-'''' "., ,,, • .,.,.""., "''''''PX''''-"",'',,'''''''''''-''' "''''-''''''' ....... ~'" , .. ~ """"""",,' ,",""c>. '''"''-'''''''''''''_''tH'''''''''~' 'N"-"" n_,,," __ "_',, ''''"'"'''''''........--:''''',.''''''.'".''''',...,.' "-'~, '<W .. '''''' ;OC,.",-,~ "'"O' ""~''''' """""""'," .. !T''''''!l:!''' .... "',.~.'''' """'-'.""",oe.'".""".",,,, .... " ..... ,,""" ,,..,,.,. ~,,,~, .... -"', .... ,," ~-''" ~ .. ,..-. "'''''''''''''''.=.'",,,,>,-,'',,' ''''''''' .. ''''''''''''''''''-'''' ..... ..::-1 ....... '''''' _'lO<"""""''''''''''''''''''<'"","'"-",,,''''' ''''''''"''''''to''''''''''''''''''"''''''''''''''' "-"""" .... '03<'0;'''''''' .. " .... "-'-',,......-.' ... ,""''''~'''''''''~ ~"H"."",-, ~.'"""" .,,' ""', .... -...,,""":' ,,"'OX'''" ""=' "''' __ '''",",~'''O_ .. ,,,.,~ "."' ........ """"""'-",' .. "-,''''',''''''''-'''-''-, 'T"''' ..... ''''" .. ",., ... [''-'''''',· ..... ,'''''',·,'''' .. .., (F.3 F6' --,-~ ~ _"=--,_ -'-6 I i r··1 h",_· _--I.-..... b t~-A t--~ 6-"" , : -~ -CO"RIUO. 1,::-,',.00 ---"-'----.~. ~ '. f .. :. " 11 i _==J ""-"-,,-~ ---_I J ::./ AAl£NlTHOUNGE • Sll.RWI • 1 .---~~ U ~_.ill· ,,' LJ '1"" l I I' ·L---- ''l'" " I : r- ~., 'I' JI ! :~j f.!:!J i [ ._1,0 1- .J --~- I i .--=t. . -I ~ WE$T eYILOI~· LEVE~ 1 flQQRPLAN SCAJ" 1.~'_1'<l' PLAN LEGEND ',G ~ " 3 , l'i --'<;~ :1 ,- , 6, J ,.! ~; ~i ;1 • 8 ----:1 t 9 -eJ g' ...... ;;;<! .1. U • ! OJ I" ...... il ! .-..c Oi~ ~~ U o~ '-i~ ru f Cl. :::J 8 0 "- btl raJ AVANA RIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10016 SE 172M STREET. RENTON, WA 9OO55 AVANA RIDGE, Ll( WEST BUILDING • LEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN " .. ,pt ... fDu ..... (lflO"(f'IIfWT A2.01-W : A) A5' B .1 i I ;i , j I 'Yl Jl q. :;- (,') :1 :Ii "~.---' 1 ' I ,'_0 KEYNOTES ( C: ,,~ 2>C.~1 ~ ",' ~"', H LEVEL 2 AREA SUMMARY "'''''''''''. 'J'" 1 ~ , \.: .. , ((;6 ,CB·, D " ~ '''<. I''''; , C:) BUILDING ENVELOPE Nons ·""""""' ........ ~~'..;E.,' .. "'~""('·'" :OJ""""'''''''''''".''''''., ... ", .......... ,~,.''''"'''''''''<, ..... 'u,...,''''ow" ..... ,.,.".""".,."""" '~F""""'-M",""",..-.".~"t""',,,,, ''''''~L>'~'"''"'';''''l\''' ,''05' E ~ '''''' F o .,.) In ,~l 'T, fLOOR PLAN GENERAL OOlES ,,,,,,,,,,,,,-, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,....-,,",,,,,,,,, .. ,,, "r"", ... """","",>'"',,,·,,",w"""" """"'.n.""""".""'",.,.. .... "'''''' ~ '-"'''''''''-''''" "'""''''~ .. O,,'''''''·(, .. ''''''',..)><...''''"~E ,"-"""', .. """'~""'''''''.,'''..", ...... ";"'''.1'',,, ... '''''''''''''''.,.=,~''''''''' "'"E'''''''"'''''''''''';'''''''''""",,,''~'~~''' ""<.""" ..... ~,~, .. "" ..... "~"'''',~,.,, • .. ~""'~"'T~'_"' .. ""' .. E· ~l""""" _~·OHro'''''',._''" """'OC""'-'''''''''~.''''',''''"'~''-~''' ,=r"'~"'F""'''''''''','''''''''.'''''''''' . .-"'''''', ... .,,,"', ........ ''' ... .,, ...... ,, """""""'0''''''' ,,-,-._,,-,w''''''''''- '''''~·c< .. m~D_<i'''''''''~'''-"'~'","''' "'~"'"""),,,,,,",,''''''''''''"' ,,'-WU~ ...... ' ,(0.>'-"""'<"" ... ' U"'''''.'''' ,,"""',-,....,,~'''.~,.~"'''"'', oW"""""_ .... , ... """' .... ' ... ,_,, ,,,,.-,,,,c<,,,,,,,,",..-,.,~,,,,.,,,,u,,-,,, ... ,,,, ".''''' .... '"'''''BL,n'''·"'E.''·~'''..;." ... c '-",.,...''''-M ......... ''''''',''' ... ''-'', ""'-'"'''''''''''''''''''',''' '""""'''',"'''....."" .. , ... .-'''''-''' ... ~''''' " .. ;~<L'""''''-E''"'''''.' ... ''E''''''''' .. ;''''' 'F 3\ (Fe; " ~;: ,l It.;~-p' '" i Sl.oJRWi, }:;" I f....-I ( I [) " ,~ _~ __ .!..!.2'l", , ____ '.L..:.R -_. .oL,,,,,,,, ~,~ ,;.~~~.,.r-~.-----~_ .. "' Jl '» ,!,' .J L en , ... 1M "' ,,",' 1"1 I' " 1 L-J !'l __ " ,r_ WEST BUILDING· LEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN 0CJ<l, ,~·;'i·-'l~ -'-' -----.. PLAN LEGEND :G' .'I, "'" "' ~ " ~ . , ~I I J :1 '1 ~, 2 4 ~ .5 , 8" 10 ~! ..... u ~l Q) 1_1 ..... ~-..c !s u '-'" ro g~ , D. t ::J S 0 L. bfJ r.J AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10616SE172nd STREET RENTON, WA 98055 AVANA RIDGE. LL( WEST BUILDING . LEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN ''''''' P<AANED~!!ANI)[\FllOPM[JjT A2.02-W A' AS' B __ -'!!.!E __ ~-~ l'J :) I , Ii ~I t-t; Ji :1 I,ll Jl J 111·,--, l.') I I':J ,,--~-"-------~ KEYNOTES " C, iC_2I1C_3,i " " _---1L c;J J), 'I LEVEL 3 AREA SUYlAARY I ,~~",l":,". , ~ <-:"""" V 7 ':C6; \C8,'\O', • a".' 'f .. ·• (~,~) BUILDING ENVELOPE NOTES '"",."H.",,,,,~,,,,,,,,· .. ',,ur"F'" """"'''' ...... ,-''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '~F.-""".-','''''"'''''''_".'''''..-. ,."",,,,,,,.,,,.,.,..,, ''''''""","",''''VIIH'''''_IO<1'''''' "-'<--'''''':'''''"''''''''~' ,""',,,,,"",,,,""'"''''''''',,,,,,,'.(.''''' .. , ". .... ' ""~'" .,"'" ""-"'''"',''-''" =>~,-"" .. -",-..... ~ D5 E F ~ fLOOR PlAN GENERAL NOTES ''''''''''''''''''''''~:''ORl'''''''E''_''''''''''' """"''''~''''-'''''''',"''O'''''';C''=~ _"',,""'_''''.l1!''''''I<''''E'''El''~ ',"',1['-"'''-'''''- . "'_-"'N""".'_ .... o',...,."-'-"..,_'--"'--~ """''''''''''-''''''',>1'''','''''''''' '''''''-''''''''''''''''''''''"'''·'l:<>-''',,"'''''' '"""''''''''''''''''\'''''''''-'''O"( .. """,.,...,.~,,,, """""'''''''''''''~''"'''''':.'-''''''<:'''''''''-'"'-~' "'~"''"«'''''~, .... '',' """"'c ~["""""~ -,,"'''''"--,'''' ~~~~~1~i~:~~§?l:' ""''''''''''''D,.,,,,',,,,,,",,.-~e,,,-'-,,,,,...m: .... ~""""'''''=".".'''''.~ '_"'~_-""''''''''''H_'''''''' .. """,,, .;""'l_""'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''" 'D"·_"'J'.c.""",..-__ ,~,,",_-, u",'"'''''''''"'-',,"'''''-'''O'l'''''<'''''''.'_''''' ,-~.,;-.. "~"."-.. ,-""""-,,,,,",,.) F"·""""" ........... "--",,""·"',"',,""'.'f+ '<t"_'"-""'''~'''''''''''' ''''''."'''''''.....,'''''' .. ''' ..... ,'"''',:'<'' .. ,,''-'', " .. ,---.... ~'''''''''''--'-..--,.''"''''';'''"-- (F 6': PLAN LEGEND ,~~~- .--1'!--'--"'-------__ l.'-I @ 1< -- ~.' . "' "' I-- ITAlRW2 VESTIBIH 11'-") ,-"b I WE,TL06BY 1. ,,{\ ~, r. , " CD,c,,,,,, 'M",~" 'f J ", / ~":l ~. $'" ".. etc < ~, J\ __ .. ~ Flf,~~O. I STAJ-::"ii ~t-Yl r '1. ?l ':-JI H ~ Af " ~~i, : '-':: II i ,"''''-''C«<---' c I "" , "-'-' ., Ci ,;) D .!J .. ~~~I~il.'-p'NG . LEVEL J f~OOJLPlAN _ Ef-) t ~ >- 3 ~ 4 '¢t 5 'I 6 'J ! 8 '; J 9 10 .... " , U g:~ , . OJ f' .... ~! .s:::. • u ~§ ..... oiil I1J i g D.. • :J , , G 0 ..... bl1 raJ AVANA RIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT lOB16SE 172nd STREET, RENTON, WA 90055 AVANA RIDGE, LL( WEST BUILDING • LEVEL 3 FLOOR PLAN ,"'-" PlW.tDuRlIAIW['I'l1O'lo1ENI A2.03 .. W :1 . ' KEVNOTES u,vn 4AREA SUMMARV L. ,"::".'c-~h,1 ~"d ,~ i A! I,A5 B C 'I "C 2,:'6 3: , . (c ~I I'C_81'-D t' ". • ',"," + " .... rc'.1 .'- C!:..'_ c"' E BUILDING ENVElOPE NOTES '...-w"A"'''''_~~,'''''-'''''.'~'''''' """"""''''-'''''''''"''''<'".0.''', ...... ''' "«"[_-"'-"""""~",""'(O""'"'"' ''''~~'''''H''''''''-'' ,~,.,-.. ''''', ..... ''''''',,''''','''., '''''''"''rw'''''-'',''''",'''', ~'~"'"'~"~""-.. ''"'''."' '''''''-.'''''''''''''''''',,..-~~''''.-..,, """'l"'-';;l""""''''''''~'''''O_''' ~"",.,,,,,,,".-.,,",,,,~~ 'D 5' E ~TAlRW2 F FLOOR PLAN GENERAL ~TES '1." .... _',,,""",·,"',,,.,"',.;,.,.,,,·", """"~("'-"'-"""'''''''I(~ .. '''',-"",-", , ... _"''' .. _I'''''','....,.. .. ~'lE'''ET''" ''''''-'''''' .. _ ....... ".,w_,.""",-,,,,,,,, ... ,.,,,",.,,,,,~, ,.""",,,-0<,-,-..0.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,',,,,,, '''''''''''F>" .... '''''''''''-'".,"'-''''.,~'''''' '''''''''"'''''''''''''W-'''''Oo'''''''''''''''''~'''' ..,""','"''''''''' """'-""""-'H"'"""""""" ,~""'" I<OC>'~" •• " '"" """." '« ~~'" ""'-""""''''''''''''''''',," ,""""',"''' ... · ... ·'''''''''''"'-'''''''~,.N'', "'-~'''''.,. .. ,, .""' .. ,~~"""..,~''''" '-"'''''E''''''''''-''''~-'"'''''~'-~''''' """,."""'L""-lD"Ll'" """ .... ,""',..."'" \""',,""'''~') ... _m''''.''''''.''''''''"',"., """"'''',rc ... _=,,~''''''''.''r .-"., .. ,,""''''., .. '''~'''' .... ,,-'''''' 'fl""l"""'''"''''''''''''~''t'''-''''''''' c'>~~'-'«-""~'-.",'"''''''''''''''~'o <JJ>""~"""L"''''''''''''''''-"''''M''''_'''' ""';""""""""'''~'''''[(''(~X''''''," ""'''''''''.''''"'''''-'~'''''''-''T('''_~ "'-" ....... ""-'"'''''', .. '',J.,''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''"''''''''' """"-"''"'"'''' "",(_ ... ,_,,,..-... W,,",,",""''''''''''W;'''-''~, F.3 :F 6') F-~..II'- tl, ,~ ! ., .1 I tL !1 ~1'! IL.. J~~. ':-1 ( ,~.~ . ¥'. " I ---:-1 --" ,_ -, ... 'r' ILl r-:f '~ r'f fJ . ' .. ~W[~1~([V l ,. PLAN LEGEND ,.. G~) " i ;~ ~! ~i , ., " ~-.- STAIRWi,C<!' -It- • Ii J1 ?), I, ' Jl L j'." IG j ",J 'e,') ~ l ~~ l1.1 ~ '_Ole' ~ " 11 ~---"'--!----1 J L WEST BUILotNG LEVEL 4 FLOOR: PLAN SCAlF l,t·~I'{· -------$ ': 't ~: .' .,' : 2 ; 3 ; 4 : ~ " ~/ 6 7, 10 ...., e! u ~"!! ClJ '. I~ ...., ~! ..c • u ~~ '-,; Iil ! D.. I ::J S 0 "- OIl raJ AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10616 SE 172nd STREET. RENTON, WA 98055 AVANA RIDGE. LL( WEST BUILDING . LEVEL 4 FLOOR PLAN ''''"'I'I.A/jN~O_OlI'lL~.T A2.04-W KEYNOTES I-----t(.~~. '"T I,'J ~ ,~ 'e"1 'C2J:::3) f' " r ~ ~. ,- d, "I .:r_~ ElE\'llDR tlAiRWi _:':±: 1- k- ~ ", ,~ YJ, LEVEL S AREA SUMMARY .~,:;;-~ ~i,,,~; ': .. ~ <":"f F~ ,C8:,D' ~ ""-J ,,--; I~.!:! __ - -~ ,(I roM~ ~~r I ~) [.;J I .... L BUILDING ENVElOPE NOTES ''''''''-..,....~M''''''' ... '''' ,e> CA_"""""'."""~~"'''. _c"._. ''''Bi ""'~"""""''''';'''''''''''''''''' ~''''"'''~t''''''''''' .~_", -""~",-,,,,,-,,".,,,, ..... '''''l~' '''''''''''''''''''·WS·~~~I ~~;", .... ~""~~ . ...,,,,,,,.;, 05 E ~'~ F ~ FLOOR PlAN GENERAl NOTES ,.",~, .. [ .. ",-"""",,",,,,,..,,,, ...... """"'><.,-.."","-"",,-"""'- '-"""""""'''_<£o'',c.-H''~ """ , ... " ''''''''''''"''''''''';'''-""'-'''''''''-,.-'"''"' .... ""''''''''''c'''''''~''',,''<.,..;,~»''''''-'"';_ft'N' ....,"""~~"~, ... ,, ... -.. ,,~,.~ ""~."",.""'-.. --'" .=r«~'''' ... ''(_'''"','''-:''''''I.''',),' ,:a.""", ... ".~ "",""',,,"""', .... &,'" "-""'~'''''''~.r'''''''''''''_~''''_ ~''''',''' . .,'o",''"'"'_''_" .... ,,,'.-. '_·"'''m~'.~I''_''''''_,,'O' ... '''' _,,~"''''','');; ... -0[0I .... ''''' ,"""",,,,-",' ;o",_,,,,,>~~, u_''''''" .. ,""'."""'''''''''''''''" .. ''' ..... ..".'''' =r'''''-''_''.''~, .. ''''''''><W'" .,., ... ""~.~,'"'''',.~,--",>ff<U.",_.''' c .. ",,,' .. "'''"''' .... '',''',,.,,,'"''''',,,.,. ... , -("-"'""""H",""""""-"'..c-",,,,,,,,,,,, ---''''''''''''"''''''''' .... • """",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~,, ... ,,,,,,,,,~,,,.""-""I , ""-"'~"'""",E"""""'~''"''~"''''''''''' (F 3'; ,:F 6) PLAN lEGEND :G I I~ I H' ,\ I 'I 1 J:\. t STAl • ..., Ik1 ] '. Jl, (OJ I : ----t J """"""",,,' ,'-' !:;.t:J 1" · c 4 Jl H ! (~'J ,.;,' I::) I A; i (,J c; t.j ffj WEST BUILDING· LEVEL 5 FLOOR PLAN SCALf-"s' ~, o· ~~---- ~ ~ '.2 " . ('--~ : 4 .. i<~;;, ~! 5' ~ '.6 ': 7 J 8 " 9 ~ ~ 10 ~ i • i g +-' U ClJ +-' .c u 1- rtl 0- :::J o "- btl r.J AVANA RIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10016 SE 172nd STREET RENTON, WA 98055 AVANA RIDGE, LL[ WEST BUILDING , LEVEL 5 FLOOR PLAN ,"'-" Pl»UI[D_OCVJ:lDPME~l A2.05-W -~ BUILDjNG ENVELOPE NOTES -ROOF '\ 3 4 ,~' 6 , .8 9 10 ~l , A 'A5 1~ II , ~~ , , '~'- , . ~U1 I A': 'AS: B ~.~----./ ',B, ROOF PLAN NOTES ROOF VENTILATION GALGULA TIONS ROOF SLOPE I PARAPET HEIGHT CALGULA TIONS ' .. -->' .... , ",',-, '''':''", ""-"'~"" .. ""'''<~ ..... -'''' :;c."""" ... ", "'~c~"'.". ""'","C:'hN, , ',,,,,,,,,,,,,",",,,,,,,,,'>.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,",,'-""'" "0'·~--"-··'-1"" -~~."'",..,~' I-"'~'" =~"-I: E!~:::::-'" I ~·""'"-¥2:~Z::,:· ::~:~". ~~',,~' I:"· .. ·,, ' """""''''''''.'''',''''''''' ,."""." I'" ,,. .~. """"", ',-,"'" ---;":,'''',, ,~,'<'" -" ,.,.~'" -! ----,~-."',. ~ .. ~ Y r :-c) " ,~ (C_~)I\~ 3') :C6 ca, D' l.l~_'+-----'-L.. L!.!~_ ~ ",", '','-:po:. 1; r m4'." ',-,--,'-'} 1 I , I ~ ~ -- ~, , ----- o ~ I ~I C I (6:2'1 ((;,3: 1-:1 u ~Jrr::r j-L __ ~ • '~"'--------< I,C.~i :C,B, i D 05 ',D_5 , E ' F (F.3;: '-',"------# r "I L , ., ~- _J [] i . I~JlJ E. 'F-' 'F 3' WEST ROOF PlAN SOd ·~·~I--Y ,,,-,.,,",,,,," . - ;F.6: ,--.---~ iF 6') .""" ...... ~.,,-,~<>1 """"'...,....."""~'" ::G' '-'-'-' rL=-r~ vi " -~ , : ----' , , IH ~:j iG) CD :~~',;"~~i" 1 :t 2 :' ~l ' 4 ;. !I ..... :~j ¥ , 5'\ ': 9 (10'1 1', 'it Je ,m .... U ClJ .... " ! .-, .!: U '- ru 0. :::J o .... btl r.J AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10616SE 172nd STREET, RENTON, WA 98055 AVANA RIDGE, LL( '''"-'''''''''' ... '''''''' WEST BUILDING • ROOF PLAN "'''-' J>lmtEDlIRlwHl£l'£ulPllOO A2.06-W ! (0: =rH1===rH3 (H_B,I __ ----"--.!.!'L __ ~'----"-',T-_- , -' TflWl'$T(JRA(;' l;; i~ J A fIIHESS I, j :) .J ,-:<OO ...... "',1f ,,,-,x' 1 ~OT"'-"I""""~<I""" KEYNOTES :1.51 'J 2/ ,J 3 -----'--, ~.' f I ~~l I I J [l,VATOR ,@"S'IOR" ,,-. If WAl[RSNlNKLERI LEVEL 1 AREA SUr.t.IARY ~,.~-~-.~. ~"o<"''' _. =:--:-:;~, ::;,";" i~:I' .. <'" " ,,~> , J6 'J 8\ K 1 , - , I... BULDING ENVELOPE NOTES " .. """"'--~"""'''-... '"'''''." """""'><"'-""'· .... ' .. W~"><CE""""" ''''''_''''_"''_'U __ '''''''''''' ,..,y",,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,", """_s'",,,,,,,,-.»,,,,,,",,,,;,,,, ''''''''''''''><>'''''''''''''', ~.::.:u .... ~"~~~ .. ,,,,,,~,, 'f5'1 M ~ + FLOOR PLAN GENERAL NOTES '"' __ '"",.)"","" .... :;E"''"''''~'''''., ,[<'"", ... ".-=-«["'''"., .... '''''-''''''''''' ~;C< .. _''""''''' ..... 'f~" .. ''''" ''''''''''-~." ... ''''' ""' ........ "',"~''''''''_ .... o'''''''.''''~, ,"""O'"",..,,,...-,,.,,.,,.''''' .... E ..... """,,,c, ..... """""'><:<:<,,,::<.\''''',~'''''' .""'''....,.,.''''''''co.",''{W'''''''.,_,~.., """"''''''''''' ~"""'~.o""~"~.,,.""'~, "'~""'~"'_,"-, ... "',' .. ",,",C ~'''''''''.;-: -... ,~"".."..-'''' ~~q~Tl~ri£~~:~~a:' \_Y."-'l"'['.~""",",",',.~O""""""''''' _"""""')"l"""'~'''''"'' '",M'~"''''F')'''''''''_''''''n ..... ·,''''' ~",,"l"""""'_"""""""'''''''''''' 'TI~"""">"£.""",,,,-,-",,,"\_-O ""''''''''''''.",''''.-'"''>'1.''''''"'''''._,0< "~,;,-.. """"""",,-,-.. ,u:c-,,,~,,,,,," ... , """'",""..-...~'"""O-"K"'·", ow.'''''-'"''''''''''~'''''''''>N ''''~'",,,,,m'''',,,,"'''''.'''T'''E'''''''''''' "",,,,,,,,,-,,,,or,,,.'~'''''"-~<''E''Y",''''''''; • N ,NS; ----'l.-, --, L"-------_~ PLAN LEGEND '0 ~-,-. ~~T,~~I,L{I?'NG LEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN --------f:B '~ !\. ) ,! :1 1 : :t: " I __ ' I : ,'. '¥~ , L ~ :+ " • ;10 ~ ! ....... i~ u ~~ QJ 1 m ....... ~! .-..c 'e t~ U "- P ru I Q ::::J S 0 "- btl raJ AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 11)616SE172nd STREET, RENTON, WA 9B055 AVANA RIDGE, LL( EAST BUILDING - LEVEL I FLOOR PLAN ~ .. ,,-fU/j/j[DlJIlilAA DHtHOPM[~l A2.31-E I H~:H 1'· +-'+-----'-'--'- ~E~'IBULE I ' I 1 Jl " 1 KEYNOTES LEVEl 2 AREA SlJdMARY ~ _",e~"'~'_ ~~,,,~i ~, ,:c) H_~' [i 6' 1,5 'J.2', :J.3) " .. C+---~_~ '!.'''' • -'!".!"-'C __ '!! • 'i ~) "r ~'- ~;~ ,~l Ji BUILDING ENVElOPE NOTES '''''''''" ..... '''~OH''m"''"_'''''''' , ...... ""' ... ...."",,,_ ..... ,,".-.''''" .... ,~,"""_"''''',.,-''''''"''',_"''..,"'''' ""~,."''''''"''' ... ,' """ "''''''''''''''''''''''., ......... ,,''"'-("".'.i"",,,).,,.,,,,,,,,~~. :.="'-' ...... """-""~'-' ''''''''',''''''-'-'-''''''-'''''''1>.<'''''' ~-"--"-,~W""",(("w"",,,,),,,-,,< 'h""""·"',",,~"'''''~.'' FLOOR PLAN GENERAL NOTES '''''''''''''''0,'''""'''",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ... ,,', "'-"" .. ,~""c ... ,,<'''''o,,~~~,, """""''''''''''''''''" .. , . ..,.. ..... ~'''''''' ~ '."""'".n"",",,,,,,, .. ,,,,,,,,",,,· ._oc..-""-...... .,..' .. ,'''''''''''' '''''' ... 'r.'''''''"'''''''''''..,.. ... rr,x:<·''''''-'= ""~"'""'-"u-"·'-"-'''",,,''"'.......,_ ...,.}.>:.:»J«~",..,."r"'" ...... ""'''''''."',· ""e .... ""-' ... , ... ,...,.".,,"' ~,-"'-'"v .. " -~'''''''''''''' .. -, .... ''''''"'''' '" "''''''",CrM''''''I'~ .'-,~~.''' •. . =''''t>'''''"'''''''''''''~'''''''''''''' """""E"""""';""'''''''''''~O'''''''' '-"'"''''..,LC<.·''''l[ .. ",:'''' ..... ,''''~.'''' """"''''''''',",---",,,,,,,,.,"-,,,,-,">,,,,",,, """''''",,'',=-,,~'''''.''''r '"""" ... ".,,"'''-''''', ... ..-,'''.,,-''''''' "l",*''''''''''''''''''''','''''·'''OO''''' >~~"""'''''''''''.''"'N('''''-''''_l) tiJ>'F-'T''''''''''""_''''''","~'''''''''''''"",",'''' "'"","',""-"''''m''.'""«~~,",,,,,, ,,,,, "'., ...... ,,' ~""~, "'"''''''''' 'O""""~ "",""'",.""",,"""',,"" ''''';or'''''''''''''''"'" .... '''.'''''',.''' '"""-'II' " .. "-~,.«' .. ,,,"-""-,''''''"','''"',''''-'''' N :N 5; PLAN LEGEND " '0 , ' . ./ ------~-.I--~ ,/1 t-- ....... ~ Ib....~r'.l .h .J .~1 I~ I j 'j -'-,-1 t~ E~ST [lEVAlOR I"i"~ '-1 '-1'1:' I~ 1/'8.,,,1, · r "" I ' L , '''''''' ," r ~; ~,) :;:'; [,' "J "' I" I, -", , " "-"",,,"co 1,<,: ":1 -L EAST BUILDING LElfEL2 FLOOR PlAN -E£j SCAlE 1~'-1"-(r "",w,.,.~ "'" ,,~'"' •• """' __ -------------------- 1 i 5,' ., ,.. :,6) I~ ! j; , ,'l. " ~ i ...... 0' U , . ,I. III ~ ! ...... • ..r:::. , ~ U L.. i ro t 0- :::J ~ 0 "- btl r.J AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10016 SE 17200 STREET, RENTON. WA s0055 AVANA RIDGE, LL( ................ """"',, .. EAST BUILDING· LEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN ,., PlMKlLnANOC\'l1rR1t.r A2.32-E ~-,,~ " ;' KEYNOTES LEVEL J AREA SUMMARY BUILDING ENVELOPE NOTES FLOOR PlAN GENERAL NOTES PLAN LEGEND ~" H ;',H 1 ,H3: :HB, , 15' J i J.3} i ~.I>---!l:.'~ ~ ~-~-' u. __ ... ' .. ~ i '~ 1<_~_ ",--~-!'-.. --'.' '-, ~;~ l~) .~) r-r ,~~ Ii " '!-;:~,::r ~,:'''': ~ \:'p" ,:J6 iJ,8}KI ~ .". {f~~-Y ---'''.'.' --- ,,,,,,,,, .. ,,,,.,,,,,,~,, , .. , ...... ,,''" , .... "".,. ... "'.,.~ ~"'~."·e'""""", "ff""""""'''''''''~'''''''''''''''''''"'",:; '~"~~"'"''['':''''' ''''''._''-'''''''''''''''''''''-''''''''' """"",,,,''''''''c ... ''''.·., ~,;;,~",~,~~ .. ,,,,.,,,,~,,, ,,,,,,,,u;,,,,,,,,~,,,,,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, "" ... ,,,,,,,,,~.,,,,,,,,~,,,,,,,,.,, .. "".""" ... "" .. ,.".,, "'~"" 'K.S/ L M' '''''''''_.''[>«[·'''''Ul'''A''''''·'''~ "'''''',"',"'''''''''''''''>T''''.N<l..>J<''", Y<J._")'."_''''''''''''''''''''~'''''''~ ,,.,,,,_a,,,,,,,·,,,,,,,,.,,,,,, .. ,tN.,~, ,-,-,,,,.,,,,~,,,,-vo,,,,",,.,_ """'''HE''''_'',""""",""'',cv.',"~,,,,,, " .. "~"""" .. ''''''''''''' .... ''''''''''''''~...., ..,...., "'-. ..... "'~ ,.,.', ~"'''''' "",~" .. '''''''.''''''IU ... Pf' .. ..., .. ,,~,~ ..."-,,."",""',., ..... , ... '"""","""""'''''''''''''''''''':,'''''''''', ,« .. '"'''''''"''''"'' ...... ".~''''''."..''''' .. ..";><l,"",, ... ' ''''"''m,'' ... '',-,. ... " """"")'"',«.~""""',""" .. ,c.,."" ... , ,""""'"""" .... ..".,..1'.,"."..,."',,,,'" "<"'''''U'''' ... OC~.",,,,,,, .. ,, ,>'><.""-....."""--..,,"' ... ><.~_, ..... "'.",_, ... C"""""'.,"" ..... ..,·~,., ",......,""""""' ... ,.""'''''''''..,,, . .,,.,,, u"''''''''''''''_'''''''',"''''''''''''''''~''~ <""".1~"_"'''''!~''''''''''''~'''''''''' ""'''''' .......... u.~''''''''''''"o'''''''' ,,>"""W"'''''''''~)',~, ,'""""",_,...:.e.,""~,,,,'''"«,,,".'''''-''', """"""""-".[C"",,,,;o_~"E"''''''~['''~_ (N" /N-S: ~-.-"-~ f ,.'go .. -+---~ 'r .. -------+ '! L-----+-------"'-!. I') v C,) " ,?d .~l ~'AlR El : 0 ,I 1..-,,, \ I. c' II p, I ... ·1,,: F""', _ L. o;J t -"f I t--" .. "-1:1 I, -;J , I I~ ,~;" ii"~'" " .. ". -" ' ,;;, .. L.......I.;o}, 1), II:,' . nmrO!!I :1./ I ,""A'fCr---,-~ .. ~ I tr-----.J I~j ~;: -!." !..- 4'·iTAIRE1 ~ " f I ,c,; I - l-j ! H~. ---+-------"-"'" ... _ "'''L_ (~J :J J1 ~; ,r), I J :TI I;) ..q ---- ~T,~.~I,~2IN.Y.: LEVEL 3 FLQQR.P~ 'W -1 j~ 'j D~ 2' 4" , I ~I ; 1.-': 5 :11;·:i,6~ I ~ ~ l ' , 7 ; I :1 (~ ~ .. ' 10' so ..... -8 H u t~ (lJ " ! ..... .-.!: Oig f~ u ,~ '-~~ rtl ! 1 D.. ::::J E 0 '- bJl raJ AVANA RIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10616 SE 172M STREET. RENTON, WI!. 98055 AVANA RIDGE, Ll( EAST BUILDING ~ LEVEL 3 FLOOR PLAN ,,,...,pt_rOUR,WHI1'Vi'IOI'IIEWT A2.33-E 'H -"'H l' (H.3,' ,..L') ,;<:4 ---'!' _'!.!..L ., ::! " ,:1 'j .Jl A, ' r-' --'le_' , ,H 6, C!, ~ 4 f .,-'''', EJ.!.1: .~, ',', .J '.5 '£ " IV KEYNOTES ~ 'J 2 'J.31 f'_!'-#- LEVEL 4AREA SUWAARY h':: .... j·· "'", ,;.~ r " J.B: (.1 -B' ,( K' f-_!"L_l.,J"'l;,. 'I!"" r-,:, BUILDING ENVELOPE NOTES """""""""~'''''''''''''''",,,,,_~ """",,,,,, ... ,,",,,,,,',,,,,-,~,,.,,,,,,..,.,-, ',m, "'~"""''''P''''''''''''''''''''''''':; '."~""')-~'''''~~'' "[["""~""",,,,;-",,,-..,,,,,,(,,., ""'''''.'(W'''''''''''''''"'''' ""-~,,.,»-"'~.....,m' .. ' ~~.~''''' -,.,,..,,,-.,,,,,, ~,,,,,,~~,,,,,,,,"-,, "' .. ,..., . ."''''''' .. ,,,-'' IK 5, M ""i: .. FLOOR PlAN GENERAL NOTES ""; "'~...:;"""-x'" "'-"" ... , .. " ..... ~."."" F'''"'''_~_'''''-['''''''''''"'''''''::'''''' "'''''''''(O''_'''''''''_"'~ ~''''''''w ""'1£' ....... _''''' ,"",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,"",,0",,,,,,,.,",,,.,," ,,,,~, , .......... ,\'<,"",--... " ... ",,,,,,,"'" ;=""'''';-'<'' __ ~'' "X""'~ "-,, ... , ~"""" ,,,., """,",wo::. "'~,~''''''''''.'''' ""....,"''''''''' ~"'-""''''''M """.'" "c." ".'''''''''t<''~'_",'''''''''''''~'''H1''-''< ..,.-"""".-.. ""',,. ' .... '""''''''h •. -'''.''" .. ,'''''''''''" .. '''''".' ""<,,."' ..... "",""""'~~""-''';.'-' .. , "'''''''"."'"..-''', .. '''''''' .... ,,, .... ,, .-.-,,,,,,=~""E'" ,:~" .... ,.,. .... ,""" ''''''''''~''''')M __ '''''"'TS''''' ... T''~'"'' •• , M<"''''-'-'-''''''_''~'''''''_'''' '''''''' ........ '·'''''''-'«l,''''''"'''U''' ... '''''-" ."","',*,E;w:'~"';«·""-""E~" ',""~""" .... <.".""r""'.',",'''''''''''' u-"",,,,, .. """","".,,·,"-',,, .... ',, ...... '"--'" ""''''''''''''''" .. ~''''''"'',...-'''''x'''' ''''''.,,, ... ~'''''"'''')W<'''''''".'''''''' ''''''''', .. ''' .... ,''"''-'.".''''- ''''''''''''','''''''''"'''<''_''''1«(''.'''''''''' " .. """"",_"""",[O_~"''''''''~''',,,,"''' N N5 ~ .+-!La-~ PLAN lEGEND : 0" , , ~~ . ". ~---4 ~ B." Y), :.',,' 1-<' ,t ,I .iJ !old. 'I' J.,,,, . ·"~'l··. I' CORRIIOIl $""'" ~(. -'" F"-r--~'A-'" ~~'1"".--"'-"";Al ,.~,- ,., n[.ATOIl 'II "' c~- "" j ... ~ l-~ ,"'~ c, "J" -- J.!, I' '-,-,---- I,', ;:, 1 "z 1 ~ST BUu..~!ftG ~mJ,4 fLQO!U'I,AN_ SCAI" ,~.~ "-<)' e;J I 4 I~ 'I 1 '. ~l I 6 I~ j ! 1 '! ! ;1 J I :[: .~ ~ ~ '10 " . ' .... ~ 6 it u 0' OJ '0 , ! .... il i; ..c E~ u ~: ... !~ ro t D. :::J 8 0 ... bIl ral .• ,,~="'-'--------~ AVANA RIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10616SE172nd STREET RENTON, WA 98055 AVANA RIDGE. LL( ,,,.-""""""',,,....,, "-"",,,,,,,,,,,, EAST BUILDING· LEVEL 4 FLOOR PLAN ,,.. "--'""""""D'VEl[ ..... '~1 A2.34·E H H.1 'H.31 ,.';' ; '-. ,,' Jl ~~ " '''0'" ~ oHc.M. ",,'''"lE,'''',''" '.,""''' "'1>."'''''~''''' I,H.~! ~. \;:' 15 KEYNOTES J" J.2",'J.3 LEVEL 5 AREA SlJdMARY ~::::;I ,,;) ( J6\' JS:,(K: -----2l~_~_~!!"~_. _ ,,~ __ + __ U' ----"'-'-'+ ___ ~_L_ _./--!"!_-4X.~ ___ '!l!1:_ .~~ "' " ") oJ I,') ,~; tLE .. rOll ;{;AlR!l f # __ '·".7 ~ 1<'7_ '_'~ ,f;l c"".DC>l $"'" ,-,) ~ ~ L BUILDING ENVELOPE NOTES , ""'XO(....,.,"'~""'"","'.''''_,'''' """'''''' .... ''''''''."'''''',,"''',, ...... -. .~'''-",.,'-< ... '' ....... '''''''''''''''" ,."~';ES-"'-E""' __ ' \~"E o" ... "'''''"., .... -( ..... -,''''[~" ,;"" ... Li,..'''''''<=~.'n) ~="""""''''~''''''-'''''''''E '''''''-'''''''''.'_''''''''-''''''''''''''CO, ' ... · .. _"'r""'~',,..",,O"'.·''''''' .. 'R w.'"=''-'"'-'~''' .....-" 1,.K.5; c,~ -----'l...~ -l~ , FLOOR PlAN GENERAL NOTES ..... _".""",""'''" ... ,''', .... " ... ,,, ",r ... , ... "_.o.>.F .. ,,,ro'M""~ .-.....,H'<U'_; ... ..."..-.. ~ "''''',''~ ''''''', ..... ''''''''',., '"'_"""""'-"""""'~""''''''''''W . ......,.,"',.,."'-"'--.... ,,,,"',,"'" ''''''"'''''''O''''''_~'''"''''''''''''' ... ~>.A ,~,".'_"'~'''''M''''r''''''~'''T'''''''!.<· ....,"""'>-",.,,"~ .... ~,"""~"..,."",.",, .,.''' .. ,.''' . ., ..... ''''-,.,,~,.'''''-.... ~""""'''''.'''''''''''''''' .... """'","'", ..... ."0'"'""'"" .. ,,,,,.. .. ,,, «"-""«c"""" '""""",,,,,,,,,-.e,,,, ~:E""'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''~''''''' =)""'''''''"';''''''''''''''''"'~'''"''' ;""""""'~"""'''_''''~'"'·''''',"'H, "',",""',","""~"~~-"""" ''''''''''-"''''''''''''-' -1<""'; U.'.'''","'' """",_o""'("""'''''·~=''' .. )('''' ::'''~...-..''''''-<.,',''"r'''"'' .. ',..,...T' u'","'""'''''''-'''-'··...,,,'.'''''-·...:''-''''u''''.''' J\"'.T~ ~"""' .. ~"'~'"'''''''' ~"" .. " ""''''''' ...... '"~'''~'''''' ... '''"''"'".~ .. -.-." ..... "'~"".",."-"~",'" ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,',"""'''''-''",,.,,,.,,,,,,,,,-,,,, <r .. """"'"'''TlIa<f",'''''' ... ~'=·''''.'''' 'N " '~5' ,~ (~ 'J 7), I:>J Ci] ,. EAST BUILDING LEVELS fLOOR PLAN SCALE '~"1'G' ... -_.- PLAN LEGEND r 0'1 I, 3 i ~: b':" 2 ~+ :> ~I~, I "j , (,' ., . r 5 ~, b" , ) 6 _I I 'j L ~j 1 " -L~ ,~ i 7 I 8 9 " ---$ ....., H u H OJ .... ~ ....., I" "'! ..c: ~-~ u §~ .... ro ~~ D. j ::::J 8 0 .... bIl rll ""='-'-"--.-"'~'""~. AVANA RIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10616SE 172nd STREET. RENTON. WA 98055 AVANA RIDGE, LL( .~"""DI:"'_" .... ,"""" .. " EAST BUILDING· LEVEL 5fLOOR PLAN ·,w. "'-"""!OU~E!AA D"[WPMI'.T A2.35-E BUILDING ENVELOPE NOlES· ROOF 5 6 I 7 6 9 " ",."" .... >'"IF,'~'~ I""'"'' H ,H 1. :H.3.' '[',J [ I [ r= i~l , L i j' i i _J ._.J J H iH 1 , , ~I H6 IH.61 ('J ROOF PLAN NOlES ROOF VENTILA lION CALCULA liONS , ">'~''''''-><''''''''''~'".,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,' ' .. _"'~r".T"."'''''' I ::,:., "","" """,",,"'" '" ~;;.': [' ~~;:~ ::: :':~ j:::'::' ,'," ~ .. ';';t" I :..~ "_ ?o?i::,::"""t ~. ~,"' :' .. ~' ---. ., -~~"'"'~ ...: :.~;," . ,1 15 J ~I (j 2':(J,3) , 'I ,J,6 ,J,B,\ K I K,S' L M (N 1 ,N,S: ;',0 I _.:!...!' __________ .• e I" ._~-..L~ .' "'I ! lC'r ___ ~." "'" ~ -------_ .. _--"-"-- '--f1F~rr ~ .J ~ 1 . 'C"j" I , 1-1 • J J ,. .1 ~ i i '1' I- I ~ II ! [ r ", IJ~ Il_ :J I ~,., , ,mn-r~ " 16+ .1 J.B i'!"K (K.5~ ! L i I ·_-tLJZ _. ---:' . j,/~ II ". I~ ,.,I,l' U_ .. J_-l '~"'~ I ~ N ,NS' -EASlHWF P~_ ~1,~·."~· "0' $ I, ;" 4 .... " 5' , .. .... '6 .,,~, I I is -;-( g, ~ -:: 10, , ....... I u QJ f ....... ..c ~ u " '- ~ ro D. ::::J 0 "- OIl rll AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELDPMENT 10616 SE 172nd STREET, RENTON. WA 98055 AVANA RIDGE, LL( ".......,"""""'"._""'''.,.'' ---.... ,,, ",., ... , EAST BUILDING, ROOF PLAN ;>.< "'-'-",",IINI"'l'llOPUl.T A2.36-E A ,A-5') ,B"" Q N.5 N c-"~~_~,[(-,."q.¥ >0'''''' """"",'-"n,,, L_ ~'~+ c-, , I ~~ , , , , _F-L J r.' ~ ~' , , " ~ -"--_-1 1 " __ J , , , L __ , .. ",.; _r---: ~\ PM~,~Y~AAJ,J,_f;L"EV~AwTl~O~N ____ _ " ~ ~., "i-) -, -'--, + : C \C 2~C,3 'C.6,:,C.a) 0 (0.5' E ',,' F :F.3' (Fa',:: G,' ~ e~ M /' '1) ,-K_?\~):,J~8Yj_~) C~,3f~-~)( J' : i I 5! I I H6 ...J ,H 3; ~ ~ ~ ,~ /H-rH~-1;,H-.-3 H~6" ,15, J ,J2';J31 :J e/J_8;) K/K5'1 : L>~M; N 'i (ri~:: (0'-'" I l- L . -:: l __ ...J .... OVERALL SITE· SOUTH ELEVATION H1",H' 'G: '/F:~ f3; E'~I SCA..[ 1,1,'.,'<)" ~,--~ 5:,,-t --- I,o.( D-):~ 8/C.~<~.3,liC,2\C ) ~ ,B ,AS! A L;.J ~-~~~,~!E-NQRTt!_(LJ:V}H~~ ___ I~l_ g' +-' ro!l ., U '. 11. ClJ ~! +-' • ...c iiig '" U 0' L.. i~ ru i 0-, :J ~ 0 L.. btl r.J AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10616SE172nd STREET, RENTON, WA 98055 EHE BE5f , AVANA RIDGE, LL( OVERALL PROJECT ELEVATIONS ,"',-" ",_mU""""OfO!LOPIIEN1 A3.01 f H )IH,~: I,H.3} i 10,1 9' (8 , "" ~" > (,;,yl " " 7 , ---~~~ ,(~) ,"1-,5", H,e, 6 :.) 4 ,~,; (~) EAST 'pJ.~E.l,!ST ELE'!'AT~ OCA\.'W,l'-Ij" ,'J,2', :'j~31 "Asr BLOC .. __ ~~H'ff,~~r" .c; EAST R4~.r ~~; ~ -JA§_T -~W\~-~ • ___ ~r :_\~~\~ t" .. [AST· Li~[\~ ~ I 1 ---I-~'> (J_6) ~~ :J.B)" K;: - iK5', EXTERIOR MATERIALS SCHEDULE C~L '"""""_ ~:~:"'~,~,,;;:,:,~~;.~'"~ . ~::;::~:e:::-I"::: ___ ~ ~~Ie;;=-I:~:~-:. BUILDING ENVELOPE NOTES .. ELEVATIONS ~." .... ~""'''''''''''''''''''-''' .... "''''''.''',.o.t" """",~",,,,-.;w_-"'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''(h_ """'" ~"""-""'·'.""'SH"'[_""~""''''~~''''' ""."," """""-,,,,,,,,,,,~,,,,,,,,,,",,,,,,",,,,,':",,,-,,,,,,,,,~,,,",,,",,, ","""''''''''''''''''WIH''''TT_T>'''''~l'''''lI''m'' ... ,,,~,,,~ ... "'-'""'w' .. -,'"_'''"'·"",''''','''.,,''"-.. ,'''' .... , """""-".,,, .. ,,"',,.,,""""'" ..... """','._...,....O'C""'"~..<QOW'_ .. ~~''''''' .. ''''',''''''''''' """"".",,-,,' <or"" .... '" ..-,=<"'''~~''''''' __ " """",."""""",,,,, ... ,,,,,,,,,,,,, '''BE ''''''''''' ~-" ,..~""cc<n";."~~"'''(('''''''' ~'" """"" .. m"' .......... "" ~'"'_'''' .. ,~O''''''''''"'' ...... ''''''',...,., ~'''~''''.,><.o.,''''"'', .. '''' . ....., .... ,.,.,,, ... ''''_,., ~." .... -'''".'"'''~ .. ,~''''''-... , ~'"''''_'''''''~''<'''''''''''"'''W.'''' ""'''''" .. ''''''',...''''' --- .~",.it><l~,!"T""E" KEYNOTES M 'N (N,S) (0) CAS" BLDG H~;~I:T, L~~T, ~ , I [ASTROOFTQP ., I ~ "~'·'315·" 1=t:tcH-~-LI-i _. i 1:1 i ,1 I I' ~ST l.jW\~ ~ '~§T . 'f~~.,~ ~ LAST· L,E~~~ i~ {iii It I ~' ,,', -, " i ·1~1Jjii:s:ljlll " •• n ......... J Ul .. It" ~"'i"':"""", t . . r: S"TRrO<';."""" . . c",",., GR.OJlE '~'~i .' . W 3al'.13l.l1"~ ~~ . _____ " - - - ----I' --..( EAST.lJE7~~9~ ~ EAST 1j,lQ!:;_· SOUJJiElEVAUON SCALE '~'~"4 , .!," I gJ E ..... -8 · .~ u i 'i OJ · ~ i ..... I ~ ..c , Olg U · go I " '-h~ rc I i 0.. :::J I B 0 l- bn I ril AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10616SE 172nd STREET, RENTON, WA 98055 8lE EfHI2E , AVANA RIDGE, lLC EAST BUILDING ELEVATIONS '''''-'Pl''''''m>J ..... o'''''(f>M[Ij, A3.10-E 1 y>']' 3'~1 :' 4 \ '0'\ (\N.~:: '< N \~ ~~ , 6 , 7 /8'~9110" FASTBlrx; -~Pl.~!-~~ ~TR~.'_:;~ -¥-_____ ~_L."~~% - EAST BLDG WEST ELEVA lION OCACCi~""-lJ' ---- ,KS' ~, ('~I , ?jii\ , '1 ' I,'J 6) _ EAST -\E6i;E~l~ ..... EoASl_~~:\~~ EAST -LEVE,t~ ..... _____ jjjll:'f' EAST BLDG _AVG, 3IITGI~'~ EAST -Li7~~\!' ~ 2 t '" -' ~ J ::i -~'J 2: '_A_j J , EXTERIOR MIl TERIAlS SCHEDULE ::"11'::::::: -:-:-::::::.:;<' ._, ,_. ".~, ". ~ ""-"'""'"' .... '-.-~ .. -.. ~ .. ""'--.;.......... --~, ... " ... "'-''''''-,~ "" 00 ... "'"""",'",..' "" ... ,." ....... ""_""""" --, "-- ~: =::::''''. :...":::;;= ~:::: ~~"-!" -------.!_~G"'''_'''"''m~_ ,n:::oi~_,,~t,,~_, ',. ~::i::"",," ~ -"~"------ BlJILDNG ENVELOPE NOTES -ElEVATIONS KEYNOTES "'" ""~",,,,,,,,,,,,,, ... ,,..,,,, .. ~,,,.,,,,,,,,,",,,,, """"" .. '"" ......... ...,.""""".......,,'",c .... "" _"~ ... '''' ...... .,'''''''''''''''''.''''',,T>O''''''',. •• '''''''"''' """"" .. ___ .., .... -... ',.".,.,,, ' .. , 'V;, ~." ... ''''''''''' ......" _"<.""''''~, ","""""",,,,-..,,,,0;_, """""."-_.,,~,,, """"'" ""' ... " ..... H' ...... "".""'"'''''''''''''''~<''_, """ ..... ...,""" .. "'",--.,. """"''''' ,""""''''''''''''''''''''.'''''""'''' ... ''''',,,,,, ", .. """ _",.-.;"-',."', .. ,,""''''.,, .... ''' .• ,,'''',, •. ,,'''',r-<:.\ ""''''"""",,'T''~''''~''<VJOO'''~';'_'' "''''''-''''''''''''W'''''''''''''''''''"" ~FO'"""",,"'''r_~~.''''~ "'", ......... '''''' .. ''',', ...... '"'' .. '",,,'''''''',, ."" ""-"''''''''''' '."'""' .... ..-..,--" .. ~ .... , '''OE '"'~""''''~''''' .. ,,'-'''"'''''' ... , ""'''''~.,~'''''''''''-''.'''''''".''''''="''. "'~ 15 i... "He', (H 3: 'H -.,~",) LAST BLDG· H~~HT1~~~ So EAST R~~.F. i~: s EM'-'J,~~'~'''''' :1 I_EI\ST'~~ ! J j' C'8c '~:::' ~ -r'~·f-FA5TAlOC GRAIl [ ..... ' Jar· 1 JlJ.,-' - -CA~L~~\~ ~ ~ST . Lf,~f,!"J. ..... SE m:NP.ST· EAST 6~~ORTH EJ.WATJON." fl, SCIolE W~I'-I)" ";.,,J §lg ...... U ". OJ ' . '~ ...... I! ~-..c ~ u :.[§ '-!~ ro i" D. f :::J 2 0 "- btl ral '-""~,-~'= AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10016 SE 172M STREET, RENTON, WA 90055 E!IfI::l In.f\:f AVANA RIDGE. LL( EAST BUILDING ELEVATIONS ,,.,, ,,--WulI\!,"olVltCI'M[OI A3.11-E -------- /;.,' A~~:' '1 (~" C) I! -y I,." LfLJ 1.1:' ["fLI_ -, 1 :'10 :;"9-'(6" ~ 7 :' 6,' i 5 " ' ... ;~ .:" B ':, ,C/ C 2 ,C.3 ~ \;>; ,3/2 ,4 "'ESTBLOO H~'I~I~: Li~ _ 'LIEST~~'!'i:.6I WEST.l~~[L:lS, ., 'hIl'S-':'I:r.E\~~ _",=sr-L:li.,?Li .... _ST -LJ7'(~i ~ ,"&S" ,AVG 1I1,-~n:,:.1\i WESISLDG -EAS_LELEIl&!ION , SCAiE '~·ol'..:r LI :C6" ()'r~··" C8 'DI :D5'1 1 .. ' I (E "~I :,c) -c'j ... EXTEROR MATERIALS SCHEDULE BUILDING ENVELOPE NOTES· ELEVATIONS ~,"_""F,,"_""'"''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''"''' """",~"',"",_,,,,cu.:.-",","~""'rP'_' """"" ~"'r'''''' ...... '',..., x'''''....,~_ ".~"""'''''' ..... "'. "'''"''' ;"" ... ...,~~ ,,,,, . ...,,, ... , ~"-"'-"-"" .... ~'" .. ""'" """""'_ .. ''''''''''''''''r_,,,,, .. Iti'''''''''''''''''~'""''''''''--'' """""W''''-'''_'''''_'''",,''"''''''~''''-'''''''-''' """""-31...,""1["''''''"""""" """"', ,'" ,'-', ............ ""_.."..".,"'" .. ~~;"',o.,~", """"'" ,.",~'''''---•. """""·"'I .. _"",,,.~, "'¥'"' ""'_., -"""""-'-""""""''''''''"''''''';~'''''''-' ~'''''''_"''''H',"''''''''''''''',"'' ,,,""""""""''''''"-''"''-'''',,"'' ~'"' __ .,,, •• ,,"'(''''''''H''''' ...... ''''"'o''''.n ~'.,~F""'l'IO'Lr .......... """"'·." ... ".,.","''')~,''','' ~E"""_''''~'''''-'''' __ ."..'''' x''''''' .... ''''''~,.''''' .. ''''"',''''." I, F--':F.3, 'FS'" , G WESTJUJX; SOUTH ElEVATION, SCAlI' I.~·o ',';). :'''''''''''IIJ."",!'"n,,,, ----~-.... """'"'~'" --~ ''""'''--'''''''.'~'' .. ''''" KEYNOt~J M:STDUlG H;:~,HT. L~~~ S __ .... ~""'-sr Ii.~~. ~~; .; \M:ST -~~E~ l~ S '!iF!;T 'J9~~\~ 1"1; _ II\'EST-!"~~E_L}._-l\i L WEST. L'[l~[\~ s , WFST -AVG \ lij' .~~~6~ ~. WFST l1~:Ll~~ ~.I ~ , ..... H u ~~ OJ ! ! ..... " .-.J:: ~B u o~ L.. '" ro '" i Cl. ::J ~ 0 L.. bfl r.,] AVANA RIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10616 SE 172nd STREET, RENTON. WA 98055 ERE' 3±flrIE AVANA RIDGE, Ll( WEST BUILDING ELEVATIONS ",',"' "'_'"U'SAADf'flOP,IUl A3.20-W , ~~ .. 2 ,4 5 « . lj r (. . I-LJ. 1:-. '-- I' ~ -Ii (. LJ. G 'F.6 'F J': F ! E \ < 7 ;' l','-, "J 1':1 ~J -~--- .J 10, \/\'!oS! BLLJO H~~~~: L~~~ ... ~ST ~~,F+~_~ ',\I[5T _l.~~[\~ "., "..,,;sr -C,EQ;E\~ I'iI ~~I -L~~EC} ~ ~--Jfl~F.'_~_~ -Wl:ST .AvK 371'_~~~:"~ ~l "~~_'3!'",,-, ~~l,,~~~ WEST ELEVATION· BENSON DR I ~~"- c., P5l ,C.'s: ,~ '.,.,} T-- O/I'~_8 C3' C~ ::,., c EXTERKlRMATERlAlS SCHEDULE ll[!.I~F~!;~~~;~'"~n ~-~.~~~:: .. :.: ., BUILDING ENVELOPE NOTES· ELEVATIONS KEYNOTES (B ': :1' ~ ,A :' ,c-•• ) n=r'J --sT7ofl~;--6' _ WE~'-~~;~L3: r-; WEST .ll~;E\~ !Ij,o WEST_ \E!~E\~ !. \"EST -ljE!r:\~-"" WEST-IWC 'if VIM' ~,':;:\,,,, '~§T -_L':;'~\~ ~ ~~~~~~ NORTH ELEV~J!QN· ~J12NO_ST -----:;:;~ ~ j ....... §lg U ", W ' . i~ ....... ~ ! .!:: j-~ u !~ ..... 'il rc ! D. t ::J S 0 ..... OIl raJ AVANA RIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10016SE172nd STREET, RENTON, WA 9ao55 .t:JiI:!:J t:fl[Bf AVANA RIDGE. LL( ." . ..., ...... """,""" WEST BUILDING ELEVATIONS 'SUi Pl.AWl<EO""BAA~""~'" A3.21-W I I I I C,,/ .1 REFUSE/RECYCLE ENCLOSURE WEST (LEV sr.A! [ I',' ~ 1'.<)- I 4 i ~"-",J ----' ,,;~ BEfUSElRE<;YCLE ENCLPS!..IRE· ~HLEY SCA\.' "'"'H" I,ll ----_. 4-4.{)91) -REFUSE AND RECYCLING 5T ANOARDS .... (..,~!,L';.:E,Pr.;!:;J:.,"';;,'r~;;.",.;:..~i';~·,:';;;:'i;;~~,~ .. " ~." ' .. ,"-''''''' ""' " •• lJO' ">, "" ... _, ... ~ '",",,,,,, -,~ "., """"~;;;; ';;'~i,;~~;;:::~\E~':;"io;';_;~'::.~~'.cci·:i.'~;'~~;~~"", ,' ...... >"'-n"'O,''".''~ "'_"' ..... ~C'U_w..<L''" .. _' "",,,~,·"-,,,~ ... ",,,~,c,,,,,,,,_, ~'''''~'·'-'''_",,,,,,''''·''''n.-... ',,,,,,","',,,,n-,.,. _""",,~, "·~"",(>,,,,.c,,," "''' MATERIALS SCHEDULE F::: -:;::;;;:::;~;,·.i".c~'·"~, I,;,"",,", ,~.::::"".;."~~,,,,~~ SOLID WASTE/RECYCLABLE REQUIREMENTS ""'". ,.c""-' .. 'n,..~ -.,.." 'M<'"",,>p<, ~;C"""'" "ee" .... ""'"'''''' ~OiOr"'''''''''T ... "'_'''' --1'L-'''' j- -"""",l";""",,,' IIIIIIIH ,:0;;.'; ---=-+,,1,,',,1,,1,,1,,: ~~EU~.~~~~~YCLE lNCLOSUR.f:. -SOUI!iELEV . *::- <CB.~ R~EUSEtR~cYCLEJ;NCI"OSU~~ ~ORTHJ~E...\i--hl SCOJ.' 'I"~ ~,~. .,~ -Ii 'j! ~~ BJ£!_tSEIREQC!-E EJ1I~WSIJRU'_LAJ1I_ SC/Il.' 1,," ~ 1'-D" ! 6 I '" -if> c- c:::L -~~~]. f -~~~< ___ ~ . ~. -':'.-... ,, .~ <7,1. . ~ ~. " ,-L-..".l~-'"='---:1"":'-~, " . ~ .~"'.''''-\~ .~-~;/. , /-, -/ .,.. ... ="--~ TRASH E~!.QSURE K.E;Y_PLAt<j 0CAlE 1". ~-.I)" tD " ! -. •• fl. ~! .-, .... u QJ .... ..c: u I- I1l D. ~ o '-- bI1 r.J AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 1[)616 Sf 17200 STREET, RENTON, WA 96055 AVANA RIDGE, lLC REFUSE/RECVCLE ENCLOSURE DETAILS '-". P.MI!ED_OC\(lOPMOO AO.08 Avana Ridge Planned Unit Development 106 16 S E 172 nd S tr eet, Ren ton , WA 9805~ Avana RId ge, LL C o ~ -SCA LE -1" = 200'-0" o Ne ighb orhood Detail Map DATE 12-29-2015 Avana Ridge Planned Unit Deve lopment 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton , WA 98055 Avana RIdge . LLC o I---SC ALE '" " 200'-0 " o Neighborhood Detail Map DATE 12·29·20 15 SE .172ND STREET Mtd -l s~~ \S'0;tt """ 6-17v, ~() "'~! ~.,/ & ,,-"-,.- ~;'>·_ •• lJ,L " -',~~~': ;~. ............. ," '-JI 'fI'II"~''''''''''~ =~:.,.~~":' -'"''''''._~''''''''' .,~ ;Or , .. ;; "I ' ... ~ .... 1 "',,:...., ,"''''' ~$7$ I ... __ ..... -- I" o .' ---- I ! / C::>. S) ,--",.~ <f?"'?' :~,:,----"-& o ,-,--,---~ <0 o "' t~. --_. --,.----, • o· 1 ! ~ , u i (l) • ~ ! .!: u '- ru 0.. ::J 0 "- btl r.J AVANA RIDGE PLANNED UNIT DEVelOPMEN T 10616SE 172NOST RENTOh w~ 96055 AVANA RIDGE , lle CONC EPTU AL LANDSCAPE PLAN - L1 ~; ~"l@ o ""C l> ~ i "" ~p H Ii! "~ ~~§ ! t :::p ,. ~~~ m z z ! H! z :;;::; l> ; i m ' ,. ~8 ~ l " ""CO~ » ! >: I 0 ~& 3: c g , z C> ~:;Om ! ...... ~ , .m ~ ~~ I I c ~; r ! C , r 5 ~ ~ " a grouparchitect 1 1 8 1 1 9 1 1 1 1 City Attorney City Council • Community and City Clerk's Office Distribution List Appeal to Council, Avana Ridge PUD LUA-1S-000894 Date: June 7, 2016 Larry Warren Julia Medzegian Chip Vincent, CED Administrator Economic Development Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Mgr Rocale Timmons, Planner Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Mgr Craig Burnell, Building Official Amanda Askren, Property & Technical Services Mgr Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Fire Marshall Fire & Emergency Mark Peterson Services Planning Commission Judith Subia Parties of Record (see attached list) Public Works Gregg Zimmerman Department PW /Transportation James Seitz Services PW/Utilities & Tech Lys Hornsby Services LUA-15-000894 • 'City Clerk's Letter & paR List only October 6, 2016 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36th St, Ste 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Denis Law Mayor Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR SIGNED PLAN SETS AND NOTICE OF LOT COMBINATION APPROVAL LUAIS-000894! Avana Ridge Lot Combination Dear Mr. Lagers: The City of Renton has finished reviewing your proposed lot line combination and is now ready to send the approved final version for recording. Please submit five sets of original signed lot line combination documents and a check for $36.04 made out to Postal Express to my attention at the sixth floor counter of City Hall. Please verify that the plan sets have been signed by all owners of record and have been notarized with an ink stamp (not embossed). The ink stamp must be legible so that King County will promptly record the lot consolidation. This decision to approve the prcposed lot line adjustment is subject to a fourteen (14) day appeal period from the date of this letter. Any appeals of the administrative decision must be filed with the City of Renton Hearing Examiner by 5:00 pm, October 20,2016. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and information on the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. If you have further questions regarding this project, please call me at (425) 430-6598. Sincerely, ;t:~ Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057· rentonwa.gov LOT COMBINATION GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS AND ApPLICATION The revised code of Washington (RCW) Section 58.17.040 (6) allows for adjusting the boundary (combining) line between contiguous properties provided that: • No additional parcels, sites, tracts, or lots are created; and • No parcels are established which have insufficient area or setbacks as required by zoning or other regulations. In order to insure that a Lot Combination meets these requirements, it must be reviewed by the Department of Community and Economic Development. Once approved, it must be recorded with the King County Recorder's Office. REQUIRED ELEMENTS OF A DECLARATION OF LOT COMBINATION (SEE SAMPLE COPY ATTACHED) ARE AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Declaration of Lot Combination document must contain the complete and accurate legal descriptions, including any recorded easements along with the parcel number(s) of the existing/original. When completed, the document must contain the notarized acknowledgements and signatures of ALL involved parties; 2. An accurate drawing of the existing/original and the revised/combined parcels, depicting the parcel number, the location of all roads, easements, structures, and other features. The drawing does not need to meet a particular scale, but it must be legible and clearly show property dimensions, distances from all structures to property lines, and an arrow pointing north. A clear one (1) inch margin shall be left on all four (4) sides of the drawing. Drawings should not exceed 8 y," x 14" in size. The existing/original lots must be labeled Parcel A, Parcel B, and so on; 3. Deeds, deeds of trust, or mortgage rel:ases if ownership is being transferred; 4. "Declaration of Lot Combination" must be clearly filled in with dark ink printing or typing. The document must have exact State required margins as follows: 3" Top Margin, 1" on each Side and Bottom of the page (your return address can be within the 3" top margin). All other sheets must have 1" margins on both sides. Once drafted, the original proposed Lot Combination documents (including items 1 through 4 above) plus one (1) copy of each submittal item shall be submitted to Department of Community and Economic Development along with any applicable processing fee. In the application, be sure to attach the name, address, and phone number of the person who should be contacted when the Declaration of Lot Combination is ready to record or if a problem arises. When approved, the applicants are notified that their Declaration of Lot Combination Documents are ready for recording with King County, along with necessary supportive documents such as an excise tax affidavit deed(s), deed(s) of trust, or mortgage releases. One (1) copy of the recorded document shall be returned to Development Services, and one (1) copy to the King County Assessor's Office, to assure proper proceSSing of the re vised parcels. CAUTION: Applicants may wish to obtain a title report and have the Declaration reviewed by a licensed land surveyor and/or title officer to ensure that all deeds, legal descriptions, and maps are correct and accurate. The accuracy of the Declaration and the associated deeds is the responsibility of the applicant. The City of Renton assumes no liability for any errors or complications that arise therefrom. h:ced\data \forms-tern pi ates\se If -hel p ha ndou ts \pl a n ni ng\lotco mb ination. d DC 11-21-2011 • City File Number LUA 15-000894 APPLICATION FOR LOT COMBINATION City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development NATURE OF REQUEST: Lot line elimination that combines the two parcels # 2923059009 and 2923059148 creating one parcel. Taxpayer/Owner Avana Rid~e LLC Address 9675 SE 361 Street. Ste 105 Phone: (206) 588-1147 City/State Mercer Island, WA 98040 Applicant Address City/State "'S"'a!"Cm"'eC.!a"'s'-'o"'w""n"'e"'r _______________ Phone: L-J ___ _ Agent Address City/State Parcel Data: _J7'u"'s:::ti;-:n"'L=a~g"'e'-'rs'--:-_=___:=-----------Phone: (253) 405-5587 9675 SE Street Ste 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Site Address: 17249 Benson Road South & 10615 SE 172"' Street Parcel #:2923059148 & 2923059009 Location: Quarter Section SW Section ~ Township...lL Range -,5,,-_ Related Parcels: Existing Zoning: RM-F Shoreline Environment: Legal Description: Parcel A: Lot 1 of City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment No. LlUA-09-024-LLA LND-30-0349. recorded December 16. 2011 under Recording No. 20111216900001 in King County, Washington, Parcel B: Lot 2 of City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment No. LlUA-09-024-LLA LND-30-0349, recorded December 16. 2011 under Recording No, 20111216900001. in King County. Washington, All dimensions must be shown, total square footage must be shown on revised lot drawing. Please list parcel numbers for the original lots. Return Address: City Clerk's Office City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Title: DECLARATION of LOT COMBINATION Project File #: LUA15-000894 Property Tax Parcel Number(s): 2923059009 & 2923059148 Address or Intersection: 10615 ,E, 172"" St, & 17249 Benson Rd. 5, Section 29 Township 23 North Range 5 East, W.M., City of Renton, King County, Washington Grantor(5): Grantee!s): 1. Avana Ridge, LLC 1. City of Renton, a Municipal Corporation I (We), Avana Ridge, llC hereby certify that I am (we are) the owner(s) of the property described in Exhibit 'A' on page 3, said property being in common ownership, do hereby petition the City of Renton to allow the separate parcels to be combined into single legallot(s) of record as described in Exhibit 'B' on page 3, as specifically allowed by the Revised Code of Washington, Section 58.17.040 (6), The Map Exhibit on page 4 depicts the original and the hereby revised parcels. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits to accrue herefrom and by signing hereon, the parties do for themselves, their heirs and assigns, revise the boundary lines of the parcels described in the aforementioned Exhibit 'A' and establish and recognize the parcel legal description(s) in the aforementioned Exhibit '8' as the new parcel legal description(s). IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said Grantor has caused this instrument to be executed this 15th day of September 20 16 h--- :«iel Mezistrano -Member Cin: of Renton &!eroval: The petition of the property owner(s) to combine the separate properties described in the aforementioned Exhibit 'A' into legal lots of record as described in aforementioned Exhibit '8', This lot combination is binding upon recordation and the resulting parcel(s) may only be divided throught the The of Renton's formal subdivision process. Planning Director Date City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Lot Consolidation_lS088.doc\ P3ge 1 of 4 FORM 13-000 l/rtmJ Notary Seal must be within box Notary Seal must be within box LAURIE M. NYBERG NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF WASHINGTON COMMISSION EXPIRES AUGUST 29, 2017 , Notary Seal must be within box Lot Coruolidation_lS08S.doc\ INDIVIDUAL FORM OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF WASHINGTON 155 COUNTY OF KING I I certify that t know or have satisfactory evidence that ________ _ -,_--,--:---,-.,----:---:---::----,:::--:-::-_--:---,-_ signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print) ______________ _ My appointment expires: ___________ _ Dated: REPRESENT A 71VE FORM OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF WASHINGTON 15S COUNTY OF KING I t certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Joel Mezistrano _____ -,------,-___ -,---______ slgned this Instrument, on oath stated that he/she/they was/were authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the Member and ___ -:-_.,-__ of Avana Ridge. LLC St te of Washington ~ ~ CORPORA Tf FORM 0 ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF WASHINGTON I S5 COUNTY OF KING ) On this ___ day of ____ ~. 19-, before me personally appeared .to me known to be .of the 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 affi)(ed Is the corporate seal of said corporation. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print), ______________ _ My appointment expires: ____________ _ Dated: Page20f 4 FORM 13-{)OOlirtmi EXHIBIT 'A' Original Legal Description Parcel A: Lot 1 of City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment No. LUA-09-024-LLA LND-30-0349, recorded December 16, 2011 under Recording No. 2011121690000 l, in King County, Washington. Parcel B: Lot 2 of City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment No. LUA-09-024-LLA LND-30-0349, recorded December 16, 2011 under Recording No. 20111216900001, in King County, Washington. EXHIBIT 'B' Revised Legal Description Lot 1 together with Lot 2 of City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment No. LUA-09-024-LLA LND- 30-0349, recorded December 16,2011 under Recording No. 20111216900001, in King County, Washington. Page 3 of 4 R: 1,]0 15W 1,1508812\Documents',Lol ConsolidmionlLOI-Combo _Exhibits A-B _ J 5088.doc ORIGINAL PARCEL CONFIGURATION PARCEL A TAX PARCEL 292305-9009 AVANARIDGE LOT COMBINA TlON MAP EXHIBIT / • LINE BEARING DISTANCE L1 N57"33' 42"E 71.12' L2 N15'23'51"E 45.74' L3 N78'35' 40"E 197.57' DELTA ANGLE ARC LENGTH 11'34'56" 80.86' j N , GRAPHIC SCALE o 100' 200' 1 INCH = 200 FT, COPYRIGHT @ 2015, D.R. STRONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS INC. IDRS) o.R. STRONG ..... _ •• L2l!M -~~ I!2lITTHA\IEM.E DIII1AIIEJ; 1ItII_ O~.JIIIlI F42fU17-2<1n --- PRO.£CT SUR'-f:YOR: SI$ DRAFTED BY: SIS FTCLD BOOK; 5IJ() DA TF: '''3/1' PROJECT NO.: , .. SHEa 4 OF4 • .. ' ...... , ..e!lt First American ACH Homes, LLC 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite lOS Mercer Island, WA 98040 Attn: Justin Lagers Re: Title Team Three Fax No. (866) 859-0429 Kristi Mathis (206) 615-3206 kkmathls@flrstam.com LIEN AND ENCUMBRANCE SEARCH Fee: $75.00 Sales Tax: $7.20 First American Title Insurance Company 818 Stewart St, Ste 800 Seattle, WA 98101 Phn -(206)615-3206 Fax -(425)551-4107 September 14, 2016 File Number: 4220-2738443 We hereby certify that we have searched our Tract Indices as to the following described property: LOTS 1 AND 2 OF CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LUA-09-024-LLA LND-30-0349, RECORDED DECEMBER 16, 2011 UNDER RECORDING NO. 20111216900001, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. and as of September 07,2016 at 8:00 a.m. The last deed of record in the Auditors Office where the property in located purports title in: AVANA RIDGE, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY Subject to: 1. General Taxes for the year 2016. The first half becomes delinquent after April 30th. The second half becomes delinquent after October 31st. Tax Account No.: 292305900907 Page 1 of 4 First American TItle Insurance Company Amount Billed: Amount Paid: Amount Due: Assessed Land Value: Assessed Improvement Value: Amount Billed: Amount Paid: Amount Due: Assessed Land Value: Assessed Improvement Value: Affects: 1st Half $ 4,662.72 $ 4,662.72 $ 0.00 $ $ 690,100.00 0.00 2nd Half $ 4,662.72 0.00 $ $ $ $ Lot! 4,662.72 690,100.00 0.00 File No.: 4220-2738443 September 14, 2016 2. General Taxes for the year 2016. The first half becomes delinquent after April 30th. The second half becomes delinquent after October 31st. Tax Account No.: 292305914809 Amount Billed: Amount Paid: Amount Due: Assessed Land Value: Assessed Improvement Value: Amount Billed: Amount Paid: Amount Due: Assessed Land Value: Assessed Improvement Value: Affects: 1st Half $ 4,776.75 $ 4,776.75 $ 0.00 $ 707,000.00 $ 0.00 2nd Half $ 4,776.75 $ 0.00 $ $ $ Lot 2 4,776.75 707,000.00 0.00 3. Taxes which may be assessed and extended on any subsequent roll for the tax year 2016, with respect to new improvements and the first occupancy which may be included on the regular assessment roll and which are an accruing lien not yet due or payable. We have also searched our General Index for Judgment and State and Federal Tax Liens against the purported title holder and find the following: NONE This report is made for the purpose herein specified and for this reason liability hereunder is expressly limited to the sum paid therefore. THIS IS NOT a title report since no examination has been made of the title to the above described property. Our search for apparent encumbrances was limited to our Tract Indices, and therefore above listings do not include additional matters which might have been disclosed by an examination of the record title. We assume no liability in connection with this Lien and Encumbrance Search and will not be responsible for errors or omissions therein. The charge for this service will not include supplemental reports, rechecks or other services. Page 2 of 4 First American Trtle Insurance Company Page 3 of 4 File No.: 4220-2738443 September 14, 2016 First American Trt:le Insurance Company Limitation of Liability for Informational Report File No.: 4220-2738443 September 14, 2016 IMPORTANT -READ CAREFULLY: THIS REPORT IS NOT AN INSURED PRODUCT OR SERVICE OR A REPRESENTATION OF THE CONDITION OF TITLE TO REAL PROPER1Y. IT IS NOT AN ABSTRACT, LEGAL OPINION, OPINION OF TITLE, TITLE INSURANCE COMMITMENT OR PRELIMINARY REPORT, OR ANY FORM OF TITLE INSURANCE OR GUARAN1Y. THIS REPORT IS ISSUED EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE APPLICANT THEREFOR, AND MAY NOT BE USED OR RELIED UPON BY ANY OTHER PERSON. THIS REPORT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN ANY MANNER WITHOUT FIRST AMERICAN'S PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT. FIRST AMERICAN DOES NOT REPRESENT OR WARRANT THAT THE INFORMATION HEREIN IS COMPLETE OR FREE FROM ERROR, AND THE INFORMATION HEREIN IS PROVIDED WITHOUT ANY WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, AS-IS, AND WITH ALL FAULTS. AS A MATERIAL PART OF THE CONSIDERATION GIVEN IN EXCHANGE FOR THE ISSUANCE OF THIS REPORT, RECIPIENT AGREES THAT FIRST AMERICAN'S SOLE L1ABILl1Y FOR ANY LOSS OR DAMAGE CAUSED BY AN ERROR OR OMISSION DUE TO INACCURATE INFORMATION OR NEGLIGENCE IN PREPARING THIS REPORT SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE FEE CHARGED FOR THE REPORT. RECIPIENT ACCEPTS THIS REPORT WITH THIS LIMITATION AND AGREES THAT FIRST AMERICAN WOULD NOT HAVE ISSUED THIS REPORT BUT FOR THE LIMITATION OF LIABILI1Y DESCRIBED ABOVE. FIRST AMERICAN MAKES NO REPRESENTATION OR WARRAN1Y AS TO THE LEGALITY OR PROPRIE1Y OF RECIPIENT'S USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN. Page 4 of 4 I Denis Law Mayor June 24, 2016 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge 9675 SE 26 th St, Ste. 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: Response Letter to Palmer's Appeal-Avana Ridge PUD. (File No. LUA-1S-000894, PP, PPPUD) Dear Mr. Lagers: Attached is a copy of Mr. Russell's Response Letter regarding Dan Palmer's Appeal of the Hearing Examiner's Final Decision on the Avana Ridge PUD, for the above-referenced land use application. I can be reached at (425) 430-6502 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, Ifj~ City Clerk Attachment cc: Hearing Examiner Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057. (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516. rentonwa.gov Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Subject: Dan Russell <dre98055@comcast.net> Thursday, June 23, 2016 9:12 AM Jason Seth Avana My concerns cover an already troubling problem. The traffic congestion on 108th at the light on New Benson. Back ups are due to the traffic on New Benson that fails to let cars on 108th turn left. I personally have sat through 4 light changes from 172nd trying to turn left. The right turn onto 108th from 172nd is many times difficult as traffic blocks the intersection onto 108th Making a left hand turn during high traffic is extremely dangerous already as there is no visibility because of the mass of cars lined up. Your proposal to change 108th does not not address the intersection at the light. The right hand lane coming from Avana onto 108th will merely cause additional risk and congestion for right turn participants unless there is a right hand turn specific lane. Can't you create a right hand lane out of Avana onto New Benson along with the change of lanes turning left. Thus one dedicated lane turning left, one lane turning left or right and one lane turning right only. I trust you will monitor this situation and measure the already existing problem during peak traffic times prior to making your decision. I am sure failure to do this will result in harm to people who will be using this street regularly. I for one do not care to be responsible for this so I am asking you to do your due diligence. I for one will do all that I can to prepare for the eventuality of this event. Thank you for your consideration. Dan Russell 7023406939 10717 se 172nd Renton, Wa 98055 1 June 17, 2016 STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING CERTIFICATE OF MAILING ) ) § ) Jason A. Seth, City Clerk for the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that he is a citizen ofthe United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter. That on the 17 h day of June, 2016, at the hour of 4:30 p.m. your affiant duly mailed and placed in the United States Post Office at Renton, King County, Washington, by first class mail to all parties of record, Applicant's Response to Palmer's Appeal regarding the Avana Ridge PUD (File No. LUA-1S-000894) I • Andrew Grav 3275 Cedar Ave 5 Renton, WA 98055 D. Bruce & Nancy Stanlev 10825 SE 172nd St, #5B Renton, WA 98055-5969 ___ "-_lY!i1l!t''''~''''P.''''-''''''V ''Ij!;,lWI'f''o ... ~~"'~crruGYE3"l'SW"zj,\v;!i,,,,>!,\~g~. Jt~~p;f;:,; Daniel Hiranaka 10510 SE 172nd St Renton, WA 98055 Doug Goods 16602 106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 H.A. Chau 4101150th Ave SE Bellevue, WA 98006 JUSTIN LAGERS Avana Ridge 9675 5E 36th St, Ste. 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Michael Gladstein Avana Ridge LLC 9675 SE 36th 5t, #105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Molly Moss 3121 Cedar Ave 5 Renton, WA 98055 Scot! Petet!, D,C. 10622 5E Carr Rd, Suite A Renton, WA 98055 Caryn Cantu 16561106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 ,,:~ ,", ! . -'';"' '.' , Dan Palner 16638 106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 • ____ D'r£j;'!S\~',·.",~,.", t~J{~~i ~m:?:2tR$~'j"_~:r::, t~~'~fU~J Daniel Ridenour 16836 106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 Emily Brooker 16810 104th Ave 5E Renton, WA 98055 Jerry Miller PO Box 686 Renton, WA 98057 Kimmie McMullin 17030 106th Ave 5E Renton, WA 98055 Mike & Julie Radtke 17024 106th Ave 5E Renton, WA 98055 Philip Reitz 2907 Cedar Ave 5 Renton, WA 98055 Wendy Yadock 17020 104th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 Carine Kumano 10829 SE 172nd St, #6C Renton, WA 98055 Dan Russell 43755 Louisiana St Palm Desert. CA 92211 1<i;~~iW·"~~~'1'~·';!,!,:\l'f':Z:4ll1!iiiiI'_'_, ~~~~i').;~~~fb_"~_~,_."J> ~t5,m'fr.~r#a Debra Russell 829 S 31st St Renton, WA 98055 Genevieve Bvrnes 3125 Cedar Ave 5 Renton, WA 98055 JODY HANAWALT PO Box 4097 Renton, WA 98057 Mark Faas 2915 Cedar Ave 5 Renton, WA 98055 Molly Heine 16829 5E 105th 5t Renton, WA 98055 Rhanda Rae Murphy 17000 104th Ave 5E Renton, WA 98055 Denis Law f _---=Mayo:.,.r ----~] .}; r Or tD ~ l. June 24, 2016 STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC CERTIFICATE OF MAILING ) ) § ) Jason A. Seth, City Clerk for the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that he is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter. That on the 24th day of June, 2016, at the hour of 4:30 p.m. your affiant duly mailed and placed in the United States Post Office at Renton, King County, Washington, by first class mail to all parties of record, Response Letter to Palmer's Appeal regarding the Avana Ridge PUD (File No. LUA-1S-000894 ) Jason Washington, residing in Renton My Commission expires: 8/27/2018 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 43().6510 / Fax (425) 430-{;516 • rentonwa.gov ! ~' . Andrew Gray 3275 Cedar Ave 5 Renton, WA 98055 Caryn Cantu 16561 106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 tr.',iir!",;; ~"··;:_~:a1r .. tft;.t.f"~~;~,~,~'M,;.t~~;,.·,"~ ... ·}.J.,"',~B,f&,'ifp..,'~J!:· ~,1'.;,:;'.:,~lk; ),.,,',,:.-\,).'.~:::.,:,-''', -:'-' !'.i ~ ;-.: . ~2 .. :~:·+'.','t ~'t~:: ~~~1'\1;f);:0~:fit i'~.:~' i'l.;~,;;.'~-"""-, -, E"'"",o~ ..;.;o.A~ ___ ..JiV~=-~.., _'".,~ .. , ~"' ",-"-",_-.-'t,Ji; ~~J.,;;;Xl!h>ti~':'I?:J.>.,"", :;.t~,,-u.,1I.:',t5_ ,;-;' ,~::. ;; ',,~ D. Bruce & Nancy Stanley 10825 5E 172nd 5t, #58 Renton, WA 98055·5969 Daniel Hiranaka 10510 5E 172nd 5t Renton, WA 98055 Doug Goods 16602 106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 HA Chau 4101150th Ave SE Bellevue, WA 98006 JUSTIN LAGERS Avana Ridge 9675 5E 36th St, 5te. 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Michael Gladstein Avana Ridge LLC 9675 SE 36th St, #10S Mercer Island, WA 98040 Molly Moss 3121 Cedar Ave 5 Renton, WA 98055 Scott Petett, D.C 10622 5E Carr Rd, Suite A Renton, WA 98055 Dan Palner 16638 106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 tl~irw·tn·"~ Daniel Ridenour 16836 106th Aye 5E Renton, WA 98055 Emily Brooker 16810 104th Ave 5E Renton, WA 98055 Jerry Miller PO Box 686 Renton, WA 98057 Kimmie McMullin 17030 106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 Mike & Julie Radtke 17024 106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 , • _ ': ' _... o} ,_" _ •• Phirlp Reitz 2907 Cedar Ave 5 Renton, WA 98055 Wendy Yadock 17020 104th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 Carine Kumano 10829 SE 172nd 5t, #6C Renton, WA 98055 t~:t:,~~~;~~1k~~~~~~:;::--': ;~::?/"~;:~~r~';'~'~:' Dan Russell 43755 Louisiana 5t Palm Desert CA 92211 ~.!I"'i!:1fi·'i"~i~~~ Debra Russell 8295 31st St Renton, WA 98055 Genevieve Bvrnes 3125 Cedar Aye 5 Renton, WA 98055 JODY HANAWALT PO Box 4097 Renton, WA 98057 Mark Faas 2915 Cedar Ave S Renton, WA 98055 Molly Heine 16829 SE 105th St Renton, WA 98055 Rhanda Rae Murphv 17000 104th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Denis Law Mayor June 24, 2016 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge 9675 SE 26 th St, Ste. 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: Response Letter to Palmer's Appeal-Avana Ridge PUD. (File No. LUA-15-000894, PP, PPPUD) Dear Mr. Lagers: Attached is a copy of Mr. Russell's Response Letter regarding Dan Palmer's Appeal of the Hearing Examiner's Final Decision on the Avana Ridge PUD, for the above-referenced land use application. I can be reached at (425) 430-6502 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, If;-a City Clerk Attachment cc: Hearing Examiner Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante l Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) 1055 South Grady Way • Renton,Washington 98057 • (425) 430-6510 I Fax (425) 430-6516. rentonwa.gov Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Subject: Dan Russell <dre980SS@comcast.net> Thursday, June 23, 2016 9:12 AM Jason Seth Avana CITY OF RENTON JUN 2, 2016 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE My concerns cover an already troubling problem. The traffic congestion on 108th at the light on New Benson. Back ups are due to the traffic on New Benson that fails to let cars on 108th turn left. I personally have sat through 4 light changes from 172nd trying to turn left. The right turn onto 108th from 172nd is many times difficult as traffic blocks the intersection onto 108th Making a left hand turn during high traffic is extremely dangerous already as there is no visibility because of the mass of cars lined up. Your proposal to change 108th does not not address the intersection at the light The right hand lane coming from Avana onto 108th will merely cause additional risk and congestion for right turn participants unless there is a right hand turn specific lane. Can't you create a right hand lane out of Avana onto New Benson along with the change of lanes turning left. Thus one dedicated lane turning left, one lane turning left or right and one lane turning right only. I trust you will monitor this situation and measure the already existing problem during peak traffic times prior to making your decision. I am sure failure to do this will result in harm to people who will be using this street regularly. I for one do not care to be responsible for this so I am asking you to do your due diligence. I for one will do all that I can to prepare for the eventuality ofthis event Thank you for your consideration. Dan Russell 7023406939 10717 se 172nd Renton, Wa 98055 Denis Law Mayor June 17, 2016 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge 9675 SE 26 th St, Ste. 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: Applicant's Response to Palmer's Appeal-Avana Ridge PUD. (File No. LUA-15-000894, PP, PPPUD) Dear Mr. Lagers: Attached is copy of the Applicant's Response to Dan Palmer's Appeal of the Hearing Examiner's Final Decision on the Avana Ridge PUD submitted by Brent Carson, Van Ness Feldman, LLP, representing Avana Ridge, LLC., for the above-referenced land use application. The City of Renton received the requests on June 16, 2016. I can be reached at (425) 430-6502 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, i!.~~c City Clerk Attachments cc: Hearing Examiner Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 430-651 0 / Fax (425) 43()-6516 • rentonw •. gov 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 CITY OF RENTON JUN 16 2016 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S Ol'FICE VIii-Q..uG~ BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: A V ANA RIDGE PUD Preliminary Planned Urban Development LUA-IS-000894 APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGEPUD 14 Pursuant to Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-8-11 0(F)(3), the Applicant for the IS Avana Ridge PUD, Avana Ridge LLC (the "Applicant"), by and through its legal counsel, 16 Brent Carson of Van Ness Feldman, LLP, files this response to the appeal filed by Dan 17 Palmer ("Mr. Palmer") on June 7, 2016 (the "Appeal") challenging the Hearing 18 Examiner's ("Hearing Examiner" or "Examiner") Final Decision l approving the Avana 19 Ridge Preliminary Planned Urban Development (the "Project"). For the reasons stated 20 below, the Appeal should be summarily dismissed, or if it is considered on its merits, the 21 Appeal should be denied and the Final Decision should be affirmed. 22 23 24 2S I Hearing Examiner's Final Decision, LUA IS-000894, PP, PPUD ("Final Decision"). APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGE PUD - I 69230-7 lJDRIGINAL I VanNess Feldman", 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA SB104 (206) 623-9372 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I. The Appeal should be Dismissed Summarily because it Fails to Meet the Standards for Filing An Appeal. The Appeal filed by Mr. Palmer fails to meet the standards established by the City Council for filing a land use appeal under RMC Section 4-8-110. RMC 4-8-110(C)(3) states: 3. Required Form/or and Content 0/ Appeals. Any appeal shall befiled in writing. The written notice of appeal shall fUlly. clearly and thoroughly specifY the substantial error(s) in fact or law which exist in the record of the proceedings from which the appellant seeks relief( emphasis added). This code provision is not a suggestion. It is a procedural requirement of the City Code. As noted in the introductory paragraph of this code section: A. SCOPE AND PURPOSE: This Section provides the basic procedures tor processing all types o{land use and development-related appeals. Specific requirements are based upon the type/level of appeal and the appeal authority. Procedures for the following types of appeals are included in this Section: RMC 4-8-110(A). Mr. Palmer has failed to comply with this fundamental procedural requirement. His Appeal alleges not one specific error. Mr. Palmer's Appeal cites to no facts in the record to support a claim that the Final Decision contains substantial errors. He presents no claims of legal errors by the Hearing Examiner. His Appeal simply agrees that the Project has a "good design," then expresses various "concerns" about the Project. Not one of these "concerns" points to any factual or legal errors in the Final Decision, let alone "fully, clearly and thoroughly specify the substantial error(s) in fact or law" as required by City Code. There was ample opportunity in both the public comment period for SEP A review and in the public hearing before the Hearing Examiner for members of the public, APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGE PUD - 2 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman LC' 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623-9372 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 including Mr. Palmer, to raise concerns about the Project. The record for stating concerns has closed. An appeal to the City Council is for the purpose of a party of record to allege, then prove, that the Hearing Examiner made substantial errors in fact or law that would require the City Council to reverse or modify the Final Decision. Here, the Appeal has failed to do anything more than restate concerns. Without meeting the fundamental requirement for a land use appeal to allege specific errors, there is no basis for the City Council to assess whether to grant or deny the Appeal on its merits. Based on Mr. Palmer's failure to allege any substantive errors in fact or law in the Final Decision, the City Council should summarily dismiss the Appeal. II. Even if the City Council Chooses to Consider the Merits of the Appeal, the Appeal should nonetheless be Denied and the Council should Affirm the Hearing Examiner's Final Decision. If the City Council does not summarily dismiss the Appeal for failing to identify any substantive errors, we ask the City Council to deny the Appeal on its merits. The record before the Hearing Examiner demonstrates that the Final Decision is fully supported by substantial evidence and is consistent with applicable law. None of the "concerns" expressed by Mr. Palmer rise to a reversible error. Each of the paragraphs below address the individual "concerns" expressed by Mr. Palmer in his Appeal and demonstrates why Mr. Palmer has failed to meet his burden to prove substantial errors in fact or law.' Concern 1: Increase in traffic to neighborhoods, specifically north of the site The Appeal states a concern that the Project will increase traffic to neighborhoods to the north. However, the Appeal fails to allege any error in this regard. 25 2 The burden of proof rests with the appellant. RMC 4-8-1 I (F)(5). APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGE PUD - 3 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman "' 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623-9372 I The record establishes that the Project will add 5 PM peak-hour trips and 4 AM 2 peak-hour trips through the single-family neighborhood to the north. Traffic Impact 3 Analysis (TIA) Prepared by TraflEx, February 2, 2016 (Exhibit 15). The Hearing 4 Examiner found that this level of traffic was minimal, that the TIA adequately addressed 5 impacts from this traffic and that the mitigation imposed through the SEPA condition to 6 address this increased traffic was sufficient. The Final Decision states: 7 A major concern of the neighbors was traffic impacts to 106 Ave SE, 104 Ave SE and 105 Ave SE. In uncontested testimony, several neighbors testified that 8 these roads are isolated, currently accommodate a minimal amount of traffic ... . Although a review of the surrounding road network shows that persons 9 may very well choose to drive through 10511041/06 to avoid the BensonlSR 515 intersection as well as other traffic problems in the area, the applicant's 10 traffic analysis reveals that the project will only add jive PM peak hour trips and four AM peak hour trips into the 1051104//06 roads. The applicant's 11 traffic analysis was verified by peer review. Given the expert traffic analysis prepared by the applicant and the independent expert verification conducted 12 under the peer review, the applicant's traffic analysis is taken as a verity given the absence of any expert testimony to the contrary. With only a 13 maximum of jive additional trips per hour generated by the proposal, there is no basis to require more than the speed radar signs required by the SEPA 14 mitigation measures. 15 Final Decision, pp. 9-10. 16 The Appeal cites to no error III these findings by the Hearing Examiner. 17 Moreover, as noted by the Hearing Examiner, no expert testimony was presented at the 18 hearing to contradict the expert traffic report prepared for the Applicant by TraflEx. The 19 Final Decision addresses this concern and should be affirmed. 20 Concern 2: Existing congestion on Benson Road, including a blind curve 21 condition, and Adequacy of I06th and I04thfor through traffic 22 The City of Renton ("City") received public comments and the Hearing Examiner 23 heard testimony regarding existing southbound queuing at the intersection of Benson 24 Road South and SR 515. The Hearing Examiner found that the TIA adequately analyzed 25 the potential impacts at the Benson Road S/515 intersection. Final Decision, p. 10. This APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE AVANA RIDGE PUD - 4 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman~. 71 9 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 I was also addressed by the Examiner in Condition 27, which requires the rechannelization 2 of the left-and right-tum southbound lanes from Benson Road South to SR SIS, to one 3 left-tum lane and one combined left-turnlright-turn lane, as well as signal improvements 4 to accommodate the rechannelization. The Examiner found that with these improvements 5 in place, the queue lengths would be reduced to below pre-development conditions. 6 As noted above, regarding Concern I, the Hearing Examiner found that traffic 7 from the Project filtering north along 10511 04/106th Avenues was adequately addressed in 8 the TIA and would be minimal. The TIA was independently peer reviewed by a traffic 9 consultant selected by the City, who concurred with the TIA's analyses. Memorandum 10 from Michael Read, PE, Principal, TENW, March 21, 2016. Exhibit 17. The Appeal cites II to no testimony rebutting these findings or establishing errors with the Final Decision on 12 this point. 13 The impacts from the Project, with the mitigation measures in place, will either be 14 better than pre-Project conditions (reduced queues) or de minimis (less than ten (10) total 15 trips in the peak travel hours». This Appeal issue should be rejected and the Final 16 Decision on this issue should be affirmed. 17 Concern 3: Entry onto Benson Road from the Project entrance 18 Mr. Palmer is concerned that the Benson Road entry to the Project is dangerous 19 but cites to no evidence in the record to support this concern or to establish any substantial 20 error by the Hearing Examiner on this point. 21 The Project site entrance as analyzed in the TIA aligns with lOSth Avenue SE and 22 is supported by adequate sight distance. Exhibit IS, p. 4. As noted above, the TIA was 23 peer-reviewed and no expert testimony was introduced in the record to refute this 24 conclusion. The Hearing Examiner properly concluded that sight distance requirements 25 are met at both site entrance driveways. Final Decision, p. 9. No finding of a threat to APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE AV ANA RIDGE PUD - 5 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman "' 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 I public safety or traffic safety was found in the SEP A determination or in the Hearing 2 Examiner's record. 3 This Appeal issue should be rejected and the Final Decision on this point should 4 be affirmed. 5 Concern 4: Radar sign age and speed bumps are not adequate mitigation 6 Mr. Palmer is concerned that the SEP A condition requiring radar signage and 7 speed bumps to slow traffic will not affect congestion in the neighborhood north of the g Project site. However, as noted above, there is no basis in the record to establish that the 9 Project will create any congestion on these streets. 10 The record demonstrates that there is very little existing traffic on these residential 11 streets and that the Project will add only 15 additional PM peak-hour trips and 14 12 additional AM peak-hour trips north on 10gth Ave SE and only 5 PM peak-hour and 4 AM 13 peak-hour trips along SE Innd west of the site. Exhibit IS, Figs. 3 and 4. Mr. Palmer has 14 pointed to no testimony to contradict the Hearing Examiner's findings with regard to 15 congestion and the adequacy of the SEP A condition to help slow traffic along this 16 residential street. 17 This Appeal issue should be rejected and the Final Decision on this point should 18 be affirmed. 19 Concern 5: The need for an on-site traffic study 20 Mr. Palmer states as a concern that an onsite traffic study is required. However, as 21 noted repeatedly in the Final Decision, the Applicant hired a traffic expert to prepare a 22 detailed Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) which was submitted into the record. 23 Exhibit 15. This TIA was peer reviewed by TENW, a third-party traffic engineer hired by 24 the City, who agreed with the conclusions reached by TraffEx. Exhibit 17. Mr. Palmer 25 has failed to show any error on this point. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE AVANA RIDGE PUD -6 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman ~, 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle. WA 98104 (206) 623-9372 1 Concern 6: Air pollution 2 Mr. Palmer alleges that air impacts could occur as a result of the Project but fails 3 to show any substantial error in the Final Decision on this issue. 4 Potential environmental impacts were fully disclosed to the City during the SEPA 5 review process. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) considered those impacts 6 and issued a Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated (DNSM) on April 11, 2016. 7 Exhibit 20. No significant adverse impacts to air quality or any other element of the 8 environment were identified. No party filed an appeal of the SEP A determination. By 9 failing to appeal the DNSM, the conclusions reached by the ERC are final and cannot be 10 challenged in this Appeal. II Moreover, concerns regarding air pollution are procedurally beyond the scope of 12 the PUD. The criteria for approval of a Planned Urban Development do not include 13 consideration of potential air pollution from traffic. 14 Nonetheless, the Hearing Examiner did consider concerns expressed about air 15 pollution from traffic and concluded that the Project would not cause air pollution. The 16 Final Decision notes that "one neighbor testified that he was concerned that pollution 17 caused by increased project traffic would exacerbate the respiratory problems of some 18 neighbors living close to the project site." Final Decision, p. 12. The Final Decision also 19 confirms that this neighbor testified that there was currently no vehicle pollution in this 20 neighborhood. Final Decision, p 4. No expert testimony was ever introduced regarding 21 air pollution impacts from the Project. Based on this record, the Hearing Examiner 22 correctly found that "[ w Jithout any scientific evidence to substantiate this assertion 23 [concerning air pollution from traffic J, there is insufficient evidence to reasonably 24 conclude that the relatively modest traffic generated by the proposal would exacerbate 25 respiratory problems." Final Decision, p. 12. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGE PUD - 7 692]0-7 I VanNess Feldman", 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623-9372 I This concern should be rejected and the Final Decision on this point should be 2 affirmed. 3 Concern 7 Compatibility o/the architecture 4 Mr. Palmer alleges that the north side of the Project is architecturally incompatible 5 with the neighborhood. However, Mr. Palmer has pointed to no substantial errors in the 6 Hearing Examiner's findings on this issue. 7 The Hearing Examiner carefully considered the documents presented by the 8 Applicant's expert architect and by the City's planning staff that reviewed the Project's 9 design (Exhibit 19) and found that it complied with all applicable design standards. Final 10 Decision, p. 12. Specifically, the Hearing Examiner found that the "(t)he project is II compatible with surrounding development." Id. The Examiner also describes the 12 measures that the Applicant took to ensure that the Project complies with the Design 13 District B standards that also apply to the Project site. Id. The Examiner found that in the 14 public comment and testimony, "no one has suggested that staff's finding of compliance 15 with these standards was in error." 16 Once again, Mr. Palmer has cited to no testimony rebutting the Examiner's 17 findings or alleging errors in compliance with any specific design review criteria. This 18 concern should be rejected and the Final Decision on this point should be affirmed. 19 III. Conclusion. 20 The City Code requires that every land use appeal must state, with specificity, 21 errors in fact or law in the decision being challenged. The Appeal states concerns but fails 22 to allege any errors. Based on the Appellant's failure to meet this procedural requirement, 23 the Appeal should be summarily dismissed. 24 Even if the Appeal is considered on its merits, it should be denied because 25 Mr. Palmer has failed to meet his burden to prove substantial errors in fact or law in the APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGE PUD - 8 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman", 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 Hearing Examiner's Final Decision. Council's consideration of this Appeal must be based 2 solely on the record, the Hearing Examiner's Report, the notice of appeal and arguments 3 based on the record. There was ample opportunity provided in both the public comment 4 period for SEP A review and during the public hearing before the Hearing Examiner for 5 members of the public to build a record in support of their positions. Based upon the 6 record, the Hearing Examiner reached appropriate findings and conclusions in approving 7 this Project. Mr. Palmer has failed to show, for any of his concerns, that the Hearing 8 Examiner erred. For this reason, the Appeal should be denied. 9 10 Dated this 16th day ofJune, 2016. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 VAN NESS FELDMAN ~-------- 719 Second Avenue, Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 Tel: (206) 623-9372 Fax: (206) 623-4986 E-mail: brc@vnf.com Attorney for Avana Ridge LLC APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE AVANA RIDGE PUD - 9 I VanNess Feldman ~, 69230-7 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 I CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 I, Jennifer Hicok, declare as follows: 3 That I am over the age of 18 years, not a party to this action, and competent to be a 4 witness herein; 5 That I, as a legal assistant in the office of Van Ness Feldman LLP, caused true and 6 correct copies of the following documents to be delivered as set forth below: 7 I. Applicant's Response to Dan Palmer's Appeal of the Hearing Examiner's Final Decision on the Avana Ridge PUD; and this; 8 2. Certificate of Service; 9 and that on June 16,2016, I addressed said documents and deposited them for delivery as 10 follows: II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ORIGINAL: City of Renton City Clerk's Office 1055 South Grady Way, Seventh Floor Renton, W A 98057 COPY: Lawrence J. Warren Renton City Attorney City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, W A 98057 COPY: Rocale Timmons Senior Planner City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development 1055 South Grady Way Renton, W A 98057 COPY: Dan Palmer 16638 106th Street Renton, W A 98059 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE -10 M230_7 D ByU.S. Mail ~ By Legal Messenger D By Email: ~ By U.S. Mail D By Legal Messenger ~ By Email: L Warren@Rentonwa. gov [2J By U.S. Mail D By Legal Messenger ~ ByEmail: RTimmons@Rentonwa.gov ~ ByU.S. Mail D By Legal Messenger D By Email: I VanNess Feldman W' 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. EXECUTED at Seattle, Washington on this 16th day of June, 2016. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE -11 69230-7 ~icok,iF':leClarant ~ I VanNess Feldman", 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623-9372 · . , . " ~ ]6?J2EI'4-! Cd/lC2?//7S OM' (f/tJs't c:0l (~S5Ces /n fic:rcz.s~. Denis Law Mayor June 17, 2016 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge 9675 SE 26 th St, Ste. 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: Applicant's Response to Palmer's Appeal -Avana Ridge PUD. (File No. LUA-15-000894, PP, PPPUD) Dear Mr. Lagers: Attached is copy of the Applicant's Response to Dan Palmer's Appeal of the Hearing Examiner's Final Decision on the Avana Ridge PUD submitted by Brent Carson, Van Ness Feldman, LLP, representing Avana Ridge, LLC., for the above-referenced land use application. The City of Renton received the requests on June 16, 2016. I can be reached at (425) 430-6502 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, 1.:!.~!1ic City Clerk Attachments cc: Hearing Examiner Rocale Timmons, S"enior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) 1055 South Grady Way. Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 43()-651 0 I Fax (425) 430-1'i516 • rentonwa.gov 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 CITY OF RENTON JUN 16 2016 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S O"FICE V Iii.,. Q...u6cS f/1 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: A V ANA RIDGE PUD Preliminary Planned Urban Development LUA-15-000894 APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGEPUD 14 Pursuant to Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-8-11 0(F)(3), the Applicant for the 15 Avana Ridge PUD, Avana Ridge LLC (the "Applicant"), by and through its legal counsel, 16 Brent Carson of Van Ness Feldman, LLP, files this response to the appeal filed by Dan 17 Palmer ("Mr. Palmer") on June 7, 2016 (the "Appeal") challenging the Hearing 18 Examiner's ("Hearing Examiner" or "Examiner") Final Decision l approving the Avana 19 Ridge Preliminary Plarmed Urban Development (the "Project"). For the reasons stated 20 below, the Appeal should be summarily dismissed, or if it is considered on its merits, the 21 Appeal should be denied and the Final Decision should be affirmed. 22 23 24 25 1 Hearing Examiner's Final Decision, LUA 15-000894, PP, PPUD ("Final Decision"). APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE AVANA RIDGE PUD - 1 69230-7 DORIGINAL I VanNess Feldman LLP 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623-9372 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I. The Appeal should be Dismissed Summarily because it Fails to Meet the Standards for Filing An Appeal. The Appeal filed by Mr. Palmer fails to meet the standards established by the City Council for filing a land use appeal under RMC Section 4-8-I 10. RMC 4-8-1 10(C)(3) states: 3. Required Form for and Content of Appeals. Any appeal shall be filed in writing. The written notice of appeal shall tully, clearly and thoroughly specifY the substantial error(s) in tact or law which exist in the record of the proceedings from which the appellant seeks relief (emphasis added). This code provision is not a suggestion. It is a procedural requirement of the City Code. As noted in the introductory paragraph of this code section: A. SCOPE AND PURPOSE: This Section provides the basic procedures (Or processing all types ofland use and development-related appeals. Specific requirements are based upon the type/level of appeal and the appeal authority. Procedures for the following types of appeals are included in this Section: RMC 4-8-11O(A). Mr. Palmer has failed to comply with this fundamental procedural requirement. His Appeal alleges not one specific error. Mr. Palmer's Appeal cites to no facts in the record to support a claim that the Final Decision contains substantial errors. He presents no claims of legal errors by the Hearing Examiner. His Appeal simply agrees that the Project has a "good design," then expresses various "concerns" about the Project. Not one of these "concerns" points to any factual or legal errors in the Final Decision, let alone "fully, clearly and thoroughly specify the substantial error(s) in fact or law" as required by City Code. There was ample opportunity in both the public comment period for SEP A review and in the public hearing before the Hearing Examiner for members of the public, APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGE PUD . 2 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman lU' 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 1 including Mr. Palmer, to raise concerns about the Project. The record for stating concerns 2 has closed. An appeal to the City Council is for the purpose of a party of record to allege, 3 then prove, that the Hearing Examiner made substantial errors in fact or law that would 4 require the City Council to reverse or modify the Final Decision. 5 Here, the Appeal has failed to do anything more than restate concerns. Without 6 meeting the fundamental requirement for a land use appeal to allege specific errors, there 7 is no basis for the City Council to assess whether to grant or deny the Appeal on its merits. 8 Based on Mr. Palmer's failure to allege any substantive errors in fact or law in the 9 Final Decision, the City Council should summarily dismiss the Appeal. 10 II. Even if the City Council Chooses to Consider the Merits of the Appeal, the Appeal should nonetheless be Denied and the Council should Aff"lfID the Hearing 11 Examiner's Final Decision. 12 If the City Council does not summarily dismiss the Appeal for failing to identify 13 any substantive errors, we ask the City Council to deny the Appeal on its merits. The 14 record before the Hearing Examiner demonstrates that the Final Decision is fully 15 supported by substantial evidence and is consistent with applicable law. None of the 16 "concerns" expressed by Mr. Palmer rise to a reversible error. 17 Each of the paragraphs below address the individual "concerns" expressed by 18 Mr. Palmer in his Appeal and demonstrates why Mr. Palmer has failed to meet his burden 19 to prove substantial errors in fact or law.' 20 Concern I: Increase in traffic to neighborhoods, specifically north of the site 21 The Appeal states a concern that the Project will increase traffic to neighborhoods 22 to the north. However, the Appeal fails to allege any error in this regard. 23 24 25 2 The burden of proof rests with the appellant. RMC 4-8-11 (F)(S). APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE AVANA RIDGE PUD -3 69230.1 I VanNess Feldman", 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 1 The record establishes that the Project will add 5 PM peak-hour trips and 4 AM 2 peak-hour trips through the single-family neighborhood to the north. Traffic Impact 3 Analysis (TIA) Prepared by TraffEx, February 2, 2016 (Exhibit 15). The Hearing 4 Examiner found that this level of traffic was minimal, that the TIA adequately addressed 5 impacts from this traffic and that the mitigation imposed through the SEPA condition to 6 address this increased traffic was sufficient. The Final Decision states: 7 A major concern of the neighbors was traffic impacts to 106 Ave SE, 104 Ave SE and 105 Ave SE. In uncontested testimony, several neighbors testified that 8 these roads are isolated, currently accommodate a minimal amount of traffic ... . Although a review of the surrounding road network shows that persons 9 may very well choose to drive through 10511041106 to avoid the BensonlSR 515 intersection as well as other traffic problems in the area, the applicant's 10 traffic analysis reveals that the project will only add five PM peak hour trips and four AM peak hour trips into the 105/104/106 roads. The applicant's 11 traffic analysis was verified by peer review. Given the expert traffic analysis prepared by the applicant and the independent expert verification conducted 12 under the peer review, the applicant's traffic analysis is taken as a verity given the absence of any expert testimony to the contrary. With only a 13 maximum of five additional trips per hour generated by the proposal, there is no basis to require more than the speed radar signs required by the SEPA 14 mitigation measures. 15 Final Decision, pp. 9-10. 16 The Appeal cites to no error III these findings by the Hearing Examiner. 17 Moreover, as noted by the Hearing Examiner, no expert testimony was presented at the 18 hearing to contradict the expert traffic report prepared for the Applicant by TraffEx. The 19 Final Decision addresses this concern and should be affirmed. 20 Concern 1: Existing congestion on Benson Road, including a blind curve 21 condition, and Adequacy of 106th and 104th for through traffic 22 The City of Renton ("City") received public comments and the Hearing Examiner 23 heard testimony regarding existing southbound queuing at the intersection of Benson 24 Road South and SR 515. The Hearing Examiner found that the TlA adequately analyzed 25 the potential impacts at the Benson Road S/515 intersection. Final Decision, p. 10. This APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE AVANARIDGEPUD-4 69230-1 I VanNess Feldman W' 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 I was also addressed by the Examiner in Condition 27, which requires the rechannelization 2 of the left-and right-turn southbound lanes from Benson Road South to SR 515, to one 3 left-turn lane and one combined left-tumlright-turn lane, as well as signal improvements 4 to accommodate the rechannelization. The Examiner found that with these improvements 5 in place, the queue lengths would be reduced to below pre-development conditions. 6 As noted above, regarding Concern 1, the Hearing Examiner found that traffic 7 from the Project filtering north along 10511 04/106 th Avenues was adequately addressed in 8 the TlA and would be minimal. The TIA was independently peer reviewed by a traffic 9 consultant selected by the City, who concurred with the TIA's analyses. Memorandum 10 from Michael Read, PE, Principal, TENW, March 21, 2016. Exhibit 17. The Appeal cites II to no testimony rebutting these findings or establishing errors with the Final Decision on 12 this point. 13 The impacts from the Project, with the mitigation measures in place, will either be 14 better than pre-Project conditions (reduced queues) or de minimis (less than ten (10) total 15 trips in the peak travel hours)). This Appeal issue should be rejected and the Final 16 Decision on this issue should be affirmed. 17 Concern 3: Entry onto Benson Road from the Project entrance 18 Mr. Palmer is concerned that the Benson Road entry to the Project is dangerous 19 but cites to no evidence in the record to support this concern or to establish any substantial 20 error by the Hearing Examiner on this point. 2 I The Project site entrance as analyzed in the TlA aligns with 108 th Avenue SE and 22 is supported by adequate sight distance. Exhibit 15, p. 4. As noted above, the TIA was 23 peer-reviewed and no expert testimony was introduced in the record to refute this 24 conclusion. The Hearing Examiner properly concluded that sight distance requirements 25 are met at both site entrance driveways. Final Decision, p. 9. No finding of a threat to APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGE PUD - 5 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman lie 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623-9372 public safety or traffic safety was found in the SEP A determination or in the Hearing 2 Examiner's record. 3 This Appeal issue should be rejected and the Final Decision on this point should 4 be affirmed. 5 Concern 4: Radar signage and speed bumps are not adequate mitigation 6 Mr. Palmer is concerned that the SEP A condition requiring radar signage and 7 speed bumps to slow traffic wil1 not affect congestion in the neighborhood north of the 8 Project site. However, as noted above, there is no basis in the record to establish that the 9 Project will create any congestion on these streets. 10 The record demonstrates that there is very little existing traffic on these residential II streets and that the Project will add only IS additional PM peak-hour trips and 14 12 additional AM peak-hour trips north on 108 th Ave SE and only 5 PM peak-hour and 4 AM 13 peak-hour trips along SE Innd west of the site. Exhibit IS, Figs. 3 and 4. Mr. Palmer has 14 pointed to no testimony to contradict the Hearing Examiner's findings with regard to IS congestion and the adequacy of the SEP A condition to help slow traffic along this 16 residential street. 17 This Appeal issue should be rejected and the Final Decision on this point should 18 be affirmed. 19 Concern 5: The need for an on-site traffic study 20 Mr. Palmer states as a concern that an onsite traffic study is required. However, as 21 noted repeatedly in the Final Decision, the Applicant hired a traffic expert to prepare a 22 detailed Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) which was submitted into the record. 23 Exhibit IS. This TlA was peer reviewed by TENW, a third-party traffic engineer hired by 24 the City, who agreed with the conclusions reached by TrafiEx. Exhibit 17. Mr. Palmer 25 has failed to show any error on this point. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGE PUD - 6 69230.7 I VanNess Feldman "' 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle. WA 98104 (20B) B23·9372 Concern 6: Air pollution 2 Mr. Palmer alleges that air impacts could occur as a result of the Project but fails 3 to show any substantial error in the Final Decision on this issue. 4 Potential environmental impacts were fully disclosed to the City during the SEP A 5 review process. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) considered those impacts 6 and issued a Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated (DNSM) on April II, 2016. 7 Exhibit 20. No significant adverse impacts to air quality or any other element of the 8 environment were identified. No party filed an appeal of the SEP A determination. By 9 failing to appeal the DNSM, the conclusions reached by the ERC are final and cannot be 10 challenged in this Appeal. II Moreover, concerns regarding air pollution are procedurally beyond the scope of 12 the PUD. The criteria for approval of a Planned Urban Development do not include 13 consideration of potential air pollution from traffic. 14 Nonetheless, the Hearing Examiner did consider concerns expressed about air 15 pollution from traffic and concluded that the Project would not cause air pollution. The 16 Final Decision notes that "one neighbor testified that he was concerned that pollution 17 caused by increased project traffic would exacerbate the respiratory problems of some 18 neighbors living close to the project site." Final Decision, p. 12. The Final Decision also 19 confirms that this neighbor testified that there was currently no vehicle pollution in this 20 neighborhood. Final Decision, p 4. No expert testimony was ever introduced regarding 21 air pollution impacts from the Project. Based on this record, the Hearing Examiner 22 correctly found that "[ w ]ithout any scientific evidence to substantiate this assertion 23 [concerning air pollution from traffic], there is insufficient evidence to reasonably 24 conclude that the relatively modest traffic generated by the proposal would exacerbate 25 respiratory problems." Final Decision, p. 12. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGE PUD - 7 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman "' 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 1 This concern should be rejected and the Final Decision on this point should be 2 affirmed. 3 Concern 7 Compatibility of the architecture 4 Mr. Palmer alleges that the north side of the Project is architecturally incompatible 5 with the neighborhood. However, Mr. Palmer has pointed to no substantial errors in the 6 Hearing Examiner's findings on this issue. 7 The Hearing Examiner carefully considered the documents presented by the 8 Applicant's expert architect and by the City's planning staff that reviewed the Project's 9 design (Exhibit 19) and found that it complied with all applicable design standards. Final 10 Decision, p. 12. Specifically, the Hearing Examiner found that the "(t)he project is II compatible with surrounding development." Id. The Examiner also describes the 12 measures that the Applicant took to ensure that the Project complies with the Design 13 District B standards that also apply to the Project site. Id. The Examiner found that in the 14 public comment and testimony, "no one has suggested that staff's finding of compliance IS with these standards was in error." 16 Once again, Mr. Palmer has cited to no testimony rebutting the Examiner's 17 findings or alleging errors in compliance with any specific design review criteria. This 18 concern should be rejected and the Final Decision on this point should be affirmed. 19 III. Conclusion. 20 The City Code requires that every land use appeal must state, with specificity, 21 errors in fact or law in the decision being challenged. The Appeal states concerns but fails 22 to allege any errors. Based on the Appellant's failure to meet this procedural requirement, 23 the Appeal should be summarily dismissed. 24 Even if the Appeal is considered on its merits, it should be denied because 25 Mr. Palmer has failed to meet his burden to prove substantial errors in fact or law in the APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE AVANARIDGE PUD - 8 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman '" 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 Hearing Examiner's Final Decision. Council's consideration of this Appeal must be based 2 solely on the record, the Hearing Examiner's Report, the notice of appeal and arguments 3 based on the record. There was ample opportunity provided in both the public comment 4 period for SEP A review and during the public hearing before the Hearing Examiner for 5 members of the public to build a record in support of their positions. Based upon the 6 record, the Hearing Examiner reached appropriate findings and conclusions in approving 7 this Project. Mr. Palmer has failed to show, for any of his concerns, that the Hearing 8 Examiner erred. For this reason, the Appeal should be denied. 9 10 Dated this 16th day of June, 2016. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 VAN NESS FELDMAN ~--------- 719 Second Avenue, Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 Tel: (206) 623-9372 Fax: (206) 623-4986 E-mail: brc@vnf.com Attorney for Avana Ridge LLC APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE I VanNess Feldman u. A V ANA RIDGE PUD - 9 69230-7 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 I CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 I, Jennifer Hicok, declare as follows: 3 That I am over the age of 18 years, not a party to this action, and competent to be a 4 witness herein; 5 That I, as a legal assistant in the office of Van Ness Feldman LLP, caused true and 6 correct copies of the following documents to be delivered as set forth below: 7 I. Applicant's Response to Dan Palmer's Appeal of the Hearing Examiner's Final Decision on the Avana Ridge PUD; and this; 8 2. Certificate of Service; 9 and that on June 16, 2016, I addressed said documents and deposited them for delivery as 10 follows: II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ORIGINAL: City of Renton City Clerk's Office 1055 South Grady Way, Seventh Floor Renton, W A 98057 COPY: LawrenceJ. Warren Renton City Attorney City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, W A 98057 COPY: Rocale Timmons Senior Planner City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development 1055 South Grady Way Renton, W A 98057 COPY: Dan Palmer 16638 106th Street Renton, W A 98059 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE -10 69230-7 D By U.S. Mail [8J By Legal Messenger D By Email: [8J ByU.S. Mail D By Legal Messenger [8J By Email: L Warren@Rentonwa. gov [8J By U.S. Mail D By Legal Messenger [8J By Email: RTimmons@Rentonwa.gov [8J By U.S. Mail D By Legal Messenger D By Email: I VanNess FeldmanLlJ' 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. EXECUTED at Seattle, Washington on this 16th dayofJune, 2016. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE -11 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman "' 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623-9372 Denis Law Mayor June 17, 2016 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge 9675 SE 26 th St, Ste. 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: Applicant's Response to Palmer's Appeal -Avana Ridge PUD. (File No. LUA-15-000894, PP, PPPUD) Dear Mr. Lagers: Attached is copy of the Applicant's Response to Dan Palmer's Appeal of the Hearing Examiner's Final Decision on the Avana Ridge PUD submitted by Brent Carson, Van Ness Feldman, LLP, representing Avana Ridge, LLC., for the above-referenced land use application. The City of Renton received the requests on June 16, 2016. I can be reached at (425) 430-6502 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, i!.~~c City Clerk Attachments cc: Hearing Examiner Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) 1055 South Grady Way • Renton,Washington 98057. (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516. rentonwa.gov 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 .... 111 \,,/ rU:::I'4!VI'II JUN 16 2016 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OCf'ICE V1cl-Lu~V' BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: A V ANA RIDGE PUD Preliminary Planned Urban Development LUA-IS-000894 APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGEPUD 14 Pursuant to Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-8-11 0(F)(3), the Applicant for the IS Avana Ridge PUD, Avana Ridge LLC (the "Applicant"), by and through its legal counsel, 16 Brent Carson of Van Ness Feldman, LLP, files this response to the appeal filed by Dan 17 Palmer ('"Mr. Palmer") on June 7, 2016 (the "Appeal") challenging the Hearing 18 Examiner's ("Hearing Examiner" or "Examiner") Final Decisionl approving the Avana 19 Ridge Preliminary Planned Urban Development (the "Project"). For the reasons stated 20 below, the Appeal should be summarily dismissed, or if it is considered on its merits, the 21 Appeal should be denied and the Final Decision should be affirmed. 22 23 24 25 1 Hearing Examiner's Final Decision, LUA 15-000894, PP, PPUD ("Final Decision"), APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE AV ANA RIDGE PUD - I 69230-7 ZJORIGINAL I VanNess Feldman "' 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I. The Appeal should be Dismissed Summarily because it Fails to Meet the Standards for Filing An Appeal. The Appeal filed by Mr. Palmer fails to meet the standards established by the City Council for filing a land use appeal under RMC Section 4-8-110. RMC 4-8-110(C)(3) states: 3. Required Form for and Content of Appeals. Any appeal shall be filed in writing. The written notice of appeal shall (ilily. clearly and thoroughly specify the substantial error(s) in ract or law which exist in the record of the proceedings from which the appellant seeks relief( emphasis added). This code provision is not a suggestion. It is a procedural requirement of the City Code. As noted in the introductory paragraph of this code section: A. SCOPE AND PURPOSE: This Section provides the basic procedures fOr processing all types ofland use and development-related appeals. Specific requirements are based upon the typellevel of appeal and the appeal authority. Procedures for the following types of appeals are included in this Section: RMC 4-8-11 O(A). Mr. Palmer has failed to comply with this fundamental procedural requirement. His Appeal alleges not one specific error. Mr. Palmer's Appeal cites to no facts in the record to support a claim that the Final Decision contains substantial errors. He presents no claims of legal errors by the Hearing Examiner. His Appeal simply agrees that the Project has a "good design," then expresses various "concerns" about the Project. Not one of these "concerns" points to any factual or legal errors in the Final Decision, let alone "fully, clearly and thoroughly specify the substantial error(s) in fact or law" as required by City Code. There was ample opportunity in both the public comment period for SEP A review and in the public hearing before the Hearing Examiner for members of the public, APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGE PUD - 2 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman Lee 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 including Mr. Palmer, to raise concerns about the Project. The record for stating concerns 2 has closed. An appeal to the City Council is for the purpose of a party of record to allege, 3 then prove, that the Hearing Examiner made substantial errors in fact or law that would 4 require the City Council to reverse or modify the Final Decision. 5 Here, the Appeal has failed to do anything more than restate concerns. Without 6 meeting the fundamental requirement for a land use appeal to allege specific errors, there 7 is no basis for the City Council to assess whether to grant or deny the Appeal on its merits. 8 Based on Mr. Palmer's failure to allege any substantive errors in fact or law in the 9 Final Decision, the City Council should summarily dismiss the Appeal. 10 II. Even if the City Council Chooses to Consider the Merits of the Appeal, the Appeal should nonetheless be Denied and the Council should Affirm the Hearing II Examiner's Final Decision. 12 If the City Council does not summarily dismiss the Appeal for failing to identifY 13 any substantive errors, we ask the City Council to deny the Appeal on its merits. The 14 record before the Hearing Examiner demonstrates that the Final Decision is fully 15 supported by substantial evidence and is consistent with applicable law. None of the 16 "concerns" expressed by Mr. Palmer rise to a reversible error. 17 Each of the paragraphs below address the individual "concerns" expressed by 18 Mr. Palmer in his Appeal and demonstrates why Mr. Palmer has failed to meet his burden 19 to prove substantial errors in fact or law.' 20 Concern 1: Increase in traffic to neighborhoods, specifically north of the site 21 The Appeal states a concern that the Project will increase traffic to neighborhoods 22 to the north. However, the Appeal fails to allege any error in this regard. 23 24 25 2 The burden of proof rests with the appellant. RMC 4-8-11(F)(S). APPLICANf'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARlNG EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE AVANA RIDGE PUD - 3 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman u' 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 1 The record establishes that the Project will add 5 PM peak-hour trips and 4 AM 2 peak-hour trips through the single-family neighborhood to the north. Traffic Impact 3 Analysis (TIA) Prepared by TraftEx, February 2, 2016 (Exhibit 15). The Hearing 4 Examiner found that this level of traffic was minimal, that the TIA adequately addressed 5 impacts from this traffic and that the mitigation imposed through the SEPA condition to 6 address this increased traffic was sufficient. The Final Decision states: 7 A major concern of the neighbors was traffic impacts to 106 Ave SE, 104 Ave SE and 105 Ave SE. In uncontested testimony, several neighbors testified that 8 these roads are isolated, currently accommodate a minimal amount of traffic .... Although a review of the surrounding road network shows that persons 9 may very well choose to drive through 10511041106 to avoid the BensonlSR 515 intersection as well as other traffic problems in the area, the applicant's 10 traffic analysis reveals that the project will only add jive PM peak hour trips and four AM peak hour trips into the 1051104/106 roads. The applicant's 11 traffic analysis was verified by peer review. Given the expert traffic analysis prepared by the applicant and the independent expert verification conducted 12 under the peer review, the applicant's traffic analysis is taken as a verity given the absence of any expert testimony to the contrary. With only a 13 maximum of jive additional trips per hour generated by the proposal, there is no basis to require more than the speed radar signs required by the SEP A 14 mitigation measures. 15 Final Decision, pp. 9-10. 16 The Appeal cites to no error In these findings by the Hearing Examiner. 17 Moreover, as noted by the Hearing Examiner, no expert testimony was presented at the 18 hearing to contradict the expert traffic report prepared for the Applicant by TraffEx. The 19 Final Decision addresses this concern and should be affirmed. 20 Concern 2: Existing congestion on Benson Road, including a blind curve 21 condition, and Adequacy of I06th and I04th for through traffic 22 The City of Renton ("City") received public comments and the Hearing Examiner 23 heard testimony regarding existing southbound queuing at the intersection of Benson 24 Road South and SR 515. The Hearing Examiner found that the TIA adequately analyzed 25 the potential impacts at the Benson Road S/515 intersection. Final Decision, p. 10. This APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGE PUD -4 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman l~ 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 I was also addressed by the Examiner in Condition 27, which requires the rechannelization 2 of the left-and right-turn southbound lanes from Benson Road South to SR 515, to one 3 left-turn lane and one combined left-turnlright-turn lane, as well as signal improvements 4 to accommodate the rechannelization. The Examiner found that with these improvements 5 in place, the queue lengths would be reduced to below pre-development conditions. 6 As noted above, regarding Concern 1, the Hearing Examiner found that traffic 7 from the Project filtering north along 105/104/1 06 th Avenues was adequately addressed in 8 the TIA and would be minimal. The TIA was independently peer reviewed by a traffic 9 consultant selected by the City, who concurred with the TIA's analyses. Memorandum 10 from Michael Read, PE, Principal, TENW, March 21, 2016. Exhibit 17. The Appeal cites II to no testimony rebutting these findings or establishing errors with the Final Decision on 12 this point. 13 The impacts from the Project, with the mitigation measures in place, will either be 14 better than pre-Project conditions (reduced queues) or de minimis (less than ten (10) total 15 trips in the peak travel hours)). This Appeal issue should be rejected and the Final 16 Decision on this issue should be affirmed. 17 Concern 3: Entry onto Benson Road from the Project entrance 18 Mr. Palmer is concerned that the Benson Road entry to the Project is dangerous 19 but cites to no evidence in the record to support this concern or to establish any substantial 20 error by the Hearing Examiner on this point. 21 The Project site entrance as analyzed in the TIA aligns with lOS th Avenue SE and 22 is supported by adequate sight distance. Exhibit 15, p. 4. As noted above, the TIA was 23 peer-reviewed and no expert testimony was introduced in the record to refute this 24 conclusion. The Hearing Examiner properly concluded that sight distance requirements 25 are met at both site entrance driveways. Final Decision, p. 9. No finding of a threat to APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGE PUD - 5 I VanNess Feldman", 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle. WA 98104 (206) 623-9372 I public safety or traffic safety was found in the SEP A determination or in the Hearing 2 Examiner's record. 3 This Appeal issue should be rejected and the Final Decision on this point should 4 be affirmed. 5 Concern 4: Radar signage and speed bumps are not adequate mitigation 6 Mr. Palmer is concerned that the SEP A condition requiring radar signage and 7 speed bumps to slow traffic will not affect congestion in the neighborhood north of the 8 Project site. However, as noted above, there is no basis in the record to establish that the 9 Project will create any congestion on these streets. 10 The record demonstrates that there is very little existing traffic on these residential II streets and that the Project will add only IS additional PM peak-hour trips and 14 12 additional AM peak-hour trips north on lOS th Ave SE and only 5 PM peak-hour and 4 AM 13 peak-hour trips along SE Innd west of the site. Exhibit 15, Figs. 3 and 4. Mr. Palmer has 14 pointed to no testimony to contradict the Hearing Examiner's findings with regard to 15 congestion and the adequacy of the SEP A condition to help slow traffic along this 16 residential street. 17 This Appeal issue should be rejected and the Final Decision on this point should IS be affirmed. 19 Concern 5: The need for an on-site traffic study 20 Mr. Palmer states as a concern that an onsite traffic study is required. However, as 21 noted repeatedly in the Final Decision, the Applicant hired a traffic expert to prepare a 22 detailed Traffic Impact Assessment (TTA) which was submitted into the record. 23 Exhibit 15. This TlA was peer reviewed by TENW, a third-party traffic engineer hired by 24 the City, who agreed with the conclusions reached by TraffEx. Exhibit 17. Mr. Palmer 25 has failed to show any error on this point. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE AV ANA RIDGE PUD - 6 69230.7 I VanNess Feldmanu, 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 Concern 6: Air pollution 2 Mr. Palmer alleges that air impacts could occur as a result of the Project but fails 3 to show any substantial error in the Final Decision on this issue. 4 Potential environmental impacts were fully disclosed to the City during the SEP A 5 review process. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) considered those impacts 6 and issued a Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated (DNSM) on April 11, 2016. 7 Exhibit 20. No significant adverse impacts to air quality or any other element of the 8 environment were identified. No party filed an appeal of the SEPA determination. By 9 failing to appeal the DNSM, the conclusions reached by the ERC are final and cannot be 10 challenged in this Appeal. I I Moreover, concerns regarding air pollution are procedurally beyond the scope of 12 the PUD. The criteria for approval of a Planned Urban Development do not include 13 consideration of potential air pollution from traffic. 14 Nonetheless, the Hearing Examiner did consider concerns expressed about air 15 pollution from traffic and concluded that the Project would not cause air pollution. The 16 Final Decision notes that "one neigbbor testified that he was concerned that pollution 17 caused by increased project traffic would exacerbate the respiratory problems of some 18 neigbbors living close to the project site." Final Decision, p. 12. The Final Decision also 19 confirms that this neigbbor testified that there was currently no vehicle pollution in this 20 neigbborhood. Final Decision, p 4. No expert testimony was ever introduced regarding 2 I air pollution impacts from the Project. Based on this record, the Hearing Examiner 22 correctly found that "[ w ]ithout any scientific evidence to substantiate this assertion 23 [concerning air pollution from traffic], there is insufficient evidence to reasonably 24 conclude that the relatively modest traffic generated by the proposal would exacerbate 25 respiratory problems." Final Decision, p. 12. APPLICM'T'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGE PUD - 7 69:30-7 I VanNess Feldman '" 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (20B) 623·9372 I This concern should be rejected and the Final Decision on this point should be 2 affirmed. 3 Concern 7 Compatibility of the architecture 4 Mr. Palmer alleges that the north side of the Project is architecturally incompatible 5 with the neighborhood. However, Mr. Palmer has pointed to no substantial errors in the 6 Hearing Examiner's findings on this issue. 7 The Hearing Examiner carefully considered the documents presented by the 8 Applicant's expert architect and by the City's planning staff that reviewed the Project's 9 design (Exhibit 19) and found that it complied with all applicable design standards. Final 10 Decision, p. 12. Specifically, the Hearing Examiner found that the "(t)he project is 11 compatible with surrounding development." ld. The Examiner also describes the 12 measures that the Applicant took to ensure that the Project complies with the Design 13 District B standards that also apply to the Project site. fd. The Examiner found that in the 14 public comment and testimony, "no one has suggested that staffs finding of compliance 15 with these standards was in error." 16 Once again, Mr. Palmer has cited to no testimony rebutting the Examiner's 17 findings or alleging errors in compliance with any specific design review criteria. This 18 concern should be rejected and the Final Decision on this point should be affirmed. 19 III. Conclusion. 20 The City Code requires that every land use appeal must state, with specificity, 2 I errors in fact or law in the decision being challenged. The Appeal states concerns but fails 22 to allege any errors. Based on the Appellant's failure to meet this procedural requirement, 23 the Appeal should be summarily dismissed. 24 Even if the Appeal is considered on its merits, it should be denied because 25 Mr. Pahner has failed to meet his burden to prove substantial errors in fact or law in the APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGE PUD - 8 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman", 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 1 Hearing Examiner's Final Decision. Council's consideration of this Appeal must be based 2 solely on the record, the Hearing Examiner's Report, the notice of appeal and arguments 3 based on the record. There was ample opportunity provided in both the public comment 4 period for SEPA review and during the public hearing before the Hearing Examiner for 5 members of the public to build a record in support of their positions. Based upon the 6 record, the Hearing Examiner reached appropriate findings and conclusions in approving 7 this Project. Mr. Palmer has failed to show, for any of his concerns, that the Hearing 8 Examiner erred. For this reason, the Appeal should be denied. 9 10 Dated this 16th day of June, 2016. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 VAN NESS FELD:v!A!' ~--------- 719 Second Avenue, Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 Tel: (206) 623·9372 Fax: (206) 623·4986 E·mail: brc@vnf.com Attorney for Avana Ridge LLC APPLlCMl'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION OK THE AVANARIDGE PUD· 9 I VanNess Feldmanu, 69230-J 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623-9372 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 I, Jennifer Hicok, declare as follows: 3 That I am over the age of 18 years, not a party to this action, and competent to be a 4 witness herein; 5 That I, as a legal assistant in the office of Van Ness Feldman LLP, caused true and 6 correct copies of the following documents to be delivered as set forth below: 7 I. Applicant's Response to Dan Palmer's Appeal of the Hearing Examiner's Final Decision on the Avana Ridge PUD; and this; 8 2. Certificate of Service; 9 and that on June 16, 2016, I addressed said documents and deposited them for delivery as 10 follows: II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ORIGINAL: City of Renton City Clerk's Office 1055 South Grady Way, Seventh Floor Renton, W A 98057 COPY: LawrenceJ. Warren Renton City Attorney City of Renton \055 South Grady Way Renton, W A 98057 COPY: Rocale Timmons Senior Planner City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development 1055 South Grady Way Renton, W A 98057 COPY: Dan Palmer 16638 106 th Street Renton, W A 98059 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE -10 69230-7 o By U.S. Mail o By Legal Messenger o By Email: o By U.S. Mail o By Legal Messenger o By Email: L Warren@Rentonwa.gov o By U.S. Mail o By Legal Messenger o By Email: RTimmons@Rentonwa.gov o By U.S. Mail o By Legal Messenger o By Email: I VanNess Feldman U1' 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws ofthe State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. EXECUTED at Seattle, Washington on this 16th day of June, 2016. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE -11 69:'30-~ I VanNess Feldman", 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623-9372 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 . , ,'," . i '~', .:... ~ i i: CiT '. :. U_J-;:I':'~; ~> r 1,,'1::- V \ J.... ~C,..Q V\f'-J'>-¥-fA.Ly<+! BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: A V ANA RIDGE PUD Preliminary Planned Urban Development LUA-15-000894 APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGEPUD 14 Pursuant to Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-8-11 0(F)(3), the Applicant for the 15 Avana Ridge PUD, Avana Ridge LLC (the "Applicant"), by and through its legal counsel, 16 Brent Carson of Van Ness Feldman, LLP, files this response to the appeal filed by Dan 17 Palmer ("Mr. Palmer") on June 7, 2016 (the "Appeal") challenging the Hearing 18 Examiner's ("Hearing Examiner" or "Examiner") Final Decision' approving the Avana 19 Ridge Preliminary Planned Urban Development (the "Project"). For the reasons stated 20 below, the Appeal should be summarily dismissed, or if it is considered on its merits, the 21 Appeal should be denied and the Final Decision should be affirmed. 22 23 24 25 I Hearing Examiner's Final Decision, LUA 15-000894, PP, PPUD ("Final Decision"). APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE AVANA RIDGE PUD· 1 69230-7 lJORIGINAL I VanNess Feldmanue 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 " I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I. The Appeal filed by Mr, Palmer fails to meet the standards established by the City Council for filing a land use appeal under RMC Section 4-8-110. RMC 4-8-110(C)(3) states: 3. Required Form for and Content of Appeals. Any appeal shall be filed in writing. The written notice of appeal shall fUlly, clearly and thoroughly specifY the substantial error(s) in (act or law which exist in the record of the proceedings from which the appellant seeks relief( emphasis added). This code provision is not a suggestion. It is a procedural requirement of the City Code. As noted in the introductory paragraph ofthis code section: A. SCOPE AND PURPOSE: This Section provides the basic procedures for processing all types ofland use and development-related appeals, Specific requirements are based upon the type/level of appeal and the appeal authority. Procedures for the following types of appeals are included in this Section: RMC 4·8-11 O(A). Mr. Palmer has failed to comply with this fundamental procedural requirement. His Appeal alleges not one specific error. Mr. Palmer's Appeal cites to no facts in the record to support a claim that the Final Decision contains substantial errors. He presents no claims of legal errors by the Hearing Examiner. His Appeal simply agrees that the Project has a "good design," then expresses various "concerns" about the Project. Not one of these "concerns" points to any factual or legal errors in the Final Decision, let alone "fully, clearly and thoroughly specify the substantial error(s) in fact or law" as required by City Code. There was ample opportunity in both the public comment period for SEP A review and in the public hearing before the Hearing Examiner for members of the public, APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE AVANA RIDGE POD· 2 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman '" 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623-9372 1 including Mr. Palmer, to raise concerns about the Project. The record for stating concerns 2 has closed. An appeal to the City Council is for the purpose of a party of record to allege, 3 then prove, that the Hearing Examiner made substantial errors in fact or law that would 4 require the City Council to reverse or modify the Final Decision. 5 Here, the Appeal has failed to do anything more than restate concerns. Without 6 meeting the fundamental requirement for a land use appeal to allege specific errors, there 7 is no basis for the City Council to assess whether to grant or deny the Appeal on its merits. 8 Based on Mr. Palmer's failure to allege any substantive errors in fact or law in the 9 Final Decision, the City Council should sununarily dismiss the Appea\. 10 II. Even if the City Council Chooses to Consider the Merits of the Appeal, the Appeal should nonetheless be Denied and the Council should Affirm the Hearing 11 Examiner's Final Decision. 12 If the City Council does not sununarily dismiss the Appeal for failing to identify 13 any substantive errors, we ask the City Council to deny the Appeal on its merits. The 14 record before the Hearing Examiner demonstrates that the Final Decision is fully IS supported by substantial evidence and is consistent with applicable law. None of the 16 "concerns" expressed by Mr. Palmer rise to a reversible error. 17 Each of the paragraphs below address the individual "concerns" expressed by 18 Mr. Palmer in his Appeal and demonstrates why Mr. Palmer has failed to meet his burden 19 to prove substantial errors in fact or law.' 20 Concern I: Increase in traffic to neighborhoods, specifically north of the site 21 The Appeal states a concern that the Project will increase traffic to neighborhoods 22 to the north. However, the Appeal fails to allege any error in this regard. 23 24 25 2 The burden of proof rests with the appellant. RMC 4-8-1 I (F)(5). APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE AVANA RIDGE PUD - 3 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman ". 71 9 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle. WA 98104 (206) 623-9372 The record establishes that the Project will add 5 PM peak-hour trips and 4 AM 2 peak-hour trips through the single-family neighborhood to the north. Traffic Impact 3 Analysis (TIA) Prepared by TraffEx, February 2, 2016 (Exhibit 15). The Hearing 4 Examiner found that this level of traffic was minimal, that the TIA adequately addressed 5 impacts from this traffic and that the mitigation imposed through the SEPA condition to 6 address this increased traffic was sufficient. The Final Decision states: 7 A major concern of the neighbors was traffic impacts to 106 Ave SE, 104 Ave SE and 105 Ave SE. In uncontested testimony, several neighbors testified that 8 these roads are isolated. currently accommodate a minimal amount of traffic ... . Although a review of the surrounding road network shows that persons 9 may very well choose to drive through 10511041106 to avoid the BensonlSR 515 intersection as well as other traffic problems in the area, the applicant's 10 traffic analysis reveals that the project will only add five PM peak hour trips and four AM peak hour trips into the 10511041106 roads. The applicant's 11 traffic analysis was verified by peer review. Given the expert traffic analysis prepared by the applicant and the independent expert verification conducted 12 under the peer review. the applicant's traffic analysis is taken as a verity given the absence of any expert testimony to the contrary. With on ly a 13 maximum of five additional trips per hour generated by the proposal. there is no basis to require more than the speed radar signs required by the SEPA 14 mitigation measures. 15 Final Decision, pp. 9-10. 16 The Appeal cites to no error in these findings by the Hearing Examiner. 17 Moreover, as noted by the Hearing Examiner, no expert testimony was presented at the 18 hearing to contradict the expert traffic report prepared for the Applicant by TraffEx. The 19 Final Decision addresses this concern and should be affirmed. 20 Concern 2: Existing congestion on Benson Road, including a blind curve 21 condition, and Adequacy of I06th and I04thfor through traffic 22 The City of Renton ("City") received public comments and the Hearing Examiner 23 heard testimony regarding existing southbound queuing at the intersection of Benson 24 Road South and SR 515. The Hearing Examiner found that the TIA adequately analyzed 25 the potential impacts at the Benson Road S/515 intersection. Final Decision, p. 10. This APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGE PUD - 4 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman '" 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 1 was also addressed by the Examiner in Condition 27, which requires the rechannelization 2 of the left-and right-turn southbound lanes from Benson Road South to SR 515, to one 3 left-turn lane and one combined left-turnlright-turn lane, as well as signal improvements 4 to accommodate the rechannelization. The Examiner found that with these improvements 5 in place, the queue lengths would be reduced to below pre-development conditions. 6 As noted above, regarding Concern I, the Hearing Examiner found that traffic 7 from the Project filtering north along 10511 0411 06th Avenues was adequately addressed in 8 the TIA and would be minimal. The TIA was independently peer reviewed by a traffic 9 consultant selected by the City, who concurred with the TIA's analyses. Memorandum 10 from Michael Read, PE, Principal, TENW, March 21, 2016. Exhibit 17. The Appeal cites 11 to no testimony rebutting these findings or establishing errors with the Final Decision on 12 this point. 13 The impacts from the Project, with the mitigation measures in place, will either be 14 better than pre-Project conditions (reduced queues) or de minimis (less than ten (10) total 15 trips in the peak travel hours)). This Appeal issue should be rejected and the Final 16 Decision on this issue should be affirmed. 17 Concern 3: Entry onto Benson Road from the Project entrance 18 Mr. Palmer is concerned that the Benson Road entry to the Project is dangerous 19 but cites to no evidence in the record to support this concern or to establish any substantial 20 error by the Hearing Examiner on this point. 21 The Project site entrance as analyzed in the TIA aligns with 108 th Avenue SE and 22 is supported by adequate sight distance. Exhibit 15, p. 4. As noted above, the TIA was 23 peer-reviewed and no expert testimony was introduced in the record to refute this 24 conclusion. The Hearing Examiner properly concluded that sight distance requirements 25 are met at both site entrance driveways. Final Decision, p. 9. No finding of a threat to APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGE PUD - 5 692]0·7 I VanNess Feldman", 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 I public safety or traffic safety was found in the SEP A determination or in the Hearing 2 Examiner's record. 3 This Appeal issue should be rejected and the Final Decision on this point should 4 be affirmed. 5 Concern 4: Radar sign age and speed bumps are not adequate mitigation 6 Mr. Palmer is concerned that the SEP A condition requiring radar signage and 7 speed bumps to slow traffic will not affect congestion in the neighborhood north of the S Project site. However, as noted above, there is no basis in the record to establish that the 9 Project will create any congestion on these streets. 10 The record demonstrates that there is very little existing traffic on these residential II streets and that the Project will add only 15 additional PM peak-hour trips and 14 12 additional AM peak-hour trips north on lOSth Ave SE and only 5 PM peak-hour and 4 AM 13 peak-hour trips along SE Innd west of the site. Exhibit 15, Figs. 3 and 4. Mr. Palmer has 14 pointed to no testimony to contradict the Hearing Examiner's findings with regard to 15 congestion and the adequacy of the SEP A condition to help slow traffic along this 16 residential street. 17 This Appeal issue should be rejected and the Final Decision on this point should IS be affirmed. 19 Concern 5: The need for an on-site traffic study 20 Mr. Palmer states as a concern that an onsite traffic study is required. However, as 21 noted repeatedly in the Final Decision, the Applicant hired a traffic expert to prepare a 22 detailed Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) which was submitted into the record. 23 Exhibit 15. This TIA was peer reviewed by TENW, a third-party traffic engineer hired by 24 the City, who agreed with the conclusions reached by TraftEx. Exhibit 17. Mr. Palmer 25 has failed to show any error on this point. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE A V ANA RIDGE PUD - 6 1j9230-7 I VanNess Feldman '" 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 Concern 6: Air pollution 2 Mr. Palmer alleges that air impacts could occur as a result of the Project but fails 3 to show any substantial error in the Final Decision on this issue. 4 Potential environmental impacts were fully disclosed to the City during the SEPA 5 review process. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) considered those impacts 6 and issued a Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated (DNSM) on April 11, 2016. 7 Exhibit 20. No significant adverse impacts to air quality or any other element of the 8 environment were identified. No party filed an appeal of the SEP A determination. By 9 failing to appeal the DNSM, the conclusions reached by the ERC are final and cannot be 10 challenged in this Appea\. II Moreover, concerns regarding air pollution are procedurally beyond the scope of 12 the PUD. The criteria for approval of a Planned Urban Development do not include 13 consideration of potential air pollution from traffic. 14 Nonetheless, the Hearing Examiner did consider concerns expressed about air 15 pollution from traffic and concluded that the Project would not cause air pollution. The 16 Final Decision notes that "one neighbor testified that he was concerned that pollution 17 caused by increased project traffic would exacerbate the respiratory problems of some 18 neighbors living close to the project site." Final Decision, p. 12. The Final Decision also 19 confirms that this neighbor testified that there was currently no vehicle pollution in this 20 neighborhood. Final Decision, p 4. No expert testimony was ever introduced regarding 21 air pollution impacts from the Project. Based on this record, the Hearing Examiner 22 correctly found that "[ w ]ithout any scientific evidence to substantiate this assertion 23 [concerning air pollution from traffic], there is insufficient evidence to reasonably 24 conclude that the relatively modest traffic generated by the proposal would exacerbate 25 respiratory problems." Final Decision, p. 12. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE AV ANA RIDGE PUD -7 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman ,~ 719 Second Aven ue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623-9372 .. This concern should be rejected and the Final Decision on this point should be 2 affinned. 3 Concern 7 Compatibility of the architecture 4 Mr. Palmer alleges that the north side of the Project is architecturally incompatible 5 with the neighborhood. However, Mr. Palmer has pointed to no substantial errors in the 6 Hearing Examiner's findings on this issue. 7 The Hearing Examiner carefully considered the documents presented by the 8 Applicant's expert architect and by the City's planning staff that reviewed the Project's 9 design (Exhibit 19) and found that it complied with all applicable design standards. Final 10 Decision, p. 12. Specifically, the Hearing Examiner found that the "(t)he project is II compatible with surrounding development." !d. The Examiner also describes the 12 measures that the Applicant took to ensure that the Project complies with the Design 13 District B standards that also apply to the Project site. Id. The Examiner found that in the 14 public comment and testimony, "no one has suggested that staffs finding of compliance 15 with these standards was in error." 16 Once again, Mr. Palmer has cited to no testimony rebutting the Examiner's 17 findings or alleging errors in compliance with any specific design review criteria. This 18 concern should be rejected and the Final Decision on this point should be affinned. 19 III. Conclusion. 20 The City Code requires that every land use appeal must state, with specificity, 21 errors in fact or law in the decision being challenged. The Appeal states concerns but fails 22 to allege any errors. Based on the Appellant's failure to meet this procedural requirement, 23 the Appeal should be summarily dismissed. 24 Even if the Appeal is considered on its merits, it should be denied because 25 Mr. Palmer has failed to meet his burden to prove substantial errors in fact or law in the APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE AVANA RIDGE PUD - 8 69230-7 I VanNess Feldman u, 71 9 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623-9372 " I Hearing Examiner's Final Decision. Council's consideration of this Appeal must be based 2 solely on the record, the Hearing Examiner's Report, the notice of appeal and arguments 3 based on the record. There was ample opportunity provided in both the public comment 4 period for SEP A review and during the public hearing before the Hearing Examiner for 5 members of the public to build a record in support of their positions. Based upon the 6 record, the Hearing Examiner reached appropriate findings and conclusions in approving 7 this Project. Mr. Palmer has failed to show, for any of his concerns, that the Hearing 8 Examiner erred. For this reason, the Appeal should be denied. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Dated this 16th day of June, 2016. VAN NESS FELDMAN ~---- 719 Second Avenue, Suite 1150 Seattle, W A 98104 Tel: (206) 623-9372 Fax: (206) 623-4986 E-mail: brc@vnf.com Attorney for Avana Ridge LLC APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO DAN PALMER'S APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION ON THE I VanNess Feldman u, A V ANA RIDGE PUD - 9 69230-7 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 I CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 I, Jennifer Hicok, declare as follows: 3 That I am over the age of 18 years, not a party to this action, and competent to be a 4 witness herein; 5 That I, as a legal assistant in the office of Van Ness Feldman LLP, caused true and 6 correct copies of the following documents to be delivered as set forth below: 7 I. Applicant's Response to Dan Palmer's Appeal of the Hearing Examiner's Final Decision on the A vana Ridge PUD; and this; 8 2. Certificate of Service; 9 and that on June 16, 2016, I addressed said documents and deposited them for delivery as 10 follows: 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ORIGINAL: City of Renton City Clerk's Office 1055 South Grady Way, Seventh Floor Renton, W A 98057 COPY: Lawrence J. Warren Renton City Attorney City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, W A 98057 COPY: Rocale Timmons Senior Planner City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development 1055 South Grady Way Renton, W A 98057 COPY: Dan Palmer 16638 106th Street Renton, W A 98059 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE -10 69230-7 D By U.S. Mail IZI By Legal Messenger D By Email: IZI By U.S. Mail D By Legal Messenger IZI By Email: L W arren@Rentonwa.gov IZI By U.S. Mail D By Legal Messenger IZI By Email: RTimmons@Rentonwa.gov IZI By U.S. Mail D By Legal Messenger D By Email: I VanNess Feldman '" 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. EXECUTED at Seattle, Washington on this 16th day of June, 2016. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE -11 69230-7 I VanNess Feldmanm 719 Second Avenue Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 623·9372 Cynthia Moya From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Cynthia Moya Wednesday, June 08, 20168:35 AM Larry Warren; Chip Vincent; Jennifer T. Henning; Vanessa Dolbee; Amanda Askren; Craig Burnell; Sabrina Mirante; Phil Olbrechts; Rocale Timmons; Julia Medzegian; Ed Prince Jason Seth Appeal to Council -Avana Ridge Avana Appeal.pdf We have received this Appeal to Council for the Avana Ridge PUD (LUA-15-000894) on June 7, 2016 at 4:58 p.m. I have attached the appeal along with the receipt of payment. Thank you, Cindy Moya, Records Management Specialist City of Renton -Administrative Services/City Clerk Division cmoya@rentonwa.gov 425-430-6513 1 - ;?Ud!-r~ I<>d~ fZ -I-CITYOFRENTON~ c:: 0 CJ-.---(5 -OQCJ (5 I' Y JUN 07 Z016j,{.s1t RECEIVED 't:?tP;-"/:Y. L X ~~e/( . ClTY;L~RK'SOFFICE . ~ , , /3a5~~ ~/? '~D~,'7fy'~c/ ffo1Y ~/ ~".,~~ .. ~~c-rS/~1(/ ,'/??~ /t1"i"",f) 0?Cf c '7? ~u~ct " /1'e)r-,· / 'r1', '~rc:7' '~r CV/ ?r~cJ ~ ~CS/O~. \' N/'fo, PnVC/ ~/ /9~c"~~ Os 7 cvootf' ~3>&~_ ,r~7/?~~~ '~~~~ ~,~ ,~~~~c _~d~C~r~ --" ~ '" 1:. ?/~¥c--'&o(up'/Y:> :-~/:a.~ ~N /t/~'l/Y6c.?/,~o~ ~ ~/~ ~/;7cV ~UrrC'C//? ~~/ ~f<::."C( '. ~. Va ac~y .. a'~~i5~~' . . . , -: • . . - . , . ~ ~62/2e/~/ C~/'7O?/I7S CJM' ;1/~ff-fi! /55~J!'h fi6ra..~o/ CITY OF RENTON City Clerk Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425·430·6510 rlCash ITCheck No. _____ _ o <::opyFee 9(~ppeaI Fee , Description: • r-· o ,'. l) \;;. .' i ~"!""2, C ..... \.t:'" .. ~ \ Funds Received From: "', r \ -. '" , . 'I • "-"~ ,~ '\ ), ~ 1 Name Address I • '. I :-~.\ • .., I( h Q'--SL City/Zip " .. ' .. \.v- Receipt !,l , ..... n.S1 i. i -7 , I (,~ Date 1,,12" - o Notary Service 0 ________ _ I Amoun' $J SC ~ · . , ~ ]&/Ce/cf-/ c~ /?C2? /" /7S (!) (l/ , fIf~s'f¥1 /55~J /nfir.5;Ocz~a./ Denis Law _""':M::ayor ,-""""'~·l ~. r rtu r l City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC June 14, 2016 APPEAL FILED BY: Dan Palmer RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision dated May 24, 2016, regarding Avana Ridge PUD. (File No. LUA-15-000894 PP, PPPUD) To Parties of Record: Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Renton City Code of Ordinances, written appeal of the hearing examiner's decision on the Avana Ridge PUD has been filed with the City Clerk. In accordance with Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110F, within five days of receipt of the notice of appeal, or after all appeal periods with the Hearing Examiner have expired, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. Other parties of record may submit letters limited to support of their positions regarding the appeal within ten (10) days of the date of mailing of this notification. The deadline for submission of additional letters is by 5:00 p.m., Thursday, June 24, 2016. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee at 3:00 p.m. on Thursday, July 28,2016, in the Council Chambers, 7th Floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98057. The recommendation ofthe Committee will be presented for consideration by the full Council at a subsequent Council meeting. Copy of the appeal and the Renton Municipal Code regarding appeal of Hearing Examiner decisions or recommendations is attached. Please note that the City Council will be considering the merits ofthe appeal based upon the written record previously established. Unless a showing can be made that additional evidence could not reasonably have been available at the prior hearing held by the Hearing Examiner, no further evidence or testimony on this matter will be accepted by the City Council. 10S5 South GradyWay • Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 430-651 0 / Fax (425) 430-6516. rentonwa.gov For additional information or assistance, please call Jason Seth, City Clerk, at 425-430-6510. Sincerely, .:Ii? as n A. Seth, CMC City Clerk * Please note that if you signed up to be a Party of Record [or this matter you are receiving a copy of this letter as a courtesy. Attachments cc: Hearing Examiner Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Ed Prince, City Councilmember Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Justin Lagers, Avana Ridge LLC, Contact • Parties of Record (25) · . · , , . City of Renton Municipal Code; Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110 -Appeals 4-8-110C4 Filing of Appeal and Fee: The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in accordance with RMC 5- 1-2, the fee schedule of the City. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-1982; Ord. 5660, 5-14-2012; Ord. 5688, 5-13-2013) 4-8-110F: Appeals to City Council -Procedures 1. Standing: Unless otherwise provided by State law or exempted by a State or federal agency, only the applicant, City or a party of record who has been aggrieved or affected by the Hearing Examiner's decision and who participated in the Hearing Examiner's public hearing may appeal the Hearing Examiner's decision. A person(s) will be deemed to have participated in the public hearing process if that person(s}: a. Testified or gave oral comments at the public hearing; or b. Submitted any written comments to City staff or the Hearing Examiner regarding the matter prior to the close of the hearing; or c. Has been granted status as or has requested to be made a party of record prior to the close of the public hearing. 2. Notice to Parties of Record: Within five (5) days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. 3. Opportunity to Provide Comments: Parties of record may submit letters in support of their positions within ten (10) days of the dates of mailing of the notification ofthe filing of the notice of appeal. 4. Council Review Procedures: No public hearing shall be held by the City Council. No new or additional evidence or testimony shall be accepted by the City Council. The cost of transcription of the hearing record shall be borne by the applicant. If a transcript is made, the applicant is required to provide a copy to the City Clerk and the Renton City Attorney at no cost. It shall be presumed that the record before the City Council is identical to the hearing record before the Hearing Examiner. (Ord. 5675, 12-3-2012) 5. Burden: The burden of proof shall rest with the appellant. 6. Council Evaluation Criteria: The consideration by the City Council shall be based solely upon the record, the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal and additional arguments based on the record by parties. 7. Findings and Conclusions Required: If, upon appeal of a decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-8-070Hl, as it exists or may be amended, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, it may modify or reverse the decision of the Hearing Examiner accordingly. (Ord. 5675, 12-3- 2012) 8. Decision Documentation: The decision of the City Council shall be in writing and shall specify any modified or amended findings and conclusions other than those set forth in the report of the Hearing Examiner. Each material finding shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. 9. Council Action Final: The action of the Council approving, modifying or rejecting a decision ofthe Examiner shall be final and conclusive, unless appealed within the time frames established under subsection G5 of this Section. (Ord. 3658,9-13-1982; Ord. 4389,1-25-1993; Ord. 4660, 3-17-1997; Ord. 5558, 1O-25-2010) June 14, 2016 APPEAL FILED BY: Dan Palmer RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision dated May 24,2016, regarding Avana Ridge PUD. (File No. LUA-1s-000894 PP, PPPUD) To Parties of Record: Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Renton City Code of Ordinances, written appeal of the hearing examiner's decision on the Avana Ridge PUD has been filed with the City Clerk. In accordance with Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110F, within five days of receipt of the notice of appeal, or after all appeal periods with the Hearing Examiner have expired, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. Other parties of record may submit letters limited to support of their positions regarding the appeal within ten (10) days of the date of mailing of this notification. The deadline for submission of additional letters is by 5:00 p.m .. Thursday. June 24, 2016. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee at 3:00 p.m. on Thursday. July 28. 2016. in the Council Chambers, 7th Floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98057. The recommendation of the Committee will be presented for consideration by the full Council at a subsequent Council meeting. Copy of the appeal and the Renton Municipal Code regarding appeal of Hearing Examiner decisions or recommendations is attached. Please note that the City Council will be considering the merits of the appeal based upon the written record previously established. Unless a showing can be made that additional evidence could not reasonably have been available at the prior hearing held by the Hearing Examiner, no further evidence or testimony on this matter will be accepted by the City Council. For additional information or assistance, please call Jason Seth, City Clerk, at 425-430-6510. Sincerely, .t/? as n A. Seth, CMC City Clerk * Please note that if you signed up to be a Party of Record Jor this matter you are receiving a copy of this letter as a courtesy. Attachments cc: Hearing Examiner Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Ed Prince, City Councilmember Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Justin Lagers, Avana Ridge LLC. Contact • Parties of Record (25) June 14, 2016 CERTIFICATE OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) ) § ) Jason A. Seth, City Clerk for the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that he is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter. That on the 14th day of June, 2016, at the hour of 4:30 p.m. your affiant duly mailed and placed in the United States Post Office at Renton, King County, Washington, by first class mail to all parties of record, notice of appeal filed by Dan Palmer of the Hearing Examiner's final decision regarding the Avana Ridge PUD (File No. LUA-1S-000894) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this 14th day of June, 2016. 'I i \ C ~R. rI(Ioya Notary Public in and for the Sta e of Washington, residing in Renton My Commission expires: 8/27/2018 , Andrew Gray 3275 Cedar Ave S Renton. WA 98055 D. Bruce & Nancy Stanley 10825 SE 172nd St, #5B Renton. WA 98055-5969 Daniel Hiranaka 10510 5E 172nd 5t Renton. WA 98055 Doug Goods 16602 106th Ave 5E Renton. WA 98055 H.A. Chau 4l0ll50th Ave 5E Bellevue. WA 98006 JUSTIN LAGERS Avana Ridge 9675 5E 36th St, Ste. 105 Mercer Island. WA 98040 Michael Gladstein Avana Ridge LLC 9675 SE 36th 5t, #105 Mercer Island. WA 98040 Molly Moss 3121 Cedar Ave 5 Renton. WA 98055 Scot! Petet!. D.C. 10622 5E Carr Rd, Suite A Renton. WA 98055 Caryn Cantu 16561106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Dan Palner 16638 106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Daniel Ridenour 16836 106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Emily Brooker 16810 104th Ave 5E Renton. WA 98055 Jerry Miller PO Box 686 Renton. WA 98057 Kimmie McMullin 17030 106th Ave 5E Renton. WA 98055 Mike & Julie Radtke 17024 106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Philip Reitz 2907 Cedar Ave S Renton. WA 98055 Wendy Yadock 17020 104th Ave 5E Renton. WA 98055 ~, ; -L Carine Kumano 10829 SE 172nd St. #6C Renton. WA 98055 Dan Russell 43755 Louisiana St Palm Desert. CA 92211 Debra Russell 8295 31st St Renton. WA 98055 Genevieve Bvrnes 3125 Cedar Ave S Renton. WA 98055 JODY HANAWALT PO Box 4097 Renton. WA 98057 Mark Faas 2915 Cedar Ave 5 Renton. WA 98055 Molly Heine 16829 5E 105th St Renton. WA 98055 Rhanda Rae Murphy 17000 104th Ave 5E Renton. WA 98055 Denis Law Mayor June 14, 2016 APPEAL FILED BY: City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Dan Palmer RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision dated May 24,2016, regarding Avana Ridge PUD. (File No. LUA-15-000894 PP, PPPUD) To Parties of Record: Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Renton City Code of Ordinances, written appeal of the hearing examiner's decision on the Avana Ridge PUD has been filed with the City Clerk. In accordance with Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110F, within five days of receipt of the notice of appeal, or after all appeal periods with the Hearing Examiner have expired, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. Other parties of record may submit letters limited to support of their positions regarding the appeal within ten (10) days of the date of mailing of this notification. The deadline for submission of additional letters is by 5;00 p.rn .. Thursday, June 24, 2016. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee at 3:00 p.m. on Thursday, July 28,2016, in the Council Chambers, 7th Floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98057. The recommendation ofthe Committee will be presented for consideration by the full Council at a subsequent Council meeting. Copy of the appeal and the Renton Municipal Code regarding appeal of Hearing Examiner decisions or recommendations is attached. Please note that the City Council will be conSidering the merits of the appeal based upon the written record previously established. Unless a showing can be made that additional evidence could not reasonably have been available at the prior hearing held by the Hearing Examiner, no further evidence or testimony on this matter will be accepted by the City Council. 1055 South Grady Way • Renton,Washington 98057 • (425) 430-6510/ Fax (425) 430-6516. rentonwa.gov • For additional information or assistance, please call Jason Seth, City Clerk, at 425-430-6510. Sincerely, .:Ii? as n A. Seth, CMC City Clerk * Please note thot if you signed up to be a Party of Record for this matter you are receiving a copy of this letter as a courtesy. Attachments cc: Hearing Examiner Rocale TImmons, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Ed Prince, City Councilmember Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Justin Lagers, Avana Ridge LLC, Contact • Parties of Record (25) , , fr0N'?/;-~(~ ~ -r>Z CITYOFRENTON"OV~ ~ 0 ~ (5' -doO 25 7 Y JU:cOc~::16V{,,~ff1 '~~;-"(4 L x~~e/( . CITY;L~RK'SQccICE J.. ~5m: cJ'/? '~~O~7Y'~q"" ffo 1?-~V: ~-"'cz~ .. ~~c-rS/.d/{/' '. r~'7 /t1~4() ~~~C-'7~ 0u.~ct ~ ,,' "eye' ') r-, , ? ~r-7 I ~Pc7' )4;" ~? ?r:~~ ~c/ ~(5/0~. \' , . . \ w/,~ /~vc/ ~/ /lcy{~(y< Os ? d'dc/ ~~&I-_ t'~~/7~~/P , :;IE/",6 ~ '4z/'P ,r-:7FC"~(-' .c-d/'?r<?,....~ \ ' ~. ?/~$£~'·U~UP'/5~~~~~~ ~AI ;/l/e~/f' 60".,4 cJcJ/ ~ /t~/rj/) Q/7V J'" {/ ~ " CJ C/,.n o/c ("7 /. ~I' c:' "f . '. Vr,? acc:-~?~(:is~~ .'.' ~ "' • . . , ,. ,--. . • , City of Renton MUnicipal Code; Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110 -Appeals 4-8-110C4 Filing of Appeal and Fee: The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in accordance with RMC 5- 1-2, the fee schedule of the City. (Ord. 3658,9-13-1982; Ord. 5660, 5-14-2012; Ord. 5688, 5-13-2013) 4-8-110F: Appeals to City Council-Procedures 1. Standing: Unless otherwise provided by State law or exempted by a State or federal agency, only the applicant, City or a party of record who has been aggrieved or affected by the Hearing Examiner's decision and who participated in the Hearing Examiner's public hearing may appeal the Hearing Examiner's decision. A person(s) will be deemed to have participated in the public hearing process if that person(s): a. Testified or gave oral comments at the public hearing; or b. Submitted any written comments to City staff or the Hearing Examiner regarding the matter prior to the close of the hearing; or c. Has been granted status as or has requested to be made a party of record prior to the close of the public hearing. 2. Notice to Parties of Record: Within five (5) days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. 3. Opportunity to Provide Comments: Parties of record may submit letters in support of their positions within ten (10) days of the dates of mailing of the notification of the filing of the notice of appeal. 4. Council Review Procedures: No public hearing shall be held by the City Council. No new or additional evidence or testimony shall be accepted by the City Council. The cost of transcription of the hearing record shall be borne by the applicant. If a transcript is made, the applicant is required to provide a copy to the City Clerk and the Renton City Attorney at no cost. It shall be presumed that the record before the City Council is identical to the hearing record before the Hearing Examiner. (Ord. 5675, 12-3-2012) S. Burden: The burden of proof shall rest with the appellant. 6. Council Evaluation Criteria: The consideration by the City Council shall be based solely upon the record, the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal and additional arguments based on the record by parties. 7. Findings and Conclusions Required: If, upon appeal of a decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-8-070H1, as it exists or may be amended, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, it may modify or reverse the decision of the Hearing Examiner accordingly. (Ord. 5675, 12-3- 2012) 8. Decision Documentation: The decision of the City Council shall be in writing and shall specify any modified or amended findings and conclusions other than those set forth in the report of the Hearing Examiner. Each material finding shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. 9. Council Action Final: The action of the Council approving, modifying or rejecting a decision of the Examiner shall be final and conclusive, unless appealed within the time frames established under subsection G5 of this Section. (Ord. 3658,9-13-1982; Ord. 4389,1-25-1993; Ord. 4660, 3-17-1997; Ord. 5558, 10-25-2010) Denis Law Mayor June 14, 2016 APPEAL FILED BY: City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Dan Palmer RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision dated May 24,2016, regarding Avana Ridge PUD. (File No. LUA-1S-000894 PP, PPPUD) To Parties of Record: Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Renton City Code of Ordinances, written appeal of the hearing examiner's decision on the Avana Ridge PUD has been filed with the City Clerk. In accordance with Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110F, within five days of receipt of the notice of appeal, or after all appeal periods with the Hearing Examiner have expired, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record ofthe receipt ofthe appeal. Other parties of record may submit letters limited to support of their positions regarding the appeal within ten (10) days of the date of mailing of this notification. The deadline for submission of additional letters is by 5:00 p.m., Thursday, June 24, 2016. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee at 3:00 p,m. on Thursday, July 28,2016, in the Council Chambers, 7th Floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98057. The recommendation ofthe Committee will be presented for consideration by the full Council at a subsequent Council meeting. Copy ofthe appeal and the Renton Municipal Code regarding appeal of Hearing Examiner decisions or recommendations is attached. Please note that the City Council will be considering the merits of the appeal based upon the written record previously established. Unless a showing can be made that additional evidence could not reasonably have been available at the prior hearing held by the Hearing Examiner, no further evidence or testimony on this matter will be accepted by the City Council. 1055 50uth Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057. (425) 430-6510 I Fax (425) 430-6516. rentonwa.gov • For additional information or assistance, please call Jason Seth, City Clerk, at 425-430-6510. Sincerely, .:Ii? as n A. Seth, CMC City Clerk * Please note that if you signed up to be a Party of Record for this matter you are receiving a copy of this letter as a courtesy. Attachments cc: Hearing Examiner Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirantel Secretary, Planning Division Ed Prince, City Councilmember Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Justin Lagers, Avana Ridge LLC, Contact • Parties of Record (25) , . . . ;. :-- • , 1-:c;"1 (">C! ~;tj<? . • # ",,A-~fO /1 . iC~~C'A-S(dF'c?-c3LC~(~ frO/¥!/ . ' IW cY:~" 5,q-y/·O uy?~ --7~' ·l~o '5''/07'" , ~.""7d. ("td /nM1(J~ t . .or . 11ci-.. ~i I' ,~, M~/n/(8/ ~F/1.3C51U ~// C7fie/1~ ,~1&/lE/cf-1 C~/'ice//7s c!);t/' (f/rJs't~l /S5e,c,::s /h ficyoQ.£~ City of Renton Municipal Code; Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110 -Appeals 4-8-110C4 Filing of Appeal and Fee: The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in accordance with RMC 5- 1-2, the fee schedule of the City. (Ord. 3658,9-13-1982; Ord. 5660, 5-14-2012; Ord. 5688, 5-13-2013) 4-8-110F: Appeals to City Council-Procedures 1. Standing: Unless otherwise provided by State law or exempted by a State or federal agency, only the applicant, City or a party of record who has been aggrieved or affected by the Hearing Examiner's decision and who participated in the Hearing Examiner's public hearing may appeal the Hearing Examiner's decision. A person(s) will be deemed to have participated in the public hearing process if that person(s): a. Testified or gave oral comments at the public hearing; or b. Submitted any written comments to City staff or the Hearing Examiner regarding the matter prior to the close of the hearing; or c. Has been granted status as or has requested to be made a party of record prior to the close of the public hearing. 2. Notice to Parties of Record: Within five (5) days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. 3. Opportunity to Provide Comments: Parties of record may submit letters in support of their positions within ten (10) days of the dates of mailing of the notification of the filing of the notice of appeal. 4. Council Review Procedures: No public hearing shall be held by the City Council. No new or additional evidence or testimony shall be accepted by the City Council. The cost of transcription of the hearing record shall be borne by the applicant. If a transcript is made, the applicant is required to provide a copy to the City Clerk and the Renton City Attorney at no cost. It shall be presumed that the record before the City Council is identical to the hearing record before the Hearing Examiner. (Ord. 5675, 12-3-2012) 5. Burden: The burden of proof shall rest with the appellant. 6. Council Evaluation Criteria: The consideration by the City Council shall be based solely upon the record, the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal and additional arguments based on the record by parties. 7. Findings and Conclusions Required: If, upon appeal of a decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-8-070Hl, as it exists or may be amended, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, it may modify or reverse the decision ofthe Hearing Examiner accordingly. (Ord. 5675, 12-3- 2012) 8. Decision Documentation: The decision of the City Council shall be in writing and shall specify any modified or amended findings and conclusions other than those set forth in the report of the Hearing Examiner. Each material finding shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. 9. Council Action Final: The action of the Council approving, modifying or rejecting a decision of the Examiner shall be final and conclusive, unless appealed within the time frames established under subsection G5 ofthis Section. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-1982; Ord. 4389, 1-25-1993; Ord. 4660, 3-17-1997; Ord. 5558, 10-25-2010) Denis Law Mayor June 14, 2016 APPEAL FILED BY: City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Dan Palmer RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision dated May 24,2016, regarding Avana Ridge PUD. (File No. LUA-15-000894 PP, PPPUD) To Parties of Record: Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Renton City Code of Ordinances, written appeal of the hearing examiner's decision on the Avana Ridge PUD has been filed with the City Clerk. In accordance with Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110F, within five days of receipt of the notice of appeal, or after all appeal periods with the Hearing Examiner have expired, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record ofthe receipt of the appeal. Other parties of record may submit letters limited to support of their positions regarding the appeal within ten (10) days of the date of mailing ofthis notification. The deadline for submission of additional letters is by 5:00 p.rn .. Thursday. June 24. 2016. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee at 3:00 p.m. on Thursday. July 28. 2016. in the Council Chambers, 7th Floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98057. The recommendation of the Committee will be presented for consideration by the full Council at a subsequent Council meeting. Copy of the appeal and the Renton Municipal Code regarding appeal of Hearing Examiner decisions or recommendations is attached. Please note that the City Council will be considering the merits of the appeal based upon the written record previously established. Unless a showing can be made that additional evidence could not reasonably have been available at the prior hearing held by the Hearing Examiner, no further evidence or testimony on this matter will be accepted by the City Council. 1055 South Grady Way. Renton. Washington 98057 • (425) 430-6510 I Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov • For additional information or assistance, please call Jason 5eth, City Clerk, at 425-430-6510. Sincerely, :M as n A. 5eth, CMC City Clerk * Please note that if you signed up to be a Party of Record for this matter you are receiving a copy of this letter as a courtesy. Attachments cc: Hearing Examiner Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Ed Prince, City Councilmember Julia Medzegian, City Council liaison Justin lagers, Avana Ridge llC, Contact • Parties of Record (25) ~0~?",---~(~ (i; -~ CITYOFRENTON </I c: 0 ~ --(5 -QQCJ :3 7' Y JUN 0 7 2016~,s1ff~ RECeiVED . ~c:e;'-'/4 L X ~ ~(?/( . CITY ;L~RK'SOfFICE /" . .dc5i'c( N? '~;f)~7:V '~c;/ ffo~ ~/ ~-,.~(-.. ~t?c-r.5j#<j~ . ~~7 ~~tf) ~~~?r;~ 0~~~ ' .. , t'1~ ') '.? J>rJ • ae!~c7' ~r ~? ?r:~cJ ~(~ c4cs/o~, t /V/·~ /~VC/ ~/ /7cy'C'><r' Os ~ C?d>c/ ~-'>&.f~ t"~7/7fi@/p . ~C"/~~. '~/'?6 ,r-?E"c"d,c-> _Cd/7r<?r~ \ . '.> t: //~:iff~"&~UP'/5~~ ~~/,:,~cr~ ~N' ~ -/J/e:///M/~cY6/ =%-/t~/rf/) Q/;7V . ~ ~~ (/' C/O/?, o/c~--?/. ~fc:'cr. Vaa.c~~!&-~ , > .' ,,, --;... . . . City of Renton Municipal Code; Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110 -Appeals 4-S-110C4 Filing of Appeal and Fee: The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in accordance with RMC 5- 1-2, the fee schedule ofthe City. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-1982; Ord. 5660, 5-14-2012; Ord. 5688, 5-13-2013) 4-S-110F: Appeals to City Council-Procedures 1. Standing: Unless otherwise provided by State law or exempted by a State or federal agency, only the applicant, City or a party of record who has been aggrieved or affected by the Hearing Examiner's decision and who participated in the Hearing Examiner's public hearing may appeal the Hearing Examiner's decision. A person(s) will be deemed to have participated in the public hearing process if that person(s): a. Testified or gave oral comments at the public hearing; or b. Submitted any written comments to City staff or the Hearing Examiner regarding the matter prior to the close ofthe hearing; or c. Has been granted status as or has requested to be made a party of record prior to the close ofthe public hearing. 2. Notice to Parties of Record: Within five (5) days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. 3. Opportunity to Provide Comments: Parties of record may submit letters in support oftheir positions within ten (10) days of the dates of mailing of the notification of the filing of the notice of appeal. 4. Council Review Procedures: No public hearing shall be held by the City Council. No new or additional evidence or testimony shall be accepted by the City Council. The cost of transcription of the hearing record shall be borne by the applicant. If a transcript is made, the applicant is required to provide a copy to the City Clerk and the Renton City Attorney at no cost. It shall be presumed that the record before the City Council is identical to the hearing record before the Hearing Examiner. (Ord. 5675, 12-3-2012) 5. Burden: The burden of proof shall rest with the appellant. 6. Council Evaluation Criteria: The consideration by the City Council shall be based solely upon the record, the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal and additional arguments based on the record by parties. 7. Findings and Conclusions Required: If, upon appeal of a decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-8-070H1, as it exists or may be amended, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, it may modify or reverse the decision of the Hearing Examiner accordingly. (Ord. 5675, 12-3- 2012) S. Decision Documentation: The decision of the City Council shall be in writing and shall specify any modified or amended findings and conclusions other than those set forth in the report of the Hearing Examiner. Each material finding shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. 9. Council Action Final: The action of the Council approving, modifying or rejecting a decision ofthe Examiner shall be final and conclUSive, unless appealed within the time frames established under subsection G5 ofthis Section. (Ord. 365S, 9-13-1982; Ord. 4389, 1-25-1993; Ord. 4660, 3-17-1997; Ord. 5558, 10-25-2010) &Cash CITY OF RENTON City Clerk Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, W A 98057 425-430-6510 O"check Noo _____ _ o Copy Fee o/AppeaI Fee Receipt 2761 Date :: /)-:-7 -J / ,:; o Notary Service 0 ________ _ Description: .' ._ ~/. \"'\ 'r i. ,-i':~ ' ...... { j""' ".' \ i'~ V 0 ., •• 'Ll ,,..V\ C'. C \..A, \...J Funds Received From: Address City/Zip '\ . -r'---, \ \.i \ \ \ t / \ \ ~ l \'~y( City 'ila/rSfgnaliire Denis Law Mayor May 26, 2016 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge 9675 SE 36th St, Ste. lOS Mercer Island, WA 98040 Subject: Hearing Examiner's Final Decision RE: Avana Ridge PUD, LUA-1S-000894 Dear Mr. Lagers: City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC The City of Renton's Hearing Examiner has issued a Final Decision dated May 24, 2016. This document is immediately available: • Electronically online at the City of Renton City Clerk Division website at www.rentonwa.gov/cityclerk.Click the "Hearing Examiner Decisions" link on the right side of the screen located under the section titled, "Helpful Links." The Hearing Examiner Decisions are filed by year and then alphabetical order by project name. • To be viewed at the City Clerk's office on the 7th floor or Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, between 8 am and 4 pm. Ask for the project file by the above project number; and • For purchase at a copying charge of $0.15 per page. The estimated cost for the Hearing Examiner Documents is $3.75, plus a handling and postage cost (this cost is subject to change if documents are added). APPEAL DEADLINE: RMC 4-8-080 provides that the final decision ofthe Hearing Examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-110(E)(14) requires appeals of the Hearing Examiner's decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner's decision. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee to the City Council, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -7th Floor, (425) 430-6510. 1055 South Grady Way. Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 430-651 0 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov • RECONSIDERATION: A request for reconsideration to the Hearing Examiner may also be filed within this 14 day appeal period as identified in RMC 4-8-110(E)(13) and RMC 4-8- 100(G)(9). Reconsiderations must be filed in writing to the Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Additional information regarding the reconsideration process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall - 7th Floor, (425) 430-6510. A new fourteen (14) day appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of a reconsideration decision. I can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, Jf«J~ City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Plann·,ng Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) ~nis~w f _~M:.ayOC ___ .."",..~] ~B rl:£ D r l. May 26,2016 STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC CERTIFICATE OF MAILING ) ) § ) JASON A. SETH, City Clerk for the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that he is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter. That on the 26 th day of May, 2016, at the hour of 4:30 p.m. your affiant duly mailed and placed in the United States Post Office at Renton, King County, Washington, by first class mail the Hearing Examiner's Final Decision RE: Avana Ridge PUD -lUA-1S-000894 to the attached parties of record. Cynthia R. ya Notary Public in and for the State 0 Washington, residing in Renton My Commission expires: 8/27/2018 1055 South Grady Way. Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 430-6510 I Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov Andrew Grav 3275 Cedar Ave 5 Renton. WA 98055 D. Bruce & Nancy Stanley 10825 SE 172nd St, #5B Renton. WA 98055-5969 Daniel Hiranaka 10510 SE 172nd St Renton. WA 98055 Doug Goods 16602 106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Caryn Cantu 16561106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Dan Palner 16638 106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Daniel Ridenour 16836 106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 Emily Brooker 16810 104th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 ~"I~.J\~~~~ffit~ ~~ H.A. Chau Jerry Miller 4101150th Ave SE PO Box 686 Bellevue, WA 98006 ~~~~t~~~~ JUSTIN LAGERS Avana Ridge 9675 SE 36th St, Ste. 105 Mercer Island. WA 98040 Renton. WA 98057 llllj'~l!iIi\ll,,--j!i;H~*~';~JYi<fi;l(;'i~~ ~Vf,'l~"it.\m~J3'/1;~~:;;%"":.i;li~;;;V;,!l'.t .. >~",,,Y: Kimmie McMullin 17030 106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Carine Kumano 10829 SE 172nd St, #6C Renton. WA 98055 Dan Russell 43755 Louisiana St Palm Desert. CA 92211 Debra Russell 829 S 31st St Renton. WA 98055 Genevieve Byrnes 3125 Cedar Ave 5 Renton, WA 98055 JODY HANAWALT PO Box 4097 Renton, WA 98057 ~1t1~~&t~~~j+~~1~~iiMi~ Mark Faas 2915 Cedar Ave S Renton, WA 98055 IW" __ ~~i ~ __ IUFTPI IJIItI1ilIfB~ Michael Gladstein Mike & Julie Radtke Molly Heine Avana Ridge LLC 17024 106th Ave SE 16829 SE 105th St 9675 SE 36th St, #105 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Mercer Island, WA 98040 t~~J~ Molly Moss 3121 Cedar Ave S Renton. WA 98055 Scot! Petet!, D. C. 10622 SE Carr Rd, Suite A Renton, WA 98055 ~l~~i~~!&t~tffi Philip Reitz 2907 Cedar Ave S Renton. WA 98055 Wendv Yadock 17020 104th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 ~.~"""''''''_''':''_''''j;S',¥'!¥~ r_ .. "~!k~"!"'l]!l{t!II>;>;~'~~l!!,,. Rhanda Rae Murphy 17000 104th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 • • Hearing Examiner's Decision 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 \0 II 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: Avana Ridge PUD Preliminary Planned Urban Development ) ) ) FINAL DECISION ) ) ) ) LUAI5-000894, PP, PPUD ) ----------------------------) SUMMARY The applicant proposes a preliminary planned urban development for the construction of two multi- family buildings on a 3.8 acre parcel for a total of 74 dwelling units. The applicant seeks PUD approval in order to vary from a number of zoning code standards, including an increase in allowed building and retaining wall height, a reduction in required roof pitch, a decrease in required parking and a decrease in required private open space. The PUD is approved subject to conditions. TESTIMONY Note: The following is a summary of testimony provided for the convenience of the reader only and should not be construed as containing any jindings of fact or conclusions of law. The focus upon or exclusion of any particular testimony or hearing evidence in this summary is not rejiective of the 22 priority or probative content of any particular hearing evidence and no assurance is made as to 23 24 25 26 accuracy. Rocale Timmons, senior City of Renton planner, summarized the proposal. She noted that recommended Conditions 14 and 15 of the staff report, requiring dedications for light fixtures, was in error as there is sufficient space proposed for the lights. The two conditions should be stricken. In response to examiner questions, Ms. Timmons noted that property to the east is zoned Residential 8. She also noted that there has been no indication that the proposal would impair any views. Traffic PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT - I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 calming features were considered for access roads and in staff's opinion the proposed speed radar signs were sufficient to control speeds. There is no public trail system close by. Sidewalk improvements are required for the intersection of Innd and Benson Rd. S. in order to assure safe walking conditions to school bus stops and continuous sidewalk connections to the surrounding sidewalk network. Rohini Nair, City of Renton traffic engineer, noted that queuing issues on Benson Road South and Benson Drive South was a major neighborhood concern. The City had the applicant's traffic engineer model queuing and from this it was found that new turning restrictions proposed for the project would reduce current queuing off of Benson Road South. A new condition of approval will be submitted by staff to require the new turn restrictions. Regarding speeding on 104 andl06, it is staff's opinion that the radar speed signs will adequately address the problem. Brian Paldar, project architect, noted that as a result of project modifications necessitated by permit review the applicant needs to request a minor increase in the proposed height from 8' 3" floor to ceiling to an 8' 6" floor to ceiling to accommodate ventilation systems. The east building will still be under the 40 foot limit. The west building will need to be increased in height 1.6 feet for a total of 41.6 feet. No changes are proposed to the roof line. The PUD process enables the applicant to preserve a lot of on-site vegetation and other natural features. There will be no view impacts since existing trees are up to 60 feet high, taller than the proposed buildings. Any existing territorial views would be to the west and would be unaffected by the proposal. In response to examiner questions, there currently is no on-street parking on SE Innd St. Mr. Paldar also noted that the "eyes on the street" caused by dwellings overlooking I 72 nd , as well as more pedestrians using the proposed pedestrian facilities, would probably serve to reduce crime. Larry Hobbs, applicant's traffic engineer, noted that the channelization changes that would improve queuing from the Benson Road S. access would be composed of a left turn lane and a shared left and right turn lane and a change out in a traffic signal face. With the channelization changes the queue lengths are reduced from 372 feet to 212 feet and will be shorter than pre-development conditions. The channelization changes double vehicle storage space. Doug Goods, neighbor, doesn't support or oppose the project, he just wants to make sure his concerns are addressed. He has seen a significant increase in traffic in the vicinity over the years. Traffic backs up all the way from Puget Drive. He wanted to know why the applicant's proposal to put in a median on Innd wasn't recommended by staff. He doesn't believe that the applicant's solution to the queuing problem will be solved by the rechanneling, given the amount of new development in the area. He felt that more traffic calming measures should be implemented for 104 and 1061h avenues, such as speed bumps, however he's not as concerned as much about speed as he is about increased traffic. Molly Moss, neighbor, is against the proposal. She feels that the access to 172 nd street will increase traffic on her street (104Ih) as well as 1051h and 1061h avenues. Currently the neighborhood has a low level of traffic. This will be a safety hazard as the streets are currently used by children. None of the PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT - 2 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 roads have uninterrupted sidewalks to Nelson Middle School. Jerry Miller, neighbor, noted that the streets impacted by the proposal haven't been adequately described. There's a new development at the northeastern corner of intersection of Benson and l72nd with several dozen units and this will add to the traffic problem. If the right in/right out l72nd solution proposed by the applicant for l72nd were to be implemented, people would be doing u-turns on their driveway so he and Anna Miller are opposed to that solution. Anna Miller, neighbor, noted that parking from the project will spill onto adjoining streets making traffic circulation difficult. 172nd is very narrow and traffic is already very poor in the area. In the next 5-10 years traffic will be a nightmare. Paul Skulstad, neighbor, felt that access to the proposal should be from SR SIS instead of I 72 nd • The surrounding community doesn't have sidewalks for students walking to and from school. Electronic radar signs aren't needed. 172nd has a portion that's like a washboard, which slows down vehicles. The traffic analysis for the project doesn't take into account traffic that will be generated by other projects in the pipeline, including a large apartment complex directly across the street and a medical dental complex. People are having trouble finding parking already in the apartment complex and it hasn't been completed yet. There's also another 21 lot subdivision and another complex on Benson being constructed. The Benson and Benson intersection needs to be redone. The two left turn lane solution was obvious. There should be a third left turn lane. Karen and Polo Cantu, neighbors, noted that the roads of her neighborhood do not have sidewalks or shoulders. Her and her husband purchased their home because of the uncommonly spacious lots and quiet neighborhood. She still feels safe walking the streets. The proposed access onto In nd St. is too close to the 1061h Ave. Residents of the proposed apartments will quickly realize that driving through the neighborhood will be much quicker than driving through the Benson/Benson intersection. A radar speed sign will not reduce the volume of traffic. The traffic study doesn't account for new development or the impact on 106th street and other neighborhood roads. Based upon 1.8 cars per dwelling unit and round up to two cars to account for visitors, the proposed parking is insufficient. The access should be moved from Innd to SR SIS. 172 nd St. is inaccurately classified as a commercial street in the ERC report. It currently primarily serves residential use. Nancy Stanley, neighbor, noted that the 162 unit Trails apartment complex across the street is still under construction and its traffic impacts haven't been fully evaluated. Danny Kumono, neighbor from Kelsey Court condominiums, affirmed that the traffic impacts of the Trails complex hasn't yet been realized as its still under construction. Crime has increased as a result of the Trails. Cars turning right onto Benson from Innd aren't slowing down. Visibility is poor because ofthe road curvature, so there are a lot of close calls in making a left turn. In the evening the Benson/Benson intersection is fully congested and it's not possible to make a left turn. A larger area should be considered when doing a traffic analysis. PRELIMINAR Y PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Dan Palmer, neighbor, noted that 104 th , 105 th and 106 th has been an oasis of a neighborhood with big yards and quiet streets. There's currently no through traffic. There's no vehicle pollution. There are people with respiratory problems in the neighborhood who will be adversely affected by the pollution from increased traffic. He noted there are no sidewalks, stormwater systems or lights on the roads. The neighborhood is full of wildlife and trees and is an important watershed area. High impact buildings are not compatible with this environmentally fragile area. Transfer of development rights would work well here. The building design is not compatible with the surrounding 60 year and turn of the century homes. Even the new CVC store is more aesthetically pleasing. In rebuttal, Ms. Timmons noted that the area was annexed into the City from King County in 2008, which is why the streets don't have sidewalks or street lighting. The site was zoned commercial arterial when it was annexed into the city. That zoning designation allowed 60 du per acre. A subsequent rezone reduced the density to the currently applicable 20 du per acre. The site serves as a transition zone from the commercial development to the south to the residential use to the north. I nnd is classified as a commercial use street because of the transportation needs to the south. The proposed development will create many of the improvements necessary to upgrade Innd to commercial use. The City currently has no transfer of development rights program. The design of the project is set by the City's design standards. SR 515 would not be a suitable access point because of significant change in grade at the southern portion of the site. Several retaining walls are necessary to stabilize this portion of the project. SR 515 is a commercial arterial street and the City limits access points. WSDOT would also restrict access from the state road. There are also critical areas that would prevent access from the south. Parking is set by city code based upon the number of bedrooms, which in this case is 96 stalls. The applicant has requested a two stall reduction. The project site has a significant amount of open space to accommodate wildlife. The applicant's request for an additional 1.5 feet in building height has been reviewed by City staff. Given the extensive number of PUD benefits and large amount of open space, staff supports the request for additional height. As to safe routes to schools, it's expected that students will not use 106/104/105 roads to get to Nelson Middle School. They would use Benson Road to walk safely to Nelson. Molly Moss noted that while student from the proposal may use Benson Road, students residing on 106/ 10411 05 would still be walking their neighborhood roads. In response to examiner questions, Ms. Nair noted that the traffic study included traffic from all approved land use applications, including the Trails project across the street. The lane configuration will result in improved queuing lengths even with the traffic of the Trails project taken into consideration. Staff is not opposed to having south bound traffic subject to a radar speed sign as well on 104 th and 106th streets. WSDOT may not approve a direct access onto SR 515 because of the availability of other access routes. Larry Hobbs, applicant's traffic engineer, testified that the traffic report was prepared pursuant to City guidelines and trip generation estimates from the latest edition of the ITE Trip Generation Manual. The report was subjected to peer review, which concurred with the traffic analysis. The Trails project was included in the background traffic along with a percentage traffic growth rate required by the PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT - 4 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 City. The traffic analysis concluded that 10% of the AM peak hour traffic would be heading west (using 106/1041105), which is 4 trips and five trips for PM peak hour. This is only one additional vehicle every 12 or 15 minutes on the three streets. The radar speed limit sign isn't necessary. WSDOT would not allow access onto SR 515 since other reasonable access is available. Brent Carson, applicant's attorney, noted that the land use designations of the site could not be questioned at this point. Many of the concerns of the neighbors concern SEPA issues that haven't been appealed. Given the minor number of trips generated on 10611 041 I 05 and verification from peer review on the applicant's analysis of this issue, the City has no nexus and proportionality to require mitigation such as the radar controlled sign. EXHIBITS The May 10, 2016 Staff report in addition to Exhibits 1-23 identified in pages 2 of the Staff Report were admitted into the record at the May 10, 2016 hearing. The staff power point presentation was admitted as Ex. 24. Revised elevations were submitted by the application and admitted as Ex. 25. Ex. 26 was submitted by the applicant and admitted as a color site plan. Ex. 27 were admitted as west building elevations and Ex. 28 as east building elevations. Google maps was admitted as Ex. 29. FINDINGS OF FACT Procedural: 1. Applicant. Avana Ridge LLC. 2. Hearing. A hearing on the application was held on May 10, 2016. Substantive: 3. Project Description. The applicant proposes a preliminary planned urban development for the construction of two multi-family buildings on a 3.8 acre parcel for a total of 74 dwelling units. The requested modifications are summarized as follows: RMC Code Citation Required Standard Requested Modification RMC 4-2-110A Roof pitches are required to be equal This proposal includes a roof pitch Development to or greater than 4:12 and may of 2:12 Standards for project an additional six (6) vertical Commercial Zoning feet from the maximum wall plate Designations' Roof height. Pitch PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT - 5 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 RMC 4-2-110A A maximum building height of 3 The proposal includes a height of Development stories with a wall plate height of 30 46-feet and 5-inches as measured Standards for feet is permitted. from average grade plane to the Commercial Zoning tallest point of the shed roof Designations-Roof elements. Pitch RMC 4-6-060F Street Various: See discussion in Table C: Various: See discussion under FOF Standards PUD Criteria -Circulation xx: PUD Criteria -Circulation RMC 4-3-100 Urban Various: See discussion in Table E: Various: See discussion under FOF Design Standards Design District 'D' Standards xx: Design District 'B' Standards RMC 4-4-080F, Based on the proposed use/ a The applicant proposed a total of Parking, Loading, and minimum and maximum of 96 parking 94 spaces within surface parking Driveway Regulations spaces would be allowed in order to areas. The proposal does not meet code. comply with the minimum parking stall requirements. RMC 4-4-090, Refuse There shall be at least one deposit The proposal includes a single and Recyclables area/collection point for every thirty refuse/recycle storage location Standards (30) dwelling units. centrally located, between both buildings at the center of the site. RMC 4-4-040, Heights are limited to 48 inches for A section of the keystone-type wall Retaining Wall Height retaining walls located within front located near the monument sign at yard/side yard along-a-street the Benson Road/Benson Drive setbacks, and 72 inches for walls intersection is proposed at a height elsewhere on site. of 5.5 feet. A section of the keystone-type wall located near the monument sign at the Benson Road/Benson Drive intersection is 5 feet and 6-inches tall. RMC 4-9-150.E.2, Each residential unit in a PUD shall The current proposal provides Private Open Space have usable private open space for 4,156 SF of private, attached open the exclusive use of the occupants of space through the use of private that unit in compliance with balconies for some of the units dimensional standards. which does not comply with the dimensional standards. The project site is currently vacant and bisected by a stream. Access to the site is proposed via SE 172nd St, between the east and west buildings, and another ingress/egress point via Benson Rd S. The two access points create a through road for emergency vehicle ingress/egress across the property. 4. Adequacy of Infrastructure/Public Services. The project will be served by adequate infrastructure and public services as follows: PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT - 6 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO II 12 13 A. Water and Sewer Service. Water and sanitary sewer service for the development would be provided by the Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. A water and sewer availability certificate from the Soos Creek utility district was submitted to the City with the land use application. Approved water and sewer plans from Soos Creek are required to be provided during utility construction permit approval. B. Fire Protection. Fire protection would be provided by the City of Renton Fire Department. C. Drainage. In conjunction with the City's stormwater regulations, the proposal mitigates all significant drainage impacts. New impervious surfaces would result in surface water runoff increases. The Applicants submitted a Technical Information Report ('"Drainage Report") with the project application (Exhibit 9). The storm water detention and water quality treatment would be provided within a combined detention/water quality vault under the parking area located in the western portion of the site. The combined detention/water quality vault would be followed by a media filtration system to accommodate the Enhanced Water Quality Treatment requirements for multi-family development. Further staff review will be conducted for final PUD approval. 14 D. Parks/Open Space. The project provides for adequate parks and open space. For parks 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 impacts, the applicant will be paying a park impact fee, which is currently assessed at $975.50 per multi-family dwelling unit. The proposed development is designed specifically to increase the access and opportunity for open space and in sheer numbers harbors a significant amount of open space as well. The project includes 19,795 square feet of community open space in the southern portion of the site in addition to 49,918 square feet of critical area space. Beyond the space required for critical areas, Renton has no public open space requirements for multi-family developments except for some nonspecific standards in its design regulations. A small fenced off-leash dog run is provided at the east side of the site between a landscape buffer and the parking lot among a grove of existing trees to be preserved. The multiple open spaces throughout the site are well designed and provide a variety of recreational opportunities both passive and active. Due to the presence of a stream along the lower area of the site, a natural border exists. A pedestrian bridge crosses the stream to link the open space and the residential developments. PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT - 7 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 A central path and complementing pedestrian bridge crossing will be constructed to create an access point to the southern community open space from the surface parking lot. The large area would be ample usable space for passive recreation and special events such as picnics, parties, weddings, movie night in the park, concerts, etc.; thereby promoting community involvement. Additionally, the space would take advantage of and display the attractive territorial views to the West. Finally, the space would serve to preserve and enhance existing vegetation and natural character through tree preservation, removal of extensive invasive Blackberries, and replacement with native understory vegetation to be maintained through the life of the development. The space features a large, central, gently sloping lawn for casual seating and recreation. The lawn is oriented to slope down towards an open pavilion whose intended use includes performances, and community gatherings. The pavilion is also sited to capture and frame the attractive territorial views to the West. The applicant has indicated that there IS an opportunity to include interpretive signage/information regarding differentiating elements (trees, landscaping, drainage, architecture, etc.) of the proposed development at strategic place(s) on site. The use of interpretive signage would result in an increase in public benefit for the overall project. Therefore, a condition of approval requires the applicant to provide interpretive signage/information regarding differentiating elements (trees, landscaping, drainage, architecture, etc.) of the proposed development at a strategic place(s) on site. A resident amenity lounge located on Level I of the West building takes advantage of outdoor space and integrates an outdoor plaza intended for gathering spaces, barbecues, and lounge areas for a variety of opportunities for the residents. The area opens up the western portion of the site and provides a softer building edge and brings visual interest to what would normally be considered the "side" elevation of the project. E. Pedestrian Circulation. The proposal provides for an appropriate pedestrian circulation system. The applicant has proposed a series of pedestrian connections throughout the site however it is unclear if there is a differentiation of materials across the drive aisles (Exhibit 2). Therefore, as recommended by staff, a condition of approval requires the applicant to revise the site plan to depict a differentiation in materials for all pedestrian connections within parking areas and/or drive aisles on site. F. Off-Site Traffic Improvements. The proposal is served by adequate and appropriate off- site street infrastructure. PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT - 8 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Based upon the applicant's traffic impact analysis ("TIA"), Ex. 15, staff have determined that the project will comply with the City's level of service standards. It is anticipated that the proposed development would generate approximately 492 average daily trips with 38 AM peak-hour trips and 46 PM peak-hour trips. The TIA assessed traffic impacts on three affected intersections as required by City standards. The TIA concluded that all intersections will operate at an acceptable level of service with the proposed development. Staff have also detennined that the proposal passes City concurrency standards as outlined in Ex. 23. Analysis of future conditions address cumulative impacts of the proposed project and traffic growth in the study area. Traffic signal warranty analysis was also provided at the intersection of SE 172nd St and Benson Rd S. The report states there is no need for a signal at the intersection as a result of the project. The TIA concludes that sight distance requirements are met at the site access driveway onto SE 172nd St and with vegetation trimming, within the right of way, at the site access driveway to Benson Rd S (Exhibit 15). ct. The conclusions of the report were accepted by staff and not disputed by a qualified traffic expert, therefore they are taken as verities. Staff also concluded in the staff report that the proposed circulation system is adequate to accommodate emergency vehicles and there is no evidence in the record to the contrary. Payment oftraffic impact fees as required by the Renton Municipal Code will assure that the applicant pays its proportionate share of system-wide traffic improvements. A major concern of the neighbors was traffic impacts to 106 Ave SE, 104 Ave SE and 105 Ave SE. In uncontested testimony, several neighbors testified that these roads are isolated, currently accommodate a minimal amount of traffic and are not developed with sidewalks or shoulders that can be used for pedestrian traffic. By contrast, the project's access to SR 515, the most likely thoroughfare to be used by project residents, can only be directly accessed by passing through the Benson Road S./SR 515 intersection, which is subject to severe congestion during the AM and PM peak hour. Neighbors are concerned that this congestion will cause vehicles going to and leaving the project site to drive through the 10511 04/1 06 Ave SE roads. A SEPA mitigation measure requires the installation of speed radar signs for southbound traffic on 104th and 106th to slow down some of this new traffic. Although a review of the surrounding road network shows that persons may very well choose to drive through 10511 04/1 06 to avoid the Benson/SR 515 intersection a well as other traffic problems in the area, the applicant's traffic analysis reveals that the project will only add five PM peak hour trips and four AM peak hour trips into the 105/104/106 roads. The applicant's traffic analysis was verified by peer review. Given the expert traffic analysis prepared by the applicant and the independent expert verification conducted under the peer review, the applicant's traffic analysis is taken as a PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT - 9 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 verity given the absence of any expert testimony to the contrary. With only a maximum of five additional trips per hour generated by the proposal, there is no basis to require more than the speed radar signs required by the SEPA mitigation measures. Neighborhood residents are certainly correct to assert that the cumulative impacts of all projects must be considered when assessing traffic impacts, but there is nothing in the record to suggest that the speed radar sign required of the applicant is less than the applicant's fair share of mitigating these cumulative impacts. Case law is very clear in the State of Washington that the City has the burden of proof in establishing that any required road improvements are proportional and attributable to impacts created by development. See Burton v. Clark County, 91 Wn. App. 505, 516-17 (1998). For this application, there is no evidence to suggest that more than the speed radar signs required by SEPA is necessary to oft:set the traffic impacts caused by the proposal on the 105/l 04/l 06 roads. Another issue frequently cited by neighbors was the queuing length at the Benson Road S.lSR 515 intersection. Uncontested trartic analysis conducted by the applicant establishes that with re-channelization measures required by this decision, queue lengths will be reduced from 372 feet to 212 feet and will be shorter than pre-development conditions, even when added trartic from recently approved development projects is incorporated into the analysis. Since the proposal will be improving upon existing queuing conditions at the Benson Road S.lSR 515 intersection, no further mitigation can be required. A few neighbors also suggested that project access directly connect to SR 515 instead of SE 172nd St. As testified by City staff, direct access onto a limited access thoroughfare such as SR 515 is avoided by both the City and the state (which also regulates SR 515 access) when reasonable alternate project access is available. Further, direct access would be highly challenging given the critical areas (stream and coal mine hazard) and steep grade on the south portion of the project site. Direct access to SR 515 is not warranted or feasible for this project. Several people also testified about walking conditions to and from school. Students may very well be walking to Nelson Middle School, located to the north of the project site. Nelson Middle School can be accessed via Benson Road S. which has sidewalks between the school and the project site. As part of the proposed project, sidewalks would be constructed along the frontage of the site and would connect to the existing sidewalk system. However, the frontage along the daycare center at the southwest corner of the intersection of Benson Road S. and SE Innd Ave is missing some sidewalk linkage. For this reason, the conditions of approval require improvements to be made along the day PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT- 10 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 care frontage to fill in the missing sidewalk connections. As noted by Ms. Moss, there are still no sidewalks along the 10511 0411 06 streets. As previously discussed, the proposal will add a minor amount of traffic to these roads, and for the reasons previously discussed, the speed radar sign required of the applicant adequately mitigates against the applicant's proportionate share of impacts to these roads. A few neighbors testified that they believed that the applicant's traffic analysis did not include traffic generated by other projects. However, as testified by both staff and the applicant, the applicant's traffic analysis did in fact factor in the traffic of currently approved projects as well as a general background traffic increase factor required by City standards. 5. Adverse Impacts. Since the project provides for adequate infrastructure and public services, the only remaining impacts to be considered are to critical areas. There are two critical areas at the project site - a Type Ns stream bisects the project site and a high coal mine hazard is located in the southern portion of the site. A. High Coal Mine Hazard. As conditioned, the proposal has been adequately mitigated to address any significant adverse impacts to coal mine hazards. High Coal Mine Hazards are considered areas with abandoned and improperly sealed mine openings and areas underlain by mine workings shallower than 200 feet in depth for steeply dipping seams, or shallower than IS times the thickness of the seam or workings for gently dipping seams. These areas may be affected by collapse or other subsidence. A Coal Mine Hazard Assessment was performed by Icicle Creek Engineers, Inc. on March 22, 2004 and January 20, 2009 (Exhibits 7 and 8). The studies found that the southern portion of the project site overlays a historic coal mine known as the Springbrook Mine, along with the opening to the mine. The study further found that the Springbrook Mine meets the City's criteria for a high coal mine hazard. Several recommendations to mitigate potential risk of the coal mine hazard/former entry were included in the Icicle Creek Engineer report, including the excavation of the fill at the mine entry and backfilling with controlled density fill (Exhibit 8). However, these recommendations were based on a former development proposal which included structures in the southern portion of the site. The proposed development is setback approximately 125 feet from the coal mine hazard and would likely not have the same impacts as the former development. However, there are some grading activities and smaller recreational improvements in the proximity of the coal mine hazard which may potentially be affected by mining related subsidence. A SEPA mitigation measure was issued requiring an updated Coal Mine Hazard Report demonstrating the proposal would not increase the threat of the geological hazard to PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT- II 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre-development conditions and the development can be safely accommodated on the site (Exhibit 20). B. Type Ns Stream. As conditioned, the proposal has been adequately mitigated to address any impacts to the on-site stream. The applicant submitted a Wetland and Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Ed Sewell Consulting Inc., dated December 22,2015 (Exhibit 10). The report identifies an unnamed seasonal stream (Stream A) that bisects the northern and southern portions of the site and runs from east to west. As defined by RMC 4-3- 050.G the stream best meets the criteria of a Type Ns stream due to its intermittent flow and lack of fish use. Class Ns streams have a standard buffer of 50 feet as measured from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) as well as a IS-foot setback from the edge of the buffer to any structure. The applicant is proposing buffer averaging for portions of the stream buffer. Additionally, the applicant is proposing an alteration within the stream and its associated buffer for a pedestrian crossing. With the conditions recommended in the staff report (and adopted by this decision), the proposed buffer averaging and stream alteration conforms to the City's critical areas regulations for the reasons identified at page 14 of the staff report. C. WildlifeNegetation. As noted in the applicant's habitat assessment, there are no state or federally listed species on or near the site and there are no rare or unique plant communities on the site. The only wildlife/vegetation subject to protection at the project site are trees. The City's adopted Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations require the retention of 20 percent of trees in a residential development. As noted at p. 10 of the staff report, the City's tree retention standards specifically require the retention of 42 trees and the applicant is retaining 46 trees. As further noted at p. 10, City tree density requirements require a total of at least 132 trees at the project site. A condition of approval requires that the applicant demonstrate compliance with this standard as the application materials are unclear as to the total amount of trees that will be planted at the project site. Beyond trees, since there are no wildlife species specifically protected by City of Renton regulations, there is no basis to regulate or restrict the project based upon wildlife or vegetation impacts. D. Compatibility. The project is compatible with surrounding development as it is within the range of densities authorized by applicable zoning standards and is heavily regulated by the City's "Design District B" design standards. As testified by staff, the intermediate densities authorized for the site are intended to serve as a transition between the commercial uses to the south and the residential uses to the north. The higher densities of the project site, compared to the northern residential uses, is mitigated by the perimeter landscaping and emphasis upon aesthetic design imposed by the City'S design standards. On the north perimeter of the project, where compatibility issues would be most pronounced, the adjacent residential dwellings would be screened from the surface parking lot through the use of landscape buffers, building modulation and new proposed street trees. The design may not bear any similarity to the design of the turn of century homes in PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT- 12 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 \0 I I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 the vicinity, but the applicant was required to comply with Design District B standards and no one has suggested that staffs finding of compliance with these standards was in error. E. Respiratory Problems. One neighbor testified that he was concerned that pollution caused by increased project traffic would exacerbate the respiratory problems of some neighbors living close to the project site. Without any scientific evidence to substantiate this assertion, there is insufficient evidence to reasonably conclude that the relatively modest traffic generated by the proposal would exacerbate respiratory problems. 6. Superiority in Design. The development of this site as a PUD results in a superior design than what would result by the strict application of the Development Standards for the following reasons: natural features, overall design, and building and site design. The proposed design provides for the retention of the natural grade on site, significant trees and a noteworthy amount of landscaping and re-vegetation. Additionally, the plan provides for both active and passive recreation spaces significantly beyond the standard code requirements. The proposed design can provide for the aforementioned amenities because of the modifications requested for the PUD as outlined in Finding of Fact No.3. The modifications approved by this decision contribute to and enable the superior design proposed for this project by increasing available space for open space and natural site features. 7. Public Benefit. The proposal provides several public benefits as detailed in pages 17-20 of the Staff Report, adopted and incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Procedural: 1. Authority. RMC 4-9-150(F)(8) authorizes the Examiner to conduct hearings and make final decisions on planned urban development applications. Substantive: 2. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Designations. The project site is zoned Residential Multi-Family (RMF) and has a comprehensive plan land use designation of Residential High Density. 3. Review Criteria. A PUD may be pursued by "any applicant" as authorized by RMC 4-9- 150(B), which is interpreted to authorize the application of PUD regulations to multi-family development projects. RMC 4-9-150(0) governs PUD criteria. Those criteria are quoted below in italics and applied through corresponding conclusions of law. RMC 4-9-150(8)(2): Code Provisions That May Be Modified. a. In approving a planned urban development, the City may modify any of the standards of chapter 4- 2 RMC, chapter 4-4 RMC, RMC 4-6-060 and chapter 4-7 RMC, except as listed in subsection B3 of PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT- 13 2 3 4 5 6 7 this Section. All modifications shall be considered simultaneousZv as part of the planned urban development .. 4. As shown In Finding of Fact No.3, the requested revisions are limited to the regulations identified in the regulation quoted above with the exception of the Private Open Space modification to RMC 4-9-ISO.E.2. As such, the conditions of approval require that the applicant provide a revised site plan demonstrating compliance with the private open space standards of RMC 4-9-150.E.2. RMC 4-9-150(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 8 1. Demonstration of Compliance and Superiority Required: Applicants must demonstrate that a proposed development is in compliance with the purposes of this Section and with the Comprehensive 9 Plan, that the proposed development will be superior to that which would result without a planned urban development, and that the development will not be unduly detrimental to surrounding 10 properties. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 5. The criterion is met. The purposes of the PUD regulations, as outlined in RMC 4-9-l50(A), are to preserve and protect the natural features of the land and to encourage innovation and creativity in development of residential uses. As outlined in Finding of Fact No.4 and 5 the natural features of the site are protected by open space, buffers and mitigation that significantly exceeds minimum code standards. The proposal involves innovation and creativity via the integration of critical area open space into the recreational open space of the project site. The project is consistent with the comprehensive plan as determined in Finding of Fact No. 22 of the staff report. As determined in Finding of Fact No.6, the proposal is superior in design to what which would occur without a PUD. As determined in Finding of Fact No.4 and 5 the project will not create any significant adverse impacts and so would not be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties. RMC 4-9-150(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 2. Public Benefit Required: In addition, Applicants shall demonstrate that a proposed development will provide specifically identified benefits that clearly outweigh any adverse impacts or undesirable effects of the proposed planned urban development, particularly those adverse and undesirable impacts to surrounding properties, and that the proposed development will provide one or more of the following benefits than would result from the development of the subject site without the proposed planned urban development: b. Natural Features: Preserves, enhances, or rehabilitates natural features of the subject property, such as significant woodlands, native vegetation, topography, or noncritical area wildlife habitats, not otherwise required by other City regulations; or". PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT- 14 2 3 e. Overall Design: Provides a planned urban development design that is superior to the design that would result from development of the subject property without a planned urban development. A superior design may include the following: ... 4 6. The proposal provides for public benefit by providing amenities related to natural features and 5 6 7 8 9 overall design that significantly exceed code standards as determined in Finding of Fact No.7. These benefits clearly outweigh any adverse impacts since there are no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposal as determined in Finding of Fact No.4 and 5. The integration of the natural features of the site with the recreational/open spaces of the site is particularly well done and will succeed in providing significant aesthetic and recreational benefits to project residents as well as retaining a significant amount of green space and vegetation for the surrounding community. RMC 4-9-1S0(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only ifitfinds that the 10 following requirements are met. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria: a. Building and Site Design: i. Perimeter: Size, scale, mass, character and architectural design along the planned urban development perimeter provide a suitable transition to adjacent or abutting lower density/intensity zones. Materials shall reduce the potential for light and glare. 7. The criterion is met for the reasons identified at page 21 of the staff report. RMC 4-9-IS0(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 19 following requirements are met. 20 21 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all ofthejollowing criteria: 22 23 24 a. Building and Site Design: ii. Interior Design: Promotes a coordinated site and building design. Buildings in groups should be 25 related by coordinated materials and roof styles, but contrast should be provided throughout a site by the use of varied materials, architectural detailing, building orientation or housing type; e.g., single 26 family, townhouses, fiats, etc. PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT- 15 2 8. The criterion is met for the reasons identified at pages 21-22 of the staff report. 3 RMC 4-9-1S0(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 4 5 6 7 8 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria b. Circulation: i. Provides sufficient streets and pedestrian facilities. The planned urban development shall have sufficient pedestrian and vehicle access commensurate with the location, size and density of the 10 proposed development. All public and private streets shall accommodate emergency vehicle access and the traffic demand created by the development as documented in a traffic and circulation report approved by the City. Vehicle access shall not be unduly detrimental to adjacent areas. 9 11 12 13 9. The proposal provides for adequate streets and pedestrian facilities as determined in Finding of Fact No.4. 14 RMC 4-9-1S0(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 15 16 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for 17 consistency with all of the following criteria 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 b. Circulation: ii. Promotes safety through sufficient sight distance, separation of vehicles from pedestrians, limited driveways on busy streets, avoidance of difficult turning patterns, and minimization of steep gradients. 10. The criterion is met for the reasons identified at p. 22-26 of the staff report. 25 RMC 4-9-1S0(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 26 PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT- 16 2 3 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria 4 b. Circulation: 5 6 7 iii. Provision of a system of walkways which tie residential areas to recreational areas, transit, public walkways, schools, and commercial activities. 8 II. 9 The criterion is met for the reasons identified at p. 22-26 of the staff report. 10 RMC 4-9-150(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only ifitfinds that the following requirements are met. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria b. Circulation: iv. Provides safe, efficient access for emergency vehicles. 12. The proposal provides for safe and efficient access for emergency vehicles as determined in Finding of Fact No.4. RMC 4-9-150(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only ifitfinds that the 21 following requirements are met. 22 23 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urhan development shall also be reviewedfor consistency with all of the following criteria 24 25 26 c. Infrastructure and Services: Provides utility services, emergency services, and other improvements, existing and proposed, which are sufficient to serve the development. PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT - 17 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 13. As detennincd in Finding of Fact No.4, the proposal is served by suf1icient public infrastructure and services to serve the development. RMC 4-9-150(0): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria d. Clusters or Building Groups and Open Space: An appearance of openness created by clustering, separation of building groups, and through the use of well-deSigned open space and landscaping, or a reduction in amount of impervious surfaces not otherwise required. 14. The project's principal PUD characteristic is its integration of clustered buildings strategically located adjacent to combined and well-designed open space and critical areas as outlined in Finding of Fact No. 4(0). RMC 4-9-150(0): The City may approve a planned urban development only ifitfinds that the 14 following requirements are met. 15 16 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewedfor consistency with all of the following criteria 17 18 19 e. Privacy and Building Separation: Provides internal privacy between dwelling units, and external privacy for adjacent dwelling units. Each residential or mixed use development shall provide visual and acoustical privacy for dwelling units and surrounding properties. Fences, insulation, walh, barriers, and landscaping are used, as appropriate, jar the protection and aesthetic enhancement of the property, the privacy of site occupants and surrounding properties, and jar screening of storage, mechanical or other appropriate areas, and for the reduction of noise. Windows are placed at such a height or location or screened to provide sufficient privacy. Sufficient light and air are provided to each dwelling unit. 20 21 22 23 24 15. The criterion is met for the reasons outlined at p. 28 of the staff report. 25 RMC 4-9-150(0): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 26 following requirements are met. PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT- 18 2 3 4 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewedfor consistency with all of the following criteria f Building Orientation: Provides buildings oriented to enhance views from within the site by taking 5 advantage of topography, building location and style. 6 16. The buildings are orientated toward the open spaces or toward the offsite view vistas afforded 7 in the naturally elevated site location. There is minimal orientation toward off site non view areas. 8 RMC 4-9-1S0(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only ifitfinds that the 9 following requirements are met. 10 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for 11 consistency with all of the following criteria 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 g. Parking Area Design: Provides parking areas that are complemented by landscaping and not designed in long rows. The size of parking areas is minimized in comparison to typical designs, and each area related to the group of buildings served. The design provides for efficient use of parking, and shared parking facilities where appropriate. 17. Parking across the site would be handled in way as to not have large surface parking areas. Instead the applicant is proposing the use of parallel parking stalls along the perimeter of the proposed drive aisle. The surface parking design is comprised of 90-degree stalls to make maximum use of parking area and provide clear, safe vehicular circulation that promotes visibility. The use of compact stalls is minimal and is well under the code-required maximums for compact stall counts. 20 RMC 4-9-1S0(D)(4): Each planned urban development shall demonstrate compliance with the development standards contained in subsection E of this Section, the underlying zone, and any 21 overlay districts; unless a modification for a specific development standard has been 22 pursuant to subsection B2 of this Section. requested 23 24 25 26 18. As discussed below, the proposal complies with all development standards imposed by RMC 4-9-150(E). The proposal is compliant with the standards of the underlying RMF zone for the reasons identified in Finding of Fact No. 23 of the staff report. As a project located in the RMF zone, the project is in the District B design district as regulated by RMC 4-3-100. For the reasons identified PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT- 19 2 3 4 5 6 7 in Finding of Fact No. 29 of the staff report, the proposal is consistent with all District B design standards. RMC 4-9-1S0(E)(1): Common Open Space Standard: Open space shall be concentrated in large usable areas and may be designed to provide either active or passive recreation. RequirementsfiJr residential. mixed use, commercial. and industrial developments are described below. a. Residential: For residential developments open space must equal at least ten percent (10%) of the development site's gross land area. i. Open space may include. but is not limited to, the following: 8 (a) A trail that allows opportunity for passive recreation within a critical area buffer (only the square 9 footage of the trail shall be included in the open space area calculation), or 10 (b) A sidewalk and its associated landscape strip. when abutting the edge of a critical area buffer and when a part of a new public or private road. or II 12 13 14 15 16 17 (c) A similar proposal as approved by the reviewing offiCial. ii. Additionally, a minimum area equal to fifty (50) square feet per unit olcommon space or recreation area shall be provided in a concentrated space as illustrated in Figure I. 19. The 19,795 square feet of community space alone exceeds ten percent of the total 164,827 square feet of the project area. This space, along with other open spaces provided in the project site, also satisfies the requirement of 50 square feet per dwelling unit, for a total of 3,700 additional square feet of open space. 18 RMC 4-9-1S0(E)(2): Private Open Space: Each residential unit in a planned urban development 19 shall have usable private open space (in addition to parking, storage space. lobbies, and corridors) for the exclusive use of the occupants of that unit. Each ground floor unit. whether attached or 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 detached, shall have private open space which is contiguous to the unit The private open space shall be well demarcated and at least fifteen feet (15') in every dimension (decks on upper floors can substitute for the required private open space). For dwelling units which are exclusively upper story units, there shall be deck areas totaling at least sixty (60) square feet in size with no dimension less thanfivefeet (5'). 20. Ground related units do not have their own private open space. A condition of approval requires that the applicant provide a revised site plan demonstrating compliance with the private open space standard of at least IS-feet in every dimension for all ground related units. Not all upper story residential units have private open space dimensioned at 60 feet. A condition of approval requires PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT- 20 2 3 4 5 6 7 that the applicant provide revised elevations for upper floor units demonstrating compliance with the private open space standard of at least 60 square feet in size with no dimension less than 5 feet. RMe 4-9-1S0(E)(3): Installation and Maintenance of Common Open Space: a. Installation: All common area and open space shall be landscaped in accordance with the landscaping plan submitted by the Applicants and approved by the City; provided, that common open space containing natural features worthy of preservation may be left unimproved. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit, the developer shall furnish a security device to the City in an amount equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060. Landscaping shall be planted within one year of the date of.final approval of the planned urban development, and maintained for a period oltwo (2) 8 years thereafter prior to the release of the security device. A security device for providing 9 10 II 12 13 14 maintenance of landscaping may be waived if a landscaping maintenance contract with a reputable landscaping firm licensed to do business in the City of Renton is executed and kept active for a two (2) year period. A copy of such contract shall be kept on file with the Development Services Division. b. Maintenance: Landscaping shall be maintained pursuant to requirements of RMC 4-4-070. 21. As Conditioned. RMe 4-9-1S0(E)(4): Installation and Maintenance of Common Facilities: a. Installation: Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits, all common facilities, including but IS not limited to utilities, storm drainage, streets, recreation facilities, etc., shall be completed by the 16 developer or, if deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee, assured through a security device to the City equal to the provisions ol RMC 4-9-060 ... 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 22. As Conditioned. RMe 4-9-1S0(E)(4): Installation and Maintenance of Common Facilities: b. Maintenance: All common facilities not dedicated to the City shall be permanently maintained by the planned urban development owner, if there is only one owner, or by the property owners' association, or the agent(s) thereof In the event that such facilities are not maintained in a responsible manner, as determined by the City, the City shall have the right to provide for the maintenance thereof and bill the owner or property owners' association accordingly. Such bill, if unpaid, shall become a lien against each individual property. 23. As conditioned. PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT - 21 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 I I 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 DECISION The proposed preliminary PUD meets all applicable criteria quoted in this decision and for that reason is APPROVED. Requested revisions to development standards identified in Finding of Fact No.3 are all approved except for revisions to RMC 4-9-ISO.E.2. The applicant's request for an additional I.S feet in building height for the west building as proposed in Ex. 27 is also approved. The proposal is subject to the following Conditions of Approval: 1. The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures issued as part of the Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated ERC Addendum, dated April 7, 2016. 2. The applicant shall be required to record formal Lot Combination or Binding Site Plan in order to ensure the proposed buildings are not built across property lines. The instrument shall be recorded prior to building permit approval. 3. The applicant shall be required to submit a detailed landscape plan to the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval complying with RMC 4- 4-070. 4. The applicant shall be required to submit a detailed landscape plan depicting at least 132, two-inch caliper, trees (or the gross equivalent inches) on site; not including the those trees located within the Native Growth Protection Easement. The detailed landscape plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 5. The applicant shall submit a revised landscaping plan depicting a minimum three-foot landscaped setback from the sidewalk at the base of retaining walls abutting, or within, public rights-of-way. Landscaping shall include a mixture of shrubs and groundcover (trees are optional) in conformance with the standards of RMC 4-4-070H4, Perimeter Parking Lot Landscaping. The revised landscaping plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. 6. The applicant shall submit a revised Mitigation plan which addresses the criteria found in RMC 4-3-0S0.H.2 demonstrating the reduced buffer wouldn't negatively impact the function of the stream. The revised mitigation plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. 7. The applicant shall submit a revised Mitigation plan which addresses the criteria found in RMC 4-3-0S0.H.2 demonstrating the bridged crossing wouldn't negatively impact the function of the stream. The revised mitigation plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. 8. The applicant shall establish a Native Growth Protection Easement over that part of the site encompassing the stream and buffer area and place split rail fencing and signage along the outer edge of the buffer. The Final Mitigation plan shall include all specifications for fencing and signage and shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT - 22 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 9. The applicant shall be required to provide. to the Current Planning Project Manager, tree retention inspection/monitoring reports after initial clearing, final grading, and annually for two years by a qualified professional forester. The inspection/monitoring reports shall identify any retained trees that develop problems due to changing site conditions and prescribe mitigation. 10. The applicant shall provide interpretive signage/information regarding differentiating elements (trees, landscaping, drainage, architecture, etc.) of the proposed development at a strategic place(s) on site. The site plan depicting the signage shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit/Final Plat approval whichever comes first. 11. A detailed fencing plan shall be provided identifying the location and specifications for all fencing on site. All fencing shall be made of quality materials in keeping with the architectural aesthetic of the proposed structures. The fencing plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 12. The applicant shall provide a lighting plan that adequately provides for public safety without casting excessive glare on adjacent properties; at the time of engineering permit review. Pedestrian scale and down lighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicular movement, unless alternative pedestrian scale lighting has been approved administratively or is specifically listed as exempt from provisions located in RMC 4-4-075 Lighting, Exterior On-Site. 13. The applicant shall eliminate the proposed access restrictions along SE 172nd St in order to provide full access along SE 172nd St. A revised site plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Plan Reviewer prior to engineering permit approval. 14. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits, all common facilities, including but not limited to utilities, storm drainage, streets, recreation facilities, etc., shall be completed by the developer or, if deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee, assured through a security device to the City equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060. 15. All common facilities not dedicated to the City shall be permanently maintained by the planned urban development owner, ifthere is only one owner, or by the property owners' association, or the agent(s) thereof. In the event that such facilities are not maintained in a responsible manner, as determined by the City, the City shall have the right to provide for the maintenance thereof and bill the owner or property owners' association accordingly. Such bill, if unpaid, shall become a lien against each individual property. 16. The applicant shall create a public outreach sign in coordination with City of Renton to communicate with road users, the general public, area residences and businesses, and appropriate public entities about project information; road conditions in the work zone area; and the safety and mobility effects of the work zone. The sign shall be placed on site prior to construction commencement. PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT- 23 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 17. The applicant shall provide a revised site plan demonstrating compliance with the private open space standard of at least IS-feet in every dimension for all ground related units. The revised site plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval whichever comes first. 18. The applicant shall provide revised elevations demonstrating compliance with the private open space standard of at least 60 square feet in size with no dimension less than 5 feet for all upper story units. The revised elevations shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval whichever comes first. 19. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit, the developer shall furnish a security device to the City in an amount equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060. Landscaping shall be planted within one year of the date of final approval of the planned urban development, and maintained for a period of 2 years thereafter prior to the release of the security device. A security device for providing maintenance of landscaping may be waived if a landscaping maintenance contract with a reputable landscaping firm licensed to do business in the City of Renton is executed and kept active for a 2 year period. A copy of such contract shall be kept on file with the Planning Division. 20. The building entries from a street shall be clearly marked with canopies, architectural elements, ornamental lighting, and/or landscaping and include weather protection at least four and one-half feet (4-1/2') wide. The revised elevations shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 21. The applicant shall be required to submit a revised site and landscaping plan depicting entrances and pedestrian connections from ground related residential units, along SE 172nd St, to the public sidewalk. The revised landscape and site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. Staff is aware there may be topographic challenges with entrances along SE 172nd St and the applicant is encouraged to provide stairs to the units or demonstrate separate entrances are not feasible prior to building permit approval. 22. The applicant shall submit revised refuse and recycle enclosure elevations which include a roof. The revised elevations shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 23. The applicant shall revise the site plan to depict a differentiation in materials for all pedestrian connections within parking areas and/or drive aisles on site. The revised site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building/engineering permit approval. If this condition of approval is met the proposal would satisfy this standard. 24. The applicant shall provide detailed specifications for all site furniture, and art, in order to ensure durable, vandal-and weather-resistant materials are used. The specifications shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior building permit approval. PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT - 24 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25. The applicant shall submit revised elevations depicting entrance detailing/weather protection for ground related units, fencing, pedestrian connectivity, lighting fixtures, contrasting materials, and/or special detailing along SE 172nd St. The revised elevations shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval whichever comes first. 26. The applicant shall submit a materials board subject to the approval of the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building pennit approval. The board shall include color and materials for the following: guardrails, fa~ade treatments, retaining walls, raised planters, siding, windows/frames, and canopies. Acceptable materials include a combination of brick, integrally colored concrete masonry, pre-finished metal, stone, steel, glass, cast-in-place concrete, or other superior materials approved at the discretion of the Administrator. 27. The current left turn and right turn southbound lanes from Benson Road South to SR SIS shall be rechanneled by the applicant to one left turn lane and one combined left turn/right turn lane and the applicant shall also modify the light signal at the Benson Road South/SR SIS to accommodate the re-channelization. DATED this 24th day of May, 2016. City of Renton Hearing Examiner Appeal Right and Valnation Notices RMC 4-8-080 provides that the final decision of the hearing examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-1 I O(E)(l 4) requires appeals of the hearing examiner's decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner's decision. A request for reconsideration to the hearing examiner may also be filed within this 14 day appeal period as identified in RMC 4-8-1I0(E)(l3) and RMC 4-8-100(G)(9). A new fourteen (14) day appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of the reconsideration. Additional infonnation regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall - 7th floor, (425) 430-6510. Affected property owners may request a change In valuation for property tax purposes 25 notwithstanding any program of revaluation. 26 PRELIMINARY PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT- 25 Denis Law _":May:..or ........ .",."..~ .. J~ ~ [to' ~ l. May 3,2016 Parties of Record Various Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: Report to the Hearing Examiner Avana Ridge, PP, PUD Dear Parties of Record: A public hearing on Avana Ridge PUD will be held on Tuesday, May 10, 2016 at 11:00 am in the City Council Chambers of Renton City Hall, located at 1055 S Grady Way, The Staff Report to the Hearing Examiner, including exhibits and public comment letters, is available: • Electronically on line at the City of Renton website (www,rentonwa.gov) • To be viewed at the City Clerk's office on the ]'h Floor at Renton City Hall, 1055 S Grady Way, between 8 am and 4 pm. Ask for the project file by the project number LUA15- 000257. • Purchased for a copying charge of $0.15 per page. The estimated cost for the staff report and exhibits is $9.15, plus a handling and postage cost of $2.00 (this cost is subject to change if documents are added). Please contact me at (425) 430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov if you have any questions. Sincerely, Rocale Timmons Senior Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Justin Lagers Phil Olbrechts Michael Gladstein, Avana Ridge LLC Parties of Record (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING Dated: 12lcd 3 ;20\ (" ) .) . ) ss ) Contact Hearing Examiner Owner See Attached Pu lic in and for the State of Washl \\)/11"" Notary (print): ___ ---li-h.!.!W~¥·9_---l..B~Q::J/j/J~e/S)>------------- My appointment eXPires:U A r Y1 ,21, ,)0 tf Avana Ridge PUD LUA15-000894, PP, PUD template· affidavit of service by mailing Andrew Grav 3275 Cedar Ave S Renton. WA 98055 D. Bruce & Nancv Stanlev 10825 SE 172nd St.1I5B Renton. WA 98055-5969 Daniel Hiranaka 10510 SE 172nd St Renton. WA 98055 Doug Goods 16602 106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 H.A. Chau 4101150th Ave SE Bellevue. WA 98006 JUSTIN LAGERS Avana Ridge 9675 SE 36th St, Ste. 105 Mercer Island. WA 98040 Michael Gladstein Avana Ridge LLC 9675 SE 36th St, 11105 Mercer Island. WA 98040 Mollv Moss 3121 Cedar Ave S Renton. WA 98055 Scott Petett. D.C. 10622 SE Carr Rd, Suite A Renton. WA 98055 Caryn Cantu 16561106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Dan Palner 16638 106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Daniel Ridenour 16836 106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Emilv Brooker 16810 104th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Jerrv Miller PO Box 686 Renton. WA 98057 Kimmie McMullin 17030 106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Mike & Julie Radtke 17024 106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Philip Reitz 2907 Cedar Ave S Renton. WA 98055 Wendy Yadock 17020 104th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Carine Kumano 10829 SE 172nd St, 116C Renton. WA 98055 Dan Russell 43755 Louisiana 5t Palm Desert. CA 92211 Debra Russell 829 S 31st St Renton. WA 98055 Genevieve Bvrnes 3125 Cedar Ave S Renton. WA 98055 JODY HANAWALT PO Box 4097 Renton. WA 98057 Mark Faas 2915 Cedar Ave S Renton. WA 98055 Mollv Heine 16829 SE 105th St Renton. WA 98055 Rhanda Rae Murphv 17000 104th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 DEPARTMENT OF colVi. JNITY enton0 AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT A. REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER HEARING DATE: Project Name: Owners: Contact: File Number: Project Manager: Project Summary: Site Area: Project Location: May 10, 2016 Avana Ridge PUD Avana Ridge, LLC; 9675 SE 36th St, Ste 105; Mercer Island, WA 98040 Justin Lagers; Avana Ridge, LLC; 9675 SE 36th St, Ste 105; Mercer Island, WA 98040 LUA15-000894, PP, PPUD Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Environmental (SEPAl Review for the construction of a multi-family development containing 74 units. The vacant 3.78 acre site is located within the Residential Multi-Family (RM-Fl zoning classification and the Residential High Density (HD) land use designation. The development would be comprised of two separate multi- family residential structures resulting in a density of 20.21 dulac. The subject site is fronted by three public rights-of-way: SE 172nd St, Benson Rd S (108th Ave SE), and Benson Drive S (SR-515). The applicant is proposing one entrance off of SE 1720d St between the proposed buildings, and another entrance off of Benson Rd S. There is an unnamed stream, classified Ns, bisecting the site which runs from east to west. Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050, the applicant is proposing ·Impacts to the stream buffer through buffer averaging. Additionally, the site contains Coal Mine Hazards. The Preliminary PUD would be used to vary street, refuse and recycle, building height, parking, design, private open space, and retaining wall standards. The applicant has proposed to provide buffer enhancement as part of the proposed PUD public benefit, along with the construction of enhanced open space, pedestrian amenities, landscaping, and superior site and building design. 164,828 SF Total Building Area GSF: 92,899 SF 17249 Benson Rd S Project Location Map HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_WA1S·000894 City of Renton Deportment of Co mity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF AVANA RIDGE PUD Report of May 3, 2016 II B. EXHIBITS: Exhibit 1: Exhibit 2: Exhibit 3: Exhibit 4: Exhibit 5: Exhibit 6: Exhibit 7: Exhibit 8: Exhibit 9: Exhibit 10: Exhibit 11: Exhibit 12: Exhibit 13: Exhibit 14: Exhibit 15: Exhibit 16: Exhibit 17: Exhibit 18: Exhibit 19: Exhibit 20: Exhibit 21: Exhibit 22: Exhibit 23: ERC Report, dated April 11, 2016 Site Plan Landscape Plan Elevations Grading Plan Page 2 of 44 Geotechnical Report, prepared by Earth Solutions NW (dated December 21,2015) Coal Mine Hazard Study, prepared by Icicle Creek Engineers (dated March 22, 2004) Coal Mine Hazard Study, prepared by Icicle Creek Engineers (dated January 20, 2009) Drainage Report, prepared by D.R. Strong (dated December 28,2015) Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting (dated December 22,2015) Conceptual Stream Mitigation Plan prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting (December 28,2015) Habitat Data Report, prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting (dated December 22, 2015) Arborist Report, prepared by Greenforest Inc. (dated December 16, 2015) Tree Retention Plan Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), prepared by TraffEx (dated February 2, 2016) Public Comment Letters/Emails Independent Secondary Review -Traffic Study, prepared by TenW (dated March 21, 2016) Response Memo -Independent Secondary Review, prepared by Traffex (dated March 26,2016) Staff Recommendation to the Hearing Examiner, dated May 3, 2016 SEPA Determination and Mitigation Measures (dated April 11, 2016) CI 73 -Residential Building Height Elevation Perspectives Transportation Concurrency HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_LUAlS-000894 City of Renton Deportment of Com"'1unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 I C GENERAL INFORMA nON: 1. Owner(s) of Record: 2, Zoning Classification: 3, Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: 4, Existing Site Use: 5. Neighborhood Characteristics: Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36th St, Ste 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Residential Multi-Family (RMF) Residential High Density (HD) Vacant a, North: Existing Single Family Residential (R-B Zane) b. East: Daycare (RMF Zane) c. South: Vacant (RMF Zone) d. West: Multi-Family, Public Storage, and a Dental Office (CA Zone) 6. Site Area: 164,827 SF (3.78 acres) II D. HISTORICAL/BACKGROUND: Action Comprehensive Plan Zoning Annexation Springbrook Ridge Apt PUD (Expired) II E. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Existing Utilities Land Use File No. N/A N/A N/A LUA09-024 Ordinance No. 5758 5758 5327 N/A a. Water: Water service is provided by So os Creek Water and Sewer District. b. Sewer: Sewer service is provided by Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. Page 3 of 44 06/22/2015 06/22/2015 03/01/2008 09/24/2009 c. Surface/Storm Water: There is partial storm water conveyance systems along Benson Drive S, Benson Rd 5, and SE 172"d St. 2. Streets: There are partial street improvements along Benson Drive 5, Benson Rd S, and SE 172"d St. 3. Fire Protection: City of Renton Fire Department F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE: 1. Chapter 2 Land Use Districts a. Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts b. Section 4-2-070: Zoning Use Table c. Section 4-2-110: Residential Development Standards 2. Chapter 3 Environmental Regulations HEX 5taff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_WA1S-000894 City of Renton Deportment of Com"Junity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Report of May 3, 2016 a. Section 4-3-100: Urban Design Regulations 3. Chapter 4 Property Development Standards 4. Chapter 6 Streets and Utility Standards a. Section 4-6-060: Street Standards 5. Chapter 9 Permits -Specific a. Section 4-9-150: Planned Urban Development Regulations 6. Chapter 11 Definitions G. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 1. Land Use Element I H. FINDINGS OF FACT (FOF): Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Page 4 of 44 1. The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development (PPUD) and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a multi-family development containing 74 units, in two four-story structures. 2. The subject site is currently vacant. 3. The development would be comprised of two separate multi-family residential structures resulting in a density of 20.21 dulac. The proposed 74 units would be comprised of (28) 1-bedroom units, (29) 2- bedroom units, and (17) 3-bedroom units. 4. The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for review on December 30, 2015 and determined the application complete on January 13, 2016. On February 15, 2016 the project was placed on hold pending receipt of an Independent Secondary Review of the provided Traffic Study. The applicant submitted all necessary documentation and on March 30, 2016 and the project was taken off hold. The project complies with the 120-day review period. 5. The project site is located on the northwesterly corner of the intersection of Benson Drive S and Benson Rd S. The site is triangularly shaped and consists of two separate tax parcels (Parcel #292305-9009 and #292305-9148)' totaling 164,828 square feet in area (3.78 acres). 6. The site is located within the Residential Multi-Family (RM-F) zoning classification, the Residential High Density (HD) Comprehensive Plan land use designation, and Design District 'B'. 7. Surrounding uses include: a daycare facility abutting the property to the east (zoned RM-F); existing single family residences to the north (zoned R-8); southeast of the site, along 108th Ave SE, a vacant parcel (zoned RM-F); and across Benson Drive S, to the west, uses consists of multi-family, public storage, and a dental office (zoned CAl. 8. Access to the site is proposed via SE 172nd St, between the east and west buildings, and another ingress/egress point via Benson Rd S. The two access points create a through road for emergency vehicle ingress/egress across the property. 9. The proposal is served by a surface parking area to the south of the two structures, flanking the main access drive. A total of 94 parking stalls would be provided in the surface parking area. An additional 20-parking stalls would be provided along the street. HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_LUA1S-000894 City of Renton Department of Corr",unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Report of May 3, 2016 Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA1S-000894, PPUD, EeF Page 5 of 44 10. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.21C, 1971 as amended), on April 11, 2016, the Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated (DNS-M) for the Avana Ridge PUD project. The DNS-M included three mitigation measures (Exhibit 20). A 14-day appeal period commenced on April 15, 2016, and ended on April 29, 2016. No appeals of the threshold determination were filed. 11_ Based on an analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, the Environmental Review Committee (ERe) issued the following mitigation measures with the Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated: a. An updated Coal Mine Hazard Report shall be submitted demonstrating the proposal will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre- development conditions and the development can be safely accommodated on the site. The report shall also discuss any measures employed in the final site/building design which serve to mitigate coal mine subsidence risk. If no measures are employed, the applicant shall provide justification for the exclusion of additional measures. The updated Coal Mine Hazard Report shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. b. One (1) Electronic Speed Radar Sign shall be installed in the northbound direction on both 106th Ave SE and 104th Ave SE. The applicant shall install the signs, mounting poles, and associated equipment, at the direction of the City. All improvements shall be included in the engineering permit submittal for review and approval, and shall be constructed prior to temporary occupancy. c. The applicant shall provide an off-site sidewalk, along the south side of SE 172nd St and the west side of Benson Rd S, approaching the intersection. The width of the off-site sidewalks shall be consistent with the widths proposed along the frontage of the subject site. ADA ramps shall also be constructed at the southwest corner of the intersection. Finally, a street lighting analysis is required to be conducted by the developer at the southwest corner of the intersection of SE 172nd St and Benson Rd S. If necessary, required street lighting shall be provided according to City standards. All improvements shall be included in the engineering permit submittal for review and approval, and shall be constructed prior to temporary occupancy. 12. The tallest point of the structure would be approximately 46 feet and 5-inches from the average grade plane to the highest peak of a shed roof element. The proposed building materials would be a combination of concrete masonry, brick, metal canopy, cast-inplace concrete, fiber cement board, and wood elements. All concrete walls are proposed to be treated with texturing and/or reveals. (Exhibit 4). 13. Requested Modifications from RMC through the PUD: When approving a PPUD, the City may modify standards (RMC 4-2, 4-4,4-7, and RMC 4-6-060 Street Standards, except as listed in RMC 4-9-150B.3). All of the following modifications are required to be considered simultaneously as part of the planned urban development· RMC Code Citation Required Standard Requested Modification RMC 4-2-110A Roof pitches are required to be equal This proposal includes a roof pitch Development to or greater than 4:12 and may of 2:12 Standards for project an additional six (6) vertical Commercial Zoning feet from the maximum wall plate Designations-Roof height. Pitch RMC 4-2-11OA A maximum building height of 3 The proposal includes a height of Development stories with a wall plate height of 30 46-feet and 5-inches as measured Standards for feet is permitted. from average grade plane to the Commercial Zoning tallest point of the shed roof HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_WA1S-000894 City of Renton Deportment of Coc-,unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Report of May 3, 2016 Designations-Roof Pitch RMC 4-6-060F Street Various: See discussion in Table C: Standards PUD Criteria -Circulation RMC 4-3-100 Urban Various: See discussion in Table E: Design Standards Design District 'D' Standards RMC 4-4-080F, Based on the proposed use, a Parking, loading, and minimum and maximum of 96 parking Driveway Regulations spaces would be allowed in order to meet code. RMC 4-4-090, Refuse There shall be at least one deposit and Recyclables area/collection point for every thirty Standards (30) dwelling units. RMC 4-4-040, Heights are limited to 48 inches for Retaining Wall Height retainingwalls located within front yard/side yard along-a-street setbacks, and 72 inches for walls else where on site. RMC 4-9-150.E.2, Each residential unit in a PUD shall Private Open Space have usable private open space for the exclusive use of the occupants of that unit in compliance with dimensional standards. Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Page 6 of 44 elements. Various: See discussion under FOF xx: PUD Criteria -Circulation Various: See discussion under FOF xx: Design District 'B' Standards The applicant proposed a total of 94 spaces within surface parking areas. The proposal does not comply with the minimum parking stall requirements. The proposal includes a single refuse/recycle storage location centrally located, between both buildings at the center of the site. A section of the keystone-type wall located near the monument sign at the Benson Road/Benson Drive intersection is proposed at a height of 5.5 feet. A section of the keystone-type wall located near the monument sign at the Benson Road/Benson Drive intersection is 5 feet and 6-inches tall. The current proposal provides 4,156 SF of private, attached open space through the use of private balconies for some of the units which does not comply with the dimensional standards. 14. There are a total of 429 trees on site of which 46 trees are proposed to be retained outside of the critical area and buffer. 15. An unnamed seasonal stream, characterized as Ns pursuant to RMC 4-3-050, bisects the northern and southern portions of the site and runs east to west. The applicant is proposing buffer averaging and a stream alteration pursuant to RMC 4-3-050. A Wetland and Supplemental Stream Study was performed by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. on December 22,2015 (Exhibit 10). 16. A historic coal mine, known as the Springbrook mine, as well as its associated opening is also located on the site near the south property line. The coal mine is designated as a High Coal Mine Hazard pursuant to RMC 4-3-050. A Coal Mine Hazard Assessment was performed by Icicle Creek Engineers, Inc. on March 22, 2004 and January 20, 2009 (Exhibits 7 and 8). 17. Preliminary earthwork for the proposal includes 11,000 cubic yards of excavation and 3,250 yards offill. 18. Construction is anticipated to commence in Summer of 2016 with substantial completion scheduled for Summer of 2017. HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_LUA15-000894 City of Renton Department of COn'"1unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000894, PPUD, EeF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 7 of 44 19. Studies provided by the applicant include a stormwater report, traffic study, habitat assessment, wetland and supplemental stream study, arborist report, geotechnical and a coal mine hazard report (Exhibit 6-13, and 15). 20. Staff received several traffic related comments/concerns. Also included in the comments letters were concerns related to; access, open space, street improvements, drainage, wildlife, density, and quality of life (Exhibit 16). Non-SEPA concernS include, but are not limited to the following; zoning, permitted uses, density, construction mitigation/traffic control, crime, landscaping, access, parking, retaining walls, setbacks, utilities, public services, and home sizes. No agency comments were received. 21. Representatives from various city departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and address issues raised by the proposed development. These comments are contained in the official file, and the essence of the comments has been incorporated into the appropriate sections of this report and the Departmental Recommendation at the end of this report. 22. Comprehensive Plan Compliance: The site is designated Residential High Density (HD) on the City's Comprehensive Plan Map. HD unit types are designed to incorporate features from both single-family and multi-family developments, support cost-efficient housing, facilitate infill development, have close access to transit service, and efficiently use urban services and infrastructure. Lands designated HD is where projects will be compatible with existing uses and where infrastructure is adequate to handle impacts from higher density uses. The proposal is compliant with the following Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies if ;ill conditions of approval are met: Compliance Comprehensive Plan Analysis Policy L-2: Support compact urban development to improve health outcomes, support " transit use, maximize land use efficiency, and maximize public investment in infrastructure and services. Goal L-H: Plan for high-quality residential growth that supports transit by providing " urban densities, promotes efficient land utilization, promotes good health and physical activity, builds social connections, and creates stable neighborhoods by incorporating both built amenities and natural features. " Goal L-BB: Maintain a high quality of life as Renton grows by ensuring that new development is designed to be functional and attractive. " Goal L-FF: Strengthen the visual identity of Renton and its Community Planning Areas and neighborhoods through quality design and development. Policy L-S1: Respond to specific site conditions such as topography, natural features, " and solar access to encourage energy savings and recognize the unique features of the site through the design of subdivisions and new buildings. Policy L-S2: Include human-scale features such as pedestrian pathways, quality " landscaping, and public spaces that have discernible edges, entries, and borders to create a distinctive sense of place in neighborhoods, commercial areas, and centers. " Policy L-S3: Orient buildings in developments toward the street or a common area, rather than toward parking lots. Policy L-S7: Complement the built environment with landscaping using native, " naturalized, and ornamental plantings that are appropriate for the situation and circumstance and which provide for respite, recreation, and sun/shade. HEX Staff Report_Avona Ridge PUD_LUA1S-000894 City of Renton Deportment of Cor"1unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 8 of 44 23_ Zoning Development Standard Compliance: The RMF Zone provides suitable environments for multi- family dwellings. It is further intended to conditionally allow uses that are compatible with and support a multi-family environment. The RMF allows for the development of both infill parcels in existing multi- family districts with compatible projects and other multi-family development. Densities range from ten (10) to twenty (20) du/acre with opportunities for bonuses up to twenty five (25) dwelling units per net acre. The proposal is compliant with the following development standards if all conditions of approval are met: Compliance RMF Zone Develop Standards and Analysis Density: There is no minimum density requirement for townhouse development in the RMF zone. The minimum density required for other attached dwelling units is 10 dwelling units per net acre. The maximum density permitted is 20 dwelling units per net acre. Net density is calculated after the deduction of sensitive areas, areas intended for public right-of-way, and private access easements . .r Staff Camment: After deducting 1,237 square feet far access easements and 4,015 square feet for critical areas, from the 164,827 gross square footage of the site, the net square footage would be 159,574 square feet (3.66 net acres). The 74 unit proposal would arrive at a net density of 20.21 dwelling units per acre (74 units I 3.66 acres = 20.21 dulac), which falls within the permitted density ronge for the RMF zoning classification. Lot Dimensions: There is no minimum lot size required in the RMF zone. A minimum .r lot width of 25 feet is required (30 feet for corner lots) for townhouse development. A minimum lot depth of 50 feet is required for townhouse development. Stott Comment: The proposal does not include alterations to Jot lines. Lot Coverage: The allowed lot coverage is 35%. A maximum coverage of 45% may be .r allowed through the Hearing Examiner site development plan review process . Staff Comment: The lot coveroge for the entire development is at approximately 13.8%. Setbacks: The required setbacks attached dwellings in the RMF zone are as follows: front yard is 20 feet, the side yard is 0 feet for the attached sides and 5 feet for the unattached sides (per CI-76). side yard along the street is 20 feet, and rear yard is 10 feet. Staff Comment: The proposed buildings would have a front yard setback of 20 feet and from the front (Sf 172'd 5t) property line which exceeds the maximum front yard Compliont if setback. The proposed west-building would have a side yard along-a-street setback of Conditions of 24 feet from the Benson DrivelSR 515 which exceeds the maximum side yard along-a- Approval is street setback. The side yard setback, from the eastern property line is 33 feet and 4- Met inches exceeding the 5-foot requirement. There is nat a rear yard for the site given street frontages surrounding the site. The project is however proposed to be built across a portion of the cammon boundary between existing property lines. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval the applicant be required to record formal Lot Combination or Binding Site Plan in order to ensure the proposed buildings are not built across property lines. The instrument shall be recorded prior to building permit approval. Requested to Building Standards: The RMF zone has a maximum impervious surface coverage of be Modified 75%. A Code Interpretation (CI-73) (Exhibit 21) was adopted regarding building height HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_LUA1S-000894 City of Renton Department of Cor---unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Through the PUD Compliant if Conditions of Approval is Met Page 9 of 44 requirements in residential zones. In the RMF zone, a maximum building height of 3 stories with a wall plate height of 30 feet is permitted. Roofs with a pitch equal to or greater than 4:12 may project an additional six (6) vertical feet from the maximum wall plate height; common rooftop features, such as chimneys, may project an additional four (4) vertical feet from the roof surface. Non-exempt vertical projections (e.g., decks, railings, etc.) shall not extend above the maximum wall plate height unless the projection is stepped back one-and-a-half (1.5) horizontal feet from each fa,ade for each one (1) vertical foot above the maximum wall plate height. Reserved. Wall plates supporting a roof with only one (1) sloping plane (e.g., shed roof) may exceed the stated maximum if the average of wall plate heights is equal or less than the maximum wall plate height allowed. An additional ten feet (10') height for a residential dwelling structure may be obtained through the provision of additional amenities such as additional recreation facilities, underground parking, and additional landscaped open space areas; as determined through the site development plan review process and depending on the compatibility of the proposed buildings with adjacent or abutting existing residential development. In no case shall the maximum wall plate height of a residential structure exceed thirty-five feet (35'). Requested to be modified through the PUD Staff Comment: The overoll project hos less impervious sUrface than otherwise would be expected. Bosed on the provided TlR the site would contain approximately 40.1% impervious sUrfaces for the overall site. This would include building areas, associated walkways, driveways, porking and drive aisles. The tallest point of the structure would be approximately 46 feet and 5-inches from overage grode to the highest peak of the tallest shed roof element. The PUD seeks to modify the minimum pitch from 4:12 to 2:12 as well as the maximum wall plate height. The requested modificotion would still give the appearance of pitched shed roof from the pedestrian perspective (Exhibit 22). The varied combination of parapet and roof slope, combined with cornice details and trellis elements achieve a visually interesting break in the roofline intended to be created with roof pitch requirement. The proposed raof prafiles effectively achieve the intent of the code by breaking up the massing and providing visual interest to the building rooflines. Additionally, the proposed height serves to concentrate development in one area of the site preserving opportunities for meaningful open space. Therefore, stoff is in support of the requested raof pitch and height modification, as part of the PUD, if all conditions of approval are met. Landscaping: The City's landscape regulations (RMC 4-4-070) require a lO-foot landscape strip along all public street frontages. Additional minimum planting strip widths between the curb and sidewalk are established according to the street development standards of RMC 4-6-060. Staff Comment: The applicant has proposed landscaping along the frontages of the site (Benson Drive 5, Benson Rd 5, and SE 172nd St) exceeding the 10-foot landscape requirement. The applicant has also thoughtfully incorporoted landscaping throughout the site in arder to create active and passive recreation opportunities as well as to separate parking and drive aisles into smaller areas. A conceptual landscape plan was submitted with the project application (Exhibit 3). HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_WA15-000894 City of Renton Deportment of Co ----unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Compliant if Conditions of Approval is Met Page 10 of 44 The landscape plan includes a planting plan which contains severol different tree and shrub species but does not provide specific detail for the number or types of trees and shrubbery. Therefore staff recommends, as a condition of approval, the opplicant be required to submit a detailed landscape plan to the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit appro vol complying with RMC 4-4-070. See additional discussion below in FOF 26: PUD Decision Criteria, Landscaping/Screening. Tree Retention: The City's adopted Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations require the retention of 20 percent of trees in a residential development. Significant trees shall be retained in the following priority order: Priority One: Landmark trees; significant trees that form a continuous canopy; significant trees on slopes greater than twenty percent (20%); Significant trees adjacent to critical areas and their associated buffers; and Significant trees over sixty feet (60') in height or greater than eighteen inches ( 18") caliper. Priority Two: Healthy tree groupings whose associated undergrowth can be preserved; other significant native evergreen or deciduous trees; and Other significant non-native trees. Priority Three: Alders and cottonwoods shall be retained when all other trees have been evaluated for retention and are not able to be retained, unless the alders and/ or cottonwoods are used as part of an approved enhancement project within a critical area or its buffer. For multi-family development, the minimum tree density is four (4) significant trees for every five thousand (5,000) square feet. The tree density may consist of existing trees, replacement trees, trees required pursuant to RMC 4-4-070Fl, Street Frontage Landscaping Required, or a combination. Staff Comment: The site is currently forested with mixed canopy dominated by Douglas fir, red cedar, big leaf maple, Scouler's willow, and black catton wood. The site's understory is dominated by Indian plum, hazelnut, Himilayan blackberry, sword fern, and creeping blackberry. The applicant provided a Tree Protection Plan/ Arborist Report, completed by Greenforest Inc., dated December 16, 2015 (Exhibit 13). Based on the provided tree inventory, 429 trees are located on the subject site. There are 114 trees located in critical areas and associated buffers; 67 trees were identified as dead, diseased, or dangerous; and 37 trees would be located within proposed rights- of-way. This results in the exclusion of 218 trees from retention calculations. As such, 211 trees were utilized to calculate retention requirements of 20% of the significant trees located on the site. Therefore, the applicant would be required to retain at least 42 trees on site. The provided Tree Retention Plan depicts the retention of 46 trees outside of the critical areas and their associated buffers which serves to meet tree retention requirements (Exhibit 13). Additionally, the project site is approximately 165,000 SF square feet. As a result, a total of 132 trees are required to be located on the site in order to meet the tree density requirements of the code (165,000 square feet / 5,000 square feet x 4 trees = 132 trees). The applicant's proposed landscape plan includes the planting of several trees, in addition to the 46 trees proposed for retention, but does not provide specific detail for the number or types of trees. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_WA1S-000894 City of Renton Department of Co. unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Requested to be Modified Through the PUD Requested to be Modified Through the PUD Page 11 of 44 approval, the applicant be required to submit a detailed landscape plan depicting at least 132, two-inch caliper, trees (or the gross equivalent inches) on site; not including the thase trees located within the Native Growth Protection Easement The detailed landscape plan shall be submitted to, ond approved by, the Current Planning Project Manoger prior to construction permit approval. Parking: The parking regulations, RMC 4-4-080, require a specific number of off- street parking stalls be provided based on number of bedrooms proposed per unit. Requested to be modified through the PUD Staff Comment: The following ratios would be applicable to the site: Use # Q[ residential units Ratio Required Spaces Attached 28 - 1 bedrooms 1.0 spaces / 1-bedroom 28 ReSidential 29 - 2 bedrooms 1.4 spaces /2-bedroom 41 Units 17 - 3 bedrooms 1.6 spaces /3-bedroom 27 Based on the proposed uses, a minimum and maximum of 96 parking spaces would be required in order to meet code. The applicant is proposing a total of 94 spaces within structured and surface parking areas. The proposal does not comply with the minimum requirements by two stalls. The applicant is proposing to modify the minimum parking requirements through the PUD. While the proposal does not meet the minimum number of parking stalls required by code the requested modification conforms to the intent and purpose of the parking regulations by providing sufficient on-site parking for the amount necessary for the new development. The applicant is requesting a very small reduction, of less than 3%. Additionally, the proposal includes 20 public stalls provided along SE 172'd St which would serve as overflow parking for the proposal. Therefore, staff is in support of the requested modification, as part of the PUD, if all conditions of approval are met. The parking conforms to the minimum requirements for drive aisle, porking stall, dimensions and the provision of ADA accessible parking stalls. Per RMC 4-4-080F.11 the number of bicycle parking spaces shall be one-half (O.S) bicycle parking space per dwelling unit for a total of 37 bicycle parking stalls. The applicant is proposing 21 bicycle parking spaces within a bike room in the West building. An additianal 20 bicycle parking spaces would be provided within a bike room in the East building, far a tatal of 41 spaces. The applicant will be required to demonstrate spaces meet the requirements of RMC 4-4-0BOF.11.c as part of building permit applications. Refuse and Recyclables: Per RMC 4-4-090 for multi-family developments a minimum of 1 Y, square feet per dwelling unit is required for recyclable deposit areas and a minimum of 3 square feet per dwelling unit is required for refuse deposit areas. There shall be at least one deposit area/collection point for every thirty (30) dwelling units. Staff Comment: Based on the proposal for a total 74 residential units, 333 square feet of refuse and recycle area us required to be dedicated. The proposal includes a 436 square foot area dedicated to refuse and recycle which complies with the area dedication requirements. Through the PUD the applicant is requesting a modification in order to provide a HEX Staff Report_Avona Ridge PUD_WA1S-000894 City of Renton Deportment of Carr unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Requested to be Modilied Through the PUD Page 12 of 44 combined refuse/recycle enclosure. The refuse/recycle storage locotion would be centrally located between both buildings at the center of the site, away from public view. To reduce architectural bulk and scale the two separately-required starage locations have been praposed in one enclosure. A single enclosure would provide ease of access to residents of both buildings in addition to allowing for one, easily- accessible, pickup point for waste management services. Therefore, staff is in support of the requested modification, as part of the PUD, if all conditions of approval are met. See additional discussion below in FOF 29: Design District Review, Service Element Design and Location. Fences and Retaining Walls: In any residential district, the maximum height of any fence, hedge or retaining wall shall be seventy two inches (72"). Except in the front yard and side yard along a street setback where the fence shall not exceed forty eight inches (48") in height. There shall be a minimum three-foot (3') landscaped setback at the base of retaining walls abutting public rights-of-way. Requested to be modified through the PUD. Staff Comment: The site can best be characterized as hilly generally sloping south toward the stream on site and Benson Drive S. Slopes on-site range from 8 to 15% with a topographic relief of approximately 35 feet. The steepest slope on the site is approximately 20% in the proximity of the stream on site. The proposal complies with the retaining wall height requirements of the code with the exceptions of two areas on site. A section of the keystone-type wall proposed near the monument sign at the Benson Road/Benson Drive intersection is 5 feet and 6-inches toll. This wall would face the street. Imposing the 4-foot maximum height would require a 4-foot wide terrace and add 105 linear feet of a 1.0-to 1.5-foot toll wall. The wall would also require removal of three additional trees. Additionally, a section of the keystone-type wall proposed along the east side of the east building reaches 6 feet and 6-inches tall, exceeding the 6-foot maximum. This wall would face the proposed building. The excess height is preferable to a terraced configuration because it provides a contiguous landscape buffer. The wall could be limited to 6-feet by steepening the grade of the landscape buffer. However, this was not pursued in an effort to minimize visual impacts to the adjacent day care facility through the use of landscaping. The requested mOdifications to the retaining wall height requirements are minimal in both cases and strict compliance would create impacts such as the removal of existing vegetation or the interruption of landscape buffer. However, given the location of the walls are adjacent to, or in many cases within, rights-of-way the proposal would very much benefit from landscaping between the sidewalk and proposed retaining walls in order to provide visual relief. The code requires a minimum three-foot landscaped setback at the base of retaining walls abutting public rights-of-way. Therefore staff recommends, as a condition of approval, the applicant submit a revised landscaping plan depicting a minimum three-foot landscaped setback from the sidewalk at the base of retaining walls abutting, or within, public rights-of-way. Landscaping shall include a mixture of shrubs and graundcover (trees are optional) in conformance with the standards of RMC 4-4-070H4, Perimeter Parking Lot Landscaping. The revised HEX Staff Report_Avono Ridge PUD_WA15-000894 City of Renton Department of Corrrwnity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 13 of 44 landscaping plan shall be submitted ta, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. Staff is in support of the requested modification for the retaining wall height, as part of the PUD, if all conditions of approval are complied with including the provision of londscoping between the sidewalk and the retaining wall. 24. Critical Areas: Project sites which contain critical areas are required to comply with the Critical Areas Regulations (RMC 4-3-050). The proposal is consistent with the Critical Areas Regulations, if all conditions of approval are complied with: Compliant if condition of approval is met Geologically Hazardous Areas: Staff Comment: A cool mine was operated historicolly within the southern portion of the site, along the southwesterly property line. According to the Coal Mine Hazard Study, prepared by Icicle Creek Engineers on January 26, 2009, the coal mine is designated a High Coal Mine Hazard (CH) as defined by RMC 4-3-050 (Exhibit 8). The classification was affirmed by Earth Solutions NW in the provided Geotechnicol Report (Exhibit 6). High Coal Mine Hazards are considered areas with abandoned and improperly sealed mine openings and areas underlain by mine workings shallower than 200 feet in depth for steeply dipping seams, or shallower than 15 times the thickness of the seam or workings for gently dipping seams. These areas may be affected by collapse or other subsidence. The main entry and airshaft for the Springbrook mine is also located on site. Icicle Creek Engineers encountered approximately 15 feet of fill at what appears to be the mine entry, estimated to be 5 to 8 feet in diameter, and inclined at approximately 55 to 60 degrees to the south (Exhibit 8). Severol recommendations to mitigate potential risk of the cool mine hazard/former entry were included in the Icicle Creek Engineer report, including the excovation of the fill at the mine entry and backfilling with controlled density fill (Exhibit 8). However, these recommendations were based on a former development proposal which included structures in the southern portion of the site. The proposed development is setback approximately 125 feet from the coal mine hazard and would likely not have the same impacts as the former development. However, there are some groding activities and smaller recreational improvements in the proximity of the coal mine hazard which may potentially be affected by mining related subsidence. A mitigation measure was issued requiring an updated Coal Mine Hazard Report demonstrating the proposal would not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre-development conditions and the development con be safely accommodated on the site (Exhibit 20). Streams: Staff Comment: The applicant submitted a Wetland and Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Ed Sewell Consulting Inc., dated December 22, 2015 (Exhibit 10). The report states there are no wetlands located on site. An unnamed seasonal stream (Stream A) has been identified on the subject site. Stream A bisects the northern and southern portions of the site and runs from east to west. As defined by RMC 4-3- 050.G the stream best meets the criteria of a Type Ns stream due to its intermittent flow and lack of fish use. Class Ns streams have a standard buffer of 50 feet as measured from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) as well as a 15-foot setback HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_WA15-000894 City of Renton Deportment of COfr"1unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation WAlS-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 14 of 44 from the edge of the buffer to any structure. The applicont is proposing bUffer averoging for portions of the stream buffer. Additionolly, the applicont is proposing an alteration within the stream and its associated buffer for a pedestrian crossing. It should be noted that the Habitat Biologist for WDFW concluded the on-site stream is not a jurisdictional water, or a "water of the state". As a result no Hydraulic Permit Approval (HPA) permit is required from Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife. Stream Buffer Averaging Praposal: RMC 4-3-050.1.1 allows for criticol area buffers to be reduced to no less than a 25-foot minimum for Type Ns streams. The applicant has proposed buffer averaging, with reductions of the buffer down to 25 feet, for Stream A. Overoll the applicant is proposing buffer reductions in the amount of approximately 8,835 square feet to be mitigated with buffer additions in the amount of approximately 9,527 square feet. The applicont is also proposing buffer enhancement for those portions of the bUffer which would be reduced. Pursuant to RMC, buffer width averaging may be allowed by the reviewing official only where the applicont demonstrates all of the following: i. There are existing physicol impravements in or near the water body and associated riparian area; and ii. Buffer width averaging will result in no net loss of stream/lake/riparian ecologicol function; and iii. The total area contained within the buffer after averaging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer width prior to averaging; and iv. The proposed buffer standard is based on considerotion of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; and v. Where the buffer width is reduced by averaging pursuant to this subsection, buffer enhancement shall be required. The existing stream buffer, which separates the north apartment building area from the southern open space, is mostly existing forest (primarily Alder and Cottonwood) with an understory dominated by invasive Himalayan blackberry. The buffer would be enhanced thraugh the removal of the invasive blackberries and ather undesirable vegetation and replaced with native understory vegetation. There are existing road improvements within the buffer on both the east and west sides of the stream. The applicant's Supplemental Stream Study concluded the buffer reduction, through averaging, would have the physical characteristics that can pratect water quality and functions of the stream on site (Exhibit 10). Staff has reviewed the stream buffer averaging proposal for Stream A, and agrees that the proposal meets all requirements found in RMC 4-3-050.1.1. However, the provided stream study does not include a demonstration of compliance with criteria found in RMC 4-3-050.H.2. Therefore, stoff was unable to verify that thraugh the enhancement of the buffer and the use of low impact development strategies the reduced buffer will function at a higher level than the standard buffer. While staff believes the proposal for a reduced buffer wouldn't negatively impact the function of the stream, this could nat be affirmed. As a result staff is recommending a condition of approval requiring the applicant submit a revised Mitigation plan which addresses the criteria found in RMC 4-3-050.H.2 demonstrating the reduced buffer wouldn't negatively impact the function of the stream. The revised mitigation plan shall be submitted to, and opproved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_WAlS-000894 City of Renton Department of Co,....,unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA1S-000894, PPUD, EeF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 15 of 44 Stream Alteration Proposal: RMC 4-3-050.1.2.a allows for the construction of non-vehiculor transpartation crossings. The applicant has praposed a pedestrian bridge trail crossing over Stream A. Pursuant to RMC, crossings may be permitted by the reviewing officiol only where the applicant demonstrates all af the folloWing: i. The propased raute is determined to have the least impact on the environment, while meeting City Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element requirements and standards in RMC 4-6-060; and ii. The crossing minimizes interruption of downstream movement of wood and gravel; and iii. Transportation facilities in buffer areas shall not run parallel to the water body; and iv. Crossings occur as near to perpendicular with the water body as possible; and v. Crossings are designed accarding ta the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Fish Water Crossing Design Guidelines, 2013, and the National Marine Fisheries Service Guidelines for Salmonid Passage at Stream Crossings, 2000, as may be updated, or equivalent manuals as determined by the Administrator; and vi. Seasanal work windows are determined and made a condition of approval; and vii. Mitigation criteria of subsection L of this Section are met. The proposed path would connect the north and sauth sides of the buffer, crossing over Stream A, via a pedestrian bridge. The bridge would also serve ta connect the proposed structures to the proposed open space on the southern portion of the site. The bridged trail crossing would be located within a narraw portion af the stream, above the flow path of water, and would be perpendicular to the water body. Staff has reviewed the alteration proposal for the bridge across Stream A, and agrees that the proposal meets all requirements faund in RMC 4-3-050.1.2. However, the provided stream study does not include a demonstration af compliance with criteria found in RMC 4-3-050.H.2. While staff believes the proposed bridged crossing wouldn't negatively impact the function of the stream, staff was unable to verify. As a result staff is recommending a condition of approval requiring the applicant submit a revised Mitigation plan which addresses the criteria found in RMC 4-3-0S0.H.2 demonstroting the bridged crossing wouldn't negatively impact the function of the stream. The revised mitigation plan shall be submitted to, and opproved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. Finally, in order to preserve and protect the stream and its associated buffer staff also recommends the applicant establish a Native Growth Protection Easement over that part of the site encompassing the stream and buffer area and place split rail fencing and signage along the outer edge of the buffer. The Final Mitigation plan shall include all specifications for fencing and signage and shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. 25. PUD Applicability Standards: Pursuant to RMC 4-9-1506, any applicant seeking to permit development which is not limited by the strict application of the City's zoning, parking, street, and subdivision regulations in a comprehensive manner shall be subject to applicability standards. The following table HEX Staff Report_Avano Ridge PUD_WA1S-000894 City of Renton Deportment of Co----unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation WAlS-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 16 of 44 contains project elements intended to comply with applicability standards, as outlined in RMC 4-9- 1506: Compliance PUD Applicability Criteria and Analysis In approving a planned urban development, the City may modify any of the standards Compliant if of RMC 4-2, RMC 4-3-100, RMC 4-4, RMC 4-6-060, and RMC 4-7. All modifications Conditions of shall be considered simultaneously as part of the planned urban development. Approval Are Staff Comment: All standards requested to be modified are contained within the cade Met sections listed obove with the exception of the Private Open Space modification. See discussion under FOF 28: PUD Development Standards, Privote Open Spoce. An applicant may request additional modifications from the requirements of the Renton Municipal Code. Approval for modifications other than those specifically Compliant if described in subsection RMC 4-9-1506.2.a shall be approved prior to submittal of a Conditions of Approval are preliminary planned urban development plan. Met Stoff Comment: All requested modifications ore outlined above under Finding 13. Staff is in support of all requested modificotions, with the exception of the privote open spoce request, if all conditions of opproval are complied with. A planned urban development may not authorize uses that are inconsistent with those uses allowed by the underlying zone, or overlay district, or other location ,r restriction in RMC Title 4, including, but not limited to: RMC 4-2-010 to 4-2-080, 4-3- 010 to 4-3-040, 4-3-090, 4-3-095, and 4-4-010. Stott Comment: Attoched residential units are a permitted use in the RMF zone. The number of dwelling units shall not exceed the density allowances of the applicable base or overlay zone or bonus criteria in chapter 4-2 or 4-9 RMC; however, ,r averaging density across a site with multiple zoning classifications may be allowed if approved by the Community and Economic Development Administrator. Staff Comment: The proposal complies with the density requirements of the zone. See discussion in FOF 23: Zoning Development Standord Compliance. 26. PUD Decision Criteria Analysis: Pursuant to RMC 4-9-1500, each planned urban development shall demonstrate compliance with the Planned Urban Development decision criteria. The following table contains project elements intended to comply with the Planned Urban Development decision criteria, as outlined in RMC 4-9-1500: Compliance PUD Decision Criteria and Analysis Demonstration of Compliance and Superiority Required: Applicants must demonstrate that a proposed development is in compliance with the purposes of this Section and with the Comprehensive Plan, that the proposed development will be superior to that which would result without a planned urban development, and that the development will not be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties. ,r stoff Comment: If the canditions of approval are met, the applicont will hove demonstrated compliance with the PUD regulations and the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant will have demonstrated that the development is superior to that which would result without a PUD and requested modifications will not be detrimental to surrounding properties. The development of this site as a PUD results in a superior design than what would result by the strict application of the Development Standards HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_WA1S-000894 City of Renton Department of COlT --unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 17 of 44 for the following reasons: natural features, overall design, and building and site design. The proposed design provides for the retention of the natural grade on site, significant trees and a noteworthy amount of landscaping and re-vegetation. Additionally, the plan provides for both active and passive recreation spaces significantly beyond the standard code requirements. The proposed design can provide for the aforementioned amenities because of the modifications requested in FOF 13: Requested Modifications from RMC above. The site is designated Residential High Density (HD) an the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. See Comprehensive Plan analysis under FOF 22: Comprehensive Plan Analysis. Public Benefit Required: Applicants shall demonstrate that a proposed development will provide specifically identified benefits that clearly outweigh any adverse impacts or undesirable effects of the proposed planned urban development, particularly those adverse and undesirable impacts to surrounding properties, and that the proposed development will provide one or more of the following benefits than would result from the development of the subject site without the proposed planned urban development: N/A Compliant if Condition of Approval is Met N/A N/A a. Critical Areas: Protects critical areas that would not be protected otherwise to the same degree as without a planned urban development. b. Natural Features: Preserves, enhances, or rehabilitates natural features of the subject property, such as significant woodlands, native vegetation, topography, or noncritical area wildlife habitats, not otherwise required by other City regulations. Staff Comment: The primary natural features of the property include retention of 114 existing trees in the critical area, in addition to the 46 trees proposed for retention outside the critical area. The number af trees proposed for retention results in minimal odverse disturbance to existing vegetation, minimize sUrface water and groundwater runoff, aid in the stabilization of soils, minimize erasian and sedimentation, and minimize the need for additional storm drainage facilities caused by the destabilization of soils. Additionally, the cluster of trees proposed for retention would serve to abate noise, provide wind protection, and reduce air pollution. Finally, the large landscaped community open space provided at the southern portion of the site totaling 19,795 square feet and the 49,918 square feet of critical area and associated buffer would remain in a vegetative/open space state providing a sanctuary for the animals that reside in the area. The trees proposed for retention may be impacted after initial clearing, final grading, due to changing site conditions. Therefore staff recommends, as a condition of approval, the applicant be required to provide, to the Current Planning Project Manager, tree retention inspection/monitoring reports after initial clearing, final grading, and annually for two years by a qualified professional forester. The inspection/monitoring reports shall identify any retained trees that develop problems due to changing site conditions and prescribe mitigation. c. Public Facilities: Provides public facilities that could not be required by the City for development of the subject property without a planned urban development. d. Use of Sustainable Development Techniques: Design which results in a sustainable development; such as LEED certification, energy efficiency, use of alternative energy resources, low impact development techniques, etc. HEX Staff Report_Avona Ridge PUD_WA1S-000894 City of Renton Department of CO""'" unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Compliant if Conditions of Approval are Met Page 18 of 44 e. Overall Design: Provides a planned urban development design that is superior to the design that would result from development of the subject property without a planned urban development. A superior design may include the following: i. Open Space/Recreation: (a) Provides increased open space or recreational facilities beyond standard code requirements and considered equivalent to features that would offset park mitigation fees in Resolution 3082; and (b) Provides a quality environment through either passive or active recreation facilities and attractive common areas, including accessibility to buildings from parking areas and public walkways; or Staff Comment: The applicant has provided a variety of recreation opportunities and open spaces throughout the development. Without the use of the proposed PUD the applicant has indicated that the proposal would have likely eliminated the opportunity for a concentroted recreation space. The applicant is proposing the construction of a large landscaped cammunity open space at the southern portion of the site. The community open space incorporotes active and passive space, with a centrol connecting sidewalk linking the space to the public right-of-way. A centrol path and complementing pedestrian bridge crossing would be constructed to create on access point to the community open space from the surface parking lot. The large area would be ample usable space for passive recreation and special events such as picnics, parties, weddings, movie night in the park, concerts, etc;. promoting community involvement. Additionally, the space wauld take advantage of and display the attractive territorial views to the West. Finally, the space would serve to preserve and enhance existing vegetation and natural character through tree preservation, removal of extensive invasive Blackberries, and replacement with native understory vegetation to be maintained through the life of the development. The space features a large, central, gently sloping lawn for casual seating and recreation. The lawn is oriented to slope down towards an open pavilion whose intended use includes performances, and community gatherings. The pavilion is also sited to capture and frame the attractive territorial views to the West. A small fenced off-leash dog run is pravided at the east side of the site between the buffer and the parking lot among a grove of existing trees to be preserved. The dog run would be a pervious wood-chip surface. The applicant has indicated that there is an opportunity to include interpretive signage/information regarding differentiating elements (trees, landscaping, drainage, architecture, etc.) of the proposed development at a strategic place(s} on site. The use of interpretive signage would result in an increase in public benefit for the overall project. Therefore, staff recammends as a condition of approvol the applicant pravide interpretive signage/information regording differentiating elements (trees, landscaping, drainage, architecture, etc.) of the proposed development at a strategic place(s} on site. The site plan depicting the signage shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Praject Manager prior to building permit/Final Plat appraval whichever comes first. The resident amenity lounge located on Levell of the West building takes advontoge of outdoor space and integrates on outdoor plaza intended for gathering spaces, HEX Staff ReporCAvono Ridge PUD _ WA15-000894 City of Renton Department of Com-"nity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000894, PPUD, EeF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 19 of 44 barbecues, and lounge areas for a variety of opportunities far the residents. The area opens up the western portion of the site and provides a softer building edge and brings visual interest to what would normally be considered the "side" elevation of the project. ii. Circulation/Screening: Provides superior circulation patterns or location or screening of parking facilities; or Staff Comment: The proposal includes through access resulting in a superior circulation pattern to that of two separote entrances into the site which do not connect. In addition to through vehicular access the applicant is proposing to pravide street improvements along SE 172,d St, Benson Road 5, and portions of Benson Drive S. The project would provide sufficient vehicle occess for the proposed development and the praposed public and private streets could accommodate emergency vehicles and the traffiC demand created by the development if all conditions of approval are complied with. All surface parking areas are internal to the praject and are pulled away fram neighboring praperties. Where grades are steep, landscaping is proposed to screen surface parking as much as possible from pedestrian paths along the perimeter of the development. Internal to the site, pedestrian pathways continue throughout the development along the internal courtyard and thraugh the open space areas. The site design pramotes social interaction and would pramote a level of safety achievable through the use of a PUD. If all conditions of approval are complied with, the pedestrian circulation system throughout the development would be well designed, would encourage walkability throughout the neighborhood, and potentiolly reduce the vehicular traffiC and impacts on the neighboring community. iii. Landscaping/Screening: Provides superior landscaping, buffering, or screening in or around the proposed planned urban development; or Staff Comment: Conceptually, the proposed landscape plan for the entire site is superior to what would be required by Renton's Municipal Code (Exhibit 3). Thematically the proposed landscaping weaves in 0 consistent theme throughout the development and ties all proposed open spaces together. The praposed landscape plan includes diverse candidate planting list: vine maple, coral bark Japanese maple, katsura, Autumn brilliance serviceberry, dogwood, Washington hawthorn, flowering crabapple, sorgent cherry, Japanese snowbell, Aloska yellow cedar, cypress, pine, fir, Western cedor, ond mountain hemlock trees. The proposed shrub planting list includes more than thirty shrub options. The applicant would be required to provide a detailed landscaping plan prior to engineering permit approval with specific plant de toils. The building and parking lot landscaping has been designed to meet severol objectives including: reductions in the overall scale of the building; breaking up of large areas of porking lot pavement with interior and perimeter landscaping; perimeter landscape buffer and screening; help define circulation routes and frame or enhance views; provide environmental benefits such as shade, impraved oir quality, natural stormwater treatment, and wildlife habitat. Underground sprinkler systems are required to be installed and maintained for all landscaped areas. The sprinkler system is required to provide full water cave rage of the planted areas specified on the plan. HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_WA1S-000894 City of Renton Department of Cor-,unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA15-000894, PPUD, fCF Report of May 3, 2016 Compliont if Condition of Approval is Met Page 20 of 44 Details for potential fencing were not provided with the application. Therefore, a detailed fencing plan shall be provided identifying the location and specifications for all fencing on site. All fencing shall be made of quality materials in keeping with the architectural aesthetic of the proposed structures. The fencing plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. iv. Site and Building Design: Provides superior architectural deSign, placement, relationship or orientation of structures, or use of solar energy; or Staff Comment: The placement of the buildings on site would allow for natural lighting opportunities, and is respectful of the neighboring residential-scaled neighboring properties through the use of modestly-sloped roof forms and adherence to building setback and landscape requirements. The building placement allows the majority of the sur/ace parking to be screened from public rights-of-way and works together with the on-site landscaping to keep internal service elements screened. The architectural design of the proposed residential building camplements the character of the surrounding community through the use of reSidentially-scaled windows, frequent modulation of the facades, and pedestrian-friendly access points, sign age, and proposed plantings. The placement of the buildings along Sf 172nd St allows buffers and additional distance from the other two rights-of-way (Benson Rd 5 and Benson Drive S) along the perimeters of the development. The buildings also serve to screen the parking from the residential properties to the North, and are pulled away from the neighboring day care property to the fast. The applicant has reduced the scale of the development with the use of two structures as opposed to the consolidation of units into one structure. The two structures also serve to reduce cangestion on the site and allow for multiple views as well as modulated facades compared to one continuous structure. All visible building materials would fallow a cohesive color scheme. A variety of materials and colors are being praposed as part of the color palette for the building design aesthetic. Materials would have a variety of patterns and textures including panel configuration, horizontal board configuration and reveal patterns consistent with window placement and proportion. The material palette includes concrete masonry, brick, metal canopy, cast-in place concrete, fiber cement board, and woad elements. All concrete walls will be treated with texturing and/or reveals. Artwork is also prapased throughout the cammunity open space and at specific building farade locations. However, opportunities exist to enhance the building design in order to provide a superior presence along Sf 172nd St. As such, staff recammends a condition of approval requiring the provision of additional ground level details (see discussion under FOF 29: Design District Review, Ground Level Details). Building and Site Design: i. Perimeter: Size, scale, mass, character and architectural design along the planned urban development perimeter provide a suitable transition to adjacent or abutting lower density/intensity zones. Materials shall reduce the potential for light and glare. HEX Staff Report_Avono Ridge PUD_WA1S-000894 City of Renton Deportment of Co ~ ~~unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA15-000894, PPUD, EeF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 21 of 44 Staff Comment: The proposal includes ample buffers between the proposed structures and property lines through the use of additional setbacks from code minimums. specificolly, along the eastern property line the increases in setbacks allow for natural daylighting opportunities for the daycare. Additionally, landscape buffers would provide a soft transition between building and daycare. On the south perimeter, the buildings are set back significantly from all property lines, and allow the park amenity to be unobstructed in its day lighting opportunities. Due to the location of the buildings to the north of the open space, no shadows from the proposed bUildings would be cast at any time of year or day. On the West perimeter, the building would have minimal impact to views across the site, as both buildings are oriented North/South. On the North perimeter, the adjacent residential dwellings would be screened from the surface parking lot thraugh the use of landscape buffers, building modulation and new proposed street trees. The conceptual landscape plan demonstrates the frequency, type and number of the street trees and interior plantings proposed. These techniques would successfully serve to mitigate the length of the two buildings and reduce impact ta existing neighboring properties if all conditions of approval are complied with. Compliance with all recommended conditions of approval would provide a suitable transition from the adjacent lower density single family residential uses to the more intense commercial and multi-family uses located to the South and West. Landscaping and terracing has been incorporated along Benson Drive 5 in order to detract attention fram the parking area which may be visible from this point of view. The new development is anticipated to fit into the existing developed fabric of the neighborhood. Stoff will be recommending, as a condition of approval, the applicant provide a materials board to the satisfaction of the Current Planning Praject Manager (see discussion in FOF 29: Design District Review). The materials board would also be used to confirm that siding materials are non-reflective which would reduce glare. Each unit wauld have windaws, which could slightly reflect light fram the building but nat to an extent beyand any typical multi-family development. The applicant has indicated that the proposal would not result in excessive glare onto adjacent properties, in the submitted design district compliance narrative. However, a lighting plan was not submitted with the application package, as such, staff recommends a condition of approval that requires the applicant to provide a lighting plan that adequately provides for public safety without casting excessive glare on adjacent praperties; at the time of engineering permit review. Pedestrian scale and down lighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicular movement, unless alternative pedestrian scale lighting has been approved administratively or is specifically listed as exempt from provisions located in RMC 4-4- 075 Lighting, Exterior On-Site. ii. Interior Design: Promotes a coordinated site and building design. Buildings in groups should be related by coordinated materials and roof styles, but contrast should be provided throughout a site by the use of varied materials, architectural detailing, building orientation or housing type; e.g., single family, townhouses, flats, etc. Staff Comment: The praposed buildings appear to have been deSigned to be built in a coordinated fashion, utilizing a cansistent set of materials. Differentiation throughout HEX Staff Report_Avona Ridge PUD_LUA1S-000894 City of Renton Deportment of CO---lUnity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Requested to be Modi/ied Through the PUD Page 22 of 44 the design is provided with the use of different materials and colors. The interior design of both buildings has been integrated with the averoll site design. The primary orientation of the units are to the North and South to take advantage of daylighting opportunities. Where the buildings meet East/West site borders, dwelling units have been rotated to face easterly and westerly. The intent of this interior design technique is to provide visually pleasing elements on all four sides of the building. Through the use of roofs sloped at 2:12, rather than 4:12, the sloped roof portions of the building reduce the shadow cast on the residential praperties to the north. Building modulation at regular intervals and a vast variety of window sizes and styles also helps to break up the scale of the buildings. As mentioned above staff will be recommending, as a condition of appraval, the applicant pravide a materials board to the satisfaction of the Current Planning Project Manager (see discussion in FOF 29: Design District Review). The materials board would also be used to canfirm the use of varied materials and architectural detailing for the proposal. Additionally, staff will be recommending a condition of approval requiring added architectural detailing elements including lighting fixtures, contrasting materials, or special detailing along the facades oriented to a street (see discussion in FOF 29: Design District Review, Ground Level Details). Circulation: i. Provides sufficient streets and pedestrian facilities. The planned urban development shall have sufficient pedestrian and vehicle access commensurate with the location, size and density of the proposed development. All public and private streets shall accommodate emergency vehicle access and the traffic demand created by the development as documented in a traffic and circulation report approved by the City. Vehicle access shall not be unduly detrimental to adjacent areas. ii. Promotes safety through sufficient sight distance, separation of vehicles from pedestrians, limited driveways on busy streets, avoidance of difficult turning patterns, and minimization of steep gradients. iii. Provision of a system of walkways which tie residential areas to recreational areas, transit, public walkways, schools, and commercial activities. iv. Provides safe, efficient access for emergency vehicles. Requested to be modified through the PUD. Stoff Comment: The applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx, doted February 2, 2016 (Exhibit lS). The provided TlA was found to meet the intent of the TlA guidelines and is generally acceptable for preliminary review. Several traffiC related camments letters/em ails have been received by the public. The comments raise concerns regarding the use of the proposed SE 172'd St entrance and potential impacts to the neighboring single-family residential development to the north as well as additional impacts to queueing delays at Benson Rd 5 and Benson Drive 5 (Exhibit lS). Based an public comments received, staff required an evaluation by an independent qualified professional regarding the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of any proposed mitigating measures. An Independent Secondary Review of the provided Traffic Study prepared by TENW, dated March 21, 2016 (Exhibit 17). In generol, the secondary review affirmed the overall trip distribution patterns. HEX Staff Report __ Avana Ridge PUD __ WA1S-000894 City of Renton Department of Cor~ nity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA1S-000894, PPUD, EeF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 23 of 44 The report however, recommended revisions be made to the traffic counts to consider the worse-cose traffic scenario given the observed intersection queuing at 108th Ave SE and Benson Rd S. The applicant provided a memo, dated March 26, 2016, in response to the recommendations included in the secondary review (Exhibit 18). The memo generally concurred with the recommendatians of the peer review with the exceptian for the removal of the site driveway access restrictions to SE 172nd Street. The applicant's response memo revised the TlA to reflect recommended changes in trip distribution, balanced traffic volumes, the analysis of queuing on Benson Rd and left turn lane warrants. After review of the original Traffic Impact Analysis (Exhibit 15), Independent Secondary Review (Exhibit 17), and the applicant's response memo (Exhibit 18) staff provided applicable comments below for each Transportotion subject. Access: The applicant is proposing two points of ingress and egress into the site in order to meet Fire Department requirements for access. The applicant proposes one entrance off of SE 172nd St between the proposed buildings, and one entrance off of Benson Road South. The two access points converge to form drive-through access through the site. Several public comments were received requesting access be eliminated from SE 172nd St, in order to mitigate anticipated cut through traffic on neighboring roads to the north. In addition, concerns were raised regarding the blacking of the proposed access, along Benson Rd S, during PM peak hour traffic. The applicant has proposed a driveway configuration which would attempt to restrict movements to left-in/right -out only as way to mitigate cut through traffiC an residential streets to the north. Access and praposed mitigation, was analyzed as part of the Independent Secondary Review prepared by TENW (Exhibit 17). TENW generally affirmed the trip distribution assumptions made by TraffEx and substantiated the need for two access points. With respect to proposed mitigation, TraffEx determined that the proposed SE 172 nd St driveway configuration would be ineffective in limiting impacts to neighboring residential streets to the north. In addition, it is anticipated that restrictions to the SE 1720d driveway would encourage u-turns and associated impacts to existing residential driveways along the north side of SE 1720d st. Therefore, staff is recommending a condition of Hearing Examiner approval, the elimination of the proposed access restrictions along SE 1720d St in order to provide fUll access along SE 1720d St. A revised site plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Plan Reviewer prior to engineering permit appraval. In order to address anticipated impacts an neighboring streets caused by cut-through traffic, a traffic calming SEPA mitigation measure was required in lieu of the foregoing site access restriction (Exhibit 20). Specifically, Electronic Speed Radar Signs are required to be installed in the northbound direction on both 106'h Ave SE and 104'h Ave Sf. Level of Service: It is anticipated that the proposed development would generate approximately 492 average daily trips with 38 AM peak-hour trips and 46 PM peok- hour trips. The provided report analyzed three intersection locations (Exhibit 15): Intersection 1: Site Access/ SE 172nd St Intersection 2: 108'h Ave SE/Benson Rd S/SE 172nd St Intersection 3: Site Access/Benson Rd 5/108" Ave SE HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_WA1S-000894 City of Renton Deportment of Com _. 'nity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 24 of 44 The provided analysis nates that all intersections will operate at an acceptable level of service with the proposed development. Therefore, the proposal would not be required to mitigate at any intersection. Analysis of future conditions address cumulative impacts of the proposed project and traffic growth in the study area. Traffic signal warranty analysis was also provided at the intersection of SE 172'd St and Benson Rd S. The report states there is no need for a signal at the intersectian as a result of the project. However, the Transportation Department conducted a model to assess any possible solution to address the citizen's concerns regarding the backing of queue on Benson Road from the intersection with SR 515 to SE 172"" Street. Unfortunately, staff is unable to provide an update on the model conducted at this time. Increased traffic created by the development would be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied. The applicant submitted for a building permit in December of 2015. The fee in 2015 was assessed at $2,214.44 per new multi-family unit. The fee is estimated at appraximately $164,000. The fee shall be payable to the City at the time of building permit issuance. Site Distance: The pravided Traffic Impact Analysis states sight distance requirements ore met at the site access driveway onto SE 172"" St and with vegetation trimming, within the right of way, at the site access driveway to Benson Rd 5 (Exhibit 15). Street Improvements: Street Impravements are regulated by RMC 4-6-060 -Street Standards. See below: Benson Drive 5 -Benson Drive 5 (SR 515) is a principal arterial and a state route roadway along the project's west property line. The existing road currently cantains curb, gutter, and sidewalk an both sides of the street. There is currently no planter strip existing along the Benson Drive 5 street frontage. Per cade, frontage improvements including 0.5 feet wide curb and gutter, an 8-foot wide landscaped planter, an 8-foot wide sidewalk, street lighting, and storm water improvements are required on prinCipal arterial streets. The applicant is proposing to maintain the existing right-of-way. Due to critical areas along portions of the frontage, the applicant has requested a modification through the PUD to allow the sidewalk to remain in the current location for those areas where critical areas are located. Staff is in support of the requested modification. By maintaining the existing sidewalk, the need for terraced retaining walls would be eliminated and impacts to the stream buffer along Benson Drive 5 would be minimized. The applicant has also proposed a walking path internal to the site to promote pedestrian connectivity. Staff recommends a condition of approval requiring the applicant to dedicate 1-foot behind the sidewalk in addition to right-of-way dedication for luminaire foundations along Benson Drive S. The dedication shall be required prior to temporary occupancy approval. Benson Rd 5 -Benson Rd S is a minor arterial along the project's east property line. Half-street frontage improvements are required to be provided an the side of the street franting the development. Per code, the minimum right-of-way width required for a minor arterial is 91 feet. The available right-of-way width on the Benson Rd 5 frontage, per the King County assessor map, is 100 feet and would not necessitate additional right-of-way dedication. The required paved width on this street is 44 feet, which includes three travel lanes and a 5-foot wide bike lane on both sides of the HEX StaffReporCAvana Ridge PUD_WA1S-000894 City of Renton Department of Corr--'nity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 25 of 44 street. Frontage improvements would include the following: a 0,5 faat wide curb and gutter, an 8-faat wide landscaped planter, an 8-faat wide sidewalk, street lighting, and starmwater improvements are required. The applicant is proposing street improvements along Benson Rd 5 which camply with code. SE 172nd St -SE 172nd St is a commerciol mixed use ond industrial access street along the project's north property line. Holf-street frontage improvements are required to be provided on the side of the street fronting the development. Per code, the minimum right-of-way width required for a commercial mixed use and industrial access street is 69 feet. The available right-of-way width on the SE 172 nd 5t frontage, per the King County assessor map, is 60 feet and would require additional right-of-way dedication. Frontage improvements would include the following; an 8-foot porking lane, a 0.5 foot wide curb and gutter, an 8-foot wide londscaped planter, a 6-foot wide sidewalk, street lighting, and storm water improvements are required. The applicant is proposing street improvements, along SE 172nd St, which comply with code. The applicant however has requested a modification through the PUD to reduce the required dedication from 4.5 feet to 3 feet. Staff is recommending approval of the requested modification. Staff recommends a condition of approval requiring the applicant to dedicate i-foot behind the sidewalk in addition to right-of-woy dedication for luminaire foundations along SE 172 nd St. The dedication shall be required prior to temporory occupancy approval. Temporory Impacts; Given the concentrotion of development to occurring in the immediate vicinity of the project site, staff anticipates that the proposed project would contribute to short term impacts to the City's street system. Therefore, staff is recommending a condition of opproval requiring the applicant create a public outreach sign in caordination with City of Renton to communicate with road users, the generol public, area residences and businesses, and appropriate public entities about project information; road canditions in the work zone area; and the safety and mobility effects of the work zone. The sign shall be placed on site prior to construction commencement. Pedestrian Improvements; As part of the proposed project, sidewalks would be constructed along the frontage of the site and would connect to the existing sidewalk system. However, safety concerns have been raised with respect to pedestrian connectivity off site due to missing sidewalk linkages approaching the intersection of Benson Rd 5 and SE 172nd St. Given the number of units proposed it is very likely that a large inflUX of people would utilize the public sidewalk system as well as the anticipated school bus stop across Benson Rd S. Providing pedestrian connections to abutting properties is an important aspect of connectivity and encouroges pedestrian activity and is required to be considered when reviewing the subject application. The condition of the existing protruded curb, approaching the intersection of SE 172 nd St and Benson Rd 5, has been largely disturbed and does not provide a safe route for school children ond or residents walking to and from the site. As a result, a SEPA mitigation measure was issued requiring the applicant to provide an off-site sidewalk, along the south side of SE 172nd St and the west side of Benson Rd 5, approaching the intersection (Exhibit 20). A street lighting analysis is also required to be conducted by the developer at the southwest corner of the intersection of SE 172nd St and Benson Rd S. Concurrency -Staff recommends a transportation concurrency approval based upon a test of the citywide Transportation Plan, considerotion of growth levels included in the LOS-tested Tronsportatian Plan, payment of a Tronsportatian Mitigation Fee, and an HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_WA1S-000894 City of Renton Deportment of Cor---unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 26 of 44 application of site specific mitigation (Exhibit 23). 27. Infrastructure and Services: Provides utility services, emergency services, and other improvements, existing and proposed, which are sufficient to serve the development. The proposal is compliant with the following development standards if all conditions of approval are met: Compliance Infrastructure and Services Analysis Police and Fire: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicated that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development; if the applicant provides Code required improvements and fees. The preliminary fire flow requirements for this project, as proposed, is 2,2S0 gpm. A minimum of one fire hydrant is required within 50 feet of 011 fire department connection for standpoints ond sprinkler systems. A Fire Impact Fee, based on new multi-family units is required in order to mitigate the proposal's potential impacts to City emergency services. The opplicant would be required to pay an appropriate Fire Impact Fee. The fee is payable to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of building permit application. A building permit opplication was submitted in December of 2015. The 2015 fee was assessed at $463.66 per mUlti-family. Parks and Recreation: The proposed development is onticipated to impact the Parks and Recreation system. The applicant would be required to pay an appropriate Parks Impact Fee. The fee would be used to mitigate the proposal's potential impact to ,/ City's Park and Recreotion system and is payable to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of building permit application. A building permit application was submitted in December of 2015. The 2015 fee was assessed at $975.90 per multi-family unit. Compliant if Condition of Approval is Met Schools: It is onticipated that the Renton School District can accommodate 011 additional students generoted by this proposal at the following schools: Cascade Elementary (1.2 mile from the subject site), Nelson Middle School (0.8 miles from the subject site) and Lindbergh High School (2.1 miles from the subject site). Future students are designated to be transported to school via bus for Elementary, and High School. Students would be within walking distance to designated middle school. For safe walking conditions, see discussion under FOF 26: PUD Criteria and Anolysis, Circulation. A School Impact Fee, based on new multi-fomily units, will be required in order to mitigote the proposal's potential impacts to Renton School District. The fee is poyable to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of bUilding permit applicotion. A building permit application was submitted in December of 2015. The 2015 fee was assessed at $1,339.00 per multi-fomily unit with credit given for the existing residence. Storm Water: An adequate drainage system shall be provided for the proper drainage of all surface water. ,/' Staff Comment: The site is located within the Black River drainage basin and Panther Creek drainage sub-basin. Upstream runoff enters the site in two locations. Portions of SE 172nd St and 106" Ave SE direct upstream runoff across the northern property line. Upstream runoff from the west side of Benson Rd S flows into a ditch along the east HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_WA1S-000894 City of Renton Deportment of Cor -unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 27 of 44 property line. Runnoff currently discharges at the sites western property line, at two locations, and heads north through a conveyance system in Benson Drive S. The flows eventually cross under Benson Drive 5 and conveyed a westerly direction in a series of pipes and catch basis eventually outfalling into Panther Creek. This project is required to camply with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapter 1 and 2. Based on the City's flow cantrol map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Conditions. This praject is subject to full drainage review. The applicant submitted a Preliminary Drainage Report prepared by D.R. Strong, dated December 28, 2015 (Exhibit 9). The report also includes a detailed summary of the pre and post developed conditions. The storm water detention and water quality treatment would be provided within a cambined detention/water quality vault under the parking area located in the western partion of the site. The combined detention/water quality vault wauld be followed by a media filtration system to accommodate the Enhanced Water Quality Treatment requirements for multi-family development. For water quality features that are not in the City Amendments or the 2009 KCSWDM, and which have the General Use level designation through the state Department of Ecology's Technology Assessment Protacol -Ecology (TAPE) program, an adjustment process request is required. Conditions associated with Preliminary PUD appraval will likely include a requirement for the submittal, and approval, of an Adjustment in order to utilize water quality features which are not in the City Amendments or the 2009 KCSWDM. Water and Sanitary Sewer: Staff Comment: Water and sewer service is provided by Saas Creek Water and Sewer ,r District. A water and sewer availability certificate from the Soos Creek utility district was submitted to the City with the land use application. Approved water and sewer plans from Soos Creek are required to be provided during utility construction permit approval. Clusters or Building Groups and Open Space: An appearance of openness created by clustering, separation of building groups, and through the use of well-designed open space and landscaping, or a reduction in amount of impervious surfaces not otherwise required. Stoff Comment: The proposed development is designed specifically to increase the access and opportunity for open space. The multiple open spaces throughout the site are well designed and provide a variety of recreational opportunities both passive and active. The proposed structures are clustered to the interior of the site allowing for large open spaces. The PUD places the buildings parallel to the neighboring properties to the north. This maximizes the opportunity for surface parking screening and a large, uninterrupted open space to the south. Due to the presence of a stream olong the lower area of the site, 0 natural border exists. A pedestrian bridge crosses the stream to link the open space and the residential developments. The overall project has less impervious surface than otherwise would be expected. Based on the provided TlR the site would contain approximately 40.1% impervious surfaces for the overall site. This would include building areas, associated walkways, driveways, parking and drive aisles. HEX Staff Report_Avono Ridge PUD_WA1S-000894 City of Renton Deportment of Co unity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF AVANA RIDGE PUD Report of May 3, 2016 N/A Page 28 of 44 Privacy and Building Separation: Provides internal privacy between dwelling units, and external privacy for adjacent and abutting dwelling units. Each residential or mixed use development shall provide visual and acoustical privacy for dwelling units and surrounding properties. Fences, insulation, walks, barriers, and landscaping are used, as appropriate, for the protection and aesthetic enhancement of the property, the privacy of site occupants and surrounding properties, and for screening of storage, mechanical or other appropriate areas, and for the reduction of noise. Windows are placed at such a height or location or screened to provide sufficient privacy. Sufficient light and air are provided to each dwelling unit. Staff Comment: Dwelling units are designed such that no twa outdaor decks are directly adjacent ta one another. Decks and building modulation have been designed cohesively to allow screening by the building ta decks for resident privacy. Units within each building are oriented to the north and south, and mimic the residential character of the properties to the north. The applicant has utilized landscaping and building screening techniques throughout the development to promote privacy and discourage the use of window screening elements as a privacy-creating element that block opportunities for natural light. Living area windows are large and aim to bring as much natural light into every unit as possible, while bedroom windows are adequately sized for light while still praviding ample privacy thraugh the use of raised sill heights. Landscape buffers also exist at graund-Ievel uses to aid in noise reduction from the street. The placement of the buildings, oriented to open space, provides separation and privacy for the residents while maintaining a communal atmosphere. See additional discussion under FOF 29: Design District Review, Graund Level Details. Building Orientation: Provides buildings oriented to enhance views from within the site by taking advantage of topography, building location and style. Staff Comment: The buildings are orientated toward the open spaces or toward the offsite view vistas afforded in the naturally elevated site location. There is minimal orientation toward off site non view areas. Parking Area Design: Provides parking areas that are complemented by landscaping and not designed in long rows. The size of parking areas is minimized in comparison to typical deSigns, and each area related to the group of buildings served. The design provides for efficient use of parking, and shared parking facilities where appropriate. Staff Comment: Parking across the site would be handled in way as to nat have large surface parking areas. Instead the applicant is proposing the use of parallel parking stalls along the perimeter of the proposed drive aisle. The surface parking design is comprised of 90-degree stalls to make maximum use of parking area and provide clear, safe vehicular circulation that promotes visibility. The use of compact stalls is minimal and is well under the code-required maximums for compact stall counts. Phasing: Each phase of the proposed development contains the required parking spaces, open space, recreation spaces, landscaping and utilities necessary for creating and sustaining a desirable and stable environment, so that each phase, together with previous phases, can stand alone. HEX Staff ReporCAvana Ridge PUD_LUA1S-000894 City of Renton Department of Cor--lUnity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 29 of 44 28. PUD Development Standards: Pursuant to RMC 4-9-1500.4, each planned urban development shall demonstrate compliance with the development standards for the Planned Urban Development regulations. The following table contains project elements intended to comply with the development standards ofthe Planned Urban Development regulations, as outlined in RMC 4-9-150E: Compliance PUD Development Standard Analysis 1. COMMON OPEN SPACE STANDARD: Open space shall be concentrated in large usable areas and may be designed to provide either active or passive recreation. Requirements for reSidential, mixed use, commercial, and industrial developments are described below. Standard: Mixed use residential and attached housing developments of ten (10) or more dwelling units shall provide a minimum area of common space or recreation area equal to fifty (50) square feet per unit. The common space area shall be aggregated to provide usable area(s) for residents. The location, layout, and proposed type of common space or recreation area shall be subject to approval by the Hearing Examiner. The required common open space shall be satisfied with one or more of the elements listed below. The Hearing Examiner may require more than one of the following elements for developments having more than one hundred (100) units. ,/ (a) Courtyards, plazas, or multipurpose open spaces; (b) Upper level common decks, patios, terraces, or roof gardens. Such spaces above the street level must feature views or amenities that are unique to the site and provided as an asset to the development; (c) Pedestrian corridors dedicated to passive recreation and separate from the public street system; (d) Recreation facilities including, but not limited to: tennis/sports courts, swimming pools, exercise areas, game rooms, or other similar facilities; or (e) Children's play spaces. Standard: Required landscaping, driveways, parking, or other vehicular use areas shall ./ not be counted toward the common space requirement or be located in dedicated outdoor recreation or common use areas. Standard: Required yard setback areas shall not count toward outdoor recreation and common space unless such areas are developed as private or semi-private (from ,/ abutting or adjacent properties) courtyards, plazas or passive use areas containing landscaping and fenCing sufficient to create a fully usable area accessible to all residents of the development. ,/ Standard: Private decks, balconies, and private ground floor open space shall not count toward the common space/recreation area requirement. Standard: Other required landscaping, and sensitive area buffers without common ,/ access links, such as pedestrian trails, shall not be included toward the required recreation and common space requirement. Standard: All buildings and developments with over thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of nonresidential uses (excludes parking garage floorplate areas) shall provide N/A pedestrian-oriented space according to the following formula: 1% of the lot area + 1% of the building area = Minimum amount of pedestrian- oriented space. HEX Staff Report_Avona Ridge PUD_LUA15-000894 City of Renton Department of Carr-unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 30 of 44 ,/ Standard: The location of public open space shall be considered in relation to building orientation, sun and light exposure, and local micro-climatic conditions. Standard: Common space areas in mixed use residential and attached residential ,/ projects should be centrally located so they are near a majority of dwelling units, accessible and usable to residents, and visible from surrounding units. Standard: Common space areas should be located to take advantage of surrounding ,/ features such as building entrances, significant landscaping, unique topography or architecture, and solar exposure. Standard: In mixed use residential and attached residential projects children's play N/A space should be centrally located, visible from the dwellings, and away from hazardous areas like garbage dumpsters, drainage facilities, streets, and parking areas. b, Private Open Space: Each residential unit in a planned urban development shall have usable private open space (in addition to parking, storage space, lobbies, and corridors) for the exclusive use of the occupants of that unit. Each ground floor unit, whether attached or detached, shall have private open space which is contiguous to the unit. Standard: Each ground floor unit, whether attached or detached, shall have private open space which is contiguous to the unit. Staff Comment: It does not appear ground related residential units have designated Compliant if private open space. As such, staff recommends a condition of approval that the Conditions of applicant provide a revised site plan demonstrating compliance with the private open Approval are space standard of at least lS-feet in every dimension for all ground related units. The Met revised site plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval whichever comes first. Additional requirements for ground related private open space can be found below under Ground Level Details. Compliant if Standard: The private open space shall be well demarcated and at least fifteen feet Conditions of (15') in every dimension (decks on upper floors can substitute for the required private Approval are open space). Met Staff Comment: See camment above. Standard: For dwelling units which are exclusively upper story units, there shall be deck areas totaling at least sixty (60) square feet in size with no dimension less than five feet (5'). Stoff Comment: Not all upper story reSidential units appear to have private open Compliant if space dimensioned at 60 feet. The applicant has requested to vary this standard as Conditions of part of the PUD. However, the City is unable to modify any of the provisions of the Approval are Planned Urban Development Regulations. As such, staff recammends a condition of Met approval that the applicant provide revised elevations demonstroting campliance with the private open space standard of at least 60 square feet in size with no dimension less than 5 feet for all upper story units. The revised elevations shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval whichever cames first. c. Installation and Maintenance of Common Open Space: ,/ Standard: All common facilities not dedicated to the City shall be permanently maintained by the planned urban development owner, if there is only one owner, or HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_LUA15-000894 City of Renton Deportment of Co~~",unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15~000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 31 of 44 by the property owners' association, or the agent(s) thereof~ In the event that such facilities are not maintained in a responsible manner, as determined by the City, the City shall have the right to provide for the maintenance thereof and bill the owner or property owners' association accordingly. Such bill, if unpaid, shall become a lien against each individual property. Stoff Comment: Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit, the developer shall furnish a security device to the City in an amount equal ta the provisions of RMC 4-9- 060. Landscaping shall be planted within one year of the date of final approval of the planned urban development, and maintained for a period of 2 years thereafter prior to the release of the security device. A security device for providing maintenance of landscaping may be waived if a landscaping maintenance can tract with a reputable landscaping firm licensed to do business in the City of Renton is executed and kept active for a 2 year period. A copy af such can tract shall be kept on file with the Planning Division. If this candition of approval is met the proposal would satisfy this standard. d. Installation and Maintenance of Common Facilities: N/A Standard: Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits, all common facilities, including but not limited to utilities, storm drainage, streets, recreation facilities, etc~, shall be completed by the developer or, if deferred by the Administrator, assured through a security device to the City equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060, except for such common facilities that are intended to serve only future phases of a planned urban development. Any common facilities that are intended to serve both the present and future phases of a planned urban development shall be installed or secured with a security instrument as specified above before occupancy of the earliest phase that will be served~ At the time of such security and deferral, the City shall determine what portion of the costs of improvements is attributable to each phase of a planned urban development~ Standard: All common facilities not dedicated to the City shall be permanently maintained by the planned urban development owner, if there is only one owner, or by the property owners' association, or the agent(s) thereof. In the event that such facilities are not maintained in a responsible manner, as determined by the City, the City shall have the right to provide for the maintenance thereof and bill the owner or property owners' association accordingly. Such bill, if unpaid, shall become a lien against each individual property. Staff Comment: Based on the proposed application the only area to be dedicated to the City is the required right-of-way and the drainage detention pond. As such all ather facilities shall be permanently maintained by the property owner. 29. Design District Review: The project site is located within Design District '8'. The following table contains project elements intended to comply with the standards of the Design District '8' Standards and guidelines, as outlined in RMC 4-3-100.E: Compliance I Design District Guideline and Standard Analysis 1. SITE DESIGN AND BUILDING LOCATION: Intent: To ensure that buildings are located in relation to streets and other buildings so that the Vision of the City of Renton can be realized for a high-density urban environment; so that businesses enjoy visibility from publiC rights-of-way; and to encourage pedestrian activity. HEX Staff Report_Avona Ridge PUD_LUA1S-000894 City of Renton Deportment of Co AVANA RIDGE PUD nity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA1S-OOOS94, PPUD, fCF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 32 of 44 a_ Building Location and Orientation: Intent: To ensure visibility of businesses and to establish active, lively uses along sidewalks and pedestrian pathways. To organize buildings for pedestrian use and so that natural light is available to other structures and open space. To ensure an appropriate transition between buildings, parking areas, and other land uses; and increase privacy for residential uses. Guidelines: Developments shall enhance the mutual relationship of buildings with each other, as well as with the roads, open space, and pedestrian amenities while working to create a pedestrian oriented environment. Lots shall be configured to encourage variety and so that natural light is available to buildings and open space. The privacy of individuals in residential uses shall be provided for. Standard: The availability of natural light (both direct and reflected) and direct sun or exposure to nearby buildings and open space (except parking areas) shall be considered when siting structures. ,/ Standard: Buildings shall be oriented to the street with clear connections to the sidewalk. or Standard: The front entry of a building shall be oriented to the street or a landscaped pedestrian-only courtyard. Standard: Buildings with residential uses located at the street level shall be: a. Set back from the sidewalk a minimum of ten feet (10') and feature substantial landscaping between the sidewalk and the building; or b. Have the ground floor residential uses raised above street level for Requested to residents' privacy. be Modified Staff Comment: The applicant is proposing ground related residential uses along Through the PUD vorious focades. Due to the unique site conditions and topogrophic challenges along the applicant is proposing to provide some of the ground floor residential units at or below grade as part of the PUD. Constructing all ground related units above grade would require increases to the height of the structures and significant site disruption. Therefore, staff is in support of the requested mOdification, through the PUD, if 0/1 conditions of approval are met. b. Building Entries: Intent: To make building entrances convenient to locate and easy to access, and ensure that building entries further the pedestrian nature of the fronting sidewalk and the urban character of the district. Guidelines: Primary entries shall face the street, serve as a focal point, and allow space for social interaction. All entries shall include features that make them eaSily identifiable while reflecting the architectural character of the building. The primary entry shall be the most visually prominent entry. Pedestrian access to the building from the sidewalk, parking lots, and/or other areas shall be provided and shall enhance the overall quality of the pedestrian experience on the site. Standard: A primary entrance of each building shall be located on the facade facing a ,/ street, shall be prominent, visible from the street, connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk, and include human-scale elements. Compliont if Standard: A primary entrance of each building shall be made visibly prominent by Condition of incorporating architectural features such as a facade overhang, trellis, large entry Approval is Met doors, and/or ornamental lighting. HEX StoffReport_Avano Ridge PUD_LUA1S-OOOS94 City of Renton Department of Co "unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 33 of 44 Stoft Comment: See Ground Level Details below. Standard Building entries from a street shall be clearly marked with canopies, architectural elements, ornamental lighting, or landscaping and include weather protection at least four and one-half feet (4-1/2') wide. Buildings that are taller than thirty feet (30') in height shall also ensure that the weather protection is proportional to the distance above ground level. Compliant if Staff Comment: The opplicant is proposing ground reloted residential uses along Sf Condition of 172'd 51. Staff is recommending a candition of approval requiring entrances and Approval is pedestrian connections from proposed patios to the public sidewalk system (see Met discussion below). As a result, staff recommends that building en tries from a street be clearly marked with canopies, architectural elements, ornamental lighting, and/or landscaping and include weather protection at least four and one-half feet (4-1/2') wide. The revised elevotions shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. The applicant is encouroged to mimic the canopy used for the primary entronces in a smaller application for ground related unit entrances. ,r Standard: Building entries from a parking lot shall be subordinate to those related to the street. Standard: Features such as entries, lobbies, and display windows shall be oriented to N/A a street or pedestrian-oriented space; otherwise, screening or decorative features should be incorporated. Standard: Multiple buildings on the same site shall direct views to building entries by ,r providing a continuous network of pedestrian paths and open spaces that incorporate landscaping. Standard: Ground floor residential units that are directly accessible from the street shall include entries from front yards to provide transition space from the street or entries from an open space such as a courtyard or garden that is accessible from the street. Staff Comment: The applicant is proposing ground related residential uses along the Sf 172'd st. The proposal partially camplies with the standard with the use of patios. Compliant if However, the proposal does not include entronces and pedestrian connections fram Condition of proposed patios to the public sidewalk. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of Approval is approval the applicant be required to submit a revised site and landscaping plan Met depicting entrances and pedestrian connections from ground related residential units, along Sf 172'd St, to the public sidewalk. The revised landscape and site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. Staff is aware there may be topographic challenges with entronces olong Sf 172'd St and the opplicant is encouroged to provide stairs to the units or demonstrote separate entrances are not feasible prior to building permit approval. If this condition of approval is met the proposal would satisfy this standard. c. Transition to Surrounding Development: Intent: To shape redevelopment projects so that the character and value of Renton's long- established, existing neighborhoods are preserved. Guidelines: Careful siting and design treatment shall be used to achieve a compatible transition where new buildings differ from surrounding development in terms of building height, bulk and scale. HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_WA15-000894 City of Renton Department of Co unity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF AVANA RIDGE PUD Report of May 3, 2016 Page 34 of 44 Standard: At least one of the following design elements shall be used to promote a transition to surrounding uses: 1. Building proportions, including step-backs on upper levels in accordance with the surrounding planned and existing land use forms; or 2. Building articulation to divide a larger architectural element into smaller ,/ increments; or 3. Roof lines, roof pitches, and roof shapes designed to reduce apparent bulk and transition with existing development. Additionally, the Administrator may require increased setbacks at the side or rear of a building in order to reduce the bulk and scale of larger buildings and/or so that sunlight reaches adjacent and/or abutting yards. d. Service Element Location and Design: Intent: To reduce the potential negative impacts of service elements (i.e., waste receptacles, loading docks) by locating service and loading areas away from high-volume pedestrian areas, and screening them from view in high visibility areas. Guidelines: Service elements shall be concentrated and located so that impacts to pedestrians and other abutting uses are minimized. The impacts of service elements shall be mitigated with landscaping and an enclosure with fencing that is made of quality materials. Standard: Service elements shall be located and designed to minimize the impacts on ,/ the pedestrian environment and adjacent uses. Service elements shall be concentrated and located where they are accessible to service vehicles and convenient for tenant use. Standard: In addition to standard enclosure requirements, garbage, recycling collection, and utility areas shall be enclosed on all sides, including the roof and screened around their perimeter by a wall or fence and have self-closing doors. Compliant if Staff Comment: The applicont is proposing a refuse and recycle enclosure at a centrol Condition of Approval is location on site. The proposed elevations do not depict a roof for the enclosure. Met Therefore, staff recommends a condition of approval requiring the applicant submit revised refuse and recycle enclosure elevations which include a roof. The revised elevations shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. ,/ Standard: Service enclosures shall be made of masonry, ornamental metal or wood, or some combination of the three (3). Standard: If the service area is adjacent to a street, pathway, or pedestrian-oriented N/A space, a landscaped planting strip, minimum 3 feet wide, shall be located on 3 sides of such facility. 2. PARKING AND VEHICULAR ACCESS: Intent: To provide safe, convenient access to the Urban Center and the Center Village; incorporate various modes of transportation, including public mass transit, in order to reduce traffic volumes and other impacts from vehicles; ensure sufficient parking is provided, while encouraging creativity in reducing the impacts of parking areas; allow an active pedestrian environment by maintaining contiguous street frontages, without parking lot siting along sidewalks and building facades; minimize the visual impact of parking lots; and use access streets and parking to maintain an urban edge to the HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_LUA1S-000894 City of Renton Department of C AVANA RIDGE PUD unity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 35 of 44 district. a. Surface Parking: Intent: To maintain active pedestrian environments along streets by placing parking lots primarily in back of buildings. Guidelines: Surface parking shall be located and designed so as to reduce the visual impact of the parking area and associated vehicles. Large areas of surface parking shall also be designed to accommodate future infill development. Standard: Parking shall be located so that no surface parking is located between: ./ (a) A building and the front property line; and/or (b) A building and the side property line (when on a corner lot). ./ Standard: Parking shall be located so that it is screened from surrounding streets by buildings, landscaping, and/or gateway features as dictated by location. b. Structured Parking Garages: Intent: To promote more efficient use of land needed for vehicle parking; encourage the use of structured parking; physically and visually integrate parking garages with other uses; and reduce the overall impact of parking garages. Guidelines: Parking garages shall not dominate the streetscape; they shall be designed to be complementary with adjacent and abutting buildings. They shall be sited to complement, not subordinate, pedestrian entries. Similar forms, materials, and/or details to the primary building(s) should be used to enhance garages. Standard: Parking structures shall provide space for ground floor commercial uses N/A along street frontages at a minimum of seventy five percent (75%) of the building frontage width. Standard: The entire facade must feature a pedestrian-oriented facade. The Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development may approve parking structures that do not feature a pedestrian orientation in limited N/A circumstances. If allowed, the structure shall be set back at least six feet (6') from the sidewalk and feature substantial landscaping. This landscaping shall include a combination of evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs, and ground cover. This setback shall be increased to ten feet (10') when abutting a primary arterial and/or minor arterial. N/A Standard: Public faCing facades shall be articulated by arches, lintels, masonry trim, or other architectural elements and/or materials. N/A Standard: The entry to the parking garage shall be located away from the primary street, to either the side or rear of the building. Standard: Parking garages at grade shall include screening or be enclosed from view N/A with treatment such as walls, decorative grilles, trellis with landscaping, or a combination oftreatments. Standard: The Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee may allow a reduced setback where the applicant can N/A successfully demonstrate that the landscaped area and/or other design treatment meets the intent of these standards and guidelines. Possible treatments to reduce the setback include landscaping components plus one or more of the following integrated HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_WA1S-000894 City of Renton Department of Co unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation WAlS-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 36 of 44 with the architectural design of the building: (a) Ornamental grillwork (other than vertical bars); (b) Decorative artwork; (c) Display windows; (d) Brick, tile, or stone; (e) Pre-cast decorative panels; (f) Vine-covered trellis; (g) Raised landscaping beds with decorative materials; or (h)Other treatments that meet the intent of this standard ... c. Vehicular Access: Intent: To maintain a contiguous and uninterrupted sidewalk by minimizing, consolidating, and/or eliminating vehicular access off streets. Guidelines: Vehicular access to parking garages and parking lots shall not impede or interrupt pedestrian mobility. The impacts of curb cuts to pedestrian access on sidewalks shall be minimized. or Standard: Access to parking lots and garages shall be from alleys, when available. If not available, access shall occur at side streets. or Standard: The number of driveways and curb cuts shall be pedestrian circulation along the sidewalk is minimally impeded. minimized, so that 3. PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT: Intent: To enhance the urban character of development in the Urban Center and the Center Village by creating pedestrian networks and by providing strong links from streets and drives to building entrances; make the pedestrian environment safer and more convenient, comfortable, and pleasant to walk between businesses, on sidewalks, to and from access points, and through parking lots; and promote the use of multi-modal and public transportation systems in order to reduce other vehicular traffic. a. Pedestrian Circulation: Intent: To create a network of linkages for pedestrians to improve safety and convenience and enhance the pedestrian environment. Guidelines: The pedestrian environment shall be given priority and importance in the design of projects. Sidewalks and/or pathways shall be provided and shall provide safe access to buildings from parking areas. Providing pedestrian connections to abutting properties is an important aspect of connectivity and encourages pedestrian activity and shall be considered. Pathways shall be easily identifiable to pedestrians and drivers. Standard: A pedestrian circulation system of pathways that are clearly delineated and connect buildings, open space, and parking areas with the sidewalk system and abutting properties shall be provided. or (a) Pathways shall be located so that there are clear sight lines, to increase safety. (b) Pathways shall be an all-weather or permeable walking surface, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed surface is appropriate for the anticipated number of users and complementary to the design of the HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_WAlS-000894 City of Renton Deportment of Co unity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA1S-000894, PPUD, EeF AVANA RIDGE PUD Report of May 3, 2016 Page 37 of 44 development. Standard: Pathways within parking areas shall be provided and differentiated by material or texture (i.e., raised walkway, stamped concrete, or pavers) from abutting paving materials. Permeable materials are encouraged. The pathways shall be perpendicular to the applicable building facade and no greater than one hundred fifty feet (150') apart. Compliont if Staff Comment: The applicant has proposed a series of pedestrian connections Conditions of Approval are throughout the site however it is unclear if there is a differentiation of materials Met across the drive aisles (Exhibit 2). Therefore staff recommends, as a condition of approval, the applicant revise the site plan to depict a differentiation in materials for all pedestrian connections within parking areas and/or drive aisles on site. The revised site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building/engineering permit approval. If this condition of approval is met the proposal would satisfy this standard. Standard: Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of buildings shall be of sufficient width to accommodate anticipated numbers of users. Specifically: (a) Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of mixed use and retail buildings 100 or more feet in width (measured along the facade) shall provide sidewalks at least 12 feet in width. The walkway shall include an 8 foot minimum unobstructed ",-walking surface. (b) Interior pathways shall be provided and shall vary in width to establish a hierarchy. The widths shall be based on the intended number of users; to be no smaller than five feet (5') and no greater than twelve feet (12'). (c) For all other interior pathways, the proposed walkway shall be of sufficient width to accommodate the anticipated number of users. N/A Standard: Mid-block connections between buildings shall be provided. b. Pedestrian Amenities: Intent: To create attractive spaces that unify the building and street environments and are inviting and comfortable for pedestrians; and provide publicly accessible areas that function for a variety of year-round activities, under typical seasonal weather conditions. Guidelines: The pedestrian environment shall be given priority and importance in the design of projects. Amenities that encourage pedestrian use and enhance the pedestrian experience shall be included. Standard: Architectural elements that incorporate plants, particularly at building Compliant if entrances, in publicly accessible spaces and at facades along streets, shall be Condition of provided. Approval ;s Met Staft Comment: See Building Entries and Ground Level Details discussion below. Standard: Amenities such as outdoor group seating, benches, transit shelters, Compliant if fountains, and public art shall be provided. Condition 0/ (a) Site furniture shall be made of durable, vandal-and weather-resistant Approval ;s Met materials that do not retain rainwater and can be reasonably maintained over an extended period of time. HEX Staff Report_Avona Ridge PUD_WA1S-000894 City of Renton Department of Ca,-JUnity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA1S-000894, PPUD, EeF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 38 of 44 (b) Site furniture and amenities shall not impede or block pedestrian access to public spaces or building entrances, sta[f Comment: The community open space includes lawn to allow for active recreation and more intimate locations featuring picnic tables and benches, Also included is an ornamental pavilion intended to provide views from the site and for public gathering opportunities, ornamental plantings and sculptural focus points, The proposal did not include specifications for proposed pedestrian amenities, Therefore staff was unable to verify the whether site furniture is compliant with the standard, As such, staff recommends a condition of approval requiring the applicant provide detailed specifications for all site furniture, and art, in order to ensure duroble, vandal- and weather-resistant materials are used. The specifications sholl be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior building permit approval. 4. RECREATION AREAS AND COMMON OPEN SPACE: Intent: To ensure that areas for both passive and active recreation are available to residents, workers, and visitors and that these areas are of sufficient size for the intended activity and in convenient locations. To create usable and inviting open space that is accessible to the public; and to promote pedestrian activity on streets particularly at street corners. Guidelines: Developments located at street intersections should provide pedestrian-oriented space at the street corner to emphasize pedestrian activity (illustration below), Recreation and common open space areas are integral aspects of quality development that encourage pedestrians and users. These areas shall be provided in an amount that is adequate to be functional and usable; they shall also be landscaped and located so that they are appealing to users and pedestrians Standard: All attached housing developments shall provide at least one hundred fifty Requested to (150) square feet of private usable space per unit. At least one hundred (100) square be Modified feet of the private space shall abut each unit. Private space may include porches, Through the balconies, yards, and decks. PUD Staff. Comment: See discussion above under Private Open Space, 5. BUILDING ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN: Intent: To encourage building design that is unique and urban in character, comfortable on a human scale, and uses appropriate building materials that are suitable for the Pacific Northwest climate. To discourage franchise retail architecture, a. Building Character and Massing: Intent: To ensure that buildings are not bland and visually appear to be at a human scale; and ensure that all sides of a building, that can be seen by the public, are visually interesting, Guidelines: Building facades shall be modulated and/or articulated to reduce the apparent size of buildings, break up long blank walls, add visual interest, and enhance the character of the neighborhood, Articulation, modulation, and their intervals should create a sense of scale important to residential buildings. ,;' Standard: All building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than twenty feet (20'), ,;' Standard: Modulations shall be a minimum of two feet (2') in depth and four feet (4') in width. HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_WA15-000894 City of Renton Deportment of Co-,unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of May 3, 2016 Page 39 of 44 Standard: Buildings greater than one hundred sixty feet (160') in length shall provide a variety of modulations and articulations to reduce the apparent bulk and scale of the facade; or provide an additional special feature such as a clock tower, courtyard, fountain, or public gathering area. b. Ground-Level Details: Intent: To ensure that buildings are visually interesting and reinforce the intended human-scale character of the pedestrian environment; and ensure that all sides of a building within near or distant public view have visual interest. Guidelines: The use of material variations such as colors, brick, shingles, stucco, and horizontal wood siding is encouraged. The primary building entrance should be made visibly prominent by incorporating architectural features such as a facade overhang, trellis, large entry doors, and/or ornamental lighting (illustration below). Detail features should also be used, to include things such as decorative entry paving, street furniture (benches, etc.), and/or public art. Compliant if Condition 0/ Approllol is Met Compliant if Condition 0/ Approval is Met Standard: Human-scaled elements such as a lighting fixture, trellis, or other landscape feature shall be provided along the facade's ground floor. Staff Comment: The applicont has proposed same human scole elements including landscape features, large windows and varied material patterns at the primary entronces. Window potterns vary based On interior layout, but all facades feature a variety of window types. Wall areas visible from public streets and sidewalks are treated with trellis elements at the upper levels, canopies ot pedestrion entries and amenity spoces, and with landscaped vinery walls and plantings. Landscaping and artwork are also proposed to break up pUblic-fronting facodes where windows are impractical due to interior configurotions. However, the proposal does not comply with the entrance and connectivity standards for ground related units along Sf 172'" St. The ground floor facades, specifically the ground related units along Sf 172n" St, are in need of additional human scale elements in order to reinforce the pedestrian orientation of the development used to justify the PUD request. Architectural detailing elements including entrance detailing/weather protection for ground related units, fencing, connectivity, lighting fixtures, controsting materials, and/or speciol detailing would bring the proposal into complionce with the intent of this standard to create human-scale character in the pedestrian environment. Therefore, staff recommends as a candition of opproval, the applicant submit revised elevations depicting entrance detailing/weather protection for ground related units, fencing, pedestrian connectivity, lighting fixtures, contrasting materials, and/or special detoiling along Sf 172'" St. The revised elevations shall be submitted to and opproved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval whichever comes first. If this condition of approval is met the proposal would satisfy this stan do rd. Standard: On any facade visible to the public, transparent windows and/or doors are required to comprise at least 50 percent of the portion of the ground floor facade that is between 4 feet and 8 feet above ground (as measured on the true elevation). Staff Comment: See discussion above. Standard: Upper portions of building facades shall have clear windows with visibility into and out of the bUilding. However, screening may be applied to provide shade and energy efficiency. The minimum amount of light transmittance for windows shall be 50 percent. HEX StaffReporCAvana Ridge PUD_WA15-000894 City of Renton Department of Co unity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA15-000894, PPUD, ECF AVANA RIDGE PUD Report of May 3, 2016 Page 40 of 44 N/A Standard: Display windows shall be designed for frequent change of merchandise, rather than permanent displays. N/A Standard: Where windows or storefronts occur, they must principally contain clear glazing. ",. Standard: Tinted and dark glass, highly reflective (mirror-type) glass and film are prohibited. Standard: Untreated blank walls visible from public streets, sidewalks, or interior pedestrian pathways are prohibited. A wall (including building facades and retaining walls) is considered a blank wall if: (a) It is a ground floor wall or portion of a ground floor wall over 6 feet in N/A height, has a horizontal length greater than is feet, and does not include a window, door, building modulation or other architectural detailing; or (b) Any portion of a ground floor wall has a surface area of 400 square feet or greater and does not include a window, door, building modulation or other architectural detailing. Standard: If blank walls are required or unavoidable, blank walls shall be treated with one or more of the following: (a) A planting bed at least five feet in width containing trees, shrubs, evergreen ground cover, or vines adjacent to the blank wall; N/A (b) Trellis or other vine supports with evergreen climbing vines; (c) Architectural detailing such as reveals, contrasting materials, or other special detailing that meets the intent of this standard; (d) Artwork, such as bas-relief sculpture, mural, or similar; or (e) Seating area with special paving and seasonal planting. d. Building Materials: Intent: To ensure high standards of quality and effective maintenance over time; encourage the use of materials that reduce the visual bulk of large buildings; and encourage the use of materials that add visual interest to the neighborhood. Guidelines: Building materials are an important and integral part of the architectural design of a building that is attractive and of high quality. Material variation shall be used to create visual appeal and eliminate monotony of facades. This shall occur on all facades in a consistent manner. High quality materials shall be used. If materials like concrete or block walls are used they shall be enhanced to create variation and enhance their visual appeal. Standard: All sides of buildings visible from a street, pathway, parking area, or open ",. space shall be finished on all sides with the same building materials, detailing, and color scheme, or if different, with materials of the same quality. ",. Standard: All buildings shall use material variations such as colors, brick or metal banding, patterns or textural changes. ",. Standard: Materials, individually or in combination, shall have texture, pattern, and be detailed on all visible facades. Compliant if Standard: Materials shall be durable, high quality, and consistent with more Condition of traditional urban development, such as brick, integrally colored concrete masonry, HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_WA15-000894 City of Renton Deportment of Co unity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA15-000894, PPUD, ECF AVANA RIDGE PUD Report of May 3, 2016 Page 41 of 44 Approval ;s pre-finished metal, stone, steel, glass and cast-in-place concrete. Met Staff Comment: In order to ensure that quality materials are used staff recommends the applicant submit a materials board subject to the approval of the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. The board shall include color and materials for the fallowing: guardrails, fa~ade treatments, retaining walls, raised planters, siding, Windows/frames, and canopies. Acceptable materials include a combination of brick, integrally colored concrete masonry, pre-finished metal, stone, steet glass, cast-in-place concrete, or ather superior materials appraved at the discretion of the Administrator. If this condition of approval is met the proposal would satisfy this standard. N/A Standard: If concrete is used, walls shall be enhanced by techniques such as texturing, reveals, and/or coloring with a concrete coating or admixture. Standard: If concrete block walls are used, they shall be enhanced with integral color, N/A textured blocks and colored mortar, decorative bond pattern and/or shall incorporate other masonry materials. III. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The subject site is located in the ReSidential High Density (HD) Comprehensive Plan designation and complies with the goals and policies established with this designation if all conditions of approval are met, see FOF 22. 2. The subject site is located in the Residential Multi-Family (RMF) zoning designation and complies with the zoning and development standards established with this designation provided the applicant complies with City Code and conditions of approval, see FOF 23. 3. The proposal complies with the Critical Area Regulations. Staff is in support of the requested buffer averaging and stream alteration proposal provided the applicant complies with City Code and conditions of approval, see FOF 24. 4. The proposal complies with the Urban Design Regulations provided the applicant complies with City Code and conditions of approval, see FOF 29. 5. The proposal complies with the Planned Urban Development provided the applicant complies with City Code and conditions of approval, with the exception of the private open space requirement, see FOF 25, 26, and 28. 6. There are adequate public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed development, see FOF 27. II J. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Avana Ridge PUD, File No. LUA15-000894, as depicted in Exhibit 2, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures issued as part of the Determination of Non- Significance Mitigated ERC Addendum, dated April 7, 2016. 2. The applicant shall be required to record formal Lot Combination or Binding Site Plan in order to ensure the proposed buildings are not built across property lines. The instrument shall be recorded prior to building permit approval. HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_LUA15-000894 City of Renton Deportment of Co ~~~~unity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Report of May 3, 2016 Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Page 42 of 44 3. The applicant shall be required to submit a detailed landscape plan to the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval complying with RMC 4-4-070. 4. The applicant shall be required to submit a detailed landscape plan depicting at least 132, two-inch caliper, trees (or the gross equivalent inches) on site; not including the those trees located within the Native Growth Protection Easement. The detailed landscape plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. S~ The applicant shall submit a revised landscaping plan depicting a minimum three-foot landscaped setback from the sidewalk at the base of retaining walls abutting, or within, public rights-of-way. Landscaping shall include a mixture of shrubs and groundcover (trees are optional) in conformance with the standards of RMC 4-4-070H4, Perimeter Parking Lot Landscaping. The revised landscaping plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. 6. The applicant shall submit a revised Mitigation plan which addresses the criteria found in RMC 4-3- OSO.H.2 demonstrating the reduced buffer wouldn't negatively impact the function of the stream. The revised mitigation plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. 7. The applicant shall submit a revised Mitigation plan which addresses the criteria found in RMC 4-3- OSO.H.2 demonstrating the bridged crossing wouldn't negatively impact the function of the stream. The revised mitigation plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. 8. The applicant shall establish a Native Growth Protection Easement over that part of the site encompassing the stream and buffer area and place split rail fencing and signage along the outer edge of the buffer. The Final Mitigation plan shall include all specifications for fencing and signage and shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. 9. The applicant shall be required to provide, to the Current Planning Project Manager, tree retention inspection/monitoring reports after initial clearing, final grading, and annually for two years by a qualified professional forester. The inspection/monitoring reports shall identify any retained trees that develop problems due to changing site conditions and prescribe mitigation. 10. The applicant shall provide interpretive signage/information regarding differentiating elements (trees, landscaping, drainage, architecture, etc.) of the proposed development at a strategic place(s) on site. The site plan depicting the signage shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit/Final Plat approval whichever comes first. 11. A detailed fencing plan shall be provided identifying the location and specifications for all fencing on site. All fencing shall be made of quality materials in keeping with the architectural aesthetic of the proposed structures. The fencing plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 12. The applicant shall provide a lighting plan that adequately provides for public safety without casting excessive glare on adjacent properties; at the time of engineering permit review. Pedestrian scale and down lighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicular movement, unless alternative pedestrian scale lighting has been approved administratively or is specifically listed as exempt from provisions located in RMC 4-4-075 Lighting, Exterior On-Site. 13. The applicant shall eliminate the proposed access restrictions along SE 172nd St in order to provide full access along SE 172nd St. A revised site plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Plan Reviewer prior to engineering permit approval. HEX Stoff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_LUA15-000894 City of Renton Deportment of CO~-lUnity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Report of May 3, 2016 Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Page 43 of 44 14. The applicant shall dedicate 1-foot behind the Sidewalk in addition to right-of-way dedication for luminaire foundations along Benson Drive S. The dedication shall be required prior to temporary occupancy approval. 15. The applicant shall dedicate 1-foot behind the sidewalk in addition to right-of-way dedication for luminaire foundations along SE 172nd St. The dedication shall be required prior to temporary occupancy approval. 16. The applicant shall create a public outreach sign in coordination with City of Renton to communicate with road users, the general public, area residences and businesses, and appropriate public entities about project information; road conditions in the work zone area; and the safety and mobility effects of the work zone. The sign shall be placed on site prior to construction commencement. 17. The applicant shall provide a revised site plan demonstrating compliance with the private open space standard of at least ls-feet in every dimension for all ground related units. The revised site plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval whichever comes first. 18. The applicant shall provide revised elevations demonstrating compliance with the private open space standard of at least 60 square feet in size with no dimension less than 5 feet for all upper story units. The revised elevations shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval whichever comes first. 19. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit, the developer shall furnish a security device to the City in an amount equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060. Landscaping shall be planted within one year of the date of final approval of the planned urban development, and maintained for a period of 2 years thereafter prior to the release of the security device. A security device for providing maintenance of landscaping may be waived if a landscaping maintenance contract with a reputable landscaping firm licensed to do business in the City of Renton is executed and kept active for a 2 year period. A copy of such contract shall be kept on file with the Planning Division. 20. The building entries from a street shall be clearly marked with canopies, architectural elements, ornamental lighting, and/or landscaping and include weather protection at least four and one-half feet (4-1/2') wide. The revised elevations shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 21. The applicant shall be required to submit a revised site and landscaping plan depicting entrances and pedestrian connections from ground related residential units, along SE 172nd St, to the public sidewalk. The revised landscape and site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. Staff is aware there may be topographic challenges with entrances along SE 172nd St and the applicant is encouraged to provide stairs to the units or demonstrate separate entrances are not feasible prior to building permit approval. 22. The applicant shall submit revised refuse and recycle enclosure elevations which include a roof. The revised elevations shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 23. The applicant shall revise the site plan to depict a differentiation in materials for all pedestrian connections within parking areas and/or drive aisles on site. The revised site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building/engineering permit approval. If this condition of approval is met the proposal would satisfy this standard. 24. The applicant shall provide detailed specifications for all site furniture, and art, in order to ensure durable, vandal-and weather-resistant materials are used. The specifications shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior building permit approval. HEX Stoff Report_Avono Ridge PUD_LUA15-000894 City of Renton Department of COl"'munity & Economic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Report of May 3, 2016 Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA15-000894, PPUD, EeF Page 44 of 44 25. The applicant shall submit revised elevations depicting entrance detailing/weather protection for ground related units, fencing, pedestrian connectivity, lighting fixtures, contrasting materials, and/or special detailing along SE 172nd St. The revised elevations shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval whichever comes first. 26. The applicant shall submit a materials board subject to the approval of the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. The board shall include color and materials for the following: guardrails, fa~ade treatments, retaining walls, raised planters, siding, windows/frames, and canopies. Acceptable materials include a combination of brick, integrally colored concrete masonry, pre-finished metal, stone, steel, glass, cast-in-place concrete, or other superior materials approved at the discretion of the Administrator. HEX Staff Report_Avana Ridge PUD_LUA1S-000894 0 EXHIBITS Project Name: Project Number: Avana Ridge Preliminary PUD LUAI5-000894, ECF, PPUD Date of Hearing Staff Contact Project Contact/Applicant Project Location 5/10/16 Rocale Timmons Justin lagers 17249 Benson Rd 5 Renton, Senior Planner Avana Ridge, LLC WA 9675 SE 36th St, St. 105; Mercer Island, WA 98040 The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 Exhibit 6 Exhibit 7 Exhibit 8 Exhibit 9 Exhibit 10 Exhibit 11 Exhibit 12 Exhibit 13 Exhibit 14 Exhibit 15 Exhibit 16 Exhibit 17 Exhibit 18 Exhibit 19: Exhibit 20: Exhibit 21: Exhibit 22: Exhibit 23: ERC Report Site Plan Landscape Plan Elevations Grading Plan Geotechnical Report, prepared by Earth Solutions NW (dated December 21, 2015) Coal Mine Hazard Study, prepared by Icicle Creek Engineers (dated March 22, 2004) Coal Mine Hazard Study, prepared by Icicle Creek Engineers (dated January 20, 2009) Drainage Report, prepared by D.R. Strong (dated December 28,2015) Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting (dated December 22, 2015) Conceptual Stream Mitigation Plan prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting (December 28,2015) Habitat Data Report, prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting (dated December 22,2015) Arborist Report, prepared by Greenforest Inc. (dated December 16, 2015) Tree Retention Plan Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), prepared by TraffEx (dated February 2, 2016) Public Comment Letters/Emails Independent Secondary Review -Traffic Study, prepared by TenW (dated March 21,2016) Response Memo -Independent Secondary Review, prepared by Traffex (dated March 26, 2016) Staff Recommendation to the Hearing Examiner, dated May 3,2016 SEPA Determination and Mitigation Measures (dated April 11, 2016) CI 73 -Residential Building Height Elevation Perspectives Transportation Concurrency ------~·Renton ® DEPARTMENT OF COMML ... -V AND ECONOMIC DEVElOPMENT -----..--,..~enton e ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT ERC MEETING DATE: Project Name: Project Number: Project Manager: Owner: Contact: Project Location: Project Summary: Site Area: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: April 11, 2016 Avana Ridge PUD LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner Avana Ridge, LLC; 9675 SE 36 th St, Ste 105; Mercer Island, WA 98040 Justin Lagers; Avana Ridge, LLC; 9675 SE 36th St, Ste 105; Mercer Island, WA 98040 17249 Benson Rd 5 The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a multi-family development containing 74 units in two 4-story structures. The vacant 3.78 acre site is located within the Residential Multi-Family (RM-F) zoning classification and the Residential High Density (RHD) land use designation. The development would be comprised of two separate multi-family residential structures resulting in a density of 20.21 dulac. The subject site is fronted by three public rights-of-way: SE 172nd St, Benson Rd S (108th Ave SE) and Benson Drive S (SR-515). The applicant proposes one entrance off of SE 172 n' St between the proposed buildings, and another entrance off of Benson Road S. There is an unnamed stream, classified Ns, bisecting the site which runs from east to west. Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050, the applicant is proposing impacts to the stream buffer through buffer averaging. Additionally, the site contains critical slopes and Coal Mine Hazards. The Preliminary PUD would be used to vary street, building height, parking, design, open space, and retaining wall standards. The applicant has proposed to provide buffer enhancement as part of the proposed PUD public benefit, along with the construction of enhanced open space, pedestrian amenities, and landscaping. 164,827 SF Total Building Areo GSF: 92,899 SF Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M). EXHIBIT 1 Full Document Available upon Request Project Location Map ERe ReporCAvana Ridge PPUD_1S-000894.pdf I ! , , " , Q ~ ... ~ ... II i ;~ !-I<C ! i , i ~ ; I I I -' J I--______ ,~~, I I I I I I I 1 I I I I • , ..... ...J fun Document Availab1e upon Request 8> tS ;------,---"L _____ .J---, ~" IJe , , , 0;; 'v ~..:0> '1 , : ;-"'L __ .-,-__ , ,,---'l..-----r-""L __ ,---.l G B m-~;~~~LEV,6.noN~~ __ - q> <:il r--.''-__ J'' - L __ r--:'- ---, " (?'~ 9 (A)I~~ (~) (;.Ht'~ r;," .. -y'--~ rr--'i\---T -'" --~ \~~f~3E~ ~/§·~t~ .... "7 c~)(~) (~} ;;.-':::, '=' Z.~) I,-~) 016JXE~ IE~ I :1\ (i,-s: '.j ~.j (D:gr:~ @(~~~~X~~§ (i:X~) (N' (N"5' (6" \_.:J ,-,j '-.:_) Co)~~ (~) L ____________ . _H£r""' ....... I """''''1. _''*', .. rr; m L:J! l::J!wa; [J LTJ (M)(L) I - <~ r.;y;'r,~·, rvv, "'.:~\..KX_~"~'~' l~~)~·!)I\,J) -. -- c ... L 0 C: TI] ~""I T~l - 'P (1'5) (i"i rH./r1 "~oj "-./ \;,j ,'H3'i rH.1/ H> 'Z..> ~ __ /~_/ EXHIBIT 4 ,~:If;~_:_r .". [J. • ,J 1""""1 •.•. .J ::C?; :~~I L.. ~~~.SOUTItl;~~~___ --l~-: ., f~ (~X~ ~;~f €§{~~),c=~<c=~(~]@(~) m_· -, =:ro 1]::: 0 . -em_ li7'[J -L.. (-" r.~~ ("--"', "'~./ ,,~,~, 0j OVERAll lITE • NOIUH ELEVATION ~~-i.1";;·Q------· .... -- ~, ...... '. u -, til <lJ "' ...... " ..c • , ~ u .... "H ! rc • 0 ! ::J l' 0 '- bJ r.: AV~ARIDGE PLANNED URB,6J DEVELOPMENT 10616SE 172rld STREET. RENTON, WA 98055 c··~ ~cJ"' .. ,~-JI. '~l -~ r f-A~_~_ \ _," __ AV~A RIDGE, L OVERALL PROJECT ELEVATIONS __ Pl.WEII __ .- A3.01 / I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ~ \ I I I I r~---____ \ ------ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 3:Jal~ VN'VA'rI ~. ';'. ffi1 / t' # q 'I j .1 Il " . " !!i i • ~-0< 'I' I. IB! .: I,. Iii i' , I' I t I ,," 'j fl ,.,.1 "!i I, i !il' ~ 'i l a ,! j'!!jli '1'1 " , ,,,i. / / / • i 'j q. ' I: ! I, In l! .I! j' ~ ~.J id II "1:1 In !II n ~ ~ i I , :I 18 an !:; ra I-t ::c >< w Geotechnical Engineellng Geologv Environmental Sciennsts Construction Monitoring .. I~' . EXHIBIT 6 Full Document Available upon Request GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY AVANARIDGE 1805 - 10615 SOUTHEAST 172nd STREET RENTON, WASHINGTON ES-4147 ., '..-" .. . . ' . -, • . , Report Geological Engineering Services Coal Mine Bazard Assessment Cugini Property -Northwest Parcel Renton (King County), Washington . March 22, 20Q4 Project·No •. 0336-004 Prepared For: AJex Cugini Prepared By: Icicle Creek Engineers, Inc. Full Document Available upon Request EXHIBIT 7 Report Geotechnical Engineering Services Proposed Property Development Springbrook Ridge King County Tax Panel Nos. 2923059009 and 2023059148 Renton, Washington January 26, 2009 Project No. 0336-004 Prepared For: Alex Cugini Prepared By: Icicle Creek Engineers, Inc, Full Document Available upon Request EXHIBIT 8 Full Document Available upon Request Preliminary Technical Information Report (TIR) for AVANA RIDGE PUD 17249 Benson Road Sand 10615 SE 172nd Street Renton, Washington DRS Project No. Renton File No. 15088 PRE15·000611 Owner/Applicant Avana Ridge, LLC 9725 SE 36'h Street, Suite 214 Mercer Island, Washington 98040 Report Prepared by _i D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers, Inc. 620 ]'" Avenue Kirkland WA 98033 (425) 827-3063 <02015 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Report Issue Date December 28, 2015 EXHIBIT 9 December 22,2015 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA Sewall Wetland Consulting. Inc. ro Box 880 lliJne: 2.53S59{BI5 Fall Gty, W A 'HJ24 Full Document Available upon Request RE: Wetland and Supplemental Stream Study -Avana Ridge PUD City of Renton, Washington SWC Job #15-159 Dear Justin, This report describes our observations of jurisdictional wetlands, streams and buffers on or within 100' of the proposed Avana Ridge PUD project in the City of Renton, Washington (the "site"). Above: Vicinity Map of site EXHIBIT 10 n..--nl ___ ........ ___ '" I :~=:r------, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .' ~: ., ~ ~, -, • (lKIi6 'tM 'PUIISI Jnj~1N -li'I4S 'l19E 1~ !iL96 :m ~~NIQ1OH /Mill ooOlU!4!l1!M 'UCIlUIiIH and alPfH rueAV N\fld NOI.LVgl.LIW VlIIV1IIJI.LIIIJ - December 22, 2015 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9725 SE 36 th Street, Suite 214 Mercer Island, Washington 98040 RE: Habitat Data Report -Avana Ridge City of Renton, Washington SWC Job #15-159 Dear Justin, Sewall Wetland Consulting. Inc. RJBox880 Fall Gty, WA Sffl24 Phone: 2.Th'i5'J.{61S Full Document Available upon Request This report is in reference to the City of Renton's requirements for a Habitat Assessment for the Avana Ridge project. Above: Vicinity Map of site EXHIBIT 12 Greenforestlncorporated December 16, 2015 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Full Document Available upon Request RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA Dear Mr. Lagers: You contacted me and contracted my services as a consulting arborist. My assignment is to inspect and assess the condition of surveyed trees at the above referenced site. I received a topographic survey of the site from DR Strong Consulting Engineers, showing the locations of the surveyed trees. visited the site on 10/15/15 and inspected the trees, which are the subject of this report. Neither parcel is developed. The site has a SW aspect with a stream delineated through the center of the site, east to west. Both parcels are covered in native vegetation, predominately deciduous tree species with moderate to dense lower understory. TREE INSPECTION My inspection is limited to visual observation from the subject parcels and the rights-of-way. Both health and structure were evaluated. A tree's structure is distinct from its health. Structure is the way the tree is put together or constructed, and identifying obvious defects can be helpful in determining if a tree is predisposed to failure. Health addresses disease and insect infestation. No invasive procedures were performed on any trees. The results of this inspection are based on what is visible at the time ofthe inspection. I identified the species of each tree, confirmed trunk diameter (DBHl, estimated average dripline and rated the condition of each tree. Bigleaf maples on this site have a wide age and size range. The largest and oldest maple trees are generally in the poorest condition. A handful of bitter cherry are scattered throughout the site, and all are viable. Black cottonwoods dominate the site in numbers, and there are far more younger cottonwoods than older. The oldest and larger trees are in better condition overall. Many of cottonwoods as edge trees lean excessively away from the stand. Nearly all the smaller cottonwoods are very slender. Although they are healthy and have no visible defects, their trunks are too tall for 4547 South Lucile Street, Seattle, WA 98118 Tel. EXHIBIT 13 r-~ __ I ----____, 6' lii, "" "-I I I I I I I I I I I I !--::;;;y:7,CXJ 33'~~m:0I~ VNVA v XXXX-XXX :l~ "~ I ! , 1 Full Document Available upon Request AVANA RIDGE APARTMENTS REVISED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON Prepared for Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36th St Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Prepared by C!€ltfEx TRAFFIC EXP£RTS 11410 N.E. 1241h St., #590 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: 425.522.4118 February 2,2016 EXHIBIT 15 Full Document Available upon Request a Hiranaka b Radtke c Moss d Ridenour e Brooker f Goods g Byrnes h Miller i Yadock j Heine k Cantu I Reitz m Gray n McMullin o Murphy p Hanawalt q Skulstad r Faas 5 Cramton t Hanawalt u Miller v Vadock w cantu x y z ! j Daniel Juli and Mike Molly Daniel Emily Doug Genevieve Jerry Wendy Molly Caryn Phillip Andrew Kimmie Rhonda Rae lody Paul Mark Dawn Jody Jerry Wendy caryn l • 1/31/2016 f x X X 1/31/2016 E X X XXX X 1/31/2016 E x X X 1/31/2016 E X x X 1/31/2016 E X X 1/31/2016 E X X X X X 2/1/2016 E x x X 2/1/2016 E x X X 2/1/2016 E X X X X 2/1/2016 E X X 2/1/2016 £; X X X X X 2/1/2016 E x X X X X 2/1/2016 E X X 2/1/2016 E X X X 2/1/2016 E X X X 2/1/2016 E X X X X 2/2/2016 E x X 1/30/2016 E X X X 1/30/2016 E X X X 2/7/2016 E X 4/4/2016 l X X X 4/5/2016 E X X X 4/6/2016 E X X X X X EXHIBIT 16 Full Documerfo Available upon Re _ est ~TENW Transportation Engineering NorthWest MEMORANDUM DATE: March 21,2016 TO: Rocale Timmons, City of Renton -Current Planning, Senior Planner FROM: Michael Read, PE, Principal, TENW SUBJECT: Avana Ridge Traffic Impoct Study -Peer Review TENW Project No. 3462 This memorandum documents my review of the Avana Ridge Apartments Revised Traffic Impact Study. February 2, 2016, prepared by TroffEx, site plan and site access/frontage improvement plans prepared by DRS Consulting Engineers, and field work conducted in Februory 2016 related ta existing site frantage conditions, available sight distance, and a general field conditions to address trip distribution questions autlined by the City of Renton. Avana Ridge TIS Peer Review The follOWing is a general list of assumptions, methods, and conclusions I have verified or recommend verification and or modification in review of the Avana Ridge Apartments Revised TIS, February 2016: • The study applies standard trip generation rates as published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers in the Trip Generation Manual, 9 th Edition, consistent with standard practice. • The Irip distribution assumptions appear reasonable in general, although the overal! total in Figure 4 only indicates 99%. The total number of trips during the p.m. peak hour however, appear to be distributed to the proposed site access driveways. Given a majority of trips are expected to be distributed to/from the south, the "eqUitable distribution" of estimated trips currently assumed entering the site from SR 515 seems unlikely given that a majority of parking access will be accessed via the driveway onto Benson Road. A directional split should be identified between these two access points that reflects the "circuitous raute" afforded by SE 172nd Street versus the direct site entry onto Benson Road for both entering and exiting traffic. Also, the trip distribution figure should be adjusted to bener indicate the actual lacation of the entry driveway onto SE 172 nd Street limmediately east of 1 06th Avenue SEI. • Related to trip assignment, existing a,m, and p.m, peak hour traffic counts between SE 172nd Street and 108th Avenue SE should be balanced. In general, reported traffic counts at the proposed site access location are directionally higher along Benson Rood at 108th Avenue SE, Traffic operational analysis should consider the worsErCase scenario and given the intersection Transportation Planning I Design I Traffic Impact & Operations PO Box 65254,Seattte, WA 98155 I Office 1206) 361- EXHIBIT 17 Full Document TraFF&flr NORTH! A "I bl R 11410 NE 1241 val a e upon equest Phone; 425.5 Mr. Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC March 26, 2016 9675 SE 36th St. Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Re: Avana Ridge Apartments -City of Renton Memorandum -Revisions to TIA per Peer Review Dear Mr. Lagers: The purpose of this memo is to provide revisions to the Avana Ridge Traffic Impact Analysis per the recommendations in the March 21, 2016 Peer Review Memo prepared by TENW. The recommendations dealt with: • revising trip distribution and assignment due to a restricted site driveway access to SE 172nd St. and also the shorter trip length using the Benson Rd. driveway for south oriented trips • balancing traffic volumes between intersections • revising level of service calculations due to new trip distribution • evaluating traffic queues on Benson Rd. from the SR 515/Benson Rd. intersection • evaluating left turn lane warrants into the site access driveway from Benson Road. Trip Distribution and AsSignment Figures R1 and R2 show the revised trip distribution and assignment of site generated traffic in the AM and PM peak hours. The revisions reflect a restricted access to SE 172nd St. allowing only left turns into the site and right tums out of the site. A careful design of the site access driveway should effectively eliminate most site generated trips to the west on SE 172nd st. and to the north on 106th , 105th and Cedar Ave. Also, site generated trips oriented to the south were assigned to the Benson Rd. driveway since it provides a shorter route to SR 515 than the driveway to SE 172nd Street. Page 1 EXHIBIT 18 Denis Law Mayor C, r --=-........ """".,~ f - of • ~JJrf)ll April 15, 2016 Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chip· Vincent, Administrator Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPAl THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERe) on April 11, 2016: SEPA DETERMINATION: Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated (DNSM) PROJECT NAME: Avana Ridge PUD PROJECT NUMBER: LUA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before S:OO p.m. on April 29, 2016, together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. Please refer to the enclosed Notice of Environmental Determination for complete details. If you have questions, please call me at (425) 430-7219. For the Environmental Review Committee, Rocale Timmons Senior Planner Enclosure cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division Boyd Powers, Department of Natural Resources Karen Walter, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Melissa Calvert, Muckle.hoot Cultural Resources Program Gretchen Kaehler, Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Full Document Available upon Request Ramin Patooki, WSDOT, NW Region Larry Fisher, WDFW Duwamish Tribal Office US Army Corp. of Emllnfl~r .. EXHIBIT 20 Ith Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.goy ..."",,~~.------~ • r $ Cityof I ---""."...,."""""""'" r < r> r I r r ' r I -~ ____ .JI_) __ Department of Community and Economic Development Planning Division ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY/CODE INTERPRETATION ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY/CODE INTERPRETATION #: CI-73 -REVISED Full Document Available upon Request MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS: REFERENCE: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND: 4-2-110.A, 4-2-110.B, 4-2-110.D, 4-2-115, 4-11-020, and 4-11-230 Residential Building Height (RC thru RMF) Erratum Statement: CI-73 implemented changes to the method of height measurement for structures in the RC through RMF zones. This erratum statement affects the two-story limitation for R-14 zoned properties by increasing it to three. Docket #116 advocates for increased height and story limits for select zones, including the RMF zone. The R-14 zone is transitional between the R-10 and RMF, and therefore R-14 standards are intended to offer a compromise between the restrictions of the R-10 and the allowances of the RMF zone. By limiting wall plate height to 24' yet allowing three stories, the R-14 zone would provide an appropriate transition between the R-10 and RMF zones with respect to building height. By definition, the current method to determine a building's height is to measure the average height of the highest roof surface from the grade plane (i.e., average grade). The maximum height allowed in the RC through R-14 zones is 30 feet (35' in the RMF). The implementation of a "maximum height" (RMC 4-2-110.A) as applied to roofed buildings is inconsistent and contradictory with the intent and purpose statements of Title IV related to residential design (RMC 4-2-115). Further, regulating the height of non-roofed structures is unenforceable by Title IV (except for Building Code). The ambiguity and contradictory aspects of the code exist for two reasons: 1. Height is measured to the midpoint of a roof; and 2. Flat roofs are able to be as tall as buildings with pitched roofs, which increases the building's massing. H:\CED\Planning\Title IV\Docket\Admini,trative Policy Code Interpretation\CI-73\Code Int EXHIBIT 21 ~ !II -' -on !II C tT_ --tD C C 0 "CI n o c ~ 3 ;:atD tD ~ .c .... c tD III .... m >< ::::c 1-1 0:1 """ -I !'oJ !'oJ ~ -,--}(, I II II I ---,,-""." -"",,_ .... .----------- ~~T BUILDING FACING NORTHWEST ED mr BUILDING FACING SOuntEAST CD ~:1iI WEST BUILDING FACING SOUTIfWEST ~, WEST BUILDING FACING NORTHEAST 5C.'.L~ - ---- (l) ED .1 ...... ~1 u OJ i, ...... ~ ..c i~ u i~ '-I~ rc i D. :::J ~ 0 '- br ... ..:J AVANA RIDGE PLANNED URBAI DEVELOPMENT 10616SE 172nd STREET, RENTON, WA 911055 AVANA RIDGE, Ll ---........ lDNINGCDDE COMPLIANCE· WEST BUILDING ;;;;;---''',",'LD''G''''.' AO.06 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M 0 RAN DUM DATE: January 11, 2016 TO: Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner FROM: SUBJECT: Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager ~ Traffic Concurrency Test -Avana Ridge East and West; File No. B15008865 and B15008867 The applicant is requesting Building Permits for two apartment buildings under separate building permits. Avana Ridge East is 40 units (Permit No. B15008865) and Avana Ridge West is 34 units (Permit No. B15008867). The subject site is located at 10619 SE 1725nd Street. The vacant site is located within the Residential Multi-Family zoning classification. The proposed development would generate approximately 572 net new average weekday daily trips. During the weekday AM peak hour, the project would generate approximately 40 net new trips (8 inbound and 32 outbound). During the weekday PM peak hour, the project would generate approximately 58 net new trips (38 inbound and 20 outbound). The proposed project passes the City of Renton Traffic Concurrency Test per RMC 4-6-070.D as follows: Traffic Concurrency Test Criteria Implementation of citywide Transportation Plan Within allowed growth levels Project subject to transportation mitigation or impact fees Site specific street improvements to be completed by project Traffic Concurrency Test Passes Full Document Available upon Request EXHIBIT 23 Pass Yes Yes Yes Yes Rocale Timmons From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: earyn.ea ntu@comeast.net Wednesday, April 06, 2016 7:32 AM Roeale Timmons Re: LUA15-000894 Avana Ridge Apartments -Off Hold Follow up Flagged In reviewing the information provided for the project, I would like to bring up a few points for consideration. The letter from the Wetland Specialist is dated December 22, 2015 and the date of the site visit is not actually noted but I assume it was done pretty close to when the letter was written. My concern with this is that many species of plant and animal are dormant in winter and therefore key species could have been missed in a survey done during this time. It is concerning also that the stream, "degraded" quality as it may be, can still be filled and paved over and developed upon. There is a Douglas Fir tree located in close proximity to the Proposed Land Use sign that can be viewed from SE 172nd ST near 106th AVE SE. It has some characteristics of an older tree such as thick, deeply grooved bark. Would this tree qualify as a heritage tree or can it be attributed other protection? I have additional concerns related to the traffic study. My primary concern was that cut through traffic on 106th AVE SE was not addressed in the traffic study. With the driveways current placement, I believe the majority of traffic will be up and down this street. The study does not take into account the brand new Avana project which is close to completion and located at SE 172nd ST east of Benson RD. This project will be added a considerable number of cars to the already substantial traffic in the area. The traffic study is, for me, hard to read and make sense of. What I do see is in the Synchro 8 Light Report, toward the end of the report is 2 different locations that state "# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer". If volume already exceeds capacity (and I didn't need a study to tell me this, I drive it often enough), why add more volume until capacity can be increased? I've run out of time but I would like to add that I would like to see NO driveway to SE 172nd ST but instead driveways located on Benson RD and 515. I would also like to see adequate parking provided on site for the development without the need for street parking in our neighborhood. Thank you, Caryn Cantu From: "Rocale Timmons" <RTimmons@Rentonwa.gov> To: "kiyokazu3037@live.com" <kiyokazu3037@live.com>, "mjrocket88@msn.com" <mjrocket88@msn.com>, "Molly.Moss@rentonschools.us" <Molly.Moss@rentonschools.us>, 1 "danielridenour@gmail.com" <c. , .. elridenour@ gmail.com>, "emilybn erphotoaraphv@gmail.com" <emilybrookerphotography@gmail.com>, "g3ds@comcast.net" <g3ds@comcast.nel>, "gtremblay7@gmail.com" <gtremblay7@gmail.com>, "jmillernw@yahoo.com" <jmillernw@yahoo.com>, "wjy@att.net" <wjy@att.net>, "heinegirl@comcast.net" <heinegirl@comcast.net>, "caryn.cantu@comcast.net" <caryn. cantu @comcast.nel>, "reitzpl@msn.com" <reitzpl@msn.com>, "zosandrew@gmail.com" <zosandrew@gmail.com>, "wally.mcmullin@gmail.com" <wally.mcmullin@gmail.com>, "rhonda. rae@comcas!.net" <rhonda. rae @comcas!.net>, "jody320@gmail.com" <jody320@gmail.com>, "chinook@oz.net" <chinook@oz.net>, "mark.faas@gmail.com" <mark.faas@gmail.com>, "dvanmcr3@ hotmail.com" <dvanmcr3@hotmail.com>, "Cheryl Boudreau" <bostonboudreau @gmail.com> Cc: "Justin Lagers (justin@americanclassichomes.com)" <justin@americanclassichomes.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 20162:54:36 PM Subject: LUA15-000894 Avana Ridge Apartments -Off Hold Hello Interested Parties, Please see the attached Off-Hold Notice for the Avana Ridge Apartment Project. The City will now continue with the processing of the application. The Public Hearing has been tentatively scheduled for May 10,2016 at 11:00 am. Hard copies, of the attached letter, will be mailed out today to all parties of record. Also please note the City will not be holding another formal public comment period. However, please feel free to forward any additional comments to me. If provided to me prior to April 6th they will be considered as part of the City's Environmental Review. If received prior to April 29 th I am able to include in staffs recommendation to the Hearing Examiner. Please feel free to contact me with questions and/or requests for additional information. Thank you. Rocale Timmons City of Renton -Current Planning Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way Renton, W A 98057 Tel: (425) 430-7219 2 Fax: (425) 430-7300 1"1 ill) rlll)ll S ((l" rc n l{ lfl\\' a. uo\ 3 Jerry and Ana Miller PO Box 686 Renton, W A 98057 April 4, 2016 Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner City of Renton Rtimmons@rentonwa.gov RE: Land Use Number LUAI5-000894, ECF, PPUD AvanaRidge Dear Rocale, Thank you for providing the recommendations from TENW and the response from TraftEx. I would like to add my own comments regarding some of the recommendations and I also have a few questions that I did not see addressed in the reports. My family and I live directly in front of the proposed project site on the north side ofSE 172nd . Our driveways are located just to the east of the proposed access to the site on 1 72nd . We have lived at this residence since 1988. The decisions that will be made concerning the design of access to the proposed development could have a profoundly negative impact on the safety and well being that we have enjoyed over the past 28 years. I would like to express my concern about the recommendation from TraffEx to restrict movements from "left in/right out" onto SE 172nd to the proposed development. The stated purpose in the recommendations is to reduce traffic to or from the west on SE 172nd or to the north on I06th Ave SE. I do not believe it would be effective in achieving that goal for the following reasons. For drivers headed to the north or west, it is more advantageous to JO 172nd westbound or I06th northbound than it is to use the intersection of SE 172 and Benson Rd. It will not take long for new residents to realize this reality. If drivers are forced to exit to the east from the site, it is very easy to use my driveway as a turnaround point and return to the west. The same condition would apply to those returning from the north. Currently, I get several cars a day using my driveway as a turn around just from the daycare center and school bus stop users alone. These are cars that are entering from Benson Rd to the east and turning around so they can park on the south side of 172nd in front of the daycare center. The daycare driveway also gets a considerable amount of U- turns. Ifthe proposed driveway restrictions are utilized on the site, I would expect the number of U-turns through our driveways to increase significantly. That will most likely lead to injuries and property damage. I am very careful when pulling out of my driveway as sometimes cars come up 172nd at high speed. Although the speed limit is 25mph, that limit is often exceeded. I have noticed that not everyone who uses my driveway as a turn around is as careful as I am. I very rarely use the intersection of Benson and 172nd to turn left if my destination is northbound (never during high traffic hours). Even with current traffic conditions, it is 1 much easier and safer to travel west on 172 nd through Victoria Hills on Cedar and enter northbound Benson Rd at the stop light on S. 26 th St., or enter northbound 515 at the Victoria Hills entry/exit. Once the new development (currently under construction of 168 apartment units) is completed on the east side of Benson at 172nd, the intersection will be even more difficult for making left turns from the west. I will most likely avoid it completely even though it is the closest intersection. Anyone who will reside in the new apartments will quickly learn the easiest routes to get into and out of the neighborhood. A simple U-turn into my driveway will be much easier than waiting to make a left turn at a bottlenecked intersection. Question: • Why was an entry/exit from the proposed site directly onto SR515 not recommended? The recommendation for this access was included in the plans for the Springbrook Ridge development of the same property in 2009. It would make much more sense to have traffic flow directly onto the adjacent developed major roadway than to have it dispersed through a neighborhood with antiquated streets and no sidewalks or streetlights. I did not see this even suggested in the two traffic studies. I do not agree with the assumption in the traffic impact reports that the access driveway on Benson Rd would not be blocked by southbound traffic stopped by the light at SR515 and Benson Rd. Many times during the peak afternoons, southbound traffic on Benson is backed up to north of SE 172nd as cars wait for the light onto southbound SR 515. Synchronization would have little effect since the backup is due to heavy volume southbound on SR 515 which is stopped due to the difficulty getting through the intersection of SR 515 and Carr Rd. Even on a green light, a limited amount of cars are able to merge onto SR 515 from Benson Rd. during peak traffic. The traffic impact studies provide analysis and make assumptions on projected use based on technical data. What I feel is a major omission in the impact studies is data from current residents. I did not see opinions from local drivers in either study. The data would be of much greater value to detemrine what the actual driving habits will be for future residents of the neighborhood if the driving habits of existing residents were included in the reports. The routes taken by futurc residents would most likely conform to routes taken by existing residents unless major improvements are made to road conditions. If major improvements were made to the intersection of SE 172 Dd and Benson Rd so that traffic flowed efficiently, there would be no need to impose a forced "left in/right out" access at the site. Drivers will use that route only if it is more efficient and safe. I believe that can only be achieved by widening the street, installing a traffic light and a left turn lane. I drive through Victoria Hills to use the traffic light at S. 26th because it is more efficient and it is safer. I would also like to note that the studies refer to the existing conditions of the roadways only at the frontages of the proposed development and do not refer to the conditions of the surrounding streets and access routes. If! have missed any information that might be in the documents you have sent to me that refer to those conditions or recommendations, please let me know. 2 The first TraftEx report dated 12/21115 indicates that SE 172nd Street has been classified by the City of Renton as Commercial Mixed Use. It is my understanding that this classification requires as a minimum standard for a two-lane street to be 69 feet wide. The existing property survey markers from the north east comer of the l,roposed development to the marker directly across to the north side of SE 172 n St. is a distance of 59 feet. This conforms to the designated width for the street right of way before the City of Renton annexed the area. The existing parking curb on the south side of SE l72nd at the intersection with Benson Rd. extending west to the NE comer of the proposed development is located 27 feet from the property marker (and the culvert) on the north side of 172nd • As cars use this curb for parking, the effective use of the roadway at this intersection is reduced to 17 feet. This does not come close to minimum standards for a Commercial Mixed Use road. It is this section of 172nd that is proposed for the main access route to the site if the "left in/right out" diversion is utilized. Questions: • Does the City have any intention of improving the entire street to meet the minimum requirements for the upgraded Commercial Mixed Use classification, or is the classification in name only? • If the City does plan to improve the street to meet the minimum requirements, where does the extra ten feet of land come from and which property owners will be impacted? Thank you for your allowing us to express our concerns. Hopefully, decisions will be made that will benefit the safety and well being of all existing and future residents of this neighborhood. Sincerely Jerry and Ana Miller 3 Rocale Timmons From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Hello Wendy (and David), Rocale Timmons Tuesday, April OS, 2016 1:28 PM 'wjy@att.net' 'dyadock@fredhutch.org' RE: LUA1s-000894 Avana Ridge Apartments -Off Hold Follow up Flagged I don't have a response for the comments below at this time other than the secondary review was based on sound traffic engineering principles and may not be a complete reflection of your past experiences. I will attempt to get some additional context for the comments. If and when I do I will make sure to informally respond. Thank you for forwarding over. Feel free to let me know if you have any other questions or comments. Rocale Timmons From: wjy@att.net [mailto:wjy@att.netj Sent: Tuesday, April OS, 2016 12:52 PM To: Rocale Timmons Subject: Fw: LUA15-000894 Avana Ridge Apartments -Off Hold Rocale, Please read comments below. On Tuesday, April 5, 2016 12:34 PM, "Yadock. David J" <dyadock@fredhutch.org> wrote: Wendy, Maybe I missed this but one problem the TENW traffic review did not address is that they made the assumption the traffic will outlet to Benson by going east. They do not even suggest that some or maybe the majority of traffic will disburse by heading north (second bullet point under TIS peer review) though the neighborhood(s). That is an incorrect assumption since if you have some residents heading off to work and they go north, they will then choose the shortest route down 172nd to 104'h and then out the neighborhoods directly north. Another incorrect assumption is that residents returning from the north will travel on SR 515 and then turn onto Benson to gain access to the apartment. The TIS peer review failed to notice or even check the traffic back-ups along SR 515 during the evening rush hour(s). Residents would by default use the path of least resistance and the least traffic. Perhaps I missed it but I did not see when (time of day) that this traffic review was conducted. If you can please forward this email to Rocale Timmons. She may have further information that was not provided in the email she sent out to you. 1 David David Yadock Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Heimfeld Lab Manager DE-554 1100 Fairview Ave N Seattle, WA 98109 206-667-4609 206-667-1258 (fax) 206-314-8141 (pager) From: wjy@att.net [mailto:wjy@att.netl Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2016 11 :56 AM To: Yadock, David J Subject: Fw: LUA 15-000B94 Avana Ridge Apartments -Off Hold On Tuesday, April 5, 2016 9:46 AM, Rocale Timmons <RTimmons@Rentonwa.qov>wrote: Hello Cathryn, Not all parties were interested in Traffic so it was not attached to my last email. I added the note at the bottom to encourage those who were interested to request additional information. The recommendations from TENW are attached to this email along with the response from the applicant. City staff will review both documents, and all other submittal materials including public comments, and provide a recommendation regarding traffic to the Hearing Examiner in a written report one week prior to the public hearing. Please note that the Environmental Review Committee will be issuing an Environmental Determination, in advance of the staff report to the Hearing Examiner, which may contain mitigation measures/conditions of approval regarding Transportation. Conditions will only be applied if there are not Renton Municipal Code requirements which would address impacts. Code requirements which address impacts will be included in the staff report to the Hearing Examiner and ultimately in the Hearing Examiner's decision. Feel free to let me know if you have any additional questions. Thank you. Rocale Timmons From: caryn.cantu@comcast.net [mailto:caryn.cantu@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2016 9:37 AM To: Rocale Timmons Cc: kiyokazu3037@live.com; mailto:mjrocketBB@msn.com; Molly Moss; danielridenour@qmail.com; emilybrookerphotography@gmail.com; g3ds@comcast.net; mailto:gtremblay7@gmail.com; imillernw@yahoo.com; wjy@att.net; mailto:heinegirl@comcast.net; reitzpl@msn.com; mailto:zosandrew@gmail.com; wally mcmullin; rhonda rae; mailto:jody320@gmail.com; chinook@oz.net; mark faas; dvanmcr3@hotmail.com; Cheryl Boudreau; Justin Lagers (justin@arnericanclassichomes.com) Subject: Re: LUA15-000B94 Avana Ridge Apartments -Off Hold Hello Rocale. In the you sent with the attached letter to Justin Lagers it states "In addition, you have also provided a memo, dated March 26, 2016, in response to the recommendations included in the 2 secondary review." Can you prle the information on these recom . ldations or any changes to the Avana Ridge project that have been proposed since the one I initially received January 31st? Thank you. Caryn Cantu From: "Rocale Timmons" <RTimmons@Rentonwa.gov> To: "kiyokazu3037@live.com" <kiyokazu3037@live.com>, "mjrocket88@msn.com" <mjrocket88@msn.com>, "Molly. Moss @rentonschools.us" <Molly.Moss@rentonschools.us>, "danielridenou r@gmail.com" <danielridenour@gmail.com>, "emilybrookerphotography@gmail.com" <emilybrookerphotography@gmail.com>, "g3ds@comcast.net" <g3ds@comcas!.net>, "gtremblay7@gmail.com" <gtremblay7@gmail.com>, "jmillernw@yahoo.com" <jmillernw@yahoo.com>, "wjy@att.net" <wjy@att.net>, "heinegirl@comcas\.net" <heinegirl@comcas!.net>, "caryn.cantu@comcas\.net" <caryn .cantu@comcas!.net>, "reitzpl@msn.com" <reitzpl@msn.com>, "zosandrew@gmail.com" <zosandrew@gmail.com>, "wally.mcmullin@gmail.com" <wally.mcmullin@gmail.com>, "rhonda.rae@comcast.net" <rhonda.rae@comcast.net>, "jody320@gmail.com" <jody320@gmail.com>, "chinook@oz.net" <ch inook@oz.net>, "mark.faas@gmail.com" <mark.faas@gmail.com>, "dvanmcr3@hotrnail.com" <dvanmcr3@hotmail.com>, "Cheryl Boudreau" <bostonboudreau @gmail.com> Cc: Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 2:54:36 PM Subject: LUA15-000894 Avana Ridge Apartments -Off Hold Hello Interested Parties, Please see the attached Off-Hold Notice for the Avana Ridge Apartment Project. The City will now continue with the processing of the application. The Public Hearing has been tentatively scheduled for May 10, 2016 at 11 :00 am. Hard copies, of the attached letter, will be mailed out today to all parties of record. Also please note the City will not be holding another formal public comment period. However, please feel free to forward any additional comments to me. If provided to me prior to April 6th they will be considered as part of the City's Environmental Review. If received prior to April 29 th I am able to include in staff's recommendation to the Hearing Examiner. Please feel free to contact me with questions and/or requests for additional information. Thank you. Rocale Timmons City of Renton -Current Planning Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Tel: (425) 430-7219 Fax: (425) 430-7300 rtimmons@rentonwa.gov 3 April 15, 2016 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36 th St, Ste 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Ch ip"Vi ncent, Adm i n i strator SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Avana Ridge PUD, LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Dear Mr. Lagers: This letter is written on behalf ofthe Environmental Review Committee (ERe) to advise you that they have completed their review of the subject project and have issued a threshold Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated with Mitigation Measures. Please refer to the enclosed ERC Report, for a list of the Mitigation Measures. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on April 29, 2016, together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, (42S) 430-6510. Ifthe Environmental Determination is appealed, a public hearing date will be set and all parties notified. Also, a public hearing has been scheduled by the Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of City Hall on May 10, 2016 at 11:00 am to consider the Preliminary PUD. The applicant or representative(s) ofthe applicant is required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff recommendation will be mailed to you prior to the hearing. If the Environmental Determination is appealed, the appeal will be heard as part of this public hearing. Renton City Han • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov • Error! Reference source not found. Page 2 of2 April 15, 2016 If you have any further questions, please call me at (425) 430-7219. For the Environmental Review Committee, Rocale Timmons Senior Planner Enclosure cc: Avana Ridge, LLC I Owner!s) Molly Helen, Daniel Ridenour, Dan Russell, Philip Reitz, Emily Brooker, Genevieve Byrnes, Caryn Cantu, Wendy Yadock, Debra Russell, Kimmie McMullin, Dan Palner, Andrew Gray, Bruce & Nancy Stanley, Daniel Hiranaka, Rhanda Rae Murphy, HA Chau, Mike & Julie Radtke, Molly Moss, Scott Pettet, Mark Faas, Jody Hanawalt, Jerry Miller, Doug Goods, Carine Kumano, I Party!ies) of Record ERG Detennination Ltr DNSM_Avana Ridge_15-000864 Denis Law __ .....:M:aYOC_---".,.~$ r 'l --...; ..... , April 15, 2016 Community & Economic Development Department Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 CE,"Chip"Vincent, Administrator Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPAl THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERe) on April 11, 2016: SEPA DETERMINATION: Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated (DNSM) PROJECT NAME: Avana Ridge PUD PROJECT NUMBER: LUA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Appeals ofthe environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before S:OO p.m. on April 29, 2016, together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. Please refer to the enclosed Notice of Environmental Determination for complete details. If you have questions, please call me at (425) 430-7219. For the Environmental Review Committee, Rocale Timmons Senior Planner Enclosure cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division Boyd Powers, Department of Natural Resources Karen Walter, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Melissa Calvert, Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program Gretchen Kaehler, Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Ramin Pazooki, WSDOT, NW Region larry Fisher, WDFW Duwamish Tribal Office US Army Corp, of Engineers Renton City Hall .. 1055 South Grady Way .. Renton, Washington 98057 .. rentonwa.gov DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL {SEPAl DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS-M) PROJECT NUMBER: LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF APPLICANT: Justin Lagers, Avana Ridge, LLC PROJECT NAME: Avana Ridge PUD PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a multi-family development containing 74 units in two 4-story structures. The vacant 3.78 acre site is located within the Residential Multi-Family (RM-F) zoning classification and the Residential High Density (RHD) land use designation. The development would be comprised of two separate multi-family residential structures resulting in a density of 20.21 dulac. The subject site is fronted by three public rights-of-way: SE 172nd St, Benson Rd S (108th Ave SE) and Benson Drive S (SR- 515). The applicant proposes one entrance off of SE 172,d St between the proposed buildings, and another entrance off of Benson Road S. There is an unnamed stream, classified Ns, bisecting thesite which runs from east to west. Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050, the applicant is proposing impacts to the stream buffer through buffer averaging. Additionally, the site contains critical slopes and Coal Mine Hazards. The Preliminary PUD would be used to vary street, building height, parking, design, open space, and retaining wall standards. The applicant has proposed to provide buffer enhancement as part of the proposed PUD public benefit, along with the construction of enhanced open space, pedestrian amenities, and landscaping. PROJECT LOCATION: 17249 Benson Rd S LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under their authority of Section 4-9-070D Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. Because other agencies of jurisdiction may be involved, the lead agency will not act on this proposal for fourteen (14) days. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on April 29, 2016. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and more information may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PUBLICATION DATE: DATE OF DECISION: SIGNATURES: Kelly Beymer, Administrator Community Services Department APRIL 15, 2016 APRI L 11, 2016 cf / iJ lib r ' Date Date Fire & Emergency Services C'CC. \J,' 4 C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Department of Community & Economic Development #&- Date Date DEPARTMENT OF COI'vIlv1UNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNSM) MITIGATION MEASURES AND ADVISORY NOTES PROJECT NUMBER: LUA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF APPLICANT: Justin Lagers, Avana Ridge, LLC PROJECT NAME: Avana Ridge PUD PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a multi-family development containing 74 units in two 4-story structures. The vacant 3.78 acre site is located within the Residential Multi-Family (RM-F) zoning classification and the Residential High Density (RHD) land use designation. The development would be comprised of two separate multi- family residential structures resulting in a density of 20.21 dulac. The subject site is fronted by three public rights-of-way: SE 172nd St, Benson Rd S (108th Ave SE) and Benson Drive S (SR- 515). The applicant proposes one entrance off of SE 172nd St between the proposed buildings, and another entrance off of Benson Road S. There is an unnamed stream, classified Ns, bisecting the site which runs from east to west. Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050, the applicant is proposing impacts to the stream buffer through buffer averaging. Additionally, the site contains critical slopes and Coal Mine Hazards. The Preliminary PUD would be used to vary street, building height, parking, design, open space, and retaining wall standards. The applicant has proposed to provide buffer enhancement as part of the proposed PUD public benefit, along with the construction of enhanced open space, pedestrian amenities, and landscaping. PROJECT LOCATION: LEAD AGENCY: MITIGATION MEASURES: 17249 Benson Rd S The City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division 1. An updated Coal Mine Hazard Report shall be submitted demonstrating the proposal will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre-development conditions and the development can be safely accommodated on the site. The report shall also discuss any measures employed in the final site/building design which serve to mitigate coal mine subsidence risk. If no measures are employed, the applicant shall provide justification for the exclusion of additional measures. The updated Coal Mine Hazard Report shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. 2. One (1) Electronic Speed Radar Sign shall be installed in the northbound direction on both 106th Ave SE and 104th Ave SE. The applicant shall install the signs, mounting poles, and associated eqUipment, at the direction ofthe City. All improvements shall be included in the engineering permit submittal for review and approval, and shall be constructed prior to temporary occupancy. 3. The applicant shall provide an off-site sidewalk, along the south side of 5E 172nd 5t and the west side of Benson Rd 5, approaching the intersection. The width of the off-site sidewalks shall be consistent with the widths proposed along the frontage of the subject site. ADA ramps shall also be constructed at the southwest corner of the intersection. Finally, a street lighting analysis is required to be conducted by the developer at the southwest corner of the intersection of 5E 172nd 5t and Benson Rd 5. If necessary, required street lighting shall be provided according to City standards. All improvements shall be included in the engineering permit submittal for review and approval, and shall be constructed prior to temporary occupancy. ADIVISORY NOTES: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions. ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes are provided as in/ormation only, they are not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions. Planning: 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Commercial, multi-family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 3. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1st and March 31st of each year. The Development Services Oivision's approval of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of the permit. 4. A National Permit Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required when more than one acre is being cleared. S. The applicant will be required to submit a Final Stream Mitigation Report and Maintenance and Monitoring proposal. In addition, the applicant will be required to comply with all the code requirements of RMC 4-3-050 Critical Areas. This includes, but is not limited to, placing the critical area within a Native Growth Protection Easement, providing fencing and signage, and providing the City with a site restoration surety device and, later, a maintenance and monitoring surety device. 6. The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any eqUipment, dispose of any materials, supplies or fluids, operate any equipment, install impervious surfaces, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. 7. The applicant shall erect and maintain six-foot (6') high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees, or along the perimeter of a stand of retained trees. Placards shall be placed on ERe Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 2 of 3 fencing every fifty feet (50') indicating the words, "NO TRESPASSING -Protected Trees" or on each side of the fencing if less than fifty feet (50'). Site access to individually protected trees or groups of trees shall be fenced and signed. Individual trees shall be fenced on four (4) sides. In addition, the applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. 8. This permit is shall comply with the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. The permitted is responsible for adhering to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (2007) and lor your U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service permit. Water: 1. Water Service is provided by Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. 2. A water availability certificate from the Soos Creek utility was submitted to the City with the land use application. 3. Approved water plans from Soos Creek should be provided during utility construction permit review. Sewer: 1. Sewer Service is provided by Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. 2. A sewer availability certificate from the Soos Creek utility was submitted to the City with the land use application. 3. Approved sewer plans from Soos Creek should be provided during utility construction permit review. Drainage: 1. A geotechnical report for the site prepared by Earth Solutions Inc. was submitted for the project. The geotechnical report mentions that the soil is till soil and is not suitable for infiltration. All geotechnical recommendations shall be followed. 2. A Construction Storm water General Permit from Department of Ecology is required since grading and clearing of the site exceeds one acre 3. Surface water system development charge fee is $0.594 per square foot of new impervious surface area, but not less than $1,485.00. This fee is subject to change at the rate that is applicable at the time of issuance of the utility construction permit will be applicable. Transportation: 1. The maximum slope back of sidewalk is 4H: 1Vfor minimum 3 feet back of the sidewalk. 2. The corner curb ramps at all street intersections adjacent to the site should be ADA compliant. ADA also requires matching ADA compliant curb ramps on the other side of the intersection. 3. The site is proposed to be accessed via driveways from Benson Road South and SE 172nd Street. Please refer to RMC 4-4-080 for driveway design standards Including location, grade, and width. 4. Street lighting is required to be provided on the frontage streets by the project. 5. The City of Renton Trench restoration and Street overlay requirements will be applicable for any work in the public right of way. Parks: 1. Park Impact Fees per Ordinance 5670 applies. 2. Street trees -Ginkgo on SR 515; Ash on Benson Rd. 5.; Elm on SE 172nd. Space minimum distance of 50 feet apart and not close than 30 feet from street lights (not all lights are shown on plans). Potential for one to two more street trees at NE corner of SR515 & Benson Rd. Use only Ginko, Elm, and Ash as street trees. 3. Planting Strip: require a continuous planting strip along all streets, then Sidewalk; plan does not show this. Dangerous, fast traffic requires that a planting strip buffer pedestrians from roadway. 4. Parking lot: some islands are too small for trees; use only vine maple or smaller in those areas. General: 1. All construction or service utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. Plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. When utility plans are complete, please submit four (4) copies of the drawings, two (2) copies of the drainage report, permit application, an itemized cost of construction estimate, and application fee at the counter on the sixth fioor. ERe Mitigation Measures and AdviSOry Notes Page 3 of 3 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUI\" " AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT • CITYOF ~ ---------Renton v ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITIEE REPORT ERC MEETING DATE: Project Nome: Project Number: Project Manager: Owner: Contact: Project Location: Project Summary: Site Area: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: April 11, 2016 Avana Ridge PUD LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner Avana Ridge, LLC; 9675 SE 36th 5t, Ste 105; Mercer Island, WA 98040 Justin Lagers; Avana Ridge, LLC; 9675 SE 36th St, Ste 105; Mercer Island, WA 98040 17249 Benson Rd S The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a multi-family development containing 74 units in two 4-story structures. The vacant 3.78 acre site is located within the Residential Multi-Family (RM-F) zoning classification and the Residential High Density (RHD) land use designation. The development would be comprised of two separate multi-family residential structures resulting in a density of 20.21 dulac. The subject site is fronted by three public rights-of-way: SE 172nd St, Benson Rd S (108th Ave SE) and Benson Drive S (SR-515). The applicant proposes one entrance off of SE 172"d St between the proposed buildings, and another entrance off of Benson Road S. There is an unnamed stream, classified Ns, bisecting the site which runs from east to west. Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050, the applicant is proposing impacts to the stream buffer through buffer averaging. Additionally, the site contains critical slopes and Coal Mine Hazards. The Preliminary PUD would be used to vary street, building height, parking, design, open space, and retaining wall standards. The applicant has proposed to provide buffer enhancement as part of the proposed PUD public benefit, along with the construction of enhanced open space, pedestrian amenities, and landscaping. 164,827 SF Total Building Area GSF: 92,899 SF Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated IONS-MI. Project Location Map ERe Report City of Renton Department of Community & AVANA RIDGE PUD Report of April 11, 2016 m;c Development PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION I BACKGROUND vironmenta/ Review Committee Report LUA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Page 2 of 13 The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development (PPUD) and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a multi-family development containing 74 units, in two 4-story structures. During our review, staff determined additional information was necessary in order to proceed. On February 15, 2016 the project was placed on hold pending receipt of an Independent Secondary Review of the provided Traffic StUdy. The applicant submitted all necessary documentation and on March 30, 2016 the project was taken off hold. Submittals included an Independent Secondary Review of the provided Traffic Study prepared by TENW, dated March 21, 2016 (Exhibit 17). In addition, the applicant also provided a memo, dated March 26, 2016, in response to the recommendations included in the secondary review (Exhibit 18). The project site is located on the northwesterly corner of the intersection of Benson Drive S and Benson Rd S. The site is triangularly shaped and consists of two separate tax parcels (parcel #292305-9009 and #292305-9148), totaling 164,828 square feet in area (3.78 acres). The site is located within the Residential Multi-Family (RM-F) zoning classification and the Residential High Density (RHO) Comprehensive Plan land use designation. Surrounding uses include: a daycare facility abutting the property to the east (zoned RM-F); existing single family residences to the north (zoned R-8); southeast of the site, along 108th Ave SE, a vacant parcel (zoned RM-F); and across Benson Drive S, to the west, uses consists of multi-family, public storage, and a dental office (zoned CAl· The subject site is currently undeveloped with a ground cover of second growth conifer, deciduous trees and brush. The development would be comprised of two separate multi-family residential structures resulting in a density of 20.21 dulac. The proposed 74 units would be comprised of (28) I-bedroom units, (29) 2-bedroom units, and (17) 3- bedroom units. Access to the site is proposed via SE 172'd St, between the east and west buildings, and another ingress/egress point via Benson Rd S. The two access points create a through road for emergency vehicle ingress/egress across the property. The proposal is served by a surface parking area to the south of the two structures, flanking the main access drive. A total of 94 parking stalls would be provided in the surface parking area. An additional 20-parking stalls would be provided along the street. An unnamed seasonal stream, characterized as Ns pursuant to RMC 4-3-050, bisects the northern and southern portions of the site and runs east to west. The applicant is proposing buffer averaging pursuant to RMC 4-3-050. A Wetland and Supplemental Stream Study was performed by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. on December 22, 2015 (Exhibit 10). An historic coal mine, known as the Springbrook mine, as well as its associated opening is also located on the site near the south property line. The coal mine is designated as a High Coal Mine Hazard pursuant to RMC 4- 3-050. A Coal Mine Hazard Assessment was performed by Icicle Creek Engineers, Inc. on March 22, 2004 and January 20,2009 (Exhibits 7 and 8). Additionally, there are critical slopes located on site. The applicant is proposing the construction of a large 19,795 square foot landscaped community open space at the southern portion of the site. The community open space incorporates active and passive space, with a central connecting sidewalk which links the open space to the public right of way. A central path and complementing pedestrian bridge crossing is proposed to be constructed to create an access point to the community open space from the surface parking lot. There are a total of 429 trees on site of which 46 trees are proposed to be retained outside of the critical area and buffer. Preliminary earthwork for the proposal includes 11,000 cubic yards of excavation and 3,250 yards of fill. I The Preliminary PUD would be used to modify parking, street, open space, retaining wall, building height, and design standards. The applicant has proposed to preserve the stream onsite, provide additional buffer, create a large public amenity space as part of the proposed PUD public benefit, along with enhanced pedestrian and vehicular circulation, pedestrian amenities, and landscaping. Construction of the development is anticipated to begin in May of 2016 and would be completed in July of 2017. ERCRepon City of Renton Department oj Community & AVANA RIDGE PUD omic Development Ivironmenta/ Review Committee Report WA1S·000894, PPUD, ECF Report of April 11, 2016 Page 3 of 13 Staff received several traffic related comments/concerns. Also included in the comments letters were concerns related to: access, open space, street improvements, drainage, wildlife, density, and quality of life (Exhibit 16). Non- Environmental 'SEPA' Review concerns will only be addressed as part of staff's recommendation to the City's Hearing Examiner for the Preliminary PUD and are not included in this report. Non·SEPA concerns include, but are not limited to the following: zoning, permitted uses, density, construction mitigation/traffic control, crime, landscaping, access, parking, retaining walls, setbacks, utilities, public services, and home sizes. Studies provided by the applicant include a stormwater report, traffic study, habitat assessment, wetland and supplemental stream study, arborist report, geotechnical and a coal mine hazard report. ~ PART TWO: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In compliance with RCW 43.21C.240, the following environmental (SEPA) review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. A. Environmental Threshold Recommendation Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials: Issue a DNS·M with a 14-day Appeal Period. B. Mitigation Measures c. l. An updated Coal Mine Hazard Report shall be submitted demonstrating the proposal will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre-development conditions and the development can be safely accommodated on the site. The report shall also discuss any measures employed in the final site/building design which serve to mitigate coal mine subsidence risk. If no measures are employed, the applicant shall provide justification for the exclusion of additional measures. The updated Coal Mine Hazard Report shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. 2. One (1) Electronic Speed Radar Sign shall be installed in the northbound direction on both 106th Ave SE and 104th Ave SE. The applicant shall install the signs, mounting poles, and associated equipment, at the direction of the City. All improvements shall be included in the engineering permit submittal for review and approval, and shall be constructed prior to temporary occupancy. 3. The applicant shall provide an off-site sidewalk, along the south side of SE 172"d St and the west side of Benson Rd S, approaching the intersection. The width of the off·site sidewalks shall be consistent with the widths proposed along the frontage of the subject site. ADA ramps shall also be constructed at the southwest corner of the intersection. Finally, a street lighting analysis is required to be conducted by the developer at the southwest corner of the intersection of SE 172"d St and Benson Rd S. If necessary, required street lighting shall be provided according to City standards. All improvements shall be included in the engineering permit submittal for review and approval, and shall be constructed prior to temporary occupancy. Exhibits Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 Exhibit 6 Exhibit 7 ERC Report Site Plan , landscape Plan Elevations Grading Plan Geotechnical Report, prepared by Earth Solutions NW (dated December 21,2015) Coal Mine Hazard Study, prepared by Icicle Creek Engineers (dated March 22, 2004) ERCReport City of Renton Department of Community & AVANA RIDGE PUD omic Development vironmental Review Committee Report WA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of April 11, 2016 Exhibit 8 Exhibit 9 Exhibit 10 Exhibit 11 Exhibit 12 Exhibit 13 Exhibit 14 Exhibit 15 Exhibit 16 Exhibit 17 Exhibit 18 Page 4 of 13 Coal Mine Hazard Study, prepared by Icicle Creek Engineers (dated January 20,2009) Drainage Report, prepared by D.R. Strong (dated December 28,2015) Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting (dated December 22, 2015) Conceptual Stream Mitigation Plan prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting (December 28,2015) Habitat Data Report, prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting (dated December 22, 2015) Arborist Report, prepared by Greenforest Inc. (dated December 16, 2015) Tree Retention Plan Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), prepared by TraffEx (dated February 2, 2016) Public Comment Letters/Emails Independent Secondary Review -Traffic Study, prepared by TenW (dated March 21, 2016) Response Memo -Independent Secondary Review, prepared by Traffex (dated March 26,2016) D. Environmentallmpacts The Proposal was circulated and reviewed by various City Departments and Divisions to determine whether the applicant has adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to occur in conjunctian with the proposed development. Stoff reviewers have identified that the proposal is likely to have the following probable impacts: 1. Earth Impacts: The site can best be characterized as hilly generally sloping south toward the stream on site and Benson Drive S. Slopes on-site range from 8 to 15% with a topographic relief of approximately 35 feet. The steepest slope on the site is approximately 20% in the proximity of the stream on site. The applicant is proposing excavation in the amount of approximately 11,000 cubic yards. Approximately 3,250 cubic yards of fill is proposed, of which 1,000 cubic yards would be imported structured fill. Following construction the applicant is proposing an impervious cover of approximately 53% of the net site area, minus right-of-way dedications and the stream on site. Less than 40% impervious cover is proposed when using the gross site area. The applicant submitted a Geotechnical Report prepared by Earth Solutions NW, dated December 21, 2015 (Exhibit 6). The report states that there are no geotechnical conditions on site which would preclude the proposed development and the development would likely be supported by conventional foundations. The soils on site were classified as Vashon till, beginning at approximately 2 to 6 feet below grade. Bedrock was encountered approximately 22 to 43 feet below grade. No groundwater seepage was found by Earth Solutions NW. However, groundwater seepage was encountered by Icicle Creek Engineers during their field viSit, for the coal mine hazard analysis, at one to two feet below grade (Exhibit 7). Therefore, perched seepage zones are anticipated during construction depending on the time of year grading activities take place. The geotechnical report includes specific recommendations in order to mitigate potential geotechnical impacts including: site preparation, structural fill, foundations, drainage considerations, hazards including, and project design and monitoring. The applicant will be required to comply with the recommendations included in the provided Geotechnical Engineering Report (Exhibit 6). A coal mine was operated historically within the southern portion of the site, along the southwesterly property line. According to the Coal Mine Hazard Study, prepared by Icicle Creek Engineers on January 26, ERCReport City of Renton Department of Community & AVANA RIDGE PUD Report of April 11, 2016 omic Development nvironmental Review Committee Report LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Page 5 of 13 2009, the coal mine is designated a High Coal Mine Hazard (CH) as defined by RMC 4-3-050 (Exhibit 8). The classification was affirmed by Earth Solutions NW in the provided Geotechnical Report (Exhibit 6). High Coal Mine Hazards are considered areas with abandoned and improperly sealed mine openings and areas underlain by mine workings shallower than 200 feet in depth for steeply dipping seams, or shallower than 15 times the thickness of the seam or workings for gently dipping seams. These areas may be affected by collapse or other subsidence. The main entry and airshaft for the Springbrook mine is also located on site. Icicle Creek Engineers encountered approximately 15feet of fill at what appears to be the mine entry, estimated to be 5 to 8 feet in diameter, and inclined at approximately 55 to 60 degrees to the south (Exhibit 8). There were several recommendations to mitigate potential risk of the coal mine hazard/former entry as part of the Icicle Creek Engineer report, including the excavation of the fill at the mine entry and backfilling with controlled density fill (Exhibit 8). However, these recommendations were based on a former proposal for a development which included structures in the southern portion of the site. The proposed development is setback approximately 125 feet from the coal mine hazard and would likely not have the same impacts as the former development. However, there are some grading activities and smaller recreational improvements in the proximity of the coal mine hazard which may potentially be affected by mining related subsidence. Therefore, staff recommends a mitigation measure requiring an updated Coal Mine Hazard Report demonstrating the proposal would not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre-development conditions and the development can be safely accommodated on the site. The report shall also discuss any measures employed in the final site/building design which serve to mitigate coal mine subsidence risk. If no measures are employed, the applicant shall provide justification for the exclusion of additional measures. The updated Coal Mine Hazard Report shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. Removal of the existing vegetated cover during construction would leave soils susceptible to erosion. The applicant will be required to design a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) pursuant to the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements. A number of retaining walls are also proposed to be constructed on site as part of the grading proposal (Exhibit 5) and will be further reviewed as part staffs recommendation to the Hearing Examiner for the Preliminary PUD. Mitigation Measures: An updated Coal Mine Hazard Report shall be submitted demonstrating the proposal will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre- development conditions and the development can be safely accommodated on the site. The report shall also discuss any measures employed in the final Site/building design which serve to mitigate coal mine subsidence risk. If no measures are employed, the applicant shall provide justification for the exclusion of additional measures. The updated Coal Mine Hazard Report shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. If mitigation measures are includes, they shall be implemented during utility permit construction. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, RMC 4-3-050 Critical Area Regulations 2. Water a. ~etland, Streams, Lakes Impacts: The applicant submitted a Wetland and Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Ed Sewell Consulting Inc., dated December 22, 2015 (Exhibit 10). The report states there are no wetlands located on site. An unnamed seasonal stream (Stream A) has been identified on the subject site. Stream A bisects the northern and southern portions of the site and runs from east to west. As defined by RMC 4-3-050.G the stream best meets the criteria of a Type Ns stream due to its intermittent flow and lack of fish use. Class Ns streams have a standard buffer of 50 feet as measured from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) as well ERCReport City of Renton Department of Community & AVANA RIDGE PUD omic Development vironmental Review Committee Report LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of April 11,2016 Page 6 of 13 as a 15-foot setback from the edge of the buffer to any structure. The applicant is proposing buffer averaging for portions of the stream buffer. Additionally, the applicant is proposing an alteration within the stream and its associated buffer for a pedestrian crossing. It should be noted that the Habitat Biologist for WDFW concluded the on-site stream is not a jurisdictional water, or a "water of the state". As a result no Hydraulic Permit Approval (HPA) permit is required from Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife. Stream Buffer Averaging Proposal: RMC 4-3-050.1.1 allows for critical area buffers to be reduced to no less than a 25-foot minimum for Type Ns streams. The applicant has proposed buffer averaging, with reductions of the buffer down to 25feet, for Stream A. Overall the applicant is proposing buffer reductions in the amount of approximately 8,835 square feet to be mitigated with buffer additions in the amount of approximately 9,527 square feet. The applicant is also proposing buffer enhancement for those portions of the buffer which would be reduced. Pursuant to RMC, buffer width averaging may be allowed by the reviewing official only where the applicant demonstrates all ofthe following: i. There are existing physical improvements in or near the water body and associated riparian area; and ii. Buffer width averaging will result in no net loss of stream/lake/riparian ecological function; and iii. The total area contained within the buffer after averaging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer width prior to averaging; and iv. The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; and v. Where the buffer width is reduced by averaging pursuant to this subsection, buffer enhancement shall be required. The existing stream buffer, which separates the north apartment building area from the southern open space, is mostly existing forest (primarily Alder and Cottonwood) with an understory dominated by invasive Himalayan blackberry. The buffer would be enhanced through the removal of the invasive blackberries and other undesirable vegetation and replaced with native understory vegetation. There are existing road improvements within the buffer on both the east and west sides of the stream. The applicant's Supplemental Stream Study concluded the buffer reduction, through averaging, would have the physical characteristics that can protect water quality and functions of the stream on site (Exhibit 10). Staff has reviewed the stream buffer averaging proposal for Stream A, and agrees that the proposal meets all requirements found in RMC 4-3-050.1.1. However, the provided stream study does not include a demonstration of compliance with criteria found in RMC 4-3-050.H.2. Therefore, staff was unable to verify that through the enhancement of the buffer and the use of low impact development strategies the reduced buffer will function at a higher level than the standard buffer. Staff will be recommending a condition of Preliminary PUD approval to address this concern prior to construction permit approval. Stream Alteration Proposal: RMC 4-3-050J.2.a allows for the construction of non-vehicular transportation crossings. The applicant has proposed a pedestrian bridge trail crossing over Stream A. Pursuant to RMC, crossings may be permitted by the reviewing official only where the applicant demonstrates all of the following: i. The proposed route is determined to have the least impact on the environment, while meeting City Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element rj!quirements and standards in RMC 4-6-060; and ii. The crossing minimizes interruption of downstream movement of wood and gravel; and iii. Transportation facilities in buffer areas shall not run parallel to the water body; and iv. Crossings occur as near to perpendicular with the water body as possible; and ERC Report v. Crossings are designed according to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Fish Water Crossing Design Guidelines, 2013, and the National Marine Fisheries Service Guidelines for Salmonid City of Renton Department of Community & AVANA RIDGE PUD Report of April 11, 2016 omic Development nvironmental Review Committee Report LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Page 7 of 13 Passage at Stream Crossings, 2000, as may be updated, or equivalent manuals as determined by the Administrator; and vi. Seasonal work windows are determined and made a condition of approval; and vii. Mitigation criteria of subsection l of this Section are met. The path would connect the north and south sides of the buffer, crossing over Stream A, via a pedestrian bridge. The bridge would also serve to connect the proposed structures to the proposed open space on the southern portion of the site. The proposed bridged trail crossing is located within a narrow portion of the stream, above the flow path of water, and is perpendicular to the water body. Staff has reviewed the alteration proposal for the bridge across Stream A, and agrees that the proposal meets all requirements found in RMC 4-3-050.J.2. However, the provided stream study does not include a demonstration of compliance with criteria found in RMC 4-3-050.H.2. Therefore, staff was unable to verify that the bridged crossing will not impact the function of the stream. Staff will be recommending a condition of Preliminary PUD approval to address this concern prior to construction permit approval. Additional conditions associated with Preliminary PUD approval will likely include signage and fencing and review and approval of a final stream mitigation plan. In order to preserve and protect the stream and its associated buffer the applicant will be required, to establish a Native Growth Protection Easement over the parts of the site encompassing stream and buffer areas. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation needed Nexus: Not applicable b. Storm Water Impacts: The site is located within the Black River drainage basin and Panther Creek drainage sub-basin. Upstream runoff enters the site in two locations. Portions of SE 172"d St and 106th Ave SE direct upstream runoff across the northern property line. Upstream runoff from the west side of Benson Rd S flows into a ditch along the east property line. Runnoff currently discharges at the sites western property line, at two locations, and heads north through a conveyance system in Benson Drive S. The flows eventually cross under Benson Drive S and conveyed a westerly direction in a series of pipes and catch basis eventually outfalling into Panther Creek. This project is required to comply with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapter 1 and 2. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Conditions. This project is subject to full drainage review. The applicant submitted a Preliminary Drainage Report prepared by D.R. Strong, dated December 28, 2015 (Exhibit 9). The report also includes a detailed summary of the pre and post developed conditions. The stormwater detention and water quality treatment would be provided within a combined detention/water quality vault under the parking area located in the western portion of the site. The combined detention/water quality vault would be followed by a media filtration system to accommodate the Enhanced Water Quality Treatment requirements for multi-family development. For water quality features that are not in the City Amendments or the 2009 KCSWDM, and which have the General Use level designation through the state Department of Ecology's Technology Assessment Protocol-Ecology (TAPE) program, an adjustment process request is required. Conditions associated with Preliminary PUD approval will likely include a requirement for the submittal, and approval, of an Adjustment in order to utilize water quality features which are not in , the City Amendments or the 2009 KCSWDM. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation needed Nexus: Not applicable 3. Vegetation ERC Report City of Renton Department of Community & AVANA RIDGE PUD Report of April 11, 2016 omic Development nvironmenta/ Review Committee Report LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Page 8 of 13 Impacts: The site is currently forested with mixed canopy dominated by Douglas fir, red cedar, big leaf maple, Scouler's willow, and black cottonwood. The site's understory is dominated by Indian plum, hazelnut, Himilayan blackberry, sword fern, and creeping blackberry. The applicant provided a Tree Protection Plan/Arborist Report, completed by Greenforest Inc., dated December 16, 2015 (Exhibit 13). Based on the provided tree inventory, 429 trees are located on the subject site. There are 114 trees located in critical areas and associated buffers; 67 trees were identified as dead, diseased, or dangerous; and 37 trees would be located within proposed rights-of-way. This results in the exclusion of 218 trees from retention calculations. As such, 211 trees were utilized to calculate retention requirements of 10% of the significant trees located on the site. Therefore, the applicant would be required to retain at least 42 trees on site. The provided Tree Retention Plan depicts the retention of 46 trees outside of the critical areas and their associated buffers which serves to meet tree retention requirements (Exhibit 13). Additional analysis will be provided as part of staff's recommendation to the Hearing Examiner on the Preliminary Planned Urban Development. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation recommended Nexus: Not applicable 4. Wildlife Impacts: The applicant submitted a Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment, prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting, Inc., dated December 22, 2015 (Exhibit 12). Several potentially regulated fish and wildlife habitats and priority species are identified in the vicinity of the project according to the list generated by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife' (Priority Habitats and Species list). The provided report identifies two mechanisms as having potential for impacting potentially regulated fish and wildlife species and/or associated habitat: temporary impacts from construction noise and long term effects associated with increased impervious surfaces. This study identified that no state or federally listed species were identified or known to use the site and/or are located on or near the site. Pursuant to the provided report there is no "critical habitat" as defined by Renton Municipal Code located on or near the subject site. Offsite priority aquatic species associated with the Panther Creek in water habitat are not anticipated to be impacted if the proposal complies with stormwater requirements as listed above. While the above conclusions may be true, the site still provides habitat for many non-state or federally listed species. Noted in the projects SEPA check list, and comments from parties of interest, several birds and mammals utilize the site (coyote, mule deer, raccoon, opossum, eastern gray squirrel, barn owl, European starling, common crow, flicker, garter snake, Pacific tree frog, songbirds, and small rodents). The removal of a large portion of the trees would impact existing habitat for common local wildlife. However, the applicant proposes a large, landscaped community open space provided at the southern portion of the site totaling 19,795 square feet and the 49,918 square feet of critical area and associated buffer would remain in a vegetative/open space state providing a sanctuary for the animals that reside in the area. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the subject development would result in a significant adverse impact to wildlife. In order to preserve and protect the stream and associated buffers the applicant will be required, to establish a Native Growth Protection Easement over the parts of the site encompassing the stream and buffer area. Recommended Preliminary PU~ conditions will include requirements for permanent fencing of the native growth protection areas which would eliminate human or domesticated animal intrusion and would not adversely impact habitat connectivity. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation needed Nexus: Not applicable ERCReport City of Renton Department of Community & AVANA RIDGE PUD Report of April 11, 2016 5_ Transportation omic Development nvironmental Review Committee Report WA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Page 9 of 13 Impacts: The applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx, dated February 2, 2016 (Exhibit 15), The provided TIA was found to meet the intent of the TIA guidelines and is generally acceptable for preliminary review, Several traffic related comments letters/emails have been received by the public. The comments raise concerns regarding the use of the proposed SE 172 0 ' St entrance and potential impacts to the neighboring single-family residential development to the north as well as additional impacts to queueing delays at Benson Rd S and Benson Drive S (Exhibit 15). Based on public comments received, staff required an evaluation by an independent qualified professional regarding the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of any proposed mitigating measures, An Independent Secondary Review of the provided Traffic Study prepared by TENW, dated March 21, 2016 (Exhibit 17). In general, the secondary review affirmed the overall trip distribution patterns, The report however, recommended revisions be made to the traffic counts to consider the worse-case traffic scenario given the observed intersection queuing at 108'" Ave SE and Benson Rd S, The applicant provided a memo, dated March 26, 2016, in response to the recommendations included in the secondary review (Exhibit 18). The memo generally concurred with the recommendations of the peer review with the exception for the removal of the site driveway access restrictions to SE 172nd Street. The applicant's response memo revised the TIA to reflect recommended changes in trip distribution, balanced traffic volumes, the analysis of queuing on Benson Rd and left turn lane warrants. After review of the original Traffic Impact Analysis (Exhibit 15), Independent Secondary Review (Exhibit 17), and the applicant's response memo (Exhibit 18) staff provided applicable comments below for each Transportation subject. Access: The applicant is proposing two points of ingress and egress into the site in order to meet Fire Department requirements for access, The applicant proposes one entrance off of SE 172nd St between the proposed buildings, and one entrance off of Benson Road South, The two access points converge to form drive-through access through the site. Several public comments were received requesting access be eliminated from SE 172 0d St, in order to mitigate anticipated cut through traffic on neighboring roads to the north, In addition, concerns were raised regarding the blocking of the proposed access, along Benson Rd S, during PM peak hour traffic. The applicant has proposed a driveway configuration which would attempt to restrict movements to left-in/right -out only as way to mitigate cut through traffic on residential streets to the north, Access and proposed mitigation, was analyzed as part of the Independent Secondary Review prepared by TENW (Exhibit 17), TENW generally affirmed the trip distribution assumptions made by TraffEx and substantiated the need for two access points. With respect to proposed mitigation, TraffEx determined that the proposed SE 172 0d St driveway configuration would be ineffective in limiting impacts to neighboring residential streets to the north, In addition, it is anticipated that restrictions to the SE 172 0 ' driveway would encourage u-turns and associated impacts to existing residential driveways along the north side of SE 172 0 ' St. Therefore, staff will be recommending a condition, of Hearing Examiner approval, the elimination of the proposed access restrictions along SE 172 0d St, and the entrance will be required to provide full access, In order to address anticipated impacts on neighboring streets caused by cut-through traffic, staff recommends traffic calming measures be used in lieu of the foregoing site access restriction, Specifically, Electronic Speed Radar Signage has been shown to be effective in reducing traffic speeds and aggressive driving. Staff recommends, as a mitigation measure, that one (1) Electronic Speed Radar Sign be installed in the northbound dilection on both 106 th Ave SE and 104'h Ave SE. The appiicant shall install the signs, mounting poles, and associated equipment, at the direction of the City. All improvements shall be included in the engineering permit submittal for review and approval, and shall be constructed prior to temporary occupancy. ERCReport City oj Renton Department oj Community & tccflomic Development AVAIVA RIDGE PUD Report of April 11, 2016 ironmental Review Committee Report LUAlS-000894, PPUD, ECF Page 10 of 13 Level of Service: It is anticipated that the proposed development would generate approximately 492 average daily trips with 3S AM peak-hour trips and 46 PM peak-hour trips. The provided report analyzed three intersection locations (Exhibit 15): Intersection 1: Site Access / SE 172,d St Intersection 2: lOS'h Ave SE/Benson Rd S/SE 172,d St Intersection 3: Site Access/Benson Rd S/10S,h Ave SE The provided analysis notes that all intersections will operate at an acceptable level of service with the proposed development. Therefore, the proposal would not be required to mitigate at any intersection. Analysis of future conditions address cumulative impacts of the proposed project and traffic growth in the study area. Traffic signal warranty analysis was also provided at the intersection of SE 172,d St and Benson Rd S. The report states there is no need for a signal at the intersection as a result of the project. However, The Transportation Department is conducting a model to assess any possible solution to address the citizen's concerns regarding the backing of queue on Benson Road from the intersection with SR S15 to SE 172,d Street. Staff, is hoping to provide an update at the public hearing for the subject project. Increased traffic created by the development would be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied. The applicant submitted for a building permit in December of 2015. The fee in 2015 was assessed at $2,214.44 per new multi-family unit. The fee is estimated at approximately $164,000. The fee shall be payable to the City at the time of bUilding permit issuance. Site Distance: The provided Traffic Impact Analysis states sight distance requirements are met at the site access driveway onto SE 172,d St and with vegetation trimming, within the right of way, at the site access driveway to Benson Rd S (Exhibit 15). Street Improvements: Street Improvements are regulated by RMC 4-6-060 -Street Standards. See below: Benson Drive S -Benson Drive S (SR 515) is a principal arterial and a state route roadway along the project's west property line. The existing road currently contains curb, gutter, and sidewalk on both sides of the street. There is currently no planter strip existing along the Benson Drive S street frontage. Per code, frontage improvements including 0.5 feet wide curb and gutter, an 8-foot wide landscaped planter, an 8- foot wide sidewalk, street lighting, and storm water improvements are required on principal arterial streets. The applicant is proposing to maintain the existing right-of-way. Due to critical areas along portions of the frontage, the applicant has requested a modification to allow the sidewalk to remain in the current location for those areas where critical areas are located. As part of the Preliminary PUD recommendation to the Hearing Examiner staff will likely be recommending approval of the requested modification. The approval would likely include a condition of approval requiring the applicant to dedicate Hoot behind the sidewalk in addition to right-of-way dedication for luminaire foundations along Benson Drive S. Benson Rd S -Benson Rd S is a minor arterial along the project's east property line. Half-street frontage improvements are required to be provided on the side of the street fronting the development. Per code, the minimum right-of-way width required for a minor arterial is 91 feet. The available right-of-way width on the Benson Rd S frontage, per the King County assessor map, is 100 feet and would not necessitate additional right-of-way dedication. The required paved width on this street is 44 feet, which includes three travel lanes and a 5-foot wide bike lane on both sides of the street. Frontage improvements would include the following: a 0.5 foot wide curb and gutter, an 8-foot wide landscaped planter, an 8-foot wide sidewalk, street lighting, and stormwater improvements are required. I The applicant is proposing street improvements along Benson Rd S which comply with code. SE 172,d 5t -SE 172,d 5t is a commercial mixed use and industrial access street along the project's north property line. Half-street frontage improvements are required to be provided on the side of the street fronting the development. Per code, the minimum right-of-way width required for a commercial mixed use and industrial access street is 69 feet. The available right-of-way width on the SE 172,d 5t frontage, per the ERCReport City of Renton Department of Community & ECVHomic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Report of April 11, 2016 vironmental Review Committee Report WA15-000894, PPUD, EeF Page 11 of 13 King County assessor map, is 60 feet and would require additional right-of-way dedication_ Frontage improvements would include the following: an 8-foot parking lane, a 0.5 foot wide curb and gutter, an 8- foot wide landscaped planter, a 6-foot wide Sidewalk, street lighting, and stormwater improvements are required. The applicant is proposing street improvements, along SE 172 0d St, which comply with code. The applicant has requested a modification to reduce the required dedication from 4.5 feet to 3 feet. As part of the Preliminary PUD recommendation to the Hearing Examiner staff will likely be recommending approval of the requested modification. The approval would likely include a condition of approval requiring the applicant to dedicate 1-foot behind the sidewalk in addition to right-of-way dedication for luminaire foundations along SE 172 0d St. Pedestrian Improvements: As part of the proposed project, sidewalks would be constructed along the frontage of the site and would connect to the existing sidewalk system. However, safety concerns have been raised with respect to pedestrian connectivity off site due to missing sidewalk linkages off site approaching the intersection of Benson Rd 5 and SE 172 0d St. Given the number of homes proposed it is very likely that a large influx of people would utilize the public sidewalk system as well as the anticipated school bus stop across Benson Rd S. Providing pedestrian connections to abutting properties is an important aspect of connectivity and encourages pedestrian activity and is required to be considered when reviewing the subject application. Pathways should be easily identifiable to pedestrians and drivers. The condition of the existing protruded curb, approaching the intersection of SE 172 0d St and Benson Rd 5, has been largely disturbed and does not provide a safe route for school children and or residents walking to and from the site. As a result, staff recommends a mitigation measure requiring the applicant provide an off-site sidewalk, along the south side of SE 172 0d St and the west side of Benson Rd 5, approaching the intersection. The width of the off-site sidewalks shall be consistent with the widths proposed along the frontage of the subject site. ADA ramps shall also be constructed at the southwest corner of the intersection. Finally, a street lighting analysis is required to be conducted by the developer at the southwest corner of the intersection of SE 172 0d St and Benson Rd S. If necessary, required street lighting shall be provided according to City standards. All improvements shall be included in the engineering permit submittal for review and approval, and shall be constructed prior to temporary occupancy. Concurrency - A concurrency recommendation will be provided in the staff report to Hearing Examiner based upon the test of the citywide Transportation Plan, consideration of growth levels included in the LOS- tested Transportation Plan, payment of a Transportation Mitigation Fee, and an application of site specific mitigation. The development will have to meet the City of Renton concurrency requirements. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation needed Nexus: Not applicable E_ Comments of Reviewing Departments The proposal has been circulated to City Department and Division Reviewers. Where applicable, their comments have been incorporated into the text of this report and/or "Advisory Notes to Applicant." ./ Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File and may be attached to this report_ The Environmental Determination decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within the 14-day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C-075(3l; WAC 191-11-680l_ Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing together with the required fee to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, on or before 5:00 p.m_ on April 29, 2016_ RMC 4-8-110 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner and additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall- 7'h Floor, (425) 430-6510. ERCReport City of Renton Department of Communit: canomic Development AVANA RIDGE PUD Environ tal Review Committee Report LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of April 11, 2016 Page 12 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these nates are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions. Planning: 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Commercial, multi-family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 3. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1st and March 31st of each year. The Development Services Division's approval of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of the permit. 4. A National Permit Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required when more than one acre is being cleared. s. The applicant will be required to submit a Final Stream Mitigation Report and Maintenance and Monitoring proposal. In addition, the applicant will be required to comply with all the code requirements of RMC 4-3-050 Critical Areas. This includes, but is not limited to, placing the critical area within a Native Growth Protection Easement, providing fencing and sign age, and providing the City with a site restoration surety device and, later, a maintenance and monitoring surety device. 6. The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any eqUipment, dispose of any materials, supplies or fluids, operate any equipment, install impervious surfaces, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. 7. The applicant shall erect and maintain six-foot (6') high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees, or along the perimeter of a stand of retained trees. Placards shall be placed on fencing every fifty feet (50') indicating the words, "NO TRESPASSING -Protected Trees" or on each side of the fencing if less than fifty feet (50'). Site access to individually protected trees or groups of trees shall be fenced and signed. Individual trees shall be fenced on four (4) sides. In addition, the applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. 8. This permit is shall comply with the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. The permitted is responsible for adhering to the u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (2007) and lor your u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service permit. Water: 1. Water Service is provided by SODS Creek Water and Sewer District. 2. A water availability certificate from the $005 Creek utility was submitted to the City with the land use application. 3. Approved water plans from SODS Creek should be provided during utility construction permit review. Sewer: 1. Sewer Service is provided by SODS Creek Water and Sewer District. 2. A sewer availability certificate from the SODS Creek utility was submitted to the City with the land use application. 3. Approved sewer plans from SODS Creek should be provided during utility construction permit review. Drainage: 1. A geotechnical report for the site 'prepared by Earth Solutions Inc. was submitted for the project. The geotechnical report mentions that the soil is till soil and is not suitable for infiltration. All geotechnical recommendations shall be followed. 2. A Construction Storm water General Permit from Department of Ecology is required since grading and clearing of the site exceeds one acre 3. Surface water system development charge fee is $0.594 per square foot of new impervious surface area, but not less than $1,485.00. This fee is subject to change at the rate that is applicable at the time of issuance ofthe utility ERCReport City oj Renton Department of Community & E AVANA RIDGE PUD mic Development -vironmental Review Committee Report WA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Report of April 11, 2016 Page 13 of 13 construction permit will be applicable. Transportation: 1. The maximum slope back of sidewalk is 4H: IV for minimum 3 feet back of the sidewalk. 2. The corner curb ramps at all street intersections adjacent to the site should be ADA compliant. ADA also requires matching ADA compliant curb ramps on the other side of the intersection. 3. The site is proposed to be accessed via driveways from Benson Road South and SE 172nd Street. Please refer to RMC 4-4-080 for driveway design standards including location, grade, and width. 4. Street lighting is required to be provided on the frontage streets by the project. 5. The City of Renton Trench restoration and Street overlay requirements will be applicable for any work in the public right of way. Parks: 1. Park Impact Fees per Ordinance 5670 applies. 2. Street trees -Ginkgo on SR 515; Ash on Benson Rd. S.; Elm on SE 172nd. Space minimum distance of 50 feet apart and not close than 30 feet from street lights (not all lights are shown on plans). Potential for one to two more street trees at NE corner ofSR515 & Benson Rd. Use only Ginko, Elm, and Ash as street trees. 3. Planting Strip: require a continuous planting strip along all streets, then sidewalk; plan does not show this. Dangerous, fast traffic requires that a planting strip buffer pedestrians from roadway. 4. Parking lot: some islands are too small for trees; use only vine maple or smaller in those areas. General: 1. All construction or service utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. Plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. When utility plans are complete, please submit four (4) copies of the drawings, two (2) copies of the drainage report, permit application, an itemized cost of construction estimate, and application fee at the counter on the sixth floor. ERCReport ® ;1"<;' EXHIBITS Project Name: Project Number: Avana Ridge Preliminary PUD LUAI5-000894, ECF, PPUD Date of Hearing Staff Contact Project Contact/Applicant Project location (tentatively) 5/10/16 Rocale Timmons Justin Lagers 17249 Benson Rd 5 Renton, Senior Planner Avana Ridge, LLC WA 9675 SE 36th St, Ste 105; Mercer Island, WA 98040 The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 Exhibit 6 Exhibit 7 Exhibit 8 Exhibit 9 Exhibit 10 Exhibit 11 Exhibit 12 Exhibit 13 Exhibit 14 Exhibit 15 Exhibit 16 Exhibit 17 Exhibit 18 ERC Report Site Plan Landscape Plan Elevations Grading Plan Geotechnical Report, prepared by Earth Solutions NW (dated December 21, 2015) Coal Mine Hazard Study, prepared by Icicle Creek Engineers (dated March 22, 2004) Coal Mine Hazard Study, prepared by Icicle Creek Engineers (dated January 20, 2009) Drainage Report, prepared by D.R. Strong (dated December 28,2015) Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting (dated December 22, 2015) Conceptual Stream Mitigation Plan prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting (December 28,2015) Habitat Data Report, prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting (dated December 22,2015) Arborist Report, prepared by Greenforest Inc. (dated December 16, 2015) Tree Retention Plan Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), prepared by TraffEx (dated February 2, 2016) Public Comment Letters/Emails Independent Secondary Review -Traffic Study, prepared by TenW (dated March 21,2016) Response Memo -Independent Secondary Review, prepared by Traffex (dated March 26, 2016) -........... ~sRenton ® lJal!4JJednoJEi <IlOO <PJ~r1OJIl_ I oczr.!l'i: 9JZ 6O~eti ... '","",," ll.li:"I,.,.'t;VOU""l/I8&~"II'$O\st:ll --- -~ -r- W Yl I , ! / , J [J I ~ I .. m!;; , to"''' "':OlE i!0Q.. i <~g ,B~ !~ <0.. Q u I! '~ f ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ; ~ '" z "' , :0 I ~~ " I .. '" I z I ..... iii: , :5 <C ~~ , ! ;Ii:i~ ;l! ;m .. 5~ , -II U I ~ ~ ~ ~ §l~~ "'" ,I., l.Hicn -------- SEJ72ND_.S. S~..u ~01' ()~~ ~~ ./& LANDSCAPE ,-fGENn fI~"tjI -. O/OO$S ,.n, -c· _ ~S>o<u":'"'!' ~,ocMRI ~ ="'~...'i''':~", "~~~I _ ...... T\J"""o...rn:r<J'lON ""It: 'l:E ge;! .11 "" "-"', u<l. "'~\ .... rcr ..... ~-.s7$ I) ~ ,- EXHIBIT 3 t: '" LAstudiocc" --.. --. ~, .... - __ R,R ---, I / / ~. S) .O~ ~~ ~a ~ «> o ~,'--_-" .... -,-. -..," ~ ~ ", " ~e H " i~ €. ~~ I~ i ~ ...... U W ...... ..c u >- m o :::J o '- bI r..:J ~J;1Y ~~ "", ...... I:!!" AVANARIDGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 10616 SE 1nNDST RENTON, WA 98055 AVAJlA RIDGE, LLe .,.----. CONCEPTUAL LAJlDSCAPE PLAr • L1 Fun Document Availab\e upon Request 89 v --, r--l r-...r--, u , , , : , , L __ , --1. __ .-" __ '-___ ~ -"1. ___ --"---L __ .;-_...1 e KEY PLAN OVERALL ~~~·1J.o~t S"::A'" w'·,'-t" ®(A=~ 0 ~l-' ,I, ~1 t::\ ::, c:::",-~ ~ 0')re3§ 'Pc~'9c~ ,~ ,:J(i) @ c§ ,0) CH1H1):8~ iu' 01 (1_81 I I ,tis', ./ ./ \:,:,j ..I ~ @ , , , ," 'iE 8 \ , , , I --'-_..r-- ~ ~_f---~--: __ -," g) '1> (~j~~~~ I@{~~~~€~ 101 ---c __ s--, , @ '-"{~ \.S"~ ® @(~) .~ ~H ._J L.. OVERALL SIrE· SOUTH ElEVATION I 2 : SCAlE: 1116'_1-11'" ~ @tE€; I~) ®CD ~.5;(KXL'XL6) (J,iXJ~(.l) q> @ (I) 0~ ~~ I'H l\(H" \..j\.j Co) f~ ~-~ 0')(') r.:~-~r.'C,(,.-;y;-y", ~.~Dj~~'~IE·~\~:.~I~j Co) (A~~ (i,\ _./ ,-y ~---------_ ...... "".>NrI..aT"""-_,_t .. h::t t::J 0 ::J'::J ::JCl .... EXHIBIT 4 I=J!!lt::::I c~ 0 *,_,.:nl Its C'O l'J-~J ..I L.. 0VE.RAlL SITE -NQRTH ElEVATION m S(.AlE.lnll'~l'~ .,,' EI . ' ...... j~ u '-~ OJ ~~ ....., ~! .-..c ii:::: -e':;:! U ,~ '-hi ro , • 0 J :::J 1l 0 L-or rL! AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10616 SE 112nd STREET. RENTON, WA """ Ettb BlITl. , AVANA RIDGE, LL -.-...... _' .... --,.,.,. OVERALL PROJECT I ELEVATIONS I _'l.I/III9l_OIMl~ J A3.01 « z :; « ~ . __ . __ ._- SE j 12ND STREET ·P:~kr~- PRfllUlNARY SHE IIDtlJUE CALCUlA TlONS ~-, (<<"'- ~-, ,"' .. ,"'-("'''''J N.i ...... __ tr __ -..''''' ...... nw _._ ...... ,.~I ,,",,1"""-ro , ... _..,... •• "'."'''- ~'i=.-=~~t::'.=.: :;::::., ~.:,:.E ........... ..-.-.O_'...,""""""y_ ' ... ~AL N01FS !:.,":"'....., :~::::U::::::::.~ ,_ N.i ...... "'''''''--''''''--' llEDftltIfCI) 7lI.H_'IfII0Ra' cn,,1I' ~ ."...."." .. """"'~""""...,."""'-"'M'aI"" __ "" ......,"" swot:£ "'" ""'-, lIE .' ... ""w~''''' "-0>£..--'< UGENO = ~ .. EXHIBIT 5 '" '", ,(r-::::--::--~:..----::-:::-~ CONSfl1wo~ " " Y OF RE'rON P'oo"'nw~u;'4;"~!Pu""" .... 0'" o""~ AVANA CONCEPTUAL GAADlIl/G PlAN DRS PROJECT NO. 15DBB ! @ NORTH _'Ie.CAlI; o " '" Geotechnical Engineellng Geology Environmental Scientlst<.; Construction :rv1onitorin~ EXHIBIT 6 Full Document Available upon Request GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY AVANARIDGE 10615 SOUTHEAST 172nd STREET RENTON, WASHINGTON ES-4147 • • . , Report Geological Engineering Services Coal Mine Hazard Assessment Cugini Property -Northwest Parcel Renton (King County), Washington March 22, 2094 Project·No .. 0336-004 Prepared For: Alex Cugini Prepared By: Icicle Creek Engineers, Inc. Full Document Available upon Request EXHIBIT 7 Report Geo~hnlcal Engineering Services Proposed Property Development Springbrook Ridge King County Tax Pareel Nos. 2923059009 and 2023059148 Renton, Washington January 26, 2009 Project No. 0336-004 Prepared For: AJex Cugini Prepared By: (dele Creek Engineers, Ioe. Full Document Available upon Request EXHIBIT 8 Full Document Available upon Request Preliminary Technical Information Report (TIR) for AVANA RIDGE PUD 17249 Benson Road Sand 10615 SE 172"d Street Renton, Washington DRS Project No. Renton File No. 15088 PRE15-000611 Owner/Applicant Avana Ridge, LLC 9725 SE 36'h Street, Suite 214 Mercer Island, Washington 98040 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers, Inc. 620 7'h Avenue Kirkland WA 98033 (425) 827-3063 @20l5D. R. STRONG Consulling Engineers Inc. Report Issue Date December 28, 2015 EXHIBIT 9 I I December 22,2015 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA Sewall Wetland Consulting. Inc. fDBoxIm Fall Gty, WA 9'lO24 Phone:~15 Full Document Available upon Request RE: Wetland and Supplemental Stream Study -Avana Ridge PUD City of Renton, Washington SWC Job #15-159 Dear Justin, This report describes our observations of jurisdictional wetlands, streams and buffers on or within 100' of the proposed Avana Ridge PUD project in the City of Renton, Washington (the "site"). Above: Vicinity Map of site EXHIBIT 10 !It'Oli6 '1M 'pueisl JaJJ<lL'II '1~aJ1S 1..I19E 3S SL96 :m 'S!lNICJ1OH MNd UO~!Y5eM 'U01U~1l and alJplU eueAV NVld NOI1V~1l11/ll V3l1V lVJI11llJ I ~ ~ , < ! , , , , ! ! ! ! l l i ; i , , , j i i , r I , , , , ! I , I , ).I i~ i , ! , ! • • Z -II ! • • • ! ; ~. ~ ~ , ! , • , ! 101 j -= li B <-• 0 N , • ~ z 6~ ~:::J " • l ~~ • , ,. .'!::: .E .. ~ ~ < i; I' 0 !~ z u --- -------- December 22, 2015 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9725 SE 36 th Street, Suite 214 Mercer Island, Washington 98040 RE: Habitat Data Report -Avana Ridge City of Renton, Washington SWC Job #15-159 Dear Justin, Sewall Wetland Consulting. Inc. IDllox880 Fall Oly, WA 'ffi?4 Phone:~5 Full Document Available upon Request This report is in reference to the City of Renton's requirements for a Habitat Assessment for the Avana Ridge project. Above: Vicinity Map of site EXHIBIT 12 Greenforestlncorporated December 16, 2015 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Full Document Available upon Request RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA Dear Mr. Lagers: You contacted me and contracted my services as a consulting arborist. My assignment is to inspect and assess the condition of surveyed trees at the above referenced site. I received a topographic survey of the site from DR Strong Consulting Engineers, showing the locations of the surveyed trees. visited the site on 10/15/15 and inspected the trees, which are the subject of this report. Neither parcel is developed. The site has a SW aspect with a stream delineated through the center of the site, east to west. Both parcels are covered in native vegetation, predominately deciduous tree species with moderate to dense lower understory. TREE INSPECTION My inspection is limited to visual observation from the subject parcels and the rights-of-way. Both health and structure were evaluated. A tree's structure is distinct from its health. Structure is the way the tree is put together or constructed, and identifying obvious defects can be helpful in determining if a tree is predisposed to failure. Health addresses disease and insect infestation. No invasive procedures were performed on any trees. The results of this inspection are based on what is visible at the time of the inspection. I identified the species of each tree, confirmed trunk diameter (DBH), estimated average dripline and rated the condition of each tree. Bigleaf maples on this site have a wide age and size range. The largest and oldest maple trees are generally in the poorest condition. A handful of bitter cherry are scattered throughout the site, and all are viable. Black cottonwoods dominate the site in numbers, and there are far more younger cottonwoods than older. The oldest and larger trees are in better condition overall. Many of cottonwoods as edge trees lean excessively away from the stand. Nearly all the smaller cottonwoods are very slender. Although they are healthy and have no visible defects, their trunks are too tall for 4547 South Lucile Street, Seattle, WA 98118 Tel. EXHIBIT 13 , ~ r~~ 'l • --- 1-, ' I ----~ @~i' i , I 0., - Z 0 ~ I I o~ ~~ ~ I g~ .; I ~. z ~I ~ I ~ 0 < ~ ~ ~ \ \ ! I \ :~'6 ~ ~ . ::::...z ~ --:-;iY t , \ 11 :,; ': ~ " " " , 3Ii t.; xxxx-xxx Full Document Available upon Request AVANA RIDGE APARTMENTS REVISED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON Prepared for Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36th St Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Prepared by c!€!tfEx TRAFFIC EXPERTS 11410 N.E. 124th St., #590 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: 425.522.4118 February 2,2016 EXHIBIT 15 Full Document Available upon Request , Hiranaka Daniel b Radtke Juli and Mike c Moss Molly d Ridenour Daniel e Brooker Emily f Goods Doug g Byrnes Genevieve h Miller Jerry i Y,dock Wendy j Heine Molly k Cantu Caryn I Reitz Phillip m Gray Andrew n McMullin Kimmie a Murphy Rhonda Rae p Hanawalt Jody q Skulstad Paul r Faas Mark 5 Cramton Dawn t Hanawalt Jady u Miller Jerry v Yadack Wendy w Cantu Caryn x v z 1/31/2016 .E. x X X 1/31/2016 [ x X XXXX 1/31/2016 E X X X 1/31/2016 E X X X 1/31/2016!:; x X 1/31/2016 E X X X X X 2/1/2016 ]; X X X 2/1/2016 E X X X 2/1/2016 E X X X X 2/1/2016 f X x 2/1/2016 E X X X X X 2/1/2016 F X X X X X 2/1/2016 ]; X x 2/1/2016 [ X X X 2/1/2016 E X X x 2/1/2016 E X X X X 2/2/2016 E x X 1/30/2016 E X X X 1/30/2016 s. X X X 2/7/2016 E X 4/4/2016 L X X X 4/5/2016 E X X X 4/6/2016 E X X X X X EXHIBIT 16 Full Documenl Available upon Request ~TENW Transportation Engineering NorthWest MEMORANDUM DATE: March 21. 2016 TO: Rocole Timmons, City of Renton -Current Planning, Senior Planner FROM: Michael Read, PE, Principal, TENW SUBJECT: Avana Ridge Traffic Impact Study -Peer Review TENW Project No. 3462 This memorandum documenls my review of the Avana Ridge Apartments Revised Traffic Impact Study, February 2, 2016, prepared by TraffEx, site plan and site access/frontage improvemenl plans prepared by DRS Consulling Engineers, and field wark conducted in February 2016 related to exisling sile frontage conditions, available sight distance, and a general field conditions to address trip distribution questions outlined by the City of Renton. Avana Ridge TIS Peer Review The folloWing is a general list of assumptions, methods, and conclusions I have verified or recommend verification and or modification in review of the Avana Ridge Apartments Revised TIS, February 2016: • The study applies standard trip generation rates as published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers in the Trip Generation Manual, 9 th Edition, consistent with standard practice. • The trip distribution assumptions appear reasonable in general, although the overall total in Figure 4 only indicates 99%. The total number of trips during the p.m. peak hour however, appear to be distributed to the proposed site access driveways. Given a maiority of trips are expected to be distributed to/from the south, the "eqUitable distribution" of estimated trips currently assumed entering the site from SR 515 seems unlikely given that a maiority of parking access will be accessed via the driveway onto Benson Road. A directional split should be identified between these two access points that reflects the "circuitous route" afforded by SE 172 nd Street versus the direct site entry onto Benson Road for both entering and exiting traffic. Also, the trip distribution figure should be adiusted to bener indicate the actual location of the entry driveway onto SE 172nd Street (immediately east of 1 06th Avenue SEI, • Related to trip assignment, existing a.m. and p.m, peak hour traffic counts between SE 172nd Street and 108th Avenue SE should be balanced. In general, reported traffic counts at the proposed site access location are directionally higher along Benson Road at 108th Avenue SE. Traffic operational analysis should consider the worse-case scenario and given the intersection Transportation Planning I Design I Traffic Impact & Operations PO Box 65254, Seattle, WA 98155 I Office (206) 361· EXHIBIT 17 Full Document TraF'&kt NonTHWE A "I bl R 11410 NE 12~t val a e upon equest Phone: 425,~ Mr. Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC March 26, 2016 9675 SE 36th SI. Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Re: Avana Ridge Apartments -City of Renton Memorandum -Revisions to TIA per Peer Review Dear Mr. Lagers: The purpose of this memo is to provide revisions to the Avana Ridge Traffic Impact Analysis per the recommendations in the March 21,2016 Peer Review Memo prepared by TENW. The recommendations dealt with: • revising trip distribution and assignment due to a restricted site driveway access to SE 172nd SI. and also the shorter trip length using the Benson Rd. driveway for south oriented trips • balancing traffic volumes between intersections • revising level of service calculations due to new trip distribution • evaluating traffic queues on Benson Rd. from the SR 515/Benson Rd. intersection • evaluating left turn lane warrants into the site access driveway from Benson Road. Trip Distribution and Assignment Figures R 1 and R2 show the revised trip distribution and assignment of site generated traffic in the AM and PM peak hours. The revisions reflect a restricted access to SE 172 nd SI. allowing only left turns into the site and right turns out of the site. A careful design of the site access driveway should effectively eliminate most site generated trips to the west on SE 172nd SI. and to the north on 106th , 105th and Cedar Ave. Also, site generated trips oriented to the south were assigned to the Benson Rd. driveway since it provides a shorter route to SR 515 than the driveway to SE 172nd Streel. Page 1 EXHIBIT 18 -------.. -----~·Renton ® OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DN5-M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: LOCATION: Avana Ridge PUD LUA15-OOO894, PPUD, ECF 17249 Benson Rd 5 Description: The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Environmental {SEPAl Review for the construction of a multi-family development containing 74 units in two 4-story structures. The vacant 3.78 acre site is located within the Residential Multi-Family (RM-F) zoning classification and the Residential High Density (RHD) land use designation. The development would be comprised of two separate multi- family residential structures resulting in a density of 20.21 dulac. The subject site is fronted by three public rights-of- way: SE 172nd St, Benson Rd S (lOath Ave SE) and Benson Drive S (SR-5l5). The applicant proposes one entrance off of SE 17Znd St between the proposed buildings, and another entrance off of Benson Road S. There is an unnamed stream, classified Ns, bisecting the site which runs from east to west. Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050, the applicant is proposing impacts to the stream buffer through buffer averaging. Additiona"y, the site contains critical slopes and Coal Mine Hazards. The Preliminary PUD would be used to vary street, building height, parking, design, open space, and retaining wall standards. The applicant has proposed to provide buffer enhancement as part ofthe proposed PUD public benefit, along with the construction of enhanced open space, pedestrian amenities, and landscaping. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITIEE (ERe) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION HAS PROBABLE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS THAT CAN BE MITIGATED THROUGH MITIGATION MEASURES. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on April 29, 2016, together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS ON THE 7TH FLOOR OF CITY HALL, 1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY, RENTON, WASHINGTON, ON MAY 10, 2016 AT 11:00 AM TO CONSIDER THE PRELIMINARY PUD. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, THE APPEAL WILL BE HEARD AS PART OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION. Andrew Grav 3275 Cedar Ave S Renton. WA 98055 D. Bruce & Nancv Stan lev 10825 5E 172nd St. #5B Renton. WA 98055-5969 Daniel Hiranaka 10510 SE 172nd St Renton. WA 98055 Doug Goods 16602 106th Ave 5E Renton. WA 98055 H.A. Chau 4101150th Ave 5E Bellevue. WA 98006 JUSTIN LAGERS Avana Ridge 9675 SE 36th St. Ste. 105 Mercer Island. WA 98040 Michael Gladstein Avana Ridge LLC 9675 5E 36th St. #105 Mercer Island. WA 98040 Mollv Moss 3121 Cedar Ave 5 Renton. WA 98055 Scott Petett. D.C. 10622 SE Carr Rd. Suite A Renton. WA 98055 Caryn Cantu 16561106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Dan Palner 16638 106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Daniel Ridenour 16836 106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Emilv Brooker 16810 104th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Jerrv Miller PO Box 686 Renton. WA 98057 Kimmie McMullin 17030 106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Mike & Julie Radtke 17024 106th Ave 5E Renton. WA 98055 Philip Reitz 2907 Cedar Ave 5 Renton. WA 98055 Wendy Yadock 17020 104th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Carine Kumano 10829 SE 172nd St. #6C Renton. WA 98055 Dan Russell 43755 Louisiana 5t Palm Desert. CA 92211 Debra Russell 8295 31st St Renton. WA 98055 Genevieve Bvrnes 3125 Cedar Ave S Renton. WA 98055 JODY HANAWALT PO Box 4097 Renton. WA 98057 Mark Faas 2915 Cedar Ave S Renton. WA 98055 Mollv Heine 16829 5E 105th 5t Renton. WA 98055 Rhanda Rae Murphv 17000 104th Ave 5E Renton. WA 98055 ~R<IV CITY OF _ _ .......,. ... ~._!IfiIPI""!'4IIl . enton En .. pm -- NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS-M) A Master Allplication has been flied and accepted wlth the Department of Community &. Economic Development (CEO) -Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOnCE OF IIPPUCATION: January 13, 2016 LAND USE NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: Avana Ridge PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Environmental (SEPAl Review for the construction of a mtlltl-famlly development containing 74 units In two 4.story structure. The vacant 3.78 acre site is located within the Commerdal Arterial (RM-F) zoning classification and the Residential High Density (RHO) land use designation. The development would be comprised of two separate mUlti- family residential structures resulting in a density of 20.21 dulac. The subject slt@ Is fronted by three publh;;:'rights-of- way: SE 172nd street. Benson Road South (lOSth Ave SE) and Benson Drive South (SR-S15). The applicant proposes one entrance off of Sf 172nd St to the north of the ·site between the proposed buildings, and one entrance off of Benson Road South to the eastern side of the site, both meeting to form.the primary drive-through access across the site. There Is a Class 4 stream which bisects the site, running east/west. Pursuant to RMC·4-3-OS0 the applicant Is proposing Impacts to the stream buffer througb the use of bu'ffer averaging. Additionally, the site contains critical slopes and Coal Mine Hazards, The PPUi> would be used to vary parking, design, open space, and retaining wall standards. The applicant has proposed to provide buffer enhancement as part of the proposed PUD public benefit, along with enhance open sp:ace, pedestrian amenities, and landscaping. Studies Include a stormwater report, traffic study, habitat assesment, wetland and supplemental stream study, arbor1st report, geotec:hn[cal and a.coal mine·hazard report. ThC proposed development would result In approximately 11,000 cubic yards of Ctlt and 3,250 cubtc yards of fill. PROJECT LOCAnON: . 17249 Benson Rd. South {generallv) & 10615 SE 172nd St (generally) OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE, MInGATED (DN5-M): As t~e Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental Impatts are unlikely to result from the proposed proJect. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.ll0, the Oty of Renton Is using the Optional DNS-M process-to give notIce that a DNS-M is likdy to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DN5-M are Integrated Into a single comment period. There wlll be no comment period following· the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non- Significance-Mitigated IONS-M). This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental Impacts of the proposal. A 14-davappe'l period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M. ~ ~ A d If) p~ PERMIT APPUCATION DATE: December 30, 2015 V lfuA£A(l-\. C' NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPUCIITION: APPUCANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: permits/Review Requested: other Permits which may be required: Requested Studies: January 13, 2015 Justin lagers/.9675 SE 36th St., Ste. 105/ Mercer Island, WA 98040/253-40S-S587/lu,Un@pnwholdlng,_",m Environmental (SEPA} Review, Preliminary PUO RECEIVED Building Pe,mH, Co",buwon Pe,mi', FI'e Permit, Sign p.,mCITY OF RENTON i-")LANNI~'IG DIVISIC ,,] Aroborlst Repon. Coal Mine HaIard Assessment, Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report, Habitat Report, Landscape Analvsis, Stream/Lake Study, Traffk Impact Statement If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further Information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CEO -Planning D1vlsion, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No.: AVana Ridge/lUA1S·000894, ECF, PPUD ::~~~e~;J\4?; \1 D.!./;s;o.."o,':Av/s,atelZlp: =t1-\!!\ h>x;r+J Vi CfM\ \ TELEPHONE NO.: $J 2 3t'rO ... 5 %.3 7\«::.~ ~ ..... <\ cx.\\ ~<:--\.""",,,,,-t " ,,~C> .,v-.ci .... &.,.. "'') ~L",,,s. \ '. J <="" () -~ \ -. , \.... F J' """"",4--1 / .... ··V""'" "-irR.!&"2;> ~ .. ,""."'---" Q, C)'-I<e.i' "'\ ~~~s ~h 5h~),_ March 30, 2016 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36'h St, Ste 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Subject: "Off Hold Notice" Application Avana Ridge Apartments, LUA15-000894, ECF, PPUD Dear Mr. Lagers: Thank you for submitting the additional materials requested in the February 15, 2016 letter from the City. Independent Secondary Review of the provided Traffic Study has been completed by TENW, dated March 21, 2016,and provided to the City. In addition, you have also provided a memo, dated March 26, 2016, in response to the recommendations included in the secondary review. As of the date of this letter, the project is off hold and the City will continue review of the Avana Ridge Apartment project. The Preliminary Planned Urban Development has been rescheduled, for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee, to April 11, 2016. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. In addition, this matter is tentatively rescheduled for a Public Hearing on May 10, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant are required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff report will be mailed to you one week prior to the scheduled hearing. Please contact me at (425) 430-7219 if you have any questions. SinCer_eIY~ .j' '-i?~~ ~o~le Timmons Senior Planner cc: Michael Gladstein / Owner(s) Party(ies) of Record Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov INVOICE REQUEST City of Renton Finance Department Date From Department Authorization (Nome & February 23, 2016 ED Signoture) Judith Subia Customer Number Account Name Dept Contoct / Phone ~vana Trails LLC Judith Subia / x6575 101 Credit Memo 1 19 Debit Memo 1 For Invoice: Invoice Title Transportation Secondary Review for Avana Ridge Apartments (LUA15-000894) Description Transportation Secondary Review for Avana Ridge Apartments (LUA15-000894 ) Account Distribution Work Order / Function *. *.*237.23. *. * INVOICE TOTAL Comments: Please email invoice to Rocale Timmons Address: Avana Trails LLC 9675 SE 36 th St Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Phone: 206-588-1147 Amount $2,000.00 Amount $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Send completed form and all backup to Accounts Receivable, Sue Olson, ASD. ext. 6897 Rocale Timmons From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Hello Gentlemen, Rocale Timmons Monday, February 15, 2016 10:28 AM 'mikeread@tenw.com'; 'mhendrix@perteet.com' Chip Vincent Avana Ridge Transportation Study -Independent Peer Review (LUAI5-000894) Colored Site Plan.pdf; Revised Avana Ridge Apartments TIA 2.2.16.pdf; Applicant Comment Response -Cut Through Traffic.pdf; Conceptual Mitigation Measure - Transpo.pdf; Avana School Walkway Analysis.pdf; Exhibit 16.k -Comment.Cantu.pdf; Avana Ridge 172nd st; Avana Ridge PUD_Neighborhood Detail Map.pdf I have either spoken with your or traded voicemails with you over the last couple of days regarding a peer review for the Avana Ridge Apartment project in the City of Renton. The City has completed preliminary review of transportation impacts associated with the 74 unit apartment proposal in South Renton. However, staff received several traffic related comments letters/emails by the public. The comments raise concerns regarding the use of the proposed SE 172 0d St entrance, potential impacts to the neighboring single-family residential development to the north, as well as additional impacts to queueing delays at Benson Rd S and Benson Drive S. Therefore, the project has been placed on hold and we are requiring Independent Secondary review ofthe submitted TIA. I have attached the follOWing information in support of our request for secondary: • Project Site Plan • Neighborhood Detail Map • Transportation Study (dated February 2, 2016) • Applicant Response -Cut Through Traffic • Safe Route to School Analysis • Potential Mitigation Measure • A sample of public comment letters Could you please provide me with a scope of work, cost, and expected timing of review so that I may forward on to the applicant. Specifically we are asking that you: • Review the applicant's analysis (particularly trip distribution which may impact the neighborhood to the north, queuing at Benson Rd and Benson Drive, location of access, safe routes to school, and pedestrian connectivity). • Effectiveness of any proposed mitigating measures or programs, to include any recommendations as appropriate. We will forward all back to the applicant and inform you of the choice. Thank you so much for your attention to this email and look forward to hearing from you soon. Rocale Timmons City of Renton -Current Planning Senior Planner lOS5 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Tel: (425) 430-7219 Fax: (425) 430-7300 rtimmons@rentonwa.gov 1 ~TENW Transportation Engineering NorthWest February 17, 2016 Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner City of Renton -Current Planning 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Subject: Avana Ridge Transportation Study -Independent Peer Review Dear Roca Ie: Per your request, TENW is pleased to present this proposal to prepare assist the City of Renton and the applicant with a peer review and evaluation of proposed traffic mitigation measures far the proposec 74-unit Avana Ridge residential project in southeast Renton. A brief technical memorandum documenting the findings of our peer review would be prepared in draft form for yaur consideration before finalizing. Items would include: • Trip distribution assumptions; • Traffic operational analysis and safety of site access locations; • Vehicle queuing from vicinity signalized intersections; • School safe walk route analysis; and • General pedestrian connectivity. In addition ta peer review of the study itself, TENW would also review the proposed mitigation measures for their effectiveness in reducing ar eliminate traffic or pedestrian impacts. As we would be considering safety issues, our peer review would also include a field visit to confirm sight distance and general circulation conditions of the study area for confirmation of other study assumptions and conclusions. For the scope required by the City, we estimate that a budget of up to $1,500 would be necessary. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any further questions or comments at (206) 361-7333 ex!. 101. Sincerely, Tr7fj,;TJineerii?;Jest Michael J Read, P.E 9 Principal mi keread@tenw.com Tronsporiotion Plonning I Desiqn I Tmtfie Im~)(j(J & Operotior1s PO Box 65254, Seattle, WA 98155 I Office (206) 361-7333 Roeale Timmons From: Sent: To: Ce: Subject: Justin Lagers <justin@americanciassichomes.com> Wednesday, February 17, 2016 1:06 PM Rocale Timmons vince@nwtraffex.com; Laura Ovsak <Iovsak@grouparch.com> (Iovsak@grouparch.com); Toby Coenen (toby.coenen@drstrong.com); Brent Carson (brc@vnf.com) Re: Avana Ridge -On Hold I take no issue with the cost or timing and I can have a check down to you in 30 minutes. Should make it for $2000.00 even in case they run over? On Wed, Feb 17,2016 at 12:53 PM, Rocale Timmons <RTimmol1s@rentol1wa.gov> wrote: Hello Justin, Please see attached scope from TenW ... should be hearing back from Perteet ,ho111y. Let me know what you think. Rocale Timmons From: Rocale Timmons Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 10:37 AM To: Justin Lagers (tustin@americanclassichomes.com) Ce: 'vince@nwtraffex.com'; Laura Ovsak <Iovsak@grouparch.com> (Iovsak@grouparch.com); Toby Coenen (toby.coenen@drstrong.com); Brent Carson (brc@vnf.com) Subject: Avana Ridge -On Hold Hello Justin, As you know the project has been placed on hold pending receipt of an independent review of the TIA (see attached on-hold letter). I have had conversations with Perteet and Ten W over the latter part of last week and this morning I forwarded over all relevant information (including the proposed mitigation measure and school route info you sent over on Friday) for them to generate a scope of work. The urgency of the request was also communicated to them. 1 As soon as I receive the scopes back I will forward over to you to for review. Please let me know if you have any further questions. Thank you. Rocale Timmons City of Renton -Current Planning Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way Renton, W A 98057 Tel: (425) 430-7219 Fax: (425) 430-7300 rtimmons@rentonwa.gov ----------Forwarded message ---------- From: "Michael Read, PE" <mikeread@tenw.colll> To: Rocale Timmons <RTilllmons@rentonwa.gov> Cc: Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 20:47:08 +0000 Subject: Re: Avana Ridge Transportation Study -Independent Peer Review (LUAI5-0oo894) Rocale: Please find enclosed our proposal for the scope of work outlined below, Our work would be completed within 2 weeks of notice to proceed, but we would make every effort to expedite the review. Please let me know if you have any questions; thanks! Michael Read, PE I p";n!";,';(]; TENW PO Box 65254, Seattle, W A 98155 lIlikeread@tenw.com I c:,;(O 206-36].7333 (, ',; I) I ',;COt' 206-999-4145 On 211512016 10:28 AM, Rocale Timmons wrote: Hello Gentlemen, I have either spoken with your or traded voicemails with you over the last couple of days regarding a peer review for the Avana Ridge Apartment project in the City of Renton. The City has completed preliminary review of transportation impacts associated with the 74 unit apartment proposal in South Renton. However, staff received several traffic related comments 2 Deni5~ f -r 0. _________ :M:ay:o:r ..................... .-. --t~' r rt£) ( 1. February 15, 2016 Philip Reitz 2907 Cedar Ave S Renton, WA 98055 Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: AVANA RIDGE PPUD COMMENT RESPONSE LETTER LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Dear Mr. Reitz: Thank you for your comments related to the Avana Ridge PUD; dated February 1, 2016 (email). Your comments and suggestions will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. To address your traffic, crime, open space, and access concerns the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the City's development regulations as well as Washington State's Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) which include requirements for mitigation for impacts caused by the development. The City will provide analysis of the proposal in three upcoming documents: the Environmental Review Committee Report, the Staff Recommendation the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner Decision (Final Decision). You will receive copies of all correspondence. To answer one of your questions the applicant is proposing a large, landscaped community open space provided at the southern portion of the site totaling 19,795 square feet and the 49,918 square feet of critical area and associated buffer which would remain in a vegetative/open space state. The community open space incorporates active and passive space, with a central connecting sidewalk which links the open space to the public right of way. Please note the project has been placed on hold, pending the receipt of an independent secondary review of the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation. As a result, the public hearing on March Ifh has been cancelled and will be rescheduled upon receipt of the requested informatian. Additionally, the timing for all reports/decisions mentioned above will be contingent upon receipt of the requested materials. You will receive notification when the project is taken off hold with information regarding the rescheduled hearing. Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. j~~ Senior Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 ;II rentonwa.gov Denis Law rtr _________ .:M:aY:o:r ....................... ~ r February 15, 2016 Daniel Ridenour 16836 106th Ave SE Renton WA 98055 ---,.....--"-.. Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: AVANA RIDGE PPUD COMMENT RESPONSE LETTER LUA15-000S94, PPUD, ECF Dear Mr. Ridenour: Thank you for your comments related to the Avana Ridge PUD; dated January 31, 2016 (email). Your comments and suggestions will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. To address your traffic and noise concerns the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the City's development regulations as well as Washington State's Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) which include requirements for mitigation for impacts caused by the development. The City will provide analysis of the proposal in three upcoming documents: the Environmental Review Committee Report, the Staff Recommendation the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner Decision (Final Decision). You will receive copies of all correspondence. Please note the project has been placed on hold, pending the receipt of an independent secondary review of the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation. As a result, the public hearing on March sth has been cancelled and will be rescheduled upon receipt 0/ the requested in/ormation. Additionally, the timing for all reports/decisions mentioned above will be contingent upon receipt of the requested materials. You will receive notification when the project is taken off hold with information regarding the rescheduled hearing. Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, • j:m~ Senior Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov February 15, 2016 Paul Skulstad No Mailing Address Community & Economic Development Department C.E,"Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: AVANA RIDGE PPUD COMMENT RESPONSE LETTER LUA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Dear Mr. Skulstad: Thank you for your comments related to the Avana Ridge PUD; dated February 2, 2016 (emaH). Your comments and suggestions will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record, To address your traffic, drainage, and access concerns the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the City's development regulations as well as Washington State's Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) which include requirements for mitigation for impacts caused bv the development. The City will provide analysis of the proposal in three upcoming documents: the Environmental Review Committee Report, the Staff Recommendation the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner Decision (Final Decision). You will receive copies of all correspondence. To answer one of your questions, the project located between SE 170'h and SE 1720d Streets is proposed to contain approximately 162 residential units, The subdivision located between S 27'h and S 29'h Streets contains 21 single family homes. please note the project has been placed on hold, pending the receipt of an independent secondary review of the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation, As a result, the public hearing on March If" has been cancelled and will be rescheduled upon receipt of the requested information. Additionally, the timing for all reports/decisions mentioned above will be contingent upon receipt of the requested materials. You will receive notification when the project is taken off hold with information regarding the rescheduled hearing. Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov. Thank you, Sincerely, • ~~~ Senior Planner Renton City Hall • ·1055 South Grady Way. Renton. Washington 98057 • rentonwa,gov Denis Law Mayor • r --=:........-""...,.~ r -Community & Economic Development Department February 15, 2016 Wendy Yadock 17020 104th Avenue SE Renton, WA 98055 C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: AVANA RIDGE PPUD COMMENT RESPONSE LETTER LUAIS-000894, PPUD, ECF Dear Mrs. Yadock: Thank you for your comments related to the Avana Ridge PUD; dated February 1, 2016 (letter). Your comments and suggestions will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. To address your traffic and access concerns the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the City's development regulations as well as Washington State's Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) which include requirements for mitigation for impacts caused by the development. The City will provide analysis of the proposal in three upcoming documents: the Environmental Review Committee Report, the Staff Recommendation the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner Decision (Final Decision). You will receive copies of all correspondence. Please note the project has been placed on hold, pending the receipt of an independent secondary review of the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation. As a result, the public hearing an March sth has been cancelled and will be rescheduled upan receipt af the requested information, Additionally, the timing for all reports/decisions mentioned above will be contingent upon receipt of the requested materials. You will receive notification when the project is taken off hold with information regarding the rescheduled hearing. Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, • i:my'~ Senior Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov _________ D_e:~:~:~::.w .................... ". r . of • ..!~·rrW'rl February 15, 2016 Emily Brooker 16810 104th Ave SE Renton WA 98055 Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: AVANA RIDGE PPUD COMMENT RESPONSE LETTER LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Dear Ms. Booker: Thank you for your comments related to the Avana Ridge PUD; dated January 31, 2016 (email). Your comments and suggestions will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. To address your traffic concerns the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the City's development regulations as well as Washington State's Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) which include requirements for mitigation for impacts caused by the development. The City will provide analysis of the proposal in three upcoming documents: the Environmental Review Committee Report, the Staff Recommendation the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner Decision (Final Decision). You will receive copies of all correspondence. Please note the project has been placed on hold, pending the receipt of an independent secondary review of the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation. As a result, the public hearing on March 8'" has been cancelled and will be rescheduled upon receipt 0/ the requested in/ormation, Additionally, the timing for all reports/decisions mentioned above will be contingent upon receipt of the requested materials. You will receive notification when the project is taken off hold with information regarding the rescheduled hearing. Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. ~~ Senior Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law f -r 0 l _________ .:M:,Y:o:r ....................... . February 15, 2016 Genevieve Byrnes 3125 Cedar Ave 5 Renton, WA 98055 ..!~' r tWo r 1, Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent Administrator SUBJECT: AVANA RIDGE PPUD COMMENT RESPONSE LEITER LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Dear Mrs. Byrnes: Thank you for your comments related to the Avana Ridge PUD; dated February 1, 2016 (email). Your comments and suggestions will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. To address your traffic concerns the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the City's development regulations as well as Washington State's Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) which include requirements for mitigation for impacts caused by the development. The City will provide analysis of the proposal in three upcoming documents: the Environmental Review Committee Report, the Staff Recommendation the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner Decision (Final Decision). You will receive copies of all correspondence. Please note the project has been placed on hold, pending the receipt of an independent secondary review of the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation. As a result, the public hearing an March 8'h has been cancelled and will be rescheduled upon receipt 0/ the requested in/ormation. Additionally, the timing for all reports/decisions mentioned above will be contingent upon receipt of the requested materials. You will receive notification when the project is taken off hold with information regarding the rescheduled hearing. Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. j~ Senior Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law C· f ____ 2M:'Y:or __ --.............. r Ity 0 l --i~' r fLU' r 1. February 15, 2016 Caryn Cantu 16561106th AVE SE Renton, WA 98055 Community & Economic Development Department C.E, "Chip"Vincent. Administrator SUBJECT: AVANA RIDGE PPUD COMMENT RESPONSE LEITER . LUA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Dear Mrs, Cantu: Thank you for your comments related to the Avana Ridge PUD; dated February 1, 2016 (letter), Your comments and suggestions will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. To address your traffic, drainage, and access concerns the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the City's development regulations as well as Washington State's Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) which include requirements for mitigation for impacts caused by the development, The City will provide analysis of the proposal in three upcoming documents: the Environmental Review Committee Report, the Staff Recommendation the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner Decision (Final Decision). You will receive copies of all correspondence, Please note the project has been placed on hold, pending the receipt of an independent secondary review of the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation, As a result, the public hearing an March lfh has been cancelled and will be rescheduled upon receipt 0/ the requested in/ormation. Additionally, the timing for all reports/decisions mentioned above will be contingent upon receipt of the requested materials, You will receive notification when the project is taken off hold with information regarding the rescheduled hearing, Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov. Thank you, Sincerely, , i:m~~ Senior Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonw •. gov Denis Law Mayor .... _~::... ___ ",.."..".rd r --""'--"--Community & Economic Development Department February 15,2016 C.E."Chip"Vincent, Ad mi nistrator Dawn Cramton No Mailing Address SUBJECT: AVANA RIDGE PPUD COMMENT RESPONSE LETTER LUA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Dear Mrs. Cramton: Thank you for your comments related to the Avana Ridge PUD; dated January 31, 2016 (email). Your comments and suggestions will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. To address your traffic and access concerns the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the City's development regulations as well as Washington State's Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) which include requirements for mitigation for impacts caused by the development. The City will provide analysis of the proposal in three upcoming documents: the Environmental Review Committee Report, the Staff Recommendation the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner Decision (Final Decision). You will receive copies of all correspondence. Please note the project has been placed on hold, pending the receipt of an independent secondary review of the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation. As a result, the public hearing on March 8th has been cancelled and will be rescheduled upon receipt of the requested infarmation. Additionally, the timing for all reports/decisions mentioned above will be contingent upon receipt of the requested materials. You will receive notification when the project is taken off hold with information regarding the rescheduled hearing. Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, • '1:m~ Senior Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way. Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov _____ D_e:~a:i~:~ra.w __ -............ $. r City of • .l~' r rill' t t. February 15, 2016 Doug Goods 16602 106th ave se Renton, WA 98055 Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: AVANA RIDGE PPUD COMMENT RESPONSE LETTER LUA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Dear Mr. Goods: Thank you for your comments related to the Avana Ridge PUD; dated January 31, 2016 (email). Your comments and suggestions will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. To address your traffic concerns the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the City's development regulations as well as Washington State's Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) which include requirements for mitigation for impacts caused by the development. The City will provide analysis of the proposal in three upcoming documents: the Environmental Review Committee Report, the Staff Recommendation the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner Decision (Final Decision). You will receive copies of all correspondence. Please note the project has been placed on hold, pending the receipt of an independent secondary review of the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation. As a result, the public hearing an March 8th has been cancelled and will be rescheduled upon receipt of the requested information. Additionally, the timing for all reports/decisions mentioned above will be contingent upon receipt of the requested materials. You will receive notification when the project is taken off hold with information regarding the rescheduled hearing. Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, • 1~ Senior Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way. Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor 9: r --=----"",.,.,.~. r of • tJ' (fID' (l February 15, 2016 Andrew Gray 3275 Cedar Ave S Renton, WA 98055 .- Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: AVANA RIDGE PPUD COMMENT RESPONSE LmER LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Dear Mr. Gray: Thank you for your comments related to the Avana Ridge PUD; dated February 1, 2016 (email). Your comments and suggestions will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. To address your traffic, animal control, drainage, residential density, and access concerns the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the City's development regulations as well as Washington State's Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) which include requirements for mitigation for impacts caused by the development. The City will provide analysis of the proposal in three upcoming documents: the Environmental Review Committee Report, the Staff Recommendation the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner Decision (Final Decision). You will receive copies of all correspondence. Please note the project has been placed on hold, pending the receipt of an independent secondary review of the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation. As a result, the public hearing on March If" has been cancelled and will be rescheduled upan receipt of the requested information. Additionally, the timing for all reports/decisions mentioned above will be contingent upon receipt of the requested materials. You will receive notification when the project is taken off hold with information regarding the rescheduled hearing. Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, • 'j:m~~ Senior Planner Renton City Hall. 1055 South Grady Way • Renton,Washington 98057 • rentonwa,gov Denis~w f _-"':M:.ayoc ------~] g' f °l,tu f I. February 15, 2016 lody Hanawalt PO Box 4097 Renton, WA 98057 Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: AVANA RIDGE PPUD COMMENT RESPONSE LETTER LUA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Dear Mrs. Hanawalt: Thank you for your comments related to the Avana Ridge PUD; dated February 1" and 7th , 2016 (emails). Your comments and suggestions will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. To address your traffic, drainage, and access concerns the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the City's development regulations as well as Washington State's Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) which include requirements for mitigation for impacts caused by the development. The City will provide analysis of the proposal in three upcoming documents: the Environmental Review Committee Report, the Staff Recommendation the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner Decision (Final Decision). You will receive copies of all correspondence. Please note the project has been placed on hold, pending the receipt of an independent secondary review of the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation. As a result, the public hearing on March If" has been cancelled and will be rescheduled upon receipt of the requested information. Additionally, the timing for all reports/decisions mentioned above will be contingent upon receipt of the requested materials. You will receive notification when the project is taken off hold with information regarding the rescheduled hearing. Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425·430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. ;?:~~ 'Ro~le Timmons Senior Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law f _~M::aYOr _."""..~]£ ~ l:tu r I. February 15, 2016 Molly Heine 16829 SE 105th St Renton, WA 98055 Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: AVANA RIDGE PPUD COMMENT RESPONSE LETTER LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Dear Mrs. Heine: Thank you for your comments related to the Avana Ridge PUD; dated February 1, 2016 (letter). Your comments and suggestions will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. To address your traffic, noise, and access concerns the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the City's development regulations as well as Washington State's Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) which include requirements for mitigation for impacts caused by the development. The City will provide analysis of the proposal in three upcoming documents: the Environmental Review Committee Report, the Staff Recommendation the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner Decision (Final Decision). You will receive copies of all correspondence. Please note the project has been placed on hold, pending the receipt of an independent secondary review of the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation. As a result, the public hearing on March S'· has been cancelled and will be rescheduled upon receipt of the requested information. Additionally, the timing for all reports/decisions mentioned above will be contingent upon receipt of the requested materials. You will receive notification when the project is taken off hold with information regarding the rescheduled hearing. Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, • 1:m~~ Senior Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton. Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor Co r --=----"",...,,~. r February 15, 2016 Daniel Hiranaka 10510 SE 172nd St Renton, WA 98055 ______ a.-. Community & Economic Development Department CE. "Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: AVANA RIDGE PPUD COMMENT RESPONSE LETTER LUA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Dear Mr. Hiranaka: Thank you for your comments related to the Avana Ridge PUD; dated January 31, 2016 (email). Your comments will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. . To address your traffic concerns the applicant will be required to comply with the City's development regulations as well as Washington State's Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) which include requirements for mitigation for impacts caused by the development. The City will provide analysis of the proposal in three upcoming documents: the Environmental Review Committee Report, the Staff Recommendation the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner Decision (Final Decision). You will receive copies of all correspondence. To answer one of your questions/concerns the applicant is proposing half-street improvements, along SE 172 0d St for the frontage of the site, which comply with City Code. Frontage improvements would include the following: an 8-foot parking lane, a 0.5 foot wide curb and gutter, an 8-foot wide landscaped planter, a 6-foot wide sidewalk, street lighting, and stormwater improvements on the southern side of the street. Please note the project has been placed on hold, pending the receipt of an independent secondary review of the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation. As a result, the public hearing on March sth has been cancelled and will be rescheduled upan receipt of the requested information. Additionally, the timing for all reports/decisions mentioned above will be contingent upon receipt of the requested materials. You will receive notification when the project is taken off hold with information regarding the rescheduled hearing. Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425·430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. '1~~ Senior Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way. Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law _ r of _________ .:M:aY:o:r .................... ~.. l ..12' r ttl)' r l. February 15, 2016 Kimmie McMullin 17030 106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 Community & Economic Development Department C.E,"Ch ip"Vincent, Admin istrator SUBJECT: AVANA RIDGE PPUD COMMENT RESPONSE LEITER LUA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Dear Mrs, McMullin: Thank you for your comments related to the Avana Ridge PUD; dated February 1, 2016 (email), Your comments and suggestions will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. The City has not approved the proposed project. To address your traffic and access concerns the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the City's development regulations as well as Washington State's Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) which include requirements for mitigation for impacts caused by the development. The City will provide analysis of the proposal in three upcoming documents: the Environmental Review Committee Report, the Staff Recommendation the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner Decision (Final Decision), You will receive copies of all correspondence. Please note the project has been placed on hold, pending the receipt of an independent secondary review of the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation. As a result, the public hearing on March 8th has been cancelled and will be rescheduled upon receipt 0/ the requested in/ormation. Additionally, the timing for all reports/decisions mentioned above will be contingent upon receipt of the requested materials. You will receive notification when the project is taken off hold with information regarding the rescheduled hearing. Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa,gov. Thank you, Sincerely, , ~~ Senior Planner Renton City Hall .. 1055 South Grady Way .. Renton, Washington 98057 .. rentonwa.gov February 15, 2016 Jerry Miller PO Box 686 Renton, WA 98057 Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: AVANA RIDGE PPUD COMMENT RESPONSE LETTER LUA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Dear Mr. Miller: Thank you for your comments related to the Avana Ridge PUD; dated February 1, 2016 (letter). Your comments and suggestions will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. To address your traffic concerns the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the City's development regulations as well as Washington State's Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) which include requirements for mitigation for impacts caused by the development. The City will provide analysis of the proposal in three upcoming documents: the Environmental Review Committee Repor!, the Staff Recommendation the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner Decision (Final Decision). You will receive copies of all correspondence. The applicant is however proposing half-street improvements, along SE 172'd St for the frontage of the site, which comply with City Code. Frontage improvements would include the following: an 8-foot parking lane, a 0.5 foot wide curb and gutter, an 8-foot wide landscaped planter, a 6- foot wide sidewalk, street lighting, and stormwater improvements on the southern side of the street. please note the project has been placed on hold, pending the receipt of an independent secondary review of the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation. As a result, the public hearing on March lih has been cancelled and will be rescheduled upon receipt 0/ the requested in/ormation. Additionally, the timing for all reports/decisions mentioned above will be contingent upon receipt of the requested materials. You will receive notification when the project is taken off hold with information regarding the rescheduled hearing. Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. j~~ Senior Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor • r -..::... ........ ,."..,.~ r February 15, 2016 Molly Moss 3121 Cedar Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 --" Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: AVANA RIDGE PPUD COMMENT RESPONSE LETTER LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Dear Mrs. Moss: Thank you for your comments related to the Avana Ridge PUD; dated January 31, 201(;; (email). Your comments and suggestions will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. To address your traffic concerns the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the City's development regulations as well as Washington State's Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) which include requirements for mitigation for impacts caused by the development. The City will provide analysis of the proposal in three upcoming documents: the Environmental Review Committee Report, the Staff Recommendation the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner Decision (Final Decision). You will receive copies of all correspondence. Please note the project has been placed on hold, pending the receipt of an independent secondary review of the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation. As a result, the public hearing on March st" has been cancelled and will be rescheduled upon receipt of the requested information. Additionally, the timing for all reports/decisions mentioned above will be contingent upon receipt of the requested materials. You will receive notification when the project is taken off hold with information regarding the rescheduled hearing. Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, • ~~ Senior Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way _ Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor • r· --=---"""...~ r rl --t ' February 15, 2016 Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Rhonda Rae Murphy No Mailing Address SUBJECT: AVANA RIDGE PPUD COMMENT RESPONSE LETTER LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Dear Mrs. Murphy: Thank you for your comments related to the Avana Ridge PUD; dated February 1, 2016 (email). Your comments and suggestions will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. The City has not approved the proposed project. To address your traffic and access concerns the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the City's development regulations as well as Washington State's Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) which include requirements for mitigation for impacts caused by the development. The City will provide analysis of the proposal in three upcoming documents: the Environmental Review Committee Report, the Staff Recommendation the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner Decision (Final Decision). You will receive copies of all correspondence. To answer one of your questions/concerns the applicant is proposing half-street improvements, along SE 172'd St for the frontage of the site, which comply with City Code. Frontage improvements would include the following: an 8-foot parking lane, a 0.5 foot wide curb and gutter, an 8-foot wide landscaped planter, a 6-foot wide sidewalk, street lighting, and stormwater improvements on the southern side of the street. Please note the project has been placed on hold, pending the receipt of an independent secondary review of the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation. As a result, the public hearing on March Ifh has been cancelled and will be rescheduled upon receipt of the requested information. Additionally, the timing for all reports/decisions mentioned above will be contingent upon receipt of the requested materials. You will receive notification when the project is taken off hold with information regarding the rescheduled hearing. Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law __ ":M:ayor~_""""",,""$. r February 15, 2016 Juli and Mike Radtke 17024 106'h Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 -~"-,.- Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: AVANA RIDGE PPUD COMMENT RESPONSE LETTER LUA1S-000894, PPUD, ECF Dear Mr. and Mrs. Radtke: Thank you for your comments related to the Avana Ridge PUD; dated January 31, 2016 (email). Your comments will be added to the public record for consideration by the reviewing official and you have been added as a party of record. The City has not made a decision on the Avana Ridge PUD project. To address your traffic and crime concerns the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the City's development regulations as well as Washington State's Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) which include requirements for mitigation for impacts caused by the development. The City will provide analysis of the proposal in three upcoming documents: the Environmental Review Committee Report, the Staff Recommendation the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner Decision (Final Decision). You will receive copies of all correspondence. Please note the project has been placed on hold, pending the receipt of an independent secondary review of the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation. As a result, the public hearing an March 8th has been canceJled and will be rescheduled upan receipt af the requested informatian. Additionally, the timing for all reports/decisions mentioned above will be contingent upon receipt of the requested materials. You will receive notification when the project is taken off hold with information regarding the rescheduled hearing. Thank you for interest in this project and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. i£~~ Senior Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa,gov ~~~.--- ___ D~e~:;~~:.raW ____ ----i~ n J( ~ ~itfl~-~~/~('" ... r,,-··1 L..~5J .J l.W~JJ .. ' February 15, 2016 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36th St, Ste 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 SUBJECT: "On Hold" Notice Community & Economic Development Department CE."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Avana Ridge Apartments, LUA1S-000894, ECF, PPUD Dear Mr. Lagers: The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for review on December 30, 2015. During our review, staff has determined that additional information is necessary in order to proceed further. The following information will need to be submitted before May 15, 2016 so that we may continue the review of the above subject application: • Independent Secondary Review of Traffic Study: Please provide 5 copies of an evaluation by an independent qualified professional regarding the applicant's analysis and the effectiveness of any proposed mitigating measures or programs, to include any recommendations as appropriate. This shall be paid at the applicant's expense, and the Administrator shall select the third-party review professional. At this time, your project has been placed "on hold" pending receipt of the requested information. The public hearing, tentatively scheduled for March 8, 2016, will be rescheduled upon receipt of the requested information, Please contact me at (425) 430-7219 if you have any questions. Sincerely, j~ Senior Planner cc: Michael Gladstein I Owner!s) Partyiies) of Record Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law -.. .... ~~~~.I..------- __ ':May:or ---"""''''''~jl~]'~"iltcQ)J.[J I, February 15, 2016 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 5E 36th St, Ste 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 SUBJECT: "On Hold" Notice Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Avana Ridge Apartments, LUA1S·000894, ECF, PPUD Dear Mr. Lagers: The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for review on December 30, 2015. During our review, staff has determined that additional information is necessary in order to proceed further. The following information will need to be submitted before May 15, 2016 so that we may continue the review of the above subject application: • Independent Secondary Review of Traffic Study: Please provide 5 copies of an evaluation by an independent qualified professional regarding the applicant's analysis and the effectiveness of any proposed mitigating measures or programs, to include any recommendations as appropriate. This shall be paid at the applicant's expense, and the Administrator shall select the third-party review professional. At this time, your project has been placed "on hold" pending receipt of the requested information. The public hearing, tentatively scheduled for March 8, 2016, will be rescheduled upon receipt of the requested information. Please contact me at (425) 430-7219 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~~ Senior Planner cc: Michael Gladstein I Owner(s) Party(ies) of Record Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov On the 13th day of January, 20161 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Notice of Application and Acceptance documents. This information was sent to: Agencies See Attached Justin Lagers Avana Ridge Michael Gladstein Owner Parties of Record See Attached (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING b Nl 1 ",\\\\\I\\(I I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Sa. f'h~ ''',r, I> re __ ~", \.. Y Po 1"'1 signe~ this i.nstru~ent and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for *~M~~ mentioned In the Instrument. ' f'~"fJI OT,,_~if) ~ 8 ' (f)~U + •. :'" % Dated:1hM,Y ,J )014> -\ ~ ... :: Notary (print): ____ B[ll.\.j(O:!,.~+' -A,...JP ,I-L' "J",',J.I.!:+1..!.1 ~:L<..I.')_.'~' _~I_" -"-,.,---.:.;...."""~"--- My appointment expires: :J, 'v v , "" 'I ·~v ~ Avana Ridge Apartments LUA1S-000894, ECF, PPUD template -affidavit of service by mailing Dept. of Ecology" Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region .. Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., M5-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 us Army Corp. of Engineers * Seattle District Office Attn: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Boyd Powers *** Depart, of Natural Resources PO 80x47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv, Attn: SEPA Section 35030 SE Douglas St. #210 Snoqualmie, WA 98065 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Seattle Public Utilities Timothy C. Croll, Attn: SEPA Responsible Official 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERe DETERMINATIONS) Dept. of Ecology ** Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. ** Attn: Misty Blair Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer PO Box 47703 39015 -172'" Avenue SE Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Auburn, WA 98092 Duwamish Tribal Office .. Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program """ 4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn: Laura Murphy Seattle, WA 98106-1514 390151721'1d Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 KC Wastewater Treatment Division .. Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program *'" Environmental Planning Supervisor Attn: Erin Slaten Ms. Shirley Marroquin 390151721'1d Avenue SE 201 s. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 WDFW -Larry Fisher· Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation· 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Attn: Gretchen Kaehler Issaquah, WA 98027 PO Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: Tim McHarg Attn: Charlene Anderson, AICP, ECD Director of Community Development 220 Fourth Avenue South 12835 Newcastle Way, Ste 200 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Newcastle, WA 98056 Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Wendy Weiker, Community Svcs, Mgr. Jack Pace, Responsible Official 355110" Ave NE 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Mailstop EST 11W TukWila, WA 98188 Bellevue, WA 98004 Puget Sound Energy Doug Corbin, Municipal Liaison Mgr, 6905 South 228" St Kent, WA 98032 *Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of Application, *"'Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: sepaunit@ecy,wa,gov ** Karen Walter, Laura Murphy and Erin Slaten with the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. are emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email addresses: KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us I Laura.murphy@muckleshoot,nsn.u5L erin.siaten@muckleshoot.nsn.us ***Department of Natural Resources is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice the following email address: sepacenter@dnr.wa.gov template -affidavit of service by mailing Dan Palner 16638 106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 Mike & Julie Radtke 17024 106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 JUSTIN LAGERS Avana Ridge 9675 SE 36th St, Ste. 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Michael Gladstein Avana Ridge LLC 9675 SE 36th St, #105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 2923059160 87000208 3809000000 174TH STLLC ALVARADO ALEXANDER+FLORENCE ANDERSON BETTY 10700 SE 174TH ST 17016 105TH AVE SE 10817 SE 172ND ST #A-3 RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 2923059022 3809000000 2923059178 AVANA TRAILS LLC BACANI DENNIS P+MARIA CIELO BENSON ROAD MINI LLC 9675 SE 36TH ST #105 10813 SE 172ND ST #D2 133 EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH SHORE MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 RENTON, WA 98055 SAMMAMISH, WA 98074 3809000000 3809000000 87000151 BONIFANT DEANN MARIE CALLIA GINA+RUTLEDGE KEVIN CASIO JAVIER AGOMEZ+LUZ MAR 10825 SE 172TH ST #5D 10809 SE 172ND ST #l-D 17031105TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 87000280 3809000000 3809000000 CHAU HAMINH CHEN FONGPIN CONE CLARA L 4101150TH AVE SE 10825 SE 172ND ST #5C 10841 SE 172 N D ST #9C BELLEVUE, WA 98006 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 3809000000 87000146 87000282 COPPOCK SYLVA JEAN CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 10813 SE 172ND ST #2A 17019 105th Ave SE 10618 SE 172nd St RENTON, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 2923059134 2923059134 2923059134 CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 10400 SE 174th St 10402 SE 174th St 10406 SE 174th St Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 2923059134 2923059150 2923059160 CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 10408 SE 174th St 10405 SE 172nd St 10700 SE 174th Suite 202 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 2923059160 2923059160 2923059160 CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 10700 SE 174th St Suite 104 10700 SE 174th St Suite 101 10700 SE 174th St Suite 106 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 2923059160 29230S9160 2923059160 CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 10700 SE 174th St Suite 204 10700 SE 174th St Suite 102 10700 SE 174th St Suite 201 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 3809000000 3809000000 3809000000 CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 10813 SE 172nd St 10809 SE 172nd St 10829 SE 172nd St Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 3809000000 3809000000 3809000000 CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 10817 SE 172nd St 10837 SE 172nd St 10833 SE 172nd St Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 3809000000 3809000000 3809000000 CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT CURRENT RESIDENT 10821 SE 172nd St 10841 SE 172nd St 10825 SE 172nd St Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 3809000000 3809000000 3809000000 GARANA RICHARD GARCIA DANIEL F+KIMBERLY A GLINES JEREMY 10841 SE 172ND ST #0 9660 MARKET BALL CIRCLE 10817 SE 172ND ST #3B RENTON, WA 98055 ANCHORAGE, AK 99507 RENTON, WA 98055 3809000000 87000146 2923059134 GOLD GLADYS M GOOD SHEPHERD OF WA GRE SUNSET VISTA LLC 10829 SE 172ND ST #06 119 N MAIN ST 2801 ALASKAN WAY STE 310 RENTON, WA 98055 PORTERVILLE, CA 93257 SEATTLE,WA 98121 1626800045 3809000000 87000211 HAMILTON RICHARD G HART DONNA MAE HIRANAKA GARTH L 10823 SE 173RD ST 10813 SE 172ND ST #2B 10636 SE 166TH ST RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 3809000000 1626800040 3809000000 JAMMEH SAMBOU JOHNSON ANDREW JUANEDA YARA 10833 SE 172ND ST #7B 10813 SE 173RD ST 10821 SE 172ND ST #4C RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 87000282 2923059150 3809000000 KAIMAKIS II LLC KC HOUSING AUTHORITY KELLAR ANN MARIE PO BOX 34 600 ANDOVER PARK W 10829 SE 172ND ST #A6 SEATTLE, WA 98199 TUKWILA, WA 98188 RENTON, WA 98055 87000207 3809000000 1626800005 KINOSHITA KYM KUMANO CORINE M KUMAR KAMLESH+SAROJANI+PRAS 17022 105TH AV SE PO BOX 1751 17314 108TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 1626800035 87000213 3809000000 KUMAR SAROJANI LANZ VANN+JAMIE LEGGETT JILL L 17314 108TH AV SE 4118 96TH AVE SE 10817 SE 172ND ST UNIT C-3 RENTON, WA 98055 MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 RENTON, WA 98055 2923059072 3809000000 3809000000 LIFE OF VICTORY CHURCH LINDSTROM JOYCE LOUIE GARLAN W 17418 108TH AVE SE 14016 SE 156TH CT 9311 MAYES COURT SO RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 SEATTLE,WA 98118 3809000000 87000214 3809000000 MADFAI MARK MARAGH DEIGHTON S MARYOTI DANA G 3010 ILWACO AVE NE 10526 SE 172ND ST PO BOX 188 RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98055 OCEAN PARK, WA 98640 3809000000 87000281 1626800010 MILES RICHARD D MILLER JERALD S+ANA L NGUYEN NGOCHAN T 10809-B SE 172ND ST 10622 SE 172ND ST 820 S 28TH CT RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 1626800015 3809000000 3809000000 NGUYEN TONY HAl NJENGAH MIRIAM N+MWANGI SAM ONORATI KAREN M 10822 SE 173RD ST 10837 SE 172ND ST#8A 10841 SE 172ND ST 9 B RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 2923059012 2923059174 87000275 PARTNERS PREFERRED YIELD 11 PETETI BUILDERS RADTKE MICHAEL T+JULIANNE PO BOX 25025 10622 SE CARR RD 17024 106TH AVE SE GLENDALE, CA 91201 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 3809000000 2923059176 2923059177 REALTY EXCHANGERS INC+NUNER RUSSELL DANIEL & DEBRA RUSSELL DANIEL & DEBRA 22732 126TH PL SE 829 S 31ST ST 10717 SE 172nd St UNIT B KENT, WA 98031 RENTON, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 3809000000 3809000000 3809000000 SIMPSON KEYSHA SMITH LAURA L SOHNLY MARY P 10837 SE 172ND ST #8C 10841 SE 172ND ST #A-9 10833 SE 172ND ST UNIT #7C RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 2923059009 3809000000 87000150 SPRINGBROOK RIDGE L L C STANLEY D BRUCE+NANCY A STATE OF WASHINGTON DOT 800 S 3RD ST 10825 SE 172ND ST #B5 PO BOX 47338 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 OLYMPIA, WA 98504 3809000000 87000285 87000293 STEVENS KRISTIN L SUBIC GEORGE & FRANCES SUBIC MARGERY 10817 SE 172NDST#7-D PO BOX 89 PO BOX 769 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98057 3809000000 87000291 3809000000 TAMAYAO TERESITA T TEUNGYAOTA THOMAS DAVID E 10813 SE 172ND ST 32C PO BOX 78414 10817 SE 172ND ST #3-D RENTON, WA 98055 SEATTLE, WA 98178 RENTON, WA 98055 3809000000 3809000000 87000283 THOMPSON MICHAEL TURPEN SUSAN K ULYANCHUK TATYANA W+GARIBYA 10821 SE 172ND ST 4A 8008 39TH AVE NE 17030 106TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98055 SEATILE, WA 98115 RENTON, WA 98055 3809000000 VARDANYAN EDUARD 10821 SE 172ND ST #4B RENTON, WA 98055 3809000000 WOODS JENNIFER L 10829 SE 172ND ST #6 B RENTON, WA 98055 Sabrina Mirante From: Rocale Timmons Sent: To: Wednesday, February 03,20168:32 AM Sabrina Mirante Subject: POR Request -LUA1S-000894 Another one. From: wjy@att.net [mailto:wjy@att.netj Sent: Wednesday, February 03,20168:14 AM To: Rocale Timmons Subject: Re: Comments re: proposed Avana Ridge development on SE 172nd street Yes, I would be interested in future correspondence regarding the Avana project. My address is 17020 104th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98055. Wendy Yadock On Monday, February 1,2016 11 :42 AM, Rocale Timmons <RTimmons@Rentonwa.gov> wrote: Hello Wendy, Thank you for your comments. I will formally respond sometime next week. If you are interested in receiving future correspondence (beyond my response letter/email) and decisions related to the project please provide me with your mailing address. Thank you. Rocale Timmons From: wjy@att.net [mailto:wjy@att.net] Sent: Monday, February 01.201611:24 AM To: Rocale Timmons Subject: Comments re: proposed Avana Ridge development on SE 172nd street Dear Rocale Timmons, My name is Wendy Yadock. I live on 104th Avenue SE which is just down the road from where the proposed Avana Ridge development (10616 SE 172nd St.) will be constructed. It has come to my attention that the main access driveway into this development will intersect with SE 172nd street. I would like to propose that the access road should be moved to the other side of the property at SR 515. We already have enough traffic on SE 172nd street. Many of the neighbors, including myself, walk along SE 172nd street. I feel that our safety would be compromised if traffic increases on SE 172nd. As it stands, we do not have sidewalks and the street has no lane markings. As SE 172nd curves and changes into 104th Ave SE / Cedar, it narrows considerably. Not long ago, a vehicle drove around the curve too fast, took out our neighbor's mailbox and landed in the ditch. People are constantly speeding in a 25 mph zone. More people will be using Cedar and 104th 1 Avenue SE to access the neighborhood streets. v Avana Ridge development. We lot need more traffic on our I am very disappointed that so many apartments are being built in our neighborhood area. Traffic congestion is at a max already at Benson road and along SR 515. During rush hour, I cannot even drive down SE 172nd street and turn right on to Benson road because of the back ups. In conclusion, It would be much safer for all who live in our neighborhood if the proposed access road to the Avana Ridge development would NOT intersect with SE 172nd Street. Sincerely, Wendy Yadock 2 Rocale Timmons From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Dan Hiranaka <kiyokazu3037@live.com> Sunday, January 31, 2016 2:04 PM Rocale Timmons Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development Follow up Completed I live across the street from the Avana Planned Development on SE 172nd St and am concerned with the added traffic onto SE 172nd St. which already carries heavy traffic on a two lane residential street. Is it possible to redesign exit from the Development to exit directly onto Benson Drive 5./ SR-515. Also sidewalks & street lights need to be built along SE 172nd St to safely protect pedestrians, children and recreational walkers. Daniel Hiranaka 10510 SE 172nd St Renton, WA 98055 1 Rocale Timmons From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Dear Rocale, Juli and Mike R. <mjrocket88@msn.com> Sunday, January 31, 2016 2:17 PM Rocale Timmons Avana Ridge Planned Development at 10616 SE 172nd st. Follow up Completed January 31, 2016 I understand from talking to one of my neighbors that there is no stopping this project. I do want to express several of my concerns. First, I have lived in this neighborhood for 30 years and I have seen allot of changes. The most noticeable is traffic and noise. This is going to be a big problem for our neighborhood. I see on the maps you provided that the main ingress/egress for this project will be on SE 172nd Street. We live on 106th Ave SE just three houses north of the proposed entrance. As it stands today we already get allot of traffic coming up and down our streets from drivers bypassing the backup of an the extra traffic on Old Benson Rd (cutting down our street and turning left on SE 172 Street to get back onto Benson Road and SR515) during peak hours. We have to listen to and watch out for cars speeding down our street everyday now. This will be compounded even more as the other Avana complex (the 160+ multi-family units located on the other side of Old Benson Road) will be occupied. Also there are no street lights or sidewalks along 106 th Ave SE (or anywhere else in our neighborhood). Trying to go for a walk in our neighborhood can be hazardous. What is the plan for traffic and noise mitigation? Can the main entrance be relocated to Benson Drive (SR515) instead of SE 172nd Street? Can the intersection of 106 th Ave SE and SE 172 nd Street be dead ended? What is the city going to do about the additional congestion and the general public safety? We talked to our Realtor who informed us that thanks to the new 74 multi-family units that is coming to our neighborhood that our home and property value has been diminished. Some of the neighbors are talking about selling and leaving. We will have to give up even more as our neighborhood win be transformed by this project. Our other concern is our safety and the possible increase in crime that apartments seem to bring with them. Most an of my neighbors have already been burglarized over the last few years. We have had our car broken into as it sat in our drive way. Between the two new Avana complexes we potentially will have more than 500+ new neighbors moving in to our small area. I'm sure this will not be the last project that will impact us and our neighborhood. I truly hope you and the city planners will take our concerns into consideration and any feedback is appreciated. We plan on attending the public hearing that is scheduled for March 8th to voice our concerns. Sincerely yours, J uli and Mike Radtke 17024 106 th Ave SE Renton, W A 98055 (425) 228-8168 1 Rocale Timmons From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Dear Ms. Timmons, Molly Moss < Molly.Moss@rentonschools.us> Sunday, January 31, 2016 2:33 PM Rocale Timmons daniel; e.c.brooker@gmail.com; ssdjpro@gmail.com; gtremblay7@gmail.com; NeighborCantu@gmail.com Avana Ridge Planned Development: 10616 SE 172nd St Follow up Completed I am a concerned citizen of Renton residing at 3121 Cedar Avenue South. I am concerned about the proposed use ofthe land located at 10616 SE 172'd Street. As a mother of three preschool aged children, I am most concerned about the increased traffic on my street (Cedar Ave S/104'h Ave SE) and the danger to children, pets, and pedestrians this would pose. The plans depict the only usable driveway (for 74 families) will be located on SE 172'd Street. 172'd turns into Cedar Avenue South, my street, when it heads north. Our neighborhood has sidewalks when the property is under the care of homeowners' associations, but does not have them in areas without associations. Children who attend Cascade Elementary and Lindbergh High School walk on the streets to their school bus stops, and children who attend Nelsen Middle School walk the entire distance to school using this spotty sidewalk system. Currently, there is a low level of traffic, and I feel comfortable using a stroller or going for walks on the roadways. If traffic increased, it would not be a pedestrian or family friendly neighborhood. Please consider an entryway to the proposed development from Benson Drive or Benson Road. This would offer commuters from the proposed property easy access to north-bound destinations. Please also consider strategies to slow the inevitable increased traffic on Cedar Avenue South/104,h Ave SE, 105'h Ave SE, and 106'h Ave SE. I look forward to a response to this request along with a timeline for next steps. Sincerely, Molly Moss 3121 Cedar Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 206-859-8591 1 Rocale Timmons From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Dear Rocale Timmons, Daniel Ridenour <danielridenour@gmail.com> Sunday, January 31, 2016 3:00 PM Rocale Timmons Avana Ridge Planned Development at 10616 SE 172nd St Follow up Completed I am a resident on 106th Ave SE Renton and have concerns regarding the planned 74 multifamily unit project. In particular, the impact the project will have in our neighborhood and the traffic/safety/noise impact issues which will ensue. I hope the planners of the project will seriously consider an alternate layout that would move the driveway/entrance to the Benson Dr S/SR-SIS side, rather than the planned main driveway/entrance off SE 172nd St just east of the intersection of 106th Ave SE. This project will definitely impact all of us and our neighborhoods, and I think by having the main entrance located on the Benson Dr S/SR-SlS side, this will least disrupt/impact our existing neighborhood. I hope this alternate layout/entrance/driveway will be discussed/addressed. Sincerely, Daniel Ridenour 1 Rocale Timmons From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Dear Mrs. Timmons, Emily Brooker <emilybrookerphotography@gmaiLcom> Sunday, January 31, 20169:46 PM Rocale Timmons Re: Avana Ridge Planned Development: 10616 SE 172nd St Follow up Completed My family which consists of 5 children currently reside at 16810 104th Ave SE and would like the Avana Ridge Planners to reconsider the layout of the main drive of the multi family unit. Our road is already congested with high speed commuters during rush hour traffic since most are trying to avoid the long waits on Benson Drive. By adding another way to cut through our neighborhood it is increasing the likelihood of a child related fatality since many of the roads near our home are used by families for access to bus stops, walks with dogs as well as bike rides through a fairly safe neighborhood. By adding another short route off the main roads into our neighborhood you are putting the families in jeopardy by those who are just look for a quick route on and off the highway and main roads. Please consider changing your plans so Renton remains a family friendly city. I look forward to the response to our concerns as this is addressed and revised. Emily Brooker 16810 l04th Ave SE Renton W A 98055 610-393-4540 On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Rocale Timmons <RTimmons@rentonwa.gov> wrote: Hello Molly, Thank you for your comments/questions. T will formally respond sometime next week. I will also add you as a party ofrccord so that you receive future correspondence :ll1d decisions related to the project. I will abo include in my ktter next week upcoming steps. Please note that the puhlic hearing is t(ntalively scheduled for March S'h at 11:00 am here al City hall. Rocak Timmons From: Molly Moss [mailto:Molly.Moss@rentonschoois.us] Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2016 2:33 PM To: Rocale Timmons 1 Cc: daniel; e.c.brooker@gmail.com; ssdjpro@gmail.com; gtremblay7@gmail.com; NeighborCantu@gmail.com Subject: Avana Ridge Planned Development: 10616 5E 172nd 5t Dear Ms. Timmons, I am a concerned citizen of Renton residing at 3121 Cedar Avenue South. I am concerned about the proposed use of the land located at 10616 SE Innd Street. As a mother of three preschool aged children, I am most concerned about the increased traffic on my street (Cedar Ave SIl04'h Ave SE) and the danger to children, pets, and pedestrians this would pose. The plans depict the only usable driveway (for 74 families) will be located on SE Innd Street. Innd turns into Cedar Avenue South, my street, when it heads north. Our neighborhood has sidewalks when the property is under the care of homeowners' associations, but does not have them in areas without associations. Children who attend Cascade Elementary and Lindbergh High School walk on the streets to their school bus stops, and children who attend Nelsen Middle School walk the entire distance to school using this spotty sidewalk system. Currently, there is a low level of traffic, and I feel comfortable using a stroller or going for walks on the roadways. If traffic increased, it would not be a pedestrian or family friendly neighborhood. Please consider an entryway to the proposed development from Benson Drive or Benson Road. This would offer commuters from the proposed property easy access to north-bound destinations. Please also consider strategies to slow the inevitable increased traffic on Cedar Avenue Southl104'h Ave SE, 105 th Ave SE, and 106th Ave SE. I look forward to a response to this request along with a timeline for next steps. Sincerely, Molly Moss 3121 Cedar Avenue South Renton, W A 98055 206-859-8591 2 Rocale Timmons From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Dear Rocale Timmons Doug Goods <g3ds@comcast.net> Sunday, January 31,201611:34 PM Rocale Timmons slgoods@comcast.net; NeighborCantu@gmail.com Avana Ridge 172nd st Follow up Completed I am writing you this letter to comment on the planned Avana Ridge Development at 10616 SE 172nd st. As a long time resident (22 years) on 106th Ave SE I am very much concerned about the impact this development will have on our street/neighborhood. It is my understanding that the primary entrance to this development will be on SE 172nd ST just east of our street 106th Ave SE. I believe very large amount of north bound traffic will use 106th ave to get to Benson Rd S. Our street is what I would call a unimproved, we do not have sidewalks, road striping or neighborhood lighting. I believe this roadway was not designed for the amount of traffic this development is likely to impose on it. I also would like to point out that there is a large group of school kids who have their bus stop at the intersection of 106th Ave Se and 166th St Se, again in an area with no improvements. The traffic in this area has become quit congested during peak time, with Benson Rd S backing up at it's intersection with SR-515 on the south end also Benson RD S, going north, backs up to 106th Ave in the morning hours and I foresee that congestion spilling over to our neighborhood if this project goes thru in it's current form. I am informing you, with this letter, that I would like my concerns consider and heard at the public hearing set for March 8th. Please contact me if this hearing date changes Thank you for the opportunity to voice my concerns both here and at the upcoming hearing. Doug Goods 16602 106th ave se Renton wa 98055 206-399-8762 1 Rocale Timmons From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Dear Ms. Timmons, Genevieve Byrnes <gtremblay7@gmail.com> Monday, February 01, 2016 10:39 AM Rocale Timmons Ben Byrnes Avana Ridge: 10616 SE 172nd Follow up Completed I am a concerned citizen of Renton residing at 3125 Cedar Avenue South. I am concerned about the proposed use of the land located at 10616 SE 172 nd Street. As a mother of a preschooler, I am concerned about the increased traffic on my street (Cedar Ave Sf 104th Ave SE) and the danger to children, pets, and pedestrians this would pose. The plans depict the only usable driveway (for 74 families) will be located on SE 172nd Street. 172 nd turns into Cedar Avenue South, my street, when it heads north. Our neighborhood has sidewalks when the property is under the care of homeowners' associations, but does not have them in areas without associations. Children who attend Cascade Elementary and Lindbergh High School walk on the streets to their school bus stops, and children who attend Nelsen Middle School walk the entire distance to school using this spotty sidewalk system. Currently, there is a low level of traffic, and I feel comfortable using a stroller or going for walks on the roadways. If traffic increased, it would not be a pedestrian or family friendly neighborhood. Please consider an entryway to the proposed development from Benson Drive or Benson Road. This would offer commuters from the proposed property easy access to north-bound destinations. Please also consider strategies to slow the inevitable increased traffic on Cedar Avenue Southll04th Ave SE, 105 th Ave SE, and 106 th Ave SE. I look forward to a response to this request along with a timeline for next steps. Sincerely, Genevieve Byrnes 3125 Cedar Ave. S. Renton, W A 98055 503-453-6112 1 .J~L.). lY.lU ....... PO Box 686 Renton, WA 98057 February 1,2016 Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner City of Renton Rtimmons@rentonwa.gov RE: Land Use Number LUA15-000894, ECF, PPUD AvanaRidge Dear Rocale, I would like to express my concerns about the proposed A vana Ridge development in the Benson Hill neighborhood in order that these concerns will become part of the record. This multi- family project combined with the other similar projects currently under construction in the neighborhood will greatly impact the existing WIdeveloped roadways that have adequately served this quite neighborhood. r have witnessed the deterioration ofthe neighborhood's livability over the last seven years as density has suddenly increased with little improvements to infrastructure. Since I have just recently learned of the proposed project I have not had time to research the details and still meet the deadline for comments. My concerns are traffic and parking. I hope to learn more as I have time to read the studies. This project will have the greatest impact on the residents along SE Innd and 106th Ave SE. Both roads have served a small number of single family homes. They are natTOw roads with no sidewalks and no street lighting. Up to now they have had very light traffic. Residents must walk in the roads because there are culverts on either side and there is no other place to walk. There are school bus stops along these roads. SE lnnd has two choke points where the road narrows to one way. One is at the east stop sign at Benson Rd S and the other is at the curve to the west where SE Innd meets Cedar Ave S. The placement for the entry/exit for the proposed development on SE 172nd will greatly impact the two mentioned roads and will endanger the existing residents. 106th Ave SE is also very narrow and is one way in areas where cars are parked. Unless these roadways are modernized the inevitable accidents will occur. The intersection of Benson Rd S and SE Innd will also be impacted by the other new 168 unit apartment pr~ect on the NE comer now WIder construction. The existing sidewalk on the south side of In , west of the intersection with Benson Rd S was placed in 1990 when the area was WIincorporated King COWIty. I spoke with the contractor at the time and asked why he had placed the sidewalk so far into the middle of the roadway. He replied that it was not staked and the COWIty inspector was not concerned with the sidewalk location. Additionally, he stated that the owner's (the owner in 1990) wife wanted to preserve a tree that was located in the center of the parking lot so they needed the extra space into the county road for cars to tum aroWId the tree. By the time the parking lot was paved she had changed her mind and the tree was removed anyway. During the weekdays cars park at the curb and this makes that section of road even narrower. There is a culvert ditch on the north side. My other concern is the number of on site parking spaces for the project and how parking will affect the neighborhood. I see the other recently constructed apartment projects in the area are clogged with street parking. Thank you f00. .Iudin g my Concerns in the record. Please keep me informed of developments. .~ _ ,~.~~;11~ 0 Rocale Timmons From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Dear Rocale Timmons, wjy@att.net Monday, February 01, 2016 11:24 AM Rocale Timmons Comments re: proposed Avana Ridge development on SE 172nd street Follow up Completed My name is Wendy Yadock. I live on 104th Avenue SE which is just down the road from where the proposed Avana Ridge development (10616 SE 172nd St.) will be constructed. It has come to my attention that the main access driveway into this development will intersect with SE 172nd street. I would like to propose that the access road should be moved to the other side of the property at SR 515. We already have enough traffic on SE 172nd street. Many of the neighbors, including myself, walk along SE 172nd street. I feel that our safety would be compromised if traffic increases on SE 172nd. As it stands, we do not have sidewalks and the street has no lane markings. As SE 172nd curves and changes into 104th Ave SE / Cedar, it narrows considerably. Not long ago, a vehicle drove around the curve too fast, took out our neighbor's mailbox and landed in the ditch, People are constantly speeding in a 25 mph zone. More people will be using Cedar and 104th Avenue SE to access the new Avana Ridge development. We do not need more traffic on our neighborhood streets. I am very disappointed that so many apartments are being built in our neighborhood area. Traffic congestion is at a max already at Benson road and along SR 515. During rush hour, I cannot even drive down SE 172nd street and turn right on to Benson road because of the back ups, In conclusion, It would be much safer for all who live in our neighborhood if the proposed access road to the Avana Ridge development would NOT intersect with SE 172nd Street. Sincerely, Wendy Yadock 1 Rocale Timmons From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Hi Rocale, heinegirl@comcast.net Monday, February 01, 2016 12:06 PM Rocale Timmons Avana Ridge Planned Developement at 10616 SE 172nd ST. Follow up Completed I am contacting you in regards to the proposed land use action for the Avana Ridge Planned Development at 10616 SE 172nd ST. I am very concerned with the new development being built in our what is now one of the last quiet areas in this neighborhood. Most of us in this neighborhood have lived here for long periods of our lives. The house that we live in was passed down from our grandparents who built it in the early 1900's. If this 74 multi family complex is going to be built we need to consider that having an entrance through our neighborhood will largely affect the way that we live as of now. Many of the families in our neighborhood including myself have kids and dogs that we walk at all times of the day. There has already been increasing traffic because of nearby newer building which has made safely walking our children and pets increasingly more dangerous. If they were to have entrances that were not allowing access to our neighborhood, we would all be grateful for our safety and traffic concems. Having this complex will also increase the noise volume in our neighborhood which is another concern of mine as well. Please keep in touch with the status of this building process and what we as neighbors can do to help prevent the roadways from becoming more unsafe and full of traffic and noise. Thanks you for your time. Molly Heine 16829 SE 105th SI. (6 houses down from where the entrance to the apartments will be. 1 We would like to provide feedback for the project Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development, located at 10616 SE 172nd ST. My husband and I have lived in this neighborhood since 2009. Our concerns are for the safety of the residents in the neighborhood, as well as for the peace, and quality of living in the neighborhood. We feel these will be negatively impacted by this project. Those components (safety, peace, quality of living) also affect the property values of our homes, and a reduction of the peace, quality of living, and standard of safety will result in a loss of property values. In reviewing the traffic analysis, there was no analysis done on the impact to the inner-neighborhood streets such as 106th AVE SE (located almost directly across from the project main driveway), l05th AVE SE, or Cedar AVE SE. These streets will all undoubtedly carry much of the traffic into and out of the project's main driveway from it's currently proposed location. I believe 106th AVE SE will carry the brunt of the traffic due to it's proximity to the driveway and that it is a straight shot north to l08th AVE SE/Old Benson RD. These inner-neighborhood streets are not equipped to carry concentrated traffic. Only a short section of 104th AVE /Cedar AVE S has any sidewalks and/or streetlights and will also carry a heavy load as SE 172nd 5T turns into 104th/Cedar AVE S as it heads north. 105th and l06th AVE SE are also both very primitive without lighting or sidewalks and are very narrow. I believe increased traffic on these streets is asking for an accident to happen. Based on information found on http://WWW.governing.com/gov-data/car-ownership-numbers-of-vehicies-by-city-map.html. Renton averages 1.8 cars per household. At 74 units, that is 133 cars introduced into our neighborhood, almost a 2/3rds increase (using the same average) based on approximately 125 households on 5E l72nd 5T, 106th/l05th/104th(Cedar) AVE SE. There are a fair number of children that walk to and from school and that stand at the bus stop at 106th AVE SE and SE 166th STthat will be at risk. Also, with the majority of the neighborhood being in the portion of Renton that is without sewer service, improvements to the inner streets such as widening, which will increase surface runoff, could lead to runoff issues for some residents. The traffic study mentions a second driveway but does not mention that it is only a Fire Department Entrance/Egress as it is designated on the site plan map. Is this something that can be changed to regu la r access? We would like to see the main access driveway rerouted onto SR-Sl5, which is a 41ane road capable of handling the additional traffic from the project and would discourage tenants from cutting through our neighborhood streets. South bound traffic could be routed to Benson Rd side through the identified fire entrance/egress. Traffic congestion during commute hours is already very heavy at the intersections of 106th AVE SE & Old Benson Rd (l08th AVE SE) and at Benson RD Sand SR 515, but this would be better than introducing this traffic into a quiet neighborhood. An entrance to SR 515 would provide easy northbound access. We would like stay informed of decisions and changes regarding this project. Sincerely, Caryn and Leopoldo Cantu Rocale Timmons From: Philip Reitz <reitzpl@msn.com> Monday, February 01, 2016 3:49 PM Rocale Timmons neighborcantu@gmail.com Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Avana Ridge Planned Development at 10616 SE 172nd St. Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Mr. Rocale Timmons Senior Planner City of Renton Dear Mr. Timmons, Follow up Completed As the City of Renton considers the proposed Avana Ridge Planned Development at 10616 SE 172,d Street here are my concerns: • Significantly increased traffic on neighborhood streets. One new housing (LaRosa) and two apartment developments are currently due to come 'online' in the next months along Benson Road S. between S 26th Street and SE 172,d Street. The current road infrastructure is unable to handle the high volume of traffic on Benson Road S. as children cross to go to Nelson Middle School or at the intersection of 108th Ave S and Benson Drive (SR 515). The long backups at the later intersection are pushing traffic back into neighborhoods especially the Victoria Hills neighborhood at all times of the day as traffic tries to move from Benson Road down the hill to the SR 515 and the Talbot Road area. What plans does the City of Renton have to require wide streets and adequate 'off street' parking so that the residents of this now new planned community don't end up parking along 172" Street? What, plans does the City of Renton have to provide adequate traffic control [interactive speed monitoring along Cedar Ave S and Mill Ave Sand 23" Ave S1 to regularly remind people of their speed and to be mindful of children who travel these streets to local schools? My experience with the existing apartment housing -Montclair Heights -and how their residents now park along S 26th and S 23" Streets is that the City of Renton is very reluctant to help manage traffic as it moves along those streets in simply trying to get 'up and down' the hill. While the street structure was not initially planned as a thoroughfare for 'up and down the hill' traffic, given the overcrowding of Benson Road and Benson Drive (SR151) the path of least resistance is to use the local neighborhood streets in order to go 'up and down' the hill. How does the City of Renton plan to address these issues before simply adding more traffic to the already heavily used roads in the neighborhood? • Increased petty crime and vandalism in the immediate neighborhood area. Over the last months and perhaps year there has been an increase in homeowner reported petty crime in the Benson Hill area. Given the significant increase in number of apartments and residences in the immediate neighborhood -all within Yo mile of my home, I expect that we will see more 'gang' activity including loitering along the streets, and the attendant disposal of miscellaneous garbage in our neighborhood. The City has been reluctant to partner with neighborhoods to provide video surveillance or other electronic means of helping citizens protect their property and enhance community living. What will the City be prepared to do in terms of increased police patrols or other law enforcement presence that will help tamp down the inevitable effects of increasing population density with limited 'open spaces' for urban livability? How much of the area to be developed by the Avana Ridge Planned Development has the City required be put into 'open space' or park area for the residents of that development? If developers are not required to provide those kinds of 'urban oasis' areas, then the added population density 1 will exacerbate the already elevated petty crime in the surrounding communities. Our development has already seen the movement of local long term residents out of the area to locations where they have greater insulation from the stresses of 'overdevelopment' in this neighborhood. I think that the above issues are significant and I hope that the City of Renton planning wisdom includes specific and enforceable means by which developers will be held accountable for the housing stock that has been proposed and the longer term impact that simple density brings to the local infrastructure of neighborhoods and existing communities. The short and long term goal of development must be accompanied by a commensurate investment in transportation thoroughfares, service amenities, parks, recreation and open spaces so that communities remain livable and aren't just block upon block of apartments. At this point the City seems to be more beholden to the money ofthe developers in terms of trying to 'shoehorn' the highest number of units into the remaining open spaces in and around at least our neighborhood. Philip Reitz 2907 Cedar Ave S Renton, WA 98055 206-310-3033 2 Rocale Timmons From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Hello, Andrew <zosandrew@gmail.com> Monday, February 01, 2016 6:37 PM Rocale Timmons Avana Ridge planned development Follow up Completed I am writing to express concerns about the proposed land use for the Avana Ridge apartment complex at 10616 SE 172nd St. Simply put, the infasteucture in this area is already insufficient for the number of additional drivers that have been added in the past year or two. I can see Benson Drive from my back yard, and there are already daily back ups for miles every single weekday -It gets backed up from Carr Road to Puget Drive on a regular basis. Widening the roads won't solve that problem as there will always be a bottleneck at Carr Road. Not to mention it would require destroying what small shield from the traffic noise residents have, if it were to expand into the green belt on the east side. Which again, wouldn't solve anything. This back up already leads a number of people to "cut through" our neighborhood, often at speeds far exceeding residential speeds. Adding a new multi-family dwelling to bring an additional 150+ drivers with a driveway that literally pours them into our neighborhood will only make matters worse. 172nd, the proposed exit point of Avana Ridge, becomes Cedar Avenue, which directly in front of my house (3275 cedar Ave S) literally narrows to a one lane road. There are no side walks, insufficient street lights, and the road is riddled with pot holes -this is not a major road, and it has no where to be expanded to be a major road without taking chunks of people's front yards. Claiming eminent domain to widen a road, that only needs widening because you continue to approve these developments, would be a major abuse of that law. Beyond the street and traffic concerns are environmental and animal control issues. Since the other Avana apartments tore down the green belt on the other side of Benson Rd we have had a major increase of deer and raccoons inside our neighborhood. It makes sense -you keep allowing people to cut down their homes, so they begin to infringe on ours. There is also flooding that will continue to be a growing concern as you continue to pave over everything in this small 2sq mile radius. How much is "too much?" You have already crammed an ungodly amount of apartments in a very small area of land. Traffic is already a nightmare, and we have two 70+ unit apartments being built inside a 1I4sq mile radius, literally at the epicenter of the biggest traffic back up in the area. How many more of these developments are you going to approve? How many more times will you place the dollar signs of these developers over the quality of life of Renton residents? Over the safety of the children in our neighborhood? Over the balance of developed and undeveloped land to provide a habitat for animals. Because that is exactly what you are doing. You are hurting, not just the people who live here, but even the people who just need to drive through here, just so you can cram one more apartment in far too small of a location. I urge you to reconsider this project. At the very least I urge you to not have this apartment's drive way exit onto l72nd street and onto the streets of our neighborhood that are very much ill equipped to handle the added traffic. The exit onto Benson Rd should be the "primary" drive way and the one on 172nd should be for emergency vehicles only, rather than the other way around. Or place the drive way on Benson Dr. Simply rubber stamping a development with no regard for how it will impact the people already living in the area isn't 1 just inconsiderate, it's down right negligent if this results in a traffic accident or God forbid, a kid gets ran over on the one lane, unlit road you just turned into a major thoroughfare. Thank you for your time, Andrew Gray 3275 Cedar Ave S Renton, W A 98055 (206)713-1861 2 Rocale Timmons From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Rocale Timmons; Wally McMullin <wally.mcmullin@gmail.com> Monday, February 01, 2016 7:23 PM Rocale Timmons Proposed Land Use Action -Avana Ridge Follow up Completed I have been wanting to contact the city for a couple of weeks now in regards to the Proposed Land Use of the 74 multi-unit complex that is to be built at 10616 SE 172nd St, Renton, WA. To my surprise, I have discovered that this structure has already been approved. So much for PROPOSED! It is my understanding that there is no stopping the project, however, I feel that it is my obligation to highly stress the negative impact that it will have on the values of our homes. Especially iftraffic is diverted through our neighbor. Having the entrance and exit to the project off of 172nd is poorly thought out. This road is already too narrow and will not handle the impact of 100 plus more cars. Visibility onto Benson Rd is poor at both 106th Ave SE and 172nd Street. In the last month, there has already been an accident on 172nd and Benson Rd S. None of the axillary roads have sidewalks and are narrow, making it more dangerous for pedestrians and for our children. Especially if you take into account that across Benson Rd S from 172nd is another uncompleted apartment complex with Avana. How is this one little intersection going to handle all that traffic without at least a stop light? The entrance and exit should be on either arterial Benson roads. I am highly disappointment in the City's approval of this project. Thank you, Kimmie McMullin 17030 106th Ave SE, Renton, WA 98055 1 Rocale Timmons From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: rhonda.rae@comcast.net Monday, February 01, 2016 7:57 PM Rocale Timmons Avana Ridge Planned Development at 10616 SE 172nd St Follow up Completed This e-mail is to share my concerns regarding the Avana Ridge Planned Development at 10616 SE 172nd St. I live on 104th Ave SE just after 172nd St turns into 104th. I would like the city to consider adding pedestrian friendly upgrades to help keep the people in this neighborhood safe. The new residents of the Avana Ridge apartments will add additional vehicle and pedestrian traffic making the need for pedestrian friendly roads more urgent. Here are my observations: I often see cars using our neighborhood as a shortcut during traffic hours. Many of these cars speed down 172/104 directly in front of rny house. There are no sidewalks between my house and the new location for the Avana apartments. The road narrows to one lane directly in front of my house. This makes the speeding cars very dangerous. Many kids walk along 172nd to 104th Ave. This stretch of road is not pedestrian friendly. The road bends leaving very little visibility for cars to see pedestrians. There is poor light and no sidewalks. I would like the city to consider adding speed bumps to 104th and 172nd to detour commuters who do not live in our neighborhood from using this path as a shortcut. Also adding sidewalks between from 172nd and 1 04th would help keep our kids and neighbors safe from cars. Thanks for your consideration. Rhonda Rae Murphy 206-369-3498 1 Rocale Timmons From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Jody Hanawalt <jody320@gmail.com> Monday, February 01, 20168:27 PM Rocale Timmons Avana Ridge Planned Development@10616 SE 172nd Street Follow up Completed First I wish to thank you for taking the time to read my words regarding this subject. I have been connected to this area for over thirty years and I am extremely concerned about this purposed project. I live at the southern end of 106th and though I only live three miles from work and my start time is 7am I need to leave before 6:30am in order to be able to tum left onto Benson off I06th in any reasonable time frame, The increased traffic and lack of egress options from this area would, in all probability, require installations of additional traffic signals to deal with the increased traffic. In reviewing the proposed plans I am very concerned about the increased traffic that would result from the location of the main entrance on 106th. There is already excessive traffic at the end of the day on I06th and Benson when parents are picking up their children from the nearby daycare. Also, if there was even minimal overflow parking on 106th from the numerous apartments, 106th would virtually be reduced to a one lane road. I06th is a very narrow two lane 'road' with no sidewalks, no street lights and near where I live, a very deep ditch on the east side of the road. I walk the neighborhood every day after work and witness the huge delays of cars attempting to tum left onto SR515 from Benson. With the huge complex of new apartments currently being completed on Benson Road, the addition of another 74 multifamily units will simply completely overwhelm an area already completely choked with rush hour traffic. The current degraded state of the roads in this area would be further impacted with the increase of traffic. And on a side note, I wonder if the proposed developer has done a valid study of the land in this area, which with simple observation, appears to be excessively water laden. I have not even gone into the impact the increased traffic would have on the safety of those individuals living in this area, many of which are older and attempt to walk as often as possible. Again, thank you for taking the time to read this and hopefully take into consideration these very valid concerns. Respectfully, lody Hanawalt 1 Rocale Timmons From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: paul skulstad <chinook@oz,net> Tuesday, February 02, 2016 9:07 PM Rocale Timmons Alana Ridge Planned Development at 10616 SE 172nd SI. Follow up Completed Rocale, thanks for reaching out to the community that will be effected by the addition of this apartment complex. Unfortunately I was out of town and not able to respond to your concerns about this project before the deadline, Anyway here's some of my thoughts. A project of this size in addition to the two other projects one of which is done and one to be completed soon will destroy the quality of life in and around the area. The traffic now is close to unbearable. Traffic a Benson Rd. and Benson Drive is a joke that is not funny, The timing ofthe lights around this area is horrible as well as the waiting times. The traffic department does not even have the right type of lights on the Benson Rd, S. Benson Dr. intersection, If you are on Benson Rd approaching Benson Dr. the light is a solid green and not an arrowed green to the left and right. It's as if the whoever decided to install those lights thinks you can go straight there. At a minimum a few other things need to be done. How about making the approach to Benson Dr two lanes that are way longer. How about allowing both lanes to turn left? There is also a curbed island just south of that intersection that has no reason for being, What it does is create a traffic jam. I get the impression that this is part of the PLANNED part of this project. Not to get rid of the stupid island that has no purpose. That's prime real estate, Use it! The addition of 74 units means at least another 100 cars on the road next to one of the worst intersections in Renton. The two new projects on Benson rd S one of which is completed and one in progress will also put unbelievable stress on the road capacity. And now you going to add another 74 units to what is already done, Not sure there is much planning going on here. I admit I voted against the annexation of this area into the city of Renton, Why? Because I saw the annexation as a way for Renton to expand it's tax base. What a surprise, a city that want's more money. And what does the citizen get? Same old lousy roads more taxes and "planned development". I guess planned development means if a developer has a plan it's going to get developed with no concern for the neighborhood, Look, I am not against building, There has been beautiful large single family homes built in this neighborhood and they "fit" are welcomed and belong. 20+ years ago a huge development further north on Benson rd Sand S 26th st. was built. An access road was built and planned to dump onto S 26 st. into the same neighborhood as this new development will dump, One difference is that the access was stopped! Even though the access was stopped by a chain over the access road to the apartments cars now park on S 26th that are driven by people that live in the apartments, The school buses also drop of students on S 26th that live in the apartments. More traffic. I'm curious how much the developer is paying to upgrade the road infrastructure around this development? My guess is zero. The taxpayer should pay zero for these road improvements. If the developer wants to build, let them pay for it. At minimum this developments traffic should dump directly onto Benson drive and NOT 172nd-l06th, If the traffic from this development dumps another 100 cars onto 172nd -105th you have turned neighborhood streets with playing children into a high traffic area that is dangerous to the citizens, Again, I am not against building but it should fit to the existing neighborhood. From what I see there are three major developments that have moved into this area in the last year. The one between S27th and S29th, one between SE 170th and SE 172nd on the east side of Benson and the Alana Ridge one. Can you tell me what the combined number of units is for these three developments? Please let me know. My guess is each one is 75 or so units each, That's 225 units, That means an extra 300 cars that need to move through the streets, At minimum changes need to be made to the existing streets and the timing of the lights, If an extra 15 minutes is added to someones commute each day that works out to 260 work days excluding Sat & Sun, 260 days x 15 minutes equals 55 hours a year that is stolen from everyone stuck in traffic burning gas and going nowhere. 1 I hope in the future more consideration will be given to what type and the scope of construction belongs where. I get it. Developers, develop. Unfortunately I think someone missed the planning part of this. To much, to fast, with no road improvements equals gridlock. Nobody wins. Quality of life goes down. Make the developer pay for these improvements. You will see how committed they are to the project. Sincerely, Paul Skulstad 2 Rocale Timmons From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Mark Faas <mark.faas@gmail.com> Saturday, January 30, 2016 1:02 PM Rocale Timmons 74 multi family unit Follow up Completed Hi Rocale, I talk to you on the 20th of Jan. about the 74 multi family units on 10616 th SE. 172nd. And you were going to send me the picture ofthe building as well as a site plan and the traffic study. I haven't received those yet. You told me at the time that we had 12 days to respond for the upcoming March 8 I believe. So I probably won't have time to show the others on the Victoria Hills homeowners Association board so I like to submit one question. If the city plans on Widening the street between Cedar Avenue and 104th where the street narrows down to one lane and it's full of potholes. And the chain-link fence that has wood slots in it for privacy is in need of repair along 104th. Thank you Mark Faas Sent from my iPhone 1 Rocale Timmons From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Dawn Cramton <dvanmcr3@hotmail.com> Sunday, January 31, 2016 2:39 PM Rocale Timmons Avan Ridge Planned Development at 10616 SE 172nd ST" Renton, WA Follow up Completed In learning of this high impact development to the end of our street, I strongly suggest the city revisit the access points ofthis complex, Our neighborhood has already been suffering with the burden of increased traffic through what used to be a quiet street. I do not want any more through traffic on our road! Just getting to our local grocery store is now a nightmare. There is so much traffic you have to wait through at least three lights to get onto the main road up to the grocery store! The traffic coming up from Renton constantly block the intersection when their light is RED at the Benson Drive/SR-515 and Benson Road S., there should be a sign up there saying Do Not Block Intersection. I do not want people cutting through our neighborhood! Please eliminate the 172nd Street access to this property. People just fly down that street and it is not acceptable! There are a lot offamily homes in this area and a lot of children, notto mention a Day Care Center right next door to the subject property! We want our neighborhood to remain safe for all of them. I really do not agree with another apartment complex in our single family home neighborhood, so please at least limit the vehicle traffic impact on our neighborhood! 1 Leslie Betlach Plan Review Routing Slip Plan Number: LUA15-000894 Name: Avana Ridge Site Address: 17249 BENSON RD S Description: The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a multi-family development containing 74 units in two 4-story structure. The vacant 3.78 acre site is located within the Commercial Arterial (RM-F) zoning classification and the Residential High Density (RHD) land use designation. The development would be comprised of two separate multi-family residential structures resulting in a density of 20.21 dulac. The subject site is fronted by three public rights-of·way: SE 172nd Street, Benson Road South (108th Ave SE) and Benson Drive South (SR-515). The applicant proposes one entrance off of SE 172nd Slto the north of the site between the proposed buildings, and one entrance off of Benson Road South to the eastern side of the site, both meeting to form the primary drive-through access across the site. There is a Class 4 stream which bisects the site, running east/west. Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050 the applicant is proposing impacts to the stream buffer through the use of buffer averaging. Additionally, the site contains critical slopes and Coal Mine Hazards. The PPUD would be used to vary parking, design, open space, and retaining wall standards. The applicant has proposed to provide buffer enhancement as part of the proposed PUD public benefit, along with enhance open space, pedestrian amenities, and landscaping. Studies include a stormwater report, traffic study, habitat assesment, wetland and supplemental stream study, arborist report, geotechnical and a coal mine hazard report. The proposed development would result in approximately 11,000 cubic yards of cut and 3,250 cubic yards of fill. Review Type: Community Services Review-Version 1 Date Assigned: 01/13/2016 Date Due: 01/27/2016 Project Manager: Rocale Timmons Environmentallmpact Earth Animals Li ght/GI a re Historic/Cultural Preservation Air Environmental Health Recreation Airport Environmental Water Energy/Natural Resources util iti es 10,000 Feet Pia nts Housing Transportation 14,000 Feet Land/Shorelij1e Use Aesthetics Public Service Where to enter your comments: Manage My Reviews Which types of comments should be entered: Recommendation -Comments that impact the project including any of the Enivornmentallmpacts above. Correction -Corrections to the project that need to be made before the review can be completed and lor requesting submittal of additional documentation and/or resubmittal of existing documentation. What statuses should be used: Reviewed -I have reviewed the project and have no comments. Reviewed with Comments· I have reviewed the project and and I have comments entered in Recommendations. Correction/Resubmit -I have reviewed the project and the applicant needs to submit and/or resubmit documentation and 1 have added f;cti~Sit;;;p;;'crkW5 ~rC9rd(VlaV1c!e -Sa£:) <ipP!!e0. Signature of Director or Aut orized Representative Date TERRY FLATLEY City of Plan Review Routing Slip Plan Number: LUA1S-000894 Name: Avana Ridge Site Add ress: 17249 BENSON RD 5 Description: The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a multi-family development containing 74 units in two 4-story structure. The vacant 3.78 acre site is located within the Commercial Arterial (RM-F) zoning classification and the Residential High Density (RHO) land use designation. The development would be comprised of two separate multi-family residential structures resulting in a density of 20.21 dulac. The subject site is fronted by three public rights-of-way: SE 172nd Street, Benson Road South (l08th Ave SE) and Benson Drive South (SR-S15). The applicant proposes one entrance off of SE 172nd St to the north of the site between the proposed buildings, and one entrance off of Benson Road South to the eastern side of the site, both meeting to form the primary drive-through access across the site. There is a Class 4 stream which bisects the site, running east/west. Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050 the applicant is proposing impacts to the stream buffer through the use of buffer averaging. Additionally, the site contains critical slopes and Coal Mine Hazards. The PPUD would be used to vary parking, design, open space, and retaining wall standards. The applicant has proposed to provide buffer enhancement as part of the proposed PUD public benefit, along with enhance open space, pedestrian amenities, and landscaping. Studies include a stormwater report, traffic study. habitat assesment, wetland and supplemental stream study. arborist report, geotechnical and a coal mine hazard report . The proposed development would result in approximately 11,000 cubic yards of cut and 3,250 cubic yards offill. Review Type: Community Services Review-Version 1 Date Assigned: 01/13/2016 Date Due: 01/27/2016 Project Manager: Rocale Timmons Environmental Impact Earth Animals Ught/Glare HistoriC/Cultural Preservation Air Environmental Health Recreation Airport Environmental Water Energy/Natural Resources Utilities 10,000 Feet PI ants Housi ng Transportation 14,000 Feet land/ShoreliFe Use Aesthetics Publi c Service Where to enter your comments: Manage My Reviews Which types of comments should be entered: Recommendation -Comments that Impact the project including any of the Enlvornmentallmpacts above. Correction -Corrections to the project that need to be made before the review can be completed and lor requesting submittal of additional documentation and/or resubmittal of existing documentation. What statuses should be used: Reviewed -I have reviewed the project and have no comments. Reviewed with Comments * I have reviewed the project and and 1 have comments entered in Recommendations. Correction/Resubmit -I have reviewed the project and the applicant needs to submit and/or resubmit documentation and I have added co..crections in Corrections. Street trees -Ginkgo on SR 515; Ash on Benson Rd. S.; elm on SE 172, Space minimum distance of 50 feet apart and not closer than 30 feet from street lights (not all lights are shown on plans). Potential for one to two more street trees at NE corner of SR 515 & Benson Rd. Use only ginkgo, elm & ash as street trees. Planting Strip: require a continuous planting strip along all streets, then sidewalk; plan does not show this, Dangerous, fast traffic requires that a planting strip buffer pedestrians from roadway. Parking Lot: some islands are too small for trees; use only vine maple or smaller in those that are. j-JJ, -IIR Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Leslie Betlach Plan Review Routing Slip Plan Number: LUA15-000894 Name: Avana Ridge Site Address: 17249 BENSON RD S Description: The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a multi-family development containing 74 units in two 4-story structure. The vacant 3.78 acre site is located within the Commercial Arterial (RM-F) zoning classification and the Residential High Density (RHD) land use designation. The development would be comprised of two separate multi-family residential structures resulting in a density of 20.21 dulac. The subject site is fronted by three public rights-of-way: SE 172nd Street, Benson Road South (108th Ave SE) and Benson Drive South (SR-515). The applicant proposes one entrance off of SE 172nd St to the north of the site between the proposed buildings, and one entrance off of Benson Road South to the eastern side of the site, both meeting to form the primary drive-through access across the site. There is a Class 4 stream which bisects the site, running east/west. Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050 the applicant is proposing impacts to the stream buffer through the use ofbuffer averaging. Additionally, the site contains critical slopes and Coal Mine Hazards. The PPUD would be used to vary parking, design, open space, and retaining wall standards. The applicant has proposed to provide buffer enhancement as part of the proposed PUD public benefit, along with enhance open space, pedestrian amenities, and landscaping. Studies include a stormwater report, traffic study, habitat assesment, wetland and supplemental stream study, arborist report, geotechnical and a coal mine hazard report. The proposed development would result in approximately 11,000 cubic yards of cut and 3,250 cubic yards of fill. Review Type: Community Services Review-Version 1 Date Assigned: 01/13/2016 Date Due: 01/27/2016 Project Manager: Rocale Timmons Environmental Impact Earth Animals Ught/Gla re Historic/Cultural Preservation Air Environmental Health Recreati on Ai rport Envi ron menta I Water Energy/Natural Resources Utilities 10,000 Feet Pia nts Housing Transportation 14,000 Feet Land/Shorelille Use Aesthetics Public Service Where to enter your comments: Manage My Reviews Which types of comments should be entered: Recommendation -Comments that impact the project including any of the Enivornmentallmpacts above. Correction -Corrections to the project that need to be made before the review can be completed and lor requesting submittal of additional documentation and/or resubmittal of existing documentation. What statuses should be used: Reviewed -I have reviewed the project and have no comments. Reviewed with Comments -I have reviewed the project and and I have comments entered in Recommendations. Correction/Resubmit -I have reviewed the project and the applicant needs to submit and/or resubmit documentation and I have added :P;;;,si/;:;;p;d--~ ~rC9yd(navtc!e Su£) ¥p!!e5. lie Oate Denis Law Mayor January 13, 2016 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36 th St, Ste 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Subject: Notice of Complete Application Avana Ridge Apartments, LUA1S-000894, ECF, PPUD Dear Mr. Lagers: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on February 1. 2016. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. In addition, this matter is tentatively scheduled for a Public Hearing on March 8, 2016 at 11:00 am, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant are required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff report will be mailed to you prior to the scheduled hearing. Please contact me at (425) 430-7219 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Rocale Timmons Senior Planner cc: Michael Gladstein IOwnerls) Mike & Julie Radtke, Dan Palner I Parties of Record Renton City Hall. 1055 South Grady Way • Renton,Washington 98057 • rentonw •. gov NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGA TED (DNS-M) A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CEO) -Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: January 13, 2016 LAND USE NUMBER: LUAI5-000894, ECF, PPUD PROJECT NAME: Avana Ridge PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Environmental (SEPAl Review for the construction of a multi-family development containing 74 units in two 4-story structure. The vacant 3.78 acre site is located within the Commercial Arterial (RM-F) zoning classification and the Residential High Density (RHO) land use designation. The development would be comprised of two separate multi- family residential structures resulting in a density of 20.21 dulac. The subject site is fronted by three public rights-of- way: SE 172nd Street, Benson Road South (l08th Ave SE) and Benson Drive South (SR-S1S). The applicant proposes one entrance off of SE 172nd St to the north of the site between the proposed buildings, and one entrance off of Benson Road South to the eastern side of the site, both meeting to form the primary drive-through access across the site. There is a Class 4 stream which bisects the site, running east/west. Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050 the applicant is proposing impacts to the stream buffer through the use of buffer averaging. Additionally, the site contains critical slopes and Coal Mine Hazards. The PPUD would be used to vary parking, design, open space, and retaining wall standards, The applicant has proposed to provide buffer enhancement as part of the proposed PUD public benefit, along with enhance open space, pedestrian amenities, and landscaping. Studies include a stormwater report, traffic study, habitat assesment, wetland and supplemental stream study, arborist report, geotechnical and a coal mine hazard report. The proposed development would result in approximately 11,000 cubic yards of cut and 3,250 cubic yards of fill. PROJECT LOCATION: 17249 Benson Rd. South (generally) & 10615 5E 1720 ' 5t (generally) OPTIONAL OETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS-M): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43,21C.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS-M process to give notice that a DNS-M is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS-M are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non- Significance-Mitigated (DNS-M). This may be the only opportunity to comment on the enVironmental impacts of the proposal. A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: APPLICANT IPROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Permits/Review Requested: Other Permits which may be required: Requested Studies: December 30, 2015 January 13, 2015 Justin Lagers/967S SE 36 th St., Ste. 105/ Mercer Island, WA 98040/253-40S.SS87/justin@pnwholdings.com Environmental (SEPA) Review, Preliminary PUD Building Permit, Construction Permit, Fire Permit, Sign Permit Aroborist Report, Coal Mine Hazard Assessment, Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report. Habitat Report, Landscape Analysis, Stream/Lake Study, Traffic Impact Statement If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CEO -Planning Division, 10S5 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No.: Avana Ridge! LUAI5-000894, ECF, PPUD NAME: ______________________________________________________________ ___ MAILING ADDRESS: _________________________________ City/State/Zip: ___________________ ___ TELEPHONE NO.: ___________________________ __ Location where applic::.~ be reviewed: PUBLIC HEARING: CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: ay Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: Proposed Mitigation Measures: Department of Community & Economic Development (CEO) -Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Public hearing is tentatively scheduled for March 8. 2016 before the Renton Hearing Examiner in Renton Council Chambers at 11:00 am on the 7th floor of Renton City Hall located at 1055 South Grady Way. The subject site is designated COMP-RHO on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and RM-F, DESIGN-B on the City's Zoning Map. Environmental {SEPAl Checklist The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-3-050; RMC 4-2- 110A and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. The following Mitigation Measures will likely be imposed on the proposed project. These recommended Mitigation Measures address project impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above. • The applicant shall comply with prOVided Supplemental Stream Study. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner, CEO -Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on January 26, 2016. This matter is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on March 8, 2016, at 11:00 am, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. If you are interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Planning Division to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled at (425) 430-6578. Following the issuance of the SEPA Determination, you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments regarding the proposal before the Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional information by mail, please contact the project manager_ Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner; Tel: (425) 430-7219; Eml: rtimmons@rentonwa.gov I PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION I CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HEARING EXAMINER DECISION, EXHIBITS Project Name: Avana Ridge Preliminary PUD Date of Hearing 5/10/16 Staff Contact Rocale Timmons Senior Planner Project Number: LUA15-000894, ECF, PPUD Project Contact/Applicant Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36th St, Ste 105; Mercer Island, WA 98040 The following exhibits were admitted during the hearing: Exhibits 1-23: Hearing Examiner Staff Report and Exhibits Exhibit 24: Staff Powerpoint Presentation Exhibit 25: Height Request -Elevations Exhibit 26: Site Illustration Exhibit 27: Rendering -Rooflines (East Building) Exhibit 28: Rendering -Rooflines (West Building) Exhibit 29: Google Maps https://www.google.com/maps Project Location 17249 Benson Rd S Renton, WA ------""""""...·R en ton Avana Ridge PUD (LUA15-000894) Public Hearing Namesffitles FIo<a ... TImmol)!l, So!nio, PI ....... Date May 10 ,2016 ------·'l{"enton ® Proposal SE 172ND STREET 5/13/2016 Presentation Outline • Project Description Process to Date -Comment P'nod • Public Con>nl~1< -5EPAOetermination -Staff AnalYlis Renton Municipal Code Analysis -Comprehenii". Plln Campti .. nCl -Zonl", COmpliance -Critical At .. Cod, CompHtntll! -Design Revl,w Compllanca -Planned Urban DevelopmentCompliance Staff Recommendation Site Characteristics Proposal SE 172"" 51 East BUilding lacing SE Ex f-\ I B\ "\ 24 1 5/13/2016 Process to Date Renton Municipal Code Analysis • Comprehensive Plan Compliance • Zoning Compliance • Critical Area Compliance • Adequate Infrastructure • Design Review Compliance • Planned Urban Development Compliance Staff Analysis-Zoning Staff Analysis -Critical Areas Staff Analysis -Infrastructure Staff Analysis -PUD 2 Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the Avana Ridge PUD, as depicted in Exhibit 2 subject to 22 conditions of approval. SE 172ND STREET ,"JRn~ E"'~Id,"II (S"172"''''1 SE 172ND STREET Height , '. '. '" '" ",' "dl ; ,.v ,'" i)1\, j, , H' ]l"m'" w .... eu,'""'" ''''"'''''''''''''''1 Parking 5/13/2016 Public Comments Trees Retaining Walls 3 Coal Mine Hazard Schools/Safe Walking Conditions Open Space SE 172ND STREET L 5/13/2016 Stream Drainage Open Space 4 5/13/2016 Building Design Private Open Space East Building (S~~~~) __ ._ Pedestrian Circulation Vehicle Circulation 5 III I. L .3-e N ~ I-~ Iii 1: w ~ I-\ (/1 lGE • PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 72ND ST. RENTON , WA 98055 EAST B UI LDI NG fXttl B i T 2-=t- ~t>6 !'-S ~ e~T NOTE: IMA GE SHOWN IS A GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION OF ARCHITI LANDSCAPE DESIGN INTENT LANDSCAP ING IS APPROX IMATED AT F )GE -PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 72ND S1. RENTON , WA 98055 WEST BUILD IN G \'Je$T BLJ)C, ReNDE NOTE : IMAG E SHOWN IS A GRAPH IC REPRESENTATION O F AR CHITI LANDSCAPE DESIGN INTEN T. LANDSCAPING IS APPROXIMATED AT F I f ~1 ~;1 ~ 1 1l )~.""IIII ~ ~ I , , III ' •• ~1~ -ROOFS 1f1AT ARE PITCHED Al A SLOPE OF ~ 12 OR GREATE~ MAl' EXTE ND UF TO t A~O'lE THE MAX I~~U I.I WA LL FL.A iE HEIGHT 'DHIAnO Ni'ROi'OSE D FOR 212 If'JOI-5lOPi: I,t ,",'/JU,I,IS i ~ -~ 1:-.. E AST B LD.G..:.... _ ! ~i ~ HEIGHT LIMIT --~ ~ - - --I a --. .J 427 ·1 3132" l.--.. EAST ROO F T OP /11"7 426 '· 5 31 8" ., • 1=-"F' ~ , ~ b~ I \,!= • • ~ I • § , ~- IEIGR,I,[f EAS T BLDG· AV G .~ 38 7.1 313;R@E, ~ EAST BLDG • , .. H"Gf L"_'" '-" 427"· :313 2" b , EAS ~BLDG . AVG . (lJ 387 )' :3132?RAOE l r- - 8:)<. t-I-\ B \ '\ I - z6 '''COf~~I,(,N ":C :"l.·t;;~S L:."'E:h"I(J'·· OX' -ti5.<S' I£1P'JI NI 01 IVIlKTS -'. R-~ (STORY 4) R-~ (STORY 3) R-, (STO RY?) R-2(STOR'i 1: e W P"II oN--1f-£-1t1 ttl 0RIGI ..... SlFfTSI.'I"'$) .... 3r I P'.()To.oTl' ~"'3)~.~IIP. .,~ - "1 I , 11 1 I=" 111 1 , . I=' : If'[ II rl r =j AVERAGE GRADE PLANE CALCULATIONS mv -mv 12 ~ AVERAGe SI,SI BUIW NG NOfl lH _ (38JB8"'39I£3'),'1 -3866~ EAS1= (3916J<ISS>lI)0 <m'~ SOJTH " (36e9O'<1B39B'jfl ":la/tO '''E51 ~ (38396'·383SS')12 -:l83 ,93 £AST BIJIL~'1G A\IG GRA[{ }lli!l \'j ES' BUILDING NORm, (361£9'':,SII3')O EAST-l:lai 13'_37760'1 SOUTh~ (m ro. SS9') 12 I'I EST. (359'.36269') WESIIlUI L[)I NG AVG OOIl' m.£ -379 .82' 3603' <Wl &l m3S -ROOF51 KA I ARE PI TCHED A 1 ~ SLOPE OF 4 I, OR GR:A1ER IAAY DTE t.D UP TO 6' AEIO IIE TI1E MAXI I.I UIo! WAll f'lAiE HEIGHT 'DEWATIOI.'f'IlOPOS EC fOR2 _11 ROOF SLCIr"E MN:IJ[fl.I$ ~ 4~·~~·MI[JP()I N1 orPlATfKTS !5:~P --_I :i~ o .1 1 --_ -1-$ -- --I W E ~T ROOHO P /'~ .. h 411 "113JB" ~ 8;01 R-t (STORY ~;' R-, (STO RY 3) ~·2(STORV2: R 2 (STORY 1: -'"-, -1----- ~ • I I," ~---,-l fi ~ \lVES T BL DG . r n 1 J i ~I ~ EIGHT U MIT ", r :r 41 1"-4 31 16" '-' ~ Ii : I 1 ~~ i I -ti h , I ~ : ~ : ~ ~ ! lJ.' " WES~~~6~', .. 1L -~".431 16-~ ~ -~, OVERALL BUILDING HEIGHT I STOR Y DIAGRAM ,. r SCAlE 1116"" 1'.(l' '--J WEST BL DG • ""I::""':i ' _ _ ___ _ HElI3 f::1.T Ll MI T ~ r-r-rr ~ ---;al ·· 4 31 1(;" JJ ~ • • .I~ • " Wf=ST -AVG ------3k-?}t~~(;~ is -.-...•.... -~ OVERALL SITE -NORTH ELEVATION SCAl::. 1116' -1_rr L ,-,~ ~ mE "'8 U =~ ~!ij OJ . ~ ~§ ~ ~ m $ i ..c ~ '~g U €~ lo.... g~ ru ~ . c~ Q ~ . :m :::J i ;2 0 lo.... bI1 rU _0 AVANARIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 106 16 SE l72nd STR EE T, RENTON , WA 98055 MM AVANA RIDGE , LLC ORO.EC1ISSll"S F"lAH~II'ISAII D£VElOPllEN'T 1/m."""S 8Ul.DINC f'EIUI n 12'290""") S<t£l OAll ~ ~"" CI£CK[D PRoseT,", Sl-£ET TrT..E BUILDING HEIGHT ANALYSIS I_I! ,w ~ ,~ ISSL( PLAN NED URB-'N DEVE LO PMENT SK.01 AVANA RIDGE -PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10616 SE 172ND ST RENTON , WA98055 EAST BUILDING £XttiBiT 2.=1- ~t£~~ftvw e~T' f?l-P&;' NOTE : IMAGE SHOWN IS A GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION OF ARCHITECTURA L AND LANDSCAPE DESIGN INTENT. LANDSCAP ING ISAPPROXIMATED AT FU LL GROWTH . AVANA RIDGE -PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10616 SE 172ND ST RENTON , WA 98055 WEST BUILDING exH-l1?> ITs Z8 N e<.;T BLJx;, i?:eNDEf2-S NOTE : IMAG E SHOWN IS A GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION OF ARCH ITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPE OESIGN INTENT. LANDSCAPING IS APPROXIMATED AT FULL GROWTH. L -3-p ~ 1 • ~ I-, -~ 11l -~ -:t Ul , & \-~ (/l i I \ Agencies Justin Lagers, Avana Ridge Michael Gladstein Parties of Record (Signature of Sender): See Attached Contact! Applicant Owner See Attached " , ... \ . ~. ) ,,'''\\\\\111, ) SS ",,-{ flOW. I'I, STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) ::::.:::-~" ~~~\ -0 ,'I)' 'i -'); / -:.... _0'" ;;. I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Sabrina Mirante ' j .. J. ~ signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the us&f anll:iu~se ~ i mentioned in the instrument. ~ \,,'If &:t."'\ ~ ~ Dated: If pa:i /." Gil Q( Co ) 1t , ;/'~ ~-""' -, '" O~ W,.S'i":'--- ", ..... -..-... Notary (print): ____ -'4~O"-lJ.'+--... ?..L0l ..... d ""U<.o{o..;>>--__________ _ My appointment expires: 'u.Si .:;zq ;20 I '+ ( Avana Ridge PUD LUA1S-000894, ECF, PPUD template -affidavit of service by mailing Dept. of Ecology ** Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region' Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers .. Seattle District Office Attn: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Boyd Powers *** Oepart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Servo Attn: SEPA Section 35030 SE Douglas St. #210 Snoqualmie, WA 98065 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Seattle Public Utilities Timothy C. Croll, Attn: SEPA Responsible Official 700 Fifth Avenue, 5uite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERe DETERMINATIONS) Dept, of Ecology ** Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. ** Attn: Misty Blair Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer PO Box 47703 39015 _172"' Avenue 5E Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Auburn, WA 98092 Ouwamish Tribal Office ,. Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program ** 4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn: Laura Murphy Seattle, WA 98106-1514 39015 172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 KC Wastewater Treatment Division .. Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program ** Environmental Planning Supervisor Attn: Erin Slaten Ms, Shirley Marroquin 39015172"' Avenue SE 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 WDFW· larry Fisher· Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Attn: Gretchen Kaehler Issaquah, WA 98027 PO Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: Tim McHarg Attn: Acting Community Oev. Director Director of Community Development 220 Fourth Avenue South 12835 Newcastle Way, Ste 200 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Newcastle, WA 98056 Puget Sound Energy City ofTukwila Wendy Weiker Jack Pace, Responsible Official 355 110" Ave NE 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Mailstop EST llW Tukwila, WA 98188 Bellevue, WA 98004 Puget Sound Energy Doug Corbin, Municipal Liaison Mgr. 6905 South 228" St Kent, WA 98032 *Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of Application. **Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: seoaunit@ecy.wa.gov ** Karen Walter, Laura Murphy and Erin Slaten with the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Oept. are emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email addresses: KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us I Laura.murohy@muckleshoot.nsn.usL erin ,slaten@muckleshoot,nsn,us ***Department of Natural Resources is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice the following email address: sepacenter@dnr.wa.gov template -affidavit of service by mailing Andrew Grav 3275 Cedar Ave 5 Renton. WA 98055 D. Bruce & Nancv Stanley 10825 SE 172nd St, #5B Renton. WA 98055-5969 Daniel Hiranaka 10510 5E 172nd St Renton. WA 98055 DOUR Goods 16602 106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 H.A. Chau 410115Dth Ave SE Bellevue. WA 98006 JUSTIN LAGERS Avana Ridge 9675 SE 36th St, Ste. 105 Mercer Island. WA 98040 Michael Gladstein Avana Ridge LLC 9675 SE 36th St, #105 Mercer Island. WA 98040 Mollv Moss 3121 Cedar Ave 5 Renton. WA 98055 Scott Petett. D.C. 10622 SE Carr Rd, Suite A Renton. WA 98055 Caryn Cantu 165611D6th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Dan Palner 16638 106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Daniel Ridenour 16836 106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Emilv Brooker 16810 104th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Jerry Miller PO Box 686 Renton. WA 98057 Kimmie McMullin 17030 106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Mike & Julie Radtke 17024 106th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Philip Reitz 2907 Cedar Ave 5 Renton. WA 98055 Wendy Yadock 17020 104th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 Carine Kumano 10829 SE 172nd St, #6C Renton. WA 98055 Dan Russell 43755 Louisiana 5t Palm Desert. CA 92211 Debra Russell 829 S 31st St Renton. WA 98055 Genevieve Byrnes 3125 Cedar Ave S Renton. WA 980S5 JODY HANAWALT PO Box 4097 Renton. WA 98057 Mark Faas 2915 Cedar Ave 5 Renton. WA 98055 Molly Heine 16829 SE 105th St Renton. WA 98055 Rhanda Rae Murphv 17000 104th Ave SE Renton. WA 98055 STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Linda M Mills, being first duly sworn on oath that she is the Legal Advertising Representative of the Renton Reporter a weekly newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continuously as a weekly newspaper in King County, Washington. The Renton Reporter has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the Renton Reporter (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a: Public Notice was published on April 15, 2016. The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $115.25. ;::>/' . '/if!//(;:! 4Z{;·L:l ,\., ciffda Mills Legal Advertising Representative, Renton Reporter ~. Subsc ibed~ this 15th day of April, 2016. ::~. "/ '. ". Gale Gwin, Notary Public for the State of Washington, Residing in~>,':>,::-;:'·,;, Puyallup, Washington 'i,! ;,:'~. -'; ;v /1', ":;;.. --, ~. ~ .-- ~ ,.-... ~ . ~.:.,. '., , ' . 'l '" \ NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AND PUBLIC HEARING RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee has issued a Determi- nation of Non-Significance Miti- gated (DNS·M) for the following project under the authority of the Renton municipal code. Avana Ridge LUA 15-000894 Location: [7249 Benson Rd S. The applicant is requesting SEPA and PPUD for the con- struction of 74 multi-family units in two 4-story structures with a density of 20.21 dulac. The vacant 3.78 acre site is located in the RM-F zonc. Access is proposed off SE 172nd St and Benson Rd S. There is a Ns classified stream which bisects the site, running eastlwest. Additionally, the site contains critical slopes and Coal Mine Hazards. Appeals of the DNS-M must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. 00 April 29, 2016. Appea1s must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner clo City Clerk, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Appeals to the Hearing Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and more infonnatton may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office. 425-430-6510. A Public Hearing will be held by the Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers, City Hall, on May 10, 2016 at 11:00 am to consider the submitted applica- tion. If the DNS-M is appealed, the appeal wi!( be heard as part of this public hearing. Interested parties are invited to attend the public hearing Published in the Renton Reporter April15, 2016. #1586563 CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM Date: May 9, 2016 To: City Clerk's Office From: Sabrina Mirante Subject: Land Use File Closeout Please complete the following information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City Clerk's Office Project Name: Avana Ridge PUD LUA (file) Number: LUA-15-000894, PP, PUD CrOSS-References: AKA's: Project Manager: Rocale Timmons Acceptance Date: January 11, 2016 Applicant: Owner: Michael Gladstein, Avana Ridge, LLC Contact: Justin Lagers, Avana Ridge PID Number: 2923059148, 2923059009 ERC Determination: DNS-M Date: April 11, 2016 Appeal Period Ends: April 29, 2016 Administrative Decision: Date: Appeal Period Ends: Public Hearing Date: May 10, 2016 Date Appealed to HEX: By Whom: HEX Decision: Date: Appeal Period Ends: Date Appealed to Council: By Whom: Council Decision: Date: Mylar Recording Number: Project Description: The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a multi-family development containing 74 units in two 4-story structure. The vacant 3.78 acre site is located within the Commercial Arterial (RM-F) zoning classification and the Residential High Density (RHD) land use designation. The development would be comprised of two separate multi-family residential structures resulting in a density of 20.21 dulac. The subject site is fronted by three public rights-of-way: SE 172nd Street, Benson Road South (108th Ave SE) and Benson Drive South (SR-515). The applicant proposes one entrance off of SE 172nd St to the north of the site between the proposed buildings, and one entrance off of Benson Road South to the eastern side of the site, both meeting to form the I primary drive-through access across the site. There is a Class 4 stream which bisects the site, running east/west. Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050 the applicant is proposing impacts to the stream .. buffer through the use of buffer averaging. Additionally, the site contains critical slopes and Coal i Mine Hazards. The PPUD would be used to vary parking, design, open space, and retaining wall standards. The applicant has proposed to provide buffer enhancement as part of the proposed PUD public benefit, along with ance open space, pedestrian ame !s, and landscaping. Studies include a storm water repo. _, traffic study, habitat assesment, welland and supplemental stream study, arborist report, geotechnical and a coal mine hazard report. The proposed development would result in approximately 11,000 cubic yards of cut and 3,250 cubic yards of fill. 2/15/16 -Project placed on hold pending receipt of Independent Traffic Study. 3/30/16 -Proiect taken off hold. Location: 17249 & 17249 Benson Rd S Comments: ERe Determination Types: ONS -Determination of Non-Significance; ONS-M -Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated; OS -Determination of Significance. ADVISORY NOTES TO APr CANT LUA 15-000894 Application Date: December 30, 2015 Name: Avana Ridge Site Address: 17249 Benson Rd S Renlon, WA 98055-5487 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I February 14, 2016 Community Services Review Comments .. Contact: Leslie Betlach 1425-430-6619ILBetlach@renlonwa,gov Recommendations: 1. Park Impact Fees per Orinance 5670 applies. Engineering Review Comments .' Contact: Rohini Nair 1425-430-7298lrnair@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: I have completed a preliminary review for the above referenced project that consists of 74 unit multifamily apartments at Parcel number 2923059009 and parcel number 2923059148. The following comments are based on the application submittal made to the City of Renton by the applicant Water 1. Water Service is provided by Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. 2. A water availability certificate from the Soos Creek utility was submitted to the City with the land use application. 3. Approved water plans from Soos Creek should be provided during utility construction permit review. Sewer 1. Sewer Service is provided by Soos Creek Water and Sewer District 2. A sewer availability certificate from the Soos Creek utility was submitted to the City with the land use application. 3. Approved sewer plans from Soos Creek should be provided during utility construction permrt review. Stormwater 1. A drainage plan and drainage report prepared by D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers was submitted for the project The drainage report was based on the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual (2009 KCSWDM). Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard (Forested Conditions). A combined detention and water quality vault is proposed to meet the detention facility and water quality treatment for the project The maximum depth of the vault shall be as per the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual. The maximum depth from finished grade to the vault invert shall not exceed 20 feet for the detention vault. The report mentions that multifamily development requires enhanced basic water quality. Additional water quality feature is proposed to serve the enhanced water quality requirement For water quality features that are not in the City Amendments or the 2009 KCSWDM, and which have the General Use level designation through the state Department of Ecology's Technology Assessment Protocol -Ecology (TAPE) program, an adjustment process request should be submitted for review and consideration of approval. The drainage plans and drainage report for the utility construction permit should be prepared based on the City of Renton's 2009 Surface Water Design Manual Amendment to the King County Surface Water Design Manual. The drainage report should include the eight core requirements and the six special requirements. Storm water flow control BMP's are also proposed for the site and should be designed as per the Design Manual and City Amendments. 2. A geotechnical report for the site prepared by Earth Solutions Inc. was submitted for the project. The geotechnical report mentions that the soil is till soil and is not suitable for infiltration. All geotechnical recommendations shall be followed. 3. A Construction Storm water General Permit from Department of Ecology is required since grading and clearing of the site exceeds one acre 4. Surface water system development charge fee is $0.594 per square foot of new impervious surface area, but not less than $1,485.00. This fee is subject to change at the rate that is applicable at the time of issuance of the utility construction permit will be applicable. Transportation 1. Payment of transportation impact fee is applicable at the time of issuance of the building permit The transportation impact fee rate that is current at the time of building permit application is applicable on the project. Since the building permit was applied in 2015, the 2015 transportation impact fee rate is applicable. The 2015 rate for apartment is $2,214.44 per dwelling. 2. A traffic impact analysis (TIA) prepared by TraffEx was submitted for the project. The TIA mentions that the daily new trips generated by the proposed project is 492, with 38 new AM peak hour trips and 46 new PM peak hour trips. The TIA reviewed the impact of trips at the two site access driveways (one driveway on SE 172nd Street, and another driveway on Benson Road South), and at the intersection of SE 172nd Street & Benson Road South. Traffic signal warranty analysis was done for the intersection of SE 172nd Street and Benson Road South and the report mentions that the need for signal at the intersection was not warranted. The TIA also showed that the proposed development had acceptable level of service at the driveways. The trips from the development is not expected to increase the existing traffic at the intersection of Benson Road South & Benson Drive South by more than 5%, therefore, this intersection was not subject to Ran: May 09, 2016 Page 1 of 6 ~ANT ADVISORY NOTES TO API LUA 15-000894 -----~ .... R'enton PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I February 14, 2016 Engineering Review Comments Contact: Rohini Nair 1425-430-72981 rnair@rentonwa.gov more study. Several traffic related comments have been received from the public regarding this project within the past two days regarding the project driveway on SE 172nd Street and the impact on the neighborhood streets. The City is looking into some of the comments. The traffic consultant can address some of the citizen questions and include in a revised TIA. The traffic consultant should also explore more into the pedestrian impacts of the project and include in the TIA. 3. Frontage: The site has frontages on three public streets Benson Drive South (SR515), Benson Road South, and SE 172nd Street. a. Benson Drive South (SR515) -is a principal arterial and a state route roadway. Per RMC 4 6 060, the minimum right of way (ROW) width required on a four lane principal arterial is 91 feet The available ROW width on the Benson Drive frontage, as per King County assessor map, varies from 100 feet to 115 feet (with half side of street ROW width varying from 50 feet to 65 feet fronting the subject site). Based on information from the Transportation section, the existing curb location on the frontage is okay. There is existing sidewalk directly behind the curb along the Benson Drive South frontage. As per code, frontage improvements including 0.5 feet wide curb and gutter, 8 feet wide landscaped planter, 8 feet wide sidewalk, street lighting, and storm water improvements are required on principal arterial streets. The ROW includes the street frontage elements and a minimum width of 1 foot back of the sidewalk. Due to critical areas along portions of the frontage, the applicant has requested a modification to allow the sidewalk to remain in the current location for the areas with the critical areas and the buffer area. At the other portions, the sidewalk is proposed to be relocated to behind an 8 feet wide landscaped planter. The street frontage improvements in the half side of the street fronting the development will be required to be provided by the developer. b. Benson Road South -is a minor arterial. As per RMC 4 6 060 the minimum right of way (ROW) width required on a minor arterial is 91 feet. The available ROW width on the Benson Road South frontage, as per King County assessor map, is 100 feet (with 50 feet of the half side of street fronting the subject site). As per transportation section, the required paved width on this street is 44 feet (includes 3 travel lanes and 5 feet wide bike lane on both sides). Therefore, the half street paved width on this street is 22 feet. Frontage improvements including 0.5 feet wide curb and gutter, 8 feet wide landscaped planter, 8 feet wide sidewalk, street lighting, and stormwater improvements are required on minor arterial streets and are required to be provided by the developer. The minimum required right of way width on arterial includes the street frontage elements and a minimum width of 1 foot clear width back of the sidewalk. The street frontage improvements in the half side of the street fronting the development will be required to be provided by the developer. c. SE 172nd Street -is a commercial mixed use and industrial access street. As per RMC 4 6 060 the minimum right of way (ROW) width required on a commercial mixed use and industrial access street is 69 feet for a 2 lane roadway. The available ROW width on the SE 172nd Street frontage, as per King County assessor map, is 60 feet. RMC 4 6 060 also requires a minimum paved roadway width of 20 feet for 2 travel lanes, along with 8 feet wide on street parking lanes on both sides, 0.5 feet wide curbs, 8 feet wide landscaped planters, 6 feet wide sidewalks, street lighting, and stormwater improvements on commercial mixed use and industrial access streets. The existing ROW width on this street is 60 feet. This will require a dedication of 4.5 feet on the sUbject frontage to achieve the code requirement. The plans submitted by the developer shows a ROW dedication of 3 feet. A street modification is required to be submitted for the reduced width of ROW dedication. The proposed pavement centerline on SE 172nd Street shall align with the existing centerline of the ROW. Street frontage improvements and ROW dedication will be required to be provided by the developer. d. The maximum slope back of sidewalk is 4H: 1V for minimum 3 feet back of the sidewalk. e. The corner curb ramps at all street intersections adjacent to the site should be ADA compliant. ADA also requires matching ADA compliant curb ramps on the other side of the intersection. 4. The site is proposed to be accessed via driveways from Benson Road South and SE 172nd Street. Please refer to RMC 4 4 080 for driveway design standards including location, grade, and width. 5. Street lighting is required to be provided on the frontage streets by the project. 6. The City of Renton Trench restoration and Street overlay requirements will be applicable for any work in the public right of way. General Comments 1. All construction or service utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. Plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. When utility plans are complete, please submit four (4) copies of the drawings, two (2) copies of the drainage report, permit application, an itemized cost of construction estimate, and application fee at the counter on the sixth floor. . Police Plan Review Comments .. Contact: Cyndie Parks 1425-430-7521Icparks@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: POLICE RELATED COMMENTS 64 Police Calls for Service Estimated Annually CONSTRUCTION PHASE Theft from construction sites is one of the most commonly reported crimes in the City. To protect materials and equipment it is Ran: May 09, 2016 Page 2 of 6 ADVISORY NOTES TO API LUA 15-000894 :;ANT PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Police Plan Review Comments Version 1 I February 14, 2016 Contact: Cyndie Parks 1425-430-7521 I cparks@rentonwa.gov recommended that all materials and tools be locked up when not in use. The site should have security lighting, and any construction trailer or storage area should be completely fenced in with portable chain link fencing. The fence will provide both a physical and psychological barrier to any prospective criminal and will demonstrate that the area is private property. Construction trailers should be kept locked when not in use, and should be fitted with heavy duty deadbolts with a minimum 1 1/2" throw when bolted. Glass windows in construction trailers should be shatter resistant Toolboxes and storage containers should be secured with heavy duty padlocks and kept locked when not in use. "No Trespassing" signs should be posted on the property during the construction phase. These signs allow officers, upon contact, to provide a verbal warning to trespassers that should they be contacted on the property again, they could be cited and/or arrested. COMPLETED COMPLEX All exterior doors should be made of solid metal or metal over wood, with heavy duty deadbolt locks, latch guards or pry resistant cylinders around the locks, and peepholes. If glass doors are used, they should be fitted with the hardware described above and additionally be fitted with a layer of security film. Security film can increase the strength of the glass, greatly reducing the likelihood of breaking glass to gain entry. Access to the back of the buildings should be limited, preferably with security fencing, as these areas could be vulnerable to crime due to the lack of natural surveillance by passersby or vehicle traffic. It is recommended that any storage units or facility rooms have alarm systems installed. As isolated as this property will be from any tranSitory traffic, it will be susceptible to burglary and theft. It's recommended an auxiliary security service be hired to patrol the property during the hours of darkness. It is important to direct all foot traffic into main entrances of the building. All access points to the property and living spaces should be controlled via access fobs (this includes the elevator and any indoor amenities). Since it appears the bulk of the complex is on private property, I recommend a security slide gate be installed to deter criminal activity (not a swing gate). Please be sure to provide the Renton Police Department with a knox box or comparable so emergency access into secured locations can be obtained in a quick and efficient manner. All areas of this project need to have adequate lighting. This will assist in the deterrent of theft from motor vehicle (one of the most common crimes in Renton) as well as provide safe pedestrian travel for users of this property. The buildings should have a building number clearly posted with numbers at least 8" in height and of a color contrasting with the building. Unit numbers for the dwellings should also be illuminated so that they are easily located. This will assist emergency personnel in locating the correct location for response. Landscaping should be installed with the objective of allowing visibility -not too dense and not too high. Too much landscaping will make tenants and their guests feel isolated and will provide criminals with concealment to commit crimes such as burglary. Landscaping absorbs a lot of light, so keeping this to a minimum will assist in deterring criminal activity. I have particular concerns about the dog park on the east side of the property. It's isolated from view and with the addition of parking spaces nearby, this will make it a vulnerable location for users Although it abuts Benson Road S., which can be quite busy during commuter hours, peripheral activity here is quite the opposite during late evening and early hours. I recommend you install this location closer to the building so it will be convenient for those living in the apartment buildings, and it can be easily seen from numerous locations within the complex. With the presence of a "community open space" -this will attract both positive, and unfortunately, negative activity. With the addition of seating areas, you are sure to attract unwanted activity. Any area where loitering may be encouraged, sufficient lighting should be installed for easy viewing. The goal of an open community space is for people to use it -but if they don't feel safe, then it will be mostly used by those with nefarious intent It's recommended that any obstructions such as landscaping berms, planter walls, dense hedges, etc., be kept to a minimum. The environmental concept for this community space should be a very open one. It is key for a large complex like this one, to have appropriate lighting and signage. "No Trespassing" signs should be posted in conspicuous locations throughout the property, including entrances to the property and parking areas. I highly recommend that the developer have a Renton Police Crime Prevention Representative conduct a security survey of the premises once construction is complete. Fire Review" Building Comments;; .;. Contact: Corey Thomas I 425c430-7024 I cthomas@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $463.66 per multifamily unit This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: Ran: May 09, 2016 Page 3 of6 ::;ANT ADVISORY NOTES TO API LUA 15-000894 ----.....,.",..--... Ren to n ® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I February 14, 2016 Fire Review' Building Comments Contact: Corey Thomas 1425-430-70241 cthomas@rentonwa.gov 1. The preliminary fire flow is 2,250 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and two within 300 feet of the building. Hydrant spacing shall meet maximum spacing requirements of 300 feet also. One hydrant is required within 50 feet of all fire department connections for standpipes and sprinkler systems. Existing hydrants may be counted toward the requirements as long as they meet current code. Looped water mains are required around buildings when the fire flow exceeds 2,500 gpm. A water availability cert~icate is required from Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. 2. Approved fire sprinkler and fire alarm systems are required throughout the buildings. Dry standpipes are required in all stairways. Direct outside access is required to the fire sprinkler riser rooms. Fire alarm systems are required to be fully addressable and full detection is required. Separate plans and permits required by the fire department. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. Fire access roads are required to be a minimum of 20 feet unobstructed width with turning radius of 25 feet inside and 45 feet outside minimum. Fire lane signage required for the onsite roadways. Roadways shall support a minimum of a 30 ton vehicle and 75 psi point loading. Maximum grade is 15 percent. Minimum vertical clearance for fire access through the building is 13 feet, 6 inches. Otherwise an approved fire access turnaround may be required near the southeast corner of the building. 4. An electronic site plan is required prior to occupancy for pre fire planning purposes. 5. The buildings are required to have at least one elevator meet the size requirements for a bariatric size stretcher. Car size shall accommodate a minimum of a 40 inch by 84 inch stretcher. 6. The building shall comply with the City of Renton Emergency Radio Coverage ordinance. Testing shall verify both incoming and outgOing minimum emergency radio signal coverage. If inadequate, the building shall be enhanced with amplification equipment in order to meet minimum coverage. Separate plans and permits are required for any proposed amplification systems. Building Review -Planning Comments Contact: Crai(fBurneIl1425-430-7290 I cburnell'@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: follow recommendations of geotechnical report Technical Services COlllments """ Contact: Amanda;Asl<ren I" 425-430-73691aaskren@renlonwa.gov Recommendations: I would recommend a Lot Consolidation for the two properties as the current property lines do not conform with the proposed site improvements. Ran: May 09, 2016 Page 4 016 :;ANT ADVISORY NOTES TO API LUA 15-000894 -----"..,.,,---*Ren ton PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 2 I April 25, 2016 Engineering Review Comments Contact: RohiniNair 1425-430-72981 rnair@rentonwa.goY Recommendations: Water 1. Water Service is provided by Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. 2. A water availability certificate from the Soos Creek utility was submitted to the City with the land use application. 3. Approved water plans from Soos Creek should be provided during utility construction permit review. Sewer 1. Sewer Service is provided by Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. 2. A sewer availability certificate from the Soos Creek utility was submitted to the City with the land use application. 3. Approved sewer plans from Soos Creek should be provided during utility construction permit review. Stormwater 1. A drainage plan and drainage report prepared by D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers was submitted for the project. The drainage report was based on the 2009 King County Suliace Water Manual (2009 KCSWDM). Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard (Forested Conditions). A combined detention and water quality vault is proposed to meet the detention facility and water quality treatment for the project. The maximum depth of the vault shall be as per the 2009 King County Suliace Water Design Manual. The maximum depth from finished grade to the vault invert shall not exceed 20 feet for the detention vault. The report mentions that multifamily development requires enhanced basic water quality. Additional water quality feature is proposed to serve the enhanced water quality requirement. For water quality features that are not in the City Amendments or the 2009 KCSWDM, and which have the General Use level designation through the state Department of Ecology's Technology Assessment Protocol -Ecology (TAPE) program, an adjustment process request should be submitted for review and consideration of approval. The drainage plans and drainage report for the utility construction permit should be prepared based on the City of Renton's 2009 Surface Water Design Manual Amendment to the King County Surface Water Design Manual. The drainage report should include the eight core reqUirements and the six special requirements. Storm water flow control BMP's are also proposed for the site and should be designed as per the Design Manual and City Amendments. 2. A geotechnical report for the site prepared by Earth Solutions Inc. was submitted for the project. The geotechnical report mentions that the soil is till soil and is not suitable for infiltration. All geotechnical recommendations shall be followed. 3. A Construction Storm water General Permit from Department of Ecology is required since grading and clearing of the site exceeds one acre 4. Suliace water system development charge fee is $0.594 per square foot of new impervious surface area, but not less than $1,485.00. This fee is subject to change at the rate that is applicable at the time of issuance of the utility construction permit will be applicable. Transportation 1. Payment of transportation impact fee is applicable at the time of issuance of the building permit. The transportation impact fee rate that is current at the time of building permit application is applicable on the project. Since the building permit was applied in 2015, the 2015 transportation impact fee rate is applicable. The 2015 rate for apartment is $2,214.44 per dwelling. 2. A traffic impact analysis (TIA) prepared by TraffEx was submitted for the project. The TIA mentions that the daily new trips generated by the proposed project is 492, with 38 new AM peak hour trips and 46 new PM peak hour trips. The TIA reviewed the impact of trips at the two site access driveways (one driveway on SE 172nd Street, and another driveway on Benson Road South), and at the intersection of SE 172nd Street & Benson Road South. Traffic signal warranty analysis was done forthe intersection of SE 172nd Street and Benson Road South and the report mentions that the need for signal at the intersection was not warranted. The TIA also showed that the proposed development had acceptable level of service at the driveways. The trips from the development is not expected to increase the existing traffic at the intersection of Benson Road South & Benson Drive South by more than 5%, therefore, this intersection was not subject to more study. A revised TIA prepared by Traffix was also submitted for the project. Staff has reviewed the traffic signal synchro model results and have corresponded with the applicant's engineer regarding corrections to the model run. The corrected model run and an updated TIA report should be provided to the City prior to the Hearing examiner meeting. Several traffic related comments have been received from the public regarding this project within the past two days regarding the project driveway on SE 172nd Street and the impact on the neighborhood streets. The City is looking into some of the comments. The traffic consultant can address some of the citizen questions and include in a revised TIA. The traffic consultant should also explore more into the pedestrian impacts of the project and include in the TIA. Staff recommends that access restriction should not be implemented at the access from SE 172nd Street. In lieu of the foregoing site access restriction, we recommend, as a traffic calming measure, that Electronic Speed Radar Signs be installed in both directions on the streets 1 06th Ave SE and 1 04th Ave SE. This type of sign has been shown to reduce traffic speeding and aggreSSive driving. As a Ran: May 09, 2016 Page 5 of 6 ADVISORY NOTES TO API 'CANT LUA 15-000894 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 2 I April 25, 2016 Engineering Review Comments .... Contact: Hohini Nair I 425-430-7298 I rnair@rentonwa.gov mitigation requirement, the signs, mounting poles, and associated equipment is to be purchased and installed by the Avana development at the direction of the City. 3. Frontage: The site has frontages on three public streets 8enson Drive South (SR515), Benson Road South, and SE 172nd Street. a. Benson Drive South (SR515) -is a principal arterial and a state route roadway. Per RMC 4 6 060, the minimum right of way (ROW) width required on a four lane principal arterial is 91 feet The available ROW width on the Benson Drive frontage, as per King County assessor map, varies from 100 feet to 115 feet (with half side of street ROW width varying from 50 feet to 65 feet fronting the subject site). Based on information from the Transportation section, the existing curb location on the frontage is okay. There is existing sidewalk directly behind the curb along the Benson Drive South frontage. As per code, frontage improvements including 0.5 feet wide curb and gutter, 8 feet wide landscaped planter, 8 feet wide sidewalk, street lighting, and storm water improvements are required on principal arterial streets. The ROW includes the street frontage elements and a minimum width of 1 foot back of the sidewalk. Due to critical areas along portions of the frontage, the applicant has requested a modification to allow the sidewalk to remain in the current location for the areas with the critical areas and the buffer area. At the other portions, the sidewalk is proposed to be relocated to behind an 8 feet wide landscaped planter. The street frontage improvements in the half side of the street fronting the development will be required to be provided by the developer. b. Benson Road South -is a minor arterial. As per RMC 4 6 060 the minimum right of way (ROW) width required on a minor arterial is 91 feet. The available ROW width on the Benson Road South frontage, as per King County assessor map, is 100 feet (with 50 feet of the half side of street fronting the subject site). As per transportation section, the required paved width on this street is 44 feet (includes 3 travel lanes and 5 feet wide bike lane on both sides). Therefore, the half street paved width on this street is 22 feet. Frontage improvements including 0.5 feet wide curb and gutter, 8 feet wide landscaped planter, 8 feet wide sidewalk, street lighting, and stormwater improvements are required on minor arterial streets and are required to be provided by the developer. The minimum required right of way width on arterial includes the street frontage elements and a minimum width of 1 foot clear width back of the sidewalk. The street frontage improvements in the half side of the street fronting the development will be required to be provided by the developer. Curb, gutter, and 8 feet wide sidewalk are required to be provided in front of the adjacent property 10717 SE 172nd Street on Benson Road South till the intersection with SE 172nd Street. c. SE 172nd Street -is a commercial mixed use and industrial access street. As per RMC 4 6 060 the minimum right of way (ROW) width required on a commercial mixed use and industrial access street is 69 feet for a 2 lane roadway. The available ROW width on the SE 172nd Street frontage, as per King County assessor map, is 60 feet. RMC 4 6 060 also requires a minimum paved roadway width of 20 feet for 2 travel lanes, along with 8 feet wide on street parking lanes on both sides, 0.5 feet wide curbs, 8 feet wide landscaped planters, 6 feet wide sidewalks, street lighting, and stormwater improvements on commercial mixed use and industrial access streets. The existing ROW width on this street is 60 feet. This will require a dedication of 4.5 feet on the subject frontage to achieve the code requirement. The plans submitted by the developer shows a ROW dedication of 3 feet. A street modification is required to be submitted for review of the reduced width of ROW dedication. The proposed pavement centerline on SE 172nd Street shall align with the existing centerline of the ROW. Street frontage improvements and ROW dedication will be required to be provided by the developer. Curb, gutter, and 6 feet wide sidewalk are required to be provided in front of the adjacent property 10717 SE 172nd Street on Benson Road South till the intersection with Benson Road South. An ADA compliant landing with curb ramps is required to be provided at the intersection of SE 172nd Street and Benson Road South. d. The maximum slope back of sidewalk is 4H: 1 V for minimum 3 feet back of the sidewalk. e. The corner curb ramps at all street intersections adjacent to the site should be ADA compliant. ADA also requires matching ADA compliant curb ramps on the other side of the intersection. 4. The site is proposed to be accessed via driveways from Benson Road South and SE 172nd Street. Please refer to RMC 44080 for driveway design standards including location, grade. and width. 5. Street lighting is required to be provided on the frontage streets by the project. 6. The City of Renton Trench restoration and Street overlay requirements will be applicable for any work in the public right of way. General Comments 1. All construction or service utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. Plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. When utility plans are complete, please submit four (4) copies of the drawings, two (2) copies of the drainage report, permit application, an itemized cost of construction estimate, and application fee at the counter on the sixth floor. Ran: May 09, 2016 Page 6 of 6 .. DEPARTMENT OF COMM TV AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -----"...."".-·Renton ® Planning Division LAND USE PERMIT MASTER APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: NAME: Avana Ridge, LLC Avana Ridge PROJECTfADDRESS(S)fLOCATION AND ZIP CODE: ADDRESS: 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 0615 SE 172nd Street (generally) Renton, WA 98055 CITY: ZIP: 17249 Benson Road South (generally) Mercer Island, WA 98040 Renton, WA 98055 TELEPHONE NUMBER: 206-588-1147 KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): 292305-9009 APPLICANT (if other than owner) 292305-9148 NAME: EXISTING LAND USE(S): Vacant Land PROPOSED LAND USE(S): PPUD to create 74 COMPANY (if applicable): multifamily dwelling units in the RM-F zone. EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: ADDRESS: RHD -Residential High Density PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION CITY: ZIP: (if applicable) NA TELEPHONE NUMBER: EXISTING ZONING: RM-F CO NT ACT PERSON PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): NA NAME: SITE AREA (in square feet): 164,827.24 Justin Lagers SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE COMPANY (if applicable): DEDICATED: 1674.47 Avana RidQe, LLC SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: ADDRESS: 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET CITY: ZIP: ACRE (if applicable) 20.21 Mercer Island, WA 98040 TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable) 253-405-5587 NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): Justin@americanclassichomes.com 74 1 C:\Users\Justin\Desktop\Avana Ridge\Master Landuse Application.docRev: 08/2015 · .OJ ECT IN FORMAT,-IO,-N_-,-(cc'-'o_n-c-.,_"_ue_d-L1) _______ _ NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): PROJECT VALUE: NA $9,289,900.00 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): 92,899 IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): NA o AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL o AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA TWO BUILDINGS (if applicable): NA 0 FLOOD HAZARD AREA __ sq. ft. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): NA 0 GEOLOGIC HAZARD __ sq. ft. NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if 0 HABITAT CONSERVATION __ sq. ft. applicable): NA 0 SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES 4015.98 sq. ft. NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): 3 0 WETLANDS __ sq. ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following_ information included) SITUATE IN THE SW QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 23N, RANGE 5E, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name!s) Joel Mezistrano, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I am (please check one) 0 the current owner of the property involved in this application or 0 the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. ~entative 7 Date Signature of Owner/Representative Date STATE OF WASHINGTON) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that 'JO£,( H £ Z IST~NO signed this instrument and acknowledge it to b®h~~~~{t~ee and voluntary act for the uses and purpose mentioned in the instnument. ......... ',..... 111" .:::-' Sell/ A --:2 // ~ / ~ I ~ ~ -:~"""';!~""~;?O\ VC;tI"/ / ~ Dateo E!i? ffOl b 4-~~?' ~ Notary Public in and for the State of Washington ~ g ~ c: I ~ o~ r-~ A? ~ ~ ::; -.J ttl • > z::: -; l \/ ~ "p \:.. ("~C' ' ~ $1 O~ E {!A-f:{l':' ,,(. 0 Z,D.,a. ,/ ~ <!), 0),0> ,be: J\C = / ZI ~ '" s?>"O "" "V -Notary (Print): I "A. Itt ... ~..... '-./.:: II/ 'VG' 111\\\\\\"", ....Q .:: III 7"ON r: $' & 1III "........ M' t t . / 7 / ('/ 11\\\\\\\"" Y appoln men expires: _----'oL._-"---....!..._---"----'O,,----_________ _ 2 C\Users\Justin\Desktop\Avana Ridge\Master landuse Application.docRev: 08/2015 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 Project Narrative Project name. size, and location of site Avana Ridge is an apartment development at 10616 SE 172" Street at the northwesterly corner of the intersection of Benson Drive South and Benson Road South. The project is comprised of a triangular property, made up of two separate tax parcels (King County Parcel #292305-9009 and #292305-9148, totaling 164,828 square feet (3.78 acres). The property is located in the SW Y. of Section 29, Township 23 North, Range 5 East. Land Use Permits Required The following permits are required for the proposed project: • Preliminary Planned Urban Development • Final Planned Urban Development • Lot Line Adjustment Zoning Designation-Sffe and Adjacent Properties Both of the parcels proposed for development have a Residential High Density (RHD) land use designation and are currently zoned Residential Multifamily (RM-F), per to City of Renton's zoning map. The site to the east adjacent to the two parcels proposed to be developed is currently zoned RM-F, operating as a daycare facility, Family Circle Learning Center (on .75 acres). The five parcels located to the north of parcel 292305-9009 are zoned R-8, and consist of existing single-family residences. Northeasterly to parcel 292305-9009, adjacent to the single family residences, is a vacant paroel zoned R-14. Located SE of the project parcels, along 1 08 th Ave SE, consists of a single parcel (on 1.19 acres) zoned RM-F, which is currently vacant and heavily wooded. Located due west, along Benson Drive South (SR-515), of both parcels are five parcels currently zoned CA. These parcels have exisling structures on them, consisting of the following uses: • Glenview Heights Apartments ( on .91 acres), a 1 O-unit subsidized housing community by King County Housing Authority • The Aviator Apartments (on 4.42 acres), a four-building, 124-unit apartment community • Public Storage (2.91 acres), a self-storage facility • Storage One @ Benson (on .95 acres), a self-storage facility • Valley Dental Center (on .83 acres), an outpatient dental care facility The parcels located east of the proposed project are all zoned R-14 and consist of the following structures: • Kelsey Court (on 208 acres), a 36-unit condominium community • Kelsey Lane, a ten lot single family community Page 1 of 10 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 • 18 separate parcels along SE 173'" Street, 16 which consist of single-family residences, and 2 of which are vacant. • Life of Victory Church (on 2.08 acres), a religious congregation Current Use of the Site and Existing Improvements Both parcels proposed for development are currently undeveloped with a ground cover of second growth conifer, deciduous trees and brush. Both parcels are covered in native vegetation, predominantly deciduous tree species with moderate to dense lower understory. Parcel #292305-9148 has a SW aspect with a stream delineated through the center of the site, east to west. Special Site Features (wetlands. water bodies, sleep slopesl The site is characterized by an unnamed seasonal stream characterized as Class 4 per Renton Municipal Code (within the central and southern site areas) and a historic coal mine, known as the Springbrook mine, as well as its associated opening (near the south property line). The stream runs east to west across the project site. A Weiland and Stream Delineation Study was performed by Sewall Wetland Consuffing, Inc. on December 22,2015 detailing their findings. Site topography generally descends from north to south, with a total elevation change of approximately 50 feet, with typical slopes ranging from 1-20%. Existing vegetation is very dense, and indicates undisturbed forested conditions. Steep slopes are present at several locations site-wide. Of the 429 total trees on site, 332 are classified as viable, and 97 are classified as dangerous, per the project's Registered Consulting Arborist. The coal mine at the southern portion of the site (dates 1948) has been designated to have high coal mine hazard (City Designation: CH). A Coal Mine Hazard Assessment was performed by Icicle Creek Engineers, Inc. on March 22, 2004, The report describes a mine shaft entrance located in the southwest portion for the site adjacent to Benson Drive (SR 515). A structural plug is recommended for the shaft entrance to mitigate any potential hazard. This southern, geologically sensitive area of the site will not contain disruptive improvements. Soil Type and Drainage Conditions The referenced geologic report indicates that native soils on site are comprised primarily of silty sand with gravel (USCS: SM), consistent with the makeup of Vashon till. Across the site, the upper two to three feet of Vashon till has been classified as "weathered" and encountered in loose to medium-dense state, while Vashon till at depth has been classified as "unweathered" and encountered in dense to very dense state. The presence of iron oxide has contributed to the "weathered" classification. Page 2 of 10 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 A Class 4 stream bisects the site into two sub-drainage basins. Both sub-drainage basins drain toward Ihe stream at grades of 5 to 20%. The stream is collected in a catch basin inlet and conveyed via underground culverts westerly underneath Benson Drive (SR-515). Proposed Use of the Property and Scope of the Proposed Development Avana Ridge Apartments proposes the construction of two new, 4-story multifamily residential buildings totaling 74 units comprised of one-, two-, and three-bedroom units. The proposal of units is as follows: (28) 1-bedroom units, (29) 2-bedroom units, and (17) 3-bedroom units, with types equally distributed across both proposed buildings. The architectural design of the proposed residential building complements the character of the surrounding community through the use of residentially-scaled windows, thoughtful and frequent modulation of the facades, and pedestrian-friendly access points, signage, and proposed plantings. The arrangement of the buildings stays respectful of neighboring properties through their placement on site. The residential development fronts on SE 1720d Street, which is comprised of mostly residential homes. The placement of the buildings along this street allows buffers and additional distance from the other two rights-of way along the perimeters of the development. The buildings screen the parking from the residential properties to the north, and are pulled away from the neighboring day care property to the East, through its location over 30' from the east property line at its most narrow point. By splitting the units between two buildings, the project maintains an appropriately scaled development that will reduce congestion on the site and allow for multiple views as well as modulated facades compared to one continuous structure. The existing stream buffer, which separates the north apartment building area from the southern open space, is mostly existing forest (primarily Alder and Cottonwood) with an understory dominated by invasive Blackbenry. The buffer will be enhanced through the removal of the invasive Blackberries and other undesirable vegetation and replacement with native understory vegetation. A path will connect the north and south sides of the buffer, crossing over the stream via an attractively designed pedestrian bridge. A surface parking lot will support both buildings, and no covered garages or underground parking are being proposed. The site is unique in its large area of open space to the southern portion of the site. The applicant is proposing the construction of a large landscaped community open space at the southern portion of the site. The community open space incorporates active and passive space, with a central connecting sidewalk which links the park to the public right of way. A central path and complementing pedestrian bridge crossing will be constructed to create an access point to the community open space from the surface parking lot. The objectives of the community open space design are as follows: • To create a special, memorable place that expresses pride of ownership and allows apartment residents as well as members of the local neighborhood to gather and enjoy the views and space. Page 3 of 10 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 • To provide ample usable space for passive recreation and special events such as picnics, parties, weddings and receptions, movie night in the park, concerts, etc. These events promote community involvement, neighborly interactions, and a sense of responsibility towards a commonly used and appreciated rare amenity. • To take advantage of and display the attractive territorial views to the West • To preserve and enhance existing vegetation and natural character through tree preservation, removal of extensive invasive Blackberries, and replacement with native understory vegetation to be maintained through the life of the development. • To promote effective pedestrian access from Benson Drive and Benson Road and through the community open space that is safe and inviting In order to meet these objectives, the community open space features a large, central, gently sloping lawn for casual seating and recreation. The lawn is oriented to slope down towards an open pavilion whose intended use includes performances, and community gatherings. The pavilion is sited to capture and frame the attractive territorial views to the west and to be a great setting for photos (e.g. weddings, graduation). The lawn has a perimeter path paved with pervious fine crushed stone with benches to facilitate short strolls to enjoy attractive perimeter plantings, which includes existing tree groves with enhanced understory plantings, as well as more omamental plantings. Two picnic tables (at least one is accessible) are nestled among the perimeter planting areas overlooking the central lawn area. Pedestrians may access the community open space via a proposed paved accessible path from Benson Road where grades are the most gentle, from Benson Drive by stairs that ascend an approximately 15 foot high slope, or from the path that crosses the stream buffer from the north. The path is lit with bollard lights which conform to the dark-sky initiative to prevent light pollution. A cobble and boulder-lined drainage swale designed to mimic a small, natural streambed parallels a portion of the central path through the site. Two focal points with a sculptural focal element are provided at entry points to the central lawn area. All of the proposed components of the community open space promote a variety of different activities and opportunities to enjoy the landscape, views, and community interaction. A small fenced off-leash dog run is provided at the east side of the site between the buffer and the parking lot among a grove of existing trees to be preserved. The dog run would be surfaced with a pervious wood-chip surface. A pervious wood chip path provides access from the proposed apartment buildings. The building and parking lot landscape is designed to meet several objectives: • help reduce the overall scale of the building through ample tree plantings • help break up large areas of parking lot pavement with interior and perimeter landscape • provide a measure of screening from adjacent public R.O.w. through perimeter landscape buffering Page 4 of 10 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 • express ownership by distinguishing private from public space through an orderly, attractively designed landscape • help define circulation routes and frame or enhance views • enhance safety and security by avoiding potential hiding places and areas with poor visibility • enhance existing tree areas to remain with native understory plantings • provide attractive residential surroundings with year-round ornamental interest (flowers, fall color, winter greenery, fragrance) • provide environmental benefits such as shade, improved air quality, natural stormwater treatment, and wildlife habitat • screen on-site utilitarian areas such as trash enclosures Avana Ridge Apartments is fronted by three public rights-of-way: SE 1720 ' Street, Benson Road South (1 08~ Ave SE) and Benson Drive South (SR-515). The applicant proposes one entrance off of SE 172 0' Street to the north of the site between the East and West buildings, and one entrance off of Benson Road South to the eastern side of the site, both meeting to form the primary drive-through access across the site. This will also serve as the emergency vehicle ingress/egress access. The site is served by surface parking to the south of the proposed buildings, flanking the main access drive. Pedestrian access is provided with existing concrete sidewalks along Benson Drive SR-515 and new sidewalks proposed along Benson Road and SE 172 0' SI. A pedestrian stair along Benson Drive (SR-515) is proposed to provide direct access to the site. Internal sidewalks and the on-site trails will provide convenient pedestrian connections within the development and adjacent right-of-way. Emergency vehicle ingress/egress over the property will be provided per the indicated drive aisle on the site plan. The proposed development conforms to required maximum hose-reach lengths as dictated by the local fire department from all points of the building. These required access points are illustrated on the site plan provided on sheet A 1.00. Proposed Off-Site Improvements (i.e, installation of sidewalks, fire hydrants, sewer main,etc) The Avana Ridge Apartment project is very unique in that it has frontage on three existing public rights-of- way. SE 172nd SI. (l72nd) is classified as a Commercial Mixed Use Roadway and will be improved to add verticat curb and gutter, 0' -25' feet of additional asphalt from the existing condition, eight foot (8') sidewalks, eight foot (8') landscaped planter strips with street trees and grass lawn groundcover to allow easy access for pedestrians between on-street parking and the Sidewalk. Ornamental trees, shrubs, and groundcover will be provided near the project Page 5 of 10 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 driveway entry for curb appeal and as a visual cue for drivers. LED streetlights will provide pedestrian and roadway illumination. The widened roadway section will provide parallel parking along a portion of the new streetscape. An additional three feet (3') of right-of-way will be dedicated to the City to accompany these improvements. Benson Road South (Benson Rd.) is classified as a Minor Arterial Roadway and will be improved along the project's frontage with the removal of the limited existing sidewalk, extruded curb and asphalt walkway and the replacement of missing vertical curb and gutter, eight foot (8') sidewalks, eight foot (8') landscaped planter strips with street trees, low shrubs, groundcover, and LED streetlights to provide pedestrian and roadway illumination. The area between the sidewalk and the R.OW line will also be enhanced with new plantings and lawn where slopes permit. Sufficient right-ol-way exists along Benson Rd. and as such, no dedication is proposed. Approximately twelve leet (12') of additional ROW lie behind the newly proposed sidewalk along Benson Rd. S. and the applicant is proposing to install landscaping in the area consisting 01 a mix 01 additional street trees and ground cover to provide a transitional area to both the existing stream buffer and the large proposed community open space. A pedestrian connection via the sidewalk on Benson Rd. S. to the community open space is proposed which consists 01 a five loot (5') concrete walking path that invites the public to the community open space and then provides a connection back to Benson Drive South. This serves to promote recreational opportunities within the open space and take pedestrian traffic away from the intersection of Benson Drive South and Benson Rd. Benson Drive South -SR515 (Benson Dr.) is a classified as Principal Arterial Roadway and currently contains a five loot (5') concrete sidewalk with a steep incline at the back of the existing walk with native underbrush. The applicant is proposing to upgrade the existing non-accessible/pedestrian ramp at the intersection 01 Benson Rd. and Benson Dr. to meet current ADA standards. The applicant proposes to leave approximately 380' linear feet 01 the existing sidewalk on the eastern frontage but improve the 20' -27' additional right-ol-way behind the sidewalk with landscaping consisting of a mix of additional street trees and ground cover. Behind the existing sidewalk the existing embankment slope will be enhanced with street trees, shrubs, and groundcover, and lawn where slopes pemnit. A gap in the tree planting will be provided near the community open space so as not to impede the territorial views to the west from within open space and views of the proposed monument sign at the comer 01 Benson Drive and Benson Road. The topography in this area would require the installation of a 4' to 10' wall in areas to extend a traditional 8' planter and 8' sidewalk. By maintaining the existing sidewalk, which currently accommodates sale pedestrian traffic, we eliminate the need lor terraced walls, we minimize impacts to the stream buffer along Benson Dr. and we promote pedestrian use of the proposed community walking path along this section of Benson Dr. Along the portion 01 the Benson Dr., which directly abuts the new proposed parking and building facades, the applicant proposes removal of the existing sidewalk and the installation of eight foot (8') sidewalks and eight toot (8') landscaped planter strips with street trees. In this area walls are minimized, additional right-at-way exists to again add additional street trees and Page 6 ot 10 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 ground cover behind the new sidewalk. The applicant is also proposing to replace the existing asphalt walk path from 172nd to the sidewalk on Benson Dr. This walk path will continue to provide a well utilized pedestrian connection between the two roadways. Existing street lighting along Benson Dr. was retrofitted to LED style bulbs by the City of Renton in recent years. Currently these lights meet the pedestrian lighting requirements along Benson Dr. but fail to meet roadway illumination standards. The applicant proposes coordinating the installation of new LED streetlights to meet current code requirements. Off-site utility work will be limited to a connection in the existing stonm manhole in Benson Dr. Water and sewer service connections are limited to direct taps on the existing mains in 172nd. along with two fire water services and new hydrant tap are proposed. Dry utilities (power, phone and cable) will be served from the existing feeder lines at the intersection of 172nd and 108th Ave SE. These service lines will be feed underground via new conduit systems the applicant proposes to install. Total Estimated Construction Cost and Estimated Fair Market Value of Proposed Project The total estimated construction cost for the project is +1-$9 million and the estimated fair market value is yet to be determined. Estimated Quanlffies and Tvpe of Materials Involved Construction of the proposed building, roadway and parking improvements will cover 3.0 acres of land. Preliminary earthwork quantities for this work are 11,000 cubic yards of excavation, and 3250 cubic yards of fill. Approximately 1,000 cubic yards of the fill will be imported structural material for building foundations, road and parking lot base, pipe bedding and other uses. Local quarries will source this material. The owner and contractor will locate a suitable dump site for excess excavated material. Number, type and size of any trees to be removed Approximately 2.6 acres of land will be cleared to allow Project improvements. This will involve removal of all vegetation. Additionally, vegetation within approximately 0.5 acres of the Site and adjacent right-of-way will be altered. This will include removal of invasive understory plants. An accompanying proposal for the trees to be removed can be found within the Tree Retention Plan. Explanation of any land to be dedicated to the city The northemmost 3'-0 along the northernmost property line are proposed to be dedicated to the city. No other dedications are anticipated. Page 7 of 10 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 Proposed Job Shacks, Sales Trailers, and/or Model Homes Two temporary job shacks are anticipated during construction. One is planned for site development, and one for the building contractor. Proposed Modifications Requested Any modifications to the Municipal Code are addressed in the Planned Urban Development statement justification as well as in the table below. A variance or waiver is also being requested of the City to request that the existing sidewalk along Benson Drive (SR-515) remain, and that the existing street lighting be retrofitted to meet current code standards. There are a number of standards proposed within the table contained on the Planned Uriban Development statement justification. The items listed below serve to delineate standards that have been modified with this PUD. These are as follows: Variance Table -Deviations from code D1-Parking Avana Ridge currently provides 94 stalls on-site. The minimum required per RMC 4-4-080.10 is 96 total stalls. The current parking proposal adheres to the intent of the code by providing parking to the extent feasible without disturbing buffer areas and minimizing impervious surface area. Though the proposal of 94 stalls does not meet the minimum 96, there are also 20 stalls provided along 172'" Street, which total 18 stalls over the minimum required number of stalls. D2 -ROW Improvements Benson Drive South -The applicant proposes to leave approximately 380' linear feet of the existing sidewalk on the eastern frontage but improve the 20' -27' additional right-of-way behind the sidewalk with landscaping consisting of a mix of additional street trees and ground cover. By maintaining the existing sidewalk, the need for terraced walls is eliminated, we minimize impacts to the stream buffer along Benson Dr, and we promote pedestrian use of the proposed community walking path along this section of Benson Dr. D3 -Private Open Space The current proposal provides 4,156 SF of private, attached open space through the use of private balconies. Avana Ridge also proposes a large outdoor amenity on West Building Level 1 at 1 ,124 SF. In addition to these Page 8 of 10 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 two types of spaces (private balcony space and outdoor amenity space at west Levell), the applicant proposes a large, landscaped community open space provided at the southem portion of the site totaling 19,795 SF, Per RMC 4-4-100.E4, the minimum required attached private open space is 7,400 SF, and minimum private open space required is 11,100 SF, Avana Ridge provides 25,075 SF of total open space, which greatly exceeds literal code requirements as well as addressing the intent of the code through the provision of numerous types of outdoor areas. The community open space to the south provides an amenity both to the residenls as well as the surrounding community, and provides for numerous types of active and passive recreation activities. 04 -Retaining Wall Height RMC 4-04-0400.1 and 0.2 establish maximum heights for retaining walls for residential property. The height limits are geared toward single-family residential development, so application of this chapter requires a certain amount of interpretation, In general heights are limited to 48 inches for walls located in front yard setbacks, and 72 inches for walls located side and rear yard setback. For the purposes of applying this chapter, Those portions of the property adjacent to the three streets surrounding the Site are considered front yards, and The property lines in common with the adjacent day care facility are considered side yards. This definition indicates a variance will be necessary to approve the proposed site grading, Specific descriptions of the deviations as follows: A section of the keystone-type wall located near the monument sign at the Benson Road/Benson Drive intersection is 5.5' tall. This wall faces the street. Imposing the 4-foot max height would require a 4-foot wide terrace and add 105 feet of 1.0-to 1.5-foot tall wall. The wall would require removal of three additional trees. Because the wall fronts an arterial roadway (Benson Road), the visual impact of the added height will be minimal. Because adherence to the code would provide no real benefit but involve costs (right-of-way and tree loss), we proposed one wall. Page 9 of 10 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 A seclion of the keystone-type wall located along the east side of the east building reaches 6.6 feet tall, exceeding the 6-foot maximum. This wall faces the proposed building. The excess height is preferable to a terraced configuration because it provides a contiguous landscape buffer. The wall could be limited to a 6-foot by steepening the grade of the landscape buffer. This was not pursued in an effort to minimize visual impacts to the adjacent day care facility. 05 -Pitched Roof Slope RMC 4-2-11 OD states: "Roofs wffh a pitch equalto or greater than 4:12 Requirements may project an additional six (6) vertical feet from the maximum wall plate height". This PUD seeks to modify the minimum pitch from 4:12 to 2: 12. This modification will still give the appearance of pitched shed roof from the pedestrian perspective. Refer to AO.06 and AO.O? for 3D images from the pedestrian point of view. These images, while not code-required, serve to illustrate the roof profile and modulation from the ground plane. By providing a 4:12 pitch, it will create additional wall massing to mitigate. Our current building modulation already successfully modulates the massing. The artful combination of parapet and roof slope, combined with cornice details and trellis elements achieve a more artful and sophisticated method of breaking up the roofline and adding visual interest to building facades and roof massing. These elements serve to exceed the literal minimum code requirements, and effectively achieve the intent of the code by breaking up the massing and providing visual interest to the building rooflines. These referenced proposed standards adhere to the intent of the Municipal Code. The proposed development exceeds several of the quantified requirements of the development code, including setback requirements, minimum site landscape requirements, and parking buffer requirements. The proposed Planned Urban Development also proposes a well-designed community open space that will benefit the residents of the development as well as members of the surrounding community. In this regard, the project sets a standard of care for future developments to follow through its enhancement of the pedestrian thoroughfare and overall experience. The Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development will enrich the quality of the community and promote neighborly gathering. Page 10 of 10 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 Statement Addressing Project's Compliance with Decision Criteria 1. Demonstration of Compliance and Superiority; The project submittal exhibits. narratives. and supporting reports illustrate the design and benefits to the community of the Planned Urban Development approach to land planning. Please see submittal documents. 2. Public Benefit Required: a.Critical Area: The site is characterized by an unnamed seasonal stream characterized as Class 4 per Renton Municipal Code (within the central and southern site areas) and a historic coal mine. known as the Springbrook mine. as well as its associated opening (near the south property line). The stream runs east to west across the project site. A Wetland and Sfream Delineafion Sfudy was performed by Sewall Wefland Consulting. Inc. on December 22. 2015 detailing their findings. The existing stream buffer. which separates the north apartment building area from the southern open space, is mostly existing forest (primarily Alder and Cottonwood) with an understory dominated by invasive Blackberry. The buffer will be enhanced through the removal of the invasive Blackberries and other undesirable vegetation and replacement with native understory vegetation. A path will connect the north and south sides of the buffer. crossing over the stream via an attractively designed pedestrian bridge. b. Natural Features: The primary natural features of the property include retention of 114 existing trees in the critical area. A stream exists on site, which will conform to required buffer areas. Buffer impacts will be offset by providing additional buffer areas throughout the site. Existing trees will be retained in accordance with city requirements as well as community open space to the southern portion of the site. Site improvements include the planting of new trees, shrubs. decorative trellises. a pedestrian bridge. pedestrian access stairways. and a weather-protected pavilion for community gatherings. Page 1 of 13 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 c. Public Facilities: The perimeter of public rights of way and public pedestrian circulation networks will be improved with the Avana Ridge PUD. The site was not previously accessible to the public due to a large cover of brush and un viable trees. With the new park, multiple types of open space are provided, including passive and active recreation areas. The park will benefit the PUD as well as the surrounding community, and will set a positive example for development of future neighborhood connectivity points in the area. The PU D will allow for the unified maintenance and protection of the park and public landscaped sidewalk areas. Avana Ridge will provide the public with a gathering point connected by a network of pedestrian paths to tie it in to the existing pedestrian street pattem. This provides the benefit of safer roadways and pedestrian paths at major cross-street intersections. The two separate vehicular access points to the residential development will help to reduce traffic along the predominantly residential SE 172nd Street. d. Overall Design: i. Open Space/Recreation: The applicant is proposing the construction of a large landscaped community open space at the southern portion of the site. The community open space incorporates active and passive space, with a central connecting sidewalk which links the park to the public right of way. A central path and complementing pedestrian bridge crossing will be constructed to create an access point to the community open space from the surface parking lot. The objectives of the community open space design are as follows: • To create a special, memorable place that expresses pride of ownership and allows apartment residents as well as members of the local neighborhood to gather and enjoy the views and space. • To provide ample usable space for passive recreation and special events such as picnics, parties, weddings and receptions, movie night in the park, concerts, etc. These events promote community involvement, neighborly interactions, and a sense of responsibility towards a commonly used and appreciated rare amenity. • To take advantage of and display the attractive territorial views to the West • To preserve and enhance existing vegetation and natural character through tree preservation, removal of extensive invasive Blackberries, and replacement with native understory vegetation to be maintained through the life of the development. Page 2 of 13 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 • To promote effective pedestrian access from Benson Drive and Benson Road and through the community open space that is safe and inviting. In order to meet these objectives, the community open space features a large, central, gently sloping lawn for casual seating and recreation. The lawn is oriented to slope down towards an open pavilion whose intended use includes performances, and community gatherings. The pavilion is sited to capture and frame the attractive territorial views to the west and to be a great setting for photos (e.g. weddings, graduation). The lawn has a perimeter path paved with pervious fine crushed stone with benches to facilitate short strolls to enjoy attractive perimeter plantings, which includes existing tree groves with enhanced understory plantings, as well as more omamental plantings. Two picnic tables (at least one is accessible) are nestled among the perimeter planting areas overlooking the central lawn area. Pedestrians may access the community open space via a proposed paved accessible path from Benson Road where grades are the most gentle, from Benson Drive by stairs that ascend an approx. 15' high slope, or from the path that crosses the stream buffer from the north. The path is lit with bollard lights which conform to the dark-sky initiative to prevent light pollution. A cobble and boulder-lined drainage swale designed to mimic a small, natural streambed parallels a portion of the central path through the site. Two focal points with a sculptural focal element are provided at entry points to the central lawn area. All of the proposed components of the community open space promote a variety of different activities and opportunities to enjoy the landscape, views, and community interaction. A small fenced off-leash dog run is provided at the east side of the site between the buffer and the parking lot among a grove of existing trees to be preserved. The dog run would be surfaced with a pervious wood-<:hip surface. A pervious wood chip path provides access from the proposed apartment buildings. ii. Circulation/Screening: The proposed pedestrian circulation systems are superior to those in a traditional platted neighborlhood due to their proximity to public rights-of-ways. Landscape elements are designed across the site to provide both access points from these public nodes as well as screening from parking areas. This enhances the quality of the pedestrian pathway experience by highlighting natural planted elements and directing attention away from parked vehicles. This doubles as a security measure for the safety of resident property. All surface parking areas are internal to the project and are pulled away from neighboring properties. Where grades are steep, landscaping is proposed to screen surface parking as much as possible from pedestrian paths along the perimeter of the development. Page 3 of 13 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 iii. Landscape/Screening: Landscaping is superior to a traditional platted development through the use of high-quality landscaping and architectural language in screening elements. Landscaping will include numerous species of deciduous and coniferous trees in addition to year-round ornamental plantings consisting of fiowers, fall colors, winter greenery, and fragrant plantings. The building and parking lot landscape is designed to meet several objectives: • help reduce the overall scale of the building through ample tree plantings • help break up large areas of parking lot pavement with interior and perimeter landscape • provide a measure of screening from adjacent public R.OW. through perimeter landscape buffering • express ownership by distinguishing private from public space through an orderly, attractively designed landscape • help define circulation routes and frame or enhance views • provide attractive residential surroundings with year-round ornamental interest (fiowers, fall color, winter greenery, fragrance) • provide environmental benefits such as shade, improved air quality, natural stormwater treatment, and wildlife habitat • screen on-site utilitarian areas such as trash enclosures Low-quality fencing techniques are completely absent from the project. The intent of the PU D is that the site design is cohesive with the building aesthetic design, and conveys a high-quality community asset rather than a poorly-integrated platted development. The site design seeks to provide year-round outdoor activity opportunities, a variety of open spaces and a color palette in building materials and plant species that will convey site-wide design cohesion. iv. Site and Building Design: The placement of the buildings on site allows for natural lighting opportunities, and is respectful of the neighboring residential-scaled neighboring properties through the use of modestly-sloped roof forms and through adherence to building setback and landscape requirements. The building placement allows the majority of the surface parking to be screened from public rights-of-way views and work together with the on-site landscaping to keep internal service elements screened. Page 4 of 13 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 . The architectural design of the proposed residential building complements the character of the surrounding community through the use of residentially-scaled windows, thoughtful and frequent modulation of the facades, and pedestrian-friendly access points, signage, and proposed plantings. The arrangement of the buildings stays respectful of neighboring properties through their placement on site. The residential development fronts on SE 172 nd Street, which is comprised of mostly residential homes. The placement of the buildings along this street allows buffers and additional distance from the other two rights- of way along the perimeters of the development. The buildings screen the parking from the residential properties to the north, and are pulled away from the neighboring day care property to the East, through its location over 30' from the east property line at its most narrow point. By splitting the units between two buildings, the project maintains an appropriately scaled development that will reduce congestion on the site and allow for multiple views as well as modulated facades compared to one continuous structure. v. Alleys: Not applicable; there are no single-family detached, semi-attached, or townhouse units proposed as part of the PUO. 3. Additional Review Criteria: a. Building and Site Design: i. Perimeter: Through the use of additional setbacks from code-minimums along the adjacent property to the east of the buildings, ample buffer has been provided between the property line and the proposed project. This minimizes the impact of the building placement on the natural daylighting opportunities of the neighboring property to the east. Through the use of roofs sloped 2:12 rather than 4:12, the sloped roof portions of the building reduce the shadow cast on the residential properties to the north. Building modulation at regular intervals and a vast variety of window sizes and styles helps to break up the scale of the buildings. RMC 4-2-1100 states: "Roofs with a pitch equal to or greater than 4:12 may project an additional six (6) vertical feet from the maximum wall plate height". This PUD seeks to modify the minimum pitch from 4:12 to 2:12. This modification will still give the appearance of pitched shed roof from the pedestrian perspective. Refer to AO.06 and AO.O? for 3D images from the pedestrian point of view. These images, while not code-required, serve to illustrate the roof profile and modulation from the ground plane. By providing a 4:12 pitch, it will create additional wall massing to mitigate. Our current building modulation already successfully modulates the massing. The artful Page 5 of 13 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 combination of parapet and roof slope, combined with cornice details and trellis elements achieve a more artful and sophisticated method of breaking up the roofline and adding visual interest to building facades and roof massing. These elements serve to exceed the literal minimum code requirements, and effectively achieve the intent of the code by breaking up the massing and providing visual interest to the building roofiines. On the South perimeter, the buildings are set back significantly from all property lines, and allow the park amenity to be unobstnucted in its day lighting opportunities. Due to the location of the buildings to the north of the open space, no shadows from the proposed buildings will be cast at any time of year or day. On the West perimeter, the building has minimal impact to views across the site, as both buildings are oriented North/South. The building design opens up on the corners through the use of large windows and corner decks to indicate a residential use and wrap the comers of the building in a meaningful way rather than providing harsh comer and edge conditions. Every effort has been made to screen the surface parking from this side of the site. Due to slope conditions, there will be some parking visible from Benson Dr (SR-515), though parking still adheres to minimum setback requirements 10' from the property line. Ample landscaping and terracing in this area will also serve to detract attention from what vehicles may be visible from this point of view. On the North perimeter, the neighboring existing residential dwellings are screened from the surface parking lot through the use of landscape buffers, building modulation and new proposed street trees. The conceptual landscape plan demonstrates the frequency, type and number of the street trees and interior plantings proposed. These techniques successfully serve to mitigate the length of the two buildings and reduce impact to existing neighboring properties. On the East perimeter, the site is adjacent to a daycare facility as well as by Benson Road. The buildings are set significantly back from the daycare, and have associated landscape buffers to provide a soft transition between building and landscape. ii. Interior Design: The interior design of both buildings has been integrated with the overall site design. The primary orientation of the units is oriented North/South to take advantage of daylighting opportunities. Where the buildings meet EastlWest site borders, dwelling units have been rotated Page 6 of 13 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 to face easterly and westerly. The intent of this interior design technique is to provide visually- pleasing elements on all four sides of the building. This avoids the aesthetic often seen with lower- quality developments whose designs are focused on efficiency and not on the quality of the interior and exterior spaces provided. The proposed project takes advantage of view opportunities to the south and west by providing large, picture windows in main living spaces and attached decks to provide private open space. The resident amenity lounge located on Levell of the West Building takes advantage of outdoor space and integrates an outdoor plaza intended for gathering spaces, barbecues, and lounge areas for a variety of opportunities for the residents. This element opens up the western portion of the site and provides a softer building edge and brings visual interest to what would normally be considered the "side' elevation of the project. The current design scheme is planned in a way that the two buildings have equal treatment on all sides. b. Circulation: i. The planned vehicular circulation system provides easy access to SE l72 nd Street and to Benson Road. The design of an access pattern that bisects the site allows for reduced traffic onsite as well as a planned circulation pattern to protect the safety of pedestrians on site as well as along the public sidewalks. This primary drive aisle also serves as the fire department access and is sized in accordance with required codes related to aisle width and turning radii. ii. Proper sight distances are provided at the connection with the public streets. Reference Civil plans for compliance demonstration and sight distances. iii. The project's pedestrian network of paths links the park, the residential buildings, and the public sidewalks along Benson Dr (SR-5l5) and Benson Rd. The Avana Ridge Apartment project is very unique in that it has frontage on three existing public rights-of-way. SE l72nd St. (l72nd) is classified as a Commercial Mixed Use Roadway and will be improved to add vertical curb and gutter, 0' -25' feet of additional asphalt from the existing condition, eight foot (8') sidewalks, eight foot (8') landscaped planter strips with street trees and grass lawn groundcover to allow easy access for pedestrians between on-street parking and the sidewalk. Ornamental trees, shrubs, and groundcover will be provided near the project driveway entry for curb appeal and as a visual cue Page 7 of 13 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 for drivers. LED streetlights will provide pedestrian and roadway illumination. The widened roadway section will provide parallel parking along a portion of the new streetscape. An additional three feet (3') of right-{)f-way will be dedicated to the City to accompany these improvements. Benson Road South (Benson Rd.) is classified as a Minor Arterial Roadway and will be improved along the project's frontage with the removal of the limited existing sidewalk, extruded curb and asphalt walkway and the replacement of missing vertical curb and gutter, eight foot (8') sidewalks, eight foot (8') landscaped planter strips with street trees, low shrubs, groundcover, and LED streetlights to provide pedestrian and roadway illumination. The area between the sidewalk and the R.o.w. line will also be enhanced with new plantings and lawn where slopes permit. Sufficient right-of-way exists along Benson Rd. and as such, no dedication is proposed. Approximately twelve feet (12') of additional ROW lie behind the newly proposed sidewalk along Benson Rd. S. and the applicant is proposing to install landscaping in the area consisting of a mix of additional street trees and ground cover to provide a transitional area to both the existing stream buffer and the large proposed community open space. A pedestrian connection via the sidewalk on Benson Rd. S. to the community open space is proposed which consists of a five foot (5') concrete walking path that invites the public to the community open space and then provides a connection back to Benson Drive South. This serves to promote recreational opportunities within the open space and take pedestrian traffic away from the intersection of Benson Drive South and Benson Rd. Benson Drive South -SR515 (Benson Dr.) is a classified as Principal Arterial Roadway and currently contains a five foot (5') concrete sidewalk with a steep incline at the back of the existing walk with native underbrush. The applicant is proposing to upgrade the existing non- accessible/pedestrian ramp at the intersection of Benson Rd. and Benson Dr. to meet current ADA standards. The applicant proposes to leave approximately 380' linear feet of the existing sidewalk on the eastern frontage but improve the 20' -27' additional right-of-way behind the sidewalk with landscaping consisting of a mix of additional street trees and ground cover. Behind the existing sidewalk the existing embankment slope will be enhanced with street trees, shrubs, and groundcover, and lawn where slopes permit. A gap in the tree planting will be provided near the Page 8 of 13 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 community open space so as not to impede the territorial views to the west from within open space and views of the proposed monument sign at the corner of Benson Drive and Benson Road. The topography in this area would require the installation of a 4' to 10' wall in areas to extend a traditional 8' planter and 8' sidewalk. By maintaining the existing sidewalk, which currently accommodates safe pedestrian traffic, we eliminate the need for terraced walls, we minimize impacts to the stream buffer along Benson Dr. and we promote pedestrian use of the proposed community walking path along this section of Benson Dr. Along the portion of the Benson Dr., which directly abuts the new proposed parking and building facades, the applicant proposes removal of the existing sidewalk and the installation of eight foot (8') sidewalks and eight foot (8') landscaped planter strips with street trees. In this area walls are minimized, additional right-of-way exists to again add additional street trees and ground cover behind the new sidewalk. The applicant is also proposing to replace the existing asphalt walk path from 172nd to the sidewalk on Benson Dr. This walk path will continue to provide a well utilized pedestrian connection between the two roadways. Existing street lighting along Benson Dr. was retrofitted to LED style bulbs by the City of Renton in recent years. Currently these lights meet the pedestrian lighting requirements along Benson Dr. but fail to meet roadway illumination standards. The applicant proposes coordinating the installation of new LED streetlights to meet current code requirements. c. Infrastructure and SelVices: All of the utilities services, including water, sewer, power, and data services are provided. Emergency services and systems including fire sprinkler and fire alarm systems are being provided. d. Clusters or Building Groups and Open Space: The PUD places the building parallel to the neighboring properties to the north. This maximizes the opportunity for surface parking screening and a large, uninterrupted open space to the south. Due to the presence of a stream along the lower area of the site, a natural border exists. A pedestrian bridge crosses the stream to link the park and the residential developments. e. Privacy and Building Separation: Dwelling units are designed such that no two outdoor decks are directly adjacent to one another. Decks and building modulation have been designed cohesively to allow Page 9 of 13 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 screening by the building to decks for resident privacy. Units within each building are oriented North/South, and mimic the residential characler of the properties 10 the north. Landscaping and building screening techniques are used throughout the development 10 promote privacy and discourage Ihe use of window screening elements as a privacy-crealing element Ihat blocks opportunities for nalurallight. Living area windows are large and aim to bring as much natural light into every unit as possible, while bedroom windows are adequately sized for light while still providing ample privacy through the use of raised sill heights. Landscape buffers also exist at ground-level uses to aid in noise reduction from the street. f. Building Orientation: The buildings are orientated toward the open spaces or toward the offsite view vistas afforded in the naturally elevated site location. There is minimal orientation toward off site non view areas. g. Parking Area Design: i. Design: The surface parking design is comprised of 90-degree stalls to make maximum use of parking area and provide clear, safe vehicular circulation that promotes visibility. The use of compact stalls is minimal and is well under the code-required maximums for compact stall counts. Site grading has been designed to minimize the steep slopes wherever possible to facilitate parking ease and damage to other vehicles. The applicant is requesting a deviation for primary access drive grading due to the presence of steep slopes. The deviation will allow for a steeper slope at the access drive aisle to the northern portion of the site in order to reduce the slopes in the surface parking areas. ii. Adequacy: The city code has a minimum and a maximum amount of parking in order to minimize the amount of roadway on site and provide adequate parking ratios. The project has been designed to meet the specific number of parking stalls required, and is under the maximum counts for compact stalls. The parking layout is efficiently laid out through the use of 90-degree oriented stalls with fully code-compliant aisle widths of 24' in all areas. Parking area has been minimized through the use of city code provisions that allow a reduction by 2' in stall length where overhang occurs over open space. Parking has been designed to serve the buildings in the most efficient manner, and is screened from the primary frontage on SE 172 nd Street through the use of landscaping and of the proposed residential buildings. Interior bike rooms are provided in both buildings. Bike stalls exceed the maximum required stalls by 10% and provide weather-protected Page 10 of 13 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 spaces for bike storage, which aids in the screening of these elements from public light of ways. There will be additional outdoor parking stalls for visitor or shorter-Ierm bicyclist parking. h. Phasing: The PUD has been designed to be an integral whole. As such, the project will be constructed in a single phase in order to provide the project's amenities and the large southem open space in particular to fruition as soon as possible. All infrastructure will all installed along with the building construction thus insuring that all the facilities needed for the community will be available for all the residents. Variance Table -Deviations from code 01 -Parking Avana Ridge currently provides 94 stalls on-site. The minimum required per RMC 4-4-080.10 is 96 total stalls. The current parking proposal adheres to the intent of the code by providing parking to the extent feasible without disturbing buffer areas and minimizing impervious surface area. Though the proposal of 94 stalls does not meet the minimum 96, there are also 20 stalls provided along 172"' Street, which total 18 stalls over the minimum required number of stalls. 02 -ROW Improvements Benson Drive South -The applicant proposes to leave approximately 380' linear feet of the existing sidewalk on the eastern frontage but improve the 20' -27' additional right-of-way behind the sidewalk with landscaping consisting of a mix of additional street trees and ground cover. By maintaining the existing sidewalk, the need for terraced walls is eliminated, we minimize impacts to the stream buffer along Benson Dr, and we promote pedestrian use of the proposed community walking path along this section of Benson Dr. 03 -Private Open Space The current proposal provides 4,156 SF of private, attached open space through the use of private balconies. Avana Ridge also proposes a large outdoor amenity on West Building Levell at 1,124 SF. In addition to these two types of spaces (private balcony space and outdoor amenity space at west Levell), the applicant proposes a large, landscaped community open space provided at the southem portion of the site totaling 19,795 SF. Per RMC 4-4-100.E4, the minimum required attached private open space is 7,400 SF, and minimum private open space required is 11,100 SF, Avana Ridge provides 25,075 SF of total open space, which greatly exceeds Page 11 of 13 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 literal code requirements as well as addressing the intent of the code through the provision of numerous types of outdoor areas. The community open space to the south provides an amenity both to the residents as well as the surrounding community, and provides for numerous types of active and passive recreation activities. D4 -Retaining Wall Height RMC 4-04-0400.1 and 0.2 establish maximum heights for retaining walls for residential property. The height limits are geared toward single-family residential development, so application of this chapter requires a certain amount of interpretation. In general heights are limited to 48 inches for walls located in front yard setbacks, and 72 inches for walls located side and rear yard setback. For the purposes of applying this chapter, Those portions of the property adjacent to the three streets surrounding the Site are considered front yards, and The property lines in common with the adjacent day care facility are considered side yards. This definition indicates a variance will be necessary to approve the proposed site grading. Specific descriptions of the deviations as follows: A section of the keystone-type wall located near the monument sign at the Benson Road/Benson Drive intersection is 5.5' tall. This wall faces the street. Imposing the 4-foot max height would require a 4-foot wide terrace and add 105 feet of 1.0-to 1.5-foot tall wall. The wall would require removal of three additional trees. Because the wall fronts an arterial roadway (Benson Road), the visual impact of the added height will be minimal. Because adherence to the code would provide no real benefit but involve costs (right-of-way and tree loss), we proposed one wall. A section of the keystone-type wall located along the east side of the east building reaches 6.6 feet tall, exceeding the 6-foot maximum. This wall faces the proposed building. The excess height is preferable to a terraced configuration because it provides a contiguous landscape buffer. The wall could be limited to a 6-foot by steepening the grade of the landscape buffer. This was not pursued in an effort to minimize visual impacts to the Page 12 of 13 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 adjacent day care facility. D5 -Pitched Roof Slope RMC 4-2-1100 states: "Roofs with a pitch equa/to or greater than 4:12 Requirements may project an additional six (6) vertical feet from the maximum wall plate height", This PUO seeks to modify the minimum pitch from 4:12 to 2:12, This modification will still give the appearance of pitched shed roof from the pedestrian perspective. Refer to AO,06 and AO,07 for 3D images from the pedestrian point of view, These images, while not code-required, serve to illustrate the roof profile and modulation from the ground plane. By providing a 4:12 pitch, it will create additional wall massing to mitigate, Our current building modulation already successfully modulates the massing, The artful combination of parapet and roof slope, combined with cornice details and trellis elements achieve a more artful and sophisticated method of breaking up the roofline and adding visual interest to building facades and roof massing, These elements serve to exceed the literal minimum code requirements, and effectively achieve the intent of the code by breaking up the massing and providing visual interest to the building rooflines, Page 13 of 13 PREAPPlICATION MEETING FOR SPRINGBROOK APARTMENTS PRE 15-000611 CITY OF RENTON Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division September 10, 2015 Contact Information: Planner: Rocale Timmons, 425.430.7219 Public Works Plan RevIewer: Rohinf Nair, 425.430.7298 Fire Prevention Reviewer: Corey Thomas, 425.430.7024 Building Department Reviewer: Craig Burnell, 425.430.7290 Please retain this packet throughout the course of your project as a reference. Consider giving copies of it to any engineers, architects, and contractors who work on the project. You will need to submit a copy of this packet when you apply for land use and/or environmental permits. Pre-screening: When you have the project application ready for submHtaI, call and schedule an appointment with the project manager to hsve it pre-saeened before making all of the required copies. The pre-application meeting is Informal and non-binding. The comments provided on the proposal are based on the codes and polldes In effect at the tIme of review. The .applicant Is cautioned that the development regulations are regularly amended and the proposal will be formally reviewed under the regulations In effect at the time of project submittal. The information contained In thIs summary is subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision-makers (e.g., Hearing examiner, Planning Director, Development Services Director, Department of Community & Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator and City Council). FIRE & EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: September 10, 2015 Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner Corey Thomas, Plans Review Inspector Springbrook Apartments 1. The preliminary fire flow Is 3,000 gpm. A minimum of three fire hydrants are required. One within !SO-feet and two within 300-feet of the building. Hydrant spacing shall meet maximum spacing requirements of 300-feet also. One hydrant is required within 50-feet of all fire department connections for standpipes and sprinkler systems. Existing hydrants may be counted toward the requirements as long as they meet current code. Looped water mains are required around buildings when the fire flow exceeds 2,500 gpm. A water availability certiflcate is required from Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. 2. Fire Impact fees are applicable at the rate of $463.66 per multifamily unit. No charge for parklng garage structures. ThIs fee Is paId at time of building permit Issuance • . 3. Approved fire sprinkler and fire alarm systems are required throughout the buildings. Drv standDlpes are required In all stairways. Direct outsIde access is requlreo to the me sprmkler riser rooms. Fire alarm systems are requIred to be fully addressable and full detection Is required. Separate plans and permits required by the fire department. 4. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required within 150- feet of all points on the buildings. Fire access roads are required to be a minimum of 2o-feet unobstructed width with turning radius of 2S·feet inside and 45-feet outside minimum. Fire lane )'lSrIag" 1 cqulred for the onslte roaDWilYs. Koadways snail support a mInimum of a 3O-ton vehicle and 75-psl point loading. MaxImum grade Is 15 percent. Minimum vertical clearance for fire access through the buildIng Is i3-feet, 6-lnches. Otherwise an approved fire access turnaround may be required near the southeast comer of the building. 5. An electronic site plan is required prior to occupancy for pre-fire planning purposes. .' ~:. .. ; ~ .~ . .:. .... ~ Springbrook Apartments Page 2 of 2 September 10, 20lS 6. The buildings are required to have at least one elevator meet the size requirements for a bariatric size stretcher. Car size shall acoommodate a minimum of a 40-Inch by 84-inch stretcher. 7. The buildlng'shall comply with the City of Renton Emergency Radio Coverage ordinance. Testing shall ver"rfy both inooming and outgoing minimum ememencv radio slRllal ooverage. If Inadequate, the bulldirig stiiil be ennanced with amplification equipment In order to meet minimum coverage. Separate plans and permits are required for any proposed amplification systems. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEV8.0PMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: Septem ber 10, 2015 TO: Rocale l)nmons, Planner FROM: Rohlnl Nair, Plan Review SUBJECT: Sprlncbrook Apartments PRE15-GOOS91 NOTE: The applicant is cautioned that InfonnatIDn contained In this summary is preHmlnary and non-binding and may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by offldal city decision-makers. Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. Water Comments 1. Water Service is provided by Saos Creek Water and Sewer District. 2. A water availability certificate will be required to be submitted to the City during land use application review. The water availability certificate should Indude the information that the fireflow requirement of the Renton Rre Department for this project is available. 3. Approved water plans from Saos Creek should be provided durir-.: utility construction permit review. Sewer I Wastewater comments 1. Sewer Service is provided by SoDS Creek Water and Sewer District. 2. A sewer ava liability certificate wiD be required to be submitted to the CIty dUring land use application review. 3. Approved sewer plans from SODS Creek should be provided during utility construction permit review. Storm Comments 1. A drainage report complying with the City Amendments to the 2009 I(Jng County Surface Water Manual and City Amendments will be required. Based on the aty's flow control map. this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard (Forested Conditions). Refer to Rgure 1.1.2.A- Row chart for determining the type of drainage review required In the Otyof Renton 2009 H:\CED\pianning\Cunent Piannlns\PREAPPS\13-OO1466.Rocale\pian Review Commen!! PRE~466.doc sp~nsbrook Apartments -PREl5.()()()611 page2of! Septemborl0. 2015 Surface Water Design Manual Amendment. Stormwater BMP's applicable on the site must be provided. 2.. A geotechnical report for the site Is required. Information on the water table and soli permeability with recommendations of appropriate flow control BMP options with typical designs for the site from the geotechnical engineer shall be submitted with the application. The gectech report should Include information whether the site Is suitable for infiltration. 3. Surface water system development fee is $0.54t'J per square foot of new Impervious surface area, but not less than $1,350.00. Transportation comments 1. Payment of transportation impact fee is applicable on the construction ofthe buildings at the time of issuance of the building permit. Please see the Impact fee sheet that gives the 2015 rates for transportation Impact fees. The transportation Impact fee rate that is current at the time of building permit application will be appUcable. 2. A traffic impact analysis is required when the estimated vehicular traffic generated from a 'proposed development exceeds 20 vehicles per hour in either the AM (6:00-9:OO) or PM (3:00 -6:OO) peak periods. Traffic study guidelines are Included with the pre-appllcatlon packet. The analysis must include a discussion on traffic circulation to and from the site and onslte traffic circulation. The study shallinciude trip generation and trip distribution for the project for both AM and PM peak hours. Traffic analysis guidelines are attached. The traffic study must include the sight distance study and traffic accident Information. Traffic sumal warranty anaivsis must be done at the intersectll1n_Qf SE 172nd Street and Benson Roaa )Outn. 3. Frontage: The site has frontages on three public streets Benson Drive South (SR515), Benson Road South, and SE 172nd Street. 1. Benson Drive South (SR515)-is a principal arterial and a state route roadway. As per RMC 4-&060 the minimum right of way (ROW) width required on principal arterial is 91 teet (for (lanes), 103 feet (for 5 lanes), 113 feet (for 6 lanes), and 12.5 feet (for 7 lanes). The available ROW width on the Benson Drive frontage, as per King County assessor map, is 115 feet (with 65 feet of the half side of street fronting the subject site). As per transportation section, the existing turb location on the frontage Is okay. Frontage Improvements including 0.5 feet wide curb, 8 feet wide landscaped planter, 8 feet wide sidewalk, street lighting. and storrnwater Improvements are required on prindpal arterial streets and Is required to be provided by the developer. The minimum required right of way width on arterial Is 1 feet behind the back of the sidewalk. The street frontage improvements and ROW dedication (If applicable) in the half side of the street fronting the development will be required to be provided by the developer. b. Senson KOad South -Is a minor arterial. As per RMC 4-6-060 the minimum right of way (ROW) width required on minor arterial is 91 feet (for 4 lanes), 103 feet (for 5 lanes), 113 feet (for 6 lanes), and 125 feet (for 7 lanes). The available ROW width on the Benson Road South frontage, as per King County assessor map, Is 100 feet (with 50 feet of the half side of street fronting the subject site). As per transportation section, the required paved width on this street is 44 feet (includes 3 trevellanes and 5 feet wide H;\CEO\Plinnlng\CYrrerrt Piannlng\PREAPps\l5-OOO591.Rctille\Plan lIevIow Comments PREJ.S.000591.doc Sprlngbrook Apartment5-PRt:1S-000611 PapEofE september 10, 2015 bike lane on both sides), Frontage Improvements includlll8 0.5 teet wide curb and gutter, 8 teet wide landscaped planter,8 feet wide sidewalk, street lighting, and stormwater improvements are reqUired on minor arterial streets and Is required to be provided by the developer. The mlnl'!lum reqUired right of way width on arterial 151 feet behind the back of the sidewalk. The street frontage Improvements and ROW dedication (If applicable) In the half side of the street fronttng the development will be required to be provided by the developer. c. SE 17200 Street-is a commercial mixed use and Industrial access street. As per RMC4- 6-<)60 the minimum right of way (ROW) width required on a commercial mixed use and industrial access street is 69 teet for a 2 lane roadway. The available ROW width on the SE 172nd Street frontage, as per King County assessor map, is·60 feet. The half street dedication is required 10 be provided on the frontage on SE 172nd Street. RMC 4-6.()60 also requires a minimum paved roadway width of 20 teet for 2 lanes, 8 feet wide on- street parking lanes, 0.5 feet wide curb, 8 feet wtde landscaped planter, 6 feet wtde Sidewalk, street IIghttng, and stormwater Improvements on oommerdal mixed use and Indus~rial access streets. The paved width of this street must be the lal1er wtdth of the code required wtdth or the paved width In the adjacent sections of this street corridor, The street frontage Improvements and ROW dedlcatton (If applicable) In the half side of the street fronting the development wtll be required to be provided by the developer. d. The corner curb ramps at all street IntefleCtlons adjacent to the site should be ADA compliant. ADA also requires matching ADA compliant curb ramps on the other side of the Intersection. 4. '!:he site Is proposed to be accessed via driveways from Benson Road South, Benson Drive South, aml-EF 172nd Street. The driveway on Benson DrIve South (SR 515] will be subject to review by WSOO ...... lso. Please reter to RMC 4-4-{)80 for driveway design standards Including locatton, grade, ana~t~. S. Street lighting is required to be proVided on the frontage streets by the project. 6. The City of Renton Trendl restoration and Street overlay requirements will be applicable for any work In the public right of way. General Comments 1. All constructton or service utility pennlts for drainage and street Improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. Plans shall be prepared by a licensed CiVil Engineer. 2. When utliity plans are complete, please submit three (3) copies of the drawings, two (2) copies of the drainage report, the permit application, an itemized cost of construction estimate, and application tee at the counter on the sixth floor. 3. All utilities serylng the site are required to be undergrounded. H :\CED\P l,nning\Current Pia nnlng\pREAPPS\1S-00D591.Rooale\pJa n Review Cornman!> PRE1S-oOOS91.dot DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: September 10, 2015 TO: Pre-Application File No. 15-000611 FROM: Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Springbrook Apartments 17249 Benson Road South, Renton, WA General: We have completed a preliminary review of the pre-application for the above- referenced development proposal. The fDllowIlII commems on development and permlttllll Issues are based on the pre-eppllcatlon submittals made to the city of Renton by the applicant and the todes In effect on the date of review. The applicant Is cautioned that infonnatlon contained in this summary may be sublect to modification and/or concurrence by official decision-makers (e.g., Hearllll Examiner, Community 8. Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator, Planning Director, Development Services Director, and City Council). Review comments may also need to be revised based on site plannllll and other design changes required by City staff or made bv the applicant. The applicant is encouraged to review all applicable sections of the Renton Mlinlclpal Code. The Development Regulations are available for purchase for $50.00 plus tax from the Finance Division on the first floor of City Hall or online at www.rentonwa.gov. Project Proposal: The subject property is located at 17249 Benson Road South at the northwesterly comer of the Intersection of Senson Drive South ilnd Benson Road South. The site consists of two parcels (APN 29~30S-9009 and 292305-9148) totaling 164,828 square feet (3.78 acres). The parcels have a Residential High Density (RHD) land use designation and a Residential Multl-Famlly (RMF) zoning claSSification. The project site is currently undeveloped with a ground cover of second growth conifer and deciduous trees and brush. The new 4-Story, multi-family residential building on the north parcel will contain approximately 82 dwelling unhs. A 2-story building Is proposed on the southern parcel near the Intersection of SR 515 and Senson Rd S containing 8 resldent181 units. The proposal Includes U2 surface parking stalls. Primary vehicular access to the north apartments will be provided by a single curb cut along SE 172nd Street to the onslte surface parking south of the residential bundlng and crosses to the site, and a Class NS stream, to serve the structure on the southern portion of the site. Secondary access is proposed via two curb cuts along Benson Rd and a restricted right-turn In/Gut driveway, Just south of the stream on SR 515. The applicant provided an alternative site plan which Included the elimination of the structure on the southern portion of the site. In Its place the applicant has proposed and active and H:\CED\Plannlng\CUrrent Planning\PREAPP5\lH100678 Springbrook Apartment< Page 2. of 8 September 10, 2015 passive recreation area. The alternative proposal would include a pedestrian crossing of the stream Bnd the elimination of a curb cut on Benson Rd S. Current Use: currently the site Is vacant. Development Standards: The project would be subject to RMC 4-2-110A, "Development Standards for Residential Zoning Designations" effective at the time of complete application (noted as "RMF standards" heneln). Zonlnl: Attached residential development Is permitted within the RM-F zoning claSSification, provided the proposal complies with the density range specified by the zone. The density range required In the RM-f zone is a minimum of 10.0 to a maximum of 20.0 dwellinB units per W acre (du/ac). There are cede provisions for a potential Density Bonus Review per RMC 4-9-065. However, the applicant sllrru/d nate thllt the City Is considering" docket Item request In order to remove lind/or amend the density bonus oIIoWlln_. Up to a maximum of5 additional dwelling units per net acre are allowed. To qualify for the density bonus, the applicant shall first provide 1 affordable housing unit (per net acre), either for sale or rental. Additional bonus units (per net acre) may be achieved on a 1;1 ratio for either: (I) Affordable housing units, either for sale or renta~ or (ii) unitS built to Built Green 3 Star (at minimum) building standards. Higher Built Green standards are allowed and may receive a greater density bonus upon review and apprdval of the Planning Director. Combinations of the above are allowed; provided, that at least 1 unit of affordable housing (per net acre) is provided. For example, 2 units of affordable housing and 2 units built to Built Green 3 Star standards would achieve a density bonus of 4 units. Density bonus review shall occur concurrently with any other required land use permit that establishes the permitted density and use of a site. The area of public and private streets and Critical areas would be deducted from the gross site area to determine the -net" site area prior to calculating density. The pre-application packet did not Indicate the total square footage of the right-of-way that WDuld be required to be dedicated; therefore the net density ceuld not be calculated. The gross density for the proposed 90 units Is 23.8 dulac. The applicant would be required to demonstrate compliance with the density range of the RMF zone using net density calculations. A completed density worksheet Is required with the formal land use submittal. The property Is also located within Urb8n Desicn District 'B', and therefDre subJect to additional design elements. Proposals should have unique, Identifiable destin tneatment In terms of landscaplns. building design, slgnale, and meet furniture. Minimum Lot Size. Width and peath -There Is no minimum lot size required for the RM-F lone. The minimum lot width required Is SO feet and the minimum lot depth required is 65 feet. The applicant would be requesting a lot ccnsolldatlon as part of the Site Plan application. The proposed lot consolidation would meet the development stIIndllrds 01 fhf zone. Buildjng Standards -The RM-F= lone restricts building height to 3S feet. An additional ten feet (10') height for a residential dweJling structure may be obtained through the provi~ion of additional amenities such as pitched roof$, additional recreation facilities, underground parking, H:\CEO\PI.nrlne;\CtJrrent PI.nnlnR\PP..EAPPs\1~-oOOS7B Springbrook Apamnents Page 3 ofB September 10, 2015· and additional landscaped open space areas; as determined through the site development plan review process and depending on the compatibility of the proposed buildings with adjacent or abutting existing residential development, In no case shall the height of a residential structure exceed fortVflVe feet (45'J. Bu Iiding lot coverage Is limited to 35%. A maximum building coverage of 45% inay be allowed through the Hearing Examiner site development plan review process. Impervious sumce coverage Is limited to a maximum of 75%. Lot.coverage ratios were not provided with the pre- application packet; therefore staff could not confirm compliance with the building ~ndards for the RM-F 2one. 1'1Ie appllmnt will be required IJttlle lime offDtmal kmd IIR app/iaJtion to provide lot collerage arid impervious sUrface mlculotlalls. A mlDdrnum bulldill/l I!DW!mgB of 45" may be obtained thl'OlIfIh the Hearing Examlrter site dwelopment pia,. ~vlew pror;ess, Setbacks -Setback.s are the minimum required di~nce between the building footprint and the property line arid a ny private access easement. The required setbacks in the RM-F zone are 20 feet In the front, 15 feet in the rear, and 20 feet for side yards along-a-street, and 12 feet for the Interior side yard setback. The entire structure shall be 5I!!t bad< an additional one foot (1') for each ten feet (10') of height In excess of thirty five teet (3S') to a maximum cumulative setback of twenty feet (20'). rr apptlflfS the proposall»mplil!l whit lIIe fftbadt5 of the RMF zlIIIe. Screening -Seneenlng must be provided for allsumce-mounted and roof top utUity and mechanlca I equipment The site plan applk:atlan WiN need to Indude elevatlans and derolls for st:reellmg •. Refuse and Recycling Areas -Refuse and recycling areas need to meet the requirements of RMC 4-4-090, "Refuse and Recydables Standards.' For multi-famlly development, a minimum of 1-* square feet per dwelling unit shall be provided for recyclable deposit areas, and a minimum of.3 square feet per dwelDng unit shall be provided for refuse deposit areas with a combined total minimum area of SO square feet. The future site plan shall include locations for refuse and recycling collection pOints. There shall be il minimum of one refuse and recyclable deposit area for each building and collection points shall be located no more than two hundred feet (200') from a common enlntnccc The proposal would be ~ to demDllStlYlfe annpflance with the refuR and recydlng standards of the axh IJt lIIe timft of Site Plan Retlfew. landscaping -Except for critical areu, all portions of the develcpmentarea not covered by structures, required parking. access, circulation or service areas, must be landscaped with native, drought-resl~nt vegetative cover. The development standards require that aU pervious areas within the property boundaries be landscaped. The minimum on-slte landscape width required along street frontages is 10 feet, except where reduced through the site plan development review process. Paridng Is not pennltted within required landscape areas. Please refer to landscape regulations (RMC 4-4-070) for additional general and specific landscape requirements (enclosed). Please IIOte tJ/I parldnglats, with more tha,. 100 Italls, are required to prollide 35 square feet o/Interlor parlclng lot landscaplnll ~r parfc/ng space. A conceptual landscape plan fmd landm:rpe fmalpls meetlnll the requIrements in RMe 4-8- 120D.U siHzH be submitted at tfJe time of appJlt:tJt/lIII /Dt Site Pia,. lItNIew. Tree Preservation· The site Is forested and vacant, primarily vegetated with red alder, big leaf maple, blad< cottonwood and Oregon ash with a salmonbeny, sword fern, ocean spray and Himalayan blackberry understory. The site contains 8 total of 440 trees of ~Inch caliper or larger; 40 are within the proposed public right-of-way, and 94 are located In critical areas, with H:\CEO\Plannlng\Currenl Plannlng\PREAPPS\14-000678 Springbrook Apartments Page4m8 September 10, 2015 their buffers resulting in 306 protected trees on site. A tlee inventory and a tree retention plan along with a tree retention worksheet shall be provided with the fonnalland use application. The tree retentIOn plan must show presetVGtlon of at Iftst 20 petCetrt (20 "J of sign/fiamt trees, and Indlt:llte how PfDP05et/ building footprlnts wouJd be sited to accommodate preselVlltiDn af slgn/jlamt trees that wOuld be reta/Md. The Adm Inlstrator may authorize the planting of replacement trees on the site If It can be demonstrated to the Administrator's satisfaction that an insufficient number of trees can be retain&!. They may be replaced with minimum 2 Inch caliper trees at a rate of six to one. Significant trees shall be retained in the following priority order: Priflrity One: Landmar1t trees; significant trees that form a continuous canopy; significant trees on slopes greater than 20%; significant trees adjacent to critical areas and their associated buffers; and SignIficant trees over 60' In heIght or greater than 18" caliper. Priority Two: Healthy tree groupings whose associated undergrowth can be preselVed; other significant native evergreen or deciduous trees; and ather significant non-native trees. Priority Three: Alders and cottonwoods shall be retaIned when all other trees have been evaluat&l for retention and are not able to be retain&!, unless the alders andl or cottonwoods are used as part of an approved enhancement project within a critical area or Its buffer. A minimum tree density shalf be mdintalne<! for multI-family devel<lpment at a rate 01' 4 slanltlcant trees for every 5,000 SF of land area. Tree density may consist of existing trees, replacement trees, trees required pursuant to HMC 4±p70fl, Street Frontage Landscaping ~equlred, or a combinatIon. The Administrator may require an independent review of any land use application that Involves tree removal and land dearing at the City's discretion. A frmnal tree retention plan anti IJIfJorlsl report would be reviewed lit tile time of SIte Plan ReviewaPfl/lcatlotl. fences -If the applicant Intends to Install any fences as part of this project, the location must be designated on the landscape plan. A fence detall should also be Induded on the plan as well. Retaining walls shall be composed of brick, rock, textured or patterned concrete, or other masonry product that complements the proposed building and site development. Walls oller 6- teet In Might shall be terrat:ed pUI'!U(Jnt to RMC 4+lUO. Additionally, there shall be a minimum three-foot (3') landscaped setback at the baSB of retaining walls abutting public rlghts- of-way. Pa I -The followln ratios would be a licable to the site: Attached Residential The appllr:tlnt Is proposing a toM/al 122 parlcln ca, If the proposal provides more or ess par1tlng than required by code, a request for a parklng modification would need to be applied for and granted. This detailed written request should be submitted by the applicant along with or prior to the land use applicatIon process. Springbrook Apartments Page 5 of8 September 10, 2015 It should be noted that the parking regulations specify standard stall dimensions. Surface parking stalls must be B minimum of 9 feet x 20. feet, compact dimensions of ~ feet x 16 feet, and parallel stall dimensions of 9 feet x 23 feet; compact surface parldns spaces shall not account for more thin 30 percent of the spaces In the surface parldng lots. ADA accessible stalls must be B minimum of 8 teet In width bV 20 feet In length, with an adjacent access aisle of 8 feet In width for van accessible spaces. The appropriate amount of ADA iltcessible stalls based on the total number of spates must be provided. Please refer to landscape regulations (RMC 4-4-070 and RMC 4-4-080F.7) for further general and speclflc landscape requirements (enclosed). Additionally. the propostIl would need to be rrvlsed In order to provide bicycle pqrldng balfll on one-ha/f (O.5} bkyde paridnp SPIKe per one dwelUfII/ unit. Bicycle parking shall be provided for secure extended use Bnd shall protect the entire bicycle and Its components and aa:essorles from theft and weather. Acceptable examples Indude bike lockers, bike check-In systems, In-building parking, and limited access fenced areas with weether protection. SpateS within the dwelling units or on balconies do not count toward the bicyde parking requirement. However, designated bicycle parklilB spaces within Individual garages can count toward the minimum requirement. . ~ -The applicant Is proposing primary access to the site via 172nd St. The proposal also Includes two curb cuts on &enson Road South and an additional curb cut along Benson Drive S. The location of Ingress and egnu driveways Illall be subJect to approvol of the Department of Commll1l/ty and ECDnomk Peveiopment. Pedestrian Access -Current pedestrian access Is provided with existing concrete sidewalks along SR 515 and partial sidewalks on &enson Rd S. Half street frontage Improvements along SE 1720<1 St. An existing pedestrian connection from 172"" St to Benson Drive Is proposed to be retained a5 part of the proposal. Building Design Standards -O1mplkmr:e with Urlxtn DesIgn Regulatlotrs. DInrlct 'S', is required. See the attrJdted clledcllst and Renton Munldp/ll Cade section 4-3-1.00. The following bullets ore a frw of the standards outlined In the mvulatlons. . • Buildings shall be oriented to the street with clear connections to the sidewalk. • A primary enmma of each building shall be located on the facade facing a street. shall be prominent. visible from the street. connected by a walkwlni to the public sidewalk. and InClude human~le elements. • The number of driveways and curb cuts shall be mlnlmi~d, so that pedestrian c!rculation along the sidewalk is minimally Impeded. • All building facades shallindude modylatipn or artlcylatjpn at in1:!!rvals of no more than twenty "et (20'1. • Modulations shall be a minimum of two feet (21 deep, four feet (4') In height, and eight feet (8') In Width. • Architectural elements that incorpprate plants. particularly at building entrances, in publicly accessible spaces and at facades along streets, shall be provided. • All attached hoysing developments shall provide at !east one hundred flftv 11501 square feet of private usable spac!! Der unit. • Any facade visible to the public shall be comprised pf at least fifty percent (50%) transparent windOWS and/or doors for at least the portion of the ground floor facade H:\CED\Plannlng\Current Plannlng\PREAPPS\1<HlOO678 Sprlnsbrook Apartments Page 6 of8 September 10, 2015 that Is between four feet (4') and eight feet (S') above ground (as measured cn the true elevation). • Buildings shall use at least one of the following elements to create varied and interesting roof profiles (see Illustration, subsection RMC ~3-100.l5f): (a) Extended parapets; (b) Feature elements projecting above parapets; (c) Projected cornices; (d) Pitched or sloped roofs. • Buildings shall employ material vuiatlons such as colors, brick or metal banding, patterns, or textural changes. Crftlcal Areas -The subject site contains regulated slopes, unclassified coalmine hazards and an unnamed Oass 4 stream as Identified In the "Wetland and Stream Delineations Study: prepared by The Watershed Company (dated January 25, 2008), and a ·Supplemental Stream Study and Mitigation Report: prepared by The Watershed Company (dated February 11, 2009). While the crttlcal area Information submitted with the pre·appllcatlon materla!s Indicates there will be buffer reductions/averaging/and/or enhancement In order to accommodate the proposed building pad it is unclear to the extent Impacts are proposed. The applicant would be required to comply with RMC 4-3-050. Please note City has passed a recent Critical Areas Ordinance. The following table represents the curnent and proposed Critical Area Ordinance for buffers, setbacks, and allowed reductions: Cilldlcallon SIorIUnI_. -"'-Mln~r Mmllulfllr Fonner J N.W forme. I N«W foarmer I New FonII ... 1 NN f'or'm9r r New CI ... 4 IType Ns 351 •• 1 I SOfeet oto81 I lSfeet 2S feet I 4Ofe81 2S feet I 2S feet proposed Impacts are identified to the stream (I.e. the bridge/culvert crossing) as a result a supp/~mmtrJl stream study would be required to be submitted with the formal land use a pp licatlon. COIIJlrucflon 01 vehicular or non-tlf!hlculDr tronspotfflfion crossings may bt permitted In acr:tmlonce with an rtpprwed stt'eVnI/lake study subjea to the following crlterirt: /. The proposed route Is determined to have the /east Impact on the environment, while meeting CIty Comprehensive Plan Tronsportotlon Element requirements and standards In RMC 4-6-060; and Ii. The crossing minimizes Interruption of downstreQT1l movement of wood and gravel; and 1If. Transportation /acillties In buffer arear shall nat run porallel to the water body; and Iv. Crossings occur as near to perpendicular with the water body as possible; and v. Crossings ore designed according to the Washington Deportment of Fish and Wildlife Fish Water Crasslng Des/gn Guidelines, 2013, and the National Marine Fisheries Service Guidelines for Salmonld Passage at Stream Crossings, 2000, os may be updated, or equivalent manuals as determined by the Administrator; and vi. Seasonal work windows are determined and made 0 condition of approval; and vii. Mitigation criteria a/subsection L of this Section are met. The appllamt has submitted lind altel7lGtlve site pion which eliminates the need for a llehlwlar crossing. Staff would be support/lie 01 the alternative site plan which minimizes Springbrook Apartments Page7of8 September 10, 2015 Impacts to crltlClJI llrea' on site and provides add/tJanal passive tmd active teeteatfon opportunities. Additionally a Geotechnical Engineering Report with a coalmlne hazard assessment, prepared by Icicle creek Engineers, Inc. (dated January 26, 2009) was provided to the City with a fonner application. The report describes the slopes as less than 25'" grade and Identifies a mine ventilation shaft located In the southwest portion of the site adjacent to Benson Drfve (SR 515). A structural plug was recommended for the shaft entrance to mitigate eny potential hazard. Geotec:hnlcal studies are typically valid for a period of up til ten years; otherwise a f~hnlcaJ report will need til be submitted with the land use applk .... v: •• -- Enlli1DtlmenftZI {SEPAJ Review: SEPA Is required dur to tile sae of tile project. Therefore, an environmental checklist is a submittal relluirement. An environmental determination will be made by the Renton Environmental Review Committee. This detennlnation Is subject to appeal by either the project proponent, by a citizen of the community, or another entity having standing for an appeal. Permit R.cjulrements: Tbe proposal would require Hearing examiner Site Plan Review, Environmental Review, and potential street and parking modifications. The purpose of the Site Plan process 15 the detailed arrangement of project elements so as to be compatible with the physical chal'llcteristlcs of a site and with the surrounding area. An additional purpose of Site Plan Is to ensure quality development consistent with City goals and policies General revIew criteria Includes the following: B. Compliance and Consistency. Confonnance with plans, policies, regulatlons and approvals, Including: b. Off-Site Impacts. Mitigation of Impacts to surrounding properties and uses. c. On-Site Impacts. MItigation of Impacts to the site d. Access and Crculatlon. Safe and efficient access and circulation for all users. e. Open Space. Incorporatlon of public and private open spaces to serve as distinctive project focal points iind to provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the ocwpants/users of the site; f. Views and Public A= Provision of view corridors to shorelines and Mt. Rainier, Incorporates public access to shorelines, and arranges project elements to protect existing natural systems where applicable. g. Services and Infrastructure. Availability of public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use; h. Signage. Use of signs primarily for the purpose of identlf'lCatlon and manag~ment of sign elements -such as the number, size, brightness, lighting Intensity, and location -to complement the visual character of the surrounding area, avoid visual clutter and distraction, and appear in proportion to the building and site to which they pertain; and I. Phasing. Inclusion of a detailed sequencing plan with development phases and estimated time frames, If applicable. The applicant will also be subject to Design Review 85 part of the Site Plan RevIew and a Design Checklist shall be completed and submitted as part of the application materials (see attached). H:\CED\Plannlng\Current Planning\PREAPPS\14-000678 Springbrook Apartments PageS 018 september 10, 2015 All applications can be reviewed concurrently In an estimated time frame of 12 weeks once a complete application is accepted. The Hearing Examiner SIte Plan Review application fee Is $2,500 and the Environmental Review Fee Is $1,000. All modifications are $150 each. There Is an additional 3% technology fee assessed at the time of land use application. Detailed Information regarding the land use application submittalls provided In the attached handouts. In addition to the required land use permits. separate construction. building and sign permits would be required. The review of these permits may occur concurrently with the reView of the land use permits. but cannot be Issued prior to the completion of any appe~1 periods. Impact Mltlptlon Fees: In 'addltlon to the applicable building and construction fees. the following Impact fees would be required prior to the issuance of building permits. Impact fees will Increase January 1, 2016. • Fire Mitigation fee currently assessed at $462.66 per new dwelling unit. t A Transportation Mitigation Fee assessed at $1.454.20 per new apartment dwelling unit. • A School District Impact Fee currently assessed at $1,360 per new multi-family unit. • A Parks Mitigation Fee currently assessed at $945.90 per new dwelling unit. expiration: Upon site plan approval. the site plan is valid for two years with a possible two-year extension. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT --------",Ren ton ® WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS Planning Division -- 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone' 425 430 7200 I www rentonwa gOV ---WAIVEf)---MOOIfI£fT LAND USE PERMIT SUBMITIAL REQUIREMENTS: BY: BY: Arborist Report 4 Biological Assessment, Calculations I Colored Maps for Display, Construction Mitigation Description 'AND' Deed of Right-of-Way Dedication I Density Worksheet. Drainage Control Plan, Drainage Report , Elevations, Architectural 'AND' Environmental Checklist 4 Existing Covenants (Recorded Copy) IAND4 Existing Easements (Recorded Copy) IAND4 Flood Hazard Data 4 Floor Plans 'AND' Geotechnical Report lAND' Grading Elevations & Plan, Conceptual, Grading Elevations & Plan, Detailed, Habitat Data Report 4 Improvement Deferral, Irrigation Plan 4 PROJECT NAME: ------------------ COMMENTS: - DATE: ___ --'-(.::...~-f/-=2-=..;:.2-..... !....:;J--'O,-.£"------- 1 H :\CED\Data \Forms-T emplates\Self -Help H andouts\Planning\ Waiversu bmittalreqs.docx Rev: 08/2015 LAND USE PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: WAIVED MODIFIED COMMENTS: BY: BY: King County Assessor's Map Indicating Site. Landscape Plan, Conceptual. (~ Landscape Plan, Detailed. ., Legal Description. Letter of Understanding of Geological Risk. Map of Existing Site Conditions. Master Application Form. Monument Cards (one per monument) 1 Neighborhood Detail Map 4 ,..... Overall Plat Plan. Vn Parking, Lot Coverage & Landscaping Analysis. Plan Reductions (PMTs). Post Office Approval, Plat Name Reservation. Plat Plan. r r-- Preapplication Meeting Summary • ~ Public Works Approval Letter> Rehabilitation Plan. Screening Detail. Shoreline Tracking Worksheet. Site Plan 'AND. Stream or Lake Study, Standard. Stream or Lake Study, Supplemental. Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan. Street Profiles, Title Report or Plat Certificate lAND. Topography Map 1 Traffic Study, Tree Cutting/Land Clearing Plan. Urban Design Regulations Analysis. Utilities Plan, Generalized, Wetlands Mitigation Plan, Final. Wetlands Mitigation Plan, Preliminary • 2 H:\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\Planning\Waiversubmittalreqs.docx Rev: 08/2015 LAND USE PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: Wetlands Report/Delineation 4 Wireless: Applicant Agreement Statement 'AND' Inventory of Existing Sites, AND' Lease Agreement, Draft 'AND' Map of Existing Site Conditions lAND 1 Map of View Area lAND' Photosimulations lAND' This Requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services 2 Development Engineering Plan Review 3 Building 4 Planning WAIVED MODIFIED BY: BY: 3 H:\CED\Data\FDrms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\Planning\Waiversubmittalreqs,docx COMMENTS: Rev: 08/2015 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ---------Renton ® WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS Planning Division -- 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone' 425 430 7200 I www rentonwa gOV LAND USE PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: WAIVED MODIFIED BY: BY: Arborist Report • Biological Assessment. Calculations. Colored Maps for Display. Construction Mitigation Description 'AND4 Deed of Right-of-Way Dedication. Density Worksheet 4 Drainage Control Plan 2 Drainage Report 2 Elevations, Architectural, AND 4 Environmental Checklist 4 Existing Covenants (Recorded Copy) lANDO Existing Easements (Recorded Copy) 'AND' Flood Hazard Data 0 Floor Plans 'ANDO Geotechnical Report 'AND' Grading Elevations & Plan, Conceptual, Grading Elevations & Plan, Detailed, Habitat Data Report 0 Improvement Deferral, Irrigation Plan, - COMMENTS: PROJECT NAME: Av""",,;vn J€ / 1)(;':; e ____ -L~~~~~~~ ________ _ DATE: ______ -..L:.;a--:....,;,L-/=.2-:...;,2.:..."/<.".;;J-O,:...-y:...,£"--_______ _ 1 H : \CE D\Data \Fo rms-T em plales\Seif -H elp H a ndo uls \PI ann Ing\ Wa iversubm Itta I reqs, docx Rev: 08/2015 LAND USE PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: WAIVED MODIFIED COMMENTS: BY: BY: King County Assessor's Map Indicating Site, landscape Plan, Conceptual, A~ " landscape Plan. Detailed, legal Description, letter of Understanding of Geological Risk. Map of Existing Site Conditions. Master Application Form 4 Monument Cards (one per monument) 1 Neighborhood Detail Map 4 ~ Overall Plat Plan. -m- Parking. lot Coverage & Landscaping Analysis. Plan Reductions (PMTs). Post Office Approval, Plat Name Reservation. Plat Plan 4 If J- Preapplication Meeting Summary. Public Works Approval Letter, Rehabilitation Plan. Screening Detail. Shoreline Tracking Worksheet. Site Plan lAND. Stream or Lake Study. Standard, Stream or Lake Study. Supplemental, Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan. Street Profiles 2 Title Report or Plat Certificate lAND' Topography Map, Traffic Study, Tree Cutting/land Clearing Plan, Urban DeSign Regulations Analysis, Utilities Plan. Generalized 2 Wetlands Mitigation Plan. Final, Wetlands Mitigation Plan. Preliminary, 2 H:\CEO\O.t.\Forms-Templates\Self-Help H.ndouts\Plannlng\Walversubmltt.lreqs,docx Rev: 08/2015 LAND USE PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: Wetlands Report/Delineation. Wireless: Applicant Agreement Statement, AND' Inventory of Existing Sites 'AND' Lease Agreement, Draft 'AND' Map of Existing Site Conditions 'ANOl Map of View Area "ND] Photosimulations "ND' This Requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services 2 Development Engineering Plan Review 3 Building 4 Planning WAIVED MODIFIED BY: BY: 3 H:\CEO\Oata\Forms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\?lanning\Waiversubmittalreqs.docx COMMENTS: Rev: 08/2015 Avana Ridge Planned Unit Development 10616 SE 172nd Street , Renton , WA 98055 Avana Ridge , LLC SCALE : 1" = 200'-0" o ~ I~ __ .. Neighborhood Detail Map DATE : 12 -29-2015 INSPIRATION CONCEPTS AVANA RIDGE PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10616 SE 172nd STR EE T, RENTON . WA98055 AVANARIDG E, LLC ICE CUBE (SW 6252) MINK (SW 6004) RHUMBA ORANGE (SW 6642) ARRESTING AUBURN (SW 6034) BRICK THIN VENEER MUTUAL MATERIALS -SLiMBRICK EBONY MAT ERIAL BOARD 12129 '15 PARKLEX -COPPER FINISH g roup a r ch i tect t. Avana Ridge PPUD Project Sequencing Plan & Construction Mitigation Description The following narrative is provided to describe the construction sequencing and mitigation measures the Developer and General Contractor for Avana Ridge will implement during the duration of the site development and infrastructure period as well as during building construction. Proposed Construction Sequencing Plan Quarter One {May -July 2016/ • Staking of clearing limits • Installation of construction entries • Silt fence installation • Protection of Critical Areas and their buffers • Installation of saved tree protection measures • Implementation of Best Management Practices • Land clearing • Rough grading • Stormwater vault installation Quarter Two {August -October 2016/ • Onsite stormwater utility installation • Placement of onsite dry utility conduits • Internal drive isle subgrade and paving • Water and sewer service stubs connections • Curb, sidewalk, gutter improvements on 172 od , Benson Road and Benson Drive Quarter Three {November 2016 -January 2017/ • Open Space Improvements • Stream Buffer enhancement • Planter strip and street tree installations on frontages • Landscaping and site amenities installation in open space • Start of building foundations and building construction Quarters Four & Five {February -July 2017/ • Building construction continues • Final pavement of parking areas • Trash enclosure installation • Mailbox kiosk installation • Final building perimeter landscaping • Final building and site signage install Proposed Construction Dates (Site Work): May 2016 -January 2016 The Developer anticipates on beginning clearing and site development work in the late spring of 2016, dependent on the timing of approvals, with a 120 day schedule to finalize all grading, storm, sewer, water and first lift of asphalt on the site. Frontage improvements along 108th Avenue SE and SE 172 0d Street will be a priority to complete to minimize the impacts on the circulation and traffic flows in the area. The goal will be to have the site erosion stabilized by October 1~, 2015. Proposed Construction Dates (Building Construction): November 2016 -July 2017 The Developer plans on beginning construction of the two building foundations in November of 2016 with an anticipated construction timeline of nine months to complete the buildings. Final landscaping and installation of site sign age will occur towards the end ofthe project in the early summer months. Hours & Days of Operation Normal site hours of operation will be in compliance with the allowable working hours in the City of Renton which are as follows: For the remodel or addition to a single-family residence, permitted work hours in or within 300 feet of residential areas are 7:00 a.m. -10:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. -10:00 p.m. Soturday and Sunday. For new single-family residences and non-residential construction, the permitted work hours are 7:00 a.m. -8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m. -8:00 p.m. Saturday, and no work shall be permitted on Sunday. Proposed Hauling I Transportation Routes The Avana Ridge site is located at the intersection of Southeast 172 0d Street and 106th Avenue Southeast. The contractor anticipates two haul routes, one to 1-405 and the other to State Route 167 (See the attached map for locations). • To 1-405N, heading east on 172 0d St. to Benson Rd. South, right to Benson Dr. (HWY-515), right to the on ramp of 1-405 North located just north of South 15 th St. • To SR 167, heading east on 1720d St. to Benson Rd. South, right to Benson Dr. (Hwy-515), left to SE Carr Rd. which becomes South 43,d st. (Northbound onramp to SR 167) and then right on East Valley Rd. to Southwest 41" St. and a right to the Southbound onramp SR 167). Measures to Minimize Impacts The Developer and Contractor will make every effort to minimize the impacts from this project on the surrounding neighbors, the environment and the traffic circulation for the immediate area. Contractor and Developer contact information will be clearly posted at the site and the job trailer to insure communication and immediate responses to any questions or inquiries from the community. • Dust! Mud! Erosion Impacts The contractor will implement and maintain the TESC measures approved for the Avana Ridge Project at all times. Measures such as water trucks, street sweepers and maintaining perimeter erosion fencing help to mitigate impacts. In addition, regular inspections by the City of Renton, the Department of Ecology and a third party CESCL inspector together with regular meetings between the Developer and Contractor will insure compliance. Depending on the timing of approvals the project engineer may need to amend the projects TESC plan to implement wet- weather measures of erosion control protection. • Traffic! Transportation Impacts The Developer and Contractor will secure all necessary Right-of-way use permits including providing traffic control measures to minimize the impact of the frontage improvements associated with the project. Haul routes and hours will be adhered to and the developer is attempting to minimize the amount of import used on the project through careful design of the site finish grades. Utilizing the on-site material and repurposing wood chips and top soil from the clearing activities minimize the need for ongoing truck and trailer loads. Sample traffic control plans are attached, • Noise The contractor will comply with the allowable working hours in the City of Renton (see above) to minimize the impact to neighbors during the site construction and building construction. • Pedestrian Traffic Due the amount of right-of-way work proposed on three sides of the project. Periodic sidewalk closures will be necessary, The Contractor will obtain all necessary right-of-permits and submit safe walking plans to the City of Renton Transportation Department before proceeding with any work, Traffic control measures such as warning signs, flaggers, fencing, and notice boards will be utilized. The safe passage of pedestrians and especially school children and the disabled will be of the utmost importance, Avana Ridge Haul Routes I .",. ~-0 _ • : ~ .j >,!,',. ~~'J ~ .. ~, " .~ ~. < s\~ '. > . , < . {36~ \\1 (\'1 " 'S\"l 16th s: ':,-..."'J ' :!-<:" : o;th :.t " 1'111: ;1'1' '1,1,. ;; if, ~ "" .' " :iI ~ ~ () ~ v' .' > " SIN 27rh st f SVV 3 4th ~;t -,'''' I:JIII ~w 41~t St q~' .-11"1 9 , " ~ '" >- .:Y " :> " • w SR-167 ._ co: \c~ -J'F\~ -,' -, " '" '.' 0 ,,' o < ,- ;115t -t ~ J. ';1 c> -.! , : ,:. "C" ~ " ~ '; " ~ ~:l.:' '''; , , r.\..1~ ~-)~ ; '-.~ " '.;" Renton "",f L·UT The nfnrmalion InClH:led on ttjs map has been oomph!d by King COlirty staff from a varie4y of sourcas and is subject 10 change wthout nolice. King County makes no representations or IIEIrrantles. express orlmplied. as to accuJacy, completeness.lmelness, or riglts to !he usa 01 such Information. This document Is rot Intended ICC' use as a S\XVfJY proouc!. King County shall no1 be lable for any gEneral, special, ildlrBCt, iflCiderel, or consequendal damage6lrduclng, btl not linlted to, lost reverue6 or bst pJOftts resudng km the USIt or mlsuStt of tile Informalbn oontained C(1 !hie map, MY sale of this map orlnrormationonthis map Is prohblled except bywrlll!!l1 pltl"lTIsslon of King County. Date: 1211712015 Notes: , -~ ., ," ~ " .; . >, ";:. "';. . o:,r ~.' " i:' .) ..... ~ , ;.;~ .. ~ , " ~ ~ .f ~ '.~'''' Sf: ~ (,.bl.t': ~~ ... ~I ~ "" ~ CIt 1 It":!! ~t :',1'1) .... ;,11 t ~ I ; I • " . '~', N A J '> q -. ~\~" f' l. ~I ,,::...:!t,. ~t 500s C:r Park King County tQ King County GIS CENTER 2009 Editioo SE 172nd Street Figure 6H-15. Work In the Center of a Road with Low Traffic Volumes (TA-15) December 2009 L (optional) 10 feet MIN. to edge of pavement or outside edge of paved shoulder , t • • • • • • • • • • • • • • f 0' J • t Typical Application 15 Note: See Tables 6H-2 and 6H-3 for the meenlng of tho symbols and/or lener oodos used In this figure. (optional) L Page66J Secl.6H.0l 2009 Edition December ZOO9 SE 172nd Street Figure 6H-13. Temporary Road Closure (TA-13) space (optional) • t • t Typical Application 13 Note: See Tables 6H·2 and 6H·3 for the meaning of the symbols and/or leUer codes used in this figure. Page 659 Sect. 6H.0l 2009 Edition SE 172nd Street Figure 6H-11. Lane Closure on a Two-Lane Road with Low Traffic Volumes (TA-11) , t (optional) --------+--• NoIe: See Tables 6H·2 and 6H·3 for the meaning of the symbol. and/or laHer codes used In thi.flgure. (optlonsl)--f-- (see Section 3B.16) • • • • • • • • • t Bulfer""DII<ce (optional) • --+----11-: ~ Typical Application 11 December 2009 Page 655 ~d.6H.ol 2009 EditiOll SE 172nd St / 108th AVE SE Figure 6H-10. Lane Closure on a Two·Lane Road Using Flaggers (TA-10) December 2009 Note: See Tables 6H·2 and 6H·3 for the meaning of the symbols andlor letter codes used in this figure . • • • • 50 to 10011 Typical Application 10 Page 653 Scd,6H.0l 2009 Edition SE 172nd St / Benson Road Figure 6H-1 O. Lane Closure on a Two-Lane Road Using Flaggers (TA-10) December 2009 Note: See Tables SH-2 and SH-3 ler the meaning 01 the symbols andior letter codes used In this figure. .• ;" , ~ • ,,' • • ::::::I::r-I- , t 100ft Typical Application 10 Pagc653 Sect,6H.0I 2009 Edition Benson Road Figure 6H-ll. Lane Closure on aTwo-Lane Road with Low Traffic Volumes (TA-11) , t (optional) -----_.-+--,..... Note: See Tabtes 6H·2 and 6H-3 for the meaning of the symbols andlor letter codes used In this figure. (optlonal)---lr-- (see Section 38.16) • • • • • • • • • It W""V', ,."..,_ (optional) Buller: .. """, (optional) . . • -+---t-:-_ , t Typical Application 11 Demnbcr2009 Page 655 Sect.6H,Ol 2009 Edition Benson Drive Intersection Work Page 677 Figure 6H-22. Right-Hand Lane Closure on the Far Side of an Intersection (TA-22) (optional) T A .... r-A --U Note: See Tables 6H-2 and 6H-3 for the meaning of the symbols andlor letter codes used In this figure. •• t t '" I .1 I .... " .. ! ... . ... ' I • ,,·t,t tJ(opIional) Typical Application 22 .... .. (optional) Sect.6H.ol 2009 Edition Benson Drive Frontage Work Page 699 Figure 6H-33. Stationary Lane Closure on a Divided Highway (TA-33) A -LONG-TERM AND INTERMEDIATE space (optional) Temporary white edge Rne • • • .. . . " • • • • • a -SHORT-TERM Typical Application 33 500ft 1. ~Work vehlde R,dl..,.~ .... (optional) Note: See Tables 6H-2 and 6H-3 for the mesnlng of the symbols andlor leiter codes used In this figure_ Scct.6H.Ol Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 Urban Center Design Overlay District Report SITE DESIGN AND BUILDING LOCATION INTENT: To ensure that buildings are located in relation to streets and other buildings so that the Vision of the City of Renton can be realized for a high-density urban environment; so that businesses enjoy visibility from public rights-ot- way; and to encourage pedestrian activity throughout the district. SITE DESIGN AND STREET PA TTERN INTENT: To ensure that the City of Renton Vision can be realized within the Urban Center Districts; plan districts that are organized for efficiency wihile maintaining flexibility for future development at high urban densities and intensities of use; create and maintain a safe, convenient network of streets of varying dimensions for vehicle circulation; and provide service to businesses. Minimum Standard: Maintain existing grid street pattern. PROPOSAL: The existing street pattem will not be affected by the proposed Avana Ridge project. BUILDING LOCATION AND ORIENTATION INTENT: To ensure visibility of businesses; establish active, lively uses along sidewalks and pedestrian pathways; organize buildings in such a way that pedestrian use of the district is facilitated; encourage siting of structures so that natural light and solar access are available to other structures and open space; enhance the visual character and definijion of streets within the district; provide an appropriate transition between buildings, parking areas, and other land uses and the street; and increase privacy for residential uses located near the street. Minimum Standard: Orient buildings to the street wijh dear connections to the sidewalk. PROPOSAL: The proposed buildings front upon SE 17?" Street, and run parallel to the proposed sidewalks. There are two clear "front' entries to each building -the northeast comer of the West Building, and the northwest comer of the East Building. Both entries are opposite each other to further reinforce the "point of entry' to the project as a whole. These building entries are highlighted through the use of canopies, plantings, and building signage visible from SE 172"" St. Minimum Standard: The front entry of a building shall not be oriented to a drive aisle, but instead a public or private street or landscaped pedestrian-only courtyard. PROPOSAL: The proposed buildings both have entries which face SE 17?" Street to demark the point of entry to both the buildings as well as the project. The buildings themselves are adjacent to an entry driveway, however the building entries by design are aligned towards the street i/se/f. To minimize the impact of entries located near a drive aisle, the project pnoposes numerous types of plantings and landscaped areas to mitigate sound impacts and to provide a clear path to the entry from SE 17?" to improve wayfinding. BUILDING ENTRIES INTENT: To make building entrances convenient to locate and easy to access, and ensure that building entries further the pedestrian nature ot the fronting sidewalk and the urban character of the district. PROPOSAL: Both buildings have direct entries and main entry lobbies off of SE 172"" Street. The circulation pattem pnoposed arrival at the primary building entries through the use of the proposed new sidewalk, running parallel to both buildings. Minimum Standard: A primary entrance of each building shall be located on the facade facing a street, shall be prominent, visible from the street, connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk, and include human-scale elements. Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 PROPOSAL: Both primary entries will be made visually prominent through the use of canopies and trellises. Omamentallighilng will also serve to highlight the prominence of primary building entries. Both buildings offer secondary entries from the surface parKing lot along the south side of each structure. These entries are intended mainly for resident use. In the East Building, the southem entry will serve as the main access point for arrival by prospective tenants at the Leasing Office. Minimum Standard: MuHiple buildings on the same site shall provide a continuous network of pedestrian paths and open spaces that incorporate landscaping to provide a directed view to building entries. PROPOSAL: The proposed project uses the proposed new sidewalk along SE 172'" Street as the primary access to main building entries. Internal pedestrian paths provide access to the secondary building entries as well as to the community open space located to the south area of the site. Due to the nature of a large, triangulated site made up of significant elevation change, direct views to the building entries from the community open space are not feasible without causing signmcant negative impact to the natural terrain, though there will be direct paths leading from the community open space to the residential development. Pedestrian pathway connections are also planned through the community open space, allowing a link between Benson Road and Benson Drive. Minimum Standard: Ground floor units shall be directly accessible from the street or an open space such as a courtyard or garden that is accessible from the street. PROPOSAL: Due to the unique site conditions and excessive topography along SE 172'" Street, providing a direct link between the street and/or courtyard would require extensive site disruption and also create security concemIl for residents at the ground level by forcing the pedestrian connection to individual private spaces. Project instead proposes to allow individual private patios or residents off each ground-level unit and in addition also provide a large open space at the westem end of the West building which includes a pedestrian stairway to Benson Drive South. ProvIding the pedestrian connection here is preferable since it encourages transition from the public ROW to pub/k; spaces on site to ul/imately private dwelling units once inside the secure building itself. By limiting the muff/pie access points into the unl and/or buildings, resident safety is preserved and a more natural point of building I site entry is providfKi. Mjnjmum Standard: Secondary access (not fronting on a street) shall have weather protection at least 4-1/2 feet wide over the entrance or other similar indicator of access. PROPOSAL: Secondary access points will be provided with weather protection via overhead canopies at least 4-112 feet wide. These canopies reflect the architectural style of the primary entries, and will include signage to improve site navigability. Minimum Standard: Pedestrian access shall be provided to the building from property edges, adjacent lots, abutting street intersections, crosswalks, and transit stops. PROPOSAl.: Outside of the primary networK of paths to building entries, there are multiple pedestrian connections present on site. There is a proposed stairway connection leading from Benson Drive to the main project site. This stairway connection is intended to provide access primarily to building residents. Throughout the community open space area of the site, there are a series of proposed networK pedestrian paths leading visitors and residents from Benson Drive over to Benson Road, and up into the main residential development across a proposed pedestrian bridge. These networKs of paths and stairways will be accented through the use of landscaping elements such as trees, ornamental planting backdrops, sculptures, community open space-related structures (pavilion). Minjmum Standard: Features such as entries, lobbies, and display windows should be oriented to a street or pedestrian-oriented space; otherwise, screening or decorative features such as trellises, artwork, murals, landscaping, or combinations thereof should be incorporated into the street-oriented facade. PROPOSAL: Primary building entries occur along the north side of both buildings opposite of one another. This entry placement emphasizes the relationship between buildings, reinforcing the inside comers of both buildings along SE 172nd Street as clearly Oriented to the public realm and sidewalk. These elements will be visually 2 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 prominent wffh covered canopies to denote their hierarchy as principal organizing elements and to highlight their relationship to human scale. Where main entries are exposed to the new access drive, Significant landscaping and feature elements such as planted trellises are proposed to soften the edge between the vehicular access point and the pedestrian-orlented building entries. Guideline: Front yards should provide transition space between the public street and the private residence such as a porch, landscaped area, terrace, or similar feature. PROPOSAL: Unffs that front SE 172"<' Street are closest of all proposed units to a public right-of-way. These unffs are set back 20'-6" from the public sidewalk, and are screened through the use of landscaping and minimally-visible retaining walls to serve as light wells for the lower level unffs on the norlhern facade of both buildings. Several of these units incorporate on-grade decks to allow private open space and private patios, landscaped to provide a softened edge between units and the public realm. TRANSITION TO SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT INTENT: To shape redevelopment projects so that the character and value of Renton's long-€Stablished, existing neighbortlOods are preserved. STANDARD: Careful siting and design treatment are necessary to achieve a compatible transtlion where new buildings differ from surrounding development in terms of building height, bulk, and scale. At least one of the following design elements shall be considered to promote a transition to surrounding uses: i. Setbacks at the side or rear of a building may be increased in order to reduce the bulk and scale of larger buildings and so that sunlight reaches adjacent yards; or ii. Building articulation provided to divide a larger architectural element into smaller pieces; or iii. Roof lines, roof pitches, and roof shapes designed to reduce apparent bulk and transition with existing development. PROPOSAL: Efforls to achieve the desired transition to surrounding uses began with building placement. The East Building has been pulled back from the setback line by an additional 20'-0" than what is required by code. This design decision was made to provide a buffer between the adjacent daycare and to avoid adversely impacting the natural topography in areas where slopes are steep. Additionally, the proposed multifamily buildings are broken up in modulation and variations in rooflines (both height and slopes / designs) to reduce the apparent scale and bulk of the building. SERVICE ELEMENT LOCATION AND DESIGN INTENT: To reduce the potential negative impacts of service elements (i.e., waste receptacles, loading docks) by locating service and loading areas away from pedestrian areas, and screening them from view in high visibility areas. Minimum Standard: Service elements shall be located and designed to minimize the impacts on the pedestrian environment and adjacent uses. Service elements shall be concentrated and located where they are accessible to service vehicles and convenient for tenant use (see illustration, RMC 4-3-1 OOE? e). PROPOSAL: The combined refuse/recycle storage location is centrally located between both buildings at the center of the site, away from public view. To reduce architectural bulk and scale associated with the City's construction requirements for the storage enclosures, the two separately-required storage locations have been provided in one enclosure to provide ease of access to residents of both buildings in addition to allowing for one, easily-accessible pickup point for waste management services. It is located off-center from the main access drive to allow it to be screened from views from the primary access off of SE 172"<' Street. The slope of the site from SE 172'" Straet is such that the primary views of the site would not be affected by the enclosure. Minimum Standard: Garbage, recycling collection, and utility areas shall be enclosed, consistent with RMC 4-4-090, Refuse and Recyclables Standards, and RMC 4-4-095, Screening and Storage Height/Location Limitations. 3 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 PROPOSAL: The refuse/recycle area is enclosed and is accessed via out-swinging doors matching the design fabric of the residential buildings, The enclosure is not adjacent to a street, pathway, or pedestrian-oriented space, but will have additional screening elements through the use of a trellis and adjacent landscaping, To reduce architectural bulk and scale associated with the City's construction requirements for the storage enclosures, the two separateiy-required storage locations have been provided in one enclosure to provide ease of access to residents of both buildings, Minimum Standard: In add~ion to standard enclosure requirements, garbage, recycling collection, and utimy areas shall be enclosed on all sides, including the roof and screened around their perimeter by a wall or fence and have self-closing doors (see illustration, RMC 4-3-100E7f), PROPOSAl.: The refuse/recycle area is enclosed and is accessed via out-swinging doors matching the dasign fabric of the residenffal buildings, The enclosure is not adjacent to a street, pathway, or pedestrian-oriented space, but will have additional screening elements through the use of a trellis and adjacent landscaping, and will have setf-<;losing doors. The use of chain link, plastic, or wire fencing is prohibited, No use of chain link, plastiC, or wire fencing is proposed, Minimum Standard: If the service area is adjacent to a street, pathway, or pedestrian-oriented space, a landscaped planting strip, minimum 3 feet wide, shall be located on 3 sides of such facility, PROPOSAL: Does not apply, Guideline: Service enclosure fences should be made of mascnry, ornamental metal or wood, or some combination of the three, PROPOSAL: The refuse/recycle enclosure will be constructed primarily of masonry, with omamental materials used to tie the design of the enclosure to the main design concept of the residential buildings, GA19'AYS INTENT: To distinguish gateways as primary entrances to districts or to the City, special design features and architectutal elements at gateways should be provided, While gateways should be distinctive within the context of the district, they should also be compatible with the district in form and scale, Minimum Standard: Developments located at district gateways shall be marked with visually prominent features (see illustration, subsection RMC 4-3-1 QQ, E7g), PROPOSAl.: Does not apply, Minimum Standard: Gateway elements shall be oriented toward and scaled for both pedestrians and vehicles (see illustration, subsection RMC 4-3-100,E7h), PROPOSAL: Does not apply, Minimum Standard: Visual prominence shall be distinguished by two or more of the following: a, Public art; b, Monuments; c, Special landscape treatment; d, Open spacelplaza; e, Identifying building form; f, Special paving, unique pedestrian scale lighting, or bollards; g, Prominent architectural features (trellis, arbor, pergola, or gazebo); h, Signage, displaying neighborhood or district entry identification (commercial signs are not allowed). PROPOSAL: Does not apply. 4 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 PARKING AND VEHICULAR ACCESS INTENT: To provide safe, convenienl access; incorporate various modes of Iransportalion, including public transit, in order to reduce traffic volumes and other impacts from vehicles; ensure sufficient parking is provided, while encouraging creativity in reducing the impacts of parking areas; allow an active pedestrian environment by maintaining contiguous street frontages, without parking lot siting along sidewalks and building facades; minimize the visual impact of parking lots; and use access streets and parking to maintain an urban edge to the district. LOCATION OF PARKING INTENT: To maintain active pedestrian environments along streets by placing parking lots primarily in back of buildings. Minimum Standard: No surface parking shall be located between a building and the front property line or the building and side property line on the street side of a corner lot. Guideline: In areas of mixed use development, shared parking is recommended. PROPOSAL: All surface parking is located on the back side of both buildings. There is no sutface parking proposed between the properly lines and the buildings. Every effort has been made to screen the surface parking from pedestrian areas through the use of landscaping and setbacks. Due to slope conditions, there will be some parking visible from Benson Dr (SR-515), though the parking still adheres to minimum setback requirements 10' from the property line. Ample landscaping and terracing in this area will also serve to detract attention from what vehicles may be viSible from this point of view. DESIGN OF SURFACE PARKING Intent: To ensure safety of users of parking areas, convenience to businesses, and reduce the impacl of parking lots wherever possible. STRUCTURED PARKING GARAGES Intent: To more efficiently use land needed for vehicle parking; encourage the use of structured parking throughout the Urban Center and the Center Village; physically and visually integrate parking garages with other uses; and reduce the overall impact of parking garages when they are located in proximity to the deSignated pedestrian environment. Guideline: Attached personal parking garages at-grade should be individualized and not enclose more than two cars per enclosed space. Such garages should be architecturally integrated into the whole development. Guideline: Multiple-user parking garages at-grade should be enclosed or screened from view through any combination of walls, decorative grilles, or trellis work with landscaping. Guideline: Personal parking garages should be individualized whenever possible with separate entries and architectural detailing in character with the lower density district. Guideline: Large multi-user parking garages are discouraged in this lower density district and, ~ provided, should be located below grade whenever possible. PROPOSAL: Does not apply. No structured parking garages are proposed. VEHICULAR ACCESS 5 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 Intent: To maintain a contiguous, uninterrupted sidewalk by minimizing, consolidating and/or eliminating vehicular acoess off streets within pedestrian environments and/or designated pedestrian-oriented streets. Minimum Standard: Parking lots and garages shall be accessed from alleys when available. PROPOSAL: Surface parking is access dil9ctly through the main drive aisle bisecting the buildings, connecting SE 172!'d Street to Benson Road. Because there al9 no adjacent alleys, the surface parking will be access off of SE 172!'d Street and Benson Road, which al9 primarily residential streets. Guideline: Garage entryways and/or driveways accessible only from a street should not impede pedestrian circulation along the sidewalk. PROPOSAL: The two primary access points to the surface parking will minimize interruption to pedestrian circulation by proposing depressed curbs in lieu of typical curb cuts to signal incoming vehicles to reduce their speed. Guideline: Curb cuts should be minimized whenever possible through the use of shared driveways. PROPOSAL: Only one curb cut is proposed per street frontage to minimize stl9ei access points. Due to service vehicle and emergency vehicle access requirements, two sffe entries and corresponding curb cuts al9 proposed to meet these I9quil9ments. PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT INTENT: To enhance the urban character of development by creating pedestrian networks and by providing strong links from streets and drives to building entrances; make the pedestrian environment safe, convenient, comfortable, and pleasant to walk between businesses, on sidewalks, to and from access points, and through parking lots; and promote the use of multi-modal and public transportation systems in order to reduce other vehicular traffic. PA THWA YS THROUGH PARKING LOTS Intent: To enhance the urban character of development in the Urban Center and the Center Village by creating pedestrian networks and by providing strong links from streets and drives to building entrances; make the pedestrian environment safer and more convenient, comfortable, and pleasant to walk between businesses, on sidewalks, to and from access points, and through parking lots; and promote the use of multi-modal and public transportation systems in order to reduce other vehicular traffic. PEDESTRIAN ClRCIlLA nON !.!llm!t To create a network of linkages for pedestrians to improve safety and convenience and enhance the pedestrian environment. Guideline: Delineation of pathways may be through the use of arcMectural features, such as trellises, railings, low seat walls, or similar treatment. Guideline: Mid-block connections are desirable where a strong linkage between uses can be established. Guideline: Decorative fences, with the exception of chain link fences, may be allowed when appropriate to the situation PROPOSAL: The proposed residential development provides a variety of different pedestrian pathways across the sffe. The pathways adjacent to the buildings will be highlighted through a variety of diffel9nt landscape treatments. The community opan space 819a will be highlighted through a number of different materials, focal points, and featUI9S. The primary access to the community open space from the residential development will be via a pedestrian footbridge and complementing wood chip path. Secondary access to the community open space will be provided through a stairway connection up from Benson Drive. The community open space proposes an opan space lawn to allow for active 19C19ation, mOI9 intimate locations featuring picnic tables and benches, an omamental pavilion intended to provide views from the sffe and for public gathering opportunities, ornamental plantings and 6 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 sculptural focus paints throughout the community open space, The community open space will mitigate site drainage through the use of drainage swales for retention of water onsite, PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES . INTENT: To create attractive spaces that unify the building and street environments and are invijing and comfortable for pedestrians; and provide publicly accessible areas that function for a variety of year-round activities, under typical seasonal weather conditions, PROPOSAL: By providing multiple access points to the private community open space located at the southem region of the site, it becomes accessible via vehicular and pedestrian traffic, The community open space incorporates a weather-protected pavilion, accessible to residents and members of the community as a public gathering space appropriate for parties, meetings, and casual relaxation. Access between the proposed buildings and adjacent streets is provided via a network of paths weaving the different areas of the site and the public realm together, LANDSCAPING/RECREATION AREAS/COMMON OPEN SPACE Intent: To provide visual relief in areas of expansive paving or struclures; define logical areas of pedeslrian and vehicular circulation; and add to the aesthetic enjoyment of the area by the community. To have areas suijable for both passive and active recreation by residents, workers, and visitors; provide these areas in sufficient amounts and in safe and convenient locations; and provide the opportunity for community gathering in places centrally located and designed to encourage such activijy, LANDSCAPING I ntent: Landscaping is intended to reinforce the architecture or concept of the area; provide visual and climatic relief in areas of expansive paving or structures; channelize and define logical areas of pedestrian and vehicular circulation; and add to the aesthetic enjoyment of the area by the community. Minimum Standard: All pervious areas shall be landscaped (see RMC 4-4-070, Landscaping), PROPOSAL: All perviOUS areas will be landscaped, Minimum Standard: Street trees are required and shall be located between the curb edge and building, as detenmined by the City of Renton, PROPOSAL: New street trees are proposed along SE 172f" Street, Benson Roed, and Benson Drive, Minimum Standard: On designated pedestrian-oriented streets, street trees shall be installed with tree grates, For all other streets, street tree treatment shall be as detenmined by the Cijy of Renton (see illustration, subsection RMC 4- 3-100,H3a), PROPOSAL: All pedestrian-oriented street trees will be installed with tree grates in accordance with RMC 4-3-100,H3a, Minimum Standard: The proposed landscaping shall be consistent wijh the design intent and program of the building, the site, and use, PROPOSAL: The landscape residential development and the proposed landscaped elements will be consistent Minimum Standard: The landscape plan shall demonstrate how the proposed landscaping, through the use of plant material and non-vegetative elements, reinforces the architecture or concept of the development. PROPOSAL: The landscape design for the site has been integrated with the intent of the architectural aesthetic, The primary purpose of the landscaping directly adjacent to building areas is to provide a softened buffer 7 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd street, Renton, WA 98055 between the building edges and public rights-of-way. This is achieved through the use of landscaped terraced retaining walls to enhance the quality of the outdoor spaces for residents. Landscaping will consist of new trees, shrubs, vegetative ground cover and seating areas across the site to provide a variety of outdoor spaces. The landscaping design intended to complement the residential buildings also serves to develop a design language for the proposed community open space. Similar plantings and shrubs are proposed within the community open space to create design cohesion between the two areas of the site. Minimum Standard: Surface parking areas shall be screened by landscaping in order to reduce views of parked cars from streets (see RMC 4-4-080F7, Landscape Requirements). Such landscaping shall be at least 10 feet in width as measured from the sidewalk (see illustration, subsection RMC 4-3-100.H3b). PROPOSAL: Surface parKing areas are set back from properly lines a minimum of 10' across the entire site. Landscaped areas within this 10' setback will serve to reduce the views of parKed cars from passersby. All surface parKing areas meet and exceed the minimum code-required dis1ance from sidewalks and are located a minimum of 20' from all sidewalk edges. Minimum Standard: Trees at an average minimum rate of one tree per 30 lineal feet of street frontage. Permitted tree species are those that reach a mature height of at least 35 feet. Minimum height or caliper at planting shall be eight feet or two inch caliper (as measured four feet from the top of the root ball) respectively. PROPOSAL: Trees will be provided along the s1reet frontage according to the minimum rate requirement. Tree species will be in accordance with the approved tree 1is1. Minimum Standard: Shrubs at the minimum rate of one per 20 square feet of landscaped area. Shrubs shall be at least 12 inches tall at planting and have a mature height between three and four feet. PROPOSAL: Shrubs will be provided along the street frontage according to the minimum rate requirement. Shrub sizes will conform with code s1andards. Minimum Standard: Ground cover shall be planted in sufficient quantities to provide at least 90 percent coverage of the landscaped area within three years of installation. PROPOSAL: Ground cover plantings will be in accordance with code required coverage. Minimum Standard: The applicant shall provide a maintenance assurance device, prior to oocupancy, for a period of notiess than three years and in sufficient amount to ensure required landscape standards have been met by the third year following installation. PROPOSAL: A maintenance plan will be provided to ensure landscaped areas on site will be properly maintained. Minimum Standard' Surface parking with more than 14 stalls shall be landscaped as follows' (1) R~ uired Amount: Total Number of Spaces Minimum Required Landscape Area' 15 to 50 15 square feet/parking space 51 to 99 25 square feet/parking space 100 or more 35 square feet/parking space , Landscape area calculations above and planting requirements below exclude perimeter parking lot landscaping areas. (2) ProVide trees, shrubs, and ground cover In the reqUired Intenor parking lot landscape areas. (3) Plant at least one tree for every six parking spaces. Permitted tree species are those that reach a mature height of at least 35 feet. Minimum height or caliper at planting shall be eight feet or two inch caliper (as measured four feet from the top of the root ball) respectively. 8 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 (4) Plant shrubs at a rale of five per 100 square feet of landscape area. Shrubs shall be at least 16 inches tall at planting and have a mature height between three and four feet. (5) Up to 50 percent of shrubs may be deciduous, (6) Select and plant ground cover so as to provide 90 percent coverage within three years of planting; provided, that mulch is applied until plant coverage is complete, (7) Do not locate a parking stall more than 50 feet from a landscape area, Minimum Standard: Regular maintenance shall be provided to ensure that plant materials are kept healthy and that dead or dying plant materials are replaced, Minimum Standard: Underground, automatic irrigation systems are required in all landscape areas. Guideline: Landscaping should be used to soften and integrate the bulk of buildings, Guideline: Landscaping should be provided that appropriately provides either screening of unwanted views or focuses attention to preferred views, Guideline: Use of low maintenance, drought-resistant landscape material is encouraged, Guideline: Choice of materials should reflect the level of maintenance that will be available. Guideline: Seasonal landscaping and container plantings are encouraged, particularly at building entries and in publicly accessible spaces, Guideline: Window boxes, containers for plantings, hanging baskets, or other planting feature elements should be made of weather-resistant materials that can be reasonably maintained, Guideline: Landscaping should be used to screen parking lois from adjacent or neighboring properties. Guideline: Front yards should be visible from the street and visually contribute to the streelscape, Guideline: Decorative walls and fencing are encouraged when architecturally integrated into the project. PROPOSAL: Surface parlting landscaped areas will be in accordance wffh the code required landscape areas at 25 square feetlparlting space. Trees, shrubs and ground cover shall be provided at interior landscaped areas as appropriate per species, Tree and shrub species proposed will be in conformance wffh the approved tree list. All parlting stalls are wffhin 50' of a landscaped area, A maintenance plan will be developed by the Landscape Architect and the Owner to ensure ongoing care and development of all landscaped areas, RECREATION AREAS AND COMMON OPEN SPACE Intent: To ensure that districts have areas suitable for both passive and active recreation by residents, workers, and visitors and that these areas are of sufficient size for the intended activity and in convenient locations; create usable, accessible, and inviting open space that is accessible to the public; and promote pedestrian activity on pedestrian- oriented streels particularly at street comers. Minimum Standard: Attached housing developments shall provide a minimum area of private usable open space equal to 150 square feet per unit of which 100 square feet are contiguous, Such space may include porches, balconies, yards, and decks, PROPOSAL: The current proposal provides 4, 156 SF of private, attached open space through the use of private balconies, Avana Ridge also proposes a large outdoor amenity on West Building Level 1 at 1,124 SF, In addition to these two types of spaces (private balcony space and outdoor amenity space at west Level 1), the applicant proposes a large, landscaped community open space provided at the southem portion of the site totaling 19,795 SF, Per RMC 4-4-100.E4, the minimum required attached private open space is 7,400 SF, and minimum private open space required is 11,100 SF, Avana Ridge provides 25,075 SF of total open space, which greatly exceeds literal code requirements as well as addressing the intent of the code through the provision of numerous types of outdoor areas, The community open space to the south provides an amenity both to the residents as well as the surrounding community, and provides for numerous types of active and passive recreation activities, 9 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 BUILDING ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN Intent: To encourage building design that is unique and urban in character, comfortable on a human scale, and uses appropriate building materials that are suitable for the Pacific Northwest climate. To discourage franchise retail architecture. BUILDING CHARACTER AND MASSING Intent: To ensure that buildings are not bland and visually appear to be at a human scale; and ensure that all sides of a building, that can be seen by the public, are visually interesting. Minimum Standard: All building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than 20 feet). Guideline: Building facades should be modulated andlor articulated with architectural elements to reduce the apparent size of new buildings, break up long blank walls, add visual interest, and enhance the character of the neighborhood . Guideline: Articulation, modulation, and their intervals should create a sense of scale important to residential buildings. Guideline: A variety of modulations and articulations should be employed to add visual interest and to reduce the bulk and scale of large projects. Guideline: Building modulations should be a minimum of two feet in depth and four feet in width. PROPOSAL: All building facades are in accordance with minimum modulation intervals. Both buildings are over 160' in length. Numerous design elements are used to reduce the apparent bulk of the residential buildings. These methods include horizontal modulation of numerous widths across the buildings, vertical roof projections, trellis elements, and overhead canopies at primary building entries and plazas to relate to human scale. Various materials including stone veneer, wood accents (parklex-style), fiber cement board in panel and verlical board configurations, and a variety of colors to add visual interest and furlher assist in modulating the facades. The interior of the unit designs have been designed to incorporate modulation depths across the project. The most common modulation depth across both buildings is 12'-6'. The longest modulation fagade length is 20'-10' and occurs only at porlions of the building where the shed-roof elements serve to differentiate it from the rest of the massing. GROUND-LEVEL DETAILS Intent: To ensure that buildings are visually interesting and reinforce the intended human-scale character of the pedestrian environment; and ensure that all sides of a building within near or distant public view have visual interest. Minimum Standard: Untreated blank walls visible from public streets, sidewalks, or interior pedestrian pathways are prohibited. A wall (including building facades and retaining walls) is considered a blank wall if: (a) It is a ground floor wall or portion of a ground floor wall over six feet in height, has a horizontal length greater than 15 feet, and does not include a window, door, building modulation or other archijecturaJ detailing; or (b) Any portion of a ground floor wall having a surface area of 400 square feet or greater and does not include a window, door, building modulation or other architectural detailing. Minimum Standard: Where blank walls are required or unavoidable, blank walls shall be treated with one or more of the following (see illustration, subsection RMC 4-3-100.l5d): 10 · . Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 (a) A planling bed at least five feet in widlh containing trees, shrubs, evergreen ground cover. or vines adjacent to the blank wall; (b) Trellis or other vine supports with evergreen climbing vines; (c) Architectural detailing such as reveals, contrasting materials. or other special detailing that meets the intent of this standard; (d) Artwork, such as bas-relief sculpture. mural. or similar; or (e) Seating area with special paving and seasonal planting. Minimum Standard: Treatment of blank walls shall be proportional to the wall. Minimum Standard: Provide human-scaled elements such as a lighting fixture, trellis, or other landscape feature along the facade's ground floor. Minimum Standard: Facades on designated pedestrian-oriented streets shall have at least 75 percent of the linear frontage of the ground floor facade (as measured on a true elevation facing the designated pedestrian- oriented street) comprised of transparent windows and/or doors. Minimum Standard: Other facade window requirements include the following: (a) Building facades must have clear windows with visibility into and out of the building. However. screening may be applied to provide shade and energy efficiency. The minimum amount of light transmittance for windows shall be 50 percent. (b) Display windows shall be designed for frequent change of merchandise, rather than permanent displays. (c) Where windows or storefronts occur, they must principally contain clear glazing. (d) Tinted and dark glass. highly reflective (mirror-type) glass and film are prohibited. Guideline: Use of material variations such as colors. brick. shingles. stucco, and horizontal wood siding is encouraged. PROPOSAL: All building facades feature large windows and varied material pattems. Window pattems val}' based on interior layout, but all facades feature a variety of window types. Wall areas visible from public streets and sidewalks are treated wffh trellis elements at the upper levels, canopies at pedestrian entries and amenffy spaces, and wffh landscaped vineI}' walls and plantings. Landscaping and artwork are proposed to break up public-fronting facades where windows are impractical due to interior configurations. BUILDING ROOF UNES Intent: To ensure that roofforms provide distinctive profiles and interest consistent with an urban project and contribute to the visual continuity of the district. Guideline: Buildings containing predominanHy residential uses should have pitched roofs with a minimum slope of one to four. Such roofs should have dormers or intersecting roof forms that break up the massiveness of a continuous. uninterrupted sloping roof. Guideline: Roof colors should be dark. PROPOSAL: Several roof modulation techniques are proposed throughout the buildings that offer distinctive profiles and interest for a project of this scale. The applicant is proposing a 2: 12 pffch for shed roof elements in order to take advantage of natural daylighting oppor/unities in the upper-level dwelling unffs. A slope of 2: 12 is proposed due to the aesthetic qualffy of a gently-rising slope. From the ground plane, pedestrians will perceive roofpattems that break up the mass of/he building. The applicant is requesting a deviation from the 4:12 pitched roof, as the difference in a 2: 12 pitched roof will not be perceived from the ground level, and will be less intrusive to the natural daylighting oppor/unities of the adjacent proper/ies at SE 172"" Street. These pitched shed roofs feature additional window types and patterns. A 2: 12 pitch meets the intent of the code through providing additional window oppor/unities and effectively breaking up the roof line, and will avoid adding additional wall area. BUILDING MA TERJALS Intent: To ensure high standards of quality and effective maintenance over time; encourage the use of materials that reduce the visual bulk of large buildings; and encourage the use of materials that add visual interest to the neighborhood. 11 Avana Ridge Planned Urban Development 10616 SE 172nd Street, Renton, WA 98055 Minimum Standard: All sides of buildings visible from a streel, pathway, parKing area, or open space shall be finished on all sides with the same building materials, detailing, and color scheme, or if different, with materials of the same quality. Minimum Standard: Materials, individually or in combination, shall have an attractive texture, pattem, and quality of detailing for all visible facades. Minimum Standard: Materials shall be durable, high quality, and reasonably maintained. Guideline: Building materials should be attractive, durable, and consistent with more traditional urban development. Appropriate examples would include brick, integrally colored concrete masonry, pre-finished metal, stone, steel, glass, and cast-in-place concrete. Guideline: Concrete walls should be enhanced by texturing, reveals, snap-tie pattems, coloring with a concrete coating or admixture, or by incorporating embossed or sculpted surfaces, mosaics, or artworK. Guideline: Concrete block walls should be enhanced with integral color, textured blocks and colored mortar, decorative bond pattem andlor incorporate other masonry materials. Guideline: Stucco and similar troweled finishes should be used in combination with other more highly textured finishes or accents. They should not be used at the base of buildings between the finished floor elevation and four feet (4') above. Guideline: Use of material variations such as colors, brick or metal banding or pattems, or textural changes is encouraged. PROPOSAL: All visible building malerials will follow a cohesive color scheme. A palette of red, white and gray tones is proposed to bring both accent colors and materials to the building design as well as to assist in breaking up the apparent mass of the building. A variety of materials and colors are being proposed as pari of the color palette for the building design aesthetic. Materials will have a variety of patterns and textures including panel configuration, horizontal board configuration and reveal patterns conSistent with window placement and proporiion control. Durable, higlHjuaiity materials are proposed that are easy to maintain and will maintain /heir aesthetic qualffy through an ongoing maintenance plan. The material palette includes concrete masonry, brick, metal canopy, cast-in- place concrete, fiber cement board, and wood elements. All concrete walls will be treated with texturing and/or reveals. Multiple details will be incorporated to ensure all material transitions occur at appropriate locations to ground the building and indicate special moments. Allwork is proposed throughout the community open space and at specific building faqade locations. All facades of both buildings will be treated with the same aesthetic care as those with public frontages. The proposed building and site design will convey a cohesive, high-quality design that sets a standard for future developments in /he area. 12 , . DEPARTMENT OF C .. IMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT --------,..Renton ® DENSITY WORKSHEET Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 I www.rentonwa.gov 1. Gross area of property -'1::..;6=--4"',8:..:2::..:7-".2=-4'---_ sq u a re feet 2. Deductions: Certain areas are excluded from density calculations. These include: Public Streets* 1,237.10 square feet ---'----- Private access easements* square feet ----- Critical Areas** 4,015.98 square feet ---'----- Total excluded area: 5,253.08 square feet -==-o.:.=.~ __ 3. Subtract line 2 (total excluded area) 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 • Alleys (public or private) do not have to be excluded, 159,574.16 square feet -=='-=-"'-'-"-=''---- -'3::..; . ..:.6-=-6 ____ acres 74 units/lots -'-'------- 20.21 = dwelling units/acre -=-'-"-'------ ··Critical Areas are defined as "Areas determined by the City to be not suitable lor development and which are subject to the City's Critical Areas Regulations including very high landslide areas, protected slopes, wetlands, or Iloodways." Critical Areas buffers are not deducted/excluded. 1 C:\Users\Justin \Desktop\Ava na Ridge\density worksheet. doc Rev; 08/2015 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT --------.. Renton ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 I www.rentonwa.gov Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: [help]http:Usepaguidance.epermitting.org!DesktopModules!help.aspx7project=O&node-471 This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use "not applicable" or "does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision-making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. INSTRUCTIONS FOR LEAD AGENCIES: Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. 1 E:\ Toby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist15088 _Dec 28, 201S.docx Rev: 08/2015 USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NON PROJECT PROPOSALS: For non project proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B even though questions may be answered "does not apply". In addition the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON PROJECT ACTIONS (part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project", "applicant", and "property or site" should be read as "proposal", "proponent", and "affected geographic area" respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non-projects) questions in Part B -Environmental Elements -that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. For help go to: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/sepa/e-review.html A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: AvanaRidge 2. Name of applicant: Avana Ridge, LLC 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 9675 SE 36TH Street, Suite 105 Mercer Island, Washington 98040 Justin Lagers (206) 229-6602 4. Date checklist prepared: December 28, 2015 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction will begin upon receipt of all required building and construction permits. This is estimated to occur in Summer 2016. 2 E:\ Toby\Desktop\Envi ronmentalChecklist15088 _Dec 28. 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. None ot this time 8. list any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. A number of reports have been prepared for the project as well as on earlier development proposal (Springbrook Ridge) on this porcel. These include: • Geological Engineering Services, Coal Mine Hazard Assessment, Cugini Property; Icicle Creek Engineers, Inc.; June 24, 1999. • Geological Engineering Services, Coal Mine Hazard Assessment, Cugini Property - Northwest Parcel; Icicle Creek Engineers, Inc.; March 22, 2004. • Geological Engineering Services, Proposed Property Development, Springbrook Ridge; Icicle Creek Engineers, Inc.; January 26, 2009. • Cugini Property wetland and stream delineation study -TWC Ref# 080109, The Watershed Company, January 25, 2009. • Environmental Checklist, Springbrook Ridge PUD; Century Pacific, LP; February 4, 2009. • Geotechnical Engineering Study -Avana Ridge Apartments; Earth Solutions NW, HC; December 21, 2015. • Tree Inspection, Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Numbers 292305-9148, -9009, Renton, WA; Greenforest Incorporated; December 16, 2015 • Wetland and Supplemental Stream Study -Avana Ridge PUD; Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc.; December 22, 2015. • Habitat Data Report -Avana Ridge; Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc.; December 22, 2015. • Avana Ridge Apartments, Traffic Impact Anolysis; Traf/Ex; December 21,2015. • Preliminary Technical Information Report, Avana Ridge PUD; D. R. Strong Consulting Engineers, Inc.; December 28, 2015. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. None at this time 10. list any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. SEPA Determination (City of Renton) Preliminary PUD Approvol (City of Renton) Final PUD Approval (City of Renton) Building Permit (City of Renton) 3 E:\ T oby\Desktop\Environmenta IChecklist15088_Dec 28, 201S.docx Rev: 12/201S Other Customory Construction Related Permits (City of Renton) Sewer and water utility connection opproval (Soos Creek Water & Sewer District) Construction Stormwoter General Permit (NPDES) (Deportment of Ecology) 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The Avona Ridge PUD is a multi-fomily housing project located on 0 3. 7S-acre parcel. Specific project elements include: • Constructing two buildings providing 74 apartment units, • Improving the road frontage of the three streets that bound the site (Benson Road, Benson Drive and SE 172nd Street), and • Constructing a small recreational open space and walking trail available for public use. 12. location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The Site occupies two legal lots defined King County tax parcel numbers 292305-9009 and 292305-9148 (addresses 17249 Benson Road South and 10615 SE 172"d Street). Property is located in the SW U of Section 29, Township 23 North, Range 5 East. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (check or circle one): Flat, rolling, ChiiiY5 steep slopes, mountainous, other _____ _ 4 E:\Toby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist15088_Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 The site is bisected by a stream that flaws east-to-west between Benson Road and Benson Drive. The areas north and south of the stream generally slope toward the stream or Bensan Drive. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Approximately 20% c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. AgC-Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. There are several landslide hazards within one mile downstream of the Site according to City of Renton Mops, ranging from moderate to very high severity. All are located just east of SR 167 near entered Panther Creek. City of Renton Maps also shows a historic coal mine in and around the project Site. We observed no obvious signs of unstable soils on the Site. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Construction of the proposed building, roadway and parking improvements will cover 3.0 acres of land. Preliminary earthwork quantities for this work are 11,000 cubic yards of excavation, and 3250 cubic yards of fill. Approximately 1,000 cubic yards of the fill will be imported structural material for building foundations, road and parking lot base, pipe bedding and other uses. Local quarries will source this material. The owner and contractor will locate a suitable dump site for excess excavated material. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. There is a potential for short-term increase in on-site erosion where soils are exposed during site preparation and construction; however, the Project will comply with all applicable erosion control measures, both short-term and long-term. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? 5 E:\ Toby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist15088_Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 Approximately 40.3% af the Grass Site Area will be covered by impervious surfaces. This excludes right-of-way improvements. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: 2. AIR A temporary erosion control plan will be implemented at the appropriate time. Erosian cantrol Best Management Proctices (BMPs) may include hay bales, siltation fences, temporary sediment ponds, cantrolled surface grading, stabilized construction entrances, cover stabilization, and other measures. All BMPs will adhere to City of Renton requirements, and be subject to Washington State Department of Ecology oversight as part of the NPDES permit coverage. a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Short-term emissions will be those associated with construction and site development activities. These will include dust and emissions from construction equipment. Long- term impacts will result from increased vehicle traffic. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Off-Site sources of emissions or odors include those typical of residential neighborhoods. These will include automobile emissions from traffic on adjacent roadways and fireplace emissions from nearby homes. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: During the construction phase, the project proposes the use of temporary erosion and sediment control (TESC) measures, in accordance with current City of Renton standards to reduce the amount of dust emissions. 6 E:\ Toby\Desktop\Envi ronmentaiChecklist15088 _Dec 28, 201S.docx Rev: 12/2015 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Yes, an unnamed stream crosses the Site. As defined in Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4.S0.Gl.a, this stream best meets the criteria of a Type Ns water due to its intermittent flow and absence of fish. For Type Ns streams, RMC 4.S0.G.2 estoblishes a 50-foot buffer measured from the OHWM. This stream is not subject to State shorelines regulations. Immediately upstream and downstream of the Site, the stream is confined to storm droin pipes and is not regulated as a critical area. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. The project is proposing building and parking lots within 200 feet of the stream, and a pedestrian foot bridge over the stream. Refer to the preliminary PUD plans for additional detail. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source offill material. None. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No, the Project proposes no sutfoce water withdrawals or diversions. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. The Project is not within a 100-year floodplain defined by FEMA's Fload Insurance Rate Map of the area, or Renton's critical area mop folio. Comments received in response to the project's pre-application review osked that the project consider potential streom flooding impacts. This will be considered as 7 E:\ T oby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist15088 _Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 part af the canveyance system design of the projects storm drain impravements, and differs from 0 regulated floodplain study. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. NO, the Praject will not discharge waste materials to surface waters. b. Ground Water: 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No groundwater will be withdrawn. Public water mains will serve the development. No water will be discharged to groundwater as the soils do not lend themselves to infiltration. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals. ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No waste material is proposed to be discharged into the ground. The Site will be served by public sanitary sewers and a public water system. c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. New impervious sUrfaces will increase sUrface water runoff volumes and rates. To mitigate this impact, a structured storm drain system will be constructed. A series of underground pipes and catch basins will callect the runaff and convey the runoff to a detention and water quality facilities. The storm facility will outlet to the existing stream or directly to the system collecting the stream. Storm water will leave the Site at its natural location and discharge at its pre-developed rate. 8 E:\ Toby\Desktop\Envi ronmentaIChecklist15088_Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. The proposed storm woter system will be designed to minimize or eliminote entry of woste materials or pollutants to ground water resources ond/or surface waters. Oils, grease, and ather pollutants from the addition of paved areas could potentially enter the groundwater or downstream sUrface water runoff· 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. No, the Project proposes ta discharge runoff at the natural location. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: A City approved storm drain system will be designed and implemented in order to mitigate any adverse impacts from storm water runoff. Temporary and permanent drainage facilities will be used to cantrol quality and quantity 0/ sUrface runoff during construction and after development. 4. PLANTS a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: x deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other (cottonwood, bitter cherry) _x_evergreen tree: tiL cedar, pine, other _x_shrubs -fSrass __ pasture __ crop or grain __ orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops. __ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other __ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other x other tvpes of vegetation (typical invasive plants such as Himalayan blackberries) b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Approximately 2.6 acres 0/ land will be cleared ta allow Project improvements. This will involve removal of all vegetation. Additionally, vegetation within 9 E:\ Toby\Desktop\Environ menta IChecklist15088_Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 approximately O.S acres of the Site and adjacent right-of-way will be altered. This will include removal of invasive understory plants. c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known within the Project area. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: The Project's proposed landscaping is comprised of multiple elements: • Immediate site landscaping araund the building and recreation areas, • Street trees and new landscaped baulevards between the sidewalks and roadways along the project's street frontage, • Removal of invasive understory plants within retained wooded areas, and • Vegetation plantings to enhance the stream buffers. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. Himalayan blackberries, S. ANIMALS a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: barn owl, crow, flicker Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: sguirrel, raccoon, opossum, coyote, vole mice, mole, Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: __________ _ b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: 10 E:\ Toby\Desktop\Environme nta IChecklist15088_Dec 2B, 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 The stream corridor will be protected with a buffer to maintain existing wildlife opportunities. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. Norway rat. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity and/or natural gas will serve as the primary energy source for residential heating and cooking within the development. Any wood stoves incorporated into the new residential units will comply with 011 local and State regulations. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Adjacent properties north of the site will be impacted by the new structures. The degree to which the potential use of solar energy is limited is not known. At present, none of the adjacent properties utilize active solar power. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? list other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: The required measures of the Washington State Energy Code and the Uniform Building Code will be incorporated in the construction of the residential units. Energy conservation fixtures and materials are encouraged in all new construction. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. There are no known on-Site environmental health hazards known to exist today and none will be generated as a direct result of this proposal. 11 E:\ T oby\Oesktop\Envi ronmentaiCheckiistlS088 _Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. None known. 2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. There ore no known hozardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. No toxic or hazardous chemicals will be stored on site. 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. No special emergency services are expected to be required. 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Special measures are not anticipated. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? The primary source of off-site noise in the area originates from vehicular traffic present on adjacent streets, particularly Benson Drive which borders the westerly boundary of the Site. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Short-term impacts will result from the use of construction equipment during site development and residential construction. Construction will be confined to day-light hours (typically 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.), and in compliance with all noise ordinances. Construction noise is generated by heavy equipment, hand tools, and the 12 E:\ T oby\Desktop\Envi ronmentaiCheckiistlS088 _Dec 28, 201S.doc): Rev: 12/2015 transporting of construction materials and equipment. Long-term impacts will be those associated with the increased use of the property by homeowners. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Construction will be performed during normal daylight hours. Motorized construction equipment will be equipped with noise mufflers. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. The Site oppears undisturbed, as it is a primarily forested area. The current use of adjacent properties is listed as follows: North: Single Family Residential South: Single Family Residential East: Single Family Residential West: Commercial b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been deSignated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or non-forest use? Not to our knowledge. 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pestiCides, tilling, and harvesting? If 50, how: No impacts. c. Describe any structures on the site. No structures exist on Site. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. 13 E:\ T oby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist15088_Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? RM-F (Residential Multi-Family) f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Residential High Density g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. Yes, a Type Ns stream runs through the Site. Additionally, a coal mine hazard was mapped aver a portion of the Site. Prior geotechnical work associated with the project Site (Icicle Creek Engineering, 1004) "concluded that the abandoned underground coal mines were substantially collapsed and most of the cool mine hazards were 'Declassified. '" The "High Coal Mine Hazard" designation remained in place over what is presumed to be a filled mine entry shaft. That location falls within newly created stream buffers and no improvements within the immediate vicinity are considered. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Approximately 171 (74 units x 1.3 persons per household = 170.1 individuals). j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: N/A I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The proposed development is compatible with the prescribed land use codes and designations for this Site. Per the City Zoning Code, the development is consistent with the density requirements and land use of this property. 14 E:\ T oby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist15088 _Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 m. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: N/A 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. The completed project will provide 74 apartment units. Rent will be priced with a market orientation to middle income level. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? As defined by Renton Municipal Code, the tallest portion of the building is 41'-11" (average of wall plates of the tallest shed-roof segment). Material palette is varied (lap siding, window glass, painted panels and other materials) to enhance overall building aesthetic. Refer to preliminary PUD application narrative for more detailed discussion. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? The properties to the west, south and east of the Site don't generally have views thot would be impacted by this project. The single-family homes to the north of the Site now have a have a view of the wooded property. These views will be replaced by the front face of the buildings and associated site landscaping and street trees. 15 E:\ T oby\Desktop\Envi ronmenta IChecklist15088_Dec 28, 20iS.doC}( Rev: 12/2015 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: The location of the buildings adheres to or exceeds the minimum setback requirements of the zoning district. The landscaping will be installed at the completion of building and paving construction. Additional methods of controlling views are through the use of landscaped screening walls, architectural building modulation and window placement. The proposed structures' siting currently adheres to all required setbacks, and provides softened edges through the use of plantings and code-adhering, architecturally integrated retaining walls. The landscape design will also assist in providing screening to adjacent property owners as well as providing privacy to the residents of the proposed development. Additional information is included with the Preliminary PUD application documents. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Light and glare will be produced from permanent building lighting and vehicle traffic. The light and glare will occur primarily in the evening and before dawn. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Light and glare from the Project will not cause hazards, and is not anticipated to inteifere with views. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Street lighting along Benson Drive will be visible to residents in the far west end of the west building. Light or glare from vehicles traveling on adjacent roadways, particularly Sf 17Z'd Street, may impact Site residents. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: New exterior parking lighting will be equipped with cutoff shields or ather measures to limit off-site light pollution, and confine light to the Site. Perimeter landscaping will create a partial visual buffer between the proposed units and the surrounding neighborhood areas. 16 E:\ T oby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist15088_Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? There are no existing recreational opportunities on this Site or in the immediate vicinity. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: The project does not include any measures to alter off-site recreational activities. The project will develop a recreation space that will be open to the public. The area will be equipped with a pavilion, trails, lawn and picnic facilities. Residents will also be able to use a fenced, off-leash dog walk. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers located on or near the site? If so, specifically describe. Yes. As part of Washington State's ongoing efforts to inventory historic properties, Artifacts Consulting, Inc. identified a number of single-and multi-fomily dwellings in the vicinity of the site that were built before 1970. The oldest structure was built in 1949. The inventory did not recommend any of the properties for registry listing or historic district inclusion. b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Is there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. None observed. c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. 17 E:\ Toby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist15088_Dec 28, 201S.docx Rev: 12/2015 Washingtan Information System for Architecturol and Archaeological Records Data was used to assess potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the Project Site. We also consulted previous environmental review for the parcel. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. There are no known impacts. If an archeological site is found during the course of construction, the State Historic Preservation Officer will be notified. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Access to the proposed Project will be from Sf 172M Street and Benson Road S. See vicinity map for Project location. b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The nearest bus stop is located at Sf Carr Road and 103'd Avenue Sf, approximately 0.2 miles from the Site. c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? No parking spaces will be eliminated. 94 parking spaces will be added within the site on a private surface parking lot. 20 parallel parking stalls will be added to Sf 172 nd Street as part of the required street frontoge improvements. d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). The Project will improve all three streets adjacent to the property: • Sf 172M Street -Additional pavement, curb and gutter, 8-foot landscaping strip, 6-foot sidewalk and street lighting. • Benson Road S -8-foot londscaping strip and 8-foot sidewalk to be installed behind existing curb and gutter, and street lighting. 18 E:\ Toby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist15088 _Dec 28, 201S.docx Rev: 12/2015 • Benson Drive S (SR 515) -B-foot landscoping strip and B-foot sidewalk to be installed behind existing curb and gutter, and street lighting. Improvements proposed for the northern half of the street frontage. e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. None in the immediate vicinity. Renton Municipal Airport is approximately 2. 7 miles away. A stop for Sound Transit Sounder train is approximately 2.2 miles owoy. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and non-passenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? The Tra!!ic Impact Analysis for the Project indicates the overage weekday will generate 492 trips per day (246 entering, 246 leaving). No commercial truck traffic is anticipated. g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. No. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Immediate project impocts will be mitigated through proposed street frontage improvements. Brooder impacts will be mitigated through traffic impact fees levied by the City of Renton in accordance with the 2015 rate structure. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Yes, the proposal will increase demand for all services. Demond increases will be typical of a residential development of this size and nature. None of the specific services sited will require an increase in patrols, an expansion of geographic service areas, or construction of new facilities. Impacts will be absorbed through existing infrastructure and operations. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. 19 E:\ T oby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist15088 _Dec 28, 201S.docx Rev: 12/2015 The demands far these services will be mitigated through payment of taxes and impact fees. 16. UTILITIES a. Check or circle utilities currently available at the site: b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. All of the following utilities are available adjacent to the site: • Electricity -Puget Sound Energy • Natural Gas -Puget Sound Energy • Water & Sewer -SOOS Creek Water and Sewer District • Telephone -Century Link C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Proponent Signature: 2&-a ~ Name of Signee (printed): .!.,;To"'b"'v'-'C"'o"'e"'n"'en"'-_____________ _ Position and Agency/Organization: Proiect Civil Engineer, D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers Date Submitted: /.2, Z 9. 20 /5 20 E:\ T oby\Desktop\Envi ronmentalChecklist15088 _Dec 28, 2015.doc)( Rev: 12/2015 DEPARTMENT OF COI\-II.JIUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 I www.rentonwa.gov Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: [help]http://sepaguidance.epermitting.org/DesktopModules/help.aspx?project=O&node=471 This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use "not applicable" or "does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision-making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal. even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining ifthere may be significant adverse impact. INSTRUCTIONS FOR LEAD AGENCIES: Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects ofthe proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. 1 E:\Toby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist15088_Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 08/2015 • USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: For non project proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B even though questions may be answered "does not apply". In addition the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project", "applicant", and "property or site" should be read as "proposal", "proponent", and "affected geographic area" respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non-projects) questions in Part B -Environmental Elements -that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis ofthe proposal. For help go to: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/sepa/e-review.html A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: AvanaRidge 2. Name of applicant: Avana Ridge, LLC 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 9675 Sf 36TH Street, Suite lOS Mercer Is/and, Washington 98040 Justin Lagers (206) 229-6602 4. Date checklist prepared: December 28, 2015 S. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction will begin upon receipt of aI/ required building and construction permits. This is estimated to occur in Summer 2016. 2 E:\Toby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist15088_Dec 28, 201S.docx Rev: 12/2015 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. None at this time 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. A number of reports have been prepared for the project as well as an earlier development proposal (Springbrook Ridge) on this parcel. These include: • Geological Engineering Services, Coal Mine Hazard Assessment, Cugini Property; Icicle Creek Engineers, Inc.; June 24, 1999. • Geological Engineering Services, Coal Mine Hazard Assessment, Cugini Property - Northwest Parcel; Icicle Creek Engineers, Inc.; March 22, 2004. • Geolagical Engineering Services, Proposed Property Development, Springbrook Ridge; Icicle Creek Engineers, Inc.; January 26, 2009. • Cugini Property wetland and stream delineation study -TWC Rem 080109, The Watershed Company, January 25, 2009. • Environmental Checklist, Springbrook Ridge PUD; Century Pacific, LP; February 4, 2009. • Geotechnical Engineering Study -Avana Ridge Apartments; Earth Solutions NW, HC; December 21, 2015. • Tree Inspection, Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Numbers 292305-9148, -9009, Renton, WA; Greenforest Incorporated; December 16, 2015 • Wetland and Supplemental Stream Study -Avana Ridge PUD; Sewall Wetland Cansulting, Inc.; December 22, 2015. • Habitat Data Report -Avana Ridge; Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc.; December 22, 2015. • Avana Ridge Apartments, Traffic Impact Analysis; TraflEx; December 21,2015. • Preliminary Technical Information Report, Avona Ridge PUD; D. R. Strong Consulting Engineers, Inc.; December 28, 2015. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. None at this time 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. SEPA Determination (City of Renton) Preliminary PUD Approval (City of Renton) Final PUD Approval (City of Renton) Building Permit (City of Renton) 3 E:\Toby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklistls088_Dec 28, 201s.docx Rev: 12/2015 Other Customory Construction Related Permits (City of Renton) Sewer ond water utility connection approval (Soos Creek Water & Sewer District) Construction Storm water General Permit (NPDES) (Department of Ecology) 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The Avana Ridge PUD is a multi-famify housing project located on a 3.78-acre parcel. Specific project elements include: • Constructing two buifdings providing 74 apartment units, • Improving the road frontage of the three streets that bound the site (Benson Road, Benson Drive and SE 17Z'd Street), and • Constructing a small recreational open space and walking traif avaifable for public use. 12. location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s}. Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The Site occupies two legal lots defined King County tax parcel numbers 292305-9009 and 292305-9148 (addresses 17249 Benson Road South and 10615 SE 172nd Street). Property is located in the SW ~ of Section 29, Township 23 North, Range 5 East. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description ofthe site (check or circle one): Flat, rolling, C}iiiiYj steep slopes, mountainous, other _____ _ 4 E:\Toby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist15088_Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 The site is bisected by a stream that flows east-to-west between Benson Road and Benson Drive. The areas north and south of the stream generally slope toward the stream or Benson Drive. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Approximately 20% c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. AgC-Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. There are several landslide hazards within one mile downstream of the Site according to City of Renton Maps, ranging from moderate to very high severity. All are located just east of SR 167 near entered Panther Creek. City of Renton Maps also shows a historic coal mine in and around the project Site. We observed no obvious signs of unstable soils on the Site. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Construction of the proposed building, roadway and parking improvements will cover 3.0 acres of land. Preliminary earthwork quantities for this work are 11,000 cubic yards of excavation, and 3250 cubic yards of fill. Approximately 1,000 cubic yards of the fill will be imported structural material for building foundations, road and parking lot base, pipe bedding and other uses. Local quarries will source this material. The owner and contractor will locate a suitable dump site for excess excavated material. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. There is a potentiol for short-term increase in an-site erosion where soils are exposed during site preparation and construction; however, the Project will comply with all applicable erosion control measures, both short-term and long-term. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? 5 E;\Toby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist1S088_Dec 28, 201S.docx Rev: 12/201S Approximotely 40.3% of the Gross Site Area will be covered by impervious surfaces. This excludes right-of-way improvements. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: 2. AIR A temporary erosion control pion will be implemented at the appropriate time. Erosion control Best Management Practices (BMPs) may include hay bales, siltation fences, temporary sediment ponds, controlled surface grading, stabilized construction entrances, cover stabilization, and other measures. All BMPs will adhere to City of Renton requirements, and be subject to Washington State Department of Ecology oversight as part of the NPDES permit coverage. a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Short-term emissions will be those associated with construction and site development activities. These will include dust and emissions from construction equipment. Long- term impacts will result from increased vehicle traffic. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Off-site sources of emissions or odors include those typical of residential neighborhoods. These will include automobile emissions from traffic on adjacent roadways and fireplace emissions from nearby homes. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: During the construction phase, the project proposes the use of temporary erosion and sediment control (TESC) measures, in accordance with current City of Renton standards to reduce the amount of dust emissions. 6 E:\ T oby\Desktop\Envi ronmentaiCheckiistl5088 _Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12!2015 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Yes, an unnamed stream crosses the Site. As defined in Renton Municipal Cade (RMC) 4.S0.G7.a, this stream best meets the criteria of a Type Ns water due to its intermittent flow and absence of fish. For Type Ns streams, RMC 4.S0.G.2 establishes a 50-foot buffer measured from the OHWM. This stream is not subject to State shorelines regulations. Immediately upstream and downstream of the Site, the stream is confined to storm drain pipes and is not regulated as a critical area. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. The project is proposing building and parking lots within 200 feet of the stream, and a pedestrian foot bridge over the stream. Refer to the preliminary PUD plans for additional detail. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No, the Project proposes no sUrface water withdrawals or diversions. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. The Project is not within a lOO-year floodplain defined by FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map of the area, or Renton's critical area map folio. Comments received in response to the project's pre-application review asked that the project consider potential stream flooding impacts. This will be considered as 7 E:\Toby\Desktop\Env;ronmentaICheckl;st15088_Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 part of the conveyance system design of the projects storm drain improvements, and differs from a regulated floodplain study. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No, the project will not discharge waste materials to surface waters. b. Ground Water: 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description ofthe well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No groundwater will be withdrawn. Public water mains will serve the development. No water will be discharged to groundwater as the soils do not lend themselves to infiltration. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals. ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system{s) are expected to serve. No waste material is proposed to be discharged into the ground. The Site will be served by public sanitary sewers and a public water system. c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. New imperviaus sUrfaces will increase surface water runoff volumes and rates. To mitigate this impact, a structured storm drain system will be constructed. A series of underground pipes and catch basins will collect the runoff and convey the runoff to a detentian and water quality facilities. The storm facility will outlet to the existing streom or directly to the system collecting the stream. Storm water will leave the Site at its natural location and discharge at its pre-developed rate. 8 E:\ Toby\Deskto p\Environ menta I (hec klist15088 _Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. The proposed storm woter system will be designed to minimize or eliminate entry of waste materiols or pollutants to ground water resources and/or sUrface waters. Oils, grease, and other pollutants from the addition of paved areas could potentially enter the groundwater or downstream sUrface water runoff. 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. No, the Project proposes to discharge runoff at the natural location. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: A City approved storm drain system will be designed and implemented in order to mitigate any adverse impacts from storm water runoff. Temporary and permanent drainage facilities will be used to control quality and quantity of sUrface runoff during construction and after development. 4. PLANTS a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: x deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other (cottonwood, bitter cherry) _x_evergreen tree: fl!:., cedar, pine, other _x_shrubs __ grass __ pasture __ crop or grain __ orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops. __ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other __ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other x other types of vegetation (typical invasive plants such as Himalayan blackberries) b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Approximately 2.6 acres of land will be cleared to allow Project improvements. This will involve removal of all vegetation. Additionally, vegetation within 9 E:\Toby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist15088_Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12/201S approximately 0.5 acres 0/ the Site and adjacent right-oj-way will be altered. This will include removal 0/ invasive understory plants. c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known within the Project area. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: The Project's proposed landscaping is comprised 0/ multiple elements: • Immediate site landscaping around the building and recreation areas, • Street trees and new landscaped boulevards between the sidewalks and roadways along the project's street/rontage, • Removal 0/ invasive understory plants within retained wooded areas, and • Vegetation plantings to enhance the stream buffers. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. Himalayan blackberries, 5. ANIMALS a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: barn owl, crow, flicker Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: sguirrel, raccoon, opossum, coyote, vole mice, mole, Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: ___________ _ b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: 10 E:\ T oby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklistls088 _Dec 28, 201s.docx Rev: 12/2015 The stream corridor will be protected with a buffer to maintain existing wildlife opportunities. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. Norway rat. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity and/or natural gas will serve as the primary energy source for residential heating and cooking within the development. Any wood stoves incorporated into the new residential units will comply with all local and State regulations. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Adjacent properties north of the site will be impacted by the new structures. The degree to which the potential use of solar energy is limited is not known. At present, none of the adjacent properties utilize active solar power. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: The required measures of the Washington State Energy Code and the Uniform Building Code will be incorporated in the construction of the residential units. Energy conservation fixtures and materials are encouraged in all new construction. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result ofthis proposal? If so, describe. There are no known on-Site environmental health hazards known to exist today and none will be generated as a direct result of this proposal. 11 E:\Toby\De,ktop\Env;ronmentaICheckl;,t15088_Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. None known. 2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. There are no known hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. No toxic or hazardous chemicals will be stared on site. 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. No special emergency services are expected to be required. 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Special measures are not anticipated. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? The primary source of off-site noise in the area originates from vehicular traffic present on adjacent streets, particularly Benson Drive which borders the westerly boundary of the Site. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Short-term impacts will result from the use of construction equipment during site development and residential construction. Construction will be confined to day-light hours (typically 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.), and in compliance with all noise ordinances. Construction noise is generated by heavy equipment, hand tools, and the 12 E:\Toby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist15088_Dec 28, 2015.doc. Rev: 12/2015 transparting of construction materials and equipment. Long-term impacts will be those associated with the increased use of the property by homeowners. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Construction will be performed during normal daylight hours. Motorized construction equipment will be equipped with noise mufflers. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. The Site appears undisturbed, as it is a primarily forested area. The current use of adjacent properties is listed as follows: North: Single Family Residential South: Single Family Residential East: Single Family Residential West: Commercial b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result ofthe proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or non-forest use? Not to our knowledge. 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: No impacts. c. Describe any structures on the site. No structures exist on Site. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. 13 E:\ Toby\Deskto p\EnvironmentaIChecklist15088_Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? RM-F (Residential Multi-Family) f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Residential High Density g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part ofthe site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. Yes, a Type Ns stream runs through the Site. Additionally, a coal mine hazard was mapped over a portion of the Site. Prior geotechnical work assaciated with the project Site (Icicle Creek Engineering, 2004) "concluded that the abandoned underground coal mines were substantially collapsed and most of the coal mine hazards were 'Declassified. '" The "High Coal Mine Hazard" designation remained in place over what is presumed to be a filled mine entry shaft. That location falls within newly created stream buffers and no improvements within the immediate vicinity are considered. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Approximately 171 (74 units x 2.3 persons per household = 170.2 individuals). j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: N/A I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The proposed develapment is compatible with the prescribed land use codes and designations for this Site. Per the City Zoning Code, the development is consistent with the density requirements and land use of this property. 14 E:\Toby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist15088_Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 m. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: N/A 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. The completed project will provide 74 apartment units. Rent will be priced with a market orientation to middle income level. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(sj, not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? As defined by Renton Municipal Cade, the tallest portion of the building is 41'-11" (average of wall plates of the tallest shed-roof segment). Material palette is varied (lap siding, window glass, painted panels and other materials) to enhance overall building aesthetic. Refer to preliminary PUD application narrative for more detailed discussion. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? The properties to the west, south and east of the Site don't generally have views that would be impacted by this project. The single-family homes to the north of the Site now have a have a view of the wooded property. These views will be replaced by the front face of the buildings and associated site landscaping and street trees. 15 E:\ To by\Desktop\E nvi ronmentalCheckl ist1S088_Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: The locotion of the buildings adheres to or exceeds the minimum setback requirements of the zoning district. The landscaping will be installed at the completion of building and paving construction. Additional methods of controlling views are through the use of landscaped screening walls, architectural building modulation and window placement. The proposed structures' siting currently adheres to all required setbacks, and provides softened edges through the use of plantings and code-adhering, architecturally integrated retaining walls. The landscape design will also assist in providing screening to adjacent property owners as well as providing privacy to the residents of the proposed development. Additional information is included with the Preliminary PUD application documents. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Light and glare will be produced from permanent building lighting and vehicle traffic. The light and glare will occur primarily in the evening and before dawn. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Light and glare from the Project will not cause hazards, and is not anticipated to interfere with views. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Street lighting along Benson Drive will be visible to residents in the for west end of the west building. Light or glare from vehicles traveling on adjacent roadways, porticularly Sf 172"d Street, may impact Site residents. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: New exterior parking lighting will be equipped with cutoff shields or other measures to limit off-site light pollution, and confine light to the Site. Perimeter landscaping will create a partial visual buffer between the proposed units and the surrounding neighborhood areas. 16 E:\Toby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist1S088_Dec 28, 201S.docx Rev: 12/201S 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? There are no existing recreatianalopportunities on this Site ar in the immediate vicinity. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: The praject does not include any measures ta alter off-site recreational activities. The project will develop a recreation space that will be apen ta the public. The area will be equipped with a pavilion, trails, lawn and picnic facilities. Residents will also be able ta use a fenced, off-leash dog walk. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers located on or near the site? If so, specifically describe. Yes. As part af Washingtan State's ongoing efforts to inventory historic properties, Artifacts Consulting, Inc. identified a number of single-and multi-family dwellings in the vicinity of the site that were built before 1970. The oldest structure was built in 1949. The inventory did not recommend any of the properties for registry listing or historic district inclusion. b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Is there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. None observed. c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. 17 E:\ T oby\Desktop\Environmenta IChecklist15088 _Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 Washington Information System for Architectural and Archaeological Records Data was used to assess potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the Project Site. We also consulted previous environmental review for the parcel. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. There are no known impacts. If an archeological site is found during the course of construction, the State Historic Preservation Officer will be notified. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Access to the proposed Project will be from Sf 17Z'd Street and Benson Road S. See vicinity map for Project location. b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The nearest bus stop is located at Sf Carr Road and 10~ Avenue Sf, approximately 0.2 miles from the Site. c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? No parking spaces will be eliminated. 94 parking spaces will be added within the site on a private sur/ace parking lot. 20 parallel parking stalls will be added to Sf 17~ Street as part of the required street frontage improvements. d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). The Project will improve all three streets adjacent to the property: • Sf 17~ Street -Additional pavement, curb and gutter, 8-foot landscaping strip, 6-foot sidewalk and street lighting. • Benson Road S -8-foot landscaping strip and 8-foot sidewalk to be installed behind existing curb and gutter, and street lighting. 18 E:\ T oby\Desktop\Environmenta I CheckiistlS088 _Dec 28, 2015.docx Rev: 12/2015 • Benson Drive S (SR 515) -8-foot landscaping strip and 8-foot sidewalk to be installed behind existing curb and gutter, and street lighting. Improvements proposed for the northern half of the street frontage. e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. None in the immediate vicinity. Renton Municipal Airport is approximately 2.7 miles away. A stop for Sound Transit Sounder train is appraximately 2.2 miles away. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and non-passenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? The Traffic Impact Analysis for the Project indicates the average weekday will generate 492 trips per day (246 entering, 246 leaving). No commercial truck traffic is anticipated. g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. No. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Immediate praject impacts will be mitigated through proposed street frontage improvements. Broader impacts will be mitigated through traffic impact fees levied by the City of Renton in accordance with the 2015 rate structure. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Yes, the proposal will increase demand for all services. Demand increases will be typical of a residential development of this size and nature. None of the specific services sited will require an increase in patrols, an expansion of geographic service areas, or construction of new facilities. Impacts will be absorbed through existing infrastructure and operations. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. 19 E:\Toby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist15088_Dec 28, 2015.do(){ Rev: 12/201S The demands far these services will be mitigated through payment of taxes and impact fees. 16. UTILITIES a. Check or circle utilities currently available at the site: b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. All of the following utilities are available adjacent to the site: • Electricity -Puget Sound Energy • Natural Gas -Puget Sound Energy • Water & Sewer -Soos Creek Water and Sewer District • Telephone -Century Link C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Proponent Signature: 27= a ~ Name of Signee (printed): !.];~o:!!b.l.y..!:C~o-",en!!!e~n~ _____________ _ Position and Agency/Organization: Project Civil Engineer, D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers Date Submitted: 1.i!.29.2b/s 20 E:\Toby\Desktop\EnvironmentaIChecklist1S088_Dec 28, 201S.docx Rev: 12/201S ~TENW Transportation Engineering NorthWest MEMORANDUM DATE: March 21, 201 6 TO: Rocale Timmons, City of Renton -Current Planning, Senior Planner FROM: Michael Read, PE, Principal, TENW SUBJECT: Avana Ridge Traffic Impact Study -Peer Review TENW Project No. 3462 This memorandum documents my review 01 the Avana Ridge Apartments Revised Traffic Impact Study, February 2, 2016, prepared by TraffEx, site pion and site access/frontage improvement plans prepared by DRS Consulting Engineers, and field work conducted in February 2016 reloted to existing site frontage conditions, available sight distance, and a general field conditions to address trip distribution questions outlined by the City 01 Renton. Avana Ridge TIS Peer Review The fallowing is a general list of assumptions, methods, and conclusions I have verified or recommend verification and or modification in review 01 the Avana Ridge Apartments Revised TIS, February 2016: • The study applies stondard trip generation rates as published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers in the Trip Generation Manual, 9 th Edition, consistent with standard practice. • The trip distribution assumptions appear reasonable in general, although the overall total in Figure 4 only indicates 99%. The total number 01 trips during the p.m. peak hour however, appear to be distributed to the proposed site access driveways. Given a majority of trips are expected to be distributed to/from the south, the "equitable distribution" of estimated trips currently assumed entering the site from SR 515 seems unlikely given that a majority 01 parking access will be accessed via the driveway onto Benson Road. A directional split should be identified between these two access points that reflects the "circuitous route" afforded by SE 172 nd Street versus the direct site entry onto Benson Road for both entering and exiting traffic. Also, the trip distribution figure should be adjusted to better indicate the actual location 01 the entry driveway onto SE 172nd Street (immediately east 01 106th Avenue SEI. • Related to trip assignment, existing a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic counts between SE 172nd Street and 108th Avenue SE should be balonced. In general, reported traffic counts at the proposed site access loeotion ore directionally higher along Benson Road at 108,h Avenue SE. Traffic operational analysis should consider the worse-case scenario and given the intersection TrcJnsporrol1on P:onning I Design I Tfni·fic Imp(~ct 3. Operotions PO Box 65254, Seattle, WA 98155 I Office 12061361-7333 Avana Ridge Traffic Impact Study Peer Review proximity, the highest directionol flows or period should be used in the onalysis, beginning with existing conditions. • With regard ta the proposed "mitigation" of site access onto SE 172 nd Street, the proposed "drivewoy configurotion" thot is intended to restrict movements to "Ieh-in, right-out only" would not be an effective control in its current configurotion for two main reasons: 11 the layout does not restrict movements from being taken li.e., not sharp enough), and 21 the lack of traffic volumes that would be in conflict with entering or exiting traffic to/from the west would not discourage U-turns or other traffic movements into the opposing travel. In addition, the proposed driveway off-set from 106th Avenue SE of roughly 70 feet would result in conflicting simultaneous left turns. Traffic volume levels however, do not indicate a significant likelihood of conflict unless redevelopment or changes in residential density is expected by the City of Renton. If a proposed access configuration is proposed and constructed that can restrict these turns, the trip distribution assumptions and traffic operational analysis should be updated accordingly. • With the trip distribution reassignments noted above, all traffic operational analyses appear consistent with the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual reporting using Synchra 8.0. • Generally, the proposed project fulfills its obligations in completing frontage improvements along Benson Road and SE 172nd Street, which include pedestrian facilities. Additional accommodation off-site could include constructing a pedestrian landing with ADA ramps at the southwest carner of the Benson Road and SE 172 nd Street intersection as well as a proposed "marked" crosswalk of Benson Road across the southern leg to access the existing School Bus stop in the northeast corner of the intersection. Field Review The following are general findings and observations of considerations based on field observations by TENW that should be included or confirmed within the traffic impact analysis of the proposed Avana Ridge Apartment project: • Entering Sight distance constraints to the west from 106th Avenue SE onto 172nd Street. Existing vegetation within the public right-of-way should be removed to maximize available Sight distance at this existing intersection. Vegetation or other sight obstructions at the proposed access driveway onto Benson Road should be identified and demonstrated on the site plan. • Assuming optimal traffic signal operations, 95th -percentile vehicle queues generated by the Benson Highway ISR 515) and Benson Road signalized intersection to the south of the proposed project should be evaluated to ensure no "blockage" of the proposed access opposite 108th Avenue NE on Benson Road occurs. ~TENW March 21. 2016 Page 2 Avana Ridge Traffic Impact Study Peer Review • With the likely distribution of actual project trips at the direct site access location onto Benson Road li.e., northbound leh turns!, a turn lane warrant analysis should be conducted to ensure minimum safety levels ore provided given opposing/advancing volumes currently traveling on Benson Road. Findings & Recommendations Based upon my review 01 the Traffic Impact Anolysis 01 the proposed Avana Ridge Apartment project and the field review, the folloWing recommendations for consideration by the City include: Traffic Impact Analysis • Revise traffic volumes to balance existing and future traffic flows Ibeginning with existing conditions) along Benson Road using the higher observed directional flows. • Revise trip distribution assumptions to reflect the distribution of on-site parking supply/travel times. • Prepare a left turn lane warrant analysis at the site access driveway onto Benson Road with revisions noted above. • Evaluate southbound queuing from the Benson Road/Benson Highway ISR 515) signal and identify potential solutions to eliminate or reduce vehicle queuing that could block the proposed site access driveway. These could be signal timing/phasing modifications, channelization revisions Isouthbound left, southbound shared left/right!, or other such improvements reasonably related to project impacts and a safe site access proposed onto Benson Road. Site Plan/Frantage Improvements • The City af Renton and the Renton School District should inventory and evaluate existing and proposed school bus stops, routing, and identify any crossing treatments that are warranted or required to satisfy safe walk routes between the project site and vicinity school bus stops far peak arrival and dismissal periods. If warranted, the City and the Renton School District would determine appropriate crossing treatments that are required for conditions of approval. • Remove the proposed access restrictions onto SE 172 nd Street from the project site plan. The City should consider conditioning the development to participote or fund a before & after cut through traffic study along 1061h Avenue SE and implement appropriate residential traffic management measures as needed to mitigate any cut-through traffic impacts generated by the Avana Ridge Apartment project. If you have any questions regarding the informotion presented in this memo, please call me at 1206) 361- 7333 x 101 or mikeread@lenw.com. ~TENW March 21,2016 Page 3 TraF~ Mr. Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36th st. Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 NORTHWEST TRAFFIC eXPERTS 1 Hll) 1'·lE 12!:th St" #::~:' KirWand, ',",,",\ ~da:Yl Pilon;: 425.522.411-3 Fax: 425.522.4311 March 26, 2016 Re: Avana Ridge Apartments -City of Renton Memorandum -Revisions to TIA per Peer Review Dear Mr. Lagers: The purpose of this memo is to provide revisions to the Avana Ridge Traffic Impact Analysis per the recommendations in the March 21. 2016 Peer Review Memo prepared by TENW. The recommendations dealt with: • , revising trip distribution and assignment due to a restricted site driveway access to SE 172nd St. and also the shorter trip length using the Benson Rd. driveway for south oriented trips • balancing traffic volumes between intersections • revising level of service calculations due to new trip distribution • evaluating traffic queues on Benson Rd. from the SR 515/Benson Rd. intersection • evaluating left turn lane warrants into the site access driveway from Benson Road. Trip Distribution and Assignment Figures R1 and R2 show the revised trip distribution and assignment of site generated traffic in the AM and PM peak hours. The revisions reflect a restricted access to SE 172nd St. allowing only left turns into the site and right turns out of the site. A careful design of the site access driveway should effectively eliminate most site generated trips to the west on SE 172nd St. and to the north on 106th , 105th and Cedar Ave. Also, site generated trips oriented to the south were assigned to the Benson Rd. driveway since it provides a shorter route to SR 515 than the driveway to SE 172nd Street. Page 1 TraH@w Balanced Traffic Volumes The traffic volume counts at the study intersections were taken on different days and therefore did not balance due to normal variations in daily traffic. For a more conservative analysis, the volumes were adjusted to reflect the higher count at all of the study intersections as shown in the existing counts in Figures R3 and R4. Level of Service Calculations Level of service calculations were performed using the revised trip distribution and balanced traffic counts for future conditions including site generated traffic at the study intersections and are shown in the following table. All study intersections were calculated to operate at acceptable levels of service thus meeting City of Renton requirements. The level of service worksheets are included in the technical appendix. LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY INTERSECTION AM FUTURE WITH PM FUTURE WITH PROJECT PROJECT Site AccessJ SE 172 nd SI. A 8.6 NB A 8.6 NB 108'" Ave. SElBenson Rd. SI SE 172nd SI. C 21.0 WB C 17.4 WB Site Access/Benson Rd SI 108th Ave. SE C 15.3WB C 18.4 WB Benson Rdl SR 515 B 17.5 B 11.8 XX Number shown is the average control delay in seconds per vehicle for all vehicles at a signalized intersection and for vehicles on the worst minor approach for unsignalized intersections, which determines the LOS for intersections per the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual A Indicates calculated level of service WB (westbound) Indicates direction of the minor approach for unsignalized intersections Southbound Queuing on Benson Rd from SR 515 Signal AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes for future conditions including project generated traffic were evaluated to determine if southbound queues on Benson Rd. would extend back to the site access driveway which is located approximately 400 feet to the north of the SR 515 signal. Using Synchro software to optimize signal operations, Page 2 Traff@:r the 95th percentile southbound queue is calculated to be 164 feet in the AM peak hour and 147 feet in the PM peak hour and therefore would not block the site access driveway to Benson Road. The calculation worksheets are included in the technical appendix. Tum Lane Warrant Analysis A tum lane warrant analysis using WSDOT criteria was performed to determine if a northbound left tum lane on Benson Rd. would be recommended for tums into the site access driveway. Figure R5 shows a left tum lane is not recommended based on the future PM peak hour traffic volumes. Summary. Conclusions and Recommendations This memo revises the TIA to reflect the changes in trip distribution, balanced traffic volumes, the analysis of queuing on Benson Rd and left tum lane warrants. We generally concur with the recommendations of the peer review except for the removal of the site driveway access restrictions to SE 172nd Street. We believe a properly designed access with associated signing will effectively limit site traffic from traveling to and from the west on SE 172nd St. even if the occasional vehicle circumvents the restrictions. If you have any questions, please call 425-522-4118. You may also contact us via e-mail atvince@nwtraffex.comorlarrv@nwtraffex.com. Very truly yours, Vincent J. Geglia Principal TraffEx Page 3 Larry D. Hobbs, P.E. Principal TraffEx 0% -,0, _, " I J " , 0 - <:> <:> <:> OJ> , I." 0 0-CD -0 0 ...... '\ t r r 3 <:> <:> ~ ~ Site Accessl SE 172nd AM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Enter 8 Exit 30 Total 38 Project Site '" <:> <:> 11 J> , 1.,,0 0-0 -0 0'""1 t frO 000 37 % -3 I ,lIT-Iff Ci:d« ,~ Lt+'Fi*j ::!:nkr " Site Access -5 19- <:> 0 0 OJ.) I \ ... 0 0-CD -a 19", t /-0 '" <:> <:> 108th Avel SE 172nd Site Access/ Benson Rd Avana Ridge Apartments· City of Renton t '" " <:> ~ 0 .. / ~ l,.L 5 0-CD-O 0'"", t ,."'·0 <=>00 .,enson "01 "" 010 Legend 15% Percentage of ProjectTraffic -3 AM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Revised AM Peak Hour Trip Generation and Distribution Figure R1 0% -0 1 . , 0":' ~ ~ + lj) en Q) u u « Q) -i:n co co co ) , , OJ ~ 0 0-CD -0 0''') f r'11 o co '" Site Access! SE 172nd PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Enter 30 Exit 16 Total 46 t <.C I .. ',i;' 37% -11 6- r,ITilyfn:!;'! LbX':W10 C·;'rlt~'f Project Site Access -19 10-Site ~ co co co co co 6 .• / ~ ""'LO O...J) , I.,. 'L 0 0-CD-o 0-0-0 0 .... 'i t i .... 0 10'"'., t ,.. r 0 o co co '" 0 co ~ 1 08th Ave! SE 172nd Site Access! Benson F d Avana Ridge Apartments -City of Renton t ."" ~ 0 en 4.,) , \ .. 15 0-0-0 0''''1 I r'O 000 Benson Rdl SR 515 Legend 15% Percentage of Project Traffic -3 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Revised PM Peak Hour Trip Generation and Distribution Figure R2 "'CD , CD I "~, 'i. , . ,.~. " .. Project CD Site .' ." CD Pipeline Future Project Future Existing Projects without Project Traffic with Project 000 000 0<:><:> 9'T'f> '" '" 0 ) ~ I" 0 oJ'; • 1..'1,.0 OJ.) I 1" .... 0 OJ.J l \,. .... 0 0... ~ 0'" '-0 50-CD ~48 2-CD -6 54-CD -56 0-CD-o 54-CD-56 0"', t ,r o o~"'\ t ,..ro O' "I ! r r 0 -. r 0"' .... t ,..r3 o , t , 3 '" 0 0 '" 0 0 <:> <:> <:> '" 0 ~ o 0 ~ ~ ~ '" '" '" '" .., <:> <0 ~ '" <0 ~ ~ N .... <=> <:> r--N N ~ '" <:> <:> N '" ~ 19 J ,} • \.",-4 o ... J , c~30 20-o'.J I I.. '-34 11 ... J , \_0 31... J I C ~ 34 0-0 -0 2-0 ~6 2-0-6 0-0-0 2-0-6 31"', t ,r4 0"', t ,r30 32-', t ,r 34 0"' "'\ I (r 0 32-', t ,r 34 '" '" '" '" '" r-- C> <X> <0 <=>00 <=> <X> <0 '" r--'" '" -'" '" -.... .... ..,. <0 '" <X> '" C> '" '" '" '" '" o '" '" '" '" N '" 0 '" o '" '" O...J J l \.. ..... 6 OJ') • \,.1\..0 0 .. / I 1..\,.6 OJ') I I.. \.. 0 0 .... .) I I.... \... 6 0-0-0 0-0-0 0-0-0 0-0-0 0-0-0 0'" t rr3 0 ...... I rro 0""" "'I 1 r r 3 19-', t ,ro 19-', t ,r 3 0 ~ 0 <:> r-'" '" '" '" '" '" 0 .., '" '" ;:;; '" '" '" cO ;;; .... '" cO .... '" <0 .., r-r-'" '" '" <0 0 '" <0 '" N " <:> -<0'" N 36 ... J I C '-475 1 .. / ~ I.. \... 6 38 ... J , c~500 0-,,) I I.. \." 5 38 ... J , c~505 262-0 -1262 0-0-0 273-0 -1313 0-0-0 273-0 -1313 0""' .... t rro 0""" t rro 0-" "I t r r 0 0"" '"\ t r r 0 0''''1 t ,..ro C> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> <:> '" '" '" Avana Ridge Apartments -City of Renton Figure AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes R3 CD ,-CD ,,, --~ I'"~ " Project G) Site '.i (1) Pipeline Future Project Future Existing Projects without Project Traffic with Project co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co o .... .J ~ 1... .... 0 0 .. / ~ \,. .... 0 0 .... .J ~ I,. 'I.. 0 oJ.} l 1..,-0 0 .... .J I 1.. .... 0 41-G) -49 7-G) -3 50-G)-54 0-G)-o 50-G) -54 0',,\ t rro 0"",,\ t rrQ 0 ..... "I I r r 0 0'"" .... I ('"""'11 0"" ""I , r"" r 11 <:> co co co co co co co 0 o 0 '" a a '" '" ..,. '" ~ '" ... a:> m ~ ~ N ..,. '" m "" N N M 00 "" ~ N '" ~ CO 0 14 .... .1 I ........ 8 0./ I \.16 15./ Ie .. 24 6,../ I \. .... 0 21 J.I I ' .. 24 0-0-1 7-0-3 7-0-4 0-0-0 7-0-4 2T" .-17 0'\ I ,'-16 28~, t ,'-34 0· .... t rrO 28~ .-34 , t , , t , ... m '" 00 '" '" "-000 '" N "- '" 0 "" M N '" '" '" "" '" '" N u:; u:; "" '" co '" '" 0 -0 0 '" '" co 0 0 CO '" '" O ... .J I !.. \.. 3 OJ.J I \,. .... 0 0 .... ..1 i 1.. .... 3 OJ.J J l.. .... 0 O .... .J I ........ 3 0-0)-0 0-0) -0 0-0)-0 (}-0)-0 0-0)-0 O~, t ,'-11 0,..... t r '0 0· .... ! ,.."'11 10~, t r'-0 10~ .-11 , I , 0 00 ..,. co '" co co 0; ... m co co '" 0; ... ..,. N ~ -'" '" '" '" '" '" co '" .". ... ~ '" N ..,. 0 N "" 0 _ ... co '" _ 0 '" ... co '" 67 J.I I ',-285 6..J) I I.. ..... 23 76J.I I ',-320 4...J.J I l..'L 15 80J J I ',-335 1127_ 0 _624 0-0-0 1173-0 -649 0-0-0 1173-0 -649 o~ .-a 0"""" t rro O' "'I t ,.. r a 0"'"' ""I I r r 0 0"" "'I f r r 0 , I , co co co co 0 0 000 co 0 0 o co co Avana Ridge Apartments -City of Renton Figure PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes R4 Avana Ridge Apartments -City of Renton Left Turn Lane Warrant Northbound Benson Rd into Site Access Figure R5 TECHNICAL APPENDIX AM FUTURE WITH PROJECT 3: Benson Rd S/10ath Ave SE & SE 172nd St 3/25/2016 I nt Delay, s/veh 3.2 Mavemen1illm!I~j!ll?~ljx~m§i5;;;~;miii~W u:.EllTh' SAllU·;t: ">I",~",,~',u;WBllilllVIIII'IIIIIIU*if"i'" "",;",;"";"~-~",,,, "n""'~"",=" ,;E'i" . ..•. ...... .• In·.;,;llllUUENIlIi·,;ll:NS .. llll. .. NBRld" .. E··n 'iESBi!!;i;i·:.~"i?'S8a Vol, vehlh 31 2 32 34 6 34 30 498 16 11 263 23 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized None None None None Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 Mvmt Flow 34 2 35 37 7 37 33 541 17 12 286 25 Conflicting Flow All 959 946 298 956 95() 550 311 0 0 559 o o Stage 1 322 322 615 615 Stage 2 637 624 341 335 Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 . Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 239 264 746 240 262 539 Stage 1 694 655 482 485 Stage 2 469 481 678 646 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 HCM Control Delay, S HCMLOS 210 210 668 414 19 C 250 746 250 646 463 218 249 539 218 249 464 467 635 637 21 C 4.1 2.2 1261 1261 0.4 M·I··n'CJIJl.·. ' •. "'W'it""fiif~.· •.. • .. "'_.·.···.· .. •.·.· .••........•.•. ............. .. '. .... ,,; n . y ..... ~. .. '. ...... E""'" ..... ,.'" . iIIlll.l:l~''''.'''' E;NBL:.; NBl:,;;' NB~EE!1Jl1"""',1 .'l"eLlsal1:m~<m':·im;:!ii1. . Capacity (veh/h) HCM Lane VIC Ratio HCM Control Delay (s) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 3/2512016 Baseline 1261 0.026 7.9 0 A A 0.1 -327 304 1022 -0.216 0.265 0.012 19 21 8.6 0 C C A A 0.8 1 0 iiiiilW\ 4.1 2.2 1022 1022 Synchro 8 Light Report Page 1 AM FUTURE WITH PROJECT 6: Benson Rd S & Site Driveway/10ath Ave SE Intersection Int Delay, siveh Movement' ';:;VT'"'' Vol, vehlh Conflicting Peds. #lhr Sign Control RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy SIg 1 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy Pot Cap-l Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-l Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 HCM Control Delay, S HCMLOS Capacity (veh/h) HCM Lane VIC Ratio HCM Control Delay (s) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 3/25/2016 Baseline 0.5 EStY' EST ESR 0 0 19 0 0 0 Stop Stop Stop None 0 0 92 92 92 0 0 0 0 0 21 , ""Mln0i2 ~~-, 963 962 357 361 361 602 601 7.1 6.5 6.2 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 3.5 4 3.3 237 258 692 662 629 490 493 232 256 692 232 256 658 627 481 490 "If .. · .. 10.4 B 1213 0.004 8 0 A A 0 WSIL;.,.WI!T HWSR1'" .. 3 0 6 5 0 0 0 0 Stop Stop Stop Free None 0 0 92 92 92 92 0 0 0 0 3 0 7 5 "" Mli\Qr:i;,'~ >",-"!fA ... fil a19iil1,' 970 960 588 357 599 599 371 361 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 235 259 513 1213 492 494 653 629 226 257 513 1213 226 257 489 491 632 627 WB,',' >' y NSF ,'i: h', 15.3 0.1 C 692 360 995 0.03 0.027 0.002 10.4 15.3 8.6 0 B C A A 0.1 0.1 0 539 4 0 0 Free Free None 0 0 92 92 3 0 586 4 ;'>""""i:ii;T';::f~'3',~ 0 0 f8";' /' P':t/,YI"r:c ' 3/25/2016 2 328 0 0 0 0 Free Free Free None 0 0 92 92 92 0 2 0 2 357 0 "'f;l8!OOl " .". :i!i:;:j 590 0 0 4.1 2.2 995 995 SB 0.1 Synchro 8 Light Report Page 3 AM FUTURE WITH PROJECT 12: Site Driveway & SE 172nd St Int Delay, s/veh Vol, vehlh Conflicting Peds, #/hr Sign Control RT Channelized Storage length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy Pot Cap-l Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-l Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 HCM Control Delay, s HCMlOS Capacity (veh/h) HCM lane VIC Ratio HCM Control Delay (s) HCM lane lOS HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 3/25/2016 Baseline 1001 0.014 8.6 A o 54 0 o 0 Free Free o o None 80 80 o 0 68 0 o o o -1546 -0.002 7.3 A o 3 0 Free 0 80 0 4 68 4.1 2.2 1546 1546 0,4 56 0 Free None 0 0 80 0 70 o 0 0 Stop 0 0 80 0 0 146 68 78 6,4 5.4 5,4 3.5 851 960 950 849 849 960 948 8.6 A 11 0 Stop None 0 80 0 14 68 6.2 3.3 1001 1001 3/25/2016 Synchro 8 light Report Page 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: SR 515/SR 515 & Benson Rd 312512016 / -+ -'-\. .; LaneGIOue >:" ' , ";<!!lii''' "EBL '.' EBT WBT .. WBR:.' sst::: SElR:' . ... Lane Configurations 'i tt tf> 'i ." Volume (vph) 38 273 1313 505 279 67 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.958 0.850 Fit Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3539 3391 0 1770 1583 Fit Permitted 0.111 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 207 3539 3391 0 1770 1583 Right Tum on Red Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 168 50 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 408 408 387 Travel Time (s) 9.3 9.3 8.8 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 40 287 1914 0 294 71 Turn Type Perm NA NA Prot Perm Protected Phases 4 8 6 Permitted Phases 4 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (5) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split(s) 40.0 40.0 40.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split(%) 66.7% 66.7% 66.7% 33.3% 33.3% Yellow Time (5) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 AlI·Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total LoslTime (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead·Lag Oplimize? Recall Mode None None None Max Max Act Effct Green (s) 36.0 36.0 36.0 16.0 16.0 Actuated glC Ratio 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.27 0.27 vic Ratio 0.32 0.14 0.91 0.62 0.16 Control Delay 14.7 5.4 18.3 26.1 9.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 14.7 5.4 18.3 26.1 9.1 LOS B A B C A Approach Delay 6.6 18.3 22.8 Approach LOS A B C Queue Length 50th (ft) 6 20 255 93 6 Queue Length 95th (ft) 29 34 #467 164 31 I ntemal Link Dist (ft) 328 328 307 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 124 2123 2101 472 458 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 312512016 Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: SR 515/SR 515 & Benson Rd -+- Storage Cap Reductn Reduced vic Ratio o 0 0 0 0 0.32 0.14 0.91 0.62 0.16 Area Type: Cycle Length: 60 Actuated Cycle Length: 60 Natural Cycle: 60 Other Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum vic Ratio: 0.91 Intersection Signal Delay: 17.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.6% Analysis Period (min) 15 Intersection LOS: B ICU Level of Service 0 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. I and Phases: 5: SR 5151SR 515 & 312512016 Baseline 312512016 Synchro 8 Light Report Page 2 PM FUTURE WITH PROJECT 3: Benson Rd S/108th Ave SE & SE 172nd St Intersection Int Delay, s/veh Vol, veh/h Conflicting Peds, #/hr Sign Control RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy Pot Cap-1 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 HCM Control Delay, s HCMLOS Capacity (veh/h) HCM Lane VIC Ratio HCM Control Delay (s) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) Baseline EBL 21 0 Stop EBT; 7 0 Stop o o EB~~d 28 0 Stop None 98 98 98 o 0 0 21 7 29 813 818 313 381 381 432 437 7.1 6.5 6.2 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 3.5 4 3.3 299 313 732 645 617 606 583 270 291 732 270 291 622 595 560 562 EB 15.5 C 1244 - "§iWBl.':'lWBTWBR . 400 34 0 Stop 4 0 Stop o o 24 0 Stop None 98 98 98 o 0 0 35 4 24 816 812 346 418 418 398 394 7.1 6.5 6.2 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 3.5 4 3.3 298 315 702 616 594 632 609 266 293 702 266 293 594 573 579 588 17.4 C 353 1205 0.029 -0.143 0.179 0.028 8 0 15.5 17.4 8.1 0 A A C C A A 0.1 0.5 0.6 0.1 NBL 35 0 Free NBI 321 0 Free a o 37 o Free None 98 98 98 o 2 0 36 328 38 327 a 4.1 2.2 1244 1244 0.7 a 33 0 Free 98 0 34 365 4.1 2.2 1205 1205 0.8 3/24/2016 294 26 0 0 Free Free None 0 a 98 98 2 0 300 27 o o Synchro 8 Light Report Page 1 PM FUTURE WITH PROJECT 6: Benson Rd S & Site Driveway/108th Ave SE 3/24/2016 Int Delay, slveh 0.7 MGVe6ti!nt:::,k~k' i::t,~>;:i ~i;iji!j:F;'::' " Eini 'Ea1ii"':tB~: Vol, vehlh 0 0 10 11 0 3 19 391 4 5 351 0 Conflicting Peds, #lhr 0 0 0 000 000 000 Sign Control Stop Stop RT Channelized Storage length Veh in Median Storage, # 0 Grade, % 0 Peak Hour Factor 88 88 Heavy Vehicles, % a a Mvmt Flow a 0 Stop None 88 a 11 Stop Stop Stop None a o 88 88 88 o 0 0 12 0 3 Mawr/Mm;~"'" '<,"Ir --, FF2£f1'Min~Al' :~;~::j;?c)o, 1ia~;;,:~ii' r:AIOOi1jiil~i¥J§L~!Fy~~5:y:i' !!;k:'::,;;, -~-"'- Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Slage2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy Pot Cap-l Maneuver Slage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Slage2 HCM Control Delay, s HCMlOS 901 902 399 906 900 410 410 490 490 491 492 416 410 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6,5 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 6.1 5.5 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 261 280 655 259 280 623 599 564 552 563 551 618 599 253 271 655 248 271 253 271 248 271 607 595 550 538 546 537 603 595 10.6 18.4 B C Capacity (vehlh) 1171 -655 284 1122 HCM lane VIC Ralio 0.018 -0.017 0.056 0.005 447 6.2 3.3 616 616 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.1 0 10.6 18.4 8.2 a HCM lane lOS A ABC A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0.1 0.2 a Baseline Free Free Free o o None 88 88 88 o 3 0 22 444 5 Free 88 a 6 Free Free None 0 0 88 88 2 0 399 0 !:i!:I:"Mal0i1~n:;~~_::_--!=~;;m: "!:j;i;ig~11~l1P"~MiiQitai~ijiii~~i; :Dl~ill 399 0 0 4.1 2.2 1171 1171 0.4 449 0 0 4.1 2.2 1122 1122 0.1 Synchro 8 Light Report Page 3 PM FUTURE WITH PROJECT 12: Site Driveway & SE 172nd St Intl!lSeetion Int Delay, slveh 1.1 Vol, vehlh Conflicting Peds, #lhr Sign Control RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow EBT EIIR 50 a a a Free Free None a a 92 92 a a 54 a 'WBl.,' WBiT'" NEllli" 11 54 a a a a Free Free Stop None a a a a a 92 92 92 a a a 12 59 a Conflicting Flow All a a 54 a 137 ~1 54 Stage 2 83 Critical Hdwy 4,1 6.4 Critical Hdwy Sig 1 5.4 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.4 Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 3.5 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1564 861 Stage 1 974 Stage 2 945 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 HCM Control Delay, s HCM LOS a Capacity (veh/h) 1019 -1564 HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0,006 -0.008 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.6 7.3 HCM Lane LOS A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) a a Baseline 1564 1,2 854 854 974 938 8.6 A NBR'., 6 a Stop None a 92 a 7 54 3.3 1019 1019 3/24/2016 " :'"',:f" Synchro 8 Light Report Page 4 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: SR 515/SR 515 & Benson Rd 3/25/2016 -- I..8neG"rOUI!' ."';ll~;"q , """':"".'iF" ····.EBi.:i:·ma:·EB'I1.II,lm··~jWBRl)jiffiL'SBI1Iim~B~.'·k£.c; :::'!l: ";·:j~;;~;;::L~::' :'::~Jtt;Kim;!i jH~~~f~Wi;!li:!lf§ll!mi!H~ Lane Configurations 'I H tTo 'I r Volume (vph) 80 1173 649 335 328 45 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Uti!. Factor 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.949 0.850 Fit Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 3539 3359 a 1770 1583 Fit Pennitted 0.193 0.950 Satd. Flow (penn) 360 3539 3359 a 1770 1583 Right Tum on Red Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 265 47 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 Link Distance (It) 408 408 387 Travel Time (5) 9.3 9.3 8.8 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 84 1235 1036 0 345 47 Tum Type Penn NA NA Prot Penn Protected Phases 4 8 6 Permitted Phases 4 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (5) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Minimum Split (5) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 Total Split (5) 29.0 29.0 29.0 21.0 21.0 Total Split (%) 58.0% 58.0% 58.0% 42.0% 42.0% Yellow Time (5) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (5) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Lost Time Adjust (5) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total LostTime (5) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Recell Mode None None None Max Max Act Effct Green (5) 23.0 23.0 23.0 17.1 17.1 Actuated glC Ratio 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.36 0.36 vic Ratio 0.49 0.73 0.59 0.55 0.08 Control Delay 20.3 13.0 8.1 17.3 4.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 20.3 13.0 8.1 17.3 4.8 LOS C B A B A Approach Delay 13.5 8.1 15.8 Approach LOS B A B Queue Length 50th (It) 14 132 69 80 a Queue Length 95th (It) #65 192 114 147 16 Internal Link Dist (It) 328 328 307 Tum Bay Length (It) Base Capacity (vph) 188 1845 1878 627 591 Starvation Cap Reductn a a a 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn a a 0 0 a Baseline Synchro 8 Light Report Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: SR 515/SR 515 & Benson Rd lane GrotJp. EBl Storage Cap Reductn 0 Reduced vic Ratio 0.45 Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 50 Actuated Cycle Length: 48.1 Natural Cycle: 50 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum vic Ratio: 0.73 Intersection Signal Delay: 11.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.3% Analysis Period (min) 15 -···EBT 0 0.67 +- ;WST,'i.,WBR 0 0.55 LSB!. S13R 0 0 0.55 0.08 Intersection LOS; B ICU Level of S8Ivice B # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Phases: 5: SR 51 Baseline 312512016 Synchro 8 Light Repert Page 2 Tra'~ Mr. Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36th St. Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Re: Avana Ridge Apartments -City of Renton Response to Traffic Comments Dear Mr. Lagers: NORTHWEST TRAFFIC EXPERTS 11110 IIIE 12cth St" #:Y~D KirklilJld. '",;,,\ 98(J'l'1 Phore: 425.522.4118 Fax: 425.:·22.4311 February 3, 2016 The purpose of this memo is to provide the following response to traffic related comments regarding the impact of Avana Ridge trips on 1 06 th Ave SE through the neighborhood to the north of the site. From existing traffic volume count patterns, the characteristics of the street network, the location of likely trip origins and destinations (employment, shopping, social and recreational opportunities), expected travel times and previous traffic studies, we have estimated approximately 10% of the site generated traffic will travel west of the site on SE 172nd St and then north on either 106th Ave SE, 105th Ave SE or 104th Ave SE. This would be 4 vehicles in the AM peak hour and 5 vehicles in the PM peak hour. The existing traffic volume on SE 172nd is 98 vehicles in the AM peak hour and 89 vehicles in the PM peak hour. The few site generated trips should not have a significant impact to existing conditions on SE 172nd St or the other streets mentioned. Several comments mentioned existing cut through traffic speeding on 1 06 th Ave. SE. The City of Renton has a program that is designed to reduce speeds on local streets that could be used there. There are two access driveways to the site. One to SE 172nd st. and one to Benson Rd. S as shown on the site plan. The Benson Rd. S driveway will allow traffic exiting the site to make a right turn to Benson Rd. S and a right turn to SR 515 to go northbound towards Renton. This would be a faster route than driving at 25 mph through the neighborhoods to the north since the speed limit on SR 515 is 40 mph. Adding an additional site driveway directly to SR 515 would be difficult since it is a state route and would need to meet several criteria per the WSDOT Design Manual including: Page 1 Traff@gr "Private access connections to the state highway system are allowed only where the property has no other reasonable access to the local road/street system or where access to the local road/street system will cause unacceptable traffic operational conditions or safety concems on that system." and, "Intersecting streets, roads, and highways are planned with a minimum spacing of Yo mile. Intersection spacing of less than Y ... mile may be allowed, but only when no reasonable alternative access exists." If you have any questions, please call 425-522-4118. You may also contact us via e-mail atvince@nwtraffex.comorlarrv@nwtraffex.com. Very truly yours, Vincent J. Geglia Principal TraffEx Page 2 Larry D. Hobbs, P.E. Principal TraffEx x x x X I X X X 1 ",I '~ ~ ~ • ~ 1 1 1 1 tJ ' ~ SW 1/4 SECTTONlVANARlbGENGE 5 E. w'M, 9 " ' "" "-«" ''-. z ~ .............. ~"--~ « -• "-~-~ "-' 1-• "-" .. ,.' . SE Il2IID 811fffT <cJ;?' j • t~~_~f! ! ------;,,:3 --'r' ,,',. / /\ I -f'i2.--=~ '1'7 ' ~_~ W~_,~U ('-~ ~,~~-,~" ... ~ ~\-~ ~ ~ST BUfl1)ING EAST BUlWING @ NOR.TH GRAPH""""" , IS '" 1fl, _ ............... -y .... CIg 8~ ___ ..--.ewoor "' ...... ......,..-G)~:.-. ~ ,~i ~ " ~,~" ..... ~, '>'« ~~ [[OOj])~~~ _ ..... A_--.""-'" o __ ~ __ '0 .0, CC,iJL __ ~ -,.. -....;;; REVlSIQI< a1Io.-r::I",,'" b .. /ir ~- r:":" I .::.::.=:. _=:111:',", ® II ii/ , 4m CIT v OF ~ RENTON 0100';09/90"':'9/'''''' Wo'" 0.",. \",1 ~ AVANA RIDGE PUD 'fR.6FF1C MIliGATlON PROPOSAl SI: 172 STREET CHANNELIZATION CONCEPT ~~~ ~11/20I~ " " " x I x x x t! t 9 , '" , < z :; < SW 1/4 s£cnoAYiAlv;tt'RfbGEANGE: 5 E:, W.M. ~ ~ i ~ • i -I BE 172ND srnEET ~...s--", ....... §i1 pi,,, ·1l ==:~~:f:-~ ~~. 4t=l~\=- WEST BUILDING " ""-., li _ CtI~_"",,,""""'Y""1>o 811 ~..__..LoooOonOorior !l>Mf.ND.cR.IjIIJ (J) EAST BU/WING I '~~'I DR. SmDNG "C;;;.fO 0 ce ; CONSULT1NGENGINEERS 1 Y 0] ------.,""---.. -c __ ._ ..... "' Ii :<,/' ~»--'-- REVISION ~ ...... = ----.. E),I,T'E: I i\PPR I --&.c AV,<WA mM.S :=:* Ja .. _T ........ ~ ..... ---x~ ., ':r. ... :::' .. = ... ,.r''':=: T -, . .~::.::- I "-- -_.-_. __ ._. SE 172NO STRER" ~7INGGlI>'r:4RI" ....z=-~= •. ® ~- I ::..;.::.. I - ~ / / I / / CITY OF RENTON Pc""r;/By;lc;";/pubne "0'" o.,t I I , / '" ..... ... @ NORTH AVANA RIDGE PUO lRAFFIC t.IIT1GATlOH f'ROPOS.IJ.. SCHOOL PEOCSTRIAN ROIJT'E IMPIl:OVEMENTS DRS PRO~CT NO. ISO" IAI-ININI 02/'2f20t~ AVANA RIDGE APARTMENTS REVISED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON Prepared for Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36th St Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Prepared by 11410 N.E. 124th St., #590 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: 425.522.4118 February 2,2016 TraFI'&zs Mr. Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36th SI. Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 NORTHWEST TRAFFIC EXPERTS 11410 NE 124th SI., #5~oJ Kirkland, 'ilA 98034 Phone: 1.25,522.'1118 Fax: '126,522<'13: I February 2, 2016 Re: Avana Ridge Apartments -City of Renton Revised Traffic Impact Analysis Dear Mr. Lagers: We are pleased to submit this revised traffic impact analysis (TIA) for the proposed Avana Ridge Apartments consisting of 74 apartment residential units. The revisions include corrected headings to Tables 1 and 2 and the addition of Figure 8 showing the distribution of daily site generated traffic volumes. The proposed project is located in the triangular area bordered by SR 515, Benson Rd Sand SE 172"d SI. in the City of Renton. Access to the site is via proposed driveways to SE 172"d SI. and Benson Rd. South. This TIA has been prepared per City of Renton guidelines and notes from the pre-application meeting. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Figure 1 is a vicinity map showing the location of the site and the surrounding major street network. Figure 2 is the preliminary site plan of the profosed 74 unit apartment complex. Vehicle access is provided by driveways to SE 172" SI. and Benson Rd. South. The anticipated horizon year for development is 2017. TRIP GENERA TION The 74 units in the proposed Avana Ridge Apartments are expected to generate the vehicular trips during an average weekday and during the street traffic peak hours as shown in the following table: Avana Ridge, LLC Page 3 TraH/1f;;f TRIP GENERATION FOR 74 UNIT AVANA RIDGE APARTMENTS Time Period Trip Rate Trips Entering Trips Exiting Total 246 246 Average Weekday 6.65 492 50% 50% AM Peak Hour 0.51 8 30 38 20% 80% PM Peak Hour 0.62 30 16 46 65% 35% A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination (exiting or entering) inside the study site. The trip generation is calculated using the average trip rates in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation. Ninth Edition, for Apartment (ITE Land Use Code 220). These trip generation values account for all site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes, including resident, visitor, and service and delivery vehicle trips. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT Figures 3 and 4 show the AM and PM peak hour site generated traffic volumes and distribution for the Avana Ridge Apartments project. The trip distribution is based on existing traffic volume count patterns, the characteristics of the street network, the location of likely trip origins and destinations (employment, shopping, social and recreational opportunities), expected travel times and previous traffic studies. EXISTING PHYSICAL CONDITIONS Street Facilities The streets in the study area are classified per the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan as follows: Benson Dr. S. (SR 515) Benson Rd. S (108th Ave SE) SE 172nd St. Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Commercial Mixed Use Frontage on SE 172nd St. has shoulders with no curb, gutter, landscape strip or sidewalks. Frontage on SR 515 has curb, gutter and sidewalk. Frontage on Benson Rd. has curb and partial sidewalk sections. Figure 5 shows the number of lanes and traffic control at the study intersections and posted speed limit. Avana Ridge, LLC Page 4 Sight ~istance TraFIil!Jx Sight distance requirements are met at the site access driveway onto SE 172nd St. and also, with vegetation trimming within the street right of way, at the site access driveway to Benson Rd. South. SE 172nd St. has a posted speed limit of 25 mph. Per American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) requirements, a design speed of 25 mph requires a stopping sight distance (SSO) of 155 feet and an intersection sight distance (ISO) of 240 ft. (for a vehicle turning right from the side street), and 2aO ft (for a vehicle turning left from the side street). The SSO and ISO is >400 ft. to the west and all the way to the 1 oath Ave. SE intersection to the east. Benson Rd. S has a posted speed limit of 35 mph. Per AASHTO requirements, a design speed of 35 mph requires a stopping sight distance (SSO) of 250 ft and an intersection sight distance (ISO) of 335 ft. (for a vehicle turning right from the side street), and 390 ft. (for a vehicle turning left from the side street). The SSO and ISO are estimated to be 360 ft. to the north with vegetation trimming within the ROW. The ESO and ISO to the south are all the way to the Benson Dr. S (SR 515) intersection. EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Traffic Volumes Figures 6 and 7 show the existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes at the study intersections. Traffic volume turning movement counts were conducted on September ih and 24th , 2015 at the study intersections and are included in the technical appendix. Per the City of Renton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development intersections and road segments that experience an increase of 5% in traffic volumes require analysis and therefore the SR 515/Benson Rd. S intersection was not included in the study. Accident Historv The latest three year accident history for the study intersections and streets in the study area was obtained from WSOOT and are included in the technical appendix. There were a total of 4 accidents recorded at the 1 oath Ave SE/SE 172nd intersection, 2 accidents at the Benson Rd. S/1 oath Ave SE intersection, 5 accidents on 1 oath Ave SE , 2 accidents on Benson Rd. Sand 1 accident on SE 172nd Street. Six of the accidents were due to inattention, 3 were due to following to close, and the rest were due to other miscellaneous driver errors and 1 operating a vehicle under the influence. Neither our field observations nor the accident history identified any obvious safety deficiencies. Avana Ridge, LLC Page 5 Level of Service Analysis TraHm';x LOS is a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic flow, and the perception of these conditions by drivers or passengers. These conditions include factors such as speed, delay, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience, and safety. Levels of service are given letter designations, from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions (free flow, little delay) and LOS F the worst (congestion, long delays). Generally, LOS A and B are high, LOS C and D are moderate and LOS E and F are low. Table 1 shows calculated levels of service (LOS) for existing and future conditions at the study intersection. The LOS's were calculated using the procedures in the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual. The LOS shown indicates overall intersection operation. At intersections, LOS is determined by the calculated average control delay per vehicle. The LOS and corresponding average control delay in seconds are as follows: TYPE OF A B C 0 E INTERSECTION Signalized < >10.0 and >20.0 and >35.0 and >55.0 and - 10.0 ~20.0 ~35.0 ~55.0 ~80.0 Stop Sign ~10. >10 and ~15 >15 and ~25 >25 and ~35 >35 and ~50 Control 0 LOS calculation worksheets are included in the technical appendix. The study intersections are calculated to operate at an acceptable LOS for existing and future conditions per City of Renton standards. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITHOUT THE PROJECT Figures 6 and 7 show projected future AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes without the project. These volumes include the existing traffic volumes, plus background traffic growth, plus pipeline project volumes from the Fieldbrook Apartments development. An annual growth factor of 2% per year was assumed per City of Renton request. The 2% per year growth factor over a two year period (totaling 4%) was added to 2015 existing traffic volumes. In addition to the growth factor, trips generated by the nearby pipeline project Fieldbrook Apartments were added to future volumes. Fieldbrook Apartments consists of 162 apartment units. Trip generation was obtained from the Fieldbrook Apartments TIA and is shown as pipeline volumes in Figures 6 and 7. F >80. 0 >50 Avana Ridge, LLC Page 6 TraH/ltx( FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT Figures 6 and 7 show the projected future AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes with the proposed project. The site generated traffic volumes were added to the 2017 future (without project) traffic volumes. Tables 1 and 2 show that the AM and PM peak hour calculated LOS for future conditions with and without the project meet the City of Renton intersection standards of LOS D or better. Signal Warrant Analysis Traffic signal warrants for new signals are contained in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (MUTCD) FHWA. The warrants are as follows: Warrant 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a Description Eight Hour Vehicular Volume Four Hour Vehicular Volumes Peak Hour Pedestrian Volume School Crossings Coordinated Signal System Crash Experience Roadway Network The primary warrant used by agencies in determining whether a signal is needed is warrant 1 (Conditions A and B). These warrants are satisfied when, for each of any a hours of an average day, certain minimum traffic volumes exist on the major and minor approaches to an intersection. Warrant 1 (Condition A) is met when the major roadway has at least 500 vehicles per hour (total of both approaches, 1 lane in each direction) and 150 vehicles per hour on the minor roadway for the same a hours. Warrant 1 (Condition B) is met when the major roadway has at least 750 vehicles per hour (total of approaches, 1 lane in each direction) and 75 vehicles per hour on the minor roadway for the same a hours. The City has requested that the traffic volumes at the 1 oath Ave SE/SE 172nd St. intersection be examined to determine if traffic signal warrants are met. The 2017 horizon year pro~ected PM peak hour traffic volumes at the intersection is 717 vehicles per hour on 10a Ave. SE (total of both approaches) and 11a vehicles per hour on SE 172nd Street. Typically, traffic volumes for the ath highest hour are 60% of the PM peak hour traffic volumes. Therefore, the ath highest hour traffic volume on 1 oath Ave. SE is 430 vehicles per hour and on SE 172nd St. 71 vehicles per hour. Avana Ridge, LLC Page 7 Tra'~ The table below presents the traffic signal warrant analysis for warrant 1 (Condition A and Condition B) for future with project traffic volume conditions. ve ra IC Igna 1 oath A SE/SE 172nd St T ffi S· IW arran t 1 Movement Projected atn Warrant 1A Warrant 1A Warrant 18 Warrant 18 Highest Hour Required Met? Required Met? Min. Vol. Min. Vol. Major 430 500 No 750 No Minor 71 150 75 The 2017 future projected traffic volumes are not anticipated to exceed the minimum traffic volumes for warrant 1A and warrant 1 B on the major street (1 oath Ave. SE) nor on the minor street (SE 172 nd St.) for eight hours on an average day. Therefore traffic signal warrant is not met and a signal is not warranted. TRAFFIC MITIGA TlON TRAFFIC MITIGA TlON REQUIREMENTS The City of Renton requires a Transportation Mitigation Fee payment of $1454.20 per apartment unit. The estimated Transportation Mitigation Fee for the 74 units of the Avana Ridge Apartments is estimated to be $107,611 (74 units x $1454.20 per unit). Frontage improvements to City of Renton standards are required on SE 172nd St. including curb, gutter, landscape strip, sidewalk and street lights. Landscape strip, sidewalk and street lights are required on Benson Rd. S. frontage. As shown on the site plan, the northern portion of the frontage on SR 515 will be improved to Renton standards with new landscape strip, sidewalk and street lights. Due to extreme slopes, a variance is requested for the southern portion of SR 515 frontage to be left as is with existing curb, gutter and sidewalk with no landscape strip. The combination of new and existing street lights on SR 515 will be designed to meet City of Renton lighting requirements. Avana Ridge, LLC Page 8 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Tra'~ We recommend that the Avana Ridge Apartments be constructed as shown on the site plan with the following traffic impact mitigation measures: • Construct frontage improvements. • Contribute the estimated Transportation Mitigation fee of approximately $107,611 to City of Renton. No other traffic mitigation should be necessary. If you have any questions, please call 425-522-4118. You may also contact us via e-mail atvince@nwtraffex.com or larry@nwtraffex.com. Very truly yours, Vincent J. Geglia Principal TraffEx /2.-2./-/5""' Larry D. Hobbs, P.E. Principal TraffEx Avana Ridge, LLC Page 9 TABLE 1 AM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY EXISTING FUTURE WITHOUT INTERSECTION 2015 PROJECT 2017 Site Accessl SE 172nd SI. NA NA 10SU' Ave. SE/Benson Rd. SI SE 172nd SI. C 16.3WB C 22.6WB Site Access/Benson Rd SI 108'" Ave. SE B 14.7WB C 15.5WB Tra'~ FUTURE WITH PROJECT 2017 A 8.8 NB C 23.3WB C 17.1 WB xx Number shown is the average control delay in seconds per vehicle for the minor approach for unsignalized intersections, which determines the LOS for intersections per the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual A Indicates calculated level of service WB (westbound) Indicates direction of the minor approach for unsignalized intersections TABLE 2 PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY EXISTING FUTURE WITHOUT FUTURE WITH INTERSECTION 2015 PROJECT 2017 PROJECT 2017 Site Access/ SE 172"d SI. NA NA A 8.8NB 108'" Ave. SE/Benson Rd. SI SE 172"d SI. B 14,2WB C 16.5WB C 17.2WB Site Access/Benson Rd SI 108'h Ave. SE B 14.3WB C 15.4 WB C 18.0WB xx Number shown is the average control delay in seconds per vehicle for the minor approach for unsignalized intersections. which determines the LOS for intersections per the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual A Indicates calculated level of service WB (westbound) Indicates direction of the minor approach for unsignalized intersections , :: :';i Project Site * -i~ I,', Avana Ridge Apartments· City of Renton Vicinity Map H' Ii """-.,-<1,, ~ .. , ,",;, ." • ,.1 Figure 1 Avana Ridge Apartments· City of Renton Site Plan / .' , , ----,----.. --~ --I i Figure 2 10% +-3 ~_ 1 Project Site Site Access! SE 172nd AM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Enter 8 Exit 30 Total 38 I /', '·;1 '," fair-ilj Ci·dJ!' ~ Lt""wl'} ',"':r(t~'r " Site Access Ivom lwei ~" II Ln Avana Ridge Apartments· City of Renton AM Peak Hour Trip Generation and Distribution t :.T Legend 15% Percentage of Project Traffic - 3 AM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Figure 3 10% - 2 1 ;;L j'! ~J ::: tI) '" ~ ~ .l!! U) Project Site 9?e 0... ,-0 0-CD-O 3......... 1 (' r 16 '" '" "" Site Accessl SE 172nd PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Enter 30 Exit 16 Total 46 I ;lmi If C j,"()e "*' LfW<1~1)·0 CeHtt:; Site Access Avana Ridge Apartments· City of Renton t Site Access! Benson Rd Legend 15% Percentage of Project Traffic - 3 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume PM Peak Hour Trip Generation and Distribution Figure 4 ;~ 25 MPH 1 1 'iT II! rj,d'! q.. LrT'Ii'l''! "~Z-'I\i':r Project Site Site Access CD Avana Ridge Apartments -City of Renton Existing Conditions -' Legend -Lane Use and Direction I Stop Sign Control XX MPH Speed Limit Figure 5 1 ' ! 1 ,~,. ;'1 --CD -, ~~·;L > ,~ ~ I/) '" l':'rTI1'1~,'~1dt' ~ Lt.'l'nntJ C::Ptll"-,,f "!r u « 2 l:i5 Project Site Access ® Site Pipeline Future Project Future Existing Projects without Project Traffic with Project <> <> <> <> C> <> C> <> <> 00<> <> <> <> OJ J l 1". .... 0 0 ... / ~ l..\o,O 0..;.) I \" ... 0 0 ...... ) , \,. '-0 OJ) ~ I". ,,-0 50-0 -48 2-0-6 54-0 -56 0-0-0 54-0 -56 0""', I r'O 0""", t ('0 0 .... "'I t r"O 1""' "'I t r r 5 1""'., t ("5 <> <> <> 000 000 O? 0 '" '" a '" ~ ~ '" " " '" ~ 0 N ~ '" '" :;:: ~ '" ..,. o 0 r--N N ~ "" <:> 0 N N 19.,' I ',-4 0.,,) I ',-30 20.,' I ',-34 8 ...... .J I I". '-0 28 J ' I ',-34 0-0-0 2-0-6 2-0-6 0-0-0 2-0-6 31', I ,'4 0', t ,'30 32-', I ,'34 5"" ... I ,..r 0 37""'., t rr34 0> '" '" 00 ... 0 O? '" N '" 0 N '" '" '" :; "" "" ~ '" '" ~ v "" '" co '" co '" N "" o '" N C> '" <> '" '" '" o '" 0 '" '" '" OJ') J 1". .... 6 OJ.J J I". "-0 o J J ~ 1,.. ..... 6 3 ... / + 1.. .... 0 3 ..... .J J I". '-6 0-CD -0 0-CD -0 0-CD-O 0-CD-O 0-CD-O 0 ..... , t ("3 0"'., I r r 0 o ""'., t r r3 11 ........ t 1'"'0 11""",,\ t rr3 0 0 o r--<> <:> 0> '" N '" 0 N :; '" "' '" '" '" Avana Ridge Apartments· City of Renton Figure AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 6 ~ " ~ " ~ I CD 1 , " , '" '" l~'ll',jY::;'ik :?1 <1> u L~ZlTH1'J ','''~''l,'r '" :i <1> -i:75 Project Site Access @ Site Pipeline Future Project Future Existing Projects without Project Traffic with Project <:> <:> <:> <:> <=> <:> 00' 0 <=> <=> <:> <=><=>0 oJ) J t..,-o oJ) J ',,-0 0 .... / ~ \,. ,,-0 0 .... / j "',,-0 0 .... / l \ ... 0 41-G) -48 7-G)-3 50-G) -53 0-G)-o 50-G) -53 O~"'I I r"-O o~ .... t r'O 0 ..... " t r'Q 3-\ f ,'16 3 -\ f ,'16 <:> 0 0 DO<=> <=> <:> <:> N <:> <0 '" o "' '" ..,. '" ... '" '" '" '" '" 00 N <=> '" '" '" ~ N ... <:> <=> N ~ N M N N "" 14 J) I l". "-8 0", ~ , , ... 16 ~ , , 3 ... / I 1..,,-0 18", ~ , ',-24 15", 0 ... 24 0-CD-1 7-0-3 7-2 -4 0-CD-o 7-0-4 27"' '17 0""', f ,'16 28""', f ,'34 3~ .... t rro 31""', f ,'34 , f , ... N <X> <=> <=> m '" M r-oo N <=> '" '" r- "" r-N M oo '" ... cO '" N N N '" oo ;:;; O;';:;LO '" " <:> ~ <:> o '" '" N M <:> '" '" '" OJ) I I,. "-3 OJ.J I \ ... 0 OJ J j I,. 'I.. 3 2 ... / i 1..,,-0 2..1) I I,. \.. 3 0-0-0 0-0)-0 0-0-0 0-0-0 0-0)-0 0""', , ,'11 O~""'I t ,.'0 0"', f ,'11 6 ..... ""'1 I ,."-0 6'·\ t ,."-11 <:> oo " 0 '" <:> 0 0; ... '" oo <=> '" '" " ... '" '" M '" '" Avana Ridge Apartments· City of Renton Figure PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 7 10% -25 SF '1 ")nci :~r. 25- Daily Traffic Volume Enter 246 Exit 246 Total 492 1 Project Site I WI:ily l~i:de '!\' t ':'i'F1W19 Cf,"ltE-f - Site Access 1081h Ave/ SE 172nd Avana Ridge Apartments -City of Renton Daily Trip Generation and Distribution Site Accessl Benson Rd Legend 15% Percentage of Proiect Traffic - 3 Daily Hour Traffic Volume Figure 8 TECHNICAL APPENDIX l'r~[la~d [,Jr' Traffex Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. l'I1(lI1~: 1253}926-6009 FAX: (253)922-7211 E-Mail: Team@TC2inc.com WBEIDBE , 1081h Wwy SE (BeJISOD Rd S) & SE 17200 St OllteofCount: ThllJll911112DlS ,L_O", R-,WM_ Chocked or-I_ Tim'. 'onISB) w •• '''':'!'~l ',"";, ",d" '''";.17';'''; ';':;:." lin""" 6:1$ A • 28 , , , II , I 6:30A 2 • " , , , " 6 • , , I • 2 , , 106 6:45 A 2 4 41 4 I 3 73 , • , , • • • • • '" 1:00 A I , 37 2 4 , 6\ \0 I , , 1 I 4 , 4 128 1:15 A 4 ... 1 4 , " 3 3 1 , I 0 3 0 , 161 7:30 A ° , 46 1 4 , '" , ° 0 0 ° 0 3 0 • "3 7:45 A 7 I so \0 1 7 12' ° , 0 , 0 , 0 , ,An 8:00 A 4 ° 6\ 5 3 7 83 ° I I ° 1 1 7 ° \0 '" 8:1~A I 1 " 1 , 4 79 , • 1 ° 1 , 4 • 9 144 8:30 A I I 50 4 , ) 95 1 ° 2 , I ° 1 , 5 165 8:45 A 3 I " 6 4 11 60 1 ° 1 , 1 1 , ° 7 164 ',0" , • " 2 2 6 67 I 3 , 0 , 4 0 ) III ,::' 26 12 m 41 " 71 940 " 6 " , 11541075 I." ,,,",' 15 I 4 I 2J' I \0 '3 I 19 I 416 1 0 4 ""«'"'" I." 4'" "" 0.71 ',83 , 172nd St 1-'-8 I I'ed II -H", " 108th Woy SE (&n •• n) 1 '" 1 " mi. , 1 .. I ~ 1..2!.J I-;;-7;1)0.\:vI to.> 8:00 ,\:\1 ° 1 , • "''' 0.'7 :'::,NSEW "1,,,1. :::: I I ...: :::::) , ::::: :: :1 u;;~~~"'~'~:::cd" :::::: : I : -; :~~;; :::: ;~;; ~' I: ;:~~ 'N~ ~~ 0 :~~.:. ~ I ~'~l::!DJc::d 0,. :::::: ~;." :::::: , o ::::: ::;:;<~-r~I~ __ ~ __ "' ,I ,I 01 , "I 0 1 31 770 770 ... . ... 0." "'0 SE I72nd St ~/,JJ}'flFl'e"k II PH. %HV .. "",,,,"'-.""''-",.~--l lh"k ". "OJ 50.0% In: no ... n lun 2.9% Oul: 770 S8 0.71 5.8% .T IConditions: I 030 I! l>r~l'~red for: Traffex \" II:' Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. I'b,,[!c: (2S3) 926-6009 FAX: (253) 922-7211 E-Mail: Team@TC2inc.00lll WHE!DBE InWnllection: l08th Way SE (Benson Rd S) '" SE 172Dd St Di!lta of Count: ThUCll9fL1!2015 L.ocatIon: RenioD. Washington CheckedB),: J= Time From North on (8~) From SO~ %'~ (NB) From East on (WD) From West on (EB) 'n ....... """""" 108th Wa SE (B<:nsan JaSti! Way SE en.ron) SE 172ndSl SE 172nd 51 ToIa' Ending at T L S R T L S R T L S R T L S R 3:15 P , 0 " l 3 3 " 3 , I 0 2 , l I 6 118 BOP 3 0 13 2 I l 76 I , 6 , , I 3 0 4 173 ~:4S P' I I " I 2 13 60 2 0 l 0 4 I 0 0 6 162 4:00 P 0 0 " 3 I 12 70 3 2 3 0 I 2 3 0 4 173 4:15 P 0 3 70 6 I 6 66 0 0 l 0 I 0 6 0 13 17. 4:30 P I 0 66 6 0 • 03 I 2 2 0 0 0 l 0 9 ll. 4:45P 2 2 " 6 I 10 " 2 • 2 0 0 0 9 0 6 '" 5:00 P I I '" 6 I 6 66 2 0 4 0 5 0 II 0 7 172 5:151' 0 0 " 6 I 13 57 0 I 2 0 2 0 7 0 , 14' 5:30 P 2 2 59 7 I 6 62 0 0 2 0 I 0 , 0 " 156 5:451' I l 69 3 I 7 36 I I 2 0 I 0 7 0 7 136 6:00P I I 60 l 0 1 11 2 0 2 0 I 0 4 0 1 ll. To'" Survey II 13 163 " II % 7<)3 19 • l4 I 20 6 67 , 36 1949 P~HDur. 3:15PM .. 4;15 PM ] "tJl (> I .. I 2S" I 14 .5 I 34 I 212 • l 1 17 , , 4 14 I 0 1 27 682 ;\ppl'O~~h 50] )14 26 41 682 ""jjV 20% 1.6% lU% , ... 2.6% rnF 0.95 0.90 0.72 0.54 0.98 mw' 1 ... 1 ~ ~ C::~::JBikC ; 1720d Sl "I m 4 4 I'"d SE modS, 1~11'l'd 0 ± "" -Bik,;" ' " 1 "I r--':'-o :Hl'. I~I r-2-.US "" .. 4:15PM ~-;-)--P~d [EJ " re~ Acnoa: N S E W I'<d " "Iml • l..:.:!:!J I il flf!' P,'d flour Volume INT01 5 , • Ijj~~: -_.'_-_. PUF %HV INT 02 0 f;B 0.54 9.8% INT03 2 , 4 c:::::;:u ~ \.'hcck WB 0,72 11.5% INT04 2 , , I .. : '"' " 090 1.6% INT05 l 3 641 1 O.t; 682 SO 0.95 2.0% INTOE 4 , 5 108" T InL 0.98 2.6% INTO 0 )conditiOIl5: I INf 08 2 2 ,,,,, INTO! I I 2 '"'' INT 10 0 :'~~ INT 11 • , INT 12 0 :~;: , 29 ISpecial Noles IN~~~ IN~~ INT09 , INT 10 2 ::~ ~! 2 21 41 01 TRA15106M 03p 1'n.:pllrcJ Ihr: Traffex Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. Phlllle: (25-' I 926-6009 FAX: (253) 922-721 I E-Mail: Teatn@TC2inc.com WBEIDBE Intersection: ll~ns()n RJ S & D":1L:i1l1l Dr S (SRSlS) Date of Count: Thurs 912412015 Location: Renton, Wubington Checked By: J~, Tmw From North an (Sa) From South on (NB) From East an (WB) From West on (EB) , ........ Tnt<rnol BensonRd S , Benson DrS (SR515 BlmlliID Dr S (SR SIS) Toto' Ending at T L S R T L S R T L S R T L S R 6:l:5A , ,. , 6 , , 0 , 2 0 302 '8 , , 31 0 '18 6:30A 0 36 0 , 0 0 0 , , , 390 54 • • ., 0 '" 6:45 A I 36 0 II 0 0 0 0 2 , 347 7. I I 43 0 '" 7:00 A , •• 0 II , , , , 6 , 3ll III , 8 " , 54' 7:1SA , " , II 0 , , 0 3 0 '" 98 2 • 60 0 '" 7:JOA , " , ,. , , , , , , '" 13' 3 II 77 0 '" 7:4SA , 69 , " , , , , • , 309 13. , 13 66 0 610 8:00 A , .. 0 , , , , , 6 , '61 "' 3 8 86 , '" 8:15 A , 37 0 " 0 , , , 7 0 227 102 I 4 87 , .72 8:30A , " 0 10 0 0 , , , , '84 " • 8 77 0 ". 8:45 A 2 70 0 II 0 0 0 , , 0 2B7 87 I 6 98 , '50 9:00 A , 43 , , , , , , 3 0 242 74 , , 99 , 473 Total S"""" 20 '" 0 "8 , , , , 61 , 3602 1115 23 " 8" 0 6337 Peak.Hour. 6:45AM 10 7:45AM T"f~1 " I 22H I () I .~5 « 1 , 1 , 1 , 221 , 1 1262 I 474 813612621' 2309 A[lproacb 2.75 , 1736 '98 2309 ~oHV 3.3% "" 1.3% 2.7% 1.1% I'HF 0.78 "'" 0.98 0.85 0.95 Benson Rd S \ T I '" I I SIO I .-----_. N B~nson Dr S (SR 515) h<l 1 __ !I ___ IBike Benson Dr S (SR 515) 110 2 l'..:J ( Gd I 1317 I P~d (I '''' I ""I Bik..:: (j : 21:181 116151 11;21 , (j IBike ~I 6:45AM to 7:-15A1-1 (I I'l'd ~ "Do A<.--: N S E W ~ /.I) l'lff" /,(:",/11 HoW" Volumfl INT01 , I PHF %HV (NT' , U 0.85 2.7% INT03 , I Ched \\'11 0.98 1.3% (NT'" ( , In: 2309 NR ,I. of. (NT' ( , O .. t: 2309 SR 0.78 3.3% INTOO ( , , Tint. 0.95 1.7% INT07 ( , Bicycles From: N S E W INU'S SlY, IE U'S WU's INTOa 2 2 4 INT01 0 0 INT09 , , 2 INT02 0 , INT 10 , INT03 , 0 INT11 I , >NT ... 0 0 fNT12 0 INTOS 0 , ,. fNToa NO BIKES , ( ISpecial Notes INT07 0 0 INTOS 0 , ~'()9 , 0 INT 10 , 0 NT 11 , 0 INT 12 , 0 01 0 'I " , , 2 0 TRA15106M reset 01a I'lcparcd for: Traffex Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. Phone: (253) 926-6009 FAX: (253) 922_721 1 E-Mail: Terun@TC2inc.com WBEIDBE Inlersection: JkllSOIl Rd S & HensonDf S (SR 5(5) Date of Count: Thun 91241201 S Location: Renton, W8lIhington Checked By: I~. Time Fram North on (58) From South on (NB) From East on (WB) From West on (EB) Interval Inte<wl Be1!IIon Rd S 0 Be1!IIOD Dr S (SR 5IS Benson Dr S (SR 5t5) Total Ending at T L S R T L S R T L S R T L S • 3:ISP 2 " 0 7 , 0 0 , • 0 m " , , 247 0 54. 3:30 P • 78 0 14 , 0 0 0 I 0 160 72 , 8 283 0 615 3:45P 0 63 • 6 0 0 , , 8 , 13! 66 0 11 29. 0 571 4:00 P 0 64 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 0 1]6 83 I I] 300 0 59' 4:1SP I 80 0 7 , , • 0 3 0 16Q 68 I , '" , '" 4:30 P I 70 0 8 0 0 0 0 3 0 146 67 0 I] 305 , 60' 4:4SP I 60 0 , 0 0 0 0 , , 136 " , , '" , 574 5:00P , 84 0 7 0 , 0 0 0 0 155 70 0 15 233 0 564 5:1SP I 73 0 , • 0 0 0 I 0 158 " , 11 'IS 0 631 5:30 P 0 70 • 7 0 0 0 0 I 0 144 64 0 " 207 0 51. S:4.5P • 72 0 11 0 , , , I 0 151 88 2 22 '" , '" 6:00 P 0 " 0 to 0 0 0 0 2 , 171 60 • 13 31. 0 627 ToO" S""'" to 864 0 98 0 0 0 0 27 0 1781 832 19 14. 333:5 0 7056 Peak Hour: 5:00PM .. 6:00PM Tollli 1 1 ~i4 1 () I 37 o I 0 I 0 I 0 , I 0 I 624 I 274 81641,12710 2400 IAppro~~h ~Il 0 898 1191 '400 %HV 0.3% •• 0.6% 0.7% 0.8% PHI' 0.94 01, 0.94 0.91 0.95 -Benson Rd S ~ T c;;:::] I us I .------. lIf ; II ;Bih~ Benson Dr S (SIl: 515) h7l ~7~ ---(J"" Ped Benson Dr S (SR 51S) ~ G::J I '" I Ped , '" I 898 I Bike: , , 22991 1""1 I~ I I !Bikc L 1191 I '-""-' ~ 5:00 PM '" 6:00PM " P~-J ''''' A ....... : N S E W ~ I.Q PHFPeak Hour Volume INTOl 0 P'HF %HV INT02 0 E8 0.91 0.7% INT03 0 rhed.: WR 0.94 0.6% INT04 1 , In: 2400 N8 01. 01. INT05 1 2 3 Out: 2400 S8 0.94 0.3% INToe 2 3 5 Tini. 0.95 0.6% INT07 0 BicyclM From: • S E W IN U's S U'S IE U's WU'. INTOB I 1 INTOl 0 0 0 INT09 I 2 3 INT02 0 0 0 INT10 0 Ii'fT03 0 0 0 INT11 0 '"''' 0 0 I INT 12 0 INT05 0 0 0 13 INT 06 0 0 0 ISpecial Notes INT07 0 0 0 INT08 0 0 0 INT09 0 0 • INT 10 0 2 • INTll 0 0 0 INT12 I , 0 0 u 01 I 01 2 0 , 0 TRA15106M reset 01 p T'r~p,\r~J rur: Traffex Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. I'hull~: C5JI9Z6-{;009 FAX: (2:53) 922-7211 E-Mail: Team@TC2inc.com WBEIDBE , BcnsunRdS & l08lhA~·c Sli Date of Count: Thurs 91241201S Renlon, Washington Ch.cked By: J~. T;"", ..... '::";;,·s'··' • .... _· ..... _··0'··' · .. ~::'::·s~ .... ' •• om' ';':::~ ,.,,,,,," 6:1:5 A 0 0 32 0 0 0 54 0 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 0 87 6:30 A 0 0 <14 0 , 0 " 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 '04 6:4SA 1 0 41 0 0 72 2 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 • II. 7:00 A • • " • J • 120 0 0 2 0 3 0 0 0 • 180 7:ISA 3 2 .2 0 0 0 102 0 0 , • 2 • • 0 • "9 7:30 A 2 0 " 0 7 0 142 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 210 7:4SA 3 0 101 0 1 0 147 0 0 0 0 , • 0 0 0 "9 8:00 A , 2 " 0 , 0 '" 0 0 2 • • 0 • • • 18. 8:1SA , 0 " 0 7 •• .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IS' 8:JOA , , 64 • 4 • 106 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 173 8:4SA 2 0 81 0 2 0 93 0 0 0 • • • 0 • 0 174 9,00 A 0 • SO • 2 0 " , 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 133 s::', 18'708.29. 1191 , 0 , 0 9 0 0 • 0 192' _H~ &4SAM '" N' AM T",,' ,1,1",10 " I • I m I 0 o I J I 0 I 6 o I 0 I 0 I 0 808._ "CO"""" 288 m 9 0 80' "'"IV '" ''''' oJ, "" 2.4% PH" 071 0.'7 0.4' ru. 0.81 Benton Rd S 1 I '''' I ~ ~ N 1------1 , __ !, ___ ,Blkc 286 I I , Ped l08tbAve SE ~. , LLJ ~ 0 ! .l ! 111 : • ..!_.!fM:c 6:45 A:\. '" 7:45 ,HI , I'cu D ,,~ Au. .. , N S E W t'ed " I Sit I , ~ I.I! PHI-" P,!ak. }[(JlI.r V(Jiume ::::: 2 2 Rike: ___ I~ __ PIIF %IIV 0 'R I nJ, oJ, :::: , , 2 G:J I ,,, I Choo' WR 10.45 of, 0 In: 808 NB 10.87 2.2% ::: 2 , 3 I '00 I Out: 808 SR 10.71 2.8% 4 4 Benson Rd S TI.L 1 0 .81 2.4% '"TO~ , , Bi.;yclea From: " S E W ICullditions: I ''''" 4 4 INT01 , 1 ''''" 0 INT 02 0 '''' " I , INT OJ 0 '''' 1 • INT 04 , , '''' " 0 INT()5 , , 17 INT 06 I , S""i., INT 07 0 INT!l8 , , """ • INT10 0 INT11 0 INT12 0 01 01 'I 05 T'rcpared. for: Traffex Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. Phone: (253) 926-6009 FAX: (25J) 922-7211 E-MIIi.l: Temn@TC2inc.com WBEIDBE Inlersection: Demon Rcl S & j !.18th Ave SE Date of Count: Thurn 91241201S Location: Renton, WashingtOn Checked By: J,~ Time From North on (SB) From South on INB) From Ea.t on (WB) From West on (Ea) Inlerval In"",,, Benson Rd S Benson RdS 108th Ave SE 0 Tota' Ending at T L S R T L S R T L S R T L S R 3:15 P 0 , 96 0 , 0 .. 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 0 168 3:30 P 4 2 90 0 , 0 74 1 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 0 168 3:4SP 0 0 68 0 4 0 " 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 151 4:00P 0 1 68 0 2 0 90 , 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 167 4:1SP 0 1 83 0 2 0 " 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 '62 4:30P 2 1 78 0 0 0 " 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 157 4:45P 0 1 71 0 , 0 " 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" 5:00P 0 0 87 0 0 0 " 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 175 S:lS P , 2 78 0 0 0 71 2 0 , 0 1 0 0 0 0 'SO 5:30 P 0 1 72 0 0 0 " 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 'SO S:45P 0 2 " 0 , 0 110 1 0 , 0 , 0 0 0 0 '" 6:00P 0 2 69 0 , 0 73 0 0 , 0 1 0 0 0 0 , .. Totol Survey 7 14 942 0 14 0 9" 16 0 20 0 7 0 0 0 0 1963 Peal Hour: 4:45PM to 5;45 PM .. Total I I j .119 , , 0 348 I 4 0 11 0 I , o I o I o I 0 690 Annro8~h 32-1 '52 14 0 .90 %HV 03% 0.3% .. ,," O.l% PHF 0.93 0.79 O.SB ,,/. 0.88 Ben~on Rd S r ". 1 I I c:::::iiU ~ l I ~~::::~~::::J8ike 319 I , " Pro l08th Ave SE 2 LU I 14 I , ! 11 I "I " II :Blkc .. ---_. GJ II 4:45 P"t1 '" 5:45 PM I I'~d II ,,~ Aera .. , N S E ,. Pc,1 " I '"~ I , ~ {,{JPHFPeakllow-VO/unu! INT01 I I Rlh:: " pnF %llV INT02 " EB ", ", INTO] 0 ~ GJ Check WB 0.58 ", INTIl4 2 2 In: .9<1 NB 0.79 0.3% INT05 2 2 r '82 I Out: 690 SB 0.93 0.3% INT06 , 4 j Benson Rd S TlnL 0.88 0.3% INT07 0 Blcycl •• From: " S E W IConditions; I INT08 , , INT01 0 INT09 2 2 INT 02 0 INT 10 0 INTO] 0 INT11 " INTIl4 , 1 2 INT 12 0 INT05 I I 13 INT06 0 ISnNiai Notes INT 07 0 INT 08 0 INT 09 0 INT 10 0 INT11 0 INT 12 2 1 , ,I ,I 2f 06 OFFICER REPORTED CRASHES THAT OCCURRED on OR in the vic/nit)! of THE FOllOWING ROAD SEGMENTS IN THE CITY OF RENTON SR 515 (aka BENSON DR, MP S.27 -5.32)@ BENSON RD /108th AVE BENSON RD /10ath AVE FROM 5R 515 (aka BENSON DR) TO 172nd 51 172nd ST FROM 106th AVE TO l08th AVE 9/1/'1.012· available 2015 (2015 dcitl1 i$ pl1rticll1nd preliminary) I./,VD1:1I.1.1 USE1iSD SiAlhS CO!)!, -~H_'I!O)N "'i'~, nus nLH C~NMrr Yi: 1.-'&:1)1.0.' DTSCO;"t'Rf 011 AS EV/fJEVCE DIST PRIMARY BLOCK I INTERSECTING REFERENCE REPORT MOST SEVERE RELATIONSHIP ROADWAY SURFACE UGHTING MV DRIVER CONT ORe AM EXISTING 3: Benson Rd S/108th Ave SE & SE 172nd St Intersection Int Delay, s/veh Movement Vol, vehlh Conflicting Peds, #lhr Sign Control RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, 0/0 Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, 0/0 MvmtFlow Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy Pot Cap-1 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, 0/0 Mov Cap-1 Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 HCM Control Delay, s HCMLOS Capacity (veh/h) HCM Lane VIC Ratio HCM Control Delay (s) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th O/Otile Q(veh) Baseline 1.5 EBL EBT EBR'" 19 0 31 0 0 0 Stop Stop Stop None 0 0 80 80 80 2 2 2 24 0 39 892 895 281 291 291 601 604 7.12 6.52 6.22 6.12 5.52 6.12 5.52 3.518 4.018 3.318 263 280 758 717 672 487 488 252 267 758 252 267 688 668 463 468 14.8 B -430 1269 0.029 7.9 A 0.1 -0.145 0 14.8 A B 0.5 'tiiWBl:t WBTWEIR 4 0 4 0 0 0 Stop Stop Stop None 0 0 80 80 80 2 2 2 5 0 5 908 901 526 598 598 310 303 7.12 6.52 6.22 6.12 5.52 6.12 5.52 3.518 4.018 3.318 256 278 552 489 491 700 664 234 265 552 234 265 469 471 660 660 16.3 C 329 1036 0.03 0.005 16.3 8.5 C A 0.1 0 0 A <'<, NBL NBT 29 416 0 0 Free Free 0 0 80 80 2 2 36 520 ·Ma!<WIi~iti 293 4.12 2.218 1269 1269 0.5 0 NBR 9 0 Free None 80 2 11 ,,,;::i:I:;:::;,!i:::: 0 10/6/2015 SSL SST SBR 4 215 19 0 0 0 Free Free Free None 0 0 80 80 80 2 2 2 5 269 24 i:imL;MWdiilljHhf:M;llmm~~i!! ';!!Iii 531 4.12 2.218 1036 1036 0.1 0 0 Synchro 8 Light Report Page 1 AM EXISTING 6: Benson Rd S & 1 Oath Ave SE Int Delay, slveh 0.2 Vol, vehlh 3 6 511 0 Confticting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free RT Channelized None None Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow o o o 81 81 2 2 4 7 o o 81 81 2 2 631 0 2 286 o 0 Free Free None o o 81 81 2 2 2 353 Confticting Flow All 989 631 0 0 631 0 Stage 1 631 Stage 2 358 Critical Hdwy 6.42 Critical Hdwy Stg1 5.42 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 274 Stage 1 530 Stage 2 707 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 273 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 273 Stage 1 530 Stage 2 705 HCM Control Delay, s HCMLOS 14.7 B 6.22 3.318 481 481 Capacity (veh/h) -384 951 HCM Lane VIC Ratio -0.029 0.003 HCM Control Delay (s) 14.7 8.8 HCM Lane LOS B A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 Baseline o A o 4.12 2.218 951 951 0.1 10/6/2015 Synchro 8 Light Report Page 2 FUTURE WITHOUT P,wJECT 3: Benson Rd S/108th Ave SE & SE 172nd St InterSection' Int Delay, siveh 3.4 Movemellt Vol, vehlh Conflicting Peds, #Ihr Sign Control RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % MvmtFlow Mlilol'lll.1lriOr iL "··· . ',;,-""" Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy Pot Cap-l Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-l Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 HCM Control Delay,s HCM LOS Capacity (vehlh) HCM Lane VIC Ratio HCM Control Delay (5) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) Baseline EBl EST 20 2 0 0 Slop Slop 0 0 80 80 2 2 25 2 MIITor2L L. 971 320 651 7.12 6.12 6,12 3.518 232 692 457 199 199 662 396 17,5 C 1256 0.03 8 A 0.1 956 320 636 6.52 5.52 5,52 4.018 258 652 472 242 242 641 451 0 A EBR. 'TWBt"WBT'WBR 32 34 6 34 0 0 0 0 Stop Stop Stop Stop None None 0 0 80 80 80 80 2 2 2 2 40 42 8 42 :';1;;:::; "EL,: Min(ji!i::IIIIIIIIi""g',TI:' 293 6.22 3.318 746 746 356 967 626 341 7.12 6.12 6.12 3.518 234 472 674 210 210 451 625 22.6 C 296 959 626 333 6.52 5.52 5.52 4.018 257 477 644 242 242 456 633 1010 0.19 0.313 0.014 17.5 22.6 8.6 C C A 0.7 1.3 0 551 6.22 3.318 534 534 0 A NBt NBt NBR 30 433 16 0 0 0 Free Free Free None 0 0 80 80 80 2 2 2 38 541 20 Mlil!1 rfLiL ' ,: <l~i::::' 305 0 0 4.12 2.218 1256 1256 0,5 101612015 SBt" SBT SBR 11 224 20 0 0 0 Free Free Free None 0 0 80 80 80 2 2 2 14 280 25 Mil(orliiilliL,I" ':0C,'''' '"'" 561 0 0 4.12 2.218 1010 1010 0.4 Synchro 8 Light Report Page 1 FUTURE WITHOUT PROJECT 6: Benson Rd S & 108th Ave SE Int slveh Vol, veh/h 3 6 539 0 2 328 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop RT Channelized None Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % MvmtFlow Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy Pot Cap-1 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 o o o 81 2 4 1075 665 410 6.42 5.42 5.42 3.518 243 511 670 81 2 7 665 6.22 3.318 460 242 460 242 511 668 Capacity (vehlh) -354 924 HCM Lane VIC Ratio -0.031 0.003 HCM Control Delay (s) 15.5 8.9 HCM Lane LOS C A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 Baseline o A Free Free None 0 0 81 81 2 2 665 0 o o Free Free None 0 0 81 81 2 2 2 405 665 0 4.12 2.218 924 924 10/6/2015 Synchro 8 Light Report Page 2 AM FUTURE WITH p, ,~JECT 3: Benson Rd S/108th Ave SE & SE 172nd St Intersection':; Int Delay, slveh Movement Vol, vehfh Conflicting Peds, #lhr Sign Control RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow M8IQtlMlno~Iii' . Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy Pot Cap-I Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-I Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 HCM Control Delay,s HCMLOS Capacity (vehlh) HCM Lane VIC Ratio HCM Control Delay (5) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) Baseline 3.8 EBL EaT 28 2 a a Stop Stop a 0 80 80 2 2 35 2 MInor2'T 982 322 660 7.12 6.12 6.12 3.518 228 690 452 195 195 658 390 19.5 C 1252 0.032 8 A 0.1 967 322 645 6.52 5.52 5.52 4.018 254 651 467 238 238 640 445 a A EBR' WBLf :WBT..WBR 37 a Stop None 80 2 46 294 6.22 3.318 745 745 - 34 6 a a Stop Stop a 0 80 80 2 2 42 8 iim01!:, Min~iiiili:iili:t» 332 981 635 346 7.12 6.12 6.12 3.518 229 467 670 203 203 445 615 23.3 C 288 971 635 336 6.52 5.52 5.52 4.018 253 472 642 237 237 450 631 1007 -0.252 0.321 0.014 19.5 23.3 8.6 C C A 1 1.3 a 34 a Stop None 80 2 42 .. 555 6.22 3.318 531 531 a A NSt NSt NBRc, 32 436 16 a a a Free Free Free None a 0 80 80 80 2 2 2 40 545 20 • ""M8!or1':!' 309 a a 4.12 2.218 1252 1252 0.5 101912015 SB~;;SBt SBR 11 224 23 a a a Free Free Free None a 0 80 80 80 2 2 2 14 280 29 ·;ml!I.Mar~:ii!:"·: ;b::g~';:;;i 565 0 a 4.12 2.218 1007 1007 0.4 Synchro 8 Ught Report Page 1 AM FUTURE WITH PROJECT 6: Benson Rd S & Site Access/1 08th Ave SE 10/9/2015 Int Delay, slveh 0.4 Vol, vehlh 3 0 11 3 0 6 2 541 0 2 333 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized None None Storage Length Vah in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor 81 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 Mvmt Flow 4 o o 81 81 2 2 o 14 o o 81 81 81 2 2 2 4 0 7 "0S0CCCCC . "",c.C.'.' .. '.'.'.'.'" I".·.' .. " ..... ',1'. c·cc c. . .·.'.1'." M u~;. ,<!\~St,,, Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy Pot Cap-I Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 HCM Control Delay, S HCMLOS 1093 1089 411 416 416 677 673 7.12 6.52 6.22 6.12 5.52 6.12 5.52 3.518 4.018 3.318 192 215 641 614 592 443 454 188 214 641 188 214 612 590 435 453 13.9 B 1096 1089 668 673 673 423 416 7.12 6.52 6.22 6.12 5.52 6.12 5.52 3.518 4.018 3.318 191 215 458 445 454 609 592 186 214 458 186 214 444 453 594 590 17.1 C Capacity (veh/h) 1148 -423 308 922 HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.002 -0.041 0.036 0.003 HCM Control Delay(s) 8.1 0 13.917.1 8.9 0 HCM Lane LOS A ABC A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 0.1 0.1 a Baseline Free Free Free o o None 81 81 81 2 2 2 2 668 a 411 4.12 2.218 1148 1148 o o o Free Free 0 0 81 81 2 2 2 411 668 0 4.12 2.218 922 922 0.1 Free None 81 2 0 a Synchro 8 Light Report Page 2 AM FUTURE WITH p, wJECT 9: Site Access & SE 172nd St Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.3 Movement Vol, veh/h Conflicting Peds, #/hr Sign Control RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehides, % Mvmt Flow Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 CMtical Hdwy CMtical Hdwy Stg 1 CMtical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy Pot Cap-1 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 HCM Control Delay,s HCMLOS ESt 54 0 Free o o .EB~' 1 0 Free None 80 80 2 2 68 o o o .. Capacity (vehlh) 961 -1532 HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.021 -0.004 .·'WBl. 5 0 Free WBt 56 0 Free None o o 80 80 2 2 6 70 69 0 4.12 2.218 1532 1532 0.6 HCM Control Delay (5) 8.8 7.4 0 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 Baseline NBL 3 o Stop o o o 80 2 4 151 68 83 6.42 5.42 5.42 3.518 841 955 940 838 838 955 936 8.8 A 13 o Stop None 80 2 16 68 6.22 3.318 995 995 10/9/2015 Synchro 8 Light Report Page 3 PM EXISTING 3: Benson Rd S/108th Ave SE & SE 172nd St Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Vol, vehlh Conflicting Peds, #lhr Sign Control RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow 14 0 27 o 0 0 Stop Stop Stop None o o 98 98 98 2 2 2 14 0 28 17 0 Stop 98 2 17 669 351 318 7.12 6.12 6.12 1 8 0 0 Stop Stop None 0 0 98 98 2 2 1 8 662 282 351 311 6.52 6.22 5.52 5.52 Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % 371 666 693 382 757 632 658 Mov Cap-1 Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 361 370 743 347 368 757 Stage 1 Stage 2 HCM Control Delay, s HCMLOS 361 370 682 660 631 609 12.1 B 347 368 644 611 665 655 14.2 B Capacity (vehlh) 1258 -546 417 1276 HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.028 -0.077 0.064 0.003 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.9 a 12.1 14.2 7.8 HCMLaneLOS A A B B A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0.2 0.2 a Baseline a A " Na~i;"i"Nst' Ni3RP;'; 34 272 8 0 0 0 Free Free Free None 0 0 98 98 98 2 2 2 35 278 8 303 0 4.12 2.218 1258 1258 10/9/2015 ;;;;;;;;"S!!!fuili;;;SSIl!i!!:ESi!!l! "';"~,,7" ,":!:> ".c,,"", ,\ 4 0 Free 98 2 4 4.12 2.218 1276 1276 283 14 0 0 Free Free None 0 0 98 98 2 2 289 14 Synchro 8 Light Report Page 1 PM EXISTING 6: Benson Rd S & 108th Ave SE Intersection Int Delay, slveh 0.3 Movement Vol, vehlh Conflicting Peds, #/hr Sign Control RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow Mal6riMlnOr' . Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 Clitical Hdwy Clitical Hdwy St9 1 Clitical Hdwy St9 2 Follow-up Hdwy Pot Cap-l Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-l Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Delay, s HCM LOS Minor Lane/Major Mvrnl" Capacity (vehlh) HCM Lane VIC Ratio HCM Control Delay (5) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) Baseline WBL 11 o Stop o o o 88 2 12 WBR 3 o Stop None 88 2 3 772 398 398 374 6.42 6.22 5.42 5.42 3.518 3.318 368 652 678 696 366 652 366 678 692 14.3 B -404 1159 -0.039 0.005 14.3 8.1 0 B A A 0.1 0 NBT NBR 348 4 0 0 Free Free None 0 0 88 88 2 2 395 5 o 0 o sal saT 5 319 0 0 Free Free None 0 0 88 88 2 2 6 362 400 0 4.12 2.218 1159 1159 10/9/2015 Synchro 8 Light Report Page 2 PM FUTURE WITHOUT PROJECT 3: Benson Rd S/10ath Ave SE & SE 172nd St Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.8 Vol, vehlh Conflicting Peds, #lhr Sign Control RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy Pot Cap-1 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 HCM Control Delay, s HCMLOS 15 7 28 34 4 24 o 0 0 0 0 0 Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop None None 98 2 15 o o 98 2 7 98 2 29 768 773 308 375 375 393 398 7.12 6.52 6.22 6.12 5.52 6.12 5.52 3.518 4.018 3.318 319 330 732 646 617 632 603 289 307 732 289 307 623 596 585 581 14.2 B 98 2 35 o o 98 2 4 98 2 24 772 762 308 379 379 393 383 7.12 6.52 6.22 6.12 5.52 6.12 5.52 3.518 4.018 3.318 317 335 732 643 615 632 612 284 312 732 284 312 620 593 580 591 16.5 C Capacity (veh/h) 1245 -443 375 1233 HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.029 -0.115 0.169 0.027 HCM Control Delay (s) 8 0 14.2 16.5 8 0 HCM Lane LOS A ABC A A HCM95th%tileQ(veh) 0.1 0.40.60.1 Baseline 10/612015 35 283 37 33 294 15 o 0 0 0 0 0 Free Free Free None 0 0 98 98 98 2 2 2 36 289 38 315 0 0 4.12 2.218 1245 1245 Free Free Free o o None 98 98 98 222 34 300 15 327 0 4.12 2.218 1233 1233 o Synchro 8 Light Report Page 1 PM FUTURE WITHOl .. 'ROJECT 6: Benson Rd S & 1 Oath Ave SE I niersectiOflJ Int Delay. slveh 0.3 Movement Vol. vehlh Conflicting Peds. #Ihr Sign Control RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage. # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % MvmtFlow MalorlMinOr Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy Pot Cap-1 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 HCM Control Delay, s HCM LOS WBt 11 a Stop a o o 88 2 12 854 447 407 6.42 5.42 5.42 3.518 329 644 672 327 327 644 667 15.4 C WBR 3 o Stop None 88 2 3 447 6.22 3.318 612 612 Capacity (vehlh) -363 1111 HCM Lane VIC Ratio -0.044 0.005 HCM Control Delay (s) 15.4 8.3 HCM Lane LOS C A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 a Baseline a A NBT: NBR d', 391 4 a a Free Free None a 0 88 88 2 2 444 5 o o o .... SBl SST 5 348 a a Free Free None a 0 88 88 2 2 6 395 449 0 4.12 2.218 1111 1111 0.1 101612015 Synchro 8 Light Report Page 2 PM FUTURE WITH PROJECT 3: Benson Rd S/10ath Ave SE & SE 172nd St Int Delay, s/veh 3 MbVement:ffi W."'j'!IT25C mm:·· ±~i EBII11,.§al!11~ifiEEl~lliii!1 Vol, veh/h Conflicting Peds, #/hr Sign Control RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 CMtical Hdwy CMtical Hdwy Stg 1 CMtical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy Pot Cap-l Maneuver stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-l Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 HCM Control Delay, S HCMLOS Capacity (veh/h) 18 7 31 0 0 0 Stop Stop Stop None 0 0 98 98 98 2 2 2 18 7 32 793 797 314 381 381 412 416 7.12 6.52 6.22 6.12 5.52 6.12 5.52 3.518 4.018 3.318 306 319 726 641 613 617 592 276 295 726 276 295 613 592 566 566 14.8 B 1234 - IliHf;ieiIWSlmfcWSl'ifiweRm25,fufu" 425 34 4 24 0 0 0 Stop Stop Stop None 0 0 98 98 98 2 2 2 35 4 24 798 790 310 397 397 401 393 7.12 6.52 6.22 6.12 5.52 6.12 5.52 3.518 4.018 3.318 304 322 730 629 603 626 606 269 297 730 269 297 601 576 571 585 17.2 C 359 1231 HCM Lane VIC Ratio HCM Control Delay (s) HCM Lane LOS 0.036 -0.134 0.176 0.027 8 0 14.8 17.2 8 0 A A B C A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0.5 0.6 0.1 Baseline Nef[;J..~Ne]§NeR¥·mJ..s 43 0 Free 98 2 44 326 4.12 2.218 1234 1234 0.9 285 37 0 0 Free Free None 0 0 98 98 2 2 291 38 o o 10/6/2015 ijll:i~BfliSsBJij:iii. sell 33 0 Free 98 2 34 329 4.12 2.218 1231 1231 296 23 0 0 Free Free None 0 0 98 98 2 2 302 23 o o Synchro 8 Light Report Page 1 PM FUTURE WITH P .• _JEeT 6: Benson Rd S & Site Access/108th Ave SE Intersection: I nt Delay. slveh 0.6 Movement" EBL EBt EBR Vol, veh/h 2 a 6 Conflicting Peds. #lhr a a a Sign Control Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized None Storage Length Veh in Median Storage. # a Grade. % a Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 Heavy Vehicles. % 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 2 a 7 Conflicting Flow All 889 889 400 Stage 1 411 411 Stage 2 478 478 Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 264 282 650 Stage 1 618 595 Stage 2 568 556 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 HCM Control Delay, s HCMLOS 259 259 611 558 EB 12.8 B 277 277 591 549 650 .. .. WBl.:WBt WBR' 11 a 3 a a a Stop Stop Stop None a a 88 88 88 2 2 2 12 a 3 891 889 456 476 476 415 413 7.12 6.52 6.22 6.12 5.52 6.12 5.52 3.518 4.018 3.318 263 282 604 570 557 615 594 256 277 604 256 277 563 550 604 590 ey,' ::~;::i;::Ii':!;:' Wi, },), '-~?f,-t>;%:;< 18 C Minorune!l.!ajoWMvl'I1F ... NB~H NBT :NBI¥EBtll.1WB!:nl! '!"SBL' sst L! __ : Capacity (veh/h) 1158 -472 292 1103 HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.009 -0.019 0.054 0.005 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.1 a 12.8 18 8.3 a HCM Lane LOS A A B C A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) a 0.1 0.2 a Baseline 10/6/2015 NBL NBT NBR SBlt SST SBR 9 399 4 5 351 2 a a a a a a Free Free Free Free Free Free None None a a a a 88 88 88 88 88 88 2 2 2 2 2 2 10 453 5 6 399 2 ",,<' Mal!;lt:i"'.'· ;iE"",'::;pp :'>p:;liii Malo~i" 1,/ SSR 401 4.12 2.218 1158 1158 lIIB 0.2 a a ¥,'"",-,- 458 4.12 2.218 1103 1103 liii":! -:~;!i!!"SBi~'0ifii 0.1 a a i'~j;r :""":;,> Synchro 8 Light Report Page 2 PM FUTURE WITH PROJECT 9: Site Access & SE 172nd St Int Delay, slveh 1.4 Vol, vehlh 50 Conflicting Peds, #lhr a Sign Control Free RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # a Grade, % a Peak Hour Factor 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 Mvmt Flow 54 3 a Free None 92 2 3 Conflicting Flow All a a Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg.1 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy Pot Cap-1 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 HCM Control Delay, S HCM LOS a Capacity (veh/h) 960 -1546 HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.009 -0.Q11 HCM Control Delay (5) 8.8 7.4 16 53 a a Free Free None a a 92 92 2 2 17 58 M8J~'.' •. """ 58 a 4.12 2.218 1546 1546 1.7 HCM Lane LOS A A a A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) a a Baseline 2 a Stop a a a 92 2 2 6 a Stop None 92 2 7 148 56 56 92 6.42 6.22 5.42 5.42 3.518 3.318 844 1011 967 932 835 1011 835 967 922 8.8 A 10/6/2015 Synchro 8 Light Report Page 3 December 22, 2015 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA Sewall Wetland Consulting. Inc. FDBox880 Fall Oty, WA '8124 RE: Wetland and Supplemental Stream Study -Avana Ridge PUD City of Renton, Washington SWC Job #15-159 Dear Justin, This report describes our observations of jurisdictional wetlands, streams and buffers on or within 100' of the proposed Avana Ridge PUD project in the City of Renton, Washington (the "site"). Above: Vicinity Map of site PNW Avanai#15-159 Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. December 22, 2015 Page 2 The site consists of an irregular shaped group of 2 parcels with a total area of 3.78 acres located within the SW Y4 of Section 29, Township 23 North, Range 5 East of the W,M. The site is undeveloped third growth forest. The site is proposed to be developed with an apartment complex with associated infrastructure. METHODOLOGY Ed Sewall of Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. inspected the site on August 4 and September 8,2015. The site was reviewed using methodology described in the Washington State Wetlands Identification Manual (WADOE, March 1997). This is the methodology currently recognized by the City of Kirkland and the State of Washington for wetland determinations and delineations. The site was also inspected using the methodology described in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987), and the Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast region Supplement (Version 2.0) dated June 24, 2010, as required by the US Army Corps of Engineers. Soil colors were identified using the 1990 Edited and Revised Edition of the Munsell Soil Color Charts (Kollmorgen Instruments Corp. 1990). OBSERVATIONS Existing Site Documentation. Prior to visiting the site, a review of several natural resource inventory maps was conducted. Resources reviewed included the Streams Study conducted by 2008 The Watershed Company, as well as a site visit with WDFW area habitat biologist Larry Fisher on September 8,2015. King County iMap website According to the King County iMap website (see Vicinity map page 1 of this report), there are no wetlands or streams on the site. National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) PNW Avanal#15-159 Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. December 22, 2015 Page 3 The NWI map depicts no wetlands or streams on or near the site. Above: NWI map of the area of the site Soil Survey According to the NRCS Soil Mapper website, the west and east sides of the site are mapped as Alderwood gravelly loam (Map units AgC) with slopes from 8-15%. Alderwood soils were formed in glacial till and are not considered "hydric" soils according to the publication Hydric Soils of the United States (USDA NTCHS Pub No.1491, 1991). PNW Avana/#15-159 Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. Above: NRCS Soil mapping of the site December 22,2015 Page 4 Wetland and Stream Study 2008 -The Watershed Company The January 25, 2008 Wetland and Stream Study (see attached) for the Cugini property (the site) was prepared and reviewed by the City at that time. The results of the study was that there was one drainage feature (Drainage/Stream A) which met stream criteria, and one (Drainage B) which did not as it was a storm water discharge. Stream A was found to be an intermittent non-fish bearing water. No wetlands were found on the site during this study. This study was reviewed and approved by the City at that time. . -~ PNW Avanal#15-159 Se\vall Wetland Consulting, Inc. December 22. 2015 Page 5 '. •. '-l~ :.--.:' ~ . ...,: .... ; __ ",,-'_>v_ ,r-. !'." .... r-.~ Above: 2008 delineation of one stream on the site by The Watershed Company Field observations Uplands The site is comprised of a west facing hillside with a linear depression through the center of the site. Storm drainage from 108th Avenue SE as well as a plat to the east drain through storm drainage pipes in the road and discharge on the east side of the site. This storm drainage runs through the site and then enters another storm drainage system on Benson Road. The site is a mix of 20-30 year old big leaf maple, cottonwood, hazelnut and sword fern. The understory has significant Himalayan blackberry coverage. Several transient camps were found on the west side of the site with associated trash and vegetation trampling. Soil pits excavated throughout the site were found to be a gravelly loam soils with colors ranging from lOYR 3/ 3-lOYR %. All were found to be dry. Wetlands PNW Avanal#15-159 Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. December 22, 2015 Page 6 As was found in the 2008 Watershed Company study, no wetlands were found on or near the site, Streams A drainage referred to as "Stream A" was delineated through the center of the site with blue flags labeled NI-NI3 and SI-SI3 marking the north and south ordinary high water marks, This drainage matches the "stream A" found in the 2008 Watershed Company report, The stream was dry during our site visits, The drainage is a swale like feature that carries storm water from several storm water sources to the east, There is no observed natural water source feeding this drainage, A site visit was conducted on September 8, 2015 with Larry Fisher, Area Habitat Biologist for WDFW for this area, The purpose of the site visit was to determine if WDFW would consider this a stream, Larry reviewed the drainage and concluded that it was not jurisdictional water or a "water of the state" from WDFW perspective (see attached email), As a result no HPA would be required if any impacts were proposed, The drainage on-site is considered a stream from the City of Renton perspective based upon past regulation of this feature as a stream, As defined in RMC 4,50,G7,a, this stream best meets the criteria of a Type Ns water due to its intermittent flow and lack of fish use, Per Renton Code section 4,50,G,2, Type Ns streams have a 50' buffer measured from the OHWM as well as a 15' BSBL measured from the edge of the buffer to any structure, Proposed Project The proposed project is the construction of an apartment complex with associated infrastructure, Due to the configuration of the Type Ns stream through the site, buffer averaging as is allowed by Code is proposed to fit the project on the site, Portions of the northhern 50' standard buffer area proposed to be reduced to 25' as allowed by Code, PNW A vanal# 15-159 Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. December 22. 2015 Page 7 In addition, a small trail crossing through the buffer and across the stream is proposed. The total area of reduced buffer is 8,83Ssf. To compensate, 8,83Ssf of buffer will be added to portions of the buffer to the east as well the north. In addition, the reduced buffer will be enhanced through removal of exotic blackberry as well as under planting native conifers. Under RMC 4.S0.H.2.b, the criteria for buffer averaging are as follows; b. Criteria for Approval of Averaged Stream Buffer: Buffer width averaging may be allowed only where the applicant demonstrates all of the following: i. There are existing physical improvements in or near the water body and associated riparian area; and There are existing roads within the buffer on both the east and west sides of the stream. ii. Buffer width averaging will result in no net loss of stream/ lake/ riparian ecological function; and The proposed buffer averaging will reduce portions of the buffer that are sloping away from the stream and are heavily covered with invasive Himalayan blackberry. Reducing the buffer in this area will not impact functions as most of the reduced buffer area slopes away from the stream thus minimizing function in this area. iii. The total area contained within the buffer after averaging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer width prior to averaging; and The total area of the averaged buffer is slightly larger than the standard SO' buffer as required by Code. The area added is 9,S27sf and the area reduced is 8,89Ssf for a net gain of 412sf iv. The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; and The proposed averaging and enhancement has been prepared utilizing the standards of best available science. PNW Avana/#15-159 Sewall Wetland Consulting. Inc. December 22, 2015 Page 8 v. Where the buffer width is reduced by averaging pursuant to this subsection, buffer enhancement shall be required. As depicted on the Avana Ridge PUD -Buffer Averaging and Enhancement Plan, the reduced portions of the buffer are proposed to be enhanced through removal of exotic blackberry and under planting the existing deciduous forest with native evergreen trees and several tall shrubs. Under RMC 4.50.CA, trails are allowed in the stream buffer as long as mitigation of impact is provided. Under RMC 4.S0.J.2 Alterations Within Streams and Lakes or Associated Buffers. a. Criteria for Administrative Approval of Transportation Crossings in Stream/ Lake or Buffer Areas: Construction of vehicular or non-vehicular transportation crossings may be permitted in accordance with an approved stream/ lake study subject to the following criteria: i. The proposed route is determined to have the least impact on the environment, while meeting City Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element requirements and standards in RMC 4-6-060; and The proposed bridged trail crossing is located within a narrow portion of the stream and in an area where no impacts to any of the structure of the stream will be impacted. ii. The crossing minimizes interruption of downstream movement of wood and gravel; and The proposed narrow bridge crossing will be above the flow path of water as well as any debris or sediments that may move in this drainage. iii. Transportation facilities in buffer areas shall not run parallel to the water body; and There are no transportation facilities proposed that are parallel to the water body. PNW A vana/# 15-159 Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. December 22, 2015 Page 9 iv. Crossings occur as near to perpendicular with the water body as possible; and The proposed crossing is perpendicular to the water body. v. Crossings are designed according to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Fish Water Crossing Design Guidelines, 2013, and the National Marine Fisheries Service Guidelines for Salmonid Passage at Stream Crossings, 2000, as may be updated, or equivalent manuals as determined by the Administrator; and The crossing will be designed to meet this manual's requirements. vi. Seasonal work windows are determined and made a condition of approval; and The crossing will be constructed in the summer when there is no flow in the channel. Since WDFW does not regulate this drainage there are no work windows required under an HPA as none is required. vii. Mitigation criteria of subsection L of this Section are met. The mitigation requirements are being met in the Avana -Buffer Averaging and Enhancement Plan. If you have any questions in regards to this report or need additional information, please feel free to contact me at (253) 859-0515 or at esewall@sewallwc.com . Sincerely, Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. Ed Sewall Senior Wetlands Ecologist PWS #212 Attached: Site Map WDFWemail The Watershed Company Study -Cugini 2008 REFERENCES PNW Avanal#15·159 Sewall Wetland Consulting. Inc. December 22, 2015 Page 10 Cowardin, L., V. Carter, F. Golet, and E. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-79-31, Washington, D. C. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y -87 -1. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Muller-Dombois, D. and H. Ellenberg. 1974. Aims and Methods of Vegetation Ecology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York, New York. Munsell Color. 1988. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Kollmorgen Instruments Corp., Baltimore, Maryland. National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. 1991. Hydric Soils of the United States. USDA Misc. PubL No. 1491. Reed, P., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). 1988. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Inland Freshwater Ecology Section, St. Petersburg, Florida. Reed, P.B. Jr. 1993. 1993 Supplement to the list of plant species that occur in wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). USFWS supplement to BioL Rpt. 88(26.9) May 1988. USDA NRCS & National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, September 1995. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States -Version 2.1 ~' .. -'.-1 -, i: WATERSHED ,.... ~:. 1 '" • \.f \..c,,,".~;\N , lanulll')' 25, 2008 CPH CoIIsultantl AIIII: Jamie Sc:htocder 733 -.,.. Ammo, Suite 100 Xirldand, WA98033 SC.,NCE , OEIW'" Rc: CUglDl Property wetland and .trpm dellgeat!on study. TWC 1W! 080102 Dearlamie, Mike Foster, Ecologist, and Ore, IobDSlOD. Sei)ior Fisbcrles BiolOJis .. made. a vilit to tile CuJini property on January 11, 2008 10 investigate 0II.Ii1e dAi!U\F'l, detr.nnine if lbcy reached Ibe tIJn:sboId of replaled IIRamJ aa:anIing to City of RenIon Cade, and, if 110, detcnDiDe.1heIr clusificatioa(s) •. We also ~ the. property for jurlJdIcIional wCtlaDdJ. 'lbc Cuainl property is iocalCd northward of the inllil'SCCtion of BeD80II Drive (SR SIS) and 1081b Way S8 IIId bas been receolly annexed mao lbc City of Renton from KiRJ County (FIpre i-aile Plan). This Ietta" SUIDIIlIIIizes !be fIDdings of Ibis study IIId detaib appIjcable federal, 1IIte, and Ioca1 wetlaDd and ItIWD resuJations. The following amy:Inntmg are included: . • Field Dclinealion Skctcb. • Weiland Detetminslion DaIa ~ . • FIgure I • CPH Site Plan wilb Walenhed Compllll)' markups • August 10, 2000 IeIIer from Srepben C. Comoy. Ph.D. of ~ County DDBS, Refenmcc AOOP0228 ... Methods The subject property wu evaluaIed for wetlands usin, mctbodolosy from lbc Wa.rhlngton Stallf W.uIand.r ldmtif/ctJtion and DIlIMaIfbn Manual (Manual) (Wasbinston ~ of EalloIY [Bc:utogy] 1997). Soil. veietation. and bydroiOJic data were IlllD(lIed at several locations 0II1be property 10 document our clctermination. We recorded data at five locations on-site. The cmlinary biBb water mark (OHWM) of a SIte8m idealified on !be subject property wu detenDined bued on !be definitioJl provided by !be WubiDaton StDtc Department of Fish and Wildlife and WAC 220-110-020(57). Areas mectin, Ibis definilion were detemlined to be !he OHWM edge. The OHWM ia localed by eun1nin, !be bed and bank physical cbaracteristica and vesetatiOlJ to ascertain In approximation of die water elevation for mean AIIIIILIl floods. 75011Il10 __ I ltiltdand. WI\ 91033 .. 425.1U.J24~ ;1425.117.8136 1 __ Schmeder, J. January 25, 20IB I'aJe 20fS One stream was flayed on sire. The OHWM of DnIinIlge ~ A" was field-flaggecl bi:ginnina at Benson Drive (SR !lIS) and extending to the no11ll poop:rty line along 108th Way sa PIags were numbered OHW I L through OHW !IlL along the left bank facing dolVllStream (!he IOIIth or east side), and OHW lR Ibrough OHW 43R a101111he right bank facing downstream (!he north or west side), The ItreaIIl was classified using pidelines in section 4-3-O!i0(L) of !he Renton MI1I1icipIe Code (RMC)-We used on-site and off-site tieId observations to c1lS11ify the subject stream FIndings '!be subject property is IDeated east of Putber CRck in !be DuwamiIIIIOIeeI Willei' Raoun:e IaWDlOry Ala (WRJA) #9. 'Ibe lite slopes generaUy from ill high point at !be II011hcast COIIICI' to ill bounduy with Bensoll Dtive South in the west. Black cottonwood (Populus trlclwctJrpa. PAC). bigleaf maple (Acer IIItICropiryllum, PACU) and ted ddet (AlnuI rwbrtl, PAC) dollli.nate the foreslM ~ of tbt subject site. with some Oregon ash '(FnuiIuu loIifolia. PACW) aad ,.rung westem red cedar c;rhuja pUcata, PAC) pre&eIIt.Salmonberry (Rub", ,qMC1IIbUiI, FAC+). osoberry (Ormlerla CIIrfJCijormlll, FAaJ) and HImalayan blackbeny (Rubus lII'IIIeIIiAcus, FACU) doJainate the undelltory, wit&. some sward fern (PcKy.rtichum IIIWIIIum, FACU) aad dewberry (Rubus uninus, FACU) preaent. Same Douglas spirea (SpUu,a dalllla.rli, FACW) borden a BIreIm cbInDe1 (illite. No jurisdictional wetlands _ Iaca=l on-sire. However. two drainages were idcDtified on-site and are Ihown on !he IICCOIIlpanyinJ site plan as Drai"!lgel "I." and ''8'', Dminage "A" (SIreIm "A") emerges froliI a piped d!ainagc system along Ihe norah_ side of 108th WaySB, \lpIItteam oftbe lite. Flow is diIched,l1OJII lOSI11 Way SE befote turDing tocrou !he central pmion of tile lite in a westerly ~ DrainIge MA" fI.ow& within a cIr.fincd cha_! 8l:IOII the site, Bowing thtough • ted akIar, bill leaf maple, and black oottonwood forest with I salmonberry, IWCId fem, ocean Spray (HolotlUc!u diJcolor. PACU), and Himalayan bladl:berry understoty. Flow euters I piped. 8)11em upon reacblng the norlheaJt side of Benson Drive (SRSU)(aeePiguR 1). , DrainIgc "B" entCra the, site from a 12-inch atorm water outfall' at the north pioperty boundary near the west pmpetty coner. The drainase cros&eIdie western tip of the site in IlOIIthwcstcrl.y dircc:tiOD as unconfined surW:e sheet flow through a Rei alder, blaek cottoawood, big leaf maple, and Otegon ash fotest. Himal&yan blaclcbeay dcvnjn·tes die understory, though sword fem, osoberry, and other lluub and groundcover Yesetation is 1110 present. Plow from Ibis drainap also enters a piped system upon reaching Benso.n Drive. and it appean !bat the Bows from. the two on-site draiJtaBes. combine within the roadWI,Y to emerge 011 the soutbwat side of the road into aa open c:hnnnel. behind lOme aplItlD.ent.!l, exteading down slope to tbe weaL Our findings regntding tbae dRinnge. are c:DlISi&teot wilb those reported by Stephen Coaroy. PhD., Senior Ecologist with King County' 8 Department of Development and EDvirolllDelltal Services in his letter to Phil Davidaon of Claremont Development CoIl1pl\lJ)', dated August 10, 2000 (alfl!Ched). .. ' Sc:brocder, J, January 25,2008 PaF30f' In that Jetter, Dr. Conroy concluded that Dmlnase ~ A" (referenced lIS flowing tIuough Lot.! 9 lind 148) WIIS ... drainaae feawe that meeIS the defiuition of a King County class 3 I~.· He indicated !hat the stream was dry thtoushoul mOIl of the sile duriog his August 8, 2000 sile visit and Ibat it was highly unlikdy that aalmoruds m1pte 10 Ibis stream read! dlllina the winter due to It=p gradients down slope and 1lck of suitable habillit on-site. He DOled !bat the IIrWn cbasmcl was wd1 defined In places. but not in othen. The King County class 3 slnlam dGfiuition in force at !be time of Dr. Conroy's loucr indica1es that be consideml. this to be a leasonal Btram. without u1monid fish we. We COIIQU' wilb Dr. Comoy'l findings. The I:OIIC5poadJng classification of this stream unda: cummt City of Renton MWlic1pnl Code (RMC) Section 4-3- 050(LXIXa)(lv), is class 4.' , Dr. Conroy also conclllded that Drainage "8" (teferenccd a f1owioS through Lot 174 In his letter) WIll "a drainage fClllUle which appears 10 convey only storm water" and that it was not a ,stream and would 110t be IeJUlated lIS a stream aecorcIiDs 10 Iben-appllcable Kina County code aectiOllS. He indicated lhallhe drainage pathway wu very poorly defined and Iilcdy OIIIy evident .In,respoase to atonn eveJIIS, and tbat loca1lOpoIiraphy ups10pe did not indicate !hat a chamIel was hisurically present At !he time of our site \'islt, DraJnaae "B" carried a fair amOlllll of flow. perhlplln tile ruge of 0.1 to 0.2 cubic, foot pet _d (cfB). lb. lids was following a sevenl·week period of appm:iably hlgber!han avenge rainfall during !be wcttat time of year. The drainap is fed by a roadside ditch exteDding along the east side of 1061h Avenue SB, which collec:t& I!Id concentrates water for • distlnce of nearly 2,000 feet. Histmcany. thla 1UIIOff would have beeu c:onsiderably lela due 10 tinsted conditiona with hip infiltIation capabI1itics. and would DOt have been collected in the ditch runnjDg a10ng 106" Aveauc 10 be diIcharged at ill pR&e1\t location. Rather, it would have either infiltrated or proc:ceded more directly OOWU &lope slona a number of pathway& and 1VOIIld not likely have been concentnted enough to form a, IIram channel at any one 1ociti0ll. Furthermore, in spite of the fairly high-observed flows. a defined channel hIlS failed to form through the leaf litter and fateSt duff slona the drainage palhway 011- Bile. Hence, we conc:or with Dr. Conroy's August 2IXXl coodusion 1hat Dlaiuge "B ft does DOt meet !he tbreshoJdof a jurisdictional atEeIm. !eatute. ' Upstream. of the site. 'In tbe ditch along the east Bide of 1061h A venue SE, IbiJ drainsge may be considenld 10 be a class S water accordiag to RMC Scc:tion 4-3-OSO(L)(l)(a)(v). However.1ICh clas S WUtel'\! are DOt RgW.toJy feantreI as defil]C!l by Ibe 2006 City of Renton Municipal Code aDd, as S1ICh, do not carry or have Rgulatory bulfeta or materially constrain site cIcvelopment. Class S waters IJlllII: be non-saImonId.-bearing and either a) flow "within an artifIcia.lly eonatructed channel where DO natural1y defined chanoel previou&ly cxiatcd. .. (as is the case Iwe), and/or b) be .... urficiaUy isolated water body less Iban ono-half (0.5) acte (e.g.. pond) DOt meeting Ibe criteria for a wetland." On-site. DraiDage "8" would not even qualify as a clua S water under this definitiOll because it does not flow throDsh a defined chlllDeI, artifW.Uy constructed or olberwi$e. Drainage "8" was DOl flagged because it waa not determined 10 be a regulated stream feature and hence does not have a defined onUnlll)' hiJh water!llllIk. " '. Sc:hn1eder. 1. January lS. 2008 l'BF4of5 We a110 '!Sessed the area flooded by Draina&e "8" for wetland characteristics. The soil III 10 Inches depth wilhin the ftooded area (_ Field Skereh, DP-I) Will I brown (IOn 413) sandy loam with no redoximorpbic features. Black collOnWOod, Himala)'lll bl.:kberry and IWOl'Ii fern domiDate the area wrrolllding the sample point. Though the area around me sample plot WIll inundated by a_half indI of sheet-flowing water from Dniaqe "B", the area WIll cIera'mIDed to DOl conrain juria:lictional wetland. The Bon-hydroph)rtle plant a.-blase IIId Bon-hydric loil 111l1li11111 the ptlllllace of iJumdaliOll and aaturated aoiIs dOlll not exterul ilno the growing --. a crila'la for jurisdic:lional \1etJlIICb. The lite also COIItIIiu otIIer _ that were AlInII:d or bid IIIl'I'aI:e seepage It the lime of 0111' visit. Soih in these &mill lII1IIe from a brown (lOYR 413) IlIIdy loalll to a very dark. gmyilh brown (IOn 312) IBDdy bam, with no redoxllllOlpblc 1eaIun!I ( .. Field SkeIch, DPl211wugh 5). Oaoberry, SWOIIl rem IIId dewberry dominam !be IIfCU around Ihese data poinIs. Soils and ve8catioo do DOt meet wetlaDd (lII'8IIletea in III)' of the _ umpled. '!'be JR8eIlCe of /1ydroIo1Y likewise appeas 19 be short-lived and Iitely does DOlaxtrllld into.1ho growiD& season. We pesume tbese ... wOllld nat axblbit lItIJlItion within the top 10 iDchea of the lOil for B ~ent dlU'lllion during !be arowiug l1l8I011 to be eoDSIdend juDadictiOlllll wetland. Local Ragulatlo~ . S1nams arc fII1IIated undel' tile Critical AmURcguhulOlll aec:tioa of !be RIde. Acc:oIdiqg to RMC 4-3-05O(L)(S)(a)(i), DraiDap "A", a c:lua 4 Itream within Iho City of Rmton lequirel a 3S-foot buffer. Additionally. "the ~g OfIidal. may require a building O£ activity IICtback from I critical area or buffer to eDI1Il'e adcquaIo proIedion of the critical areaIbuffer duriDg constraction IIIIl oqoing rnaintenalW!. of the activity. A requirement for a sedIaclc Iha1I be based on the findings of I critical area report or a peer review required for the activity. (Ord. '137.4-25-2005)" (RMC 4-3-OSO(E)(5». The RMC equires that an applicant acUust proposed site plans to avoid and/!Jl' minimi7~ impac1s 10 cdticalllleBS and their nspective tiuffen. If avoidance Is DOt reasOlllbly poslible, the IIIDdard buffer width of Stream "A" may be modified usiDg one of two pmviIIons in· die City code- RMC 4-3-O.5O(LX5Xc) O£ (d). Tm: minilll1llll buffer width II10wed for a cIus 4 IItnaI\l illS feet lIDder either of thole optioas. Buffer reduction with enhaM>tnellt may be appxoved if tile applicant demonstntcB tJat bufmr 1'UnctIons will be maintained, the action will not detlrade riparian habital, and no diIect or indirect, short-term O£ long-Iem\, advene imptu:ts to Stream A will result from a rcgulared IICtivity. The sile hu bigh potential for enhancement, jncInding Himalayan blackbeay IIlII !r8Sh removal, IIId dense planting with natiVD riparian vegetation. .Buff~ averaging may be approved if Iho applicant demonstratea. that the reduclion in the staDdard buff~ will IeS1Ilt In no l1li1 loss of function, the ~et' Is contiguous and the total. buffer area is not .n:dueed. The additional buildiDg setback may not be ~. The City of Routon may allow the on-sitll ctoIIing of StRIIIII "I.!' per RMC 4-3..()SO(L)(8Xa)(i). The proposed route must be ihown to have the least Unpact all the 1trwD. l1li(\ buffer atea, minimize iutem!ptioa of downstream movement of wood and gmvel. and should be pe!lIeDdicwar to the flow of Stream "A" wbel'I: it CfOIIeI the m=n and buffer. The Cty requln::s that such • c:rossitg must be dcslgned "according to the W uhington Deputment of Fish and Wlldlif'e FI.r1I PtJS8fJgt Design III Road Culverts, 1999, and the Natioaal Marine Fisheries -", . Sc~,J. 1anaary 25, lOO8 Pqc50fS Service Guidrlines for StJlnwnid PllSltlfle Qf Slmun Crouings, 2000, or equivalent manuals lIS detmnined by rhe Responsible Official." Impacts associated wllb the crossing must be mitigated (oDowing guidelines in RMC 4-3- OSO(L)(3)(c)(ii). "Mitlplion to IlOIlIpCDSaIe altcntions to [Sll'Cam "A'1 and associated buffets shall achieve equi valent CX' pillet biDlogic and hydrologic functions and shall include miliption for adVeRe impllCb up511AD1 ~ downslrealll of the dcveIopltlCllt proposal sile. No lid loss of ripariaa habitat or watet body fiIIIction shall be demonsln\led.· The on..ale potential to te&torc riparian babitat and buffer iuuclion through invasive weed removal and dease native plmtinp is high thmugbwt the Streu1 "A" buffer. State and Federal RetlulaUona Wedands and sl!9m.s In also n:suJatcd by the U.S. Anny Cotps of Engi_ (CO!pI) WIder section 404 of the Clean Water Act Any fiDins of Waters of the United States would liIceIy require notification and pel1IIits from rhe Cotps. Federally permiUed aclions that could lffect endsnpted species (i.e. ss1mon or bull trout) may also_require a biologicsl. IISIeSsment study and cOOsuItati.on with the U.s. PIah and WJldlife Service and/or the National Marloe Pllhaiea Service. Application for Cotps permits may IIls(nequire an iudividual 401 Watct Qua1ity Cerlification and Coastal Zone Manasement Consbtency detcrmiJ)ation from Ecology. Please DOle that the findilgs of Ibis letter, lncllJdlns stream classification and ~ buffer width predictions, arc subject to !be verification and agreement of local, state and/or federaI regulatory authorities. Plca&e call if you have anyques1ions or if we ean provide you with any additional infonnatiOll. MikeFostcr Ec:oJosist BncIosures: Pield DelinutlonSatdl Wedllad Delanllilllioll DIIa l'oIms Fi ...... I -CHP SlIc Plan 'IIith Watcnbed Compaay IIIII/tIIpI """'It 10.2000 Ieuerrs-SIepbcn C. ComIy,Ph.D.afJQngCDUIII)'DDES,RdD.-. AOOP02l& .... _---"'~---'--' .-.-- :.:.~y i 11l1li""'" db;; NIP 4"...... &1$ .Ii CUGINI PR NSON.ROAD _CIIUftY ~ ... ' .J • . '. ~:"IJ..:"".' .: ;.:.i. J~:: ~·:'i.!:.' . , -- -.t-';\"_:", .:~,:.: ~~::'.:'}.,:. "~: ~~.(.;.; .:' :::E.'.:·-=:;f··'-,· . !. :~.jj>,,:-'-:;- . .' I .•. ~<. :···-·-,···-,....~t: .. : .. ,:..:,. .... ~ .-.1...;...;----~.--~_. ~~ ~ .. ~ . ..~ tl-*ot~ .o..J 'Iii. '-' 11 . .~- I ·l .~¥f:.rtH '>C7~ . z: • .., •• , .' • " • :-1. .. . ... _~ • .. _ • :t-.. t... '." ,.-,"':i·t:l"S ---or .• ",..,1 -. '. • ..... ,,,bt,,,,. .~ .. _. "t, •• "...... " • .... 1fit..,~:,:i--.. /~ 'Dralriage US" .... '''''.... ~. ~. . J'~ ... ___ .. ~ ( figura 1 _ CPH Site Plan with Watershed markups. . \.~" ~Y'" I.~_ .. " ......... r '''~ .... .-~.'~ ... .... :. ,.'~ . ® k 'uJ ·f;r.Ltl ..=... !!! ....... "t~ ~~ . / L ':"-at.1 .. --' ltE'· ' •. ~ .. " .. '" , -it'" '9 .. ~ f " " Ed_II ",-, Date: To: "'j<tt Ed: -FiIbcr.1...any 0 (DFW)" <lany.Fishcr@dfw.wa..aov> MoadIy, September 14, 201~ 1:04 AM ~Ed Sc::wall-<.cKwllll@icwal1wc.com> RE: Radon site Page 1 of2 That iscorreet. Tl'le dra1nase fNture appears Ilkeiv to have been crelted by stormwater runoff, and an HPA will not be required for the pro~ct. LarTy FISher WDFW Area Habitat Biologist 1775 12th Ave NW Suite 201 lS$lquah, WA 98027 425-313-5683 FAX 42S-.4Z7--OS70 Cell: 425-449-6790 <'ItGlx <'ItGlx rro.: Ed sewall [~ese aIIOseouallwc.com] _ FI1day, 5." .. ",b .. 11, 2015 10,'3 AM To< PISheo-, laITy D (OM) ...,...,""'_sibe Larry, J just wanted to confirm wilb you ahat you will not require an HPA lor the CI'Ofi!iing of the storm drainage £ealun!/stream wilb. road and footbridge ahat we looked at on P"",,12923009148 earlier Ibis week. Thanks! EdSewaU SewaU Wetland Consuitinilo Inc. (2531&59-0515 OK. Ed See you about 1:30. La"v How about tund-v.t 1:.30, that will wor1c. I parted rilht where 108th connects to Benson. ld ProM: A$hrt LArry D tC>FW) _I: ThInday, ~i 03, 2015 ~'20 PM T"'~ ...,...,RE, __ Ed: I (lA meet you next Tuesd-V or Thursday, preferably early .ttemoon, like 1:.30 Is preflmed. LarTy FIsIler WDFW Am Habitlt Biolollst 177512th Ave NW Suite 201 Issaquah, WA 98027 4250313-5683 FAX 425--427-0570 Cell: 425-44!H~790 <'){OIx <1(0)>< 12/2112015 ~III: Ed Sewall [mallto:esewall@sewallwc ,com J s..t: Thssday, Septl!ntler 03, 2015 l:~ PM To: Fistle", Larry D (DFVoI) !kIhject: Renton ... larry, Page 2 of2 I want to see rt t could meet you on ~ site in Renton (Parcel 2923059148) thai has a ditch lhallooks stream like through the site. II comes oul of the stonn drain. I need to know if you would coosKicr lhis a stream so we know whether to apply for an hpa . "The: ditch enlers the northeast comer orlb: sit from road drainage and tb:n goes westerly through the site and iNO a pipe. Lei me know if and when you could meet me out there. Thanks! Ed Sewall (253) 859'{)515 12/21/2015 • ._J 4{1 10 20 40 SCALI: IN FEET CONTOUR INTERVAL: 2 FOOT SITE PLAN LEGEND i - - - - - -50' STANDARD STREAM BUFFER LIMITS _ 9,115 SF STREAM BUFFER REDUCTION I I 9,527 SF STREAM BUFFER EXPANSION .. 11,500 SF fNH"'NCfMENT PLANTINGS -SEE DfTAIL 2·1 SPLIT RAIL FENCING AT BUFFER LIMITS (1,060 lFI -SEE DETAil 2-3 CRITICAL AREA SIGf'lAGE AT BUFFER LIMITS (13 TOTAL) -SEE DETAIL 2-3 ' •• -r _. S,f .? S"S 49~ 1<J'0 . -:::/' , WEST BUILDING I ,I ~ I I I I '" O-!'~ <') PRIQR TO PLANT INSTALLATiON, CONTROL NOXIOUS WEEDS WITHIN THE HAfCHED AREA SHOWN ON THIS DHAIL. TARGET NOXIOUS WEED ~PECIE~ SHALL INCLUDE THE FOlLOWING: ALL CLASS "A", "B", AND "Cn NO)[IOUS WEEDS (INCLUDING NON_REGULAnO "8" AND He NQ){IOUS WEEDS) IDENTIFIED ON THE [Amy kiNG COUNTY NOXIOUS WEED LIST. DURING NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL WORK, EXISTING NATIVE VEGETATION SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM DAMAGE ALL NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL CUTTINGS AND DEBRIS SHALL OE REMOVED FROM THE SITE. CONTROl MHHODS; "" \V 1. REDUCE TOP GROWTH OF NOXIOUS WEEDS ACCEPTABLE METHODS INClUDE: WALK BEHIND OR TRACTOR MOUNTED MOWER, EXCAVATOR WITH BUCKET AND THUMB. POWER SAW, BRUSH HOG, LINE TRIMMER, LOPPERS, CLIPPERS, HAND PULLING, OR APPROVED EQUAL GRUB OliT LARGE ROOT CROWNS AND MAJOR ROOTS BY HAND USING CLAW MAnOCI(, PULASKI. OR APPROVED EQUAL 3. S-POT APPLY RODEO" HERBICIDE TO RE·GROWTH. HERBICIDE SHALL BE APPLIED BY A WASHINGTON STATE LICENSED COMMERCIAL APPLICATOR HAVING A CURRENT "AQUATIC" {Q) ENDORSEMENT NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL REQUIREMENTS: " '" ~ ----1~~ EAST BUILDING - , CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE: 1. fl.AG LIMITS Of PLANTING AREA 2 REQUEST AND AnEND PRE·CONSTRUCTION MEETING WITH OWNER AND CITY OF RENTON 3. CONTROL NOXIOUS WEED SPECIES WITHIN THE AREAS SHOWN IN DETAIL 1·1 4 INSTALL NATIVE PLANTS (SEE SHEET 2) s. PLACE MULCH AT BASE OF Pl.ANTS (SEE SHEET 21. 6. CLEAN·UP AND DEMOfll1l2E FROM SITE. I. REQUEST FROM AND AnEND INSPECTION WITH OWNER 8. OWNER TO COMPLETE AS·BUIl[ AND SUBMIT TO CITY OF RENTON '- 9. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE 1 YEAR OF MAINTENANCE UNDER DIRECTION Of OWNER FUTURE MAINTENANCE TO BE PROVIDED BY OWNER 10.0WNER TO COMPLHE 5 YEARS OF MONITORING 0.,'- &---. GENERAL NOTES: 1 All CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH OTY OF RENTON CODES, ORDlNAN(tS, AND APPROVED PERMIT CONDITIONS 2 BEFORE THE START Of ANY CONSTRUCTION, A PRE·CONSTRUCTION MEETING MUST BE HELD BETWEEN CITY Of RENTON, THE OWNER, AND THE CONTRACTOR. 3. A COPY OF THESE PLANS MUST BE ON THE JOB SITE WHENEV£R CONSTRUCTION IS IN PROGRESS. 4 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING ADEQUA! t SAfEGUAROS, SAFITf DEVICES. PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT, Fl.AGGERS, AND ANY OTHER NEEDED ACTIONS TO PROTECT THE LIFE. HEALTH. AND SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC, AND TO PROTECT PROPERTY IN CONNECTION WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS. ANY WORK WITHIN THE TRAVELED RIGHT·Of·WAY THAT MAY INTERRUPT NORMAL TRAFFIC fLOW SHAll REQUIRE TRAFFIC CONTROl IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANY AND ALL CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS 5 SITE CONDITIONS MAY VARY BASED ON SEASON AND/OR TIME OF VOAR CONTRACTOR SHALL ACCOMMODATE REALIZED AND ANTICIPATED \ITF r:ONDITIONS WHEN COMPLETING THE WORK SHOWN ON THIS PLAN \ " MITIGATION PLAN SHEET INDEX: SHEET NUMBER DESCRIPTION SITE PLAN, NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL, NOTES PLANTING PLAN, MONITORING & MAINTENANCE MITIGATION PLAN NOTES: 1 THE BOUNDARY/TOPOGRAPHIC MAP AND SITE PLAN USED TO GENERATE THIS PLAN WAS PROVIDED BY OR STRONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS. INC. (5l0 7TH AVE· KIRKLAND. WASHINGTON 98011. SOURCE DRAWINGS HAVE BEEN MODIFIED fOR VISUAL ENHA)jCEMENT. MAP DATE REFERENCE: 11/21/2015 " Know what's below. Callb.1<n you dg. UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROX'MAT£. UTILITY LO:ATlONS AND CHARACTERISTICS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING. IF ANY, ARE BASED ON THE FIELD LOCATION Of THE APPARENT SURFACE EVIDENCE Of EXISTING STRUCTURES. THE UNDERGROUND ROUTING AND CONDITION OF BURIED UTIliTIES HAS NOT BEEN VERifiED OR CONFIRMED AODITIONAL UTILITY LOCATION AND MAPPING MAY BE REQUIRED FIELD LOC.ATE. VERifY DEPTH OF, AND AD:QUATELY PROTECT ALL UTILITIES PRIOR TO THE START OF WORK 8 a f .; .E .. . .§ :; ~ ~ 0 u " ~ '" ;:: " ;;: '" ~ " '" z :3 Q. Z 0 i= <t c c ~ ::J 0 _ 0.. ~ .... ~:c -.. ~ :E "t> '" .-;;: a:, <t fa § LI.I c ~ 0::: ~ ~ <t« ....I ~ i= iii: u g z ~ " z II , ~ • " , 1 • • .~ j g ! • ~ ~ I~ II DATE: 12/lS/l01S JOB NLJMBI'R. 15·1S9 DESIGN BY ES DRAWN B¥ EARC CHECK BV· lS 0 ('; '" '" '" ;;: ,,' u c ~ '" ~" vi":: '" ~ z ~ -. 9::;; 0, ::c 0; ;;: ~ zv; "-~ <l; M w ~ ~ "-"' '" I I Site Plan, Noxious Weed Control, Notes SHEET 1 m 2 • • MONI ING PLAN & MAINTENANCE PLAN .......asE Of AND NEm FOR PlAN: IN AODlTIOH TO THE DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS REGARDING PLANT COMMUNITY CONDmoNS, PHOTOGRAPHS OF ENHANCED STREAM BUfFER AREAS SHAll BE TAKEN fROM THE PERMANENT PHOTO POINTS ESTABUSHEO DURING THf AS-BUILT. THE PURPOSE OFTHIS PlAN IS TO DESCRIBE THE STREAM 8UFFER MOOlflCATlON REQUIRED FOR THE COHSTAUCTION Of A PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT IPUD) LOCATED IN RENTON, WASHINGTON. PIAN GOALS. OBJECI1V8, AND P£RFOIIMAN(E STANDARDS: PIAN GOAlS, 08JECTNES, AHO PfRFORMANCf STANDARDS AR£ OUTUNED IN THE TABU BElDW. THE GOAlS AND OBJEcnvES Of THIS PLAN ARE CONSIOEREO AOIlMOWHEN THE PERFORMANCE STANOAADSARf SATISFIED. MONITOIIING PlAN (DURATION. 5 ¥UltSI: ~ SCHEDUU, IMMEOI4TnYfOUOWINGCONSTRUCnON FOLlOWING COMPtETION OFTHE WORK SHOWN ON TliIS PLAN, AQUAUFIED PROfESSIONAl. SHAU. PREPARE AN AS-BUllT. THE AS-BUILT SHAll SUMMARIZE THE COMPLETED WORKASWEll ASAlIIY DEVIATIONS FROMTH( APPROVED VERSION OF THIS PlAN. IN AUDITION TO THE AS-6UILT, BASWNE MONITOJ'lING DATA SHALL BE COlUCTED AHD P£ftMAJENT PHOTO POINTS SHAlL BE f'STA6USHEO TO DOCUMENT REPRESEHTATNE CONDtTlOHS WITHIN ENHANClD STREAM BUfFER AREAS. 8A5(U'U MONITORING DATACOU£CTED AND REPORTED WITH THE AS-BUILT SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH THAT DE5CRJBED FOR ANNUAl MONrTORlNG. THEAS-BUILT AND BASEUNE MONITORING OATA SUAlL BE SUBMITTE010 THE OTY Of II£NTOH NO lATER THAH JOGAYS FROM THE DATI THAT THE WORK SHOWN ON 1'iiiSIIiJii'""HASBEENCOM~ ANNU",,-MONITORING SOIEDUU: AMIIUAlLY FOIlS YUR5 FOUDWING PlANT INSTAllATION FOUDWINoG ACCEPTANCE OF THE AS-8UllT, ANNUAL MONITORING SHAll BE COMPlETED FOR A PERIOO OF FIVE (51 'lIARS. ANNUAL MONITORING SHAll BE COMPlETED BY A QUAUFIED PROfESSIONAl AND SHAll COMPRISE A SITE INVE511GATION AND IIfI'ORTlNG PER THE fOl.WWING INTERVAl: QUAltTII!lY OURIHGTHl FIRST YlAA fVEAIIlt FOLLOWING PLANT lHSTAUATION; AND THE PI..IRf'OSE Of THf O£rAll.£O SITE ASSESSMENTS IS TO EVALUATE CONOfTIONS WITHIN ENHAHCED 5TREAM BUfFElI AREAS PER THE UJRRENT YEJIIII'S PEIIfOItMANCl STANOAIlOS. THE fOllOWING INFORMAnOH SHAlt 8t: COLlECTED AND ASSfSS(D RflATlVE TO THE PEItfOftMANCE STAH0AR05 ESfABUSHEO FOR THE PROIEO: PlOTSOR THE RESULTS OF EACH ANNUAL MONITORING SHAll BE SUMMARIZED IN A WRlffiN REPORT AND SUBMITTED TOTHE OTYOf RENTON NO LATER THAN ~ OF THE RESPECTIVE MONITORING YEAR. CONTiNGENCY PlAN SHOULD AHf MONITORING ASSESSMENT REVEAL THAT THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR THE RESPECTIVE YEAR ARE NOT SATISfiED, THE PERMITTEf SHAll. WOIU( WITH THE an Of II1NTON TO DEVELOP ACONTINGENCY PLAN TO ADDRESS THE DEFIOENC'I'/lES). CONTINGENCY PLANS CAN INClUDE, BUT ARE NOT UMIT£D TO, THE FOLl.OWING ACTIONS: t. ADDITIONAL PlANT INSTAlLATION; 2. EROSION CONTROl.; 3. HERBIVORY PROTECTION; 4 MODIFICATION TO THE IRRIGATION REGIME; AND/OR 5. f'tANT SUB511TUTIONS OF lYPE, SIZE,. QUANTITY, AND LOCATION. SUCH CONTINGENCY PLAN SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY Of RENTON NO LATER THAN IANUAAY U OF ANY \'fAR WHEN DEflOENCIESARE DISCOVERED. UNLESS OTHE~OVED BY THE CITYOf' RENTOfli. ACTIONS SPEOFIED ON AN APPROVED CONTINGENCY PLAN MUST BE COMPLETED WITHIN 60 DAYS. IFTHE FAILURE IS SUBSTANTIAl, THE CITY Of RENTON MAY EXTEND THTCi)MPUANCE MONITORING PERIOD FOR THE STREAM 8UfFER ENHANCEMENT WORK. MAlNTENAHa P!AfII THIS SECTION PROVIDESAGENERAI. OVERVlfW Of THE MAINTENANCE PROGAAM NECESSARY TO ENSURE THE PERfORMANCE STANDARDS ESTABLISHED FOR THIS PLAN ARE SATISfiED. NOXIOUS WEED CONTROl fOLl.OWING PLANT INSTAUATION AND AT REGULAR INTERVAlS DURING THE MONITORING PERIOD, NOXIOUS WHO CONTROL SHALl.OCCUR ON A SPOT TREATMENT BASIS WITHIN THE AREAS SHOWN IN DETAIL 1-1 AND PERTHE SPEOflCATIONS DESCRIBED IN DETAIL 1·1. GENfRAl. MAINTENANCE INSTALl.ED PLANTS SHAll. BE MAINTAINED AT REGULAR INTEflVA1.5 DURING THE MONITORING PERIOO TO PROMOTE THE SUCCESSfUL EST ABUSHMENT AND VIGOROUS GROWTH OF INSTAlLED PlANTS. GENERAL MAINTfNANCE sw.Ll.INClUDE: WEEDING THE BASE Of EACH INSTAlLED PLANT. RE·APPlYING BAflK MULCH TO MAINTAIN .116-MINIMUM APPUEDTHICl(NESS- YEAR10NLV. THE PRUNING OF INSTALL£D PlANTS TO REMOVE DEAD WOOD AND PROMOTE VIGOROUS PLANT GROWTH AND PROPER FORM. THE REPlACEMfNTOF PlANTS IN DISTRESS ANDIOR THAT ARE DISEASED. THE REMOVAL OF TRASH, urrER, AHDIOR OTHER NON-OECOMPQSING DEBRIS TEMPORARY IRRIGATION TEMPORARY If\lUGATION SHAlL BE PROVIDED FOR TWO (2) GROWING SEASlJNS FOLl.OWING PlANT INSTAllATION PER THE SPEOFICATlONS SHOWN ON THIS PlAN. PLAN GOALS, OBJECTIVES, & PERFORMANCE STANDARDS GOAL: OBJECTIVE: I PERFORMANCE STANDARDS: TO 5UCCISSfULl.Y ESTABUSH A NATIVE PlANTCOUMUNITY WtTIftNTHE STREAM BUfFElI AREAS SHOWN ON THIS PlAN. TO UPofl NOXIOUS WEED SPEOE· wmtlN THE STREAM BUFFER AREAS SHOWN ON THIS PlAN TO INSTAilANO SUCCESSfULl.Y ESfABUSH DENSELY PlANTED NURSERY GROWN TREES AND SHRUBS TO PROVIDE FUU IHITIAl CONTROL OF NOXIOUS WEEO SPEOES ,!,NO THEN TO MINIMIZE THE GENERAl. PRESENCE OF NOlClOUS WEED SPfOES. PLANT QUANTITY CALCULATIONS: FOR PERMITTING PlIRPOS£S ONLY "" "" .... BUFFER ......".. .... 11,500 Sf , ... "'" . .. """" TREfS(9'OC) SHRUBS {6' oq REQUIRED PER O£SIGN GUIDfUNlS- 138 TREES U2SHRU8S 1~ SURVIVAL SY INSTALl.ED PLANT STOCKAmR THE FIRST GROWING SEASON. THIS STANDARD CAN BE ACH1EV£0 STRICTlY THROUGH SURVIVAL OR THROUGH A COMBINATION OF SURVIVAl AND PLANT REPLACEMENT. !IO% SURVIVAL SY INSTAllED PLANT SToac AfTER THE SECOND GROWING SEASON 6O%AV£RAGE COVERAGE BY NATIVE WOODY PLANT SP£OES AFTER THE fiFTH GROWING SEASON. UPTO 2O%0f THE NATIVf WOODY PLANT SPfaES COVERAGE MAY BE COMPRISED Of DESlRA8L£ NATIIiE COLONIZING SPEOES. LESS THAN 10%COVERAGE BY All ClASS "A", wSw, AND"C' NOXIOU5 WEEDS (INCLUDING NON-REGULATED 'B" AND'C' NOXIOUS WHDS) IDENTIFIED ON THE LATEST KING COUNTY NOXIOUS WHO LIST. PROPOSED IY .... 13B TREES 312 SHRUBS TOTAl 460 TOTAl 460 • LATfST EDITION OF lONG COUNlY "CRITICAL AREA MITIGATION GUIDEUNES". TEMPORARY IRRIGATION REQUIREMENTS: PLANT SCHEDULE: SYMBOL COMMOIriINNM: SOENTIFIC MAME Sl1~FORM QU""'" SPAONti ® ---DOtlGlAS-fIR 0-WESTERN REOCfOAR e ---VINE MAPLE ® -INDIAN PLUM ® ---REDLfOWER UJRRANT e -ClUSTER ROSE @ ---SALMONBERRY 9 -COMMON SNOWBERRY PSEUDOTSUGA MfNZ/£s/1 THUJA Pf./CA TA ACER CIRCINA TUM OEMtfRIA CEfIA5lFORMIS RI8ES 5ANGUIN!UM R~ PISCDCARPA RU8US5PEcrABILIS SYMPHORICARPQS AllJUS 1" MIN CAL, CONTAINERIZED " AS-SHOWtt 1" MIN CAl., CONTAINERIZED '" "-'>K>Ym 2 GALLON CONTAINERIZED " AS-SHOWN 2 GALLON CONTAINERIlED '" AS-SHOWN 2 GALLON CONTAINERIZED " AS--SHOWN Z GALLON CONTAINERIZED " AS-SHOWN 2 GALLON CONTAINERIZED " AS--SHOWN 2 GALLON CONTAINERIZED " AS-SHOWN TOTAL 460 PLANTS SHAlL BE NATIVE TO THE PAOflC NORTHWEST, PREfERABLY THE PUGET SOUND REGION Of WASHINGTON STATE. PLANTS SHAll. SE PROPAGAnD FROM NATIliE STOCK; NO CUlTII/AftS OR HORTICULTURAL VARIETIES ARE ALLOWED. PLANTS SHAlL BE NORMAL IN PATTERN Of GROWTH, HEALTIfI', WELl.-BRANCHED AND HAVE ALL LEADERS AND BUDS INTACT. TREES SHAll NOT HAve SUNSCALD5, DiSfiGURING KNOTS, flt(SH CUTS OF LIMBS, DAMAGED LEADERS, AND/OR DEFORMED T!l;UNKS. CONTAINERIZED PLANT STOQ( SHAlL BE GROWN IN A CONTAINER LONG ENOUGH TO DEVElOP A ROOT SYSTEM THAT REAOIES THE EDGES OF THE CONTAINER IN WHICH IT HAS GROWN. TREES AND SHRUBS SHALL BE WEll lI.ooHOANO SHAll HAVE SUFFICIENT ROOT MASS TO HOLD TOGETHER THE SOIl, IN WHICH PLANT IS GROWING, WHEN REMOVED FROM THE POT. f------.,.-------l DOUGLAS·fIR WESHRN REOCEDAR VINE MAPLE INDIAN PLUM REDflOWEIl CURRANT CLUSTER ROSE SALMONBERRY COMMON SNOWSERRY WETTER DRIER PlANTING SQlEMAnc MOTES: PROTECT AHD ACCOMMODATE EXISTING NATlV£ VEGETATION WITHIN EACH PLANTING AREA. 1. PLANT MATERIAL QUAUTY AND LOCATIONS SHAlL8E INSPECTED BY THE PlAN DESIGNER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 3. PLANT LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. ADJUST PLANT lOCATIONS TO ACCOMMOOATE sITe CONDITIONS, TO PRESERVE AND PROTECT E)(ISTING NATIVE VEGETATION, AND/OR PER PLAN DESIGNER ATTIME OF INSTALLATION. 4. PRIOR TO PLANT INSTAUATION, CONTROL MQlClOUS WEED SPECIES seE "NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL SPECIFICATIONS' jSHEET 1). SEE DETAil 2-2 fOR PLANT INSTAlLATION DETAILS f7\ PLANTING SCHEMATIC AND PLANT SCHEDULE \V il " ~ MUlOI AT BASE Of PLANT (6" MINIMUM THICkNESS) NAnvESOll~' I ,,,,~~N;'!·~~!~~~T~~' ,I MULCH AT BASE OF PLANT !6" MINIMUM THICKNESS) f7\ \..U MIN. 1.S TIMES THE , WIDTH OF THE ROOTBAi:L' MULCH Sl'fOF1CATlON: PLACE TOP OF ROOT8ALl. liNCH ABOVE THE LEVEL OF NATIve SOIL BEFORE MULCH, POTTING SOil SHOULD BE VISIBU. BY HAND MULCH SHAll BE COMMfROAllY AVAILABLE "DOT WOOD OIP MUlOt" IWWW_PACFICTOPSOILS.COM·42S-lJ7-17'OOI.ARIIOfUSTotlPS.ClAAPPROVEDfQUAL MULOi SHAll. NOT CONTAIN RESIN, TANNIN, DR OTHER COMPOUNDS IN QUANTITIES THAT WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO PLANT LIFE. MULCH SHAll. NOT BE DERIVED fROM STUMP GRINDINGS AND SHAll. NOT CONTAIN SOIL HOG FUEL OR EQUAL IS NOT ACCEPTABlE. SUIl.lECTTO REVIEW BY THE PLAN DESIGNER, LOCAlARI.IOR1ST AND/OR COMMERCIAl TREE TRIMMING COMPANIES MAY BE ALTERNATIVE ACCEPTA8I.E MATERIAL SOURCES (WWW.CHlPOfIOP.INI PLANT INSTALLATION DETAILS NOSCAL£ 5' MIN. DIA. ROUGH CUT WOOD RAil- U~REAHD [TVP) CRITICAL AREA NON-BUFFER __ _ BUfFER 3'MIN. 2'MIN. 1 1\ \~~I Dill I (.flITICAL AREA FENCE ~~lr-f= =1 ~~~~~~~SIGN (DETAIL 31. 6" MIN. DIA. SQUARE OR I\~ ~~N_DU~~~Ti~~D t,V ·v' X" MINUS CRUSHED ROCK / >).., ;' BACKFILL COMPACT TO 95% SPUT RAIL FENCE NOTES: ,. , / MIN. DENSITY 1. FENCE SHAll. BE COMMEROALLY AVAILABLE POST AND RAIL SYSTEM PER THE ABOVE MIN. SPECifiCATIONS. 2. WOOD SHALL BE WESTERN REDCEDAR OR EQUAl. f7\ SPLIT RAIL FENCE AND CRITICAL AREA SIGN INSTALLATION DETAIL \.y NOSCAL£ CRITICAL AREA SIGN NOTES: 1. SIGN SHALL BE .040 INCH ALUMINUM WITH BAKED ENAMEl. 2. SIGN FACE SHALL BE A SILK SCREEN DESIGN ACC£PTA8L£ TO THE CITY OF RENTON. 3. SIGN PLATE SHALL BE GREEN IN A COLOR ACCEPTABL£ TO THE CllY OF RENTON 4 ATTACH SIGN TO fENCE USING GAlVANIZED LAG BOLTS. SIGNS SHAlt FACE AWAY FROM CRITICAL AREA BUFFER ~ u .5 ,. ~ :E " ~ ~ 0 U "0 ~ .. '" " ;: .. ~ " '" z S CI. Z a I-ex: c c ~:::> 0 "'0;, -c ~ QJ ~ -.. ~ ~" 0 .-'" a: . <C fa g LLI s::: 1:: c:: ~ ~ ex:<t ...J 5 l- ii: u • 15 z ~ o ~ ~ ~ , ~ • • ! ~ G ~ • ~ ~ " ~ a DATE: 12/2B/2015 JOB NUMBER: 1S-159 DESIGN BY: ES DRAWN BY: fARe OiECKBY, es 0 .. 0 ro '" <{ " -d u c ~-" ~ , \1\"-: '" ~ Z ~ -. 9:0 o. "" " ~ z!x ""£ <:0 ffi w ~ ~ ~ "' '" Planting Plan, Monitoring & Maintenance SHEET· 2 DC 2 I, --=0: December 22 , 2015 Ju stin Lagers Avana Ridge , LLC 9725 SE 36 th Street, Suite 214 Mercer Is la nd , Washington 98040 RE: Habitat Data Report -Avana Ridg e City of Renton , Washinb10n SWC Job #15-159 Dear Justin , Sewall Wetland Consulting. Inc. fD Box 800 Phone: 2.53-S:9-0515 Fall Gty, WA <m24 This report is in reference to the City of Renton 's requirements for a Habitat Assessment for th e Avana Ridge proj ect. Above: Vicinity Map of site Avanal#15-159 Sell,'all Wetland Consulting, fnc. December 22, 2015 Page 2 The site consists of an irregular shaped group of2 parcels with a total area of3.78 acres located within the SW :4 of Section 29, Township 23 North, Range 5 East of the W.M. The site is undeveloped third growth forest. The site is proposed to be developed with an apartment complex with associated infrastructure. Under RMC 4.50, b. Habitat Conservation Areas: Based upon subsection G6 of this Section, Habitat Conservation Areas, the City shall require a habitat/wildlife assessmentfor activities that are located within or abutting a critical habitat, defined in RMC 4-11-030, or that are adjacent to a critical habitat, and have the potential to significantly impact a critical habitat. The assessment shall determine the extent,junction and value of the critical habitat and potentialfor impacts and mitigation consistent with report requirements in RMC 4-8-120D. 6. Habitat Conservation Areas: a. Classification of Critical Habitats: Habitats that have a primary association with the documented presence of non-salmonid or salmonid species (.,ee subsection L1 of this Section and RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, for salmonid species) species proposed or listed by the Federal government or State of Washington as endangered, threatened, sensitive and/or of local importance. b. Mapping: Critical habitats are identified by lists, categories and definitions of species promulgated by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (Non-game Data System Special Animal Species) as identified in WAC 232-12-011; in the Priority Habitat and Species Program of the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife; or by rules and regulations adopted currently or hereafter by the u.s. Fish and Wildlife Sen1ice. c. Buffers: The Administrator shall require the establishment of buffer areas jor activities in, or adjacent to, habitat conservation areas when needed to protect fish and wildlife habitats of importance. Buffers shall consist olan undisturbed area of native vegetation, or areas identifiedfor restoration, established to protect the integrity, functions and values of the affected habitat. Buffer widths shall be based on: i. Type and intensity of human activity proposed to be conducted on the site and adjacent sites. ii. Recommendations contained within a habitat assessment report. Amna/#J5-J59 Sewall Wetland Consulting. lllc. December 22. 20J5 Page 3 iii. Management recommendations issued by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife WDFW Priority Habitat Website Map According to the WDFW Priority Habitat Website with Publie access layers activated, there are no priority habitats on or near the site. Thc closest feature is a wetland (purple shading) located 1,200' east of the site No state or federally listed species are identified or known to use the site. The wetland has been rated using the City of Renton methodology and is rated as a Category 2 wetland. Our review of the site did not reveal any state or federally listed species on or near the site. WADNR Natural Heritage Program A review of the information on the Washington Department of Natural Heritage program website did not reveal any high quality or mapped rare plant communities on or ncar the site. 3.2 Habitat Cover Types Ava/la/#J5-J59 Sel1!o/l Wetland Consulting, Inc. Decernber 22, 2015 Page 4 The site is immature third growth forest vegetated with a mix of big leaf maple, bitter cherry and cottonwood. Understory species include Indian plum, hazelnut, Himalayan blackberry, sword fern, and creeping blackberry. There are several transient camps that have been recently used. As a result these areas are highly degraded with trash, human waste and vegetation clearing and trampling. The stream passing through the site has degraded water quality as the primary source of flows to this feature is street runoff and stormwater facility discharges. This results in a habitat water source that is currently degraded as far as water quality. Ahove: vegetation cover type map o(the site. 3.2.1 Wildlife use and patterns The site can be characterized as an isolated patch of immature forest within a highly urbanized area. It provides habitat to a variety of human-tolerant species typically found in areas such as this to include coyote, mule deer, raccoon, opossum, eastern gray squirrel, Norway rat, bam owl, European starling, common crow, flicker, garter snake, pacific tree frog, as well as numerous songbirds and various borrowing rodents to include voles, moles and mice. The roads along the east and west sides of the site are heavily travelled roads with substantial amounts of noise and light. This further reduces the habitat value of this area. • Avullal#15-159 Set-vall Wetland COl/suiting, il1c. December 22. 2015 Page 5 No state or federally listed wildlife species were noted on or near the site. There is no evidence of habitat for any state or federally listed species. 3.1 Proposed habitat alteration The northern half of the site will be cleared for the proposed multi-family development. The habitat to be removed is generally low quality immature forest that has been fragmented by surrounding urban land uses. There will be some loss of habitat from this project. However, species displaced are common, human tolerant species that will migrate to the east to find other suitable habitat. 3.3 CONCLUSION There is no "critical habitat" as defined by Code on or near the site. There are no state, or federally listed species on or near the site. There are no rare or unique plant communities on the site. If you have any questions in regards to this report or need additional information, please feel free to contact me at (253) 859-0515 or at esewallCw,sewallwc.com . Sincerely, Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. Ed Sewall Senior Wetlands Ecologist PWS #212 , Greenforestlncorporated December 16, 2015 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA Dear Mr. lagers: You contacted me and contracted my services as a consulting arborist. My assignment is to inspect and assess the condition of surveyed trees at the above referenced site. I received a topographic survey of the site from DR Strong Consulting Engineers, showing the locations of the surveyed trees. visited the site on 10/15/15 and inspected the trees, which are the subject of this report. Neither parcel is developed. The site has a SW aspect with a stream delineated through the center of the site, east to west. Both parcels are covered in native vegetation, predominately deciduous tree species with moderate to dense lower understory. TREE INSPECTION My inspection is limited to visual observation from the subject parcels and the rights-of-way. Both health and structure were evaluated. A tree's structure is distinct from its health. Structure is the way the tree is put together or constructed, and identifying obvious defects can be helpful in determining if a tree is predisposed to failure. Health addresses disease and insect infestation. No invasive procedures were performed on any trees. The results of this inspection are based on what is visible at the time of the inspection. I identified the species of each tree, confirmed trunk diameter (DBH), estimated average dripline and rated the condition of each tree. Bigleaf maples on this site have a wide age and size range. The largest and oldest maple trees are generally in the poorest condition. A handful of bitter cherry are scattered throughout the site, and all are viable. Black cottonwoods dominate the site in numbers, and there are far more younger cottonwoods than older. The oldest and larger trees are in better condition overall. Many of cottonwoods as edge trees lean exceSSively away from the stand. Nearly all the smaller cottonwoods are very slender. Although they are healthy and have no visible defects, their trunks are too tall for 4547 South lucile Street, Seattle, WA 98118 Tel. 206-723-0656 Justin Lagers, Avana Ridge, LLC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 2 of 24 their girth, and they cannot be retained as stand-alone trees or even in small groups without an increased risk of failure. A few Oregon white ash, madrone, alder and willow are scattered among the cottonwoods. And only 12 conifers grow on the site; hemlock, fir and cedar, and all are relatively small, young trees. The table below summarizes the total trees by species, and by Dangerous or Viable. Species Douglas-fir 6 Black cottonwood 284 Bigleaf maple 109 Scouler's willow 6 Western red-cedar 4 Bitter cherry 11 Red alder 5 Oregon white ash 1 Western hemlock 2 Pacific madrone 1 429 Dangerous Trees 97 Viable Trees 332 429 The attached inventory summarizes my inspection results and provides the following information for each tree: Tree number as shown on the attached survey. DBH Stem diameter in inches measured 4.5 feet from the ground. Tree Species Common name. Dripline Average branch extension from the trunk as radius in feet. Tree Class Tree, Significant: A tree with a caliper of at least six inches (6"), or an alder or cottonwood tree with a caliper of at least eight inches (8"). Tree, Landmark: A tree with a caliper of thirty inches (30") or greater. Structure and Health rating '1' indicates no visible health-related problems or structural defects, '2' indicates minor visible problems or defects that may require attention if the tree is retained, and '3' indicates significant visible problems or defects. Trees rated a 1 or 2 are considered viable. Trees rated a 3 are considered dangerous (see below). Greenlorest @ Registered Consulting Arboris! Justin lagers, Avana Ridge, llC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 3 of 24 Dangerous or Viable? Tree, Dangerous: Any tree that has been certified via this report as dead, terminally diseased, damaged, or otherwise dangerous to persons or property; and for healthy trees, a determination whether the tree is viable for retention. Visible defects Obvious structural defects or diseases visible at time of inspection. Asymmetric canopy-the tree has an asymmetric canopy from space and light competition from adjacent trees. Branch dieback -Mature branches in canopy are dying/dead; overall low tree vigor, Bow in trunk - a trunk lean characterized by the top of the tree leaning over. (Common with edge trees) Crack -separation of wood fibers and predisposed to failure. Dead -tree is dead. Deadwood -large and/or multiple dead branches throughout canopy. Decay -process of wood degradation by micro-organisms resulting in weak and defective structure. Diseased -foliage and trunk/stems are diseased. Dogleg in trunk -trunk with a bow or defective bend (90") in trunk often half way of further up the trunk. Foliar disease -Foliage is diseased with manageable fungus. Ivy -Dense ivy prevents a thorough inspection, and other defects may be present. lean -Angle of the trunk from vertical. Multiple (double) leaders -the tree has multiple stem attachments, which may lead to tree failure and require maintenance or monitoring over time. Previous failure -Tree trunk previously broken and defective. Suppressed -tree crowded by larger adjacent trees; with defective structure and/or low vigor. Retain tree only as a grove tree, not stand-alone. During my fieldwork, I numbered the trees sequentially as I inspected them, and then annotated a clean sheet using Adobe Acrobat text tool. The numbers in this report are typed over the corresponding tree symbol on the survey. Trees marked XX are dead, fallen over or gone, and are not included in this report (even though some other dead trees are). TS indicates a tree to small to be considered significant, and these trees were not added to the inventory. Trees I added to the inventory, and that were not shown in the survey, are indicated by an asterisk preceding the number. Approximately 36 of the subject trees are on adjoining rights-of-way. Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Justin Lagers, Avana Ridge, LLC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 4 of 24 Sincerely, "P'7-t-f By Favero Greenforest, M. S. ISA Certified Arborist # PN -0143A ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist· #379 ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Favero Greenforest Attachments: 1. Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 2. Tree Inventory 3. Annotated Tree Survey Greenforest Digitally signed by Favero Greenforest ON: cn=Favero Greenforest. 0, OU, email=greenforestinc@mindspring.com.c=US Date: 2015.12.16 16:14:30 -OS'OO' @ Registered Consulting Arboris! Justin lagers, Avana Ridge, llC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 5 of 24 Attachment No. 1-Assumptions & limiting Conditions 1) A field examination of the site was made 10/15/15. My observations and conclusions are as of that date. 2) Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has been verified insofar as possible; however, the consultant/arborist can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. 3) I am not a qualified surveyor, and although considerable effort was made to match the trees on the site with those shown on the survey, I cannot guarantee the accuracy. 4) Unless stated other wise: 1) information contained in this report covers only those trees that were examined and reflects the condition of those trees at the time of inspection; and 2) the inspection is limited to visual examination of the subject trees from the subject property, without dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied that problems or deficiencies of the subject tree may not arise in the future. 5) All trees possess the risk of failure. Trees can fail at any time, with or without obvious defects, and with or without applied stress. A complete evaluation of the potential for the subject trees to fail requires excavation and examination of the base of the tree. Permission of the adjoining property owner must be obtained before this work can be undertaken and a risk assessment completed. 6) Construction activities can significantly affect the condition of retained trees. All retained trees should be inspected after construction is completed, and then inspected regularly as part of routine maintenance. 7) The consultant/appraiser shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made. 8) loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report. 9) Unless required by law otherwise, possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of the consultant/appraiser. 10) This report and any values/opinions expressed herein represent the opinion of the consultant/appraiser, and the consultant's/appraiser's fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified value, a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported. 11) Ownership and use of consultant's documents, work product and deliverables shall pass to the Client only when All fees have been paid. Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arboris! Justin Lagers, Avana Ridge, LLC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 6 of 24 Attachment No.2 -Tree Inventory Tree No. DBH Species DL Class Health Structure 1 8 Douglas-fir 10 Sig. 1 2 2 22 Douglas-fir 16 Sig. 1 1 3 12 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 4 14 Bigleaf maple 16 Sig. 1 2 5 14 Bigleaf maple 16 Sig. 1 1 6 9 Black cottonwood 8 Sig. 1 1 7 6 Bigleaf maple 6 Sig. 1 2 8 9 Bigleaf maple 8 Sig. 3 2 9 12 Bigleaf maple 8 Sig. 3 2 10 36 Black cottonwood 18 Land. 1 1 11 18 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 3 2 12 12 Scouler's willow 12 Sig. 2 1 13 10 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 2 14 24 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 15 10 Scouler's willow 12 Sig. 2 1 16 7 Scouler's willow 8 Sig. 1 1 17 28 Black cottonwood 0 Sig. 3 3 18 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 19 10 Bigleaf maple 12 Sig. 2 3 20 35 Black cottonwood 20 Land. 1 1 21 35 Black cottonwood 0 Land. 3 3 22 10,14 Bigleaf maple 10 Sig. 3 3 Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Dangerous Notes Or Viable Suppressed Viable Viable Viable Asymmetric canopy Viable Viable Viable Suppressed Viable Decline, previous failure Dangerous Decline, previous failure Dangerous Viable Decline, previous failure Dangerous Diseased Viable Asymmetric canopy Viable Viable Diseased Viable Viable Dead, trunk failure Dangerous Viable Decay, ivy on trunk Dangerous Viable Dead Dangerous Trunk decay Dangerous Justin lagers, Avana Ridge, llC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 7 of 24 Tree No. DBH Species Dl Class Health Structure 23 7 Bigleaf maple 8 Sig. 2 3 24 8 Douglas-fir 6 Sig. 1 3 25 8 Bigleaf maple 0 Sig. 3 3 26 8 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 27 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 28 10 Black cottonwood 8 Sig. 1 3 29 8 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 30 36 Black cottonwood 18 land. 1 1 31 14 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 32 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 33 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 34 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 35 8 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 36 8 Bigleaf maple 0 Sig. 3 3 37 16 Bigleaf maple 18 Sig. 1 1 38 12 Bigleaf maple 16 Sig. 1 1 39 14 Bigleaf maple 16 Sig. 1 1 40 12 Bigleaf maple 6 Sig. 2 3 41 6 Bigleaf maple 10 Sig. 1 2 42 8 Black cottonwood 0 Sig. 3 3 43 18 Bigleaf maple 8 Sig. 2 3 44 8 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 45 8 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 46 10 Black cottonwood 14 ~g. L_ 1 .. Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Dangerous Notes Or Viable Crack in trunk Dangerous lean, dogleg in trunk Dangerous Dead Dangerous Viable Viable Trunk failure Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Dead Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Trunk failure Dangerous Trunk decay Viable Dead Dangerous Trunk failure Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Justin Lagers, Avana Ridge, LLC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 8 of 24 Tree No. DBH Species DL Class Health Structure 47 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 48 10,16 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 2 49 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 50 12,24 Bigleaf maple 0 Sig. 3 3 51 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 52 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 53 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 54 16 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 2 3 55 12,16 Bigleaf maple 10 Sig. 3 3 56 8,10,12,12,14,18 Bigleaf maple 25 Sig. 3 2 57 18 Bigleaf maple 16 Sig. 3 1 58 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 59 12 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 2 60 8,10 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 1 2 61 6 Bigleaf maple 10 Sig. 1 1 62 6,6 Bigleaf maple 12 Sig. 1 2 63 18 Bigleaf maple 12 Sig. 2 3 64 14 Bigleaf maple 10 Sig. 1 3 65 12 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 1 3 66 18 Bigleaf maple 18 Sig. 1 1 67 22 Bigleaf maple 18 Sig. 2 3 68 16 Western red-cedar 14 Sig. 2 3 69 20 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 3 1 70 16 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 3 1 Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Dangerous Notes Or Viable Viable Double leader Viable Viable Dead Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Trunk decay Dangerous Trunk decline Dangerous Decline, trunk decay Dangerous Decline Dangerous Viable Double leader Viable Double leader Viable Viable Double leader Viable Trunk decay Dangerous Trunk decay, crack Dangerous Lean, crack in trunk Dangerous Viable Decline, trunk decay Dangerous Top dieback Dangerous Decline Dangerous Decline Dangerous Justin lagers, Avana Ridge, llC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 9 of 24 Tree No. DBH Species Dl Class Health Structure 71 10 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 1 1 72 14 Bigleaf maple 16 Sig. 1 3 73 10 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 1 1 74 6,6, Bigleaf maple 10 Sig. 1 3 75 12 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 76 8 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 2 77 10 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 78 8 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 2 79 8 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 80 8 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 81 8 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 82 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 2 83 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 2 84 10 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 2 85 14 Bigleaf maple 16 Sig. 1 3 86 14 Bigleaf maple 16 Sig. 1 3 87 20 Bigleaf maple 16 Sig. 1 2 88 16,16,20 Bigleaf maple 25 Sig. 2 3 89 8 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 1 1 90 14 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 91 10 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 92 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 93 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 L-94 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 --------- Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Dangerous I Notes Or Viable Viable Trunk decay Dangerous Viable Trunk decay Dangerous I Viable I Asymmetric canopy Viable Viable Asymmetric canopy Viable Viable Viable Viable Asymmetric canopy Viable Asymmetric canopy Viable Asymmetric canopy Viable Trunk decay Dangerous Trunk decay Dangerous Asymmetric canopy Viable Trunk decay Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Justin Lagers, Avana Ridge, LLC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 10 of 24 Tree No. DBH Species DL Class Health Structure 95 16 Black cottonwood 18 Sig. 1 1 96 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 97 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 98 16 Black cottonwood 18 Sig. 1 1 99 8 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 100 9 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 1 1 101 14 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 102 14 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 103 8 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 104 16 Black cottonwood 18 Sig. 1 1 105 8 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 1 2 106 14 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 107 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 108 12 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 109 8 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 1 1 110 38 Bigleaf maple 18 Land. 2 3 111 22 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 112 8 Black cottonwood 6 Sig. 3 1 113 16 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 114 10 Black cottonwood 8 Sig. 1 3 115 16 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 1 3 116 16 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 1 3 117 12 Douglas-fir 14 Sig. 1 2 _118 14 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 - Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Dangerous Notes Or Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Asymmetric canopy Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Trunk decay, decline Dangerous Viable Diseased Dangerous Viable Suppressed Dangerous Previous failure Dangerous Previous failure Dangerous Dogleg in trunk Viable Viable - Justin lagers, Avana Ridge, llC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 11 of 24 Tree No. DBH Species Dl Class Health Structure 119 7 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 120 9 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 121 10 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 2 122 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 3 123 5 (14-24) Bigleaf maple 25 Sig. 2 3 124 9 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 125 16 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 126 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 127 20 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 128 12 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 129 20 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 130 8 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 1 1 131 14 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 132 14 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 133 7 Bigleaf maple 10 Sig. 1 1 134 7 Bigleaf maple 10 Sig. 1 1 135 7 Bigleaf maple 10 Sig. 1 1 136 6 Western red-cedar 8 Sig. 1 1 137 7 Bigleaf maple 10 Sig. 1 1 138 6 Bitter cherry 8 Sig. 2 2 139 6 Bigleaf maple 12 Sig. 1 1 140 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 141 8 Black cottonwood 8 Sig. 1 1 _142 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Dangerous Notes Or Viable Viable Viable Suppressed Viable Trunk failure Dangerous I Decline, trunk decay Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Suppressed Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Justin lagers, Avana Ridge, llC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 12 of 24 Tree No. DBH Species Dl Class Health Structure 143 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 144 8 Black cottonwood 8 Sig. 1 3 145 12,14 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 2 146 14 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 147 10 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 148 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 149 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 150 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 151 10 Red alder 14 Sig. 1 2 152 14 Red alder 16 Sig. 1 3 153 8 Bitter cherry 8 Sig. 1 1 154 8 Bitter cherry 8 Sig. 1 1 155 8 Bigleaf maple 12 Sig. 1 1 156 8 Bigleaf maple 12 Sig. 1 1 157 8 Bigleaf maple 12 Sig. 1 1 158 8 Bigleaf maple 12 Sig. 1 1 159 12 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 1 2 160 28,28 Bigleaf maple 2S Sig. 1 2 161 24 Red alder 0 Sig. 3 3 162 12 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 163 18 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 164 14 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 165 8 Bitter cherry 12 Sig. 1 1 166 16 Black cottonwood 18 Sig. 1 3 Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Dangerous Notes Or Viable Viable lean Dangerous Double leader Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Asymmetric canopy Viable Trunk failure Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Asymmetric canopy Viable Multiple leader Viable Dead Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Viable lean Dangerous Justin lagers, Avana Ridge, llC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 13 of 24 Tree No. DBH Species Dl Class Health Structure 167 18 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 3 168 8 Red alder 12 Sig. 1 1 169 20 Black cottonwood 18 Sig. 1 1 170 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 2 171 10 Douglas-fir 6 Sig. 1 1 172 8 Red alder 14 Sig. 1 2 173 18 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 174 16 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 175 26 Bigleaf maple 16 Sig. 1 3 176 16 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 177 16 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 178 8 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 1 1 179 8 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 1 1 180 8 Scouler's willow 8 Sig. 3 1 181 28,28 Bigleaf maple 16 Sig. 2 3 182 14 Bigleaf maple 12 Sig. 3 2 183 16 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 184 20 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 185 16 Black cottonwood 12 5ig. 1 2 186 10 Black cottonwood 8 5ig. 1 1 187 16 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 188 10 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 189 12 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 190 14 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Dangerous Notes Or Viable Trunk decay Dangerous Viable Viable Dogleg in trunk Viable Viable Previous failure Viable Viable Viable Trunk decay Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Viable Diseased, die back Dangerous Decay, decline Dangerous Decline, trunk decay Dangerous Viable Viable Asymmetric canopy Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Justin lagers, Avana Ridge, llC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 14 of 24 Tree No. DBH Species Dl Class Health Structure 191 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 192 12 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 193 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 194 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 195 7 Bigleaf maple 10 Sig. 1 1 196 8 Bigleaf maple 10 Sig. 1 1 197 8,8 Bigleaf maple 12 Sig. 1 2 198 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 199 8 Bitter cherry 8 Sig. 1 1 200 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 201 14 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 202 10 Black cottonwood 6 Sig. 1 3 203 8 Black cottonwood 8 Sig. 1 1 204 14 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 205 14 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 206 6 Bigleaf maple 12 Sig. 1 1 207 8 Bigleaf maple 12 Sig. 1 1 208 18 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 209 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 210 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 211 10,12,16,20 Bigleaf maple 25 Sig. 2 3 212 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 213 12 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 214 16 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Dangerous Notes Or Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Asymmetric canopy Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Trunk decay Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Decay, decline Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Justin lagers, Avana Ridge, llC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 15 of 24 Tree No. DBH Species Dl Class Health Structure 215 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 3 216 14 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 217 14 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 218 14 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 219 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 220 7 Oregon white ash 12 Sig. 1 1 221 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 222 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 223 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 224 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 225 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 226 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 227 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 228 14 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 229 8 Scouler's willow 10 Sig. 2 3 230 8,8, Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 2 231 10,10 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 3 2 232 8 Bigleaf maple 16 Sig. 1 2 233 22 Bigleaf maple 18 Sig. 1 3 234 12 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 235 10 Black cottonwood 8 Sig. 1 3 236 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 237 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 238 8 Western hemlock 10 Sig. 1 1 Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Dangerous Notes Or Viable Suppressed Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Suppressed Dangerous Double leader Viable Suppressed, double leader Dangerous Asymmetric canopy Viable Trunk decay Dangerous Viable Suppressed Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Justin lagers, Avana Ridge, llC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 16 of 24 Tree No. DBH Species Dl Class Health Structure 239 10 Douglas-fir 8 Sig. 1 1 240 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 241 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 3 2 242 10 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 2 243 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 244 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 245 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 246 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 247 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 248 8,8,8 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 3 249 14 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 2 3 250 20 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 251 8 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 2 252 8 Bigleaf maple 14 5ig. 1 1 253 14 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 254 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 255 10 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 256 10 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 257 14 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 258 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 259 16 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 260 16 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 261 14 Black cottonwood 3 Sig. 3 3 262 10 Bigleaf maple 16 Sig. 1 1 Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Dangerous Notes Or Viable Viable Viable Diseased Dangerous Suppressed Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Suppressed Dangerous Cracks in trunk, die back Dangerous Viable Suppressed Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Trunk failure Dangerous Viable Justin Lagers, Avana Ridge, LLC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 17 of 24 Tree No. DBH Species DL Class Health Structure 263 14 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 264 14 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 265 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 266 10 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 267 8 Western hemlock 10 Sig. 1 1 268 12 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 269 14 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 270 8 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 271 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 272 10 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 273 16 Western red-cedar 12 Sig. 1 1 274 26 Bigleaf maple 20 Sig. 1 1 275 8 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 3 276 26,26 Bigleaf maple 25 Sig. 1 3 277 28 Bigleaf maple 20 Sig. 1 1 278 24 Bigleaf maple 20 Sig. 1 2 279 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 2 280 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 281 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 282 8 Black cottonwood 6 Sig. 2 3 283 14 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 284 14 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 285 14 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 286 8,8 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 2 G reenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Dangerous Notes Or Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Suppressed Dangerous Trunk decline Dangerous Viable Asymmetric canopy Viable Suppressed Viable Viable Viable Nearly dead Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Double leader Viable Justin Lagers, Avana Ridge, llC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 18 of 24 Tree No. DBH Species DL Class Health Structure 287 22 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 288 22 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 289 10 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 290 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 291 8 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 292 6 Pacific madrone 8 Sig. 1 2 293 9 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 2 294 14 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 3 295 6 Bigleaf maple 10 Sig. 1 2 296 8 Bigleaf maple 10 Sig. 1 2 297 8 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 2 3 298 10 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 1 2 299 14 Bigleaf maple 0 Sig. 3 3 300 22 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 301 8 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 302 8 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 303 10 Black cottonwood 6 Sig. 1 3 304 20 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 305 12 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 306 8 Scouler's willow 0 Sig. 3 3 307 10 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 308 12 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 309 8 Bitter cherry 8 Sig. 1 1 310 18 Black cottonwood 0 Sig. 3 3 Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Dangerous Notes Or Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Dogleg in trunk Viable Double leader Viable Trunk failure Dangerous Suppressed Viable Suppressed Viable I Decline, trunk decay Dangerous Asymmetric canopy Viable Dead Dangerous Viable Viable , Viable Trunk decay Dangerous Viable Viable Dead Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Dead Dangerous Justin lagers, Avana Ridge, llC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana RidgePPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 19 of 24 Tree No. DBH Species Dl Class Health Structure 311 8 Black cottonwood 8 Sig. 1 1 312 10 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 2 313 24 Black cottonwood 18 Sig. 1 1 314 12 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 2 315 18 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 316 18 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 317 12 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 318 8 Black cottonwood 6 Sig. 3 1 319 10,18,24 Bigleaf maple 20 Sig. 1 1 320 8 Black cottonwood 0 Sig. 3 3 321 14 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 322 36 Black cottonwood 2S land. 1 1 323 8 Bitter cherry 12 Sig. 1 1 324 14 Black cottonwood 0 Sig. 3 3 325 16 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 326 18,26 Bigleaf maple 18 Sig. 1 2 327 16 Black cottonwood 18 Sig. 1 1 328 8 Black cottonwood 8 Sig. 1 2 329 16 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 330 8 Black cottonwood 3 Sig. 3 2 331 14 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 332 12 Black cottonwood 6 Sig. 3 2 333 12 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 334 8 Black cottonwood 0 Sig. 3 3 G reenforest ® Registered Consulting Arborist Dangerous Notes Or Viable Viable Dogleg in trunk Viable Viable Asymmetric canopy Viable Viable Viable Viable Diseased Dangerous Viable Dead Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Dead Dangerous Viable Double leader Viable Viable Suppressed Viable Viable Decline Dangerous Viable Decay, decline Dangerous Viable Dead Dangerous Justin Lagers, Avana Ridge, LLC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 20 of 24 Tree No. DBH Species DL Class Health Structure 335 7 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 1 1 336 12 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 337 14 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 338 14 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 339 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 340 14 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 341 8 Black cottonwood 0 Sig. 3 3 342 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 343 26 Bigleaf maple 20 Sig. 1 2 344 12 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 345 16 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 346 8 Black cottonwood 6 Sig. 1 2 347 8 Black cottonwood 0 Sig. 3 3 348 14 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 349 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 3S0 12 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 351 12 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 352 10 Black cottonwood 12 5ig. 1 1 353 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 354 12 Black cottonwood 14 5ig. 1 1 355 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 356 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 357 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 358 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Dangerous Notes Or Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Dead Dangerous Viable Deadwood Viable Viable Viable Suppressed Viable Fallen over Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Justin lagers, Avana Ridge, LlC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 21 of 24 Tree No. DBH Species Dl Class Health Structure 359 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 360 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 361 10 Bitter cherry 0 Sig. 3 3 362 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 363 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 364 8,18 Bigleaf maple 16 Sig. 1 2 365 4x8 Bigleaf maple 18 Sig. 1 2 366 7 Bigleaf maple 12 Sig. 1 1 367 8 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 1 1 368 8,8,8 Bigleaf maple 16 Sig. 1 3 369 10 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 370 10,12 Bigleaf maple 12 Sig. 2 3 371 8 Bitter cherry 12 Sig. 1 1 372 8,10,12 Bigleaf maple 12 Sig. 2 3 373 14 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 374 20 Bigleaf maple 10 Sig. 2 3 375 20 Bigleaf maple 10 Sig. 2 3 376 8,12 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 1 1 377 16 Bigleaf maple 16 Sig. 1 1 378 16,16 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 2 3 379 14 Bigleaf maple 12 Sig. 1 1 380 8 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 381 8 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 3~ 16 Black cottonwood 14 ,. Sig. 1 1 ------ Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Dangerous Notes Or Viable Viable Viable Dead Dangerous Viable Viable Deadwood Viable Multiple leader Viable Viable Viable Decay, decline Dangerous Viable Decay, decline Dangerous Viable Decay Dangerous Viable Decay, decline Dangerous Decay, decline Dangerous Viable Viable Decay, decl i ne Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Viable Justin Lagers, Avana Ridge, LLC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 22 of 24 Tree No. DBH Species DL Class Health Structure 383 16 Bigleaf maple 16 Sig. 1 1 384 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 385 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 386 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 387 12 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 388 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 389 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 3 1 390 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 3 1 391 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 392 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 393 14 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 3 2 394 12 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 395 14 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 396 14 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 397 14 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 398 14 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 3 2 399 14 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 1 1 400 10 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 401 10 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 402 10 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 1 403 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 404 10 Bitter cherry 8 Sig. 1 1 40S 12 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 406 12 Black cottonwood 14 5ig. 1 1 _. - Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Dangerous Notes Or Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Dieback, decline Dangerous Dieback, decline Dangerous Viable Viable Dieback, decline Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Viable Dieback, decline Dangerous Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable --. - Justin Lagers, Avana Ridge, LLC RE: Tree Inspection; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Renton WA December 16, 2015 Page 23 of 24 Tree No. DBH Species DL Class Health Structure 407 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 408 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 409 10 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 410 16 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 411 16 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 412 14,14,14 Bigleaf maple 16 Sig. 1 2 413 6,8,8,10 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 2 3 414 10 Bigleaf maple 10 Sig. 3 2 415 21 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 2 3 416 8 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 3 417 10 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 3 418 8,10,12,12 Bigleaf maple 14 Sig. 2 3 419 10,10 Bigleaf maple 12 Sig. 2 3 420 8 Bigleaf maple 12 Sig. 1 1 421 6,6 Bigleaf maple 10 Sig. 1 2 422 10 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 2 423 14 Black cottonwood 12 Sig. 1 1 424 10 Black cottonwood 14 Sig. 1 1 425 8 Western red-cedar 8 Sig. 1 1 426 10 Bigleaf maple 12 Sig. 2 3 427 14 Black cottonwood 16 Sig. 2 3 428 7 Black cottonwood 10 Sig. 1 3 429 7 Bitter cherry 8 Sig. 1 1 --------- Greenforest @ Registered Consulting Arborist Dangerous Notes Or Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Viable Multiple leader Viable Multiple leader, decay, decline Dangerous Decay, decline Dangerous Decline Dangerous Lean Dangerous Lean Dangerous Multiple leader, decay, decline Dangerous Multiple leader, decay, decline Dangerous Viable Multiple leader Viable Bow in trunk Viable Viable Viable Viable Decline Dangerous Decay Dangerous Lean Dangerous Viable --------- / / ',' / • / / • ,. / 'y / S~lVl' ~orm DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -Renton 8 TREE RETENTION WORKSHEET Plannlna DIvision 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 I www.rentonwa.gov 1_ Total number of trees over 6" diameter1, or alder or cottonwood trees at least 8" in diameter on project site _4_29 ____ trees 2_ Deductions: Certain trees are excluded from the retention calculation: Trees that are dangerous' 67 trees Trees in proposed public streets 37 trees Trees in proposed private access easements/tracts trees Trees in critical areas' and buffers 114 trees Total number of exduded trees: 218 trees 3. Subtract line 2 from line 1: .. 2 ... 1 ... 1'--___ trees 4. Next, to determine the number of trees that must be retained4 , multiply line 3 by: 0.3 In zones RC. R-!, R-4, R-6 or R-8 0.2 In all other residential zones 0.1 In all commercial and industrial zones S. List the number of 6" in diameter, or alder or cottonwood trees over 8" in diameter that you are proposini to retaln4 : 6. Subtract line 5 from line 4 for trees to be replaced: Iff line 6 Is zero or less, stop here. No replacement trees are required) 7. Multiply line 6 by 12" for number of required replacement Inches: 42 trees 46 trees 0 trees 0 inches 8. Proposed size of trees to meet additional planting requirement: (Minimum 2" caliper tnees required) 0 inches per tree 9. Divide line 7 by line 8 for number of replacement trees': (If nemalnder Is .5 or greater, round up to the next whole number) 1 Measured at 4.5' above srade. Q trees 1 A tree certified. In a written report. as dead. tennlnalty dIseased, demased, or otherwise dangerous to persons or property by Incensed landscapo architect, or certified .rboris~ and approved by the CIty . .3 Crttlcal areas, such 8S wetlands, streams, floodplains and protected slopes, are defined In RMC 4-3--050. , COunt only those trees to be retained outside of critical areas and buffers . .s The City may require modification of the tree retention plan to ensure retention of the mlximum number of trees per RMC 4-4-1~0H7a. & When the required number of protected trees cannot be retained, replacement trees, with at teast a two-inch (2-) caliper or iln evergreen at least six feet (6') tall, shall be planted. See RMC 4-4-130.H.l .•. pl) for prohibited types at replacement trees. 1 H:\CfD\Oata\Forms-TE!fI1JIiItes\SeIf·H elp Ha rdout5\Plannlns\lree Retention worksheet.doot 08/2015 Minimum Tree Density A minimum tree density shall be maintained on each residentially zoned lot (exempting single-family dwellings in R-10 and R-14). The tree density may consist of existing trees, replacement trees, or a combination. Detached single-family development': Two (2) significant trees' for every five thousand (5,000) sq. ft. of lot area. For example, a lot with 9,600 square feet and a detached Single-family house is required to have four (4) significant trees or their equivalent in caliper inches (one or mare trees with a combined diameter of 24"). This is determined with the following formula: (.L afJlno :'\ x 2 • Minhnum Numbrr of Trea \S,OfIOl4oftj Multl-famlly development (attached dwelllnesl: Four (4) significant trees' for every five thousand (5,000) sq. ft. of lot area. Example Tree Density Table· Lot Lot size 1 5,000 2 10,000 3 15,000 Total Gross Area Minus ROW Dedications Minus Critical Stream Area Net Lot Area Net Area /5,000 sq.ft Multifamily Multiplier Minimum Tree Density Req. Total Tree Density on site Min significant New Trees trees required 2 2 @ 2" caliper 4 0 6 2 @ 2" caliper 164,827.24 sq.ft 1,674.47 sq.ft. 4,015.98 sq.ft. 159,136.79 sq.ft. 31.83 4 per 5,000 sq.ft. 127 Trees 160 Trees Retained Trees Compliant a Yes 1 tree (24 caliper Yes inches) 1Maple-15 Yes caliper inches 1 Fir - 9 caliper inches. 7 Lots developed with detached dwellings In the R·IOand R·14 zoned are exempt from millntalnlnl iI minimum number of slantflcant trees onslte, however they are not exempt from the annual tree removal limits • • Or the 11"05$ equivalent of colper Inches provided by one (1) or more trees. 2 H:\CED\Oata\fOnns-TemplMes\SeIf-Hl!lp Handout5\Plannlng\Tra Retention Worbheet.docx 08/2015 AVANA RIDGE -PPUD -Tree Retention , • 429 Trees Total Total Lot Area 164,827.24 minus 114 Trees in Critical Area Minus ROW Dedications 1,674.47 24 Dangerous Minus Critical Stream Area 4,015.98 minus 37 Trees in ROW Net Lot Area 159,136.79 6 Dangerous Lot Area/5000 sq.ft 31.83 278 Trees in Development Area Multifamily Multiplier 4 per 5,000 minus 67 Dangerous Minimum Tree Denisty Required 127 Total 211 Trees X 20% retention requirement Retained Critical Area 114 Total 42 Trees Required Retention Retained Development Area 46 Total Tree Denisty 160 OPERATING AGREEMENT OF AV ANA RIDGE, LLC AV ANA RIDGE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT THIS LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY OPERATING AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is made and entered into effective as of the 28th day of October 2015, by and among the parties listed on Schedule I attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof, and any other person who executes this Agreement as and becomes a Member of the Company according to the terms hereof. ARTICLE 1. DEFINITIONS The following terms used in this Agreement shall have the following meanings (unless otherwise expressly provided herein): "Act" means the Washington Limited Liability Company Act (RCW Ch. 25.15). "Adjusted Capital Contnbution." The Capital Contribution made by each Member to the Company as increased by Additional Capital Contributions or reduced from time to time by the return of capital and the aggregate distributions, if any, of Sale or Refinancing Proceeds made to such Member. "Bankruptcy" of any person means the filing by such person of a voluntary petition in bankruptcy, or the adjudication of such person as bankrupt or insolvent, or the filing by such person of any petition or answer seeking any reorganization, arrangement, composition, readjustment, liquidation, dissolution or similar relief for itself under the present or any future federal bankruptcy act or any other present or future federal or state statute or law regarding bankruptcy, insolvency or other relief for debtors, or such person's seeking, consenting to or acquiescing in the appointment of any trustee, receiver, conservator or liquidator for itself or for its membership interest in the Company. "Capital Account" means the capital account determined and maintained for each Unit Holder pursuant to Section 7.3. "Capital Event." The sale, exchange or other disposition, including an involuntary conversion or condemnation of the Property, or a portion or item thereof or the refinancing of Company indebtedness. "Capital Contribution" means any contribution to the capital of the Company in cash or property by a Member whenever made. "Certificate of Formation" means the certificate of formation pursuant to which the Company was formed, as originally filed with the office of the Secretary of State on October 28, 201 5, and as amended from time to time. "Code" means the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or corresponding provisions of subsequent superseding federal revenue laws. AVANA RIDGE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT - 2 of28 "Company" means A V ANA RIDGE, LLC. "Companv Minimum Gain" has the same meaning as the tenn "partnership minimum gain" in Regulation Sections 1.704-2(b)(2) and 1.704-2(d). "Deficit Capital Account" means with respect to any Unit Holder, the deficit balance, if any, in such Unit Holder's Capital Account as of the end of the taxable year, after giving effect to the following adjustments: (i) credit to such Capital Account any amount that such Unit Holder is obligated to restore to the Company under Regulation Section 1.704-I(b)(2)(ii)(c), as well as any addition thereto pursuant to the next to last sentences of Regulation Sections 1.704-2(g)(I) and (i)(5); and (ii) debit to such Capital Account the items described in Regulation Sections l.704-1(b)(2)(ii)(d)(4), (5) and (6). Tbis definition is intended to comply with the provisions of Regulation Sections 1.704-1(b)(2)(ii)(d) and 1.704-2, and will be interpreted consistently with those provisions. "Distributable Cash" means all cash funds received by the Company from Company operations for a fiscal period (other than funds received as Capital Contributions or from a Capital Event), in excess of the amounts reasonably required for the repayment of or Reserves for Company borrowing, interest thereon, other liabilities, Company working capital and Reserves which the Manager reasonably deems to be required for the proper operation of the business of the Company, payment of all operating expenses and the repayment of current liabilities of the Company and in excess of any cash reserves which the Manager reasonably deems necessary for the operation of the business, including, but not limited to, Reserves for contingent or unforeseen liabilities or obligations of the Company. "Economic Interest" means a Unit Holder's share of Net Profits, Net Losses, and other tax items of the Company and distributions of the Company's assets pursuant to this Agreement and the Act, but shall not include any right to participate in the management or affairs of the Company, including, the right to vote on, consent to or otherwise participate in any decision of the Members. "Economic Interest Owner" means the owner of an Economic Interest who is not a Member. "Entity" means any general partnership, limited partnership, limited liability company, corporation, joint venture, trust, business trust, cooperative or association or any other organization that is not a natural person. "Majority Interest" means, at any time, more than fifty percent (50%) of the then outstanding Units held by Members. "Manager(s)" means Michael Gladstein, Robert Gladstein, and Joel Mezistrano, and any other Person who may become a substitute or additional Manager as provided in Article 5. A VANA RIDGE, LLC OPERATlNoAOREEMENT-3 of28 "Member" means each Person who executes a counterpart of this Agreement as a Member and each Person who may hereafter become a Member. To the extent a Manager has purchased a Membership lnterest in the Company, it will have all the rights of a Member with respect to such Membership lnterest, and the term "Member" as used herein shall include a Manager to the extent it has purchased a Membership lnterest in the Company. If a Person is a Member immediately prior to the acquisition by such Person of an Economic lnterest, such Person shall have all the rights of a Member with respect to such Economic Interest. "Membership lnterest" means all of a Member's share in the Net Profits, Net Losses, and other tax items of the Company and distributions of the Company's assets pursuant to this Agreement and the Act and all of a Member's rights to participate in the management or affairs of the Company, including the right to vote on, consent to or otherwise participate in any decision of the Members. "Member Minimum Gain" has the same meaning as the tenn "partner nonrecourse debt minimum gain" in Regulation Section 1.704-2(i). "M=ber Nonrecourse Deductions" has the same meaning as the tenn "partner nonrecourse debt minimum gain" in Regulation Section 1.704-2(i)(l) and (2). The amoWlt of Member Nonrecourse Deductions for a Company fiscal year shall be determined in accordance with Regulation Section 1.704-2(i)(2). ''Net Profits" and ''Net Losses" shall have the meaning ascribed to those terms in Section 8.5. ''Nonrecourse LiabilitY' has the meaning set forth in Regulation Section 1.704-2(b)(3). "Percentage Interest" means with respect to any Unit Holder the percentage determined based upon the ratio that the number of Units held by such Unit Holder bears to the total number of outstanding Units. "Person" means any individual or Entity, and the heirs, executors, administrators, legal representatives, successors, and assigns of such "Person" where the context so permits. "Property" means all of the Company's assets. "Regulations" includes proposed, temporary and final Treasury regulations promulgated under the Code and the corresponding sections of any regulations subsequently issued that amend or supersede such regulations. "Reserves" means, with respect to any fiscal period, funds set or amoWlts allocated during such period to reserves which shall be maintained in amoWlts deemed sufficient by the Manager for working capital and to pay taxes, insurance, debt service or other costs or expenses incident to the ownership or operation of the Company's business. "Sale or Refinancing Proceeds" means the net proceeds derived from a Capital Event less the expenses incurred in connection with such Capital Event and less the application of such proceeds to the reduction of existing indebtedness, the discharge or payment of any other AYANA RIDGE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT -4 of 28 expenses or liabilities and the establishment of appropriate reserves, all as detennined by the Manager in its sole discretion. ''Unit Holder" means a Person who is a Member or who holds an Economic Interest but is not a Member. "Units" means the Units issued to any Member under this Agreement as reflected in attached Schedule 1 , as amended from time to time. ARTICLE 2. FORMATION OF COMPANY 2.1. Formation. The Company was formed on October 28, 2015, when the Company's Certificate of Formation was executed and filed with the office of the Secretary of State in accordance with and pursuant to the Act. 2.2. Name. The name of the Company is "A V ANA RIDGE, LLC." 2.3. Principal Place of Business. The principal place of business of the Company shall be 7603 SE 37th Place, Mercer Island, W A 98040. The Company may locate its places of business at any other place or places as the Manager may from time to time deem advisable. 2.4. Registered Office and Registered Agent. The Company's initial registered agent and the address of its initial registered agent and initial registered office in the State of Washington are as follows: Address Hoda Mezistrano 7603 SE 37th Place Mercer Island, WA 98040 The registered office and registered agent may be changed by the Manager from time to time by filing a statement of change with the Secretary of State. 2.5. Term. The term of the Company shall be perpetual, unless the Company is earlier dissolved in accordance with either Article 12 or the Act. ARTICLE 3. BUSINESS AND POWERS OF THE COMPANY 3.1. Business of the Company. The business of the Company shall be: 3.1.1. to engage in construction services as a prime contractor and as a speculative builder; 3.1.2. to acquire and develop that certain real property commonly known as 17300 Benson Road South, Renton, W A 98027 ("Property"); 3.1.3. to cause the construction of apartment units on the Property (the "Project"); 3.1.4. to obtain any and all permits necessary in connection with the Project; A V ANA RIDGE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT - 5 of28 3.1.5. to obtain financing for the Project; 3.1.6. to market and lease the Project; and 3.1.7. to exercise all other powers necessary to or reasonably connected with the foregoing or Company's business which may be legally exercised by limited liability companies under the Act. 3.2. Powers of the Company. In furtherance of the Company's purposes, the Company shall have the power: 3.2.1. to enter into and perform contracts, leases and/or agreements of any kind necessary or incidental to the accomplishment of the Company's business purposes; 3.2.2. to acquire all real, personal and intangible property necessary or appropriate to the Company's business purposes; 3.2.3. to borrow money and to issue evidences of indebtedness, and to secure the same by mortgage, pledge, security interest or other lien against all or any portion of the Company's Property, and to prepay, refinance, modifY, or extend any such indebtedness; 3.2.4. to collect all income and pay all expenses of the Company; 3.2.5. to sell, exchange or otherwise dispose of all or any portion of the Company's Property; 3.2.6. to assume, perform and discharge any obligations and liabilities assumed in connection with the acquisition, ownership, financing, leasing, management, improvement or disposition of the Company's Property; 3.2.7. to bring and defend actions at law or in equity; 3.2.8. to make prudent interim investments of the Company's excess funds; and 3.2.9. to engage in and carry on any other activities necessary or incidental to the accomplishment of the Company's purposes that may be engaged in by a Washington limited liability company. AVANA RIDGE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT - 6 of28 ARTICLE 4. NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF MEMBERS A.."'ID MANAGERS The names and addresses of the Members are as follows: Michael Gladstein 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105, Mercer Island, W A 98040 Robert Gladstein 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105, Mercer Island, W A 98040 Joel Mezistrano, Trustee of the Mezistrano Family Trust dtd 1120/2006 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105, Mercer Island, W A 98040 The names and addresses of the Managers are as follows: Michael Gladstein 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105, Mercer Island, W A 98040 Robert Gladstein 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105, Mercer Island, W A 98040 Joel Mezistrano 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105, Mercer Island, W A 98040 ARTICLE 5. MANAGER; RIGHTS AND DUTIES 5.1. Managers 5.1.1. The overall management and control of the business and affairs of the Company shall be vested solely and exclusively in three Managers elected and/or removed by the unanimous vote of the Members from time to time. Michael Gladstein, Robert Gladstein, and Joel Mezistrano, shall be the initial Managers and shall serve until resignation or removal by the unanimous vote of the Members. Except for matters set forth in Section 5.2.7 below, the signature of anyone Manager shall be sufficient to bind the Company. 5.1.2. The affirmative action of a vote of 2/3 of the Managers shall be the act of the Manager. 5.2. Authority. Except as otherwise specifically provided in this Agreement, the Manager is hereby vested with the sole and exclusive right and full authority to manage, conduct AV ANA RIOOE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT-7 of28 and operate the business ofthe Company, and the Manager shall be entitled to make all decisions relating thereto or to any matter set forth herein. Specifically, but not by way of limitation, the Manager shall be authorized: 5.2.1. to enter into and execute any contracts, leases or agreements on behalf of the Company that the Manager dcems necessary or appropriate to operate and manage the Company, and to carry on the business of the Company and achieve the Company's purposes; provided, however, that any contracts entered into with persons affiliated with any of the Members shall be upon tenns comparable to those available from unaffiliated third parties; 5.2.2. to engage, on behalf of the Company, such agents, accountants, attorneys, property managers, consultants and other persons necessary or appropriate to carry out the business of the Company, and, to pay from the funds of the Company sueh fees, expenses, salaries, wages and other compensation to such persons as the Manager shall determine; 5.2.3. to pay, extend, modify, adjust, submit to arbitration, prosecute, defend or compromise, upon such terms as the Manager may determine, any obligation, suit, liability, cause of action or claim, including taxes, either in favor of or against the Company; 5.2.4. except to the extent prohibited by the Act, to take any actions and make any expenditures that the Manager deems necessary or appropriate in connection with (i) the operation of the business of the Company, (ii) the carrying out of the Manager's obligations and responsibilities under this Agreement, and (iii) the compliance with all obligations imposed upon the Company by agreements pertaining to the Company or its Property from time to time; 5.2.5. to make all tax elections on behalf of the Company; 5.2.6. to open, maintain, modify and close such bank accounts on behalf of the Company as the Manager deems appropriate; and 5.2.7. (i) to sell all or substantially all of the Company's Property to any third party, and/or (ii) to finance or refinance the Company's Property, and to borrow money and issue evidences of indebtedness on behalf of the Company, and as security therefor, (iii) to mortgage, pledge or otherwise encumber all or any portion of the Company's Property, (iv) to repay, refinance, modify, or extend any such indebtedness, (v) to acquire any other property, (vi) to obligate the Company as a surety, guarantor or indemnitor. Unless authorized to do so by this Agreement or by the Manager, no Member, employee or other agent of the Company shall have any power or authority to bind the Company in any way, to pledge its credit or to render it liable for any purpose. 5.3. Duties. The Manager shall use good faith, diligent efforts to oversee the management of the Company's business and other assets and to perform all of the Manager's obligations pursuant to this Agreement. In particular, and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Manager shall be responsible for the management of the Company's Property, for maintaining appropriate casualty and liability insurance policies covering the Company's AVANARIDGE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT -8 of 28 Property and business, and for keeping the Company's books and records and preparing the reports described in Article 10 below. 5.4. Compensation. Except as otherwise provided herein or agreed upon by the Members, the Manager shall not receive any compensation from the Company for its services. 5.5. Expenses; Reimbursement of Manager. The Company shall reimburse the Manager for all monies advaneod and expenses incurred by the Manager which are directly connected to the management of the Company's business or affairs. The Company shall bear all operating expenses of the Company including, without limitation, the cost of any legal and accounting services performed on behalf of the Company by outside legal or accounting firms, and all due diligence, financing and other expenses relating to the Company's business or Property. 5.6. Vacancies. If a vacancy in a Manager's position arises as a result of a Manager's removal, Bankruptcy, resignation, disqualification or otherwise, the other Members may, by a unanimous vote within ninety (90) days after such vacancy arises, elect an additional or substitute Manager who shall succeed to all of the rights and obligations of the Manager under this Agreement. The failure of the other Members to fill a vacancy in a Manager's position within ninety (90) days after the occurrence of such vacancy shall result in the dissolution of the Company in accordance with Article 12. 5.7. Limitation on Liability; indemnification. 5.7.1. The Manager shall not be liable, responsible or accountable in damages or otherwise to the Company or the Members for any act or omission by the Manager performed in good faith pursuant to the authority granted to the Manager by this Agreement or in accordance with its provisions, and in a manner reasonably believed by the Manager to be within the scope of the authority granted to the Manager and in the best interest of the Company; provided that such act or omission did not constitute fraud, misconduct, bad faith or gross negligence. The Company shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Manager, and each director, officer, partner, employee or agent thereof, if any, against any liability, loss, damage, cost or expense incurred by it on behalf of the Company or in furtherance of the Company's interests without relieving the Manager of liability for fraud, misconduct, bad faith or negligence. No Member shall have any personal liability with respect to the satisfaction of any required indemnification of the Manager. 5.7.2. Any indemnification required to be made by the Company shall be made promptly following the fixing of the liability, loss, damage, cost or expense incurred or suffered by a final judgment of any court, settlement, contract or otherwise. In addition, the Company may advance funds to the Manager claiming indemnification under this Section 5.7 for legal expenses and other costs incurred as a result of a legal action brought against such Manager only if (i) the legal action relates to the performance of duties or services by the Manager on behalf of the Company, (ii) the legal action is initiated by a party other than a Member, and (iii) such Manager undertakes to repay the advanced funds to the Company if it is determined that such Manager is not entitled to indemnification pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. A v AN A RIIXlE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT - 9 of 28 5.S. Removal. A Manager may be removed at any time, with or without cause, by the unanimous vote of a the Members. The removal of a Manager who is also a Member shall not affe,,"! the Manager's rights as a Member and shall not constitute a withdrawal of a Member. Upon termination, a Manager shall be paid all compensation due him through the date of termination pursuant to Section 5.5 above. 5.9. Right to Rely on the Manager. Any person dealing with the Company may rely (without duty of further inquiry) upon a certificate signed by any Manager as to the identity and authority of any Manager or other Person to act on behalf of the Company or any Member. ARTICLE 6. RIGHT AND OBLIGATIONS OF MEl\ffiERS 6.1. Limitation of Liability. Each Member's liability shall be limited as set forth in this Agreement and the Act. 6.2. Liability for Company Obligations. Members shall not be personally liable for any debts, obligations or liabilities of the Company beyond their respective Capital Contributions and any obligation of the Members under Section 7.1 or 7.2 to make Capital Contributions, except as otherwise provided by law or as otherwise agreed upon by the Members. 6.3. Inspection of Records. Upon reasonable request, each Member shall have the right to inspect and copy at such Member's expense, during ordinary business hours, the records required to be maintained by the Company pursuant to Section 10.5. 6.4. No PriOrity and Return of Capital. Except as expressly provided in Article 8 or 2, no Unit Holder shall have priority over any other Unit Holder, either as to the retwn of Capital Contributions or as to Net Profits, Net Losses or distributions; provided, that this Section 6.4 shall not apply to loans made by a Member to the Company. 6.5. Withdrawal of Member. Except as expressly permitted in this Agreement, no Member shall voluntarily resign or otherwise withdraw as a Member. Unless otherwise approved unanimously by the Members, a Member who resigns or withdraws shall be entitled to receive only those distributions to which such Person would have been entitled had such Person remained a Member (and only at such times as such distribution would have been made had such Person remained a Member). Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, a resigning or withdrawing Member shall become an Economic Interest Owner. The remedy for breach of this Section 6.5 shall be monetary damages (and not specific performance), which may be offset against distributions by the Company to which such Person would otherwise be entitled. 6.6. Additional Members. The Members agree to adroit additional Members, only upon the unanimous affirmative vote of the Members. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a Person shall not become an additional Member unless and until such Person becomes a party to this Agreement by signing this Agreement and executing such additional documents and instruments as the other Members may reasonably request as necessary or appropriate to confirm such person as a Member in the Company. 6.7. Meetings of Members. An annual meeting of the Members is not required. The Members may hold meetings, both regular and special, at any time. Regular meetings of the AVANA RIDGE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT -10 of 28 Members may be held without notice at such time and at such place as shall from time to time be determined by the Manager. Special meetings of the Members may be called at any time by any Member. The Members or Manager may participate in meetings by means uf telephone conference or similar communications equipment that allows all Persons participating in the meeting to hear each other, and such participation in a meeting shall constitute presence in person at the meeting. If all the participants arc participating by telephone conference or similar communications equipment, the meeting shall be deemed to be held at the principal place of business of the Company. 6.8. Action by Written Consent. Any action required or permitted to be taken at any meeting of the Members may be taken without a meeting if the Members consent thereto in writing. Such consent shall have the same force and effect as a unanimous vote at a meeting. ARTICLE 7. CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE COMPANY AND CAPITAL ACCOUNTS 7.1. Members Capital Contributions. Each Member shall contribute such amount as is set forth in attached Schedule I as such Member's share of the Members' initial Capital Contribution. 7.2. Additional Capital Contributions. 7.2.1. Call for Additional Capital Contribution. The Manager may determine, from time to time, that Capital Contributions in addition to the Members' initial Capital Contributions are needed to enable the Company to conduct its business ("Additional Capital Contributions"). Upon making such a determination, the Manager shall give notice to all Members, in writing, at least thirty (3~} days before the date on which such Additional Capital Contribution is due. The notice shall set forth the amount of thc Additional Capital Contribution needed, the purpose for which it is needed and the date by which Members shall contribute his pro rata share in accordance with his Percentage Interest. Except as noted in Section 7.2.2 below, no Member may voluntarily make any additional Capital Contribution. 7.2.2. Failure to Make Additional Capital Contribution. Ifa Member fails to make any Additional Capital Contribution required under Section 7.2.1 of this Agreement within thirty (30) days after it is required to be made (a "Defaulting Member"), the Manager shall, within fifteen (15) days after said failure, notify each other Member (a "Non·Defaulting Member") in writing, of the total amount of the Defaulting Members' Capital Contnbutions not made ("Additional Capital Shortfall"), and shall specify a number of days within which each Non-Defaulting Member may make an Additional Capital Contribution (on behalf of the Defaulting Member), which shall not be less than an amount equal to a Non-Defaulting Member's Percentage Interest multiplied by the Additional Capital Shortfall. If the total amount of Additional Capital Shortfall is not so contributed, the Manager may use any reasonable method to provide Non-Defaulting Members the opportunity to make Additional Capital Contributions, until the Additional Capital Shortfall is as fully contnbuted as possible. Following the Non-Defaulting Members' making of such Additional Capital Contributions to meet the Additional Capital Shortfall of the Defaulting Member, the Capital Accounts of the Members shall be adjusted accordingly and the Percentage Interest of the Defaulting Member shall be proportionately reduced and the Non·Defaulting Member or Members who have AVANA RIDGE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT -II of 28 contributed all or a portion of the Additional Capital Shortfall shall ha\'e his or their respecti\'e Percentage Interest increased proportionately. The Members recognize and acknowledge that a failure to make an Additional Capital Contribution will dilute such Member's Percentage interest. 7.3. Capital Accounts. 7.3.1. Establishment and Maintenance. A separate Capital Account will be maintained for each Unit Holder throughout the term of the Company in accordance with the rules of Regulation Section 1.704-1 (b)(2)(iv). Each Unit Holder's Capital Account will be increased by (1) the amount of money contributed by such Unit Holder to the Company; (2) the fair market value of property contributed by such Unit Holder to the Company (net of liabilities secured by such contributed property that the Company is considered to assume or take the property subject to under Code Section 752); (3) allocations to such Unit Holder of Net Profits; (4) any items in the nature of income and gain that are specially allocated to the Unit Holder pursuant to Sections 8.2 and 8.3; and (5) allocations to such Unit Holder of income and gain exempt from federal income tax. Each Unit Holder's Capital Account will be decreased by (1) the amount of money distributed to such Unit Holder by the Company; (2) the fair market value of property distributed to such Unit Holder by the Company (net of liabilities secured by such distributed property that such Unit Holder is considered to assume or take the property subject to Code Section 752); (3) allocations to such Unit Holder of expenditures described in Code Section 705(a)(2)(B); (4) any items in the nature of deduction and loss that are specially allocated to the Unit Holder pursuant to Sections 8.2 and 8.3; and (5) allocations to such Unit Holder of Net Losses. In the event of a permitted sale or exchange of a Membership interest or an Economic interest in the Company, the Capital Account of the transferor shall become the Capital Account of the transferee to the extent it relates to the transferred membership interest or Economic interest. 7.3.2. Compliance with Regulations. The manner in which Capital Accounts are to be maintained pursuant to this Section 7.3 is intended to comply with the requirements of Code Section 704(b) and the Regulations promulgated thereunder. If in the opinion of the Company's legal counselor accountants the manner in which Capital Accounts are to be maintained pursuant to the preceding provisions of this Section 7.3 should be modified in order to comply with Code Section 704(b) and the Regulations thereunder, then notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the preceding provisions of this Section 7.3 the method in which Capital Accounts are maintained shall be so modified; provided, however, that any change in the manner of maintaining Capital Accounts shall not materially alter the economic agreement between or among the Members. 7.4. Withdrawal or Reduction of Members' Contributions to Capital. A Member shall not receive out of the Company's Property any part of its Capital Contribution until all liabilities of the Company, except liabilities to Members on account of their Capital Contributions, have been paid or there remains Property of the Company sufficient to pay them. A Member, irrespective of the nature of its Capital Contribution, has only the right to demand and receive cash in return for its Capital Contribution. AVANA RIDGE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT -12 of 28 7.5. Gnaranty of Company Indebtedness. The Members shall have no obligation to guaranty Company indebtedness unless they agree to do so. ARTICLE 8. ALLOCATIONS OF NET PROFITS AND LOSSES 8.1. Allocation of Net Profit and Loss -In General. 8.1.1. Net Profit. Net Profit for each fiscal year shall be allocated to the Members in proportion to their respective share of Distributable Cash, to the extent thereof, and thereafter according to their respective Percentage Interests. 8.1.2. Net Loss. Net Loss for each fiscal year shall be allocated to the Members in proportion to their positive capital accounts balances, to the extent thereof, and thereafter according to their respective Percentage Interests. 8.1.3. Limitation. The Net Loss allocated to each Member for any Company fiscal year pursuant to Section 8.1.2 shall not exceed the maximum amount of Net Loss that can be so allocated without causing such Member to have a Deficit Capital Account at the end of the fiscal year. All Net Losses in excess of the limitation set forth in this Section 8.1.3, shall be allocated to the other Members who do not have Deficit Capital Accounts in proportion to their respective Percentage Interests. 8.2. Special Allocations. The following special allocations shall be made for any fiscal year of the Company in the following order: 8.2.1. Minimnm Gain Chargeback. If there is a net decrease in Company Minimum Gain during any Company fiscal year, each Unit Holder shall be specially allocated items of Company income and gain for such year (and, if necessary, subsequent years) in an amount equal to such Unit Holder's share of the net decrease in Company Minimum Gain, determined in accordance with Regulation Sections 1.704·2(f) and 1.704-2(g)(2). The items to be so allocated, and the manner in which those items are to be allocated among the Unit Holders, shall be determined in accordance with Regulation Sections l.704-2(f) and 1.704·2G)(2). This Section 8.2.1 is intended to satisfy the minimum gain chargeback requirement in Regulation Section 1. 704-2(f) and shall be interpreted and applied accordingly. 8.2.2. Member Minimnm Gain Chargeback. If there is a net decrease in Member Minimum Gain during any Company fiscal year, each Unit Holder who has a share of that Member Minimum Gain, determined in accordance with Regulation Section 1.704·2(i)(5), shall be specially allocated items of Company income and gain for such year (and, if necessary, subsequent years) in an amount equal to such Unit Holder's share of the net decrease in Member Minimum Gain, determined in accordance with Regulation Sections 1.704-2(i)(4) and 1.704- 2(i)(5). The items to be so allocated, and the manner in which those items are to be allocated among the Unit Holders, shall be determined in accordance with Regulation Sections 1.704- 2(h)(4) and 1.7042(j)(2). This Section 8.2.2 is intended to satisfy the minimum gain chargeback requirement in Regulation Section 1.704-2(i)(4) and shall be interpreted and applied accordingly. 8.2.3. Qnalified Income Offset. In the event that any Unit Holder unexpectedly receives any adjustments, allocations, or distributions described in Regulation Sections 1.704- AVANA RIDGE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT -13 of28 J(b)(2)(ii)(d)(4), (5) or (6), items of Company income and gain shall he specially allocated to such Unit Holder in an amount and in a manner sufficient to eliminate as quickly as possible, to the extent required by Regulation Section 1.704 2(1)(b)(2)(ii)(d), the Deficit Capital A count of the Unit Holder (which Deficit Capital Account shall be determined as if all other allocations provided for in this have been tentatively made as if this Section 8.2.3 were not in this Agreement). 8.2.4. Nonrecourse Deductions. Nonrecourse Deductions shall be allocated among the Unit Holders in accordance with their respective Percentage Interests. 8.2.5. Member Nonrecourse Deductions. Any Member Nonrecourse Deductions shall be specially allocated among the Unit Holders in accordance with Regulation Section l.704-2(i). 8.3. Corrective Allocations. 8.3.1. Allocations to Achieve Economic Agreement. The allocations set forth in the last sentence of Section 8.1.3 and in Section 8.2 are intended to comply with certain regulatory requirements under Code Section 704(b). The Members intend that, to the extent possible, all allocations made pursuant to such Sections will, over the term of the Company, be offset either with other allocations pursuant to Section 8.2 or with special allocations of other items of Company income, gain, loss, or deduction pursuant to this Section 8.3.1. Accordingly, the Manager is hereby authorized and directed to make offsetting allocations of Company income, gain, loss or deduction under this Section 8.3.1 in whatever manner the Manager determine is appropriate so that, after such offsetting special allocations are made, the Capital Accounts of the Unit Holders are, to the extent possible, equal to the Capital Accounts each would have if the provisions of Section 8.2 were not contained in this Agreement and all income, gain, loss and deduction of the Company were instead allocated pursuant to Section 8.1. 8.3.2. Waiver of Application of Minimum Gain Chargeback. The Manager shall request from the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service a waiver, plll"suant to Regulation Section 1.704-2(t)(4), of the minimum gain chargeback requirements of Regulation Section 1.704·2(t) if the application of such minimum gain chargeback requirement would cause a permanent distortion of the economic arrangement of the Members, as reflected in Section 8.1. 8.4. Otbel' Allocation Rules. 8.4.1. GeneraL Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, all items of Company inoome, gain, loss, deduction, and any other allocations not otherwise provided for shall be divided among the Unit Holders in the same proportions as they share Net Profits or Net Losses, as the case may be, for the year. 8.4.2. Allocation of Recapture Items. In making any allocation among the Unit Holders of inoome or gain from the sale or other disposition of a Company asset, the oroinary inoome portion, if any, of such inoome and gain resulting from the recapture of oost reoovery or other deductions shall be allocated among those Unit Holders who were previously allocated (or whose predecessors-in-interest were previously allocated) the oost recovery deductions or other AVANARIDGE,LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT -14 of 28 deductions resulting in the recapture items, in proportion to the amount of such cost reco~ery deductions or other deductions previously allocated to them. 8.4.3. Allocation of Excess Nonrecourse Liabilities. Solely for purposes of determining a Unit Holder's proportionate share of the "excess nonrecourse liabilities" of the Company within the meaning of Regulation Section 1.752-3(a)(3), the Unit Holders' interests in the Company's profits shall be determined in accordance with Section 8.1.1 of this Agreement. 8.4.4. Allocations in Connection with Varying Interests. If, during a Company fiscal year, there is (i) a permitted transfer of a Membership Interest or Economic Interest under this Agreement, or (ii) the admission of a Member or additional Members, Net Profit, Net Loss, each item thereof, and all other tax items of the Company for such period shall be divided and allocated among the Unit Holders by taking into account their varying interests during such fiscal year in accordance with Code Section 706( d) and using any conventions pennitted by law and selected by the Manager. 8.5. Determination of Net Profit or Loss. 8.5.1. Computation of Net Profit or Loss. The Net Profit or Net Loss of tbe Company, for each fiscal year or other period, shall be an amount equal to the Company's taxable income or loss for such period, determined in accordance with Code Section 703(a) (and, for this purpose, all items of income, gain loss or deduction required to be stated separately pursuant to Code Section 703 (a)(J ), including income and gain exempt from federal income tax, shall be included in taxable income or loss). 8.5.2. Adjustments to Net Profit or Loss. For purposes of computing taxable income or loss on the disposition of an item of Company Property or for purposes of determining the cost recovery, depreciation, or amortization deduction with respect to any property, the Company shall use such property's book value deternlined in accordance with Regulation Section 1.704-1(b). Consequently, each property's book value shall be equal to its adjusted basis for federal income tax purposes, except as follows: 8.5.2.1. The initial book value of any property contributed by a Member to the Company shall be the gross fair market value of such property at the time of contribution; 8.5.2.2. In the sole discretion of the Manager, the book value of all Company properties may be adjusted to equal their respective gross fair market values, as determined by tbe Manager as of the following times: (1) in connection with the acquisition of an interest in the Company by a new or existing Member for more than a de minimis capital contribution, (2) in connection with the liquidation of the Company as defined in Regulation Section 1.704-(l)(b)(2)(ii)(g), or (3) in connection with a more than de minimis distribution to a retiring or a continuing Unit Holder as consideration for all or a portion of his or its interest in the Company. In the event of a revaluation of any Company assets hereunder, the Capital Accounts of the Unit Holders shall be adjusted, including continuing adjustments for depreciation, to the extent provided in Regulation Section 1.704-(l)(b)(2)(iv)(f); AVANA RIDGE., LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT-IS of28 8.5.2.3. If the book value of an item of Company property has been detennined pursuant to this Section 8.5.2, such book value shall thereafter be used, and shall thereafter be adjusted by depreciation or amortization, if any, taken into account with respect to such property, for purposes of computing taxable income or loss. 8.5.3. Items SpeciaJly AUocated. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Section 8.5 any items that are specially allocated pursuant to Sections 8.2 or 8.3 shall not be taken into account in computing Net Profit or Net Loss. 8.6. Mandatory Tax AUocations Under Code Section 704(c). 8.6.1. In accordance with Code Section 704(c) and Regulation Section 1.704-3, income, gain, loss and deduction with respect to any properly contributed to the capital of the Company shall, solely for tax purposes, be allocated among the Unit Holders so as to take account of any variation between the adjusted basis of such property to the Company for federal income tax purposes and its initial book value computed in accordance with Section 8.5.2.1. Prior to the contribution of any property to the Company that has a fair market value that differs from its adjusted tax basis in the hands of the contributing Member on the date of contribution, the contributing Member and the Manager (or, if the contributing Member is the Manager, a Majority Interest of the non-contributing Members) shall agree upon the allocation method to be applied with respect to that property under Regulation Section 1.704-3. 8.6.2. If the book value of any Company property is adjusted pursuant to Section 8.5.2.2, subsequent allocations of income, gain, loss and deduction with respect to such property shall take account of any variation between the adjusted basis of such property for federal income tax purposes and its book value in the same manner as under Code Section 704(c). The choice of allocation methods under Regulation Section 1.704-3 with respect to such revalued property shall be made by the Manager. 8.6.3. Allocations pursuant to this Section 8.6 are solely for purposes of federal, state, and local taxes and shall not affect, or in any way be taken into account in computing, any Unit Holder's Capital Account or share of Net Profit, Net Loss, or other items as computed for book purposes, or distributions pursuant to any provision of this Agreement. ARTICLE 9. DISTRIBUTIONS 9.1. Distributions of Distributable Cash. The Company will distribute Distributable Cash in a fiscal year as it becomes available to the Members as follows: 9.1.1. Pro rata in accordance with each Member's Capital Account in an amount up to each Member's Capital Accollht; and then 9.1.2. The balance, if any, shall be distributed to the Members pro rata in accordance with their Percentage Interests in the Company. 9.2. Distributions of Sale or Rermancing Proceeds from a Capital Event. Upon the occurrence of a non-terminating Capital Event, such as a refinancing of the deht secured by the Property, the net proceeds shall be distributed to the Members as follows: AVANA RIDGE, LLC OPERATINGAGREEMENT-160f28 9.2.1. Pro rata in accordance with each Member's Capital Account in an amount up to each Member's Capital Account; and then 9.2.2. The balance, if any, shall be distributed to the Members pro rata ill accordance with their Percentage Interests in the Company. 9.3. Distribution of Proceeds from a Terminating Capital Event. Upon the dissolution of the Company, the proceeds of liquidation, including any proceeds from a Capital Event and any other funds or assets of the Company, shall be distributed in the same order of priority as set forth in Section 9.2. 9.4. Distributions in Kind. Non-cash assets, if any, shall be distributed in a manner that reflects how cash proceeds from the salc of such assets for fair market value would have been distributed (after any unrealized gain or loss attributable to such non-cash assets has been allocated among the Unit Holders in accordance with Article 8). 9.5. Withholding; Amounts Withheld Treated as Distributions. The Manager is authorized to withhold from distributions, or with respect to allocations or payments, to Unit Holders and to pay over to the appropriate federal, state or local governmental authority any amounts required to be withheld pursuant to the Code or provisions of applicable state or local law. All amounts withheld pursuant to the preceding sentence in connection with any payment, distribution or allocation to any Unit Holder shall be treated as amounts distributed to such Unit Holder pursuant to this Article 9 for all purposes of this Agreement. 9.6. Limitation on Distributions. No distribution shall be declared and paid unless, after the distribution is made, the assets of the Company are in excess of all liabilities of the Company, except liabilities to Members on account of their contributions. ARTICLE 10. ACCOUNTING, BOOKS, AND RECORDS 10.1. Accounting Principles. The Company's books and records shall be kept, and its income tax returns prepared, under such permissible method of accounting, consistently applied, as the Manager determines is in the best interest of the Company and its Members. 10.2. Interest on and Return of Capital Contributions. No Member shall be entitled to interest on its Capital Contribution or to return of its Capital Contribution, except as otherwise specifically provided for herein. 10.3. Loans to Company. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent any Member from making secured or unsecured loans to the Company. 10.4. Accounting Period. The Company's accounting period shall be the calendar year. 10.5. Records, Audits and Reports. At the expense of the Company, the Manager shall maintain records and accounts of all operations and expenditures of the Company. At a minimum the Company shall keep at its principal place of business the following records: AVANA RIDGE. LLC OPERATI~GAGREEMENT-17 of28 10.5.1. A current list and past list, setting forth the full name and last known mailing address of each Member, Economic Interest Owner and Manager; 10.5.2. A copy of the Certificate of Formation and all amendments thereto; 10.5.3. Copies of this Agreement and all amendments hereto; 10.5.4. Copies of the Company's federal, state, and local tax returns and reports, if any, for the three most recent years; 10.5.5. Minutes of every meeting of the Members and any written consents obtained from Members for actions taken by Members without a meeting; and 10.5.6. Copies of the Company's financial statements for the three most recent years. 10.6. Tax Matters Partner. 10.6.1. Designation. Joel Mezistrano shall be the "tax matters partner" of the Company for purposes of Code Section 6221 ~. and corresponding provisions of any state or local tax law. 10.6.2. Expenses of Tax Matters Partner; Indemnification. The Company shall indemnify and reimburse the tax matters partner for all reasonable expenses, including legal and accounting fees, claims, liabilities, losses and damages incurred in connection with any administrative or judicial proceeding with respect to the tax liability of the Unit Holders attributable to the Company. The payment of all such expenses shall be made before any distributions are made to Unit Holders (and such expenses shall be taken into consideration for purposes of determining Distributable Cash) or any discretionary Reserves are set aside by the Manager. Neither the tax matters partner nor any Member shall have any obligation to provide funds for such purpose. The provisions for exculpation and indemnification of the Manager set forth in Section 5.7 of this Agreement shall be fully applicable to a Member aeting as tax matters partner for the Company. 10.6.3. Returns and Other Elections. 10.6.3.1. The Manager shall cause the preparation and timely filing of all tax and information returns required to be filed by the Company pursuant to the Code and all other tax and information returns deemed necessary and required in each jurisdiction in which the Company does business. Copies of such returns, or pertinent information therefrom, shall be furnished to the Unit Holders within a reasonable time after the end of the Company's fiscal year. 10.6.4. Except as otherwise expressly provided to the contrary in this Agreement, all elections permitted to be made by the Company under federal or state laws shaH be made by the Manager in their, his or its sole discretion. AVANA RIDGE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT-IS of28 ARTICLE 11. TRANSFERABILITY General -Voluntary Transfers. Unless the Members unanimously agree, neither a Member nor an Economic Interest Owner shall have the right to (a) sell, assign, transfer, exchange, pledge, hypothecate, encumber, or otherwise transfer for consideration, (collectively, "sell" or "sale"), and (b) gift, bequeath or otherwise transfer for no consideration whether or not by operation of law, except in the case of bankruptcy (collectively "gift") all or any part of its Membership Interest or Economic Interest. Each Member and Economic Interest Owner hereby acknowledges the reasonableness of the restrictions on sale and gift of Membership Interests and Economic Interests imposed by this Agreement in view of the Company's purposes and the relationship of the Members and Economic Interest Owners. Accordingly, the restrictions on sale and gift contained herein shall be specifically enforceable. Any such purported sale or gift will not be recognized by the Company, and will be deemed null and void. In no event will the purported transferee in a sale or gift transaction have any Economic Interest, nor any right to participate in the management of the business and affairs of the Company or to become a Member. 11.2 Involuntary Transfers. 11.2.1 Death of a Member. Upon the death of a Member or Joel Mezistrano (the "Deceased-Member"), the personal representative of the Deceased-Member's estate (or any person entitled to receive the Deceased-Member's Membership Interest upon his or her death) shall be obligated to sell, and the Company shall be obligated to purchase, the Membership Interest of the Deceased Member for a purchase price determined pursuant to Section 11.3 to be paid as provided in Section 11.4. If no personal representative is appointed and qualified v .. ithin sixty (60) days following the death of the Deceased-Member, such persons as are entitled to receive the Deceased-Member's Membership Interest as a result of his death shall be deemed to have made an offer to sell his Membership Interest to the Company for a purchase price determined pursuant to Section 11.3 to be paid as provided in Section 11.4. 11.2.2 Disability of a Member. If a Member or Joel Mezistrano becomes totally "Disabled" (defined as provided in any disability insurance policy covering such Member through the Company, or, ifthere is no such policy, as the inability to be gainfully employed without serious discomfort or pain and without material injury to health or danger to life, referred to as either Disabled or a "Disability") (a "Disabled Member"), and such total Disability continues beyond one (1) year from the date of such Disability, the Company shall purchase, and the Disabled Member shall sell to the Company, the Membership Interest of the Disabled Member, for a purchase price determined pursuant to Section 11.3 to be paid as provided in Section 11.4. 11.2.3 Bankruptcy or Insolvency. In the event any of the Membership Interest of a Member shall be levied upon, sequestered, administered by a receiver, trustee in bankruptcy, or debtor in possession in bankruptcy, or sold or proposed to be sold in foreclosure or execution or under any power of sale contained in a note, loan A V ANA RIDGE, LLC OPERATlNGAGREEMENT-190f28 agreement, deed of trust or similar document, or by operation of law, the Member whose Membership Interest is thereby affected shall give the Company written notice of such occurrence and the Company shall have the option, exercisable for a period of sixty (60) days after receipt of such notice, to purchase all or a part of such Membership Interest at the purchase price determined pursuant to Section 11.3 to be paid as provided in Section 11.4, by giving notice of such right to the person then having legal title to such Membership Interest. In the event that the Company fails to exercise its option hereunder, the other Member(s) shall have the same right for a period of thirty (30) days after the Company declines or fails to exercise its option hereunder. 11.2.4 Dissolution of Marriage. In the event of any separation agreement, or in the event of dissolution of the marriage (each a "Marriage Termination Event") of any Member or Joel Mezistrano (the "Member Spouse"), his or her spouse (the ''Non-Member Spouse") hereby agrees to release, convey and/or transfer whatever separate property interest or community property interest such Non-Member Spouse may have in the Membership Interest of the Company to the Member- Spouse upon such Marriage Termination Event, and as part of any property settlement pursuant to such Marriage Termination Event, the Non-Member Spouse shall be compensated for such interest held by the Member-Spouse. In the event the Member Spouse and the Non-Member Spouse cannot agree as to the value of such interest of the Non-Member Spouse, the value of any Membership Interest in which such Non-Member Spouse has an interest shall be determined in accordance with Section 11.3 and payment shall be made by the Member Spouse (not the Company) as provided in Section 11.4 or as otherwise decreed by a court of competent jurisdiction. Each spouse of a Member shall execute the Spousal Consent set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein. 11.3 Determination of Purchase Price. The Purchase Price of the Membership Interest sold pursuant to Article II of this Agreement shall be the sum the Company pays to a selling Member for his Capital Interest and the sum the Company pays to a selling Member for his Profits Interest in the Company. 11.3.1.1 For purposes of Section 11.2.1 through Section 11.2.4, that portion of the Purchase Price attributable to a Member's "Capital Interest" is an amount equal to his Capital Account measured at the end of the first calendar quarter following the event which gave rise to such sale, with allocations of gain and loss made at the end of such quarter to reflect profit and loss year to date. 11.3.1.2 For purposes of Section 11.2.1 through Section 11.2.4, that portion of the Purchase Price attributable to a Member's "Profits Interest" is an amount equal to profits allocated and distributed to such selling Member pursuant to this Agreement following an event which gives rise to a sale under Article II. Upon the Company's execution of a Subordinated Note for Capital Interest in payment for a selling Member's Capital Interest, his Membership Interest shall convert to a Profits Interest. A selling Member, when selling his Membership Interest pursuant to this Article 11, is deemed to have withdrawn A V ANA RIDGE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT -20 of28 from the Company and his Membership Interest shall tenninate in all respects on the day when the Company delivers the executed Subordinated Note for Profits Interest. 11.4 Payment and Terms. The Purchase Price shall be paid as provided in this Section 11.4. 11.4.1 Subordinated Note for Capital Interest. At the end of the first calendar quarter following the event that gave rise to a sale under this Article II, the Company shall execute in fayor of the selling Member a subordinated promissory note in an amount equal to the Selling Member's Capital Interest with standard commercial terms (the "Subordinated Note for Capital Interest"). Interest shall accrue at the most recently published short term AFR rate, and shall be payable when Principal Payments are due. The maturity date of the Subordinated Note for Capital Interest shall be the closing date of the sale of the last portion or piece of Company Property that was owned, or under contract to be acquired, as of the date giving rise to such sale. The payee under the Subordinated Note for Capital Interest shall execute a subordination agreement upon the request of any lender to the Company or any affiliate of the Company. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, in the event the Managers determine, at anytime prior to winding down and dissolving the Company, capital is required to retire debts of the Company, then the amount due under Subordinated Note for Capital Interest shal1 be reduced by an amount equal to the seJling Member's pro rata portion of all such capital so required. The Members understand and acknowledge this limitation is required to facilitate the proper wind down of the Company under the Act. 11.4.2 Subordinated Note for Profits Interest. Contemporaneous with the execution of the Subordinated Note for Capital Interest, the Company shall also execute in favor of the selling Member a subordinated promissory note in an amount equal to the Selling Member's Profits Interest with standard commercial terms (the "Subordinated Note for Profits Interest"). Interest shall accrue at the most recently published short term AFR rate, with a balloon payment of principal and accrued interest due and payable when all Company Property is sold, all debts are paid, and the Company has been wound down. The "Principal Payment," or the amount of the selling Member's Profits Interest, is equal to the selling Member's distributable share of Net Profits in the Company as determined in accordance with this Agreement, which Principal Payment will not be known until the Company is wound down. If there are no profits to distribute, then the principal and interest due under the Subordinated Note for Profits Interest is zero. The payee under the Subordinated Note for Profits Interest shall execute a subordination agreement upon the request of any lender to the Company or an affiliate of the Company. A" ANA RIDGE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT· 21 of28 ARTICLE 12. DISSOLUTION AND TERMINATION 12.1. Dissolution. The Company shall be dissolved upon the occurrence of any of the following events: 12.1.1. upon the Tennination Date; 12.1.2. by the written agreement of all Members; 12.1.3. a Person ceases to be a Member upon the occurrence of any of the events specified in Section 25.15.130 of the Act, unless the business of the Company is continued with the consent of all of the remaining Members within ninety (90) days following the occurrence of such event; or 12.1.4. upon the simultaneous death of Members resulting in only one remaining Member. 12.2. Allocation of Net Profit and Loss in Liquidation. The allocation of Net Profit, Net Loss and other items of the Company following the date of dissolution, including but not limited to gain or loss upon sale of all or substantially all of the Company's assets, shall be detennined in accordance with the provisions of Articles 8 and 2. and shall be credited or charged to the Capital Accounts of the Unit Holders in the same manner as Net Profit, Net Loss, and other items of the Company would have been credited or charged if there were no dissolution and liquidation. 12.3. Winding Up, Liquidation and Distribution of Assets. Upon dissolution, the Manager shall immediately proceed to wind up the affairs of the Company, unless the business of the Company is continued as provided in Section 12.3.3 and Section 12.1. The Manager shall sell or otherwise liquidate all of the Company's assets as promptly as practicable (except to the extent the Manager may detennine to distribute any assets to the Unit Holders in kind) and shall apply the proceeds of such sale and the remaining Company assets in the following order of priority: 12.3.1. Payment of creditors, including Manager and Members who are creditors, to the extent otherwise permitted by law, in satisfaction of liabilities of the Company, other than liabilities for distributions to Members; 12.3.2. To establish any reserves that the Manager deems reasonably necessary for contingent or unforeseen obligations of the Company and, at the expiration of such period as the Manager shall deem advisable, the balance then remaining in the manner provided in Section 12.3.3 below; 12.3.3. By the end of the taxable year in which the liquidation occurs (or, if liquidation occurs within ninety (90) days prior to the end of the taxable year, within ninety (90) days after the date of such liquidation), to the Unit Holders in proportion to the positive balances of their respective Capital Accounts, as determined after taking into account all Capital Account adjustments for the taxable year during which the liquidation occurs (other than those made pursuant to this Section 12.3.3). AVANA RIDGE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT -22 of 2 8 12.4. No Obligation to Restore Negative Capital Account Balance on Liquidation. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, upon a liquidation within the meaning of Regulation Section 1.704-1 (b )(2)(ii)(g), if any Unit Holder has a negative Capital Account balance (after giving effect to all contributions, distributions, allocations and other Capital Account adjustments for all taxable years, including the year during which such liquidation occurs), such Unit Holder shall have no obligation to make any Capital Contribution to the Company, and the negative balance of such Unit Holder's Capital Account shall not be considered a debt owed by such Unit Holder to the Company or to any other Person for any purpose whatsoever. 12.5. Dissolution. The Manager shall comply with any applicable requirements of applicable law pertaining to the winding up of the affairs of the Company and the final distribution of its assets. Upon completion of the winding up, liquidation and distribution of the assets, the Company shall be deemed dissolved. 12.6. Certificate of Dissolution. After dissolution pursuant to RCW 25.15.270, the Manager shall file a certificate of dissolution pursuant to RCW 25.15.273. After the filing of the certificate of dissolution, the Company shall wind up business pursuant to RCW 25.15.295, dispose of any known claims pursuant to RCW 25.15.298 and distribute assets pursuant to RCW 25.15.300. 12.7. Return of Contribution Nonrecourse to Other Members. Except as provided by law or as expressly provided in this Agreement, upon dissolution each Unit Holder shall look solely to the assets of the Company for the return of its Capital Contribution. If the Property remaining after the payment or discharge of liabilities of the Company is insufficient to return the contributions of Members, no Unit Holder shall have recourse against any other Unit Holder. ARTICLE 13. INDEPENDENT ACTIVITIES OF MANAGER AND MEMBERS Any Manager, Member or Economic Interest Owner may engage in or possess an interest in other business ventures of every nature and description, independently or with others, including but not limited to, the ownership, financing, management, employment by, lending to or otherwise participating in businesses which are similar to the business of the Company, and neither the Company, the Manager or any Unit Holders shall have any right by virtue of this Agreement in and to such independent ventures or to the income or profits therefrom. ARTICLE 14. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 14.1. Notices. Any notice, demand, or communication required or permitted under this Agreement shall be deemed to have been duly given if delivered personally to the party to whom directed or, if mailed by registered or certified mail, postage and charges prepaid, addressed (a) if to a Member, to the Member's address specified on attached Schedule 1, (b) ifto the Company, to the address specified in Section 2.3, and (c) if to the Manager, to the address specified in Section 2.3. Except as otherwise provided herein, any such notice shall be deemed to be given when personally delivered or, if mailed, three (3) business days after the date of mailing. A Member, the Company or the Manager may change its address for the purposes of notices AVANA RIDGE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT-23 of28 hereunder by gi\;ng notice to the others specifying such changed address in the manner specified in this Section 14.1. 14.2. Governing Law. TIlls Agreement shal1 be construed and interpreted according to the internal laws of the State of Washington. 14.3. Amendments. This Agreement may not be amended except by the unanimous written agreement of all of the Members. 14.4. Construction. Whenever the singular number is used in this Agreement and when required by the context, the same shall include the plural and vice versa, and the masculine gender shall include the feminine and neuter genders and vice versa. 14.5. Headings. The heading in this Agreement are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect the interpretations of this Agreement. 14.6. Waivers. The failure of any Person to seek redress for violation of or to insist upon the strict performance of any covenant or condition of this Agreement shal1 not prevent a subsequent act, which would have original1y constituted a violation, from having the effect of an original violation. 14.7. Rights and Remedies Cumulative. The rights and remedies provided by this Agreement are cumulative and the use of anyone right or remedy shall not preclude or waive the right to use any or all other remedies. Said rights and remedies are given in addition to any other rights may have by law, statute, ordinance or otherwise. 14.8. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement or the application thereof to any Person or circumstance shall be invalid, illegal or unenforceable to any extent, the remainder of this Agreement and the application thereof shall not be affected and shal1 be enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. 14.9. Heirs, Successors and Assigns. Each of the covenants, terms, provisions and agreements herein contained shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and, to the extent permitted by this Agreement, their respective heirs, legal representatives, successors and assigns. 14.10. Creditors. None of the provisions of this Agreement shall be for the benefit of or enforceable by any creditors of the Company. 14.11. Counterparts. TIlls Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. 14.12. Investment Representations. 14.12.1. The Units have not been registered under the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Act of Washington or any other state securities laws (collectively, the "Securities Acts") because the Company is issuing the Units in reliance upon the exemptions AVANA RIOGE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT -24 of 28 from the registration requirements of the Securities Acts, and the Company is relying upon the fact that the Units are to be held by each Unit Holder for investment. 14.12.2. Accordingly, each Unit Holder hereby confirms the Units have been acquired for such Unit Holder's own account, for investment and not with a view to the resale or distribution thereof and may not be offered or sold to anyone unless there is an effectiYe registration or other qualification relating thereto under all applicable Securities Acts or unless such Unit Holder delivers to the Company an opinion of counsel, satisfactory to the Company, that such registration or other qualification is not required. The Unit Holders understand that the Company is under no obligation to register the Units or to assist any Unit Holder in complying with any exemption from registration under the Securities Acts. AVANA RIDGE. LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT· 25 of 28 Executed by the undersigned Members effective as of the date first above written. AVANA RIDGE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT -26 of28 MEMBERS: Michael Gladstein Joel Mezistrano A&ll Mezistrano, Trustee of the Mezistrano Family Trust dated January 20, 2006 AVANA RIDGE PPUD Submittal December 2015 Title Report Exceptions AmR RECORDING MAlL TO: Avana Ridge, liC 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Flied for Record at Request of: Arst AmerIcan 11t1e Insurance CompanV II'JIIIIIII PAGE .... , OF eez 74." 11/38/28IS 14-37 KING COUNTY, iIA PAGE .. " OF eel STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED File No: 4243-2482190 (CD) Grantor(s): Springbrook Ridge LLC Grantee(s): Avana Ridge, LLC Date: November 23, 2015 Abbreviated Legal: Lots 1 8r. 2, City of Renton LLA No, LUA-09-024-LLA LNO-30-0349, Ree. 20111216900001 Additional Legal on page: Assessor's Tax Parcel No(s): 292305-9009-07 and 292305-9148-09 THE GRANTOR(S) Springbrook Ridge LLC, a Washington limited liability company for and in consideration of Ten Dollars and other Good and Valuable COnSideration, in hand paid, conveys, and warrants to Avana Ridge, LLC, a Washington limited liability company, the following described real estate, Situated in the County of King, State of Washington. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Real property in the County of King, State of WaShington, described as follows: LOTS 1 AND 2 OF CITY OF RENTON LOT UNE ADJUSTMENT NO. LUA-09-024-LLA LND- 30-0349, RECORDED DECEMBER 16, 2011 UNDER RECORDING NO, 20111216900001, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. Subject To: This conveyance Is subject to covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements, If any, affecting title, which may appear in the public record, including those shown on any recorded plat or survey_ Page 1 of 2 LPB 10-0S • APN: 292305-9009-01 Statutory Warranty Deed -continued FLle No.; 4243-2482190 (CD) Springbrook Ridge LLC, a Washington limited liability company STATE OF Washington COUNlY OF King ) )-55 ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Cathy Cugini O'N~~i~re the person(s) who appeared before me, and sa~n(s) acknowledged that ""Q!!SPthey signed this Instrument, on oath stated that he~ey isfare authorized to execute the Instrument and acknowledged it as the Manager of Springbrook Ridge LLC to be the free and voluntary act of such party(ies) for the uses and purposes on in . Ie. Dated: II-W-'2.op,::> , 'JICOLE LARIE JOHNSON ", NOTARY PUBLIC I ~ 1 ~ TE OF WAStDNGTON " ';'ll,".~!SSION EXPIRtoS I !;,NUARY 29 2018 • -,,; wc;'c No ry c in and for the State of Washington Residing at: ~~\,)o..A rr.~ My appointment expires: 01-,<;-1 {( Page 2 of2 NICOLE LARIE JOHNSON NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF WASHINGTON COMMISSION EXPIR~S JANUARY 29 2018 LP81O-C5 .OR~HIR. PAOIFIC RAILWAY DEED or GIn D •• a Mo.2S914.W OOMPA.Y mIl DIID, .. 41 the lOth 4aJ ot J)eo~bel't 1n ttl. Jlar. ot INI' Lol'4 .... __ DiR. _droa ... a tiny.;..tp •.•. III tis. 1I011!11D111 I PAC_ma !\AI,urAY ,(lO~AJI! •• '_01'Por:at!l,o_,,_-o:r .';'JIi:talle ~~ Yl~'.OJW1~. ~. /'11 pOn ..... '0 IeIl'!JlDl\l I'ACIFI1J 'IIAIUlAY FO!JIII)AnOR.;.ob.l'1~b1.e 00 .... iii·'· pO .... UOD or tho. s.tato or. IU,nn .•• ota.· ba~ng 1ta. Pr1. DO.1»&1 pl.o •• or I ~lD'.' ln, at.pau l , In-"th. GCMm:t,. ot Rbi • ."., 04 aut, or , 1U.nn •• ota, grant •• , VI~lBemR: 'I'bt _to!' 40 ••. h .... 1Il ao ...... aa.Y.T _ qllu.l.olJl to. tho. _te" tho tolloVlng 4 •• o~be4 "".&1 .••• o1t ... to4 ln tho county ot J:1ng. III1a State of lIUMng1:on. to-nt: !lie .... th ... t quarter or .outllW •• tq ...... t.r (sdotnt) ot S.o_ tl ... W.",t';'IIl.D •. (291. ln toinilMp .tir."ty;, ...... (2j!:JI.rtb. llange fly. (5) !la.tof th .• 1il~tt.ilmU#·;~~UH;1;Ii.ioet ...... b~"~" 01:11 (1) ao_re oor:'~."~,,.t~· ~;"-~t.o~'-~~~O~,\~.~~4.~.4 4ate4 rebl'Ulll'J' 19. ~926. ....ool'4 .•. 4·.IIa,i'~ ·~.1~¥): l,iI. !G..ut8. ~k_1J o~ .", .• a.,. on' ,P&841 6U,i-,:,r'cs~rti q':;',~4:' O~qwlt.li,~d' .~)~ o1l11lty-.br •• bandro4th., (6.'8, )· •• r .. · oODnJ:04: .10" J.·:lI; Al11>i'1«bt uDderMo4 4ate4J\a.lT ·16.1,,,,.p ••• i'4Wi.~1·1O.19jll'·1""'.1iIIo. lS93. Book D ot DO.aa •. .::. pogo 4S0.l'eoojo4a' a,t "S4,Oftllty. IIlth. lforth.lII.tern IlIPro ... nent: aCIIap&D7. pl"8480, ••• _OI" -1ft' lntere.t ot tbe gloantor. . . Dl •. traa' _ ot land hereb7 -OOn.T"'-':~ ,oo!\1iatna -thlr"'~t._o ani lennteen hwldr"edthll (32;.11) ~or"" lIIore ,or 1i •• r .. ·.U4 1. n~J.ot to an ..... ent in til. pu.bl1cs rap aD,. public roa4il heret,otor.l_ 1&14 out or_, •• taljl1lhed and now· alltl. OTeri ana. '.a'r:o •• U1 ~ or the pre.f.... ",' .-, D:aept1ns aa4 re •• PriM unto the ,'~tor:_t ~1t.:_ ",oo, •• Gr. aD4 ae.lgu. toreYer, .11.1neral, at an,. _n8:~Ur" ;"'t.oiY~i ~lna:lu41ftg bu.t 110t U.lte4 to uranlulI, ooal, lron',:· DaturaJ;;, p. __ -,and otl-ln, upCRl or lUlder 'M14 lUl4, ,togtlttier wi-ttl ill._ u_i~,''Ot'-:'ftab~,()t-' th',-aur- t .. oe •••• , ~ -neo~I'.:rY tor Gp:tor1ng. tOI"_' ~~ ~n~.ng.-o~ _ o'tiun~_ ~~.,_.~r~O!~_ ~~:,.~ns,.~-th'-~~~j-:J!1'!= _.~~:~.~~_r, ,~t. wooI •• on __ -&ad< .. elgaul'l" ._lia'I'l-".1' to i the·-~8:I);j; •• '; or' to 'it •. _'· 8110;.' oe.~or. 01" "'180" .. 1Il8rket " .. lue ~t t~. t1 •• aia.lftg, op'1"'«tlon. al'", o ... need of auoh-p0l'1i1:On, af.:the .Urtaoe-",u:U7,-be,_u.e4.'for nob ~.ratlon. 01' inJUred" theioebJ', blolUUng."u, iWpl"'OYeiilent. '$tier.aD. ~ Il10'(1: ~lII! ~l!0ID •. a~l"'<1 .1I1S11la.r.tbe.~Y.o"srant.4p!'ft1- IH. t~eth.r,1f1tb 't:he:-~.'ftUoe.f unto ,tbe gN;n.~ •• , ttl IUC:- O"iON .,4. u.lp.-, to!'rl'ei-._ I1111t~1 1III!l\IXIr. tbe grttntor baa ..... 04 tb' ... ··~ (1) .. . j cl , .\ . \ to be c.ale4~tb lt8 oOl'POl'at ... el, and 1l1Ple4 1>1 it. rroe1de':'. • the da1 an~ ye.,. Ur.t .boY" Wl'ltten. 1I0R'rllDUI PACIFIO I\AlUlAT CO!IPAJIT, ~!fMI!!M~ l'rA'f.E or \lIlrilEioifA I : .. ' I III 1II'l'IIEII1IRDUXI', 1 baTe be.l'lIWltc .8.t II'!' _d and at- Ul<e4 II'!' oftlG1al' ... 1 the dllY andy ..... lo.t aboYe .... ltten. I • lUI!!!!!! by and betweeD. ___ .. L .... &"'E ..... PYES"" ..... "T!!EIII ....... c,,!l!PA!!X .... "" ..... ____________ and ________________________ --ihereiDafter called. "Gr .... tor (.)" and _.:EIII~l::G..:C::0I.ti'1'Y=~.:II:::.:::'I'1t:a:...:D::ISTRlC'r:::!=::...H::O::..:...:S~8:.... _________ _ • lDLIIlicip&l cOr'poratiou. of _...:JCh::::!:J'i... _____ """"COUIlty, Stet. of Wa.biDaton, Wl'DIESSETII : Tbat laiel Grator (.) for and in cClDat.d.eraUoo 01. the sum of $ , to them in haad paid. by the .aid. Or_cu, _d ferr other .el .. .,I. cQD.'id.r~ re.ce1pt whereof :i.e hereby ac1c:nowleclaed, do by tb ••• p~._t. araut, barpt:ll. sell I cODVey, ad cODfint. into the .. td GreC .. a 'I'labt-of-wy or "'ellllDt for • ll&tema1D v1tb the ~.,aaq .".teo. .. aac .. over. tbrouah .. aeroll .. d upoo the· followtDa ·.IKribecl propUty -.ituatl" CGUIlty, W.1biDataa, particularly The. SE 1/4 of the SW 114 of Section 19, tvp 2.3N, ~-S£ .. Wilt 'foae.ther witb vacated road, le'8 Welterly 405 feet of portion ly1ns'Horth of North lfae of lOlLJ Place S.I. & Borth of Hortb 111le of sa1d vacated road.; kcept -Nortb~ly 150 feet tbere .. of leaa portioa. lying 1lE1y of sdd 1031'4 Plaee S.E. md Southerly of said vaclted road. ('lou: Lot 11). A 20 foot pemanent easement d.eBcribed &8 the !&aterly %0 feet of the Westerly 132 feet of the Northerly 150 feet of the above described ~ lot; I ADd Also; A. 20 foot penanent easement lying within tbe abuva -described t.u lot ."d the center line of ,which :le' desc,rib~ &S ft?11owe; B~_~&-, ~t .• ,p~:l.nt. ~ -,~_ East l1D.e of the SW 1/4 of SecttOll 29. twp 2.3 N, B._ 51, .•• 4,tlS-..'30 fe,t Rortber1y Of the SE comer thereof; thence,1t 81.79 1 W .bDI the edge_ of ._,private paVed. road kncnro. as S.E. 174th Street. 1000 feet more -or 1e8 • .--to.--tbe __ ~~~-~Y.:~~~d)f J~ ,G. Carr Road. (106t.b .lace S~E.) axcept. that portion vit.bin 1ea..oIi'-~· (SSU-SC); 'rogetlier with a to, ,foot PerlDl1leD.t ~I~t S feet 00.-eacb dele .0£, the fire hydrants and their coauecting r(al8 .. constructed. The .. 14 Crantee .hall have the right vitbout prior institution of aay suit or proceed.iIIIl at law, at t1lDa. al ma.y be [~e8Ilary. to enter upon aaid property for the purpose of ~on.tructlul. repair1nl. alteriug or reeonacructinB .aid watenaain or Mkin& any CODDection. therewith. without 1neurriul any bp1 abU_tloD or llab1Uty tbuefor; =prov~~i.d~.~d:tbo~t~'~UC~h~.~ ... ~.~t~ruc~t~l~"'~'::_ repa1r1na, alter1a& or recoaltl'UCtUIS of Mid .ball be accocplhbed ia. neb .. IIIlIIPn tblot in tbb ript"of-way lball Dot b. disturbed or 01' in the event they are dbturhecl or destroyed, ther vUl be uplaeed in a. pod • cand1t1on as they yere ~1at.ly kfore the property _. eDtered upop by the Cnntee •. The Grantor aba11 I'8:tain tb. daht to us. tbe surface of Hid euemeat. so luna; .... id use cion nc;t interfere. vlth tbe tnstallation and _inteMDCe of the Y'teTP'ln ... ct 80 loaS •• no pera&llOnt buUdhp or .truc~e5 are erected 011 .ald euc::aeat. Th:l.a eueaent shall be a coveaaut nzaninl with the bod and shall be blndinS co the Grctor'. lucce'lora, beirs and .s.ips. L+-£, Z:"""1f,'. 0.0, q ; STATE 0' lIIISIIDIC1'OII ) ( ss COOlIn or ItIIIIl ) I, the .... uraipad. a notary public in and fol' the State of WUhlDltOD.. hen..,. .ortify tbo .... thh a cloy of !j/~ar . 19 U. _ .... - ally appeared before me --::Dau ttl if /{meG £001 to ae mow to be the :Lu.dlv1dual (a) dellCl'ibed. in and who executed the. fore- free. aDd. volwtary act "ad eked. fOl' the u ... ad puJ'pOaea thel'ein aea.tlCDeCl .. ~ca;;4'(';/ . • • -4· ~ .... __ • \' ·,·'··Il~ .....•....................... ""l~ ",.:n ... M4. \IW ~'I\ ... , "t J.Sr .... ':;. lot? .. , ttu, .-". t&e'trJ~ l'Al"""r ,.aI1IIIJ'UNI, ••••• nul. 00."..,..11 ..... • r \M .. n •• , 1It_,Aa, I'Ha'_I 1ft I.. 11. tM Ir." al" ".ttltll' r. UWWIT·, kJe ",r •• aft4 MY u L.. m;fo~ ~ ...... -.!!: f. t;I%I!rtI, .S. wi'" .al..,. ... ,1 ..... e. ,lie L. l I'Y&-J~Y"'" Ct't! ... ~.f lIutl1\1&on, I!J'IIft_., IoIln,,:;: .. 1'IIt _"''''., ., • " .... 'ree' I" wit· ....... ,.,.d 1ft," tM lU • ,t'1J;'), or I"" •• _.n •• I"'. u.. """entor c~tr,cl." to 'fltl .,,' .1, fllft"T ... t.l" 10 .. 10, or .. IIIeIl ~ ... ~""'''' _I ... r ... ,. 4 •• crt~J .,. ... rt. wh'ct~ COft:",t\ .... !:.-II'I "'J:ly ~rr"''' ... d It toO tbot 1'",J ....... 'n.rt.r ",.,,'beJ .~J u ... 4r."~, •• ,. ••• Me,.. .~'t'tl • .! to • C~""''''M' 01 ~ :.J"''''"'"U nc~. T'4~~~' t~ ar.ft'~ •. tn c·~II~.,.tt~~ c~ ft~ .,M of 111,f9., _~fI 't IM'lrt. til ......... -!rt ,.pc( ' •• !'y,....,.l. .,re4 ..... , •• M ",,,"nt, vflt.1I tt .... ..,. ... ·.f~. tr' .• :r .U:t':-... cr. .~ .elt~ •• tbt to)IONlftC-4 •• c~'l~ It.ft ;! 1.~ •• 'tu.t. Ip \lie c ...... t, or UIII, ,~.t' ef *.',I"'~"", ..... It, ( '7 ., ~ t-,:' "'t>o "-"'rlJ lSO r •• , .. r .,. _u...,. '1".rtn or UA ~fllilUtb'"'1: 4:loert.,. cp;t er S"JH " : .. ccl~n t'-l."t,. fI' ... I~li ~"""".'" .. _,.U-..... "~l ~ "rn .• !',~" rty. C!=) lIt of' "". -111 .... tl. ::'rf11.~. ':"!':.. tt--C''t er l_ft1 n. .... tI .. t''''' ..... ,,~.j c:t'"-~., .. , .a...!!.. att.", I''l10''' or 1." ..... ." t. ,,,t .. hl('t t~ ... , _.· •. "-:of"'':; ... :.tA' ~,.'tl~~ r"'r .... ~ ~bUc 1"1'.1' r·.~cor,..~ t-, t O'I.:! "'r c-,! -'tl t,t·,...; eO'; J .. ~ ... • ".~h'!;t "" .. r ."l -t,.O ••• !'l: t'''r'C. ~f t~. cr.I'l!,.e. ~tt.C't .1.0 t~ u-:, ft' .... , ..... !:,..ft '1:::' .... :I"~r.l' ,~ -: •• .! ~:"~~. , .... 'ett~ ... rt I.rltlf' :..,\" ... :O&"~I':" tc 0:-,. ... f' .. ~.~:-':"'. -.ta', .. ~ .... ~ ... 10, lC'~r, .t:~1 .. eef:N.:1 fl'l ~" .• !"f!~ •.. : :t ... -'~,.-,. ~t., 'oUt~r C"f\ :.-c"",bcr 1t;, ~(. ~. 1~. V .. h .. , .. )('·0 nf .-•• .:.. It ..,ro SIIe, ., ~"'r!.l ce.s.:J. .. r.t'e1" ft-t ~:!t i •• .! ... !tt.'Wt ..,!.t:'t~ t~ .-"J,,11i .,..,t 1M 864" ~. U· ..... ".,. ...... , .:-~f .. '!"r."'t •• t. ",. t:-: .... .. 1"" ~tr b.lr. or .... t~, •• .t."~ ~'·t ... r tt~ «,,:"lotL'tCr-~:-r 1M lonaw", , .. trl" """ ... , :_~1. l .. lr •• ce.,rort ., , .. 1"",_ .... 11 "-,,, ... , __ I' .. r~.1I1. or IhU. to tt .. , .... ", •••• or I", •• t....., ... " .. fW'M1" ~r r .rt!'.~r ... r. f!r."· M'r"~ t"t'"I'.« t.~."'ftl fer .n7 -4_,..,. .... f I'-.t .... " .... tt'l"'t, t<, ........ or • .., ...... 01' .... M .. " ar ~t .... rtt. "_til"'" by u-... ",.,..,.1 be ... tDt~ or· '~.1 ••• I"ttl ., ,...:t un4,r &.bt ~.u .. (.c. or .,.. •• 1~" ... "1 ••• , or t~IU.17 .:ljo •• ~t It •• reco. ~t fer .ft, d.,"r-"'." .... ,, .... I'ltl~ 'rf)~ or ~'U.f' tly tt .. ... '.n ..... ibe're-t.'." .1 :.tA et.l .. 'I'tfl t"l !.I\. "'ctlOlfty er tt ... ftfW.-i ..... l_' .. lib 11" .,," .,,,l·.ten ...... tr-.. r ~"l.r!t.,:m \M H!U .. ~ •• r tt'9 "Hftter. t~ ,. .. "tt ... "", r.cI!:~ t:.Uw.,. C..-f!I. u..1, lurC •• ,ftr. OP •• "1*1'11, f'lT ru.,. ... ' ... ,,,4 t .... .... potH.' ...... t.' I.,,,,,, ell ll-'tt'! ~ .~l .et ... , -1\ 11'1_"1":' I",. Itt,..,. ·.l'l"ttr ~ .. C't~ ~,..t • 'WI' ."J wut 'I., eft;! ta"ld be....s ••• ~ , ..... t_. I." t:'rtr •• -ft ht"'!!e ".:h,-;- e~",. U\.etr ............•• , •• -1\1. rrDf'l e~,. cl.h. u .. ,..ro-r, • ..'I • ...1. i ! ; ;. I I • j • - I • , I t· • , • ; ;. · ~ . \. i ..:I ! " I. "N." t.t .. , ... ) ,-~'.JI".l ep Oth." r.,.fIo ..... tur~!ah.·1 ".be cr."" •• 1I, U .. ',r • .,.t. ... " .",.11 "",t ten.lttur •• ,..f',. ••• ". UU ... .,. 'III .",,11' 1_ or •• t" ....... 1 ...... , .~.t'""'r' .t .• l1 I" .... , .. U ... 'N W""ta .. , ...... ~M U.blln, .Ol_~ .hl .. I •• ,. .t " ... ,. ........ , ... _ """,Ide', 'tlf ...... ""II 'III "" .. ,,'_ ...... _rt ... ..e.1 , ....... _&I "lear'-' .. ,,, •• ,..1 ... ",.""'"t"". TC "'\'1 ,.:. Tt 1ICt::. till •• lel 1'114 OM .,,'OUI'l.".II ... Uftt 0 ... e cr-fttHI. t".tr lueCC'lor .... ,1 ••• t ... ",. ro~.,.. 'rill ,,"nbr .. Ill 'o,..oP ,,"",lftC ..... ".tlll4 ",. ,nh to ,be ... " ...... c.pt .t .,.""t It." •• tt ....... ,NS .M"""'."'I!.' wllrl",'11II' .h.t th. d.,. or tt. •• tore ... '·' (' .. "tr.~l ~~ •• 1 •. I. "l~U ...",itf." , .• tt.. I'P.'!"llte-r t ••• of' a\t •• d t .... f r ... tf"":' 'flo .,. · ••• 1.4 • .su. 1" .• r-crr":"t. , •• 1 ...... ,....1 t·, ft., WI.""at t~ ".., .",,1 -p.r nrn .t.o ... ,,'It~ .. ". In ,"_" rtf (f...tl.!W-.... 'I. 1M II' ;1:'1 J~ to ~~ '-:/" .. .1.:'. 10.'.,. t."er, _ '~Ui\iM t te ~, ·~,,~v~ t: tt the ~I l'M ~fU·~rft ,.d:h •• !!v'i tf"'UIoJett:", t.bt tt-tt with'" "":1 l"f'I"'I"'"t"tr ~ !~.t'!"'~~~! • • ~ •• If! " •• t~ ... .,~ t,. t~ ", .. ~,.., .-P;" .el'.."!:t.r:- .ft •• t ... , e' .. td cH"fW"'P'el.lfI" fft tt'. 1.1."" ·",,1 c'Jr .. :-It, tt'~.t.'''' .. ~t'''''N4, _,.. ".. Ott~b .~11~.4 t:1\_t: ~ ... , .tJtt~~I.i t,., .J:.~~ . •• 14 ," .. ..-M •• ~.t to,-t Ul<O ••• 1 .,rt .. ~ to ~!'I tO~~~"·.! 1 ot ."14~arl'O,.tlon. ~. --_. __ ... _.-.. _-. ---_. ... : • "'v ?4 • Co .',.A., .' ';.'" h~. '. ~ ",.- I I , ' I t i -'-"._(,-,}-,.---" -----.. ---_ I l I ~)~ J , vOt 5U 1 'ICE ;;"):] I", pJ. 1 \.:. ,. Ttilf. ~. =.o.dc the-_::rt dn,y 01' O.:tcber. A.D.l::HO. b'y the ElTR!.!'f'lOTCtf JCOft'l'm;JW \!:JR<.ING1'ON lICRTl:E.~ FC'JlID},l'IO~ I I FOUMDATIO!i, a cntt..ritnblt' 't'OJ1l0r:U.1cn or H.'.! P .. :te 0" Minnl"s.o~Il<o suc:ce-,so'" in 1n-re ~ "I ~ '" . "'I '1' . C' ttl a .-..c te'"",t by .lIh!'T'gcr t('l r;crthern ?Qci f, c Follva,)' FOu.'1.i!atlon,. Q. chari t.able eo~ora'L!on II,"','S=H: ~., by .,.o...traet fr. vrltine: entereu into the 2bth dey o! June, A.D. 1966 1 tbc County of K1n,,~ St.o.te of \lb!)b.u.~on .. to-vit.: '!'J.d'·t, ... r of i:: .. C' u,v,lth ... ·tt 'lultrt .... r [-;u:,.· .. t.; tt,. ~t,·. :.J:'t'.C'r.::~ ~"H.(.r ~ht'r .. 'cr; (:.If·'i.' , I: " . -, " , I . , .. )escription: King,WA Deeds-DocId 6705976 Page: 1 of 4 >rder: dx Comment: rJR I ._----------------- . , I .-.. -.-.~------------ ~,1.1 :"'5S~ '''V_ .• "i cust ;0 reet lying vithln s-,oonl ... .,. Stat. !llsnvL,Y :/n. 5C (Be.!>sor. Soa.l.n ~u..so &tarTrnc th~rt"rrc:c thtr s"utherly tv fC'-e'l I :lore or l~s.» lying \Ii thin I ,C. C~r Poa4 (SDutbCIIUIIl 1.711't.b. StI"eotl. lIiIu.bJt:ct 'to 'the Z'OGt!rvation u1' m.ine!''ll;l in deed. f'rCtti the HorthC!'r:l PElo:ltlc: Ro.11tl'8Y t.:''D:lp.nny to the gr.:...1tor, date..! Der~mblf"r 10. 195~ .. and ~eord~d t~ t.he' o!'tlcl!" of tb4:-Ki:c.e CD1mty AuJ.1t.or ~n DeCcIG~r 19, 1958, in VolU!:e JD60 or Deeds at Page-,:'6. OJ'bbJ~C"t also to 'lD eo.=l.!lI2C'nt in the pubUc for 81''1 P\ !tHe ro.nds herctoton ledd out t.ie ~Jl1:'.-..... !' 1..1 the operat.ioD ht.rctorOft', f"It' t.h~ ecol ~ne~ In t'tJ.-: vieiDl. t:y ":Jot t.ht> Pre'U5C':I. /#:!/J; ~\"": /.;"! .... /.J/~ • 'escription: King,WA Deeds-DocId 6705976 Page: 2 of 4 'rd.er: dx comment: - .--'- 1 I I \ .---.------.----------.----~~ =t.::~ .. -"' ... ""-== ..... H ___ w .. bb;· -- I I I ---------- re C'~pt a.3 l,!.Q!l..tn:J":. lieD!J. Cb.lU·~t!''"; cm.d cn~~rs:t.:~9 o:"!.g1nnting e.fter the d!..te or =--§ ttl .. a.!ort':uud contrc.ct or "'uc. ~ It; ~ESS .rdEREOF. lone srllntcr bll!J eaus('d the-se pf't."'ae:11.ts 'to b~ SC'EU.e-d \lith 1t~ eorporate seGJ. cui,\ &11)0.<:4 by ttl \ Lee me1dcnt ~be c1ny and ye'rLr first above \'r-t.ten. ~"A17 JF ..... : ... .:...., -:~ be the ~e: QDCi vrlmltar;r &.c't aoLl ":~1:J. IJf sbid 1.:orporat.!.oo rOl tnt!' 'J.!h:.!fl and corporation. --~~ -~~-' ---_. h .... _I ..... --. wt __ ... ~scription: ~ng,HA Deeds-DooId 6705976 Page: 3 of 4 )rder: dx Comment: I I j . ~~·'''_:'7;'"'',-'''''''.' ... n ~'-b''I···jR mHT?i"i'i'WW"'ID&..;i;'-'isy.,r~~=!Sl ~~~t..:U-"'I::-'-,;'':: . . -. I :;() I -'" 5c (',' vJ\. v ... I .... t. .... 1; ...... f(') ......... _ ' .. , \n lS'"'" t"C") -r-, \ , <!2 ~ i a.,( ,. '-J.J ~ .. \ . •.... :I1T t ". , . ". .~ .. "'1\,0_ •••. , Description: KingrWA Deeds-DocId 6705976 Page: 4 of 4 Jrder: dx Comment: I I I . , \t ... , • -~ _ .... .-. __ ..... -.. / ,ar" 7 •.• ' IF 7 aNi ............. 1:. t I ,Ie __ ...... 141 •• II ... __ .. .. • .... , ... MI_III_lra 1M IF 11 '" _ wi., .......... baa IIr_.'''2.r~. OF" ..... 'S ,. ___ ............ _.' lUI a_'., ' ... Ie 4* ....... '.! ... I ........... : •••• X,. v ... /..--.... PtWo' ,,,,,, __ ' • lit ra.f..r. ....... ' ...... Dn4 __ .JolT 5, 1967, .., no .... III y~ 5 OC »elM -* ... ,., lI4Io ...... ot PC1ac COWltYl Dn4 d&~ JolT 22, 1968, .., __ 1%1 Vol_ ~ OC _ It _ 640, _ ...... or K1%Ig CaooM71 __ o.t_. ;;., 191O, .., ..... ....w .... VCIlae ~OI. or n.ede, _,a3, Records or It"" COlmty. SubJect to 4el1aq .. nt tax .. _ &Jl ... .t til the Pl>bl1o tat: 1lIIY Pl>bUc __ loIrator""" l&!4 out or eatabllel>84 _ """ ...uUas """ .., ac._ 1lIIY pori at '\\be 2~"" . 8""-180. aloe t<> the l'IHI ...... ttOll or mlnerale 1%1 _ r.... ._ Fae me IIo.Ua7 c:am_ to Ifartbom Faetfic II&1l1nIf l"IJUIIAIoUon, IlatH Dee_ lO, 1958, _..w 1n the oftJ.ce ot tile xu.. County Audltor OIl De._ 19, 195B. 111 Val_ ,l86o ot _ at _ 5118. A _tuial. e_re.t.1cm tor thtl c~. vitbout lI7I1eb 1t L by the a .... t.ee tor l ... U ",,' tor It. """,eo"Q "'lIM. t.hat _1~ 't.be Onnt.cr nor Bur~tOll K#them. Inc .. , ... IIJo" • / I, d".·',,·'· =5 W ~.a~_'~.lA ~ lw.-.aIR."o .• '''0 1lleU1e IIMI,..' ....... U .. GAAWI'. "". __ "'"-tl_.at'.~ .... at, __ • __ .(t1Mj,~ _,.wl.le.,. -ou1AleZaU-, ."-" UIl_"'W-'''''~,JIIIl''''US\ •• '.Il<ICNl •. & . . . • -'! ~-.'" I/&I/l.I.IIItCXI ...... "'''--~ •• 1$baJrollal!lM -.oriw ...... ...,. alt_;", the C~1lI>1i:r at' u... ~,,*~. ,·!I"I*CII!t;,1Vl .. • .. ,..,,~~ theft1a,~ Q ..... t~..,. ~,~I, , .. , .' (2,), ~ ;::.1~i=-~~~~(:~H}~:"'tI.e'"':~=.. .. dA1Ul1 _"'-,"'1 JI(4'd lS_.;::'liT~ c •• tH4.to.A8Il&wllelltord. --....... ~ -...s ~,.J90 19&6, ............... IIIftb 23, 19Iil6, '" Y.w. l2!I8. lIoc*:D Qt, ....... pi,J_.,.613n ..... ot<~ .. ~ ...... ....,. e1sbty- three b~ (6.8) _e_.,.o. to J. B. ~ WIlIer __ -'G. J~ 16, 19~ N!O ....... AIIIuIIt:).O,t~·.1s,Vol.lop.~~ ... D,of;!) .... , OIl pace ~5o, lise.,.. of ..sA "01IIII;,, bt·.~ ~ c:a.pu;r. pro •••• ar 1A laterut at ~Ll'IIIPr"'. "ll"V;"oplF1''''' ",":1'-~ .. """.JI,fta !.beNet pNYl-J,J .w,...,..,. to i. •• Lodt.t ....,. Ind. • Loritt, hia vUs, """ lIaYid L ........... 1rsI.e.a • .-......,,,hia.WUS,(4oU&, ....... IS L' •• taY_ CO., tl.lr belft &114 unc-..... tile ro1lA:of1as oIes4al . ~ ,',," ... ~ .-. Dss4 a..h4 ...... h 22, 19'67 • ....,. ...., ...... 1D Yol_ 4912 of llooeols ..... 433, Reo ...... lI:i,.. ~I DM4.a..h4 JIIlt ~, 1967, U4 ....,......, 1s.'~ 5 of DMda,-* ..... 339, 1Ise"-of KSAc CouatYI IIes4 dah4 JIIlt 22, 1968. UI4 ....,<Med 111 Vol_ ~129 at Dn4a at .... 61>0, lee ..... of KSAc C_" IIMd __ OII&oIow l.o 1910, _ rae ....... Sa V~ 501 at ~ .... ,s3, R..,orb ar Its,.. C_,. S.w,leel lO teU.t-_ ....... _ .... __ t 10 tile P\lbU., tJr &1\)' puw.. ,..:~ot_ iot.W ... , ...... \&IoU __ ud now -1111 _ ...... ..-... fart tit, \be ~. f..,., ~ t.. .... 1111 .. u. fIC ..... ,.101 ....... trw .... e' _ """'n~ . . , ....... c: "., l. ~ IIItdtk IIaUtoot '_~I" .. tet II« ,'u 10, 1~, ". Oil ... U 10M! ............ ar U1s1i111 0-, ... 0f6ll« <lD ""_r "-9, 19,8, 1Io Yo>1_ , ..... --. •• UIt .......... ,,'" JI ... t.o('l-1lf'Voa". 1M., .. ,iI .. ...... "u •• ,n or ... !.po, IM1l be £a ..., _ '", "·le .. u.a. '" .. 0" $ I" Of' ..., .ubl"' __ ' ~ .. ...-b' •• r~ _.., ,.,.. .rtlr':II~. tt.? 'e. lor .., .... of ~ ..... -II, __ ot ..., .... 01' .. e • or .... _ ...... .., .. .,..,.-.l1ltf'tW-III ~calo .... b QI' r""" ...................... of , • ..u II ._. or 1-.411*_11 ~ \bentq, .. tOlt ..., ..... .-...-~\ .... h. Of' . r -'. '.' c ..... 4 D, tile opII'MlGI\ 1Iuft4I'" or .. ' ,aN at.. la '" ."'." or "" ..... " ......1 ~. 1 ... , 1A~l¥4iDI tin .... ~!OD,~ .... ttt tiwc-e ~ "!I'11 •• ;~ fit ... ~QI', BurlUlctoo'loftbIn lDe., tllelr ................. &pt, or~, ... ... of • ... .-,. , • 0"0\" heNloY u..... all. il.uw." ........ _ aU 1:16aM t. tn .... arw_ , ......... ,~., .. _~r ...... ~ .... rr~ lucb OplftUCII. &lid vU1 .ve '..s !IoU 1IIr'_ ........ -lJaCfiaI ~ ~.' .... .. .. ..' • +fHt .-~ Narthel'll I""., t"-lr .... e ................ tJo .. ..., elAUl ~_. Ol'Alltgr 401. MInD, ....... ~r UIII lit _ to \.be 0 ...... all. or G"""t""·. rJlltt.. r 'P1nc ~; .. «rW.1D. ~ ..... 1--.-..... ~ a, Aid lior.""Z''' Paclt1c Batl>o&)' POWI/IaU ... AI .. Un UIII I. II. Lon .. ..a4 Dan4 L. _I.OD, 401.cg b".1De •• AI tbo L. I Io."" .. _t Co., or w~ .. pvc_ for 'be &&lo ILII4 l>W'"hue or tb •• _-d .. e .. l .... "'--. .... ,.,.,. ......... ""robl ... --'" f~... ... JIll ., .. :"J' ~ • .... ume ..... d AtII'''. to t'ultUl tIMo cOll41tiOll8 at 1&14 rw.l ._to eODt~~. ' . modified ILII4 tile Grantor lIe ... b)o-.......... ta that tbero la I10Ir ""1'&14 011 .,.4,"II:u.. , ~ cil"'l or SAid contreet tbe IllIZI at tortl tbOll8eOld doUara ($100,000) plua bItere~~ Dated tbie /td. ds.l or d.'1 1t si-A.D. 19'7l. If -• I . i .1 ' .. ~ I -,f ~ -" 1 , ro - -.' -... ~, #> • ~ .................... ... ftaft (II • s, ) , .. ... _ .. ,... --c,un (1_ ~ ... ... .. .. .. .. .. - ~ . ~ ~>q .. "... ..... - &Ut appe&R4 •.• ' ~-::: ::: (s , to ......... 'lIe..... '--' .. • [.. ~_':'. to r--:;·.;.i .... -... IiS.'iIIII'iI' Ii '3 ....... '.f t ...... -,. ... ....... II IID'18 ~. E ~ .. ""_0 --' ~ IIMI' .. ."... ., """"',-.1 -.... ~;.. ."" .__ • _ ... of tba -J'" pal' lu1. ~ vrnwa .. : :,;;:;,:: :JO , "TJ:;J3 l r(;IlO~~r& . : .~. 7.:-:-:::' Z,"ii • · , , . , , · . e· <.' " " ,~ -:1 r· · ' • ~..: '. " .... " li f· ... 'f' . ( ... f ... '. '. , • > .' , .. , • • l 1 . (.0) ... i;, " "" W I' .... .... eO .~ " ., co , " ~ ......... -... --' . .': . ' ,. ( ItIDaIlimi 'b .fl.", .. , ( to .... ' 't:I Yn::m " .~ 8d.f I'd ~jJ fI'\Io1oml .. c>1 b) ..... ,r., bbi, I b~ .. ~ • . -t ,', .. .:"'IC>CI-1,. ao(, ,llll-"'.,," ~R Ir>tlllGJlIUI)o ,.,!» ...... )~ • •. '-.. , . , ~,,",,,,,':,,,,l bl ... b"*""'t ... "" ... · 11M .Jtl_~~.u ~"w1. o4t two", .. _ • . , .. , .•. ,",. U"" btU ~:.~ 'I<.lhrrclj..." hal 10 :...b boa :,.. 'CI_.L6. bn.o> ~ . . , . . .... 0\- tJr! It, iii .. II 24 7 &ILIO'''' 1C •• _,..w~ • J , 'f..', • ; • ~--.-:.- -." .. ,~.:~~ -.-- .= - -- --, .: . ..... -.~." -' ," - .. ' .;", . -.~ .. ~~,,< .£L-;, f.,e.: -f . I . .1DRlftil EIlIJISI •. 1EDiIUlsaur' ~. .~ -. -.. to -~ a&JEIr v. ~ ! '. Do .... ~Q;""'''-... r:..!Il.'--~_ •• 1!taL j " , nilS ASR£EJEJIT ad! ... ea\el'ed iato by ...,.. bebeen. Soos Creet Vater and se.r District.,. • IluhtAJtae _lei,..) corpord.on. hereinafter Rferred to as IH.sti-id."" "Sb!n! .:J4 I.m !fitr'r!1' refe'red: 10 u r.er/DtVelaper." VIIIESSETR: • h!n"hafter iIEP.£JU. the: ihaEr/Dewelaper hI.S 1astal1ec1 Md/or ape...:; to Insull I lliiter or Se'P'eT .:Il1n ZAdJor fac$11ty to serve certain property In Soos Creek. Water and .sewr District .mel his agreed uron "C~let1on of s_ to tender to the D1strt~t a bin of sale; and HHEREAS. the District has beretllfore by and through Its eo-fssiooers • dopbld a res.!)lution pro,'dtng for the execution of a contntt to reillbur5e the Otmer/Developer pursuant to tbe provisions herelm.·f'ter set forth; ilIld W'.tEREAS, tl:e eo.mIssloners heve determined that specific: property ,,111 be benefited by the utilization of thh l~rovt:lllellt. JfOW. nlEREFORE, IT IS AGREED: 1. That an properties directly connected to the improvement and/or pt'cperty OMItrs allowed to connect by use of laterals or branches. shall pay Ii; fatr pro~r.ta sllere of tlte cost of the construction of said iqJroYE!ID'"..nt. Said illlpr'OveD!nt is described &5 follows: 40' ~t. of s· ... .in .loclIeea in s.t. 172nd st. The property or properties to which Slid charges apply is described IS follows: 8S1/01/20 10563 [) RECO F 8.00 a:lSHSl.. "''''**8.00 S5 2. That the Ovier/Devl!loper shall be entitled to re~lYC! reidMIn .. nt from said benefited properties for a period of 15 years cOIIIIIencin51 from the 4a.te Df this contr,act; provtdK. said rell1bursement Is subjuect to the prD'fhlons hereinafter set forth. 3. Thet the aJOunt of refmhursellll!nt that the OWner/De\'eloper shall be entitled to shalt be z. rusonable SUII determined by cQGIPI!ttUve costs of like r.on5tMltttons wtthfn the lrea and within tbt ttllll!! period, that the Ormtr/Df!velo~..!; 6g~,.S to provfde to the District ill cOIIIplete cost record and his elaia for total cost of construction within thirty days of hts execut10n of tt.e btll of nle for the t,.rove.nt to the: 01ltrlct. The OWner/Developer agrees that hb flttUl'e to provide satd toul cost rlCOrd and total cost of CMstructton within thI tt~ period afon- ..,ttoned. (3D da1s fro. the dati of tile btn of sale). shall result tn his ~l ... tar.)' wiver of In)' clli. 0_' right to reilllbun_nt JlUnuant to this contreet. \~ '-. . . " -; i .' }:.-: . ."; ,. j j , ,\ ; 1 :r-'~~'-"--'" -.':-r~ ~~,?,t ~l<::\~.\~'~::-4:l.-:~!1:~:~4;~~~"~"'~l~ .... " .... ..ti1fooi, ........... 1 "" '. Jescription: King,WA Document~-"I~ieialrl'iHioinltlh"liiillillllli9ii8i91'1112101'15.6.3 .. Jrder: dx Comment: ~- (- [- ( - -.":. , ;<-== .. '-~ ... _- - .. ~ ~ ., I 1 I i i ! -. PARCEL A SODS· CRE£iC VATIl!. MD S9I£R DlSilICT MITOiEll IIAlR EXIDCS10ll LAT£C(I'£RS 110. 114 IS£\IER DlVlSIOICI ~.·A· The Westerly 436.45 feet of the Easterly 611.45 feet. measured on the Korth boundary line from the Northeast corner and the llest~ .... l1ne of Benson Road (Secondary State Highway No. 5C) of the folluv1ng desedbed property: The South 120.00 fen: of the North 150.00 feet of thf.t portion of the Southust quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 29~ T()IIjr\sh1p 23 Korth, Range 5 East. N.M.. lying Easterly of a Hne dr61iffl para 11el with and 405.00 fe1!:t East ..tIen measured at r1ght angles to the West l1ne of said subdivision; EXCEPT those partiolS eonve.)'2d to the State of 'Wash1ngt-1n by deed recorded undeT ~.ecord1ng No. 7312u60244 for SR 515. Ail situated 1n tile County of King. 3tate of Washington. ~ lot 13 of Block li of Mer's farms No.5 as recorded in Plats. YolllJD!! 40. page 41, in King County. liIashingtoni LESS the t'forth fiO.OO feet of the West 130.00 fe!e-t thereof. PARCEL C The Llest half Of lot 14 of Block 4 of Aker's Farm No. 5 as recorded 1n P1ets. YollJIIIe 40. page 47. in K1ng County, WaShington. .ATE • $20.Z61F.F. ~., r."" E" ;:s:0-f as zaY.:r C)o;rr. 1I':'"J~2 is o~< .. c~in ~~o ~ --z 5i ~!i: Ii .. ,:-_ .. -~ I f i j I .~ , .. ~ n ; ~ 1 I ; I ! f ... ". I . . 1 ;, ,,- r--.... - ...-:-- ~ - ~ ~-=. ." ..... ~ --- I. - )escription: ~ng,HA Document ~~~~e~a~r~.~M~o~n~t~h~.D~.y~.~D~O~C~I~D~1~9~8~9~.~1~2~O~.~5~623~p~a~g=e~;~2~O~f~4~---::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~ )rder: dx Comment: ..,. == - -n..t u.,;-..JD-l_.,..... tllat __ .. 1-. "'11 ....... rtlld fa ...... tile 'hI1r Qllt Gf-" '.0 t. MII.tlllit SI'. ....... lsllln .. b.s.d' .. tlaAt ytl. ~ ..,t thI! -=ba1 cOestructfaia' cart tllCW'l'td ... U. satd ~/DtwelOPU; prOit4ed. thl.t ~t •• ~ ... tt_ sha11 lie ..... t to Iesol.t1_ ~."&fie .. 4.. That the District sbl11 have tb! right to pnmde for GIl ~tlCIQ -for HdI ~ IMM!r withfn tM .effected al"'H of t:he i ..... o._t; prowided. said selregation shall 1M! Uafted bJ iI single .,a1lY drM!111ag aM/or ftStdeftt~ _ 5ball CGntafn DDt., less than .100 fed cf f",nuge .. 5. That all s-s; reuhtd by the District pun.Ulllt to this re'~t contrllct shill be subject to the reasonable administrative charge of twenty pen:ent (201). arid upon tile DistrIct's collection of any fLEOlds from a .baiEftted real propel"t;y eMler. tIt@ District shall have the rfght to deduct said 201 at its sole optivn. ,PRonDED. that if for ant reason the lhmer/geveloper Mid/or the lleneffchrles of this contract eapress a desire to wive Pl)'IIent bl' any andlor all properties affected hereby; the Distrfct shall be etlUlled to collect the 201 at tts sole option. 6. The duty of the District to reimburse the Owm!r/Developer shall temnate on the Ii! ~ day of 'tkoetI4(..£( • ~ and an rehJlbursea::nts collected thereafter shall be the sole and exclusive property of said District; It befng ur.der- stood that after such period (If tilDE! the District Maintenance and operation of said facflity and sewer/water main. liver said extend2d period of time would entitle the District to the usus contribution to said lIIilin and lor facility. 7. The O\omer/Df'Yelopl!~ agre£~ that the District's duty to enfo!"!:e the reimbursement contract ~11 be limited to actual utilization of facilities by real property DWIIers and that any non-utilization resulting froll II real property mmer's desi~ of 6 s,)'steIJ and/or re-desiflll of the system contemplated pursulnt tot bis construction contract shall not be subject to tMs retmbur5l!11eRt. Provided further. that any costs of the enforterRent of this retmbursement contract, including but not 1lmtte~ to attorney fees. shall be chargeable to the Owner/Developer and shall bE deducted from payRnts received by the Dlstrh::t from be.,efited prt;,erty owners. prior to the District hIVing any duty to pay oYllr to the lhmer/Dl!Mloper; tbat in the event Second p,My his heirs. and/or assigns. desire to waive their rights of reiMbursement htreunder. then in that eve'lt, the Dfstr1c.t sban be entitled to a pl.YII!nt of lOS on any retdlul"$lIAellt and/or portiDn of reilliJu:rsement waived by the Second party, B, That at 'UK! time iIInd as part of the Owner!Developer's extension Igreement. the Owner/DeveloJ..!!r shan notify the btstrtct of IIts des;re for ret"'rse_"t of constructton costs; that If the Omer/Develope-r fath to request refllbursene:nt then .. 11 bts rights and cla111S for ret"ursement are thereby waived and said rei .... sement shill thereafter become the: Sale and elclu5tve property of the Distrtct, free of any el,f_ or reillburstll8flt by the OMner/Developer. r i :''' .... •• :~ •••. > •.•••. "'!""'""""~-.-.-~."'.--.----.-.--, . . ;: .. ~ . -~ i i , i ! ,. ..; .' , j 1 • ; ; ( -- r -'"- - - - - .- ~: -'. :,," -1. ", ~-~-~ ... , BllliOT.,.U': ~ 'DA1D ms _. , f 1 -; " ! ! , ! - i , i ~ I Iy STAlE OF lIASIUlISTiIH) COUNTY OF K]~ lSS On 'hi> 1n.#1 day of '1'I,d/lJfYlWIJ/ I. 19jf; bef ...... tile under- signed. iI Hotary ~c: fn ,andi#tfJe"rtate O(II::.b~ton, dtJl.)'" c:o.issiDHd and sworn. penonelb ilPpe'red~lIe t1J 1:tJ:!]±LL and _____ _ • to Il! known to be the President and secretary respectfully, =.f ........ =.,-,trii="i"w ... "tei'-=-!and Sever Distric~, the corporation that 'exeetted the foregoing 1ns'lrulftent Uld acknowledged the said 1nstru.nt to be the free '!M voluntary act and deed of said curporllltion~ for the uses and purposes therein lllentfoned. and on oath stated that they authorized the execution of said 1nstrunent end that the setl . affixed 15 Ue corporate seal of said mrporation. WlllESS 18.)' hand and officil1 seal hereto affixed the day and year f1rst above written. STAT' OF WASHINGTOO) COUNTY Of KIIIG )5S On tMs day peNonRlly appeu'f.d before II! --,-====r.o;;;;-;==-r.;-;;;-;r to me know to be the 1nd1vlouo 1 described in lIld W1i=,'"" •• "'."e" ..... "d""hii"'''W\''th=ln''.'''n;r •• '''.'''r'ego1ng instrument. and acknowledged that -, ... ,_ signed the same as free and yoluntary act and deed, fOT the uses !:nd purposes therein meut1onea. GI\'EN under IIY hand and official seal this day of 19.:-o RoTARy puallc In ,Ad for the Stl tt: of Washington. residing 11'1. _____ ~ STAll OF WASHINGTOI) CO\IITY OF KING )" On tbfs dlY of • 19 • before IE. the under s1gned. pE:T'Somll.ly apJleareG end to 111ft knOtm to be ttle Pn:s1dent and Secretary =re".:::pe='''t''t''v.'''I''y~,'''''f;-- -• the corporation that executed the foregotng lnstru"!nt, :ana acknowledged (hi sltd instl"Ulllent to be the free Ind Yoluntary act I' and dl!ed of satd corporation for the uses and purposes theretn Rnt1clQed. ami on . oath liitated that authorbed to execute the SIIIid tnst; ument and that the seal affbed is the corporate seal of said corpordion. WiTlESS ~ hand and offfcial seal heretofore affixed the day and year first l above wrfttel1. NOTARY PIIIUC In Inti for the Stote of Wishh'9ton. "std'ng 'n _____ ' ) '; .! ~ -f ... I I ,~.t"''''''''--~''''---'"''''--~~''-'''''';"'''''''''~' t,: ,'." ~ ,~ Jescription: King,WA Document~;;y;e;a;r;;'H;;O;n;t;h;';D;a;Y;';D;O;C;;I;D;:1:9:B~9~,~1;2;O;;,;5;6~3~p~a~g:e~:::4~o~f~4~iiiiii5!e;iiiiiiii~~ 'rder: dx Comment: r. --- ( . .., =>. = = FIled for Record at the request of. SOOS CREEK WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT 14616 SE 192nd SI POBox 58039 Renton, Washington 98058-1039 Document Tltle(s). SEWER SPECIAL CONNECTION CHARGE # 120 Reference Number(s) of Documents assIgned or released' N/A AddttlOnal reference nwnbers on page _ of document(s) Grantor(s) N/A AdditIOnal names on page _ of document Grantee(s). SOOS CREEK WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT Addtllonai names on page _ of document Legal Descnpllon' See ExlubJt "A" Addtllonailegails on page _ of document Assessor's Property Tax Parcel/Account Number(s) N/A Jescription: King,WA Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2001.1003.193 Page: 1 of 5 )rder,' dx Comment: . .., on ~ C> "" = ..., SOOS CREEK WATER & SEWER DISTRICT I, _-"P .. hi .. hpI'-"-Su",lllhv .. anllL_~ Secretary of tho Board of CommiSSloners of Soo. Creek Wat ... and Sewer DIStnct, King County. Waslnngton. hereby oerufy that the attached copy of Resolution No 22..11./ -$ IS a true and oorrect OOPY of the original resolu\1on adopted on the 16-ib day of ~ I..!..o,t .WI DATED thiS .--:1C...!1-'Ci1t. __ date of fh.:9t.lSt • 2001 ~~- piriLIPLlVAN. SECrurrARY BOARD OF COMMISSIONER.S SOOS CREEK WATER & SEWER. DISTRICT 'escription: King,WA Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2001,1003.193 Page: 2 of 5 Jrder: dx Comment: «=> "'" .- 'CC> = CN SOOS CREEK WATER AND SewER DISTRICT KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 2214-6 A RESOLUTION of the Board of Commissioners of SOos Creek Water and Sewer DIstnct, Kmg County, Wastmgton, establishing Special ConnectIOn Charge #120 due Soos Creek Water and Sewer District for the Contract 2-825 Project WHEREAS, sewer mams and facilities have heretofore been Installed as part of the prOject commonly known as Contract 2-825, and WHEREAS, said sewer facilities Will prOVide benefrts and services to the properties deSCrIbed In Exhibit "A" attached hereto, which IS made a part hereof by thIS reference thereto, and WHEREAS, It IS the poliCY of Soos Creek Water and Sewer Dtstnct to require reimbursement for any faCilities bUilt by the DIStrict andlor by an IndIVIdual when said hnes proVide benefit and seMce to other properties, and WHEREAS, the Dlstnct engineer has determined the properbeS benefited and computed the value of said benefrt as applied to said properties. and WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners finds said benefits and the cost thereof to be reasonable, and the Special Connection Charge Rate based thereupon to be a faJr allocation of such benefits and costs NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLveD by the Board of CommiSSIOners of Soos Creek Water and Sewer District as follows SECTION 1: That Sewer Speaal ConnectIOn Charge No 120 IS hereby established for the propertieS and In the amounts shown In Exhibit "A", which IS Incorporated herem by thiS reference Said rate does not Include cost of connecting, stub seMce. pernuts or InspectJOns, general faCIlities charges, or other latecomers that may be due on the properties RESOLUTION NO. 2214-S SUBJECT: Establishing Sewer Spectal Connecllon Charge #120 Due SCWSD Pertaining to Contract 2-82S PAGE.1 Description: King,HA Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2001.1003.193 Page: 3 of 5 Order: dx Comment: ~ = = = ...... = = .- SECTION 2: That no seMce shan be proVIded to any of the property descnbed In ExhIM "A" pnor to payment to the Dlstnct of the above established charges for all property held by the applicant which lies w~hln the area described In Exhlbrt "A" SECTION 3: That a Notice of the adoption of thIS Resolubon as SpeCIal Connecbon Charge shall be recorded With the King County DIVISion of Records and Elections ADOPTED by the Board of Commissioners of Soos Creek Water and Sewer Dlstnct, King t,2001 CLEMENT QUANRUD, Commissioner ~ c ~ ~. 4<-DY ~EECE\comm.ss;oner RESOLUTION NO. 2214-6 SUBJECT: establishing Sewer Special Connec!lon Charge #120 Due SCW5D Pertaining to Contract 2-825 PAGE·2 )escription: King,WA Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2001.1003.193 Page: 4 of 5 )rder: dx Cammen~: ,.-, en .-= = = (Y") = = .- <=> <=> '" PARCEL A Exhlblt ffAn SODS CREEK WATER AND SE~ER DISTRICT CONTRACT 2-825 LATECOMERS NO. 120 (SEWER DIVISION) The East half of Lot 13, Block 3, Aker's Farms No.5 as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, page 47, records of King County, Washington. LESS the North 75.00 feet thereof. Rt>.TE 102 F.F. x $46.66/Foot ~ $4,759.3? No Stub Cons tructed = 0.00 Total Latecomers Charge = $4,759.32 PARCEL B That portion of the North 150.00 feet of the Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 29, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., lying Easterly of SR 515 • LESS the East 665.00 feet thereof. LESS the North 30.00 feet for road. RATE 124.66 F.F. x $46.66/Foot Plus Two Stubs @ $344.74/Ea. Total Latecomers Charge ~ $5,816.63 = 689.48 = $6,506.11 Description: King,HA Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2001.1003.193 Page: 5 of 5 'rder: dx Comment: " " W .n n' z '" N >-' oi N vi .. "- 0 '" Z Vl ~ is .. z " "-~ ~ '" ~ Vl j~~ ~~~ I!! O"~~' i5~~ j:'l ~ wO ~~ f~ p; o. I •• to; h 1m ~ ~~ J~ !z~ j: ~ §~ ~ ~ ~~ :j~ • '!~ I!! ~~§ , .. )... Ci : " ~)-~ ! ... Ii: u:::i~ I :., F ~.. , , ~ ... ~ -!,... u~z ;. ~;:)B b. l" ~~i ~~ S .' 0 O"'"I!i ~ It: ;;~ . ~ iil 0,. Ii ». ~~.., !i z~~ ~.> .~5 ~§~ ~ ~ .. i'l .. ~ il ~ ''\ ~ 'w i~ • ~ '0 · i~ .;: f iii ~ ~. l'< .. '4: '" I> ~. ~ 8 • • ~ ~ S F W < l'i u '" , " uurhngton Resources Oil & Gas Co LP Attn: Holly A. Lyncb P.O. Box 51810 MIdland, Texa. 79710-1810 r-- NOTICE OF CLAIM TO SEVERED MINERAL INTEREST STATEOFWASIDNGTON § § COUNTY OF KING § In accordance Wlth the apphcable proVlSIon of law mcludmg Chapter 78 22 040 ReViSed Code of Waslungton, the folloWlng Nonce of Chum of Severed Mmeral Interest IS given Claimant Burlington Resources OJ! & Gas Company LP, a Delaware CorporatIOn (formerly known as Mendlan Oil Producnon Inc) authonzed to conduct busmess m the State of Washmgton 2 Clmmant's pnnClpal place of bus mess IS located at 801 Cherry Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76102 3 DesCription orLand Affected by This Notice Attached hereto as ExhIbit "AU and mcorporated herein by reference IS a lIst and descnpnon of the severed mmeral mterests m the above captIoned county owned and claimed by Clannant 4 ClamIaflt 18 the owner of the severed mmeral mterests m the lands descnbed In ExhIbIt "AU that were ongmally held by the Northern PaCIfic RaIlway Company 5 Nature and Extent of ClaIm With respect to the severed mineral Interests covered hereby, Clallnant a.'lserts and clauns all nghts and pnVlleges appurtenant to such Interests mcludlng, but not 11l11lted to, free and unencumbered mgress and egress at all nrnes for the purpose of exploranon, mmmg and dnUmg on smd lands and conducnng all such other actlVltIes and operanons as may be appropnate m searclung for and remoVing 011, ga.'l and other rmnerals of any krnd or nature, Includrng, but not hmded to hydrocarbons of any nature, rare earths, ferrous and non-ferrous metals and ores 6 Non-Waiver TIllS notice of claIm IS expressly made WIthout waiver or prejudice to Claunant's nght, expressly reserved and retatncd herem and hereby, to challenge the valIdity of any statute, ordInance or enactment requmng such notIce as a condltlon to continued ownerslup of severed mmeral fee mterests, on the ba.'lIS that any such statute, ordInance or enactment IS vlolatlve of property nghts and procedural nghts afforded and guaranteed under the Constrtutlon of the Umted States of Amenca and the State ofWashmgton, and IS therefore VOid )escription: King,WA Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2003.125.2078 Page: 1 of 12 )rder: 750859 Comment: EXECUTED thIS .3 Is-\" day of October, 2002 BURLINGTON RESOURCES OIL & GAS COMPANY LP By BROG GP Inc , Its sole General Partner BY~h . S KEITH FRANK, Attomey-m-Fact z:f{f( STATE OF TEXAS § § COUNTY OF MIDLAND § BEFORE ME, the underSIgned authonty, on tins day personally appeared S KEITH FRANK, known to me to be the person whose name 18 subscnbed to the foregOIng mstrument as Attorney-m-Fact ofBROG GP Inc ,a Delaware corporation and the sole General Partner of BURLINGTON RESOURCES OIL & GAS COMPANY LP, a Delaware bmlted partnersiup, and ac1mowledged to me that he executed the same lor the purposes and conslderatlOn therem expressed, m the capacIty stated, and as the act and deed of sa,d !un,ted partnerslup GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE t1us~ day of October, 2002 3300N "A", Bldg 6, tdland, TX79710 ~scription: King,WA Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2003.125.2078 Page: 2 of 12 Jrder: 750859 Comment: ; STATE OF WASlliNGTON COUNTY OF KING EXHIBIT" A" MINERAL OWNERSIDP: OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS. LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS TownshIP 019 North, Range 007 East Sectlon 5 NW/4SW/4 (40 0 8CS) S!2SW /4 (80 0 acs) Sectlon 9 N!2NW/4 (80 0 acs) Townslup 020 North. Range 007 East Section 5 S!2NE14 (80 0 acs) SEl4NW/4 (40 0 acs) SW/4SEl4 (40 0 8CS) Lot 1, Lots 2, 3, Less 10 00 sc BN RfW (98 97 acs) Section 7 NEl4 (160 08es) E/2NW/4 (80 0 8es) Fl2SW/4 (80 0 acs) Sechon 9 SectIon 15 SecbOn 17 SW/4NW/4 of Lot 2 (43 62 acs) NW/4SW/4 of Lot 3 (42 64 acs) SE/4 Less 54 01 ac BN RfW (1 08CS) All (640 08es) All (640 0 aes) Fl2 (320 0 acs) El2W!2 (160 08CS) NW/4NW/4 (40 0 8CS) W!2SW/4 (80 0 8CS) SectIOn 19 El2 (320 0 acs) Fl2SW/4 (80 0 acs) NW/4NW/4 of Lot 1 (41 03 acs) SectIon 29 W!2NW/4 (80 0 acs) SectIOn 31 SEl4NE14 (40 0 acs) SEl4SW/4 (40 0 8CS) Section 33 Sl2NE14 (80 0 acs) FJ2W/2 (1600 8es) SFJ4 (160 0 acs) Townslup 020 North, Range 008 East Seehon 5 All (641 25 8es) SectIon 7 All (591 928CS) TownshIp 020 North, Range 009 East SectJon 11 N/2 (320 0 acs) )Qscription: King,WA Document -Year.Mbnth.Day.DocID 2003.125.2078 Page: 3 of 12 >rder: 750859 Comment: Townslup 020 North. Range 010 East SectIOn 6 NWI4SW/4 of Lot 6 (34 54 aes) Seeton 34 FJ2NW/4 (80 0 aos) NFJ4SW/4 (400 aes) Townslup 021 North. Range 004 East Section 27 NFJ4 (160 0 acs) FJ2SEl4 (80 0 aes) Seenon 31 NFJ4NE14 (400 scs) NW/4NE14 of Lot 1 (32 OS aes) SE/4NE14 of Lot 2 (33 5 aos) Section 35 NW/4NWI4 (40 0 aos) TownshIP 021 North. Range 005 East Section 29 NW/4SW/4 (40 0 aes) Townslup 021 North. Range 008 East Seetton 22 SW/4SEl4 (40 0 scs) Sl2NW/4SEl4 (20 0 80s) NW/4NW/4SEl4 (10 0 acs) TownshIP 021 North. Range 009 East Section 30 SEl4SW/4 (40 0 aes) SW/4SEl4 (40 0 aes) Section 32 SW/4NE14 (400 acs) S12NW/4 (80 0 aes) Nl2SW 14 (80 0 aes) SEl4SW/4 (40 0 aes) SEl4 (160 0 acs) TownshIP 021 North. Range 010 East SectIOn 3 All (548.96 acs) Section 9 All (640 0 ses) Section 11 All (640 0 acs) Sectton 15 All (640 0 acs) Section 17 All (640 0 acs) Section 19 All (640 0 aes) Secllon 26 W/2SW/4 (80 0 acs) Section 27 All (640 0 ses) Section 28 S12SW/4 (80 0 aes) Section 29 All (640 0 acs) Section 31 All (631 08 aes) SectIon 32 N12SEl4 (SO 0 acs) N12SW/4 (80 0 acs) SEl4SEl4 afLot 1 (33 58 aes) SW/4SEl4 of Lot 2 (34 11 aes) SEl4SW/4 of Lot 3 (3466 acs) Section 33 All (610 43 acs) Sectton 34 N/2NI2 (160 0 aes) N12SW/4 (SO 0 acs) SEl4SW/4 of Lot 3 (31 39 aes) ~escription: King,~ Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2003.125.2078 Page: 4 or 12 ,)rder: 750859 Comment: Township 021 North. Range 010 East SectIOn 3; All (595 48 aes) Township 022 North. Range 004 East SectIon 36 Lot 4 and Part ofLoI 7 (164 acs) Townslup 022 North. Range 010 East SectIon 3 1 FJ2NW 14 (80 0 aes) NEl4SW/4 (40 0 acs) SEl4 (1600 8CS) NW/4NW/4 of Lot 1 (3849 aes) SW/4NW/4 ofLo! 2 (38 47 8es) NW/4SW/4 of Lot 3 (3845 aes) SW/4SW/4 of Lot 4 (38 43 aes) SectJ.on 33 NEl4 (160 0 aes) SI2 (320 0 aes) Township 022 North. Range 0 II East Secbon 5 RIW acrosS SEl4SW/4, W/2SEl4 (5 85 8es) SectIon 17 RIW across W1ZNW/4, SI2NI2 (15 89 aes) TownshIP 023 North. Range 004 East SectIon I3. NI2NW 14 (80 0 8es) Township 023 North. Range 005 East SectIon 1 SW/4SW/4SW/4SW/4 (2 5 acs) Section 3 SEl4NE14 (40 0 acs) SEl4SEl4 (40 0 acs) NEl4SEl4 (40 0 acs) NEl4NE14 (35 92 8es) W12SW/4 (80 0 acs) NW/4NW/4 (35 778es) SectIon 7 SW/4SW/4 (32 6 acs) Section 9 NEl4 (160 0 8es) N12SEl4 (80 0 acs) SectIon II All (640 0 acs) Section 18 PortIon ofSW/4 descnbed by metes and bounds m deed to Milestone (4 80 aes), Those portIons of Tracts 8 and 9, supplemental map of Renton Shorelands, and the SFJ4SW/4 desenbed by metes and bounds In deed to MIlestone SectIOn 19 PortIon of Government Lot J descnbed m deed to Milestone (1 S3 8CS) SectJ.on 25 S12SEl4 (80 0 acs) Part ofSW/4NE14, s/2NW/4, NI2SW/4, NW/4SEl4 (53 46 8CS) Seclton 27 Tract m NW 14NE14 (1 0 aes) Secbon 29 SE/4SW/4 (40 0 acs) Part ofSEl4NW/4 (S acs) Seclton 35 SEl4NE14 (40 0 aes) TownshIp 023 North, Range 006 East SeCllon 1 All (626 02 acs) )escription: KinglWA Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2003.125.2078 Page: 5 of 12 )rder: 750859 Comment: TownshIp 023 North, Range 006 East Section 3 SEl4NE14 (40 0 acs) E/2SEl4 (80 0 acs) NEl4NE14 of Lot 1 (31 76 acs) NW/4NW/4 of Lot 4 (30 89 acs) Part ofEl2SEl4 berng a stnp of land 75' Wlde desenbed rn deed to Milestone (4 23 acs) Seetton 5 Part of Lots 3, 4, West of Sunset Htghway (22 0 acs) 100' ROW across Lots 3,4, SW/4NW/4 (24 06 aes) Section 11 All (640 0 80S) Section 17 SW/4NW/4NW/4SW/4 (2 5 acs) s/2NE14 (800 acs) E/2NW 14 (80 0 acs) NW/4NW14 (40 0 aes) N/2SEl4 (80 0 acs) SEl4SEl4 (40 0 acs) S/2SW/4 (80 0 acs) Townslup 023 North, Range 007 East Section 1 Parts of Lots 1,2, S/2NE14 (160 0 80S) Seebon 5 All (629 06 acs) Seetton 7 All (64240 acs) Seetton 9 All (640 0 aos) Section 11 All (640 0 aos) Section 13 All (640 0 acs) SectIOn 15 All (6400 80S) Sectton 17 All (640 0 80S) Section 19 All (648 58 80S) Secbon 21' All (640 0 acs) Sectton 23 All (640 0 acs) Section 25 All Less 404 ac BN RfW (635 96 80S) Sectton 27 NI2N12 (1600 80S) SeCtIon 29 All (640 0 acs) Sectton 31 Hwy RfW across Lots 2, 3, NE/4SW/4, W/2NW/4, NW/4NE14 (25 17 acs) Sectton 35 NEl4 (160 0 acs) NEl4SEl4 (40 0 acs) TownshIp 023 North, Range 008 East SeCtIon 3 NE/4NE14 of Lot 1 (47 80 80S) SEl4NE14 ofLo! 5 (42.9 80S) Townsbm 023 North. Range 009 East Secbon 1 W I2SW 14 (80 0 acs) Lot 1 (1965 aes) Lot 2 (3740 8es) Lot 5 (37.40 80S) Lot 6 (38 65 80S) Lot 7 (4140 80S) Lot 8 (40 0 aes) Lot 9 (40 o 80S) Lot to (21 0 acs) Lot 11 (21 0 acs) )escription: King/~ Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2003.125.2078 Page: 6 or 12 )rder: 750859 Comment: Township 023 North. Range 009 East SeetJon 1 Lot 12 (40 0 aes) Lot 13 (400 acs) Lot 14 (40 0 aes) Lot 15 (37 5 acs) Lot 16 (401 aes) Lot 17 (40 0 acs) Lot 18 (40 0 acs) Lot 19 (40 0 Res) SeetJon 3 SeetJon 5 SeenoD 7 SeetJoD 9 Lot 20 (21 0 acs) All (593 90 acs) S12S/2 (160 0 acs) W I2NEf4 (80 0 aes) NEf4NW/4 (40 0 acs) NW/4NW/4 of Lot 1 (35 11 acs) SW/4NW/4 ofLo! 2 (34 15 acs) SE/4NW/4 of Lot 5 (3907 8es) SW/4NE14 of Lot 6 (39 44 aes) SEl4NE14 ofLot 7 (39 81 aes) N/2NW/4 (80 0 Res) NW/4NE14 of Lot 1 (31 4 aes) SW/4NW/4 of Lot 2 (38 4 aes) SEl4NW/4 of Lot 3 (38 6 aes) SW/4NE14 of Lot 4 (32 4 acs) SeetJoD 11 SEl4NE14 (40 0 Res) SEl4SW/4 (40 0 acs) SEl4 (160 0 aes) NEl4NE14 of Lot 1 (3905 Res) NW/4NE14 of Lot 2 (44 2 acs) SW/4SEl4 of Lot 3 (44 4 acs) NEl4SW/4 of Lot 4 (39 75 8es) NW/4SW/4 of Lot 5 (44 0 acs) SW/4SW/4 of Lot 6 (43 45 acs) SeetJon 15 SEl4NE14 (40 0 acs) Sl2SW/4 (80 0 acs) SEl4 (160 0 acs) NEl4NE14 of Lot 1 (44 0 acs) NW/4NE14 of Lot 2 (46 25 aes) SW/4NE14 of Lot 3 (41 5 aes) NBl4SW/4 of Lot 4 (42 0 aes) NW/4SW/4 of Lot 5 (40 8 acs) SeetJon 21 El2NE14 (80 0 Res) NW/4NE14 of Lot 1 (37 55 acs) SW/4NE14 of Lot 2 (38 4 acs) Township 024 North. Range 004 East SeetJoD 6 Crty of Seattle, Blocks 5 and 12, DaVid S Maynard's DonatJOD Claun No 43, North 30' Less street of Lots 5, 6, Block 12, North 15' Lot 5, Block 5 (09 ac.s) Jescription: ~ngf~ Document -Year.Hontn.Day,DocID 2003.l25.2078 Page: 7 of 12 'rder: 750859 Comment: Townslup 024 North. Range 004 East SectIOn 8 Seattle, part of vacated 8th Avenue South Between Blocks 243 and 250, Seattle Tidelands Addlnon, Seattle, Block 245, Seattle TIdelands, Lot 5, Lots 6 through 9, CIty of Seattle, Block 248, Seattle Tidelands SubdlVlslon, Slnp ofland 32' Wlde extendmg North and South through Block 248, also part Of Lots 16 to 19, Block248lymgEasterly ofa Ime parallel andconcentnc Wlth Perpendicularly distant 17 0' Easterly of the Easterly Ime of 8" Avenue South, as Established by Ordmance No 23591, City of Seattle, Block 249, Seattle Tidelands, West 2750' of East 50' of Lots 12 through 14, City of Seattle, Block 250, Seattle Tidelands subdlV1SIOn, West 225' of Lots 1 through II, except West 114' of Lots 9, 10 and 11 and West 114' of32 25' of Lot 8, Seattle, Block 252, Seattle Tidelands, parts ofLots 3, 4, 17-20, parcel called parts of Lots 1,2,3,20,21,22, Block 252, also parts of Lots 7, 8, 9, 10 11, Block 252, parcel called part of Lots 1,2,3,4,5,6, m Block 252, parcel called portions of Lots 12 through 16 InclUSive as established by ordmance No 23591, all descnbed more fully m deed To Milestone, City of Seattie, Block 253, Seattle Tidelands, Lot II and all those Parts of Lots 7 to 10 Iymg Southeasterly of a lme distant 15' as measured radIally From Railway Track Centerlme descnbed by metes and bounds m deed to Milestone, Also parts of Lots 6 to 9 m Block 253, descnbed as separate parcel In deed, CIty of Seattle of Block 254, Seattle Tidelands, Part of Lots 7-9 (230 8es), CIty of Seattle of Block 255, Seattle Tidelands, East 22 5' of Lots 1-5, West 225' of Lots 6-10, City of Seattle, Block 256, Seattle Tidelands, Easterly 25' of Lots 1-4, Westerly 25' of Lots 19 And 20, Dty of Seattle, Block 278, Seattle Tidelands, East 270' of Lots 17 through 19, City of Seattle, Block 297, Seattle TIdelands SubdIVlSlon part of North 50' of vacated Hanford Street adjOInIng East 183' ofLol24, and East 183' of the South 20' ofLo! 15, The East 183' of Lots 16 through 24 mcluslVe, Block 297, City of Sean Ie, Block 300, Seattle Tidelands, part of Lots 1 through 5, City of Seattle, Block 243,250, Seattle Tldelands Bemg the West 60' oCLot 6 except the South 10' thereot; the West 52' of The North 22' of Lot 5 which be Southerly of a lIne parallel to and IS' Southerly ofthe Descnbed centerlme bemg Block 243, accordIng to plat thereof, those portiOns of Lot 17 And 18 of Block 250 wluch he Easterly of 8" Avenue South as established by Ordmance No 23591, and Southerly of a Ime parallel to and 15' Southerly of centerlmc desenbed In Deed to Milestone, Part of vacated 8" Avenue South lymg between Lots 12 to 15 inclUSive m Block 248, and Lots 6 to 9 mciuslVe, Block 245, accordtng to plat thereof ( 49 aes) TownshIP 024 North. Range 005 East Sectton 11 NEl4SEl4 Less I 43 80 sold (38 57 80S) Secnon 21 S/2NW/4SW/4 (20 0 80S) Secnon 23 El2NE14 (80 o 80S) NEl4SEl4 (40 0 aes) Townslup 024 North. Range 006 East Secnon 3 SW/4NW/4 (40 0 acs) NW/4SWf4 (40 0 acs) Secnon 5 SEl4NE14 (40 0 80S) SEl4 (160 0 acs) Secnon 13 SWf4NWf4 (40 0 aes) NWf4SWf4 (40 0 aes) Sf2SWf4 (80 0 aes) SWf4SEl4 (40 o 80S) Jescription: King,WA Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2003.125.2078 page: 8 of 12 )rder: 750859 Comment: TownshIp 024 North. Range 006 East Seebon 15 SEl4SW/4 (40 0 aos) Seebon 19 W/2SEl4NE14 (20 0 acs) N12SEl4 (80 0 acs) NW/4NE14 (40 0 80s) NW/4NE14SW/4 (10 0 acs) W12NE14NE14SW/4 (50 acs) SW/4SW/4 (40 0 acs) West 330' of North 990' of fractIOnal NW/4NW/4, South 200' of the West 99' of Government Lot 1 (7 5 acs) Secbon 21 SEl4NE14 (40 0 acs) NEl4SEl4 (40 0 acs) SEl4 Less 1 12 aes BN RR ROW (38 88 acs) Seellon 23 S/2NW 14 (80 0 acs) SeclIon 2~ SEl4NE14 (40 08CS) SEl4NW/4SEl4 (100 acs) Part SW/4SW/4, SEl4SW/4, SEl4SEl4, NEl4SEl4, Less BN RIW, Less State Road (143 01 acs), abandoned RIW across SI2812, NW/4SW/4, NEl4SEl4 (13 5 acs) Seellon 27 SI2SEl4 (80 0 8CS) NEl4SEl4, Less 4 09 ac R/W (35 91 acs) SeclIon 29 W/2 (320 0 aes) Sechon 35 NW/4 (160 0 aos) N12SW/4 (800 acs) TownshIp 024 North. Range 007 East SectIon 3 100' WIde strip runnmg across Lot 4 and portIons of the SI2NW/4, NEl4SW/4, and S12SE/4 descnbed more fully In deed to MIlestone (14 63 8es) SectIon 17 El2El2 (1600 acs) N12SW/4 (80 0 acs) SW/4SW/4 (40.0 acs) SectIon 21 NEl4NE14 (40 0 acs) NW/4NW/4 (40 0 acs) SW/4SW/4 (40 0 acs) SeclIon 27 NW/4NE14NW/4 (10 0 acs) SeclIon 31 FRL WI2 Less North 150' thereof(309 95 aos) 100' ROW across N/2NE14, NEl4NW/4 and Lot 1 SectIOn 35 All (626 28 acs) Townshtp 024 North. Range 008 East SeclIon 25 SEl4SEl4 (40 0 acs) Secbon 29 Clty of Snoqualnue Falls, Block 24, Northeasterly 60' of Lots 17 through 20 And Southeasterly 15' of Northeasterly 60' ofLo! 16 ( 18 acs) SeclIon 31 NW/4SEl4 (40 0 acs) Townslup 024 Nom Range 009 East SeclIon 25 NEl4 (158 90 acs) lescription: King,WA Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2003.125.2078 Page: 9 oE 12 lrder: 750859 Comment: .. Townshm 024 North. Range 010 East Section IS N/2NE14 (80 0 acs) SW/4NE14 (40 0 acs) WI2 (320 0 aes) NW/4SEl4 (40 0 aes) Secllon 23 SEl4SEl4ofLo! I (4276 8es) SW/4SEl4 of Lot 2 (43 45 8es) SEl4SW/4 of Lot 3 (44 13 8CS) SW/4SW/4 of Lot 4 (44 82 8es) Section 25 NW/4NE14 of Lot 2 (38 69 aes) NEf4NW/4 of Lot 3 (3885 aes) NW/4NW/4 of Lot 4 (3912 acs) SW/4NW/4 ofLo! 5 (39 0 acs) SEl4NW/4 of Lot 6 (38 73 acs) SW/4NE14 of Lot 7 (3877 acs) SEl4SEl4 of Lot 8 (38 5 acs) Scctlon 27 SW/4NE14 (40 0 acs) S/2NW/4 (80 0 aes) SW/4 (160 0 acs) WI2SEl4 (80 0 acs) NW/4SEl4 of Lot 2 (33 46 acs) NEl48W/4 ofLo! 3 (33 12 acs) NW 14SW /4 of Lot 4 (32 85 acs) SW/4SW/4 ofLol 5 (3288 8CS) SEl4SW/4 ofLo! 6 (33 15 aes) 8W/4SEl4 of Lot 7 (3346 8CS) Townshm 025 North. Range 003 East Section 2 City of Ballard, Block B, Bryggers 2'" Home Addttlon, vacated streets adjOining SUbdivISion, Block II, Bryggers 2'" Home Addtbon, part of Lots 1 and 2, Block 6, Bryggers 2'" Home Addttlon, part of sald block (28 acs), Block 7, Bryggers 2'" Home Addition, Part of Lots 5-7, Parts of Lots 2 and 3,A tnangularparcel In that poruon of West 574< Street, vacated by ordinance No 82757, all parcels descnbed In deed to Milestone Section II That part ofSecI!on 11 beglOnmgat the comer of common SectlOns 11, 12, 13 and 14, Thence North on the Ime between Sccbons I land 12, 62 7' to the South margmallme OfShdshole Avenue, thence North 66 deg 18 mm West along saldrnarglnallme 352' To the polll! ofbegummg, thence folloWlDg sald marglnalltne North 66 deg 18 mm West, 150', thence North 23 deg 42 mm East, IS' and parallel to the Southerly rnarglOal Lme of Sbtlshore Avenue, 150', thence North 23 deg 42 nun East, 15' SecbOn 14 City of Seattle, Block 1, Gilman's AddIbon, Easterly 60' of Lots 20 and 21, Those porbons of Lots 4, 19,20,21 and portion of vacated alley, descnbed by Metes and bounds 10 deed to Milestone Townsbtp 025 North, Range 009 East Section 13 NEl4 (160 0 acs) 8/2 (3200 acs) TownshIP 026 North. Range 005 East Seebon 3 Stnp ofland m 8W/4NE14 (3 62 acs) 'escription: King,WA Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2003.125.2078 Page: 10 of 12 )rder: 750859 Comment: · . Township 026 North. Range 006 East See1JOn 25 NEl4NW/4 (40 0 aes) TownshIP 026 North, Range 009 East SeeUon I W/2SEl4 (80,0 aes) SEl4SEl4 of Lot 14 (3887 aes) SeeUon 3 Lot 3 (42 19 aes) Lot 4 (41 06 acs) Lot 5 (37 39 acs) Lot 6 (3739 aes) SW/4NE14 of Lot 10 (39 17 acs) SEl4NW/4 of Lot II (3769 acs) SW/4NW/4 of Lot 12 (37 69 acs) NWf4SW/4 of Lot 13 (3794 acs) NEl4SW/4 of Lot 14 (37 81 aes) SEl4SW/4 of Lot 15 (38 12 aes) SW/4SW/4 of Lot 16 (38 25 aes) SeeUon 5 SW/4 (160 0 aes) Lot 1 (39 1 acs) Lot 2 (38 93 acs) Lot 3 (3877 aes) Lot 4 (38 6 aes) NW/4NW/4 of Lot 5 (400 acs) NEl4NW/4 of Lot 6 (40 0 aes) NW/4NE14 of Lot 7 (40 0 aes) NEl4NE14 ofLo! 8 (40 0 aes) SEl4NE14 of Lot 9 (40 0 acs) SW/4NE140fLot 10 (40 0 aes) SEl4NW /4 of Lot 11 (40 0 aes) SW/4NW/4 of Lot 12 (40 0 acs) SeeUon 7 El2Wf2 (1600 acs) NEl4NE14 of Lot 1 (39.91 acs) NWf4NE14 of Lot 2 (39 91 acs) NWf4NW/4 of Lot 3 (45 22 Res) SWf4NWf4 of Lot 4 (44 79 Res) SW /4NE14 of Lot 5 (39 72 Res) SEl4NE14 of Lot 6 (39 72 aes) NW/4SW/4 of Lot 7 (44 35 Res) SW/4SWf4 of Lot 8 (43 92 aes) Secllon 11 SW/4 (159 02 aes) Secllon 15 NEl4 (160 0 aes) NEl4SWf4 (40 0 acs) Nf2SEl4 (80 0 aes) SE/4SEl4 (40 0 aes) TownshIP 026 North. Range 010 East Secl!on 1 Nf2 (323 68 aes) SecI!on 11 W 12SW 14 (80 0 Res) NEl4SWf4 ofLo! 9 (39 1 acs) SEl4SW 14 of Lot 14 (34 45 aes) Jescription: King,WA Dooument -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2003.125.2078 page: 11 of 12 )rder: 750859 Comment: " Township 026 North, Range Oil East SectIOn 22 SBl4 (160 0 aes) SectJon 26 Part of Lot 5 (26 90 acs) SectJon 3~ CIty ofSkyomlsh, Block 3, Townsite Lots II and 12 TownshIp 026 North, Range 012 East SectJon 31 S12NBl4NE14 (20 0 acs) Township 026 North, Range 013 East SectlOn 28 SW/4SEl4 (40 0 acs) SeclIon 29 S/2NW/4SBl4 (20 0 acs) That part ofS/2SBl4, SBl4SW/4, S/2NB14SW/41ymg Northerly ofRIW, Includmg 28 ac RIW In SW/4SEl4 (106 65 aes) WIllamette 1851 Plat CIty of Seattle, Block 135, Seattle Tide Lands, part of Lot 4 and parts of vacated alley In Lot 4 CIty of Seattle, Seattle TIde Lands, Block 139, parts of Lots 8-10 CIty of Seattle, Block 140, Seattle TIde Lands, parts of Lots 1-3, 14-16, and Lot 6 and parts of Vacated aUey !herem CIty of Seattle, Block 103, DaVId T Denny's I" Addlllon, Lots 11-14, Less East 17', Less North 11 36' of Lot 14 and Less West 5' CIty of Seattle, Block 101, DaVId T Denny's AddllIon, Lots 11 and 12 City of Seattle, Block I, BNNorpac Jndustnal Dlst #1 Lot 7 and 8 (214 acs) City of Seattle, Block 4, Lots 1-5 and East 110' of Lot 6 (7 41 acs) CIty of Seattle, Block 18, Lawton Park SubdiVISion, All Lot 4, part of Lots 8-13 wluch are lymg Southwesterly of Ottman Avenue CIty of Seattle, Ladd's I" AddltJon, parts of Lots 8-10 (35 acs) CIty of North Seattle, Block 101 D T Denny's 5th Addloon, Lots 7 -I 0 Less the West 4' thereof CIty of Seattle, Lawton Parle AddJllon, Block 7, those portIOns of Harley Avenue and Lots 1-4 And 15 all of whIch IS more fully descnbed m a deed to MIlestone CIty of Earlmgton Plat Clty ofEatlmgton, Earhngton JnduslJ'1al Park #1, Lot 5 (10 01 acs) ~scription: King~WA Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2003.125.2078 Page: 12 of 12 )rder: 750859 Comment: Burtlllgton Resources 0,1 & Gas Co LP Attn: Holly A. Lynch P.O. Box 51810 MIdland, Texas 79710-1810 NOTICE OF CLAIM TO SEVERED MINERAL INTEREST STATE OF WASHINGTON § § COUNTY OF KING § In accordance WIth the apphcable proVISIon of law including Chapter 78 22 040 ReVISed Code of Waslnngton, the fonowlng NotIce of aalm of Severed Mmerallnterest 15 gIVen I aatmant GlacIer Parle Company, a Delaware CorporatIon (formerly mown as Mendlan Land and Mlne.al Company) authonzed to conduct busmess m the State of North Dakota 2 Claunant's pnnclpal place of business IS located at 801 Cherry Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76102 3 Description of Land Affeeted by This Notice Attached hereto as ExhIb,t "AU and mcorporated heretn by reference 18 a hst and descnpnon of the severed mmeral mterests m the above captIoned county owned and claImed by C1a.unant 4 Clallnant IS the owner of the severed mmeral mterests In the lands descnbed 10 ExhIbIt" A" that were ongtnally held by the Northern PacIfic Rallway Company 5 Nature and Extent of Claim W,th respect to the severed mmeral mterests covered hereby, ClaImant asserts and chums all nghts and pnVlleges appurtenant to such Interests mcludmg, but not 111mted to, free and unencumbered mgress and egress at all tImes for the purpose of exploratIon, mmmg and dnllmg on SaId lands and conductIng all such other actIVIties and operations as may be appropnate 10 searchtng for and remoVl11g oil, gas and other m1Oera1s of any k10d or nature, 1Ocludmg, but not 111mted to hydrocarbons of any nature, rare earths, ferrous and non-ferrous metals and ores 6 Non-Waiver ThIs notlce of clann IS expressly made WIthOut waIver or PreJudIce to ClaImant's nght, expressly reserved and retamed herem and hereby, to challenge the vahdtty of any statute, OIdmance or enactInent requtnng such notIce !IS a condluon to contJnued ownerslnp of severed nunera! fee Interests, on the baSIS that any such statute, ordmance or enactment IS Vlolallve of property nghts and procedural nghts afforded and guaranteed under the ConstItubon of the Uruted States of Amenca and the State of Waslnngton, and IS therefore VOId Jescription; King,HA Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2003.125.2079 Page: 1 or 10 'rder: 750859 Comment: EXECmtD thiS 3 \ S'r day ofOctober, 2002 GLACIER PARK COMPANY STATEOFlEXAS § § COUNTY OF MIDLAND § BEFORE ME, the understgned authonty, on t1us day personally appeared S KEITH FRANK, Attorney-m-Fact of Glacier Park Company, known to me to be the person whose name IS subscnbed to the foregomg mstrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same for the purposes and considerabon therem expressed and m the capacity stated therem as the act and deed of said corporatIOn GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE t1us ~ day of October, 2002 "~ ... ~ HOLLYLYNCH I~· *:'J NOTARY PUBLIC ~~ ':I~g;o~ i~--~-.. __ _ -~ a. "i"~ ';'~'. My commISSion eXPireS 07/03/2003 ~scription: King,~ Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2003.125.2079 Page: 2 of 10 )rder: 750859 Comment: STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING EXHIBIT" A" MINERAL OWNERSHIP: ALL MINERALS EXCEPT OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS. LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS Township 019 North. Range 007 East SeefJon 5 NW/4SW/4 (40 a acs) Sl2SW/4 (80 0 acs) Section 9 Nl2NW 14 (80 0 aes) Township 020 North. Range 007 Eas! Section 5 S12NE14 (80 0 acs) SEl4NW/4 (40 0 8es) SWI4SEl4 (40 a 80s) Section 7 Sectton 9 Section 15 Section 17 Lot I, Lots 2, 3, Less 10 00 ae BN RfW (98 97 acs) NEl4 (160 a 8es) El2NW 14 (80 0 acs) El2SW/4 (80 0 8es) SW/4NWI4 ofLo! 2 (43 628es) NW/4SW/4 of Lot 3 (4264aes) SEl4 Less 54 01 ae BN RfW (I 08es) All (640 0 aes) All (640 0 8es) El2 (320 0 acs) El2WI2 (160 08es) NW/4NW/4 (40 0 aes) W/2SW/4 (80 0 acs) Section 19 El2 (320 0 aes) El2SW/4 (80 0 acs) NW/4NW/4 of Lot 1 (41 03 acs) Section 29 W/2NW/4 (80 a 8CS) Section 31 SEl4NE14 (40 08CS) SEl4SWl4 (40 0 aes) Section 33 S/2NE14 (80 0 8CS) El2WI2 (160 0 aes) SEl4 (160 0 acs) Township 020 North. Range 008 East Section 5 All (641 25 8es) Section 7 All (591 92 8es) TownshIp 020 North. Range 009 East Sectton 11 NI2 (320 0 80s) ~scription: King,WA Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2003.125.2079 Page: 3 of 10 )rder: 750859 Comment: TownshlP 020 North. Range 010 East Section 6 NW/4SW/4 ofLo! 6 (34 54 8es) Sechon 34 El2NW/4 (80 0 Res) NEl4SW/4 (40 0 Res) Town.h,p 021 North, Range 004 Eas! Section 31 NEl4NE14 (40 0 acs) NW/4NE14 of Lot 1 (3205 aes) SEl4NE14 of Lot 2 (33 5 aes) Townshtp 021 North, Range 005 East Secbon 29 NW/4SW/4 (40 0 acs) Townshtp 021 North. Range 008 East Secbon 22 SW/4SEl4 (400 acs) Sl2NW 14SEl4 (20 0 acs) NW/4NW/4SEl4 (10 0 aes) TownshIp 021 North. Range 009 East Sechon 30 SEl4SW/4 (40 0 8es) SW/4SEl4 (40 0 aes) Section 32 SW/4NE14 (40 0 8es) Sl2NW/4 (80 0 8es) N12SW/4 (80 0 aes) SEl4SW/4 (40 0 aes) SEl4 (160 0 acs) Townshtp 021 North. Range 010 East Sechon3 Secbon 9 Section 11 Secbon 15 Secbon 17 Section 19 Section 26 SecI!on27 Section 28 See!J.on 29 Sectton 31 Sec!J.on 32 Secbon 33 Sec!J.on 34 See!J.on35 All (548 968es) All (640 0 aes) All (6400 8es) All (640 0 aes) All (640 0 aes) All (640 0 8es) WI2SW/4 (80 0 Bes) All (640 08es) SI2SW/4 (80 0 8es) All (640 0 acs) All (631.08 8es) N/2SEJ4 (80 0 acs) N/2SW/4 (80 0 aes) SFJ4SEl4 of Lot 1 (33 58 acs) SW/4SEl4 of Lot 2 (3411 acs) SFJ4SW/4 of Lot 3 (34 66 acs) All (610 43 8es) NI2N/2 (160 08es) N/2SW/4 (80 0 acs) SE/4SW/4 of Lot 3 (31 39 acs) All (595 48 8es) )esoription: King,WA Document -Year.Month.Day,DocID 2003.125.2079 Page: 4 of 10 'rder: 750859 Comment: TownshIP 022 North. Range 010 East Section 31 El2NW/4 (80 0 aes) NE/4SW/4 (40 0 acs) SEl4 (160 0 acs) NW/4NW/4 of Lot 1 (3849 aes) SW 14NW 14 of Lot 2 (38 47 aes) NW/4SW/4 of Lot 3 (38 45 acs) SW/4SW/4ofLot4(3843 aes) SeclIon 33 NEi4 (160 0 Beg) S/2 (320 0 aes) TownshIP 022 North. Range 011 Eas! Sectton 5 RIW across SEl4SW/4, W12SEl4 (S 85 acs) Sechon 17 RIW across W/2NW/4, S12N/2 (15 89 8es) Township 023 North, Range 004 East Sectton 13 NI2NW/4 (80 0 8CS) TownshIP 023 North. Range 005 East Section 1 SW/4SW/4SW/4SW/4 (2 5 8CS) SeclIon 3 SEl4NE/4 (40 0 acs) SEl4SEl4 (40 0 8CS) NEi4SE/4 (40 0 8CS) NEl4NE/4 (35 92 8CS) W/2SW/4 (80 0 8es) NW/4NW/4 (35.77 acs) Seetton 7 SW/4SW/4 (326 8CS) Seetton 9 NEl4 (160 0 aes) N/2SEl4 (80 08CS) Section 11 All (640 0 Bes) Section 25 S12SEl4 (80 0 Bes) PartofSW/4NE14, SI2NW/4, NI2SW/4, NW/4SEl4 (53 46 Bes) Secnon 27 Tract m NW/4NE/4 (1 0 acs) Sectton 29 SEl4SW/4 (40 0 acs) Part of SEl4NW /4 ( 5 Bes) Secnon 35 SEl4NEi4 (40 0 acs) Townslup 023 North. Range QQ6 East Section 1 All (626 02 Bes) Section 3 SEl4NFl4 (40 0 Bes) El2SEl4 (80 0 Beg) NE/4NFl4 ofLo! 1 (31 76 Bes) NW 14NW 14 of Lot 4 (30 89 acs) Part ofEl2SEl4 bemg a slnp ofland 75' w,de descnbed In deed to Mllestone (4 23 Bes) Sectton 5 Part of Lots 3, 4, West of Sunset H,ghway (22 0 aes) 100' ROW aerna. Lots 3, 4, SW/4NW/4 (24 06 Bes) Secnon 11 All (640 0 acs) Seenon 17 SW/4NW/4NW/4SW/4 (2 5 8CS) Sl2NE/4 (80 a BeS) E12NW/4 (80 0 aes) NW/4NW/4 (40 0 acs) escription: KingfNA Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2003.125.2079 Page: 5 of 10 Irder: 750859 Comment: TownshIp 023 North. Range 006 East SectIon 17 N/2SEl4 (80 08CS) SEl4SEl4 (40 0 acs) SI2SW 14 (80 0 8CS) TownshIP 023 North. Range 007 East SectIon 1 SectIon 5 SectIon 7 Secllon 9 SectIon 11 Section 13 SecllOn 15 Section 17 Section 19 Section 21 Seellon 23 SectIOn 25 Secllon 27 SeclIon29 SectIon 31 SectIon 35 Parts of Lots 1, 2, Sl2NE14 (160 08es) All (629 06 8CS) All (642 40 8CS) All (640 08es) All (640 08CS) All (640 08CS) All (640.0 8CS) All (640 0 8CS) All (648 58 acs) All (640 0 8CS) All (640 08CS) All Less 4 04 ac BN RfW (635 96 acs) N/2N/2 (160 0 8es) All (640 0 acs) Hwy RfWacross Lots 2, 3, NEl4SW/4, WI2NW!4, NW!4NE/4 (2517 acs) NEl4 (160 0 acs) NEl4SEl4 (40.0 8CS) TownshIP 023 North. Range 008 East SectIon 3 NEl4NE14 of Lot 1 (47 80 acs) SEl4NE14 of Lot 5 (429 8es) TownshIp 023 North. Range 009 East Secllon I W!2SW!4 (80 08es) Lot I (1965 acs) Lot 2 (3740 8es) Lot 5 (3740 acs) Lot 6 (38 65 acs) Lot 7 (41 40 acs) Lot 8 (40 0 acs) Lot 9 (40 0 acs) Lot 10 (21 08CS) Lot 11 (21 0 acs) Lot 12 (40 0 acs) Lot 13 (40 08es) Lot 14 (40 0 acs) Lot 15 (37 58CS) Lot 16 (401 acs) Lot 17 (40 0 aes) Lot 18 (40 0 8CS) Lot 19 (40 0 8es) Lot 20 (21 08es) SectIon 3 All (593 90 acs) Section 5 Sl2S!2 (160 0 8es) ~scription: King,WA Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2003.125.2079 Page: 6 of 10 'rder: 750859 Comment: .' TownshIp 023 North. Range 009 East Secbon 7 W12NEJ4 (80 0 acs) NEJ4NW/4 (4O 0 aes) NW/4NW/4 of Lot 1 (35 11 acs) SW/4NW/4 of Lot 2 (34 15 aes) SE'J4NW/4 of Lot 5 (39 07 aos) SW/4NEJ4 of Lot 6 (39 44 acs) SEl4NEJ4 oCLot 7 (39 81 aes) SectIOn 9 N12NW/4 (80 0 acs) NW/4NEJ4 of Lot 1 (31 4 acs) SW/4NW/4 of Lot 2 (384 aes) SEl4NW/4 of Lot 3 (38 6 acs) SW 14NEJ4 of Lot 4 (32 4 acs) SeetJ.on 11 SE'J4NEJ4 (40 0 aes) SE/4SW/4 (40 o 80s) SEl4 (160 0 aes) NEJ4NEJ4 of Lot 1 (39 05 aes) NW/4NEJ4 of Lot 2 (44 2 acs) SW/4SEl4 ofLot 3 (44 4 acs) NEJ4SW/4 of Lot 4 (39 75 8es) NW/4SW/4 of Lot 5 (44 0 acs) SW/4SW/4 of Lot 6 (43 45 acs) SectJ.on 15 SEl4NE/4 (40 0 aes) SI2SW/4 (80 0 acs) SEl4 (160 0 acs) NEJ4NEJ4 of Lot 1 (44 0 aes) NW/4NEJ4 of Lot 2 (46 25 acs) SW/4NE14 of Lot 3 (41 5 aes) NEJ4SW/4 of Lot 4 (42 0 aes) NW/4SW/4 of Lot 5 (40 8 80s) Secllon 21 El2NEJ4 (80 0 acs) NW/4NEJ4 of Lot 1 (37 55 8es) SW/4NEJ4 of Lot 2 (38 4 acs) Townshtp 024 North. Range 005 East SeetJ.on 11 NEl4SEl4 Less J 43 ae sold (38 57 aos) 8eetJon 21 S/2NW/4SW/4 (20 0 aes) SeetJ.on 23 El2NEJ4 (80 0 aos) NEl4SEl4 (4O 0 acs) Townslup 024 North. Range 006 East SeetJ.on 3 SWf4NW/4 (40 0 8es) NW/4SW/4 (40 0 aes) SeetJ.on 5 SEl4NE/4 (40 0 acs) SEl4 (160 0 acs) 8eetJ.on 13 SW/4NWf4 (40 0 aes) NW/4SW/4 (40 0 aes) S/2SW/4 (80 0 aes) SW/4SEl4 (40 0 aes) SectJ.on 15 SEl4SW/4 (40 0 acs) SectJ.on 19 W12SEl4NE14 (20 0 aes) )escription: ~ng,~ Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2003,125.2079 Page: 7 of 10 >rder: 750859 Comment: TownshIP 024 North. Range 006 East SectIOn 19 N/2SFJ4 (80 0 aes) l'.'W/4NE14 (40 0 aes) NW/4NE14SW/4 (10 0 aes) WI2NE14NE14SW/4 (50 acs) SW/4SW/4 (40 0 aes) West 330' of North 990' offraroonal NW/4NW/4, South 200' of the West 99' of Govenunent Lot 1 (7 5 acs) SectIOn 21 SEl4NE14 (40 0 aes) NEl4SEl4 (40 0 aes) SEl4 Less 1 12 acs BN RRROW (3888 aes) Seeoon 23 S/2NW/4 (80 0 aes) SectIOn 2S SEl4NE14 (40 0 aes) SEl4NW/4SFJ4 (10 0 acs) Part SW/4SW/4, SEl4SW/4, SEl4SFl4, NE/4SFl4, Less BN RIW, Less State Road (143 01 acs), abandoned RIW across S/2S12, NW/4SW/4, NEl4SFl4 (13 5 aes) Secoon 27 S12SFl4 (800 acs) NE/4SFl4, Less 4 09 ac RIW (35 91 acs) SectIOn 29 WI2 (320 08es) Secoon 35 NW/4 (160 0 acs) N/2SW/4 (80 0 aes) TownshIP 024 North. Range 007 East Secoon 17 Fl2F12 (160 0 acs) N/2SW/4 (80 0 aes) SW/4SW/4 (40 0 acs) Seellon 21 NEl4NE14 (40 0 aes) NW/4NW/4 (40 0 aes) SW/4SW/4 (40 0 acs) Secl!on 27 NW/4NE14NW/4 (100 acs) Section 31 FRL WI2 Less North ISO' thereof(309 95 acs) 100' ROW across N12NEI4, NE/4NW/4 and Lot 1 Seroon 35 All (626 28 aes) Townslup 024 North. Range 008 East Secoon 25' SFl4SFJ4 (40 0 aes) Secoon 31 NW/4SFl4 (40 0 aes) Townslup 024 North, Range 009 East Sccllon 25 NEl4 (158 90 aes) TQwnshlP 024 North. Range 010 East Secoon 15 N12NE14 (80 0 acs) SW/4NE14 (40 0 aes) WI2 (320 0 aes) NW/4SFJ4 (40 0 aes) Secllon 23 SEl4SFl4 of Lot 1 (4276 aes) SW/4SFl4 QfLot 2 (43 45 aes) SE/4SW/4 of Lot 3 (44 13 aes) SW/4SW/4 QfLot 4 (44 82 acs) 'escription: King,~ Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2003.125.2079 Page: 8 of 10 )rder: 750859 Comment: Townshtp 024 North. Range 010 Eas! SeelIon 25 NW/4NE14 ofLo! 2 (3869 .es) NEl4NW/4 ofLo! 3 (38 85 aes) NW/4NW/4 of Lot 4 (3912 Res) SW/4NW/4 ofLo! 5 (39 0 aes) SEl4NW/4 ofLo! 6 (38 73 8es) SW/4NE14 ofLo! 7 (38 77 8es) SEl4SEl4 of Lot 8 (38 5.es) SeelIon 27 SW/4NE14 (40 0 8eS) S/2NW 14 (80 0 Res) SW/4 (160 0 acs) W I2SFJ4 (80 0 .es) NW/4SFJ4 ofLo! 2 (33 46 Bes) NFJ4SW/4 ofLo! 3 (33 12 les) NW/4SW/4 ofLo! 4 (32 85 aes) SW/4SW/4 of Lot 5 (32 88 Bes) SE/4SW/4 ofLo! 6 (33 15 Res) SW 14SEl4 of Lot 7 (33 46 8es) Townslup 025 North, Range 009 East SeelIon 13 NEl4 (160 0 acs) 812 (320 0 acs) TownshIp 026 North. Range 006 East Sec!Jon 25 NEl4NW/4 (40 08CS) TownshIP 026 North. Range 009 East SectJon 1 W I2SEl4 (80 0 Res) SEl4SEl4 ofLo! 14 (38 87 .cs) SeelIon 3' Lot 3 (42 198cs) Lot 4 (41 06 acs) Lot 5 (37 39 acs) Lot 6 (37 39 acs) SW/4NE14 of Lot 10 (39 178es) SEl4NW/4 ofLo! 11 (3769 aes) SW/4NW/4 ofLo! 12 (37 69 acs) NW/4SW/4 of Lot 13 (37 94 acs) NEl4SW/4 of Lot 14 (37 81 Bes) SEl4SW/4 of Lot 15 (38 12 Bes) SW/4SW/4 of Lot 16 (38 25 aes) SeclIon 5 SW/4 (160 0 acs) Lot 1 (39 1 8es) Lot 2 (38 93 acs) Lot 3 (38 77 acs) Lot 4 (38 6 8es) NW/4NW/4 of Lot 5 (40 08es) NEl4NW/4 ofLo! 6 (40 0 acs) NW/4NE14 of Lot 7 (40 0 acs) NEl4NE14 ofLo! 8 (40 0 8es) SFJ4NE14 of Lot 9 (40 0 acs) SW/4NE14 orLo! 10 (40 0 8CS) )escription: King,WA Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2003.125.2079 Page: 9 of 10 'rder: 750859 Comment: Townshm 026 North, Range 009 East SectIOn 5 SEl4NW/4 of Lot II (400 acs) SW/4NW/4 of Lot 12 (40 0 aes) Section 7 El2W/2 (160 0 aes) NEl4NE14 of Lot 1 (3991 acs) NW/4NE14 ofLo! 2 (39 91 acs) NW/4NW/4 of Lot 3 (45 22 acs) SWI4NW/4 of Lot 4 (44 79acs) SWI4NE14 ofLo! 5 (3972 aes) SEl4NE14 ofLo! 6 (39 72 acs) NW/4SWI4 ofLo! 7 (44 35 aes) SWI4SW/4 ofLo! 8 (43 92 aes) Secoon 11 SW/4 (159 02 aes) Secoon 15 NEl4 (160 0 acs) NEl4SW/4 (40 0 acs) N/2SEl4 (80 0 aes) SEl4SEl4 (40 0 acs) ~scription: King,HA Document -Year.Mbntn.Day,DocID 2003.125.2079 Page: 10 of 10 )rder: 750859 Comment: FILED for ReCord at Request of Namew...Mel.!\\; .. ~ '-. Address \'.0 \\9' ) 5""oC) City 1Sec-llulli\l .... 01:: 1<i"",S"-,s-.... , NOTICE OF CLAIM TO SEVERED MINERAL INTERESTS 20081209000691.:: Tllis Statement of Claim is being made for the purpose of preserving mineral interest indicated on Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, in the lands described on Exhibit A, located in King County, Washington of the undersigned owner, BURLINGTON RESOURCES Oil & GAS COMPANY L.P., a Delaware Partnership (fonne~y known as Meridian Oil Inc. and Burlington Resounces Oil & Gas Company), and a wholly owned subsidiary of ConocoPhillips whose address is P.O. Box 7500, Bartlesville, Oklahoma 74005-7500 : od EXECUTED this Bth day of October, 2008 ~ .. -. BURUNGTON RESOURCES OIL & GAS COMPANY, L,P, BY: ~~kftlcJu!¢ AttomeY-in-Fact ~ ~scription: King,HA Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2008.1209.691 Page: 1 of 68 lrder: 750859 Comment: 20081209000691 ~ ,: .. ~, STATE OF OKLAHOMA ) ) SS, COUNTY OF OSAGE ) Before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public, within and for said County and State, on this the 8th day of October 2008, personally appeared Cindy D. Blevins, as Attorney-in-Fact for Burlington Resources 011 & Gas Company l.P., te ine personally known to be the identical person who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that she executed the same as her free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposed therein set forth. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and offocial seal the day and year last above written. My Commission Expires: 1112512008 Tem L. Bute Notary Public 'escription: King,HA Document -Year.Month.Day.DocID 2008.1209.691 Page: 2 of 68 'rder: 750859 Comment: : ~ ~ .. ' i '" ~ :g o '" Exhibit A Attached to and made iii part of that certain $tatomo"t of Claim to Mlnorallntoro&t datod NovombGr 21, 2008 far King County. WA Fife # Suffix Dated Granton> M13877 M1387B M13879 M27389 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET AI... M27389 000 12Jl/19a3 BURUNGTON NORTHERN. ET AL M27:390 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN-ET Al. M27390 000 12/111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN-ETAl M27391 000 12/111983 BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27392 000 5126/1988 BURliNGTON NORTHERN -ET AI. M273~3 000 5126/1088 BURliNGTON NORTHERN -'ET AI. M27394 000 5/26/1988 BURUNGTON NORTi-ERN -ET AL M273as 000 5126/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET At M21395 000 5128/1988 BURLINGTON NORTl-ERN • ET At M21396 OCiD 612S/1S88 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27396 000 5126IH188 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27397 pOO 5128/1988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27398 0(10 5126/1988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET Al M27399 000 5126/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27400 000 5128/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27401 000 5126/1988 SURLINGTONNORTHERN-ETAL page 1 0(66 Book Page T R: Seet ---ooc-------- 8806280226 DOC 8806280226 DOC •••• 2.022. DOC 840725(,1712 DOC 8407250112 BOOKJPAGE DOC.#840725 0712 BOOKIPAGE DOC.#840125 0712 BOOKIPAGE DOC_#$4072. 0712 BOOKfPAGE 6907070392 BOOKIPAGE S{lQ7070aa2 BOOKfPAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 89.7070392 BOOKIPAGE 89070703$2 BOOKIPAGE 8907070392 BOOI(IPAOE 8907070392 BOOI(IPAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE a901070392 BOO~lPAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOKIPAGE 8907070392 19 N 6 E 19 NeE 19N7E 5 ,. N 7 C • 19 N 7 E 9 19 N 10 c: 19 N 10 E 3 19 N 1G E 5 19 N 10 E 9 19 N 10 E 9 19 N 10 E 11 1S N 10 E 11 19 .N 11 E ,. N 11 E 3 19 !II 11 E 5 19 N " E 7 19 N 11 E 9 QQ NWSW S2SW N2NW ALL AlL AlL N2 N'I!SW N2 N2S2 ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL R~eptlon Nu~r Log'aJ Description LOTS 1 AND 2 (73.24 B(nl$) PART OF lOT ., SWJ4NW4 NORTH Of THE WHITE RIVER (42.26 acres) Interest 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.0(1000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.COo-OOOOO 1.00000000 1.00000000 ~ ... o '" & II! 5 .. o '" ... .. o o '" ::: o 8 g '" .. ~ ~ " ~ ~ .. I " 8 "-.. § ~ ~I '~ tJ "' .. • '. Ie) ~ .. 00 -~ '" .. " .~ .. " " o • ~'O !l!~ • I • I ~ '" ~ 0 0 '" 0 N ~ Exhibit A :g 0 Attached to and made a part 0' that cortaln Statomctlt pf ClUm to Mlnorallntoi'Ost dated November 11.1 2Q08 fclr IQng COunty, WA N File" Suffix Dated Grantors Book Pag~ T R Sm aQ RoC&pUon Numbor Legal DascnpUon M27402 000 512S/1'9aS BU'RL.iN·GTor·rNO~-fHERN'-· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 19 N 11 e 11 All a907070392 M2740S 000 512611988 UURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL. BOOK/PAGE 19 N 11 E 15 NO 89G7070392 M27403 000 612611938 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· eT AL BOOK/PAGE 19 N 11 E 16 SW 8907070392 M27404 coo 5126/1 Gl88 BURLINGTON NORTHeRN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 19 N 11 E 15 SE S9D7070S92 M27405 000 .Mla/t9$$ BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKIPAGE 19 III 11 E 17 ALL 8907070392 M27406 000 5126/19$8 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al BOOKIPAGE 19 N 11 E 21 NE 8907070392 M2740S 000 6126/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 19 N 11 E 21 NENW 8907070392 M27406 000 512611988 BURt.INGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 19 N 11 E 21 NESE 89007010392 M27407 000 5126/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -I;:T AL BQOKIPAGE 19 N 12 E 3 AlL 8907070392 M2740a 000 51i6119B8 BURlINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOI<IPAGE 1'1 N 12 E 11 AlL 89(}7070392 M274"09 aoo 1211f1983 eURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKIPAGE 20 N 5 E NESW DOC.W4{]726 0712 AKA Lot 20 (27,01 acres) M27409 /JOO 1211/1983 eURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BQOKIPAGE 20 N 5 E NWSE OOC.'840725 AM. lotS (26.7 Bcres) 0712 M27410 000 1211/1983 eURllNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL 8QOKIPAGE 20 N 6 E 3 NENE DOC.#840725 AKA Lot 1 (34.57 ac:res) 0712 M27410 000 12}'I11983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN-et Ai.. BOOKIPAGE 20 N • E 3 NWhW OOC.#S40726 AKA lot 4 (34.27 acres} 0712 M27410 000 12/1/1963 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKIPAGE 20 N 6 E 3 SENW OOC.#S40726 0712 M27411 000 1211/1963 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET A,l BOOKIPAGE 20 N 6 E 5 NWNE OOC.#S40725 AKA Lot 2 (307.58 acres) 0712 M27412 000 12f1f1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET /IJ... BOOKJPAGE 20 N • E 7 E2NW OOC.#840726 0712 M27412 000 1211f1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· E:r AJ.. BOOKIPAGE 20 N 6 E 7 NWNW OOC,tI!840n6 AKA lot 1 (39.92 acres) 0712 Page 2 of 66 InttrHt 1.00000000 1.00000000 1:00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1,00000000 1.00000000 1,000000DO 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 ::: ~ .. ~ .l! .... ~ '" '" .. .... '" '" '" .. lOl 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ :! .. i Q g .. ... in ~~ '" .. ., "'" Q'" '" ., ...... e, ''"1 •• g~ ~~ ,,' ,;> ~' i ~ i N Exhibit A AUac.hed to and made a part of that certain Statomont of ClaIm to Mlnoral1n1orost dated Novomber 21, 2008 for King County, WA. File II Suffix Dated Grantors Boo. Pag,ct T R Sect QQ Rocoptlon Number LogalOQsc:rlpUon M274'12-" 000' . 12iii1983 -euRl'it.i'GTON' NciRTH"ERN: ei AL 'SOOi<iPAGE 20 N • E 7 SWNW 000 .• 1340726 AKA. lol2 (40.25 acres) 0712 M27413 000 12/1/1'983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 6 E 11 E2SW 00C.'840725 0712 M27413 000 12/1/1'983 aUALINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL 800KIPAGE 20 N 6 E " S2folE OOC,;4I840725 0712 M27413 000 12/1/1983 HURUNGTON NORTHERN· EI AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 6 E 11 SE 00C,'640725 0712 M274H 000 12/1/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET Al BOOK/PAGE 20 N 6 E 13 S2NE OOC.IIII840725 0712 M27-415 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· £T AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 6 E 17 NWSE OOC ... 'S40725 0712 M27416 000 1211/1963 BuRLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Ai-BOOK/PAGE 20 N 6 E 25 ALL LESS 11.45 ACS BN FWI. DOC.il84072e lESS s..16ACS (825.39 acres) 0712 M27417 000 12/1f1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N • E .. NE4; PART OF E2SW4. SE4 OOC.;t:B40725 lYING SLY OF COUNTY ROAD 0712 &NLY Of COUNTY UN E (266.93 acres) M270418 001) 5126/1988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. BOOK/PAGE 20 N 7 E • &WSW 8907070397 M27419 000 1211/1983 BURlJNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL. ""OK/PAGE 20 N 7 E S S2NE OOC.tl840725 0712 M274~9 ooD 12/1111383 BURL.JNGTON NORTH5RN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 20 N 7 E 5 SENW OOC.'840725 0712" M:2.7419 000 12/1/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET A.L BOOK/PAGE 20 N 7 E • SWSE DOC,#M072S 0712 M27419 000 121111983 8~UNGTON NORTHERN· ET A.L BOQKlPAGE 20 -N 7 E 5 LOT1, LOTS 2. 3, LESS 10.00 DOC,#840725 0712 AC BN R1W (98.97 aClOS) M27420 000 1211/1983 B~liNGTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOK/PAGE 20 N 7 E 7 E2NW DOC.#S4C725 071' M27420 000 12/1/1983 BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 7 E 7 E2SW DQC,'840725 071~ Page 3 0166 Interest 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 .. '" 1,00000000 ... 0 '" 1,00000000 ~ • 1,00000000 .. ... '" '" 1.00000000 .; 0 '" ... 1.00000000 .; 0 0 '" ~ 1,00000000 0 0 1.00000000 Q !>, ~ Q 1.00000000 '" ., 1.00000000 ~ ~ " ~ ~ 1.00000000 ., 1.00000000 ~ 0 0 1.00000000 Q .. ., ;J a t>~ " 0 '" t.J "'", .. ", ~'" 00 '" '" .,,,, .~ ., a ~ ~" }J?~ " ~ g en l'il ~ ~ Exhibit A Attached to and made a part otthat cortaln Statomont or Claim to Mlnor-allntorest datotl Novombor 21, 2008 for King County, WA Filo 11 Suffix Dated GnlntOJ"$ ~~~__ ~ag..! T R Sect QQ . _ f!.':~.!~!~. ,~_l!.~~~'.. L..o~1 poserlptfon Interest M27-120 000 12i1/;983 BURU'NGTON N6R'fHERN'~ a' Ai. BOOI<JPAGE 20 N 7 E 7 NE 1.00000000 00C.1I840725 0712 M27420 COG 12{1/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 7 E ? NWSW 1.00000000 DOC,#S40725 J.J<A lot a (42.64 acres.) .o71.2 M270420 oeD 12{,/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOI<JPAGE 20 N 7 E 7 SWNW 1.00000000- OOC.#840725 AKA Lot 2 (43.62 a-cres) '" 0712 '" M2742{] 000 1211/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHER:I\I" ET AL BOOI<JPAGE 20 N 7 E 7 SE4 LESS 54.01 AC BN R/VIJ 1.00000000 ... OOC.ifI!S40725 0 0712 (105.&a acres) '" M27421 000 12/1J1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -~ AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 7 E , ALL 1.00000000 00C.'840725 ~ 0712 ,;0: M27.tj22 {lOO 1211/1983 BURL.INGTON NORTHERtII· ET At BOOI<JPAGE 20 N 7 E I. ALL 1.00000000 DOC.tl840726 '" '" 071.2 '" M27423 000 12/1/1983 BURL.INGTON NORTHERN· ET AL. BOOK/PAGE 20 N 7 E t7 E2 1.00000000 '" DOC.il840725 0 '" 0712 '" M27423 aoo 12"/1/1983 BURLINGTON NO~THERN _ ET AI.. BOOKIPAGE 20 N ? E 17 E2W2 1.00000000 .; DOC.tl84D725 0 0 0712 '" M27423 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN ~ ET AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 7 E t7 NWNW 1.00000000 El DOC.IJi8407:20 " 0712 g M27423 000 1211/1983 aURllNGTON NORTH.ERN -E;T Al BOOK/PAGE 20 N ? • I? W2SW 1.00000000 DOC.#84072S ~ 0712 M27424 000 121111983 BURUNGTON NORTH!:RN -ET AL. BOOK/PAGE 20 N 7 • I. E2 1.00000000 '" OOC.lI040725 .., 0 0712 ~ M2H24 000 12/1/1933 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL. BOOI<JPAGE 20 N 7 E I. E2SW 1.00000000 DOC.#840725 " • 0712 >'! M27424 000 121111983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL. BOOI<JPAGE 20 N 7 E '19 . NWNW 1.00000"000 OOC.#84072.5 AKA Lot 1 ("'1~03 acres) 0712 .., M27425 000 12'1119$:3 BURliNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL. BOOK/PAGE 20 N 7 E 2. W2NW 1.00000000 ~ DQC:l~~£40;~S § 0712 " 0 M27426 000 12'111983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL. BOOI<JPAGE 20 N ? E 31 SENE 1.00000000 Q .. OOC.#840725. .., 0712 H ." <> "'", PBge40(66 .. ", 0" 00 ." '" .., .... . ~ .. " " u ~ ." ~~ : ' ': I ~ '" '" 0 0 0 '" ~ ~ Exhibit A 00 0 0 Attached to aM made a part of that c9rtalll statomont of Claim to Ml/'lOfal rntor"t datod Novombor 21, 2008 'at King County, WA-N File. Suffix Dated Grantors Book Page T R Sect QQ Reeoptron Number M27426 000 12/111983 BURliNGToN NORhtERN ·'eT AI. BOOK/PAGE: '0 N 7 E 31 -SESW Legal DcserlpUon Jnterest 1.00000000 DOC.#840725 Q712 M27427 000 12/111963 BURLING10N NORTHERN -ET AI. BOOKIPAGE 20 • 7 E 33 E2W2 1.00000000 DQC.#34{)725 0712 M27427 000 12/111983 BURLINGTON NORTHf'J;lN -6T AI. BOOKIPAGE ,0 N 7 E 33 $2NE 1.00000000 OOC.#840725 0112 '" '" M27427 000 121111983 I3URLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI. BOOKIPAGE '0 N 7 E 33 SE 1.00000000 ... DOC ..... 072. 0 0712 .... M27428 000 1211/19S:! BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI. BOOKIPAGE 20 N • E 5 ALL 1.00000000 DOC ..... 072. 0712 Il. • M27429 OOQ 12J1/19S! ElURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKiPAGE 20 N • E 7 ALL 1.00000000 .. OOC.I840725 0712 ... '" '" M27430 000 6/1311989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -El AL BOOKIPAGE 20 N 8 E 8 .2 1.00000000 '" 8907070392 0 '" M2743Q DOG 8te/19ail BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET Al BOOKIPAGE 20 N • E • SE 1.00000000 ... 8907070392 '" M27431 000 512611988 BURlINGTON NORTHERN. ET AL BOOKIPAGE 20 N 8 E 11 N2N2 1.00000000 0 0 ae07070392 '" M27432 000 618/1989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 20 N 8 E 17 ALL 8907070392 1.00000000 f:1 U M27433 000 6/8/1989 aURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL . BOOKIPAGE 20 N • E 18 NE 1.00000000 0 " 8907070392 M27434 000 618/198.9 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 8 E 20 N2 8907070392 1.00000000 ~ " M27435 000 818/1989 BURLINGTON NORTHf;RN· £T AI.. BOOKlPAGl;: 20 N • E 24 N2SE 8907070392 1\(27435 000 618/1969 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. BOOKIPAGE 20 N 8 E 2' SESE 1.00000000 '" .. 0 1.00000000 ~ 8907070:HI2 " M27436 000 61811989 BURlINGl~N NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOKJPAGE 20 N • E 25 E2NE 89(]~070392 1.00000000 • ~ M27436 000 6/811989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 20 N • E 25 NW 1.00000000 8901070392 .. M274S6 000 6/811989 BURUNGTON NORTt-£RN· ET At aOOKfPAOE 20 N • E 25 W2SE 8907a7039~ '.00000000 i M27437 000 8/811989 BURLINGTON NORTtERN -ET AI.. BOOKIPAGE 20 N • E 2. N2SE 1.00000000 U 0 8907070392 " .. M27437 000 Sl8IUI89 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. aOOKIPAGE 20 N , E 28 NESW 8907070392 .. 1.00000000 § 0 ~I ~u '" Page 5 of6a ..... 0'" 00 ." ... .. "" II. .... " ~ ; . .., ~~ r' ~ 8 ... C> '" ~ "" ~ Exhibit A Attached to and made a part of that urtaln Stiltomont of Clatm 10 Mlno'Jllntofost dated November 21, 2008 fot King County, WA File # Sulfllc Dated Grantors Eic;Jok Page T R SKt QQ Recoptlon NumbFJr M2743a: 000 s/26i19as"suaLi'NGfON"NoRTH"eRN". ET"i';C .. -.... -·,------SOOKIPAGE-· 20 N 9 E 1 'W2' .,,--.---.. -... , _._--....... . Legal Description Interest 8907070392 M27439 000 5/26/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. BOOK/PAGE 20 N 9 E 3 All. e907070392 M27440 000 5/2611988 eURLiNGTON NORTHERN· E1 AJ.. M27441 00[) 512$11988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET />J.. M27442 000 512811988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27443 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -E1 Al.. M27444 000 5/2611988 eURlINGTON NOR.THE:RN -ET N... M2744fi 000 512.611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. M2744t1 000 51261uI88 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -Elf AL M27447 000 12f1111i183 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. M274<18 000 5/2611 gsa BURUNGTON NORTHERN. ET AI.. M27449 000 5126119"88 BURUNOTONNORTHERN-ETAL M27449 000 5128/1988 BURUNGTONNORTHERN·ETAL M27450 000 512611988 BURUNGTONNORTHERN-ETAl.. M27451 000 5126JH)8S BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. M27451 000 51261198a BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. M~7452 000 Sl2611988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27463 000 6i26J1988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN-ET AL M27454 000 0I26J1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET /IlL M27455 000 5/26/1988 BURlJNGTON NORTHERN -ET I'J.... M27455 000 5126/1988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET PJ.... PageS 0'66 BOOKIPAGE B9070703a2 BOOKIPAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 8806280227 BOOKJPAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 6907070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE . DOO.#840725 0712 BOOK/PAGE -8907070:392 BOOK/PAGE 89070703&2 BOOK/PAGE ·8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOKJPAGE 8907070;)92 BOOK/PAGE· 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 8S07070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOKIPAGE 8Q07070a:92 20N9E4 ALL 20 N 9 E 5 52 20N9E5 :20N9E6 2QNGE7 HE 20N9E8 NW 20N9E9 N2 20 N 9 E 11 N2 20 N 9 E 13 sw 20·N 9 E 15 NW 20 N 9 E 15 52 20 N 9 E 17 ALL 20 N 9 E 19 E2 20 N • E 19 20 N iii E 21· ALL 20N9E23 AlL 20N9E25 ALL 20N9E27 NE :20N9E27 NENW FRL N2 (307.28 acres) FRL NE4 & FRL 82 (460.81 acres) FRL NW4 & FRL N2SW4 (227.21 Bcres) 1.00000()()0 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1,00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000()Q0 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1,00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 ~ 't: ., ~ O'! ... ::: '" c '" ... ., c <:> '" fl 8 g '" ., ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ., i o o Q .. ., H ",0 '" ...... ~'" 0<:> " .... "" .~-. ~ ~ o ~ .'" ~~ ~' CD ... Q g CD Q '" -Exhibit A CD Q Q Atta-ched to and mado a part of ttlat certain Stahl'rnont O'f Claim to Minerai 'ntere&.t dated Novembor 21, 2008 for King Count)'. WA '" File j Suffix Oatod Grantol'$ aook Pa~o T R Seci QQ RecepUon N..~IJ!I~~r . Legal Descrfptlon inti rest M27456 000 5126119"88 BURLlI'IIGTON NORTHERN. ET Al eo6Kii>AGE 20 H , E 29 N2SW 1.00000000 8S07070392 M27456 000 5/2611988 BURLINGTON NORTI-£RN -ET At BOOK/PAGE 20 H 9 E 29 NENE 1.00000000 8907070392 M27456 000 5J26J1988 BURLINGTON NORTt-ERN· ET At. BOOK/PAGE 20 N 9 E 29 NW 1.00000000 8907070392 M27456 000 5J26J19a8 BURLINGTON NORTt€RN -ET At. BOOK/PAGE 20 N 9 E 2. W2NE 1.00000000 8901070392 '" M27457 000 5/2611986 eu~lINGlON NORTHERN. ET AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N • E 35 NE 1.00000000 '" 8907Q70392 ... M27457 000 5/26/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 9 E 35 t.leNW 1.00000000 0 8907{l70392 '" M27458 000 5}26/1988 BURUNGTOH NORTt-ERN -ET Al BOOK/PAGE .20 N 10 E NW 1.00000000 ~ 8907070392 M27458 000 5/.2e/1988 BURUNGTOH NORTl-ERH -ET Al BOOK/PAGE 20 N 10 E 52 1.00000000 <l: 8907070392 ... M274~9 000 12f1/1983 BURUNGTON NORTt-ERN -ET AL DOC:N840725 20 N 10 E 6 NWSW 1.00000000 '" AKA Lot 6 (a4,S4 aa'es) '" 0712 .; M27460 000 5126/19138 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET Al BOOK/PAGE 20 N 10 E 7 t:'Rl N2 & FRL SE4 (461,17 1,00000000 <> 8907070392 acres) '" ... M21461 000 5J26J1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOK/PAGE 20 N 10 e • AlL 1.00000000 cO 89070703ij2 <> M27462 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTI-ERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 10 E 1, 1.00000000 <> AlL '" 8907070392 f::l M27463 000 5126119S8 aURliNG10N NORTHERN-ET AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 10 E 13 FRL N2 & FRL SW4 (4eS.~ 1.00000000 0 8907070392 acres) 0 M2746-4 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 10 E 1. ALL 1.00000000 " 8907070392 ~ M27465 000 512611988 BURliNGTON NORTI-IER~· ET Al BOOKIPAGE 20 N 10 E 17 FRL N2 & FRL SE-4 (-438.67 1.00000000 " 8907070392 acres) .c: .. M27466 000 5126/1988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKJPAC3E 20 N 10 E 1. FRL W2 & FRL SE4 (448.05 1,00000000 " 8907070392 ,"""s) ~ M27467 000 512611986 BURLINGTON NORTHERN~ ET AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 10 E 2. 5252 1.00000000 ~ 8907070392 ~ M27468 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NOI-fTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE; 20N10E 23 PART OF NW4SE4 (TRACT N. 1.00000000 ~ 8806280227 PART OF NE4 (TRACT B) (~T.8 . acres) .. M27469 000 512811986 BURUNGTON NOR1HERN~ ET Al BOOK/PAGE 2() N 10 E 2. AlL 1.00000000 " 8QQ7070392 ~ M27470 000 512611Q88 BURUNGTONNORTHERN·ETAL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 10 E 27 FRl S2 & FRL NE4 {540.0S 1.00000000 " 8907070392 acres) 0 " .. M27471 000 5126/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 10 E 29 FRL 52 & FRl NW4 (527.36 1.00000-000 .. 8907070392 e:cres) § 0 ~I ." " .. ", Page 7 Of 66 .. ., "'" 0<> ." ., ...... 0. 'P"I '. ~ ~ " . ~" N1I , ! ... en g 5l !;J ... DO o !;J Exhibit A Attached to and made a part of that certain SUitomel'lt of Claim to Mlnetallntor'Oat datod Novomber 21, 2008 for King County, WA File # Suffix Datod G~ntQrs Book Page T !< Sect QQ Roce.pllon Numb~r Legal OOaetlpncn M21472 000 6126/1988 8URLINGTON NORTHERN· E.T AI.. BOOKIPAGE " .. 20 N 10 E 31 All 8907070392 M27.1173 000 5/2611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AJ.. BOOKIPAGE 20 N 10 E 33 All 8907070392 M27.t174 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL SOOKIPAGE 20 N 10 E 3' E2NW DOC.#840725 0712 M27474 000 1211n983 eURl.lNGTON NORTHERN· ET At. BOOKIPAGE 20 N 10 E 3. NESW DOC.#840726 0712 M27475 000 51.2611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET ~ BOOKIPAGE 20 N to E 35 All 89070.70392 M27476 000 512611988 BURliNGTON NORTHERN. S1 At BOOKIPAGE 20 N 11 E 3 THAT PART 82 AND SE<4NE<4 8907070392 L YIN:G SOUTHERLY BN RJW (278.09 ilCrlI$) M27477 000 512511988 6URl.II'fGTON NORHtERN. ET At. BOOKIPAGE 20Nt1E 3 GOVT LOTS 3 & 4 ALL THOSE 8806280227 PORTIONS OF 52N2 & N252 lYING NORTHERLY Of THE BNRR RIW & THOSE PORTIONS OF GOvr LOTS '{ & 2 L VING SOUTHERLY OF THE BNRR RNV. (285.32 acteS) M27478 000 5128/1988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET At. .BOOKIPAGE 20N11E S ALL a~7G70392 , M27479 000 5J26(1gea 8URUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL DOC 20 N 11 E • E2NE 8907070392 M27470 000 5J26It9aa BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL DOC 20 N 11 E 9 52SW 8907070392 M27479 000 5126(1986 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL DOC 20 N 11 E • SE 8907070392 M27479 000 5f26J1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET AL DOC 20Nl1E • THOSE PORTIONS Of THE 8907070392 W2NE. .... SE4NW4. N2SW4 lYING SOUTHERLY OF THE 8NRR RIW (88.n acrei} M27480 000 5126/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. I:.T AL 800KIPAGE 20 N 11 E •• THOSE PORTIONS Of THE 8806280.227 W2NE4, NW4, N2SW4 LYING NORTH OF THEBNRRRlW (180.63 acres) M27481 000 5126/1988 aURuNGTON NORlHEA:N· ET Al BOOKIPAGE 2C N 11 E 11 A~l ee~7Q70392 M27482 000 5126/1968 BURUNGTQN NORTHERN· ET AL I>OOKIPAGE 20 N 11 E .15 AlL 8907070392 PageS Of6G Interut 1.000000QO 1.00000000- 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.0000MCtO :g ~ o ... ~ .l: S '" o " ... '" o o " ~ 8 .. .~ '" .u ~ " • :1: .u i 8 Q •• .u ~ ~ ~I ." u "'", ' ... ~'" 00 ." .. .u .... . ~ '. t ~ ~" ~~ ,~ ~ en ~ 0 0 en 0 N ~ Exhibit A CD 0 Attached to and made-a pan of that cartain Slat.mont of Claim to Mlnllrallntorost datod Novomber 21, 2008 for King County, WA 0 N Fila # Suffix Dated Grantors Book Paso T R Sltet QQ Roc:optlon Number Legal Doscrlptlon Interest M27483 {loa 5t.2B.ils's"s· "BURLiNGTON-NORTHERN. ET /IJ.." BOoKiPAGE 20 N" ,-,' "e: 17 THOSE PORTIONS OF THE 1.00000000 8907(170302 NE4. N2SE4, N2S2SE4 lYING EASTERLY OF BNRR RI'W (223.65 acres) M27484 aDa 512611988 BURLINGtON NORtt£RN -ET IoJ... BOOKJPAGS 20 N 11 E 17 W2 1.00000000 8806280227 M27484 000 5t26/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET JIIJ.... BOOKIPAGE 20 N 11 E 17 THOSE PORTIONS OF W2E2 1.00000000 8806280227 LYING WESTERLY OF SNRR .. RIW& THOSE PORTIONS OF '" S2S2SE4 LYING EASTERLY OF ... BNRR RMJ (2.53 acres) 0 M27485 {JOO 512611988 eU~LING'rON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOKIPAGE 20 N 11 E 21 N2NE 1.00000000 .... .... 8907070392 M27485 000 5126/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 20. N 11 E 21 SENE 1.00000000 ~ 890.70.70392 ~ M27485 000 512611986 BURLINGTON NORTH£RN. ET N.. BOOK/PAGE 20. N 11 E 21 W2SW 1.00000000 .. 8907070392 .... '" M27485 000 512611'988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 11 E 21 iHe NE CIAGONAL 112 OF 1.00000000 '" 8907070392 THe SW4NE4 (20 8Cl&S) .; M27485 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL 800KlPAGE :20 N 11 E 21 THE SW DIAGONAL 1/2 OF 1,00000000 0 '" SQ07070S$2 THE E2SW (40 acres) .... M27486 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL. BOOK/PAGE 20 N 11 E 21 SE 1.00000000 .; 8806280227 0 0 M21486 000 5126/1986 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. E.T AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 11 E 21 THE SW DIAGONAL 112 OF 1.00000000 '" 8806280227 SW4NE4 & THE NE DIAGONAL f1 112 OF THE E2SW~ {~O acres) " M27437 000 5126/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL. BOOK/PAGE 20 N 11 E 23 ALL 1.00{)OOOOO 0 " 8907070392 ::-M274Sa 000 5f2611aa8 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. BOOK/PAGE 20 N 11 E 25 ALL 1.00000000 690.7070392 " M27489 000 5/26/1988 BURLINGTON NORTJ-ERN • ET AI.. BOOK/PAGE 20 N 11 E 27 E2E2 1.00000000 '" ., 890.7070392 ~ M27489 000 5/2SJ1988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 11 E 27 THE NE DIAGIONAL 1/2 OF 1,00000000 ~ 8907070392 THE W 314 (240 acres) " M27490 000 5/2611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOK/PAGE 20 N 11 E 27 SW DIAG10NAL 112 OF THE 'IV 1.00000000 ~ 8806280227 314 (240 acres) :1! M27491 000 5J28/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI., BOOK/PAGE 20 N 11 E 2. ALL 1.00000000 8907070392 ., M27492 000 512611988 BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 20 N 11 E 31 ALL 1.00000000 ~ ~ e9!:'7Q?O!9~ § M27493 000 5J~e/19aa BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET N... froOK/PAGE 20 N 11 E 33 . ALL 1.0000000.0 0 0 8907070392 " .. BOOK/PAGE ., M27494 000 5/26/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERt-!. ET AI.. 20 N 11 E 35 1.00000000 ~ ~ 8907070392 ~I ~o .. Page S or66 ...... ~., 00 .~ .... .,,,, .~ 0, n ~ ~'" ~1=1 ,'! ~ '" ... 0 0 0 '" 0 '" -EJo;hibit A co 0 0 Att8choo to and made a part of that certain ShUll1'lont af Claim to Mlnorallnterest elated Novctmber 21 t 2008 for King County, WA '" File # Suffht Dated Grantors Book Pago T R $cc;t CC ._Roc:~ptlon Numbor log~ DO$(;rlptlQn Interest M27495 000 .. 'si2ai1988'iuRuNGTON~NORTHERN ~ ET Al BOOKJPAGE 20 N 12 E 27 ALL 1.00000000 B907070392 M27496 000 Sl26I1SSB BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOK/PAGE 20 N 12 E ,; W2 1.00000000 B907070392 M27496 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 12 E 35 W2NE 1.00000000 6907010a92 M27497 000 512e;J1988 BURL.INGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKfPAGE 20 N 12 E .. E2NE 1.00000000 a907070392 ~ M27497 000 5126/1988 6URUI'IGTON NORTHERN -sr AL BOOK/PAGE 20 N 12 E ,. SE 1.00000000 ... 8907070392 0 M27498 000 121111963 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET Al BOOK/PAQE 21 N • E " NENE 1.00000000 " DOC.1840725 .... 0712 ll. M27498 000 12/111963 BURLINGTON NOfHHERN· HAL BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 31 NWNE UIOOOOOOO DOC.IIS'07"" AKA Lot 1 (32.05 acres) • .. 0712 .... M27498 000 12/1/1'363 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 21 N • E 31 SENE 1.00000000 '" '" DOC.#840725 AKA Lot 2 (33.5 sCtes) oi 0712 <::> M27499 000 1211/1983 BURl.INGTON NORTHERN. eT Al BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 2. NWSW 1.00000000 " DOC.tI840725 .... 0712 .; <::> M27S00 000 618/1989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E NENE 1.00000000 <::> 8907070a97 AKA Lot 1 (42..46 acres) " M27500 000 6la/1989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. 800KfPAGE 21 N • E NWNE AKA Lot 2 (42.67 ilcrElS) 1.00000000 E1 8907070397 0 M27500 {lOO 6IB11989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Ai BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 1 NWSW 1.00000000 .g 890707031;17 ~ M27500 000 61811989 BURLINGTON NQRHIERN • ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E S2NE 1.00060000 8907070397 '" M27500 000 6IB11989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E S2SW 1.00000000 '" • 8907070397 ~ M27500 000 618/1989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E ,1 SE 1.00000000 8907070397 , • M27501 000 711811983 BURlINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOKIPAGE 21 N 6 E 2 ALL, LESS 0.70 ACS BEING A 1.00000000 :!'! 8907070397 PARCEL OF LAND LYING SOUTHERLY OF THE BNR ROW (6SO.3 acres) '" M27502 000 61311989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 3 S2NE 1,00000000 ~ eg070703£l~ ~ M27502 coo 6181198S BURLINGTON NORTl-£RN • ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 3 SE 1.00000000 0 0 8907070~9::i! " .. '" M27002 000 61811989 BURLINGTON NORTI-ERN· ET At. BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 3 LOTS 1, 2, 3; EAST:i!1.47 OF 1.00000000 Ol • 8£107070392 LOT 4 (149.24 acres.) ~I ." " "'", .. ", page 10 of6a ."" 0<::> ," '" "' .... 0. ''"I '. , , o w ~k ''! ~ ... :g 8 ... 0 N ~ Exhibit A ex> 0 0 AltacheCl to and made a part otthat certain Statcul'lont 0' Claim 10 IVIlnarallntGrest dated HQI/ember 21, :2008 for King Counly, WA N File II Suffix Dated Grantors Book Pag, T R Soct QQ Roc:~ptl~n N.umba.r Legal De~c:rlptlon M27503 000" '1'ii1i1983~'BURlj'NGTO~fNriRiHERN . EiAL BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E 3 LOTS 5 ••• 7. W, OF LOH DOCJI840126 0712 (150.18acre3) M275(}.4 000 61aJ1989 eURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E • N2NW 8907070a29 M21504 000 618/1989 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 9 52 B90707{l32:9 M27504 000 6JBI1989 BURUNGTON NORTrtERN -ET AI. BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 9 SENW 8907070329 M27504 000 61811989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· I:.T AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 9 W2NE 8907070329 M27504 000 618/1989 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 9 THAT PART OF THE SE4NE4 8907070329 L VING WESTERLY OF COUNTY ROAD, & THE NORTH 30 FT OF THE SE4NE4 lYING EASTERLY OF COUNTY ROAD. (21 acres) M27505 000 1211119&3 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al BOOK/PA.GE 21 N • E 9 LOT 1 & PART OF SE4NE4 (58 OOC.tl840725 0712 acre$) M21506 000 ti!8J19S9 BURUNGTON NORTHERN. ET AL BOOKIPAGE 21 N • E 11 W2NW4, LESS 2.0 AC BN INC 8907070392 RIW (78 acres) M27507 000 121111983 BuRUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKIPAGE 21 N • E 11 E2NW DOC.#840725 0712 M27507 000 121111963 BURliNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E 11 HE 00C.#840725 0712 M27507 000 121111963 aURUNGTON NORTHERN-ET /IL BOOKIPAGE 21 N 6 E 11 52 DOC.#.'0725 0712 M27508 000 61811989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E I. N2SESE 8907070392 M27508 000 6J8J1989 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E I. NESE 8907070392 M27608 000 618i19B9 euRLINGTON NORTHERN -ET N.. BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 15 NW '.07070392 M2750B 000 6J8J1 SB9 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E 15 SW 3907070392 M27506 000 618/1989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 15 SWSESE ag07070392 M2750B 000 61811989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E 15 W2SE 8907070392 M27509 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKIPAGE 21 N 6 E 15 SESESE DOC.#840125 0712 Page 11 of 86 Interest 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.0000000-0 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.000.QOOOO 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 t.OOoOOOOO 1.00000000 UlOooooao 1.00000000 1.oo00oo0D ~ 'll .., .... t. ~ .. .... ~ 0\ '" '" .... '" '" '" '" El o 8 ~ '" ... ~ :\l ~ ~ ... I o o Q .• ... H .~ u "' .. '. '" ~'" 0<> .~ '" ... " .~ '. n .91); • 0 '! ~ '" ~ 8 '" o N ~ g N Exhibit A Attached 10 and made a part of that cortaln Statomont of Claim to MIOQr'allntore$t datC!d November 21, 2I)(JB forKing COLinty, INA File II Suffix Oated Granlora Book pago T R Sect QQ Reception Number Legal D88CriptiM Interes.t ~i2i'6i:i9"Oo'6' ',I,.i1/1983'"BURliNGTON"NORTHERN":ETAl. ·"'SO-OI<lPAGe--·· .. · 21 N 6 E 15 W2NE --- DOC.fII840725 0712 M27510 OeD 1211/1963 BURLINGTON NORTHE;RN· ET At. BOOKIPAGE 21 N 6 E 19 $WNW DOC.'e<1072S 0712 M27511 ODD 618/1969 9URLINGTON NORTHERN· ET n. BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E 21 E2 89007070392 M2'7511 000 6/811989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOKIPAGE 21 N • E 21 NESW 8907070392 M27511 000 618/1989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E 21 NW 8907070392 M27512 000 12/,/1-983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/P'AGE 21 " 6 E 21 NWSW DOC.'840726 0712 M27512 QOO 1211/1'983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI... BOOK/PAGE 21 " 6 E 21 S2SW OOC.#B40125 0712 M27513 000 6181t 989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET N... BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E 23 N2SE 8907070392 M27513 000 618/1989 eURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET />J.... BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E 23 NENENE 8907070392 M27513 000 6/S11989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E 23 NENW 8907070392 M27513 000 61611989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI. BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E 23 NENWNW 8907070392 M27513 coo 81811989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E 2' S2N' 8907G7()392 M27613 000 618/1989 eURLINGTON NORTHE:RN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E 23 S2tt2l11E 8907070392 M271513 000 BfS/1989 BURLINGTON NOf{THERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE ., N 6 E 2. S2NWNW .90707039. M27513 000 6/8/1989 SURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E 23 890707039-2 M27514 oao 1211/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AI. BOOKIPAGE 21 " • E 2. OOC.#8"072~ . 0712 Page 12 of 66 1.00000000 1.00000000 AKA Lot 2 (309.93 acres) 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 SW4, LESS 15.87 AC R1W SOLD 1.00000000 BY OEED DATED 6/1411 948 RECORDED 27531336 (154.13 'aacs) . RIW ACROSS A PORTION OF 1.00000000 NW4N64NE4, N2NW4NE4, NW4NW4NW4, SW4SE.4, STRlP OF LAND ACROSS E2NE4, NE4SE4: (-135.87 8cre3) ~ ... o .. ~ t, ~ ~ '" o '" ~ ., o o '" ~ o o " ~ .., ... o ~ ~ ~ ~ ... I o " o • ... § m ~~ ." <.J "'", o. '" 0" 00 ." '" ....... "-..... '. ~ ~ ow ." .!!!~ , .. (~ ~ 3l ~ o '" ~ 00 o o '" M27517 000 618/1989 8URUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27511 000 618/1989 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27518 000 1211/198a BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27518 000 1211/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET At M27518 000 1211/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET At M27519 000 1211/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET Al M2151g 000 1211/1933 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -£T AL M27519 000 1211/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -eT AL M27619 000 12/1/1933 BURUNGTON NORTHERN-ET AL Paglt 13 of 66 21 N 8 E DOC.#8-4012S 0712 BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E 8-907070392 BOOK/PAGE 21 N fi E Bi07070S92 BOOKIPAGE 21 N 6 E DOC.'840125 0712 BOOKIPAOE 21 N • E OOC.1I840725 0712 BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E DOC.#840725 0712 BOOKfPAGE 21 N • E OOC.it84072S 0712 BOOK/PAGE 21 N B E QOC.#840725 0712 BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E DOC.'84{)725 0712 BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E OQC.fl!640ns 0712 20 27 N2NW 27 :n NWNE :n SESE 27 2. NWNW 29 SENE 29 29 SW4SW4, LESS 1.40 P£ BY DECREE OF COORT IN AMENDED JUDGMENT OF SUPERIOR COURT 318/78. RECORDED UNDER S.C., 765079 (3$..6 acres) LOTS 2, 4--9,12,14, W2 OF LOT 10 (253.7 acres) AKA Lol6 (29.$ acres) AJ<A lot 11 (38.!jjI acres) (10.2 acres) (12.e acres) Jnterest 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 ::: ~ '" ... ~ : E '" <:> '" ... '" o o '" El 8 ~ .c: ... " ~ .. • ~ ... i ... ~I ." t.J 1<", '. '" "'" 00 ." '" ....... . ~ " b ~ ~" ~~ ;! ! -en :g 8 :!l N -:g ~ Exhibit A Altac:hod to and mado a Piilrt Qftllat curtain Staklmtmtof Claim to Minorillintoroat dated Novombor 21. 2008 for King County. WA File # Suff1x Dated GranlQrs BOL)k Page) T R Soct QQ Recoptlon Number Legal DeSCription M27S19 000 1211it9~1J. BURLINGTON NoRr-HeRN· El AL BOOKIPAGE 21 N • E 29 OOC.,840725 (2J..25 acres) 0712 M27519 000 1211/1983 8URUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BooKIPAGE 21 N e E 29 000.i1841)725 ('.5 seres) 0712 M27519 000 1211/1983 8URLtNGTON NORTHERN· El Al BooKIPAGE 21 N 6 E 29 ooC.#8-40725 (6 eere$.. 0712 M27519 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E 29 OOC.;II840725 (9.1 acres) 0712 M27520 000 12(1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. • ET Al BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E 33 E2NE 00C.#&40725 0712 M27520 ODD 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At. BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E 33 NENW OOC.#840725 0712 M27520 000 12(1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E 33 NWNE OOC,#84072Q 0712 M27521 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET N-. BOOKlpAGE 21 N • E 35 NWSE OOC.#840725 0712 M27522 000 618/1989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI. BOOK/PAGE 21 N 7 E ALL 8907070392 M27523 000 618119a9 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N 7 E 3 W2 8907070392 M2752-4 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN ~ ET N.-COC 21 N 7 E 3 E2 8407251)712 M27525 000 efSl1 iS9 BURLlNG"TON NORTHERN· ET AI-BOOK/PAGE 21 N 7 E 5 ALL FRL. LESS 22.11 AC BN 8907070392 RIW, LESS 25.08 ACS OF RAVER SUBSTATION LANDS SOLD 8Y DEED RECORDED 12-13-65, 84730, P193. BOOK OF DEEDS, LESS HWY RIW (667.52 ac:res) M27526 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOKJPAGE 21 N 7E 5 PART OF LOTS a, 9, NE-4SE4 8806280227 (25.08 acres) M27527 000 6IBJ1"9ae BURliNGTON NORTI-tERIII • ET Al BOOK/PAGE 21 N 7 E 7 E2NE !!907Q7009!! M27527 000 618/1989 BURUNGTON NORTHERN. ET Al BOOK/PAGE 21 N 7 E 7 E2W2NE 8907070392 Page 140166 Interest 1.00000000 1.GOOooOOO 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 ~ ... o .. ... & ol: ... '" .. '" <> ",. ... ... <> <> '" § ~ .c: ., ~ " • ~ ., I o IS ., § 0 ~I ," tJ "'", .. ", 0" 0<> ." '" ., ... n. .... ". ~~ ~k ~ "! -'" :g g g: N -co g N Exhibit A Attachod to and made a part of that certain Stat.mont of Claim to MJneral Il1torest dated Noyomber 21, 2008 for King COlmlYI WA File # Suffix _, , Dated " '" Grantors ~k, Page T R Soct QQ Recoptlotl Numbor _ legal [)8BCrlptlon Interest M27S"28 000 '-'6iS/1-989'-BURLINGr6NNORTHERN-~ETAL 'BOO~PAGE' 21 N 7 E 9 .. . .. ···-ALL:CES"S·16.2&AC"BNRM'. 1.00000000 8907070392 leSS 5.29 ACS DECREE, LESS 1,23 ACS TO USA IN CAuse #4355 DATED 3126157. AND lESS 1.23 ACS, TRACT SOLO BY DEED RECORDED 5.'6/69 IN 83909, PS43. A.F.' 5020604. TO T~E U.SA lESS 93.00 ACS, UiL, IN N64SE4, NE4, SE4 HW4, & N2SW4 SOLD BY DEED DATED 6·16·89 RECORDEO 611(1/89 UNDER A.F.#890S1615C)4, (524,29 acres) M27529 000 alBl1\i189 BURliNGTON NORTHeRN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N 7 E 11 N2, lESS 0.70 ACS 1.00000000 M27530 000 121111 983 BuRLINGTON NORTHERN· I:.T AI.. M27530 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27530 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET At page 1.5 of 66 89D7c:t70392 CONVEYED TO USA BY DIST COURT DECREE BOOKIPAGE 21 N 7 E 11 NWSW DOC.#e40725 0712 BOOKIPAGE 21 N 7 E 11 SWSE DOC.#!U072!} 0712 BOOKIPAGE 21 N 7 E 11 DOC.#840725 0712 RECORDED UNDER CAUSE NO. 4355 OATED 312811967. E2SE4.NVV4SE4,NE4~~,& THAT PORTION Of SW4SW4 LYING NORTHERLY OF THE BN RR RJW & SOUTHERLY OF CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE & ST. PAUL RR RiW LESS THE S2NE4NW4. N~NW4 & THAT PORTION OF THE S2NW4 LYING NORTHEASTERLY OF THE CHiCAGO MilWAUKEE. ST. PAUL & PACIFIC RR RIW & NORTHERlY OF S E HUDSON RD. (FORMERlY SE 304TH STREET), THE NE4SW4, NW4SE4, & THAT PORTION OF THE E2SE4 • 82NE4 LYING NORTHERLY Or: SAID S E HUDSON ROAD AND SOUTHERLY OF S E COURTNEY ROAD. (195.03 acres) 1.00000000 1.00000000 S£4SW4LESS16.25ACRNI& 1.00000000 PARTS OF W2SW4 DESCRIBED IN DEED TO MILESTONE (66.1 actes) ~ ~ ... ... ~ : ~ '" o '" ... '" o o '" El 8 ~ '" ., o :!l " • ~ ., I o Q .. ., ~I .... u .. ", .. ", 0'" 00 .... '" .,,,, ,~ " n .!I~ t;~ ~ CJ) ~ o o ~ N ~ N Exhibit A Attar;:h(\'d to lind made a part cfthat cortaln Statoment or Claim to Mlnorallntorest dated Novomber 21,2008 for King County, WA File ## Suffix Dated Gl'al'ltof'$ Book Page T R Sect QQ Rocaptlon Number Legal Coscrlptlon M27531--Cioo---6"f8i100'9 BURlINGTOt,INORTHE-RN'". ET AI.. BOOI(JPAGE 21 N 1 E 12 8907070:392 M27532 000 6f2J1989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27633 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET I>J.. M27534 000 6/B/1989 BURLINGTON. NORTHERN. ET AI.. M27535 000 616/1969 BURUNGTONNORTHERN-ETAl M21536 000 12/1/1963 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET A1. M27537 000 6f8.I198~ BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al M27537 DOD $l8J16aQ BURLINGTON NORTtlERN -ET Al M27537 000 6I8l1G89 6UR.lII'IGTON NOR.THERN· ET At M27537 000 61811989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI. M27537 000 61811969 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At M27536 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET At Page 16 of 66 BOOKJPAGE 8907070392 BQQKfPAGE DOC,1I840725 0712 BOOK/PAGE 89D7070~2 BOOKIPAGE 890707031:12 ~OOK/PAGE DOC.1¥840725 0712 BOOK/PAGE 890707D392 BOOl</PAGE 8Q0707D392 BOOKtPAGE 8907010392 BOOKIPAGE 89D7070392 BOOKIPAGE 8907070392 BOOKIPAGE oaC.tI!840726 0712 21 N 7 E 13 21 N 7 E 13 21 N 7 E I. 21 N 7 E 17 21 N 7 E 17 21 N 7 E 21 21 N 7 E 21 21 N 7 E 21 ':;!1 N 7 E 21 21 N 7 E 21 21 N 7 E 21 N2 N2S2 SESE SESW SWSW PART OF SW4SW4 (1 0 ~cres) E2NE4. I.ESS 7.ao ACS FORMER NFl RNJ & ~.D6 ACS RESV SITE. NW4HW4, S2NW4. S2. l.ESS 7,aO ACS CONVEYED, 21.77 ACS FORMER NP RMI, 64,63 ACS DECREE, 3.50 AC R~SERVOIR SITE (406.94 acres) PAR.T OF S 200 FEET OF SE4NE4 & PART OF NE4S64 (5.58 ~cre.s) PT N2N 64, SOUTH OF BN R1W. l.ESS 18.50 AC DECREE, S2NE4. N2NW4, lESS 5,84 AC BN RIW, S2NW4, lESS 13.47 AC BN R1W, 52. L.ESS 215.46 AC BN RIW {549.16 acres) E2. LESS &2,85ACS SOLD BY DEED RECORDED UNDER AF-*83081S0B45 (33.81 AC) AND AF.#8308180846 {33.87)BOOK OF DEEDS, KING COUNTY. (267,15 aeres) PARTS OF W2NE4 & NW4:SE4 {52.8~ acre!» THAT PART Of SW4SE4 LYING WESTERLY OF 8N RR R/W, lESS 304-.69 AC BN RR R/YV, 5,96 ACS MilW R/W & 0,04 ACS SOLO (MI.72 acres) Intere&t 1,00000000 1,00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1,00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 ::: .... o '" ,., l ,., ::l '" o '" ,., '" o o '" ~ 2 ~ '" ., o :il .. ~ ~ I g '" "" ., § ~ ~~ "" " "'", "" "> 0'" 00 "" "> .,,, n. ''i .• ~ .. ~-Il .!IIi:! ,~ ~ en ... 0 g en 0 N ~ Exhibit A eo 0 0 Attached to and mado 8 part of that certain Statement of Claim to Mlnorallnterest dated Novomllor 21, 2008 for King County, WA N File # Suffix Diilted Grantors B.oIe Page T R Sect QQ Reception Numbor legal Doscrlptlon Interest M27536 000 t2i1i1-983 BURliNGTON'NOOTHE'RN: ET 'At BooKJPAGE 21 N 7 E 21 PARTS OF E2NE4, SE4SW4. 1.00000000 OOC,_84072S 0712 NE4SE4, S2SE4 (40.89 acres) M27539 000 6J8J1989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. BOOKJPAGE 21 N 7 E 23 ALL 1.00000000 8&07070392- M27540 000 6J8J1!l89 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -El AI.. 800KJPAGE 21 N 7 ~ 26 ALL 1.00000000 8907070392 M27541 000 6/811989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOKJPAGE 21 N 7 E 26 E2W2 1.00000000 ., 6901070392 '" M27541 000 618119&9 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET IlL BOOKIPAGE 21 N 7 E 2. NWSE 1,00000000 .... 0 8907070392 '" M27541 000 6/811989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At BOOK/PAGE 21 N 7 E 2. SWNE 1.00000000 .. 8907070392 M27541 000 6J8J1989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At BOOK/PAGE " N 7 E •• SWSW 1.00000000 ~ 8907070392 .l: M27542 000 61811989 8URUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 21 N 7 E •• N2NE 1.00000000 .. 89070703{12 .. '" M27542 000 61811989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At BOOKIPAGE ., N 7 E 2. NESE 1.00000000 8907070392 .. <> M27542 QOO 616/1989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOK/PAGE 21 N 7 E 2. S2SE 1.00000000 '" .. 8907070392 .. M:2:7542 000 618'1989 BURLINGTON NORTJoiERN • ET At BOOKIPAGE . , N 7 E •• SENE 1,00000000 <> 8907070392 <> '" M27543 000 7J16/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At BOOKIPAGE 21 N 7 E 27 AlL 1.00000000 f:l 8907070392 0 M27544 000 6J6f1969 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At BOOKIPAGE " N 7 E 2. EAST 990 FTOF LOTS 1 &4 '.00000000 0 89070392 ($5.2 aCIH) Q M2754S 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET N.. BOOKJPAGE 21 N 7 E 2. LOTS 2, 3, LOTS " 4 LESS E 1.00000000 ~ DOC.'840725 990 FEET E2SE4 (138.26 0712 acres) .., M27546 000 618/1969 BURliNGTON NORTHERN -ET .AL BOOK/PAGE " N 7 E 30 SENW 1.00000000 ... 8907070392 ~ M27547 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKIPAGE ., N 7 E .31 E2$W 1.00000000 ~ OQC.#840725 ~ 0712 :: M27547 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE ., N 7 E 31 N2NE 1.00000000 DOC,U84072. 0712 ... ~ M27547 000 1211/1983 BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOKJPAGE 21 N 7 E 31 N2SE 1.00000000 ~ DOC.j64G725 0712 0 0 M27547 000 121111983 BURUOOTON NORl HERN.· ET AL. BOOK/PAGE 21 H 7 E 31 1.00000000 Q '. ... OOC.#840725 LOTS 2-4 (121.89 acres,) !l! ~ 0712 ..J ~ 0 ." l> "' .. Page 17 of 66 .. ", ~., 0<> ," '" ....... Q, 'r-! " n !J1I · . . :: ... 3l g ~ -co o o '" Exhibit A Attached to and mad. a part of th .. t ,ulUln Stillw(Ilenl of Claim to Mloorallntere-51<latod Nov&mber 21,2008 for King County, WA File ~ Suffix Dated Grantol'$ 80Qk Pago T R soct QQ Rel;eptlon Numbor Legal DescrlpUon 'nterest 1.00000000 M27548-"OoO Si26iT9SS" SURUN'GTON'NORTHE'RN:"ET"A1. BOOt\1PAGe" ,.. 21 N 7 E' 31 NENW M27548 000 5i2B/1Saa BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At M27548 000 512611988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· E,T AL M27S49 {lOO 61E1/1999 auRLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AJ.. M27549 000 618/1999 BURUNGTON NORTI--lERN. ET PJ... M27549 000 618/1989 BURUNGToN NORTHERN-ET Al M27550 000 1211/1983 aURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET Al M27550 000 1211/'1983 BURlINGTON NORTHgRN -ET AI.. M27550 000 1211/1983 BURlINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. M27551 000 6/8/1989 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27552 000 6/811989 BURUNGTON NORTHERN. ET AL M27553 000 1211J1gS3 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL Page 18 ot66 Sg07()70392 BOOK/PAGE $907070392 aOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 9907070392 aOOKIPAGE 1907070,92 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE OOC.N840725 0712 BOOK/PAGE OOC.'84072S 0712 BOOK/PAGE DOC.'840725 0712 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOKIPAGE 8907070392 800KIPAGE OOC,#840725 0712 21 N ., E 31 NWNW 21 N 7 E 31 S2NE 21 N 7 E 33 N2SW 21 N ., E 33 SE 21 N 7 E " 21 N 7 E 3' NE 21 N 7 E ,. S2SW 21 N 7 E ., 21 N 7 E 34 21 N 7 E ,. All 21 N 8 E 22 NWNWSE AKA lot 1 (41.23 acres) 1.00000000 1.00000000 1,.00000000 1.00000000 NW4, LESS 0.63 AI; SOlO IN 1.00000000 NW4NW4 BY OEED RECORDED 11130183 UNDER AF .#B311301224 (1159.37 acres.) 1.00000000 1.00000000 0.60 ACRE TRACT IN THE 1.00000000 NW4NW .. LYING WESTERLY OF A UNE DRAWN WITH AND DiSTANT 50' EASTERlY MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES FROM 'THE MILWAUKEE ROAD WHITE RIVER BRANCH MAIN LINE CENTERLINE (.6 acres) THAT PART Of NW4SW4 1.00000000 DESCRIBED AS FOllOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT 428 FT SOUTH OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NW4SW4; THENCE SOUTH 200 FT; THENCE EAST 100 fT: THENCE NORTH 12 OEGREES 17 MINUTES 00 SECONDS EAST TO A POINT WHICH BEARS DUE EAST FROM THE POS; THENCE OUE WEST TO THE poe (.57 2Cres) 1.00QOooOO '.00000000 ::: ~ " " ~ ~ ~ '" " " ... .. " " " ~ ~ " g " ., o :il " ~ ~ ., ~ ~ '" ' . ., H ~u '" ...... 0" 0" ." .... "" n. .... '. " " ~-Il 1}); " .: -'" '" g 0 '" 0 N ~ Exhibit A ., 0 0 Att;:tched to ancl made a part of that certain Statom(J'l'It of Claim to Mlflorallntoresl dated NOYom!Jer 21,2008 for King County. WA N File # Suffix Dated Grantors. BOOk Page T R Sect .... ~.~_ ... __ , __ .R~c~ptlon Numbar LQgal Oescrlptlon Intort>st 'M275"53'" '000 -"'-iiiu1-0Sa'''fiu'Ri'INGTON' NORT"HERN:"ET" AL" .. ·'-'·iicfoi<.iPAGf· .. ··· _ .... 21 "N""a · .. ·E ,,-22 S2NwSe '"~OOOOOO OOC.tS40725 0712 M27553 000 1211/1983, BURliNGTON NORTI-1ERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 22 SWSE 1,00000000 OOC.i1840725 0712 M275S4 000 5/2611988 eURLINGTON NORTHERN -£T Al BOOKlPAG~ 21 N 9 E • NESW AKA Lol 7 (315.95 acres) 1.00000000 (19070703092 M27554 000 51213/1988 BURliNGTON NORTHERN. ET Al BOO)(JPAGE 21 N • E 8 NWSE 1,00000000 ~ 8907070392 AkA Lot 8 (39.99 acres) .. 5/26/1966 BURLINGTON NORtHERN -ET At. BOO)(JPAGE 21 N 9 E 8 NWSW 1.00000000 0 M27!554 000 AKA. Lot 6 (37.57 acres} .e907070392 ... '" M27554 000 512611988 BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET At BOO)(JPAGE 21 N • E 8 S2SW 1.00000000 ag07070392 ~ M27554 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHE~N • ET No. BOOK/PAGE 2' N • E • SWSE '.00000000 • 8907070392 .. M27554 000 5126/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET N... BOOKIPAGE 21 N 9 E 8 W2SESE' 1.00000000 .... AKA Lot 12 (20.93 acres) ., 8907070392 .. M27554 000 512611 sse BURLINGTON NORTHERN" ET IV... BOOI<IPAGE 2' N • E • LOT 2 (10.39 oEtCres) 1,00000000 ., 8901070392 Q '" M27554 000 512811988 BURL.lNGTON NORTHERN -ET AI... BOOI<IPAGE 21 N • E a 1.00000000 ... 8907070392 LOT 9 (B.31 acres) .; Q M27555 000 512611868 BURLINGTON NORTt-iERN -ET AI.. aOOKIPAGE 2' N • E 15 SW '"OOO~OOO Q 6907070392 '" M27556 000 512611988 eURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. BOOI<IPAGE 21 N • E 18 NESE AKA l.ot9l41.99 acres) '1'.00000000 i:l 8907070392 U 0 M27556 000 51.2611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI... BOOKJPAGE 2. N • E ,. $ENW 1,00000000 Q 8907070392 AKA LotS (32.48 acres) ~ M2:75:5e 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AJ.... BOOI<IPAGE 21 N 9 E ,. SESE 1.00000000 Q 8901070392 " M275Q6 000 5,128/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN ~ ET AJ.... BOOKfPAGE 21 N • E ,. sw 1.00000000 .... • 89010703132 ~ M27556 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET J>L BOOI<IPAGE 21 N 9 E ,. SWNW 1.00000000 8907070392 " ~ M27!;i56 000 512611988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET I>L. BOOI<IPAGE 21 N • E ,. W2SE 1,00000000 :1! 8907070392 M27556 000 5J26I1988 BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET AI... eOOKfPAGE 21 N • E ,. lOT 3 (20.97 acres) 1.0GoaOOOQ 6907070J92 .... M27556 000 5/26J198& BU~lINGTON NORTHERN. ET AL sOOKrPAGE 2' N 9 E ,. '.00000000 ~ 8907010392 LOT B [10.55 acres) ~ U M27557 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI... BOO)(JP"'GE 21 N • E 17 N2 1.00000000 0 8901070392 Q "" .... M21558 000 512.611983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL. aOOKIPAGE 21 N • E 18 SE 1.00000000 H 65107070392 ~u 0\ Page 19 offll "" '" ... 00 "" '" ....... 0. .... '. " " ~.g !~ " ': p en CD ~ o N ~ :g ~ Exhibit A Altached to and made a part of tnat certain StalOment of Claim to Mlrwrallntorest datod Novombor 2:t, 2008 tor King CO\Inty, WA Flle# .. "~,~~_"._~~t.8~".. ,,,." . __ ... ,_ .. _~~~t.o_~.. !I.o~~_ .. _." .. ~a~~ T R Soct QQ Recoptlol1Numoor Logal Doscriptlon Interest M2755B 000 512611 5188 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET Al BOOK/PAGE 21 N 9 E 18 W2 8907070!J92 M27559 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27560 000 512611 9S8 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al M27561 000 512611988 eURllNGtON NORTHERN· ET AL M27562 000 5126/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27562 000 5J2611e8S BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27562 000 5/2611983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27.562 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27562 000 6n6l1988 BURLINGTON NORTHE~N· ET At M27562 000 5126I1Q$8 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27562 000 5/26/1988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN-ET AL M27562 000 512611938 BURLINGTON NORTHERN-ET Al M.27563 000 5126J11le,S BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET·Al M27563 000 '612611 gaS BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27663 000 6/26/1988 BURlINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27564 000 5126/1986 8URUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27564 000 5126J19ea BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27564 000 5/2611988 aURUNGTON NOFm-lERN· ET AL M27564 000 512911988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET Al M27564 000 512e11988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET Al M27564 000 5f2S11988 BURUNGTON NORTI"iERN -ET Al M27564 000 512611988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL Page 2Q 0'6$ BOOK/PAGE 89[}7070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 890707(J392 BOOKIPAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070:!~2 BOOK/PAGE 890707C392 BOOK/PAGE 890707Q392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 890701Q392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 89070703.92 SOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070302 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 . BOOK/PAGE 81i107070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PACE 8907070392 21 N 9 E 19 21N9E20 21N9E21 21KSlE22 21 N Sl E 22 21N9E22 21NeE22 21N9E22 21N9E22 21N9E22 21N9E22 21NBE23 21NBE2a 21NeE23 21N9E24 21NGE24 21N9E24 21N9E24 ~1 Pol 9 E 2oi. 21 NeE 24 21 NeE 24 Al~ Al~ Al~ NENW NESE NWSE S2SE SENW SW W2NW NESE NWSW S251 NENE 51 51NE SENW 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 Al<A l012 (26.01 acrElls) 1.00000000 AKA lot 7 (34.8 ~1;Se:~) 1.00000000 AM Lot a (39.7 acres) 1.00000000 1,QooOOQOO AKA lot 3 (39.9 acres) 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 LOT 4 (1 D.GS acreo) 1.000Q0000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 AKA Lot 7 (39.82 acres) 1.00000000 LOT 1 (30.12 acres) 1.QIJOOOt:!OQ. LOT 4 (7.49 acres) 1.00000000 LOT 8 (29.97 Iilcres) 1.00000000 :g .... o '" '" ~ ~ ~ '" o '" ... 0> o o '" f:l o Il ~ .., ..., ~ " • :1: ..., i o Il .... il! 0 d "'", .. '" 00> 00 .~ '" ..., .... . ~ .. " " o ~ ~.., ~~ "" ':: ~ '" '" CI CI .. '" .. N ~ EKhibit A :g .. Attached to and made a part of that certain Siawment Df Claim to M,nerill fnteroat dat&d Novomber 21, 2008 for King County, WA N Frill II Suffix Dated Grantors So .. Page T R Sect 00 Roceptlon Numbor logil' Description Interest M"27565' 000 5126J1988 "BliRLtNGTON NORTHERN":-ET AL BOOK/PAGE 2. N 9 E 2. Ale 1.00000000 8901070392 M:27566 000 512et19l\8 BURL lNGTON HORTI-lER"· ET Al BOOK/PAGE 21 N 9 E 27 ALe 1,00000000 8907070392 M27567 000 5I26119SB BURLINGTON ~OATHERN • ET Al BOOK/PAGE 2. N 9 E 28 ALL '.00000000 8907070392 M275Sa 000 5J26J196S BURLINGTON NORTHERN· El AL BQOKlPAGE 21 N • E 2. ALL 1.00000000 8907070392 .. '" M275EiS 000 5/26/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 30 E2NW 1.00000000 ~ 8907070392 M27S6ii 000 5J26I1988 eURLINGTON NORTHERN -E'f Al SOOK/PAGE 2. N • E 30 E2SE 1.00000000 "> 8'907010392 '" M2756S 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 30 NE 1.00000000 ~ 8907070392 ~ M27569 000 5J26/198B BURLINGTON NORTtiERN • ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 30 NESW 1.00000000 '" $907070392 .... M27569 000 5J26'1989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 30 NWNW 1,00000000 '" AKA Lot 1 (3925 acres) '" 8907070392 "' M275B9 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 30 NWSE 1.00000000 c 89070703g2 '" .... M27569 000 5126f1988 BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 2. N • E 30 NWSW AKA. lot:3 (39.81 scres) 1.00000000 '" 8907070392 c c M2756~ 000 5fl6f1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 30 SWNW 1.00000000 '" 8907070392 AKA lot 2 (39.43 acres) El M27SS9 000 512611988 BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET Al. BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 30 SWSW AKA lot 04 (39.79 acres) 1,00000000 u 8907070392 0 " M27570 000 121111983 BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET At. BOOK/PAGE 2. N • E 30 SESW 1.00000000 ~ OOC.#840720 ·0712 M27570 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOKIPAGE 21 .... • E 30 SWSE 1.00000000 .., DOC.'840725 ., " Oi12 ~ M27571 000 Sl26/1988 BURLINGTON IiORTHERN • ET AL BOOKIPAGE: 21 N OE 31 ALL 1.00000000 .; eg070703"92 • M27572 000 5ml1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI. BOOKJPAGE 21 N • E 32 N:2N2 1.00000000 ~ .8i07070a"Sl2 M27S72 000 51:2811988 BURlINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 3, SENE 1,00000000 ., 8907070302 " M2757:2 000 5126119'88 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET Al .BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 32 SWSW 1.00000000 § 89070703"92 U M27'73 000 121H1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 2. N • E 32 N2SW 1.00000000 0 OOC.#840725 " .. ... 0712 H "" u '" '" Page 21 of6S .. ", "'" 00 ." '" ... " .~ .. ~~ !P " I • . :~ ... fJ o :5 on o '" ... CO o o '" Exhibit A Attacbed to and made a part Of that certain Statemont of Claim to Minorallnterost dated Novomber 21, 2008 for King Cot.lnty, WA File # Suffi:a: Dated Grantors Book Page T R Silet QQ R~ceptlon Numbor M27673 OQD 1211119&3" "BURiiNGTO"N-NORTHERN-~·ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N 9 E 32 S2NW OOC.tlS40725 0712 M27573 000 1211/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET Al BOOK/PAGE 21 N 9 E 32 SE 000.#840725 0712 M27573OO0 1211/1963 BURUNGTONNORTHERN·ETAL BOOK/PAGE 21 N 9 E 32 SESW DOC.ft4072:! 0712 M27573 000 12'1/1983 BURL1NGTON NORTHERN -ET Al BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E .2 SWNE DOC.#840725 0712 M27574 000 5126/1986 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 33 E2 8907070392 M27575 000 612611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al. BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 3' W2 8806280227 M2757t3 OGO 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al. BOOKIPAGE ., N 9 E .. All 8907070392 M27577 000 5126/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -.ET Al BOOK/PAGE 21 N 9 E 3. N2NW 69070703Q2 M27578 000 5J2Ei11gee BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al BOOK/PAGE 21 N • E 36 ALL 89070703.92 M27679 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORlH!:RN -1:T Al. BOOKIPAGE 21 N 10 E 3 All OOC.#840725 0712 M27.580 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON ~RTHERN-ET Al BOOK/PAGE 21 N 10 E • All OOC.#840725 0712 M27581 000 1211/1963 SURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al BOOKIPAGE 21 N '10 E 11 All DOC.#840725 0712 M27582 000 1211J1983 8URllNGTON NORTHERN -ET Al BOOKIPAGE 21 N 10 E ,. All DOC:1I840725 0712 M27583 000 12/1/1963 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N 10 E 17 All DOC.#840725 0712 M27584 000 ·121111983 BUR:UNGTON NORTt-ERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 21 N '10 E '. All DOC.#840725 0712 M27585 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTt£RN -ET AL BOOKIPAGE " N 10 E 2. W2SW DOC,#84072' 0712 M275S6 000 1211/'\983 BURLINGtON NORTHERN -ET AJ.. BOOK/PAGE 21 N 10 E 27 ALL DOC._o?. 0712 pagt22 of 66 Legal DoscriptEon Interest 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 ~ 1.00000000 .... 0 .. '" 1.00000000 1.00000000 Il, ~ '" , .00000000 ... '" '" 1 .00000000 .,; <:> '" 1.00000000 ... .; <:> ,.00000000 <:> '" f:l 1.000000tlO u a C\ 1.00000000 ~ '" .. 1.00000000 0 ~ " 1.00000000 ~ :1! 1.00000000 .. ~ 1.00000000 § 0 0 " .. .. 1.00000000 H ," tl "'", .. ", 0" 00 ," '" ...... n. .... '. " " u • ~.., ~}{ " '::: -en § en o .... ~ CX) o o .... Exhibit A A.ttached to and made a part of that certain Statornont of Claim to Mlnorallntofost clatod Novombor 21, 2008 for King county. WA FilIP tI Sufnx Dated Grantors Book Pago T R Soc, QQ ReoepUon Number Legal Description Interest M27,S87 "000' 121;-"-983 BURLlNG'joN NORTHER·N~---ET·Ai BOOKIPAGE 21 N 10 E 28 S2$W OOC.#84D725 0712 M275Se: (lOO 12111100J BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOKIPAGE 21 N 10 E 29 ALL 000."840125 0712 1'\427589 000 1211f1983 BURLINGTON NORTHE~N -ET AI.. BOOKIPAGE 21 N 10 E 31 ALL OOC.tII&40725 00712 M27:590 DOD 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOKIPAGE 21 N 10 E 32 N2SE OOC.#B40725 00712 M27590 000 12/1;H~83 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET ~ BOOKIPAGE 21 N 10 E 32 N2SW DOC.#840n5 ()712 M27590 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET N.. BOOKWAGE 21 N 10 E .2 SESE DOC.'840ns 0712 M27590 000 121111963 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOK/PAGE 21 N 10 E 32 SESW DOC.tJ840725 0712 M27590 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET IV.. BOOKIPAGE 21 N 10 E ~2 SWSE OOC.#840725 0712 M27591 000 1211/1983-BURLINGTON NORTH~. ET N.... BOOKIPAGE 21 N 10 E 33 ALL OOC.#840725 0712 M27592 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET N.. BOOKIPAGE 21 N 10 E 34 N2N2 DOC.#840725 0712 M27592 000 12f1f1aS3 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET N. BOOK/PAGE 21 N 10 E ~4 N2SW OOC.#840725 0712 M27592 000 1211f1983 BURLINGTON NO~HERN~ ET At. BOOKIPAGE 21 N 10 E 3. SESW DOC.#840725 0712 M27593 000 5/26/1988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL. BOOK/PAGE 21 N 10 E 3. S2N2 ~B280227 M:27594 000 12(111983 BURLINGTON NORTHE'RN -ET AL BOOKJPAGE 21 N 10 E 35 ALL OOC.#&4Q725 0712 M~7595 000 S/2i1V198B BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKIPAGE 21 N 11 E 5 8907070392 M27596 (lOD 512611988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL. BOOKIPAGE 21 N 11 E 17 E2 8907070392 Page 23 ofGG 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 AKA Lot 1 (33.S8 SCfe$) 1.00000000 AKA Lot 3 {34.66 acres} 1.00000000 AKA lot 2 (34.11 acr-es) 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.0000lJOOO 1.00000000 AKA Lot! (31.39 acres) 1.00000000 1.00000000 FRl E2 & FRL E2NW4 (a95.72 1.00000000 acres) 1.00000000 12 ':l ., '" g, <l! ~ '" <> '" ... .. <> <> '" El 8 ~ '" .. ~ §! ~ ~ :1! .. i u o Q ", .. rl! 0 ~I "" <.J "'", ", ., 0" 0<> ," ., ...... . ~ '. ~ ~ 0" jI~ ' .. . :: -m ... g g: N .... g N Exhibit A Atta-c:hed to anel made a part of that certain Statement..,.r Chllm to MlnOlilllllterest elated Novemb.or l1! 2008 for King County. 'NA File # Suffix Dated Gl4llntors Bootl Pago T R Soct QQ Reception Number Mi7S96--006"" 5[261,'988-" BU'RLIN<3'TON" NORTHERN":"'ET 'Ai.. "'800KiPAGe--21-""N 1 {" E . "1'7 e-;iNW' . . .. ,. '.-., ." . ~~.g!,I_~.~.~-:,pt.lC?n Jnterest M27596 000 612611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27597 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. M27598 000 512611988 eURLINGTON NORTHERN -El At M27598 000 !51261191313 eURlIN,GTON NORTHERN· ET AI... M27S99 000 51261191313 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. M27599 000 5/2611988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. M27600 000 5/2611988 BURUNGTON toIORTHERN -eT N.. M27601 000 512611988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. M27601 000 5126/1988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27601 000 512611988 BURUNGTONNORTHERN-ETAl M 27602 000 ~2B1198S BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al "'2760;3 000 5126/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· EX AL M27604 000 5-/2eJ'1968 BURL.INGTON NORlHERN -ET AL M27605 000 512611986 BuRUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AI. M2760e 000 5126/1988 eURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET .AI.. M27607 000 Sf.26/196S eURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AI. M27607 000 5J2e/1gee BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET PL M2760a 000 ~/19a8 eURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET N.. M27609 000 5/28/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27B10 000 12/1/1983 BURllNGTONNORTHERN-ET AL Page 24 of66 8907070392 BOOKIPAGE 8907070392 BOOKIPAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 89070703'92 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOKIPAGE 8907070392 BOOKJPAGE 8907070392 BOOKIPAGE. 89Q7070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOKJPAGE 890]070392 BooKlPAGE SS07070392 BOOK/PAGE Ml07070392 BOOKIPAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 8901070392 BOOK/PAGE: 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907071)392 BOOKIPAGE 8007070392 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOK/PAGE DOC.#84D725 0712 21 tt 11 E 17 21 N 11 E 17 21 N 11 E 19 21 N 11 E 19 21 N " E 21 21 N 11 E 21 21 N 11 E 21 21 N 11 E 23 21 N 11 E 23 21 N 11 E 23 21 N 11 E 2-3 21 N 11 E 25 21 N 11 E 27 21 N' if E 29 21 N 11 E 31 21 N 11 E 33 21 N 11 E 33 21 N 11 E 33 21 N' 11 E 35 22,N4E36. SWNW SW E.SE NE N2 sw SE N2 N2SE sw S2SE ALL ALL ALL N2 sw SE AlL, LESS n04 AC BN RJW (617,96 acres) ALL, lESS ~2.24l".C BN f(P."! (547.76 acre5) LOT'" & PART OF LOT 7 (1.64 a",",,) 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1,00000000 1,00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1,00000000 1.00000000 1,000aoooo 1,00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1 .00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 ~.OQOOOQOO '.00000000 ::: .... o .. '" ~ ~ S '" Q '" ... co Q <> .. ~ 8 ~ '" ., ~ :il " ~ :1! I ~ " .. ., ~ ~ ~I .~ <J "" .. '. "' ~'" 00 .~ "' .,,, n. '<i '. " " ~~ J!t~ " ,= ~ ~ o o '" ~ gii o N File # SuHix M27611 000 M27611 000 M27611 000 M27612 000 M27612 000 M27613 000 M27614 000 M27615 000 M27615 000 M27615 000 M27615 000 M276Hi 000 M27615 000 M27616 000 M27617 000 Exhibit A Attached to and made a part of that certain Statomont of Claim to Mlner~ IQt~rest (l.;I.ted Novombcr 21, 2008 for King County, WA Dated Grantors Book Page T R Soc. QQ RocopUon Number l~.!I' _~sc:rlptlon 12f1/1983 -eURLiNGTON'-tioRTHeRN-:-E"T' AL -BC)O"KlPACiE' ,. 22 r.f -6" E N2SE OOC.N840125 0712 12/1/1983 BURLIIiGiON NORTHERN· aT AL SOOK/PAGE 22 N • E NENE DOC.N840725 0712 AKA Loll (38.87 aetes) 12/1/1983 BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET A.L BOOK/PAGE 22 N • E NWNE OOC.il84072S AKA l.(lt 2 (36.87 acres) 0712 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ST Ai. BOOK/PAGE 22 N • E 5 N2SW DOC.#840725 0712 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET ~ BOOK/PAGE 22 N • E 5 SWNW OOC,tl840725 0712 12/1/19S3 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 22 N • E t1 NW$E OOC.#84D725 0712 1211/1983 BURliNGTON NQRTHERN. ET At BOOKJPAGE 22 N 6 E 15 N.NE DOC.:J840725 0712 B1811989 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET At DOC 22 N • E 23 NE"WSW 8g07070:;i92 6J8J19S9 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET M. DOC 22 N • E 23 NESE 8907070392 6J8J1989 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL DOC 22 N • E 23 S2SE B907070392 6f811989 BURLINGTON NORTI-lERN. ET Al DOC 22 N • E 23 SESW 8907070892 61S11 QS9 BURliNGTON NQRTHERN -ET AI.. DOC 22 N • E 23 PART OF LOT 11 S OF 8907070392 MILWAUKEE AJW LESS B.19 AC CITY OF SEATTLE R1W. N2 NW4 NW4 SW4 LESS 1.97 AC MILWAUKEE RIW (13.9 acres) . 618J19898URLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al DOC 22 N • E 23 SOUTH 34 ACS OF SE4NE4 8907070392 (340_) 1211/1983 BlRtlNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL . BOOKIPAGE 22 N • E 23 PARTS OF LOT 11 AND 100' ooC.*840725 R1W ACROSS NW4SW4, 0712 DESCRIBED sy METES AND BOUNDS IN DEED TO MILESTONE (i7.:::8 aCies) 618/1989 SLRLING10N NORTHERN. ET AL BOOK/PAGE ~2N • E 2. NW 8907070392 Page 25 of 88 tntorest 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 t.OOOOOOQO 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 ~ ... o .... '" & .l: :;: '" .. c '" ., '" c c '" r'1 o o Q ~ " ., ~ " ~ :1: ., i o o Q " ., !l! " ~I .~ <J " .. .. ", "'" oc '~ '" .,,,,, .~ '. " " o • ~'O !I,t. '.: '., ~ en ~ g o N ~ CO o o N Exhibit A Attached to and made a part of that certain Statemont of Claim Ie M1norallnter.asc dated Novembor 21 1 2008 for King C~lntYr WA ,Fn~" $1.l1':IJt, Oatod, , _ Gr~ntors_ ,_ Book _ Pago T R Socl QQ RGc:.G_p~lon Nilmbo, Lagal OilS4;rlption M27617' 000 ···6J8i1989 "BURLINGTON' NO·RTHE-RN·~·eT /.L. . SOOK/PAGE . 22 N 6 E 25 . . __ . --.-. 'THA,T PART OF SE4SW-4 & M27618 000 12/111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27618 000 12/1J1983 eURlINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. M27618 000 12/1J1983 BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET Al M27619 000 6l3l1~88 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. M21620 000 61811989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M2762CJ 000 eJ8I1969 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET Al M27S21 000 1211119ij3 BURUNGTON NORTHERN. ET AI. M27621 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET At M27G:22 000 1211/1983. BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At M27623 000 6/8/1 eas BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27624 000 12/1119aS . BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M2762-4 000 12/111983 BURLINGTON NORl'HEAN· ET AL Page 26 of66 8907070392 SW4SE4 LYING SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE NORTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE KENT-KANGLEY ROAD BOOKIPAGE OOC.#840725 0712 BOOI(JPAGE OOC.tIIS40725 0712 BOOI(JPAGE OOC.'S40725 Q712 BOOK/PAGE An91020610 75 BOOKJPAGE ij5l07070J92 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOKJPAGE DOC.#M0725 0712 BOOK/PAGE DOO.#840725 0712 BOOI(JPAGE DOC.#840725 0712 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOKIPAGE DOC.#84072!5 0712 BOOKJPAGE DOC.#840725 0712 22N6E2S 22N6E2!5 22N6E25 22N6E25 22 N 6 E 2. 22 N 6 E 2. 22 N 6 E 2. 22 N 6 E 26 22 N 6 E 27 22 N 8 E 33 22 N 6 E 33 22 N 6 E 33 N2SE NESW SESE N2NW NE 52 SlNW SW>lW (51 acres) THAT PART 5E4SW4 & 5W4SE4 LYING NORTHEASTERLY OF TIlE KENT·KANGLEY ROAD (2. acres.) SE4SE4 LESS ".6S AC BN RIW (35.34 ilCres) SE4SW4. SWt-SE4. lESS 6.97 AC BN RIW (73.03 8<:(es) THAT PART OF NW4 SW4 lYING S OF A LINE PARAllEL WITH &" DISTANT ~ FT SWlYMEASUREDAT RIGHT ANGLES FROM THE NORTHERN PACiFIC RAILWAY CO CENTERLINE (12,7' aeres) 'nterest 1.00000000 1.QOOOOOoo 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1,00000000 1.00000000 (g 'll '" '" E s '" o '" ... '" o o '" f; o .g ~ "" ... o ~ ~ ~ :: ... I 8 Q ., ... ~ & ~~ "" <.J '<", ", '" 0'" 00 ." '" ... "" n. ..... '. ~ ~ o • ~.., ~~ , ,= ~ '" l!l g '" !'l i N Exhibit A Attached to and made a part of that cortaln statomont 01 Claim to MlnGrallntorest datod Novembor 21, 2008 for King Count~. WA File-II Suffix Oated Grantors M27S2"S'" '000· "12tiiUl6s'""eURliNGToo-N'oR'iH"ERN ; eT AL' M2762.6 000 eJeJ1989 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27627 000 313011987 BURLINGTON NORnERN -ET AI.. M27628 000 6/8/1989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. M2762B 000 6/6/1989 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27628 000 GJ8/1G89 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET At pagt270f6S Book Page "BOOK/PAGE"'" . NIA BOOKJPAGE 6907070392 BOOK/PAGE AF3!S1020610 75 BOOK/PAGE 8907Q70392 BOOK/PAGE BIiI07C70392 BOOK/PAGE 6907070392 ,. R Sect '22 'N'-6 "1: . 203 22N6E3!5 22 N 6 E 35 21 N 6 E 2 22 N 6 E 3' 22 N 6 E 38 QQ .. __ ~~eptlon Number Legal De8crlptlon Inle>reet SW4NW4 LESS 0.70 ACS 1.00000000 SOLD BY DEED RECORDED 04fT/SO UNDER A.F.#8004Q70391 BOOK Of DEEDS. THA.T PART OF THE NWI$W4 LYING NORTH OF THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY. (82.22 SCI"e$) AlL. LESS 14.01 AC BN R/W, 1.00000000 LESS 4.30 ACS SOlO IN SW4S~. MORE FULL. Y DESCRIBED AS fOLLOWS: ALJ., LESS 14.01 ACS WITHIN eN RR RIW, LESS 4.30 ACS SOLO IN SW4SW4 AS CONVEYED BY QUITCl..AJM DEED RECORDED 4-7.87, A.Fj[18704070610 BOOK OF DEEDS, KING COUNTY; LESS THAT PORTION OF THE W2SW4 LYING SOUTHERLY OF WE aR RR R/IN -PARCEL 003 DEEDED TO MERID~N MINERAlS CONSISTING OF 65.0 ACS (~56.69 acres) TRACT IN SW4SW4 (4.3 "", .. ) 1.00000000 SEE DESCRIPTION AT 1.00000000 SECTION a6-22N..flE SEE DESCRIPTION AT 1,00000000 SECTION 36-22N-6E N2, LESS 15.18 ACS SOLD. 1.00000Q<lO 14.2SAC BN RlW.3.15AC SCHOOL SITE, 7.99 ACS SOLD IN UNRECORDED TOWN PLAT, S2. LESS 4.00 AC BN RNoI, MORE FULLY DESCRIBeO AS FOLLOWS: A PARCEL OF LAND lYING SOUTHERLY OF THE BR RR RIW & NORTHERLY OF THE RAVENSDALE·BLACK OJA.MONO ROAD LOCATEO IN THE $E4 OF SEC 35 AND THE SW4 Of SEC 36, T22N, R6E, AND THE NE04 OF SEC 2, T21N, R6E. W.M. MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED ::: ... o '" '" ~ ~ ... ~ '" o '" ... '" o o '" E1 8 ~ .c: " ~ ~ " ~ ~ j 8~ In ~§ .~ <.J .... '. '" ~'" 00 .~ '" ....... a. '11 " ~ " o ~ ~" !~ ~. en :g 8 en o '" -co ~ Exhibit A Attilched to and made a part of Ihat certain Statomont 01 Claim to MlnOlaJ Into,o.t datod Novmnber 21, 2008 for King County, WA File 1# surnx Dated Grantors Book Page T R $0<:1 QQ RilCGptlon Numbor Legal o.scrlptlon M27629 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al BOOK/PAGE OOC.0840725 0712 M27630 000 1211/1987 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL SOOK/PAGE AF#91020610 75 M27631 000 5/26/1988 BURuNGTON NORTHERN -Er AL BOOK/PAGE 8806280227 M27632 000 MII1989 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKIPAGE 89070703g2 M27633 000 618/1989 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET Al aOOK/PAGE 8907070392 M27634 000 12'111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al BOOKIPAGE DOC.'840725 01'12 M27614 000 12/1119$3 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKIPAGe ,OOC.#840725 0712 Page 28 or66 22 N • E 36 22 N • E 36 22 N • E 36 22 N 7 E 23 SW 22 N 7 E 25 ALL 22 N 7 e 28 E2$E 22 N 7 E 26 AS FOLLOWS; FROM THE INTERSECTION OF THE CENtER LINES OF THE BR RR RftN& lHE RAVENSDALE-BLACK DIAMOND ROAD SOUTH 37 OEGREES OU WEST 96.0 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. THENCE SOUTH 26 O:EGREc:S 00' WEST 90 FEET; THENCE SOtJ'rH 50 DEGREES DO' WEST 850 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 45 DEGREES ~D' WEST 850 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 45 DEGREES 30' WEST 480 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 40 DEGREES 30' WEST 811 FEET; THENCE SOUTli 55 DEGREES 00' WE:ST 1592 FEET; THENCE NORTH 24 DEGREES SO' WEST 1135 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY RIW LFNE OF SAID RR; THENCE NORTH 66 DEGREeS 24' EAST SS74.7 FEET, MIl. AlONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE TO THe POINT OF BEGIHNING {550.25 aetas) TRACTS IN NE4 & SE4NW4 {1 0.49 acres} TRACT IN SW4NE4 (3.77 ~C7EI5) TRACT IN N2NE4 (9.3 acres) 100~ RIW IN E2NE4 (3.41 ac:res) Inte,..st 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1,000DooOO 1.00000000 ~ ':l o '" ~ ol! ~ .. o '" .... .. o c .. ~ " ,SJ ~ " .u • ~ '< ~ :I: .u I " '. .u fl! ~ ~~ .~ " "' .. '. '" ... 00 .~ '" .u" '" '0-1 " ~ ~ ~.., jI!:t '" ~ :! ~ en CD g g: N ~ (» <> <> N Exhibit A Attacbed to and made a part ofthilt certain SUtt<tmont of Claim to Mlnorallntorost datod NOVOl'flber 21, 20Q8 for King County, WA File # surnx Datlid Grantors Book Pag& T R Stet QQ Reception Number Legaf Description fnterest 1.00000000 M27634' cioo' 1.2/1"{1983' -S(jliUNGTON-NORTHERN. In AL BOOK/PAGE 22 N 7 E 26 000.#840725 0712 M27635 CIOa 61811949 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 22 N 1 E 27 8907070397 M27635 (lOO 61611989 eURL.ING10N NORTHERN· ET.AI. BOOK/PAGE 22 N 7 E 27 8907070397 M27636 000 12/111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At BOOK/PAGE 22 N 7 E 27 DOC.#840725 0712 M27636 DOD 12/111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN ~ ET AL BOOK/PAGE 22 N 7 E 27 00C.#840725 0712 M27637 000 12/\/1963 eURLINGTON NORTHERN ~ ET AI.. BOOK/PAGE 22 N 7 E 29 DOC.fI840725 0712 M27638 000 6/.6/1989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN ~ ET AL BOOK/PAGE 22 N 7 E 30 89{]7070392 M27e39 000 61811989 BURUNGTON NORTHERN ~ ET ItJ.. BOOK/PAGE 22 N 7 E 31 B907()70392 M27540 0110 121111983 SURUNGTON NORTHERN· El AI.. BOOKIPAGE 22 N 7 E 31 DOC._Ons 0712 M27641 000 618111189 8URUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 22 N 7 E 32 8907070392 M27642 000 61811989 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. BOOK/PAGE 22 N 7 E 33 89070703Q2 M27643 000 6/811989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AJ... BOOK/PAGE 22 N 1 E 36 8907070392 M27644 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOKJPAGE 22 N.l0E 31 DOC.#S40725 0712 M27544 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOK/PAGE 22 N 10 E 31 OOC.#840725 0712 Page 29 0'66 N2NE W2 S2NE NE4 LESS 6.38 AC ROW (153.62 acres) 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.0000000a SE 1.00000000 PORTIONS OF NW4NW4NW4, 1.00000000 SW4NW4NW4, W2SW4NW4 (14.1 acre$) S2 1.00000000 ALL ALL E2NW NESW All FRL, LESS 21.22 AC BN 1.00000000 RIW. lESS THAT PART OF THE EAST 1805.50 fT OF S2NE4. SOUTH OF BN RIW (562.0. acres) 1.0000000(1 PART OF S2NE4 (1(1.23 acres) 50 FT RlW IN FRONT OF LOT 1.00000000 • ACROSS SHORE lANDS, BED AND WATER OF FISH LAKE; PART OF NW4NW4 l VING SOUTH OF KENT~KANGLeY ROAD, ALSO INCLUDES OWNERSHIP OF A 20' WATER PIPELINE Rm ACROSS NW4SW4 AND OOV'T LOT 4. (6.07 acres) 1.00000000 1.00000001J 1.00000000 1.00000000 ~ 'tl ... "l ~ .l: ... ::: .. <:> '" .... co <:> <:> '" El u .g ~ ~ • :il " ~ ~ j u .g ., " H i:llJ .. .. '" .co 0<:> ." '" " .... ,~ .. ~~ ,!lit! , ': '::: r' en CD i N ~ ~ ~ Exhibit A Attached to and made a part of that certain Statoment of Claim to Mfneralloterostdatod Nav(!mber 21. 2008 for King County, WA File # $ufflJC Da.ted Gre.ntors flook Pago T R s.et QQ ReeepUon Number Legal Descrlpdon 'M27644 "00·0· '12i1i1983·· BURLINOTO·N' NORTHERN ~"ET AL BOOKIPAGE 22 N 10 E 31 NWNW DOC.#B40i25 AKA Lot 1 (36.49 acres) 0712 M276404 000 1211119133 BURLINGTON NORTHERN-Er At BOOKIPAGE 22 N 10 E 31 NWSW OOC.#a40725 AKA Lot :$ (38.45 acres) 0712 M27644 000 12/1119133 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET At BOOKIPAGE 22 N 10 E 31 SE DOC.#S4072S 0712 M27644 000 12/1J1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET N.. BOOKIPAGE 22 N 10 E 31 SWNW OOC.tl8c0725 AKA Lot 2 (38,47 3a'es) 0712 M27644 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET /JJ.. BOOKIPAGE 22 N 10 E 31 SWSW DOC.#840725 AKA Lot 4 (3BA3 acres) 0712 M27645 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOKJPAGE 22 N 10 E 33 NE OOC.N840725 0712 M27645 000 1211/1S83 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET /'lJ.. BOOKIPAGE 22 N 10 E 33 52 DOC.tt840725 0712 M27646 000 1211/1 ge3 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE ~ N 11 E • RIW ACROSS SE4SW4, DOC,'84072' 0712 W2SE4 (6.85 BCreS} M27647 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 22N1tE 5 PARTS OF SW4, W2SE4 (61.28 8806260227 ..... ) M27648 000 5126/19a8 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI... BOOK/PAGE 22 N 11 E 7 SESE 8806280227 M27649 000 5f.2eJ19Sa BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET PJ.... BOOK/PAGE 22 N 11 E 17 E2NE 890707-0392 M27649 000 5126119138 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI... BCOK/PAGE 22 N 1'1 E 17 SE 890707-0392 M27649 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORnERN. ET Al... BOOKJPAGE 22 N 11 E 17 W2 8907070392 M27649 000 512611I3Ba BURLINGTON NORTJ-£RN. £T AJ.. BOOKIPAGE 22 N 11 E 17 NW4NE4, LESS 12.86AC RR 8907070392 RIW. 3,35 AC HWY RIW. 1,11 ACS SOLD TO BPA, (22,13 acres) M27650 000 1211J1983 BURLINGTON NORTI£RN -ET AL BCOKJPAGE 22·N11"E 17 RfW ACROSS W2NW4. S2N2 DOC.#840725 0712 (15.89 aeres) M27651 000 5/26/1 ~68 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 22 N 11 E 17 PARTS OF $2SW4, N2NW4, 8806280227 NW4NE4 (5-.01 acres) M27652 000 5J26/196B BURLINGTON NORTt-£RN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 22 N 11 I: ,. ALL 89070703!i12 Page 30 0166 Interest 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 ~ 1.00000000 ... 0 '" .., 1.00000000 & ~ 1.00000000 .. ... '" '" 1,00000000 '" <> '" ... 1_00000000 .; <> <> '" 1.00000000 f; 0 1.t10000000 0 " 1.00000000 ~ " 1.00000000 '" ... ~ 1.00000000 ~ ~ 1.00000000 ~ :: ... 1.00000000 ~ ~ 1.00000000 0 0 " ., ... 1.00000000 ~ ~ ~I ,~ <.J "'", .. '" ~ .. 0<> '~ '" ...... . ~ '. ~ " ~~ ~.!:! " , ~' ~ 8 en ~ -co ~ Exhibit A AtCa'Chcd to and made a part of that certain Statomont of Clilim to Mlnarallnte(V:Stdatcd November 21, 2008 for King County, WA Flit tI Suffll( Dated Grantors BDOk Page T R Sect QQ Roc;epUcm Numbe( -M27'e'S3 '000" 1211'11'98'3 BURllNGi"'oN NORT'HERr:i. ET Al BOOKIPAGE 2a N -"~ E 13 N2NW OOC.t840725 logal Ooserlptlon Interest 1.00000000 0712 M27654 000 812/1982 BURLINGTON NORTHE.RN • £T N.. BOOKIPAGE 23 N 4 E 2. PART OF LOTS 9-11, S2~E4, 1,00000000 DOC.tf8.40405 SE4NW4, SE4SW4, $W4SE4 0908 (S •. " actes) M27655 000 812'1982 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N , E 36 RIIN ACROSS A PORTION OF 1.00000000 OOC.#840405 0908 NW4NE4, NE4NW4 M27656 000 12/1/t9a3 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N 5 E SWSWSWSW 1.00000000 OOC.fi40726 0712 M27657 000 , 2/111 9B3 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al BOOKIPAGE 23 N 5 E 3 NEN. 1,00000000 DOC.tI840725 0712 M21657 000 12/111963 BURLINGTON NOR1HE.RN· ET AL eoaKiPAGE 23 N 5 E " NESE 1.00000000 DOC.1I840725 0712 M27657 000 12/111913:3 BURL.INGTON NORTHeRN -ET AL eOOKIPAGE 23 N • E 3 NWNW 1.QOOOOOOO OOC,1I840725 0712 M27657 000 '12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 23 N 5 E 3 SENE 1.00000000 OOC.'6<072. 0712 M27657 000 121111963 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 23 N • E • SESE 1.00000000 OOC.f!840726 0712 M276S7 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Ai. BOOK/PAGE 23 N 5 E 3 W2SW 1.00000000 DOC.#840725 0712 M276S8 000 12/111gS3 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N • E 7 SWSW 1.00000000 DOC.#840725 0712 M27659 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 23 N 5 E • N2SE 1.00000000 OOC . .J840725 0112 M27659 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL eOO'llPAGE 23 N • E • NE 1.00000000 DOC .#840725 0112 M27660 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N • • 11 ALL 1.00000000 OOCJII!640?2S 0712 M27661 000 5IW196B BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AJ.. BOOKJPAGE 2. N 5 E 21 NENW AKA lot 6 (39.95 acre$.) 1.00000000 8806280227 M27661 000 5126f198S BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 23 N 5 E 21 NWNE ~KA lo14 (25.8 acre&.) 1.00000000 8806260227 Page 31 of 66 ~ .... 0 .., .., Il. .l! ... '" \Q '" <:> .. ... .; 0 0 .. ~ 0 0 '" " • '" .., ., " ~ " • ~ ., " ~ 0 0 '" " ., H ." " '<", ., '" "'" 00 ," '" .,,, .~ '. " " o • ~.., ~k , , I ::~ .... en § en o '" .... ~ ~ Exhibit A Attached to and made a part of that tertaln Statemcmt of Claim to Mlnorallntcro&t dated NOYCImoor 21, 2008 for King County, WA File # Suffix Dated GnmtQrs Book Pago T R Sect QQ Roceptlon Numbcilr Lagal Doscrlptfoll Interest M27561 000 --S12sri'g'iia "BUALii\icfroN "N'OR'THERN·· 'ET'AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N 5 E 21 NWNW 8806280227 M27661 000 512GJ1gea BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N 5 E 21 S2NW 8\l0.280227 M27661 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At BOOKIPAGE 23 N 5 E 21 SW 88062.00227 M27661 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. BOOKIPAGE 23 N 5 E 21 SWNE 88062a0227 M27661 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOt<IPAGE 23 N 5 E 21 8806280227 M27662 000 12f1119BJ BURLINGTON NORTHERN-ET Al 600t<lPAGE 23 N 5 E 25 S2SE OOC.#840725 071:2 M27662 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET Al BOOKJPAGE 23 N 5 E 25 DOC.*840725 0712 M27663 {JOO 512611986 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N 5 E 25 8806280227 M27664 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N 5 E 27 OOC.#84D725 0712 M27665 000 5.126/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PA.GE 23 N 5 E V 8806280227 M27666 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NQRTHERN. ET At BOOKIPAGE 23 N , E 2. SESW DOC.il840725 0712 M27666 (lOa 1211115163 BURliNGtON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 23 N , E 20 DOC.#840725 0712 M?7667 000 81211982 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 23 N 5 E 30 DOC.#84040S 0908 MZ7668 000 61211982 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL SOOKtPAGE 23 N 5 E 31 DOC..#84D405 0908 M2766Q 000 812/1982 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 23 N 5 E 32 N2N2NE$W DO\::.#840405 0908 M27669 000 81211982 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL SOOKJPAGE 23 N 5 E 32 DOC.#840405 0900 Page 32. 0'66 W2SE4, LESS 10.54 ACS SOLD. LESS 6.09 ACS CONDEMNED BY CllY OF SEATILE (63.:37 aues) PART OF SW4NE4. S2NW4, N2SW4, NW4SE4 (53.48 aCfes) PART OF SW4NW4 (.ElIe acres) . TRACT IN NW4NE4 (1 acres) ALL LESS $4.45 ACS SOW & 55.94 ACS CONDEMNED BY CITY OF SEATIl.E (54 •. 81 ~(es} PART OF SE4NW4 (.5 w .. ) AJW ACROSS A PORTION OF NW4NW4 PART OF NE4NW4 (24.80 acres.) PART OF NW4 MORE FULLY DESCD BY OEED (5.07 acres.) 1.00000000 1.00000000 t.OOOOOOOO 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 ~ ... 0 ... .., Il, • '" .... '" '" .; 0 '" .... ..; 0 0 '" i:1 0 0 " ~ " '" ., • ~ ~ • ~ ., • w § 0 0 " " ., § ~ ~~ >II,) '" .. ", .'" 00 ." '" .,,,, 0. '.,.. " ~ ~ ~.1J ~);:! '::' ':: ~ ~, en ~ g en ~ -CO o o '" Exhibit A Attaclllld to and made a part ofth.t certatn Slatomcnt of Claim to MinorBllnterll$t dillod NQvombor ,21, :2008 for I<In9 County, WA FH~# SuffiJ(. Dated. Grantors Book page) T R Seet QQ Roc;::cpUon Numbor legal Description M2"7670'-·'000"· '·1'211ii·963 -ei,.iRCiNGTON NORTHE"RN-:'''·Ei AL 600KlPAGE· 23 N 6 E 3S SE:NE DOC.#84072S M27671 000 5126/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27671 000 5126/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27672 000 12/111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN-ET AL M27673 000 ~211/1983 euRl.lNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27673 000 1211/1963 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -er AL M27673 000 1211/1963 BURLINGTON NORTrlERN-Err AL M27673 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN-ET AL M27674 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27675 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27G76 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTrlERN -ET AL M27676 000 12/1/1003 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al M27E!76 000 12n11983 BURLINGTON NORTt-lERN -ET AL M27676 000 1211/1003 BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET At r.,i27676 iJCiiJ 12ijijij6:3 DvnLiriGTOi" riORTHEn.N -ii:T Ai. M21676 000 121111983 BURliNGTON NORTHERN -E.T AL Page 33 of66 0712 BOOKIPAGE 8806280227 aOOKIPAGE 8800280227 BOOKIPAGE DOC."B40725 0712 800KlPAGE DOC.tII840725 0712 BOOKIPAGE DOC.tI!840726 0712 BOOK/PAGE DOC.#840725 0712 800KIPAGE DOC.#8'0725 0712 BOOKIPAGE DOC.#840125 0712 BOOKIPAGE DOC.#840725 0712 800KIPAGE DOC#8407250 712 BOOK/PAGE OOC,8407250 712 BOOKJPAGE 00(;#8407250 712 BOOK/PAGE DOe'8407250 712 600iVPAGE DOClS407250 712 BOOK/PAGE D0C#8407250 712 23 N 5 E 23 N 5 E 23 N • E 23 N • E 23 N • E 23 N • E 23 N 8 E 23 N • E 23 N 8 E 23 N 6 E 23 N 6 E 23 N 6 E 23 N • E 23 ;,i • E 23 N 6 E 35 N2NE 35 ACL 3 E2SE 3 NENE 3 NWNW 3 SENE 5 11 ALC 17 E2NW " N2SE 17 NWNW 17 S2NE ;7 S2SW 17. SESE PARTS OF SW4NE4, NW4 (193.52 acre:s;) AKA Lon (31.76 acre$.) AKA Lot 4 (30,89 acres) PART OF LOTS 3, 4, WEST OF SUNSET HlGHWAY (22 acres) Interes,1 1.00000000 1.00000000 1_00000000 1.000(10000 1,00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 .. '" 'l: '" .., ~ .l! 0: '" '" o '" ... .. o o '" i'1 ~ g !i ~ ~ " • ~ " I o " .. " ~ ~ g;i ;;j" '" .. ", ~ .. 00 ." '" ....... ,~ ., " " u • _'0 ~ !:I ~' en :g g ~ ~ g ... Exhibit A Atta(;hed to and made a part of that 1:ort,l" StWJmortt of Claim to Mlnorallnterost dat'lld Novomber 21, 2Doa for King County, WA File # Suffix Dated Grantors 'M27f)n""ooo 1211/1983 sURLINGi(>N NORTH'ERN'. ET At _k page T R Soot QQ Roceptlon NumbO( LBgat DescrJpUon BOOKiPAGE 23 N • E ,. N2NE OOC.il1340725 0112 M27677 000 121111983 BURUNGrON NORTHERN -(;r AI. 800KIPAGE 23 N 6 E ,. NENW DOC.'840725 0712 M27677 000 12/1/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN-ET AI.. BOOK/PAGE 2. N • E 19 NWNW OOC.#840725 AKA lol1 (40.18 acres) 0712 M27677 000 121111983 B\JRUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOK/PAGE 2. N 6 E '9 SESW DOC.#840J25 AKA lot 90 (38.34 acres) 0712 M27677 000 1211/1S83 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. BOOK/PAGE 2. N • E ,. SWS~ OOC,#6.072. AKA lot 8 (31.B2acres) 0712 M27677 000 12/1/1gS3 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. SOOK/PAGE 2. N 6 E ,. !'{WSW OOC,#.'07~ (1712 AKA lot 10 (38.24 ac:rH) M27678 000 1211/1f1S3 BURUNGTON NORTHERN. ET Ai. BOOK/PAGE 23 N 6 E 27 E2N,W OOC.#e40725 0712 M2767B 000 12/1/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET Al BOOK/PAGE 23 N 6 E 27 NWNE bOCJ1S40725 0712 M27679 000 61811989 BURUNGTON NORTHeRN· H AI.. BOOK/PAGE 23 N 6 E 2. E2E2 .8907070392 M27679 000 61811969 8URl,.INGTON NORTHERN -ET Ai. BOOKIPAGE 2. N 6 E 2S NWSE 89070703£12 M27679 OOQ 6ISl19ag; eURL.INGTONNORTHERN-ETAL BOOKIPAGE 2. N • E 2. SWNE 8907070392 M27680 000 1211/1983 aURl,INGTON NORTHERN· ET AI. BOOK/PAGE 23 N • E 2. DOC.#840725 LOT 2 (13.25 acr&$) 0712 Page 34 of 66 rnterest 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 '.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 ::: ~ '" .., 1l. ,;0: ... ~ '" <> '" ... .., <> <> '" ~ M ~ '" ..., • ~ , • ~ j o Q " " ..., !iI ~ ~~ ' .. t> .. ", ,,"> . .., 0<> ' .. "> ...,,, .~ " , , o • ~'O ~~ ,~: ~. m '" 8 o g: N ~ '" o l'l Exhibit A Attached to and made a part 01 tbat cortain statomont 01 Claim 10 "Inoralilltoros' datod Nov~mbor 21, 2008 for King Counly, WA File I#-SufRx Datod GTantors Book ,_ _ _ Pag(t T R Soct QQ RGc.o~tJon ,Numbo-t Logal Doscrlptlon M27661 000 816/1969 BURLINGTON NORTHERf,;-· ET Al. 'BOOKIPAGE 2J N 6 E 33' .... -•. -....... ~-.• ~'NE4; S-E4NW4~ NW4SE4: .. )./127682 000 12/1/19a3 BURLINGTON NORTt-ERN • ET AL M27882 000 1211h 9as BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27682 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NOR1HERN· ET AL M276&2 000 1211/1963 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL 8907070397 OESCRIBEC AS: NE4, SE4NW4 BOOK/PAGE OOC.#840125 0712 BOOK/PAGE OOC.tl840725 0712 BOOK/PAGE OOC,fI.840726 0712 ·BOOK/PAGE DOC.#S040725 0712 23N6E33 23N6E33 23N6E33 23N6E33 E2NENW E2SE NESW SWSE L~SS THAT PORTION OF THE S2NE4 & SE4NW4 l YIHG ~STERLY OF THE BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION POWERLINE RMI, SOUTHERLY Of SE LAKE DESIRE RO & WESTERLY OF LAKE DESIRE ROAD SE & THE NW4SE4 & ALL THAT POR"ON OF THE S2NE4 & SE4NW4lYING ~STERLY OF THE BONNEVILLE POWER ADMJNISTRA nON POWERLINE RIW. SOUTHERLY Of SE lAKE DESIRE ROAD & WESTERLY OF LAKE DESIRE ROAD S.E. (138.1 acres) lnlerte! 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 M27662 000 1211/1983 BlJRUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. . BOOKIPAGE DOC.iI'840725 0712 BOOKIPAGE DOC.'840725 0712 23N6Es3 W2NENW lYING SOUTHWESTERLY OF 1.00000000 M27682 000 1211/19E.3 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27682 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ~ At M27682 DOD 1211119B3 BURUNGTOfII NORIHERN· ET At page 350168 . BOOKIPAGE DOC.iI'840725 0i'':2 BOOKIPAGE OOC,#640725 0712 23N6E 33 23N6E33 23N6E as CEDAR GROVE ROAD (50,$ BcreS) ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 1.00000000 332306-9tM2-O. 8BNG THE W2NE4NWI LYING NORTH'JVESTERLY OF CEDAR GROVE ROAD ( ... acre.) 1,00000000 LOT 1 (3S.95 acres) 1.00000000 LOT 2 (23.Q5 acres) ~ ~ ... '" ~ ~ .., ::: '" o '" .., '" o o '" El 8 ~ '" .., ~ .; ~ :1! .., i g '" .. .., ~I "l" '" .. ", "'" 00 .... "' .., ... . ~ '. ~~ .!Pi! .:::' ~. '" ... g ~ '" ~ co g '" Exhibit A Attached to and made a part of that «ltaln Stat(lm&nt of Claim to Wnorallntorust datod November 21,2<108 tot King County, WA FDe # sumx Dated Grantors Book page-Y R Sect QQ Reet!~t~o~ .~~.~be.r. Legal DOSCription M2768i' 0"00' 12Iii"~8J aiiRLINGTON NORTH~RN· 'eT AL -IiOOKiPAG. .. 23 N 6 E 33 DOC.#840725 LOT 3 (11.61 acres) 0712 M27682 OOQ 12/1/1QS3 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N 6 E 33 DOC.l¥840725 LOT:; (36.9 acres) 0712 M27682 000 12/1/1QS3 BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET Al aOOt<JPAGE 23 N 6 E 33 OOC.#640725 LOT 6 (1.56 acres) 0712 M27683 000 6/-B/1gag BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET AI. BOOK/PAGE .3 N 7 E THAT PART OF SE4NE4 8907070392 LYING SOUTHERLY OF INYERSYATE 90. SE4 (201.04 acres) M27684 000 1211/1963 BURLINGTON NORTHERN' El AI.. BOOKIPAGE 23 N 7 E PARTS OF LOTS 1,2, S2NE4 DOC . .fi40725 0712 (160 Beres) M27685 000 12/.30/1986 eURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 23 N 7 E 'fHA T PORTIOlII OF GOVT AF#91020B10 LOiS 1 & 2. LYING NORTH OF 7' THE MORTH RMlOF INYERSTATE 90 (12 a"",.) M276S6 000 12(1/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN-ET AL BOOKIPAGE 231'0171: • ALL OOC.fi40725 0712 M276B7 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N 7 E 7 ALL 00C.#84072' 0712 M27688 000 12/1/1983 BURliNGTON NORTHERN -ET At.. BOOKIPAGE 23 N 7 E B ALL 00C.#640725 0712 M27689 000 1211J1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N 7 E 11 ALL DOC.#64072' 0712 M27690 000 12/1/1983 BURlINGTONNORTHERN-ETN.. BOOKIPAGE 23 N 7 E 13 ALL OOC.#840725 0712 M27691 000 1211/1Q83 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI. BOOK/PAGE 2' N , E ,. ALL DOC.#840725 0712 M276a2 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI. BOOK/PAGE .. N 7 E 17 ALL DOC.lf840720 0712 M27693 000 12/1/1983 8URUNGTON NORTHERN -ET At BOOKIPAGE .. N 7 E 19 ALL DOC.#840725 0712 M27694 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At BOOKIPAGE 23 N 7 E 21 ALL 00C.#840725 0112 Page 36 of 6ti Interest 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00aOOOQO 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.0000~000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 ~ ~ .. '" ~ 8! ~ '" o '" ~ .. o o '" ~ " 2 ~ '" .. • ~ " ~ :I! .. i " o " '. .. i'n ~~ .... " "'", ' . ., ... 00 .... ., .. " 0. .... '. tl ~ ~" .9!~ , ~' r' en .., 0 0 0 en 0 N ~ Exhibit A co 0 Attached to and m.de Iil part oftl1at certain Statomont of Claim to Mlrtora-Ilntorea' claUl'd November 21, nos for King County, WA 0 N FI!e. Suffix Oated GJ'ilntOf$ Book PilgC' T R S.<I QQ _ ... -'.~~I?~I?~~~ ~~.~bor Legal Ooscrlpllon M2769'5'··OOO ··12hI1983·'-eURL.INGIoti'NoRTHERi';;--: ET Ai. BOO'Kii'AGE-" 23 N 7 E 2. ALL OOC.,,840i'25 0712 M27696 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. E.T AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N 7 E 2S ALL LESS 4.0-1 AC BN RIW OOC.ilB40725 0712 (63S.96aCfes) M27697 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN-ET Ai. BOOK/PAGE 23 H 7 E 27 NON2 OOC.tl840725 0712 M27698 000 12f1f19ij3 BURLINGTON NORTHERN-£T AL BOOKIPAGE 2. N 7 E 29 All DOC.f#a40725 0712 M27699 000 6J8/19B9 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 23 N 7 E 31 ALL, lESS 25.17 ACS SOLD 8(107070392 TO THE STATE OF WA8Y OEED RECORDED 112311961 41181599. AND LESS 40.00 ACS SOLD BEING THAT PORnON OF THE N2 LYING EASTERLY OF S.R, 18 (PHS02). NORTHWESTERLY OF THE WEST BANK Of HOlDER CREEK AND NORTHERLY OF A LINE WHICH JS 2200 FEET SOUTH Of AND PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE Of THE NE4, (687,61 acres) M27700 000 121111983 BURliNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N· 7 E .1 HWY RNI ACROSS lOTS 2, 3, OOC.#840725 Ne:4SW4. W2HW4. NW4NU 0712 (26,17 ilCfH) M27701 000 121111983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKJPAGE 23 N 7 E 3' NE OOC."840726 0712: M27701 000 12f1/19a3 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET At. BOOKIPAGE 23 N 7 E 3. NESE OOC."e40725 0712 M277{)2 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. BOOKIPAGE 23 N 8 E 3 NENE DOC,'840725 0712 AKA lot1 (47,8acres) M27702 000 1211/1983 SVRLlNGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. BOOKIPAGE 23 III 8 E 3 SE.NE DOC.I840725 0712 . AKA Lot 5 (42.9 acres) M27703 000 6/8/1989 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -~ Al BOOKIPAGE 23 N 8 E 7 ALL a907070392 M27704 000 5126/19813 BURLINGTON NORlHERN -a AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N • E 11 N2 8806280227 Page 37 cf66 Interest 1.000000ClO 1.O<J00OOClQ 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1,00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 .. '0 'll '" .., ~ .l! ~ '" <:> '" ... Co <:> <:> .. f:l u Il ~ '" ... • ~ " • I!i "" ~ u o Q '. "" il! • ~I '~ '-' "'", '. '" ... 0<:> ," '" ....... Q, ."i ., " " u ~ ~" ~~ , , ~ '" ~ g '" ~ ~ ~ o N Exhibit A Attached to and made a part Qt (hat certain StatGment of Claim to Mlnorallnlorest dated Novombor 21. 2008. for Ktng County, WA FIle" S~ffb: Oated G.rantors Book Page T R Sect QO Reception Numbor . M27705 'cicio-121"111963 "BuRii'NGTON "NO"RTHERN ~ 'a"Ai.. -'800K.fPAGE 23 N 9 e 1 W2SW 00C.;6I840725 Legal Oe-scrlptlon Interust 1.00000000 0712 M27705 000 12/t/1983 BURliNGTON NORTHeRN· ET AL aOOK/PAGE 23 N 9 E 1.00000000 OOc,,840725 Lol10 (21 acres) 0712 M2770S 000 12/1J19B3 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 23 N 9 E 1.00000000 00C.fil840725 lot 11 (21 aetes) 0712 M27705 000 1211/1983 8URtlNGTDN NORTHERN· ET AJ. BOOK/PAGE 23 N 9 E 1.00000000 00C.#840725 Lot 1 (19.65 acres) 0712 M2770S 000 12/111 BB3 BURliNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKfPAGE 23 N 9 E 1.00000000 OOC.#840725 Lo112 (4D acres) 0712 M27705 000 12/1/1gea BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 23 N • E 1 1.00000000 OOC."'840725 Lot 13 (40 acres) 0712 M27705 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At BOOK/PAGE 23 N • E 1.00000000 DOC.#840725 Lot 14 (40 acres) 0712 M27705 000 12/111983 BlIRUNGTON NORTHERN -er IV... BOOK/PAGE 23 N • E 1.00000000 DOC.#840725 lot 15 (37.5 acres) 0712 M:27705 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET IU. BOOK/PAGE 23 N • E 1.00000000 DOC.#S40725 lot 16 {40.1 acres} 0712 M2770S 000 12/1/1963 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET At BOOKJPAGE 23 N • E 1.00000000 DOC.#840725 lot 17 (40 acres) 0712 M27705 oo,~ 1:2/111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -El Al BOOK/PAGE 23 N • E 1.00000000 000,#640725 0712 lot 18 (-40 acres) M27705 000 1211J19B3 aURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 23 N • E 1.00000000 DOC.tla.40725 0712 Lot 19 (40 acres) M27705 000 12/11t 983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al BOOK/PAGE 23 N 9 E 1.00000000 OOC.fUl40725 0712 La! 20 (!i!:1 acres) M2n05 000 12/111983 BURUNGTON NORTHEF!~-Sf fJol. ·BOOKIPAGE 23 N • E 1.00000000 OOC.#E!4C72~ 0712 lOt 2 \3-1Aactesj M2n05-000 12/111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET M... BOOK/PAGE 23 N 9 E 1.00000000 DOC.#840725 0712 Lot 5 (37.4 acres.} Page 3-8 of 66 ~ ... 0 0 '" I!. 0': '" '" '" .; 0 '" '" .. 0 0 '" ~ 0 0 '" ~ .,.; .. ~ ~ " • ~ .. ~ ~ 0 0 '" .. .. ~I ~u '" .. ", ~ .. 00 .... '" .. " .~ .. " " o • ~" H ; ~; ~ '" I ~ co o o N Exhibit A Attached to and made a part Qfthat certain Statomont of Claim to ~norallnroroa.t dated Novembor 21. 2008 ror King County, WA File f ~urh Dated, ,_ Gra~tors" Book Page T R Sect QQ Roceptlon Numbor I.iIgal Description . M2770S' 000' 12i,i1983' BURLINGTON NORTHERN :ET-Al. BOOKJPAGi: 23 N 9 E 1 DOC.1I840725 Lot 6 (36.55 aCfes) 0712 M27705 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN" ET AL BOOI(JPAGE 23 N • • DOC."840725 lot 7 (41.4 aero.) 0712 M27705 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -Er AL BOOK/PAGE 23 N 9 E OOC.#840725 l..ot e (40 acres) 0712 M27705 000 12J1/19S3 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N 9 E 00C,#B40725 lot g (40 acres) 0112 M27706 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 23 N • E , ALL DQC.'840725 0112 M27707 000 12f1J1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 23 N 9 E • S2$2 DOC.,840725 0712 M27708 000 1211/1983 eURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL. eOOKJPAGE 23 N • E 7 NENW OOC,tt840726 0712: M27708 000 12(1/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 23 N • E 7 NWNW DOC.#8-40725 AJ<A Lot 1 (35.11 acres) 0712 M2770a 000 12{1/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET Al BOOKIPAGE 23 N • E 7 SENE DOC.#840725 AKA Lot 7 (39.81 aaes) 0712 M2n08 OCO 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -E.T Al BOOK/PAGE 23 N • E 7 SENW OOC.'840725 AKA lot 5 (39.07 acres) 0712 M277CS 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOK/PAGE 23 N • E 7 SWNF. DOC.tl840725 AKA Lot e (39.44 acre$) 0712 M2770e DCC 1211115183 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET AL BOOK/PAGE 23 Ii • E 7 SWNW OOC.t#84072~ 0712 AKA Lot 2 (34.15 acres) M27708 coo 12/1/H183 BURlINGTON NORTHERN -ET M. BOOK/PAGE 23 N • E 7 W2NE DOC.#840725 07t2 M:2:n09 000 1211/H183 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET M. BOOK/PAGE 23 N • E • N2NW !)OC.1I610?25 0712 M21709 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOK/PAGE 23 N 9 E 9 NWNE OOCM40725 0712 AKA L.ot 1 (31.4 acres) Plilge 39 of $6 Interest. 1,00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.0'0000000 .1.00000000 1,0000000D 1.00000000 t.OOOOoooO ::: ... 0 .., .. ~ ~ '" .., '" '" .; 0> '" ... .; 0> " '" ~ U 0 " '" ,!l '" ., " ~ " ~ !!! ., " ~ § u 0 " ., ., :li " ,;,I " 0 '~ 0 "'", .. '" "'" 00> '~ '" .,,, 0. 'ro! '. " " u • . .., ~ ~ 51 t_~ ~ en § en o .... ~ ex> ~ Exhibit A Attaehe(l to and made-a part of 1hat cortaln Statomont of CIO\Im to Mlnoral Inloroet Clatod Novombctr 21, 2Q08 'or King County, WA FUll # Suffix Catad Grantors Book Page T R Sect QQ RQcoptEon N~m~er ... ___ ~~,,~.I. D~~crlpdDn M27709 000' " 12i1i,g"sa "BURUNGTON NOR'Ti-iERN-~-ET At. BOOMAGE .-23 N 9 E 9 SENW 000.#840725 0712 AKA Lot 3 (38.6 acre$-) M2770Gl ODD 12/1/1983 aURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE .. N 9 E 9 SWNE OOC.#S40725 0712 AKA lot 4 (32.4 acres) M27709 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKIPAGE . 23 N 9 E 9 SWNW OOC.fI840?2' AKA Lot 2 (38.4 scres) 0712 M27710 000 1211/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AI. BOOKIPAGE 23 N 9 E 11 NENE 000.'840725 AKA Lot 1 (39.05 aCtes) 0712 M2771G 000 12/1/1983 eURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AI. BOOKIPAGE 23 N • E 11 NESW OOCil840725 AKA Lot4 (39.75 aetes) 0712 U27110 000 121111983 aURL1NGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. BOOKIPAGE 23 N • E 11 NWNE OOC.tl840725 AKA Lot 2 (44.2 acres) 0712 M27710 000 121111983 8URLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al.. BOOKIPAGE 2l N 9 E 11 NWSW oOC .• e<0725 AJ<A Lot fi (44 acres) 0712 M27710 000 1211/1983 8URlItiGTON NORTH~N. ET Al BOOKIPAGE 23 N • E 11 SE OOC.*84072~ 0712 M27710 000 1211/1983 BUR.LINGTON NORTI-iERN· ET AL. BOOKIPAGE 23 N • E 11 SENE DOC.#640725 0712 M27710 000 1211/19B3 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N • E 11 SESW DOC.fl8401:25 0712 M27710 000 12h/198S BURLINGTON NORTHERN· EfAl BOOKIPAGE 23 N • E 11 SWSE DOC.tl840725 IU(A Lot 3 (44 ..... 8Cf&l!l) 0712 M27710 000 12/111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At -BOOKIPAGE 23 N • E 11 ~wsw· DOC.tl840725 AJ<A. Lot 6 (43.45 acres) 0712 M27111 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL aOOKIPAGE 23 N • E 15 NENE DOC.1I840726 AKA Lot 1 (44 acres) 0712 M21711 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N • E 15 NESW DCC.#&4C725 AKA Lol .... ("",2.&CtQSi) 0712 M27711 000 1211/1ge3 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -~T AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N • E 15 NWNE OOC.W0726 AKA. Lol2 (48.25 acres) 0712 PagEl'O cf 56 Interest 1.00000000 1.00000000 1,00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 LoooooOoo 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 ::: ~ '" .. t. ;: ... ~ '" o '" ... '" o o '" ~ o o " ~ !i " :il " • :1! " i g " .. " H ." !J '<", .. ", "'" 00 ." '" "", .~ " " " o G ." ~~ " .:! ~ en I ~ ~ Exhibit A Att<lched to and made a part oftha. certain Statomont of Claim 10 MlflQrillntc-rosl datod Novombor 21. 2008 for King County, WA File * Suffix Dated Grantors Book Pa~~ T R Soet QQ R~c.o.ptl.~~ Num~~ Leg~I.De.sc:riptlon . M.27711 , 000" 12i1/1983' BURL.fNChoN 'NORTHERN :-E1'-&" . "BOOK,iPAGE 23 ii{ "s -E"" 15 NWSW DOC.tl840725 0712 AKA Lot 5 (40.8 acres) M27711 000 1211/1963 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET N.. aOOK/PAGE 23 N , E 1S 52SW DOC.#84072S 0712 M27711 000 12/1/1963 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET N.. BOOKIPAGE 23 N , E 15 SE DOC.'840726 0712 M27711 000 121111983 SURuNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N • E 1S SENE OOC.t6040726 Q712 M27711 000 121111983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -E=:T AJ.... BOOK/PAGE 23 N • E 1S SWNE oOC.'8<40n5 AKA lot 3 (41.5 acres) 0712 M'27712 000 121111983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL 800K/PAGE 23 N , E 21 E2NE DOC.'840725 0712 M27712 000 12/111983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOKIPAGE 23 N , E 21 NWNE DOC.#S-40725 AKA Lot 1 (37.55 acres) 0712 M27712 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOKIPAGE 23 N , E 21 SWNE DOC.#S40725 AKA lot 2 (36.4 acres) 0712 M27713 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 23 N • E 27 NENE AKA lot 1 (41 :97 acres) -88062-80227 M27713 000 ~12611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL. BOOK/PAGE 23 N '9 E 27 NWNE 880628D227 AKA Lot 2 (43.74-ac:res) M27713 000 '512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 23 N 9 E 'll SENW 8806280227 M2771l 000 S/26J1988 eURUNGTONNORTHERN· fTAt BOOK/PAGE 23 N 9 E 27 SWNE 8806280227 M27714 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOK/PAGE 23 N • E 3S N2 8806280227 W.27715 000 5126/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· E.l Al BOOK/PAGE 24 N S E 3 SESW 8$062$0227 M27716 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· E.T AL BOOK/PAGE 24 N 5 E 11 NE4SE4 LESS 1.43 AC SOLD DOC.#-B40726 (36.57 acres) 0712 M27717 000 12/1/1963 BURUNGTON NORTt-ERN" E.T Al BDOKIPAGE 24 N S E 21 S2NWSW DOC .• 84072ti Q712 M27718 000 1211/HIB3 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOKIPAGe 24 N • E 23 E2NE DOC.jB40725 0712 P8.ge 41 of66 Interest 1.00000000 1.COOOOOOO 1.00000000 ~ 1.00000000 ... 0 '" ... 1.00000000 ~ ~ 1.00000000 '" .... '" ... 1.00000000 .; " " .... 1.00000000 .. " " " 1.00000000 E: U 1.00000000 0 Q 1.00000000 ~ Q 1.00000000 '" ..., " 1.00000000 :il .; 1.00000000 • ~ 1.00000000 ..., " 1.00000000 w 9 U 0 1.00000000 " .. ... ~ ~ ~~ "' " "", .. ,,> "'" 0" " "> ...,,, "-'''i '. n ~ ." .9!~ .. ( ! -en i ~ -co ~ File"N Suffix M27718 000 M2771'9 QOO M27719 aoo M27720 000 M27720 000 M27721 000 M27721 000 M27721 000 M27721 000 M27721 000 M27721 000 M27721 000 M27722 000 M27723 000 M2n23 000 Exhibit A Attached toO and made iI part of that celtlln Statement of Claim to Mlmnal lntoroat datod Noyombor 21, 2008 fOf King County, WA Dated Grantot'$ Book P,gc T R Sect QQ __ R;~~~.e~£,:n, ~_u_~~~~ . ... -,. _ .. _._ .. _ .. _ .. -.. __ .. _. . BOOK,iPAGE" 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL 24 N 5 E 23 NESE OOC.'840725 0712 1211/19&3 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AJ.. eOOK/PAGE 24 N • E 3 NWSW DOC.tlB40725 0712 12/1/1983 BURI.INGTON NORTHERN· ET M. BOOK/PAGE 24 N 6 E 3 SWNW DOC.,e40725 0712 1211/1983 BURliNGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOKIPAGE 24 N • E 5 SE 000.#840725 0712 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 24 N • E 5 SENE OOC.#S40725 0712 1211/1Q83 BURLINGTON NORTHERN-ET AI.. BOOK/PAGE 24 N • E 13 N2SWSW DOC.#840725 0712 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET AL BOOK/PAGE 24 N 6 E 13 NWSW DOC,#840725 0712 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL. BOOK/PAGE 24 N B E 13 SESW DOC.iI840725 0112 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET Al BOOK/PAGE 24 N • E 13 SESWSW DOC.IM0725 0712 12/111983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET n. BOOKIPAGE 24 N 6 E 13 SWNW DOC.tte40725 0712 12/1J1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKIPAGE 24 N • E 13 swse DOO.#840725 0712 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET .AI.. BOOK/PAGE 24 N 6 E 13 SWSWSW DOC.#M0725 0712 1211111383 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET 1'l... BOOK/PAGE 24 N. 6 E ,. SESW DOC.#8"'0725 0712 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -El AL BOOK/PAGE 24 N 6 E ,. N2SE DOC.1I8<!D72S 0712 121111983 8URlINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOK/PAGE 24 N • E ,. NWNE DOC.'&40725 0712 Page 42 of 66 LegalOescrlption Interest 1.00000000 1.0000DOoo 1,00000000 .. '" 1.00000000 ... 0 ... ... 1.00000000 :g, 1.00000000 .:: '" '" .. 1.00000000 .; c " '" 1.00000000 ., c c " 1.00000000 El " 1.00000000 .Ij ~ Q 1.00000000 .., ., 0 1.00000000 ~ " ~ 1.00000000 :1: ., 1.00000000 i § " 1.00000000 0 Q ' • ., ~ ; ~~ ," " "'", .. ., 0<0 oc ," ., ., .... 0. .... " " " " . ~" IU'l :1' (,! ~ III i ~ :g o N Exhibit A AUached tQ and mads.\l part of tha. certain Statomon1 of Claim to Mlnorallnterest dlltod NOYBfnbCl'r 21, 2008 forKing County, \'VA FUo'# Suffix Dated Gr'oIIntors Book Page T R Sect QQ Reception Numl;\er Legal Ooserlptjon M2'723000 12/1iis8a"·BuRUNGrON NORTHERN" li·f·Al SOOK/PAGE· 2. N 6 E I. NWNESW OOC.tI840725 0712 M27723 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN" ET AL BOOK/PAGE 24 N 6 E ,. SWSW DOC.'M072S 0712 M27723 000 12/1/1963 BURLINGTON NORTHERN" ET Al SOOK/PAGE 2' N e E ,. W2NENESW OOC.fl840725 0712 M27723 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN ~ ET AL BOOK/PAGE 2. N • E ,. W2SENE DOC.tl340725 0712 M27723 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN" ET AL BOOK/PAGE 24 N • E ,. WEST !SO FEET OF NORTH DOC .#840725 990 FEET OF FRACTIONAL (]712 NWNW. SOUTH 200 FEET OF lHE WEST.9 FEET Of GOVT lOT 1 (7.5 "", .. ) M27724 000 12/1 "983 eURLINGTON NORTHERN ~ ET AL BOOK/PAGE 2. N • E 21 NESE DOC.#640725 (]712 M2n24 000 121111;8:1 BURliNGTON NORTHERlII. ET AL BOOK/PAGE 24 N • E 21 SENE DOC.#840725 0712 M27725 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 2. N • E 23 S2NW DOC.#84CJ725 (1712 M27726 000 1211/1983 BURliNGTON NORTHEmN~ ET Al BOOK/PAGE 24 N • E 2. SENE DOC.*S40725 0712 M2n26 000 121111983 BURliNGTON NORTHERN" ET AL BOOK/PAGE 24 N • E 2. SENWSE DOC.#840725 0712 M27726 000 121~/19a3 BURlINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 24N 6 E 2. PART SW4SW4, SE4SW4, DOC.#840725 SE-4SE4. NE4SE4. lESS BN 0712 rvw.LESS STATE ROAD (1'3.01 ocr .. ) M27727 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN ~ ET Al BOOK/PAGE ·24 N 6 E 2. ABANDONED RJW ACROSS DOC_"'40725 S2S2. NW4SW4. NE4SE4 (13.5 0712 ~Ct8s) M27728 000 712011987 BURUNGTON NORTHERN ~ ET AL BOOK/PAGE 24 N 6 E 2. TRACT IN N2NW4SE4 (.51 9102061075 acres) M27729 000 1211/1983 eURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At BOOKIPAGE 24 N • E 27 S2SE DOC.#a40125 0712 M27729 000 1211/1"983 aURLINGTON NORTHERl'oI· ET At BOOK/PAGE 2. N 6 E 27 DOC.#840725 N E4SE4, lESS 4.09 AC RNi 0712 (35.91 acres) Page 43 of66 Interest 1,00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 '.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.0<:1000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 '-00000000 1.(]OOOOOOO 1,00000000 1.00000000 '" '" ... o '" ... ~ ol: ~ .. <> .... ... '" <> <> .... ~ a '" ., ~ ~ ~ ::'! ., I o Q .. ., § ; H ." " "' .. '. '" 0'" 0<> -" '" " .... n. 'rot ., ~ ~ o • ~"o ~~ j: ~ ~ :ll g en ~ ~ co ~ M27732 000 12/1/1983 flURUNGTON NORTHERN. ET AL M27733 000 512611988 BURLtNGTON NORTHERN· ET Al M27733 000 512611988 eURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET At M27733 000 512611966 BURl1NGTON NORTl-ERN· E:T At M2n33 000 5126/1968 BURLlNGTON NORn-ERN -ET 14. M2n33 .ooa 5i28J19a8 BURLINGTON NORTl£RN -ET 14.. M27733 000 512611988 BURLiNGTON NORH£RN -ET n. M27734 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. I:T M.. M27734 000 1211/1983 BURliNGTON NORTJ-IEHN· ET Al M27734 DOD 121111983 BURliNGTON NORTHERN -ET Al M27734 000 1211/1'983 BURliNGTON NORTHERN -I:T AL M27734 000 121111'983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At M2773S 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al M27735 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al Page 44 of 66 BOOKIPAGE OOC.#S4072S 0712 BOOKfPAGE OOC.#840725 0712 BOOKIPAGE DOC.'840n5 0712 BOOK/PAGE DOC.'840725 0712 E 24 N 6 E 2' N 6 E 24NSE: 24 N 7 E 24 N 7 E 24 N 7 ~ 24 N 7 E- 2. N 7 E 24 N 7 E 24 N 7 E 24 N 7 E 24 N 7 E 24 N 7 E 24 N 7 E 24 N 7 E 24 N 7 E 2' 2' 35 35 17 17 _17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 21 21 Interest 1.00000000 W2 1.00000000 N2SW 1.00000000 NW 1.00000000 ~ 'I< 0 NWNW 1.00000000 10 .. S2NW 1.00000000 ~ • SESW 1.00000000 .. ... . ", SWNE 1.00000000 10 .; c SWSE 1.00000000 '" ... W2NENW 1.00000000 to c c E2E2 1.00000000 '" r:l u 0 N2S2SWSW 1.00000000 " ~ N2SW 1.00000000 '" .. ~ N2SWSW 1.00000000 ~ ~ • S2S2SWSW 1.00000000 :1! .. NENE 1.00000000 ~ ~ U NWNW 1.00000000 0 " " .. llli ~ ~I ~(.J '" .. ", 0'" 00 ," '" .. " '" .... <. ~ ~ u • . " · ~ " " (!!. ~ en :g § '" ~ :g o '" Exhibit A Attached to and mado a part of lhat certain $tatoment of Claim to MlnOfallnl.OrOit dated Novembor 2.1. 2008 for King County, WA FiI& /I Suffix Dated Grantors Book Pago T R Soct QQ ... _._.,,_~o~p.t!~n,~u~b~_r. Legal OnC:riptloll -_. '.,. . ... __ ... .. . .•... ,,_ ...... ,._-... M27735 aDO 12'1119B~ OURLlI'IIGTON NORTI~eRN. ET AI.. 800KJPAGE 24 N 7 E 21 SWSW OOC ..... 0725 0712 M27736 (lOa 121111 9S30 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET AI.. BOOl<iPAGE 24 N 7 E 27 NWNENW DOC.#840725 0712 M27737 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET /tL. BOOKIPAGE 24 N 7 E 27 NENENW 880.6280227 M27737 000 S12aJ19S8 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI... BOOKIPAGE 24 N 7 E 27 S2NENW 880.6280227 M27737 00.0. 5/26/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN _:ET AI.. BOOKIPAGE 24 N 7 E 27 SENW 88062602~7 M;21138 000. 12/1611988 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. BOOKIPAGE. 24 N 7 E 29 ABANDONED RIW ACROSS 8812291307 SW4 M27739 000 12/1611988 8URUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 24 N 7 E 30 ABAHDONED RIW ACROSS 8812291307 S2 (7 aeres) M27740 000 61811989 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. BOOKIPAGE 24 N 7 E 31 E2 LESS NORTH 160 FT 8907070392 'THEREOF (311.62 acres) M27741 000 1211/Ht83 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET PI.. BOOKiPAGE 24 N 7 E 31 FRL W2 lESS NORTH 150 FT 000.#840725 0712 THEREOF (309.95 acres) M27742 000 12/111983 BURUHGTON NORTHERN· ET At. BOOKIPAGE 24 N 7 E •• ALL DOC ...... 07 .. 0712 M27743 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOKIPAGE 24 N 8 E 2. SESE OOC.#84D725 0712 M27744 ODe 212411989 BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOK/PAGE 24 N 8 E 31 LOTS 3 & 4, lESS 20.92 AC AFj91 02061 0 75 HIGHWAY RMI (59.14 acft!!S) M27745 000 1211/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET At SOOK/pAGE 24 N 8 E .. NWSE OOC.#84072S 0712 M277<46 000 512611982 BURUNGTON NORTHERN-ET AL BOOK/PAGE 24 N 8 E 31 E2SW 8606280227 M27746 000 ~6J1966 eURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 24 N • E 31 SWSE 8606260227 M27746 000 5126/1966 BURliNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 24 N • E 31 HIGHWAY RIW ACROSS .8a06280227 SW4SW4 (20.92 ~cres) M2?74'! 000 !211!198-' 9UR:UtfI3TON NO~I-IERt.! -ET At BOOKJPAGE .. N 9 E 2. "E DOC.#840725 0112 M27748 DOO 5126J1986 BURLINGTON NORTHERN ETA!.. BOOK/PAGE: 24 N 10 E 7 All 8806280227 Page 45 of 66 Interest 1.0.0.000.000 1.0.00.00.00.0- 1.0.0.0.00.0.00. ., 1.0.00.0.0.000 '" ... 0 1.0.0.0.00.0.00. " .. 1.00000000 & 1.00000000 ~ .. '" 1.00000000 ::l 1.0000000D '" <:> '" '" 1.00DOOQOO .; <:> <:> '" ,.00000000 ~ U 0 Q 1.00000000 ~ 1.00000000 '" ., Q ~ 1.00000000 ~ ~ 1.QOOOOOOO II! 1.00000000 ., ~ 1.000QOCIJO § U 0 Q " 1.00000000 ., ~ ~ ,;;Ii " 0 ." " "I", '. "' Q'" 0<:> ." "' .,,, " '1'1 '. ~ ~ u ~ ~'O )J!.~ , , -en ~ 8 ~ -:g ~ Exhibit A Attached to and made a part of that certain 51atemont of Claim to MlnoraJ Interest datod Novt'rlnbDr 21, 2008 for King County I WA Flle,# Suffix Dated Gr~ntors aook Pago T R Sect QQ Roceptlon Number Legal Description Interest M27749 000 sl26/19sa' BURLiIliGlONNORi"'HERN. ET AL BOOKIPACE 24 N 10 E 9 SW 6907070392 M277S0 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· H AL BOOKr'PAGE 24 )If 10 I:: , E2 690(l2a0227 M27750 000 5126/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOK/PAGE 24 N 10 E , NW 8B06280227 M27751 000 5126/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BooKIPAGE 24N10E 11 ALL 8806280227 M27752 000 1211J1963 BURLINGTON NORTHERN' ET Al BOOK/PAGE 24 N 10 E 15 N2NE DOC.#840725 0712 M27752 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 24 N 10 E 15 NWSE DOC.#840725 0712 M2nS2 oaa 1211J1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BooKiPAGE 24N10E 15 SWNE DOC.#840725 0712 M27752 000 1211/19133 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At BOOK/PAGE 24 N 10 E 15 W2 00C.#840725 0712 M21753 000 Sl26J1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al BOOKJPAGE 24 N 10 ~ ,. ALL B806280227 M277li4 QOO 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET At BOOK/PAGE 24 N 10 E 23 SESE OOC.'840725 0712 M27754 000 12(1/1963 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -,ET Al BOOK/PAGE 24 N 10 E 23 SESW DOC.;l640725 0712 M27754 000 1211/1963 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKIPAGE 24 N 10 E 23 SWSE 00C.*840725 01~2 M27154 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN-ET AL BOOK/PAGE 24 N 10 E 23 SWSW DOC.#840725 0712 M21755 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN-ET AL BOOK/PAGE 24 N 10 E 25 NENW DOC.#8407:25 0712 M27755 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOK/PAGE 24 N 10 E 25 NWNE OOC.#840725- 0712 M27155 ODO 12f111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN-ET AL BOOKIPAGE 24 N 10 E 25 NWNW DOC.#$40725 0712 M27755 000 12/111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al BOOK/PAGE 204 N 10 E 25 $ENW DOC.#840725 0712 Page 46 of 66 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.QOOOOOoo 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 A¥A L(lt 1 ("~,76 acm;) 1.00000000 AKA lot 3 (44.13 acres) 1.00000000 AJ<A Lot 2 (043.45 acres) 1.00000000 AKA Lot 4 (44.82 acces) 1.00000000 AKA. Lot 3 (as.S6 acres.) 1.00000000 AKA Lot 2 (36.69 acres) 1.00000000 AKA Lot 4 (3:9.12 aetas) 1.00000000 AI<A lot 8 (38.73 acres) :: 'll .. .. !l. ~ S '" o '" ... .. o o '" ~ ,g ~ '" " • ~ " • :1! " I o o " '. " ~ . . d "'", .. ." ... 00 ... ." " .... '~" ~ ~ ." ~~ ; ~~ ~ m o 8 '" o N ~ ., ~ M27756 000 121111963 eURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AI... M27756 000 12/1tH~8::J BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET & M27756 000 121111953 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET fIJ.. M27756 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al M27756 000 12/1/1983 BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET Al M27757 000 512611988 aURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At M27768 000 12/1/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN-ET Al Pagl!47 0166 BOOKIPAGE DOC.#640125 0712 BOOKIPAGE DOC..#a..0725 0712 BOOKIPAGE DOC.#840725 0712 BOOKIPAGE DOC.'840725 0712 BOOl<lPAGE DOC.#840126 0712 BOOK/PAGE sooe250227 BOOK/PAGE Doo.#840725 0712 24 N 10 E 26 24 N 10 E 2' 24 N 10 E 27 24 N 10 E 27 24 N 10 E 27 24 N 10 E 27 24 N 10 E 27 24 N 10 E 27 24 N 10 E 27 24 N 10 E 27 24 N 10 e: 27 24 N 10 E 27 25 N 8·E 5 25 N 9'E 13 SWNE SWNW NESW NWSE NWSW S2NW SESW SW SWNE SWSE SWSW mSE NW NE AKA Lot 7 (33.46 acres) AKA Lot 5 (32.86 acreS) Interest 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 ,.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 ., '" " 0 '" .. ~ • 0, ... '" '" .,; 0 '" ... .; 0 0 '" El 0 0 Q ~ Q .., .... • ~ ... • ~ .... ~ 0 0 Q ., .... lUi ~~ ... " "'", .. ", ."' 00 ... '" "r--.~ '. ~~ !!I~ : . .. ' '" I ~ DO ~ Exhibit A Attachod to and made a part of that certain Slatcment or Claim to Minotalll'ltemsi dated Novomber 21, 2008 for6'Ung County, WA FHe" Suffix Dat-EId Grantors Book Page T R Soct .... q~ . ___ ., ... ~.~ptl.o.~ Numbor LAgal Doscrtptlon M277SS' 'oo'ij' "12i;ii9S3 'SUR'LING'TON 'NORTHERN': ET Ai.. -BOOKiPAGf~ . . __ ...•. ,_.-,--" .. 2. N g E 13 S2 DQC.ttB4C725 0712 M27759 000 9!21119QO BURliNGTON NORTHERN -ET M... DOC 2ti N 12 E , 52SE "-9010310136 M277S9 000 9121/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET PJ... DOC 25 N 12 E , GOvr lOT 1 LESS BN RIW, #9010310136 LOT 2 (76.01 acnts) M27760 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET N-BOOKIPAGE 26 N 5 E 3 STRIP OF lAND IN SW4NE4 DOC.t840725 (3.62 aaee) {]712 M27761 000 12/1/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET N.. aooKIPAGE 26 N • E 25 NENW DOC.tII840725 0712 M27762 000 5126/1006 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· I::T At BOOKIPAGE 26 N • E 2. W2SE4NE4 AND LOTS 1 & 3 iN 6800280227 KING COUNTY S1iORT PlAT NO 12S002aR LOCATED IN THE E2SE4NE4 (30 aetas) M277S3 000 5126/1986 BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET At.. BOOKIPAGE 26 N 6 E 3' NWSE 66062E10227 M27764 000 12/111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. eOOKIPAGE 2. N 9 E SesE DOC.'B40725 AKA Lot 14 (38.87 acres) 0712 M27764 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET N.. BOOKIPAGE 26 N 9 E W2SE OOC.'B40725 0712 M27765 000 1211/1983 BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET At.. BOOKIPAGE 26 N • E • NESW DOC.tlB40725 AKA Lot ,. (37.01 .Cres> 0712 M277S5 000 1:2/111983 SURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKIPAGE 26 N 9 E • NWSW OOC.tlB40725 AKA Lot 13 (37.94 acres) 0712 M27765 000 1211/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN. ET At BOOKIPAGE 2. N • E 3 SENW DOC:'&40725 AKA Lot 11 (37.69 acres) 0112 M27765 000 1211/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET Al BOOKIPAGE 26 N • E 3 SESW I;)OC,'840725 0712 AKA Lot 15 (38.12 ."es) M27765 000 12/1/1983 BURUNI3TON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOKIPAGE 2. N 9 E 3 SWNE DOC.'840725 0712 AKA Lot 10 (39.17 acres) M27765 000 12i1i19fs3 BURLiNG10N NORTHERN· ET Al BOOK/PAGE: 26 N 9 E 3 SWNW DOC.I840725 0712 AKA Lot 12 (37.69 acres) M27765 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -El At BOOKIPAGE 26 N 9 E 3 SWSW DOC.#84072$ AKA Lot 16 (38.25acfln) .0712 Page 48 oti6 Intorest 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 ., '" ... 0 1.00000000 0 "' 1,00000000 ~ • .. ... '" 1.00000000 '" ,,; 1.00000000 0 " ... '" 1.00000000 0 0 " 1.00000000 El " 0 " 1.00000000 ~ .., .., 1.00000000 " :il " 1,00000000 • :I! 1.00000000 .., " • 1.O(lQ(JDODO 9 " 0 " '. .., 1.00000000 H ' ... " "'", '. "' "'" 00 .... "' ..,t- .~ .. ~ " u • ~'O ~~ 1.11 ':;;! -aJ I i N Exhibit A Auac:hed to and made a part of that certain Statemont of Claim to Nllnotallr'lterost datod November 21, 2008 fot KIRg Count~, WA File" Suffix Dated Grantors Book p~~.~ T R Soct QQ ~eceptloR Numbet Logal Description M27765 000 , 2'1/1·"9·8·3 fIlJRLING·"{ON ·N·ORTHERN· ... ET AI. BOOK/PAGE 26 N 9 E 3 OOC.1840725 LOT 3 (42.1 e acres) 0712 M2778S 000 1211119B3 aURLINGTON NORTHERN .. ET AL BOOK/PAGE 26 N • E 3 DOC.#840725 0712 lOT 4 (41.06 acres) M2i'7SS 000 1211/1.963 BURLl'iGTON NORTHERN .. ET Al BOOK/PAGE 2. N • E , OOC.ft40725 LOT 5 (37.39 OIelE'S) 0712 M2i'7S5 ODD 121111933 BURLIN.GTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOKfPAGE 26 N • E 3 OOC .. #840725 LOT 6 (37.39 acres) D7l2 M27766 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN .. ET Al BOOK/PAGE 26 N • E 5 NENE DOC.#S40725 AKA lot e (40 acres} 0712 M21166 000 121111983 BURlKiG70N NORTHERN .. ET AL BOOK/PAGE 26 N • E 5 NENW DOC .. #840725 AKA Lot. (40 acres) 0112 M277SS 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN .. E.T Al BOOK/PAGE 26 N • E 5 NWNE DOC.#840725 AKA Lot 7 (4Q acre,) 0712 M27766 000 121111983 BURLING70N NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE ,. N • E • NWNW DOC.#840726 AKA Lot 5 (40 acres) 0712 M27766 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOK/PAGE 2. N • E • SENE 000.#840725 A¥.A lot 9 (40 acres) 0112 M27766 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN .. E~ AL BOOKIPAGE 2. N • E 6 SENW OOC.#840725 AKA Lot 11 (40 acres) 0712 M2778S 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al BOOK/PAGE 26 N • E 5 SW OOC.#640725 Q712 M27766 000 12.11/1983 I3URUNGTQN NORTHERN .. ET Al BOOKIPAGE 2. N • E • SWNE OOC.tI840725 AKA L-ot 1 0 (40 acres) 0112 M2:7766 000 121111983 eURUNGTON NORH£RN· ET Al BOOKJPAGE 16 N • E • SWNW DOC.#840725 0112 AKA Lot 12 (.0 aaes) M217e6 000 1.211/1983 BURLINGTON NORU£RN· ET AL BOOKIPAGE 26 N • E • DOC.#e40725 0112 1.0T i (39,1 acres} M27768 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON HORTt-ERN .. ET Al BOOKIPAGE 26 N • E 5 DOC.#840725 LOT 2 (38.93 acres) 0712 P~ge'" of 66 IntefQ51 1 .. 00000000 1,00000000 1.00000000 .. '" ... 1.00000000 0 ... '" 1.00000000 1:. 1.00000000 : ... .. '" 1,00000000 .; 0 '" ... 1,00000000 .. 0 0 '" 1.00000000 l:l U 0 Ci 1.00000000 ~ Ci ,.00000000 '" ... • 1.00000000 ~ " ~ :1! 1.00000000 ... 1.00000000 ~ § U 0 1.00000000 Ci •. ... ;i ~ g'§ .~ <.J "' .. .. '" ... 00 .~ '" ....... 0. .... '. " " o ~ ~" ,9:!~ <: =: ~. ~ o :fi f;I ~ CO g '" Exhibit A Attached to ilnd made a part: orthat 1;:O'rtaln Statoment cf Claim to Mlnarallnterest dated Novombtl..-21, 20118 'or King COl,lnW. WA File # ~ffix Oated, _ _', "(irantors,, Book, ' _PagG T R Seet QQ Reception Numbor Legal DOSCriPtlOn 'M27766 000 '12/1I1'9s-a'"sURtINGTONNORTHERN::ETAt. . "sOOKiPAGE .... 26 N 9 E 5 OOC.1840725 LOl3 (311.77 acres) 0712 M27766 000 12/111983 aURLINGTON NORTHERN _liT N.. BOOKIPAGE 26 N • E 5 DQC.'840725 LOT 4 (38.6 acres) 0712 M27767 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET N.. BOOKIPAGE 2. N 9 E 7 E2W2 OOC.#840725 0712 M27767 000 121111983 BURliNGTON NORTHERN -El' A1.. BOOK/PAGE 2. N 9 E 7 NENE DOC.fI8.40726 AKA Lot 1 (39.91 acres) 0712 M27767 000 12/1/1983 aURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AI. BOOK/PAGE 2. N • E 7 NWNE DOC.#84072S AKA lot 2 (3g.91 acres) 0712 M27767 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET N.. BooKlPAGE 28 N 9 E 7 NWNW DOC.l¥i40125 fJ.J<A Lot 3 (45.22 a;crea) 0712 M27767 000 1211/1983 eURUNG10N NORTHERN -ET AI... BOOKIPAGE 28 N 9 E 7 NWSW OOC.#840725 AKA Lot 7 (44.35 Bcres) 0712 M27767 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI... BOOKIPAGE 26N 9 E 7 SENE DOC.1I840726 At<A LoOt 6 (39.72 acres.) 0712 M27767 000 1 :V1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHE:RN. ET AI... BOOK/PAGE 26 N 9 E 7 SWNE OOC.#a40725 AKA loiS (39.72 ilcres.) 0712 M21767 000 121111983 BURliNGTON NORTHERN -e.T AI.. BOOK/PAGE 26 N 9 E 7 $WNW DOC.iI#840725 AKA lot 4 (44.79 acres) 0712 M27767 000 121111983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -E.T AI.. BOOK/PAGE 26 N • E 7 swsw DOC.#94072s 0712 A'AA. Lot 8 (43.92 acres) M27766 000 12/111983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AI-BOOK/PAGE 26 N 9 E 11 SW DOC.'S40725 07f2 M27769 000 121111983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AJ.. BOOK/PAGE 26 N • E ,. N2SE DOC.#940725 00712 M27769 000 121111983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET ~ BOOK/PAGE 26 N • E 15 NE OOC.#8407'S 0712 M27769 000 1211/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET N.. BooKiPAGE 2. N • E ,. NESW DOC.#840725 0712 pag&50 ot" Interest 1.00000000 1.00000000 , .000000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 ., '" ... 0 '" '" & .l: ,., '" '" ,,; 0 '" ,., .; 0 0 '" ~ U 0 Q ~ '" ., 0 :il " • .0: ., 0 ~ u 0 Q .. ., tj i H ;;jtJ '" .. ", 00> 00 .~ '" .,,, 1>. .... " n ~~ £ .... ~ o o en l'il iii l'il Exhibit A Attached to and made a part 01 that cortaln $tatomont of Clarm to Mlner'allntor8litdatod Novombor 21, 2006 for King COUflty, WA fU. #-Suffix Dated Gr.anlOni M2776e "000'· 1·2I1/1·983··BURliNGTON ·NORT'HERN ~·E·fAC·· M27770 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27771 000 5126119Ba BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27772 000 9/21/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27772 000 9/21/1890 aURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. M27172 000 9/21119\)0 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al MV772 000 9/21/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27772 000 9121/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET Al M27772 000 9/21/1990 eURLINGlON NORTHERN -ET AL M27772 000 9121/19&0 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27m 000 9/2111990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI... M27772 000 Qi21/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET AI.. M27773 000 9/21/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27773 000 9/21/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27773 000 912111'£190 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27773 000 Q/21/1111i10 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -'ET AL M27773 000 912111990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· CT AL M27774 000 9121/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al M27774 000 9121'199D BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al M2n74 000 912111990 BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M2n74 000 912111990 BURLINGTON NORfHERN -ET AL Page 51 ofEi& Book Page 800KIPAOe -, " DOC.tt840725 0712 BOOKIPAGE OOCJiB40726 0712 BOOKIPAGE 8806280227 DOC #9010310136 DOC .9010310136 DOC #901D310136 DOC ;ll:Q010310136 DOC 119010310136 DOC ifil010310136 DOC #9010310136 DOC #9010310136 DOC #9010310136 DOC #9010310136 DOC 119010310136 DOC #9010310136 DOC #90100.10136 DOC '9010310136 DOC #9010310136 DOC . #9010310136 DOC #:9010310136 DOC #9010310136 T R 26 N 9 e 26N10E 26 N 1(.1 E Sect ,. 26 N 10 E 3 26 N 10 e. :3 26 N 10 E 3 26N10E 3 26 N 10 E 3 26 N 10 E 3 26 N 10 E 3 26 N 10 E 3 26 N 10 E 3 26 N to E 101 26 N 10 E 11 26 N 10 E 11 26 N 10 E 11 25 N 10 E 11 26 N 11 E 26 N 11 E 26 N 11 E 26 N 11 E QQ ~~.~~p~~ .. ~~.!,!~r .... ~~I CesarJpuon SESE N2 SE N2NW AKA lot 3 (49.67 acres) NESE A1<A Lot 5 (23.33 aCMa) NESW AKA Lot 7 (37.2 acres) NWSE AKA lot 6 (33,95 acres) SESE AKA Lot 8 (28.68 acres) SESW SWSE W2SENW AI<A lot 4 (21.6 acres) W2Sw NESE AKA Lot 7 (32.92 aere$) NWSE AKA Lot 8 (38.4 acres) S2SWSE AKA lot 12 (13.61 acres) lOT 11 [i.74 aaes) LOT 13 (21.13 acres) NENE AKA Lot 1 (39.95 a~s) NENW AKA Lot S. (:)v.74 acres) NWNE AKA Lot 2 (39.84 acres) NWNW AKA Lot 4 (3Q.B3 acres) Interest 1.00000000 1.00000000 1,00000000 1 JlOOOOOOa 1.00000000 1,OOO{lOOOO 1,00000000 1,00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.0000ClOOO 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1 .{lQaOOOOa 1.00000000 ~ 'll .., '" 1l. 0': ... ::: '" c '" ... '" c c '" ~ 8 ~ .., .... ~ " • ~ .... I o Q .. .... ~ 0 d o 0 " tJ "", .. ", 0'" 00 " '" .... " n. 'I'"j '. g~ !I ~ " q -eft :g ~ ~ -IX> o ~ Exhibit A Aitsehed to and made a part of that cortaln Stat&mont of Claim to Mlnorallntorost ctatod November 21,2001 rot King County, WA File # Suffix Datod GrantOrG M27774 000 9/2111990 BURlINGTON"NOR"rnERN· ET AL M27774 000 111/21/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AJ.. M27775 CDC 9/21/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET AL M2777S 000 9/2111990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al M27775 000 9121/1990 BURLINGTON NORTt-lERN· ET AL M2777S 000 9/21/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27775 000 9/21/1990 8UJ:tuNGlON NORTHERN. ET AL M21775 000 9/2111990 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M21776 000 9121J1990 BURUNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M2nn 000 912111990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M21IT6 000 9/2111990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27778 000 912111990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27779 000 9/21/1990 BURLING10N NORTHERN· ET AL M27779 000 9121/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27779 000 9121/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M2n79 000 9/21/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET AL M2n79 000 912111990 BURLINGTON NORTI-ERN· ET AL M27779 000 912111990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. M27TBO 000 912111990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. M27780 000 912111990 RU~I.INGTON NORT~N. 8" "'t M277BO 000 91'2111990 BURL.INGTON NORTHERN· £T AL M27780 000 9/2111990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET & Page 52 of66 Book Page DOC: #9010310136 DOC #9010310136 DOC #9010310136 DOC #9010310136 DOC #9010310136 DOC fl.9010310136 DOC #9010310136 DOC #9010310136 DOC "010310136 DOC 119010310136 DOC '9010310136 DOC #9010310136 DOC '90t0310136 DOC '9010310136 DOC '9010310136 . DOC #9010310136 DOC #9010310136 DOC #9010310136 DOC #9010310136 DOC '#9010310136 DOC 19010310136 DOC fi01031013.ES T R So-CI 26Nl1E 26N11E 26NllE 3 26N11E 3 26 N 11 E 3 26 N 11 E 3 26 N 11 E 3 26 N 11 E 3 26 N 11 E 9 26 N 11 E 10 26 N 11 E 12 26 N 11 E 12 26 N 11 E 13 :26 N 1 t E 13 26 N 11 E 13 26 N 11 E 13 2~ N 11 E 13 26 N 11 E 13 26 N 11 E 15 2E-N ~1 E 1~ 26 N 11 E 15 26 N 11 E 15 QQ S2 S2NO NENE NENW NWNE NWNW 52 52M2 E2 ALL E2NE NO NOS2 SESE SESW SWSE SWSW N2NW N2SE NE Roception Numbor ~~ga.l" ~ltac:r1.pdGn AKA L011 (40.3-4 ac~lIl$} AKA lot ~ (40.18 acres) AKA Lot2 (40.26 acres) A't<A Lot ... (4fO.1 acres) SE4SE4 LESS E2NE4SE4SE4 (3 ...... ) AKA Lot 1 (40.91 acrelJo) AKA lOt a (44.S4 acres) AKA Lot 2 (42.72 acre9) AKA Lot 4 (46.35 acres) F"Rl N2, FRL Sf4 AKk GOvr LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4 (218.24 acreS) Interest 1,00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000(100 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 t.oooooooo 1.00000000 '.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1 ,0000.0000 1.00000000 1.00000000 ~ ':: " .... E ... ~ '" o '" ... ., o o '" fl " c!l ~ "" ., ~ " ~ ~ '" I o Q '. " ~I ... " ><", ' ..... . ., 00 ....... "' .... 0. .... '. ~ ~ 0'" JI ~ .', .. : § g en ~ ~ ., g N Exhibit A Attached to 4lnd m~de a part oftbat certain Statement of Claim to Mlnorallnterosldatod Novltmber 21. 2008 forKing County, WA FUe # Suffix Dated Granton Book Pago T R Se<;:t QQ Roc&ptlon Numbor M:2i7e·1'·OOO-'·-5i26i19~i8·-'IiURUNi3"iON-NORfHERN7'ET·Ai-·· BOOKJPAGf -:i6 """"1--E 19 W2' -- 88D6280227 _l:-e.g.!LI!."~.~ptlon ll'ller.st M27782 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NO~THeRN -ET AL. M277113 COO 9/2111990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27784 000 121111963 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. M27785 000 9121/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. M27785 000 912111'990 8URL.INGtON NORTHERN· ET AJ... M27785 000 912111990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Ai. M27785 000 Qr'21J1geO BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. M27785 000 9J2:111990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al M2774S 000 9/21/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27786 000 9/21/1990 9URUNGTON NORTHERN-ET & M27786 000 '912111990 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET PJ.. M27786 000 "912111"990 BURLlNGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. M27786 000 9121J1990 BURLINGTON NORTJ.lERN -ET AI... M277S7 000 5/2611 e88 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET PL. M277B7 000 1512611 e8e BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET N.. M27766 000 912111S90 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al Page 53 0166 BOQKlPAGE DOC .*840725 0712 OOC .9010310136 BOOK/PAGE OOC.#840725 07,2 oce #901Q31 0136 oce 1:8010310136 oce #9010310136 OOC 19010310136 oce #9010310136 oce #Q01C13010136 oce 19010310136 OOC iIIOO1C:3010136 DOC fl:9Q103101a8 DOC Il19010310136 BOOK/PAGE 8806280227 BOOKIPAGE 8806280.227 DOC 1901(l310136 26 N 11 E 22 26 N 11 E 25 26 N 11 E 26 26 N 11 E 31 26 N 11 E 31 26 N 11 E 31 26 N 11 E 31 26 N 1~ E 31 26 N 11 E 31 21;1 N 11 £ 33 26 N 11 E 33 26 N ,1 E 33 26 N 11 E 33 26 N 11 E 33 26 N 11 E 33 26 N 11 E 35 SE NENW NWNW NWNWNE NWSW SWNW SWSW NWNW S2SW SWNW NENW SENW LOTS 1, 2, 8, N2NB4lESS PT CONVEve:O BY oeEO TO USA (SPA), PT OF N2NE4NW4 LYING EAST OF BeCKLER RIVER, S2N2SW4 LYING WEST OF BECKLER RIVER, PT OF LOT 9 LYING SOUTH OF BN R1W, SE4SE4 LESS 8N RIW (224.44 acres) PART OF LOT S (2eJI acres) AKA Lot S (33.44 attN) AKA lot 4 (52'.99 aetas) AKA lot 8 (6.9 aaes) AKA LotS (46.-46 acres) AKA Lot 6 (4S.68 aetas) AKA Lot 7 (48.25 ;acres) AKA Lot 2 (36.3 acres) GOvr lOTS"", 5, W2SE4lESS WEST 26-4 FT OF NORTH .95 FT AKA l.ot 1 (31 acres) AKA Lot 3 (32.5 BCCe$) FRL S2 A'AA GOVT LOTS 1.2.3.-4.5.6,7,8 (299.7 aaea) 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1_00000000 1.00000000 1_001]00000 ,.ooaODDOO 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1:00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 ::: 't ~ ~ .:: S '" '" '" ... '" '" o '" El o Il ~ '" .. ~ ~ ~ :! .. i o o Q .. .. fl! ~ d '<", .. ", ~'" 00 ... '" ..... . ~ .. ~ ~ ~'R " : : ~ ~, '" ... 0 0 0 '" 0 '" ~ Exhibit A QO 0 Au.ched to and made 8 part of that certain Statomont of Cfabn to Mlnorallnterosl datod Novombol' 21, 20Q8 for King County, WA 0 '" File #I Suffix Dlted G"ntors Book .~.ge T R S.oI QQ Roceptlon Number l..oga' OeSCrlpuon "M2778S 000' '9121/1'990' Bli'RiTNGTOt·.iNORTHERN-·"ETAl. DOC 26 N 12 E 2. THAT PART OF SE4$E4 ~O10310136 LY~G SOUTHERLY OF aN RIW (35,71 acfes) U:27790 000 9121/1$90 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At. DOC 26 N 12 E 27 THAT PART OF S2SE. & .901031<1136 SE4SW. LYING SOUTHERLY OF BN: RIW (38.4 acres) M27791 000 912'11990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL DOC 26 N 12 E 28 THAT PART OF THE S2 I.YlNG #90103100136 SOUTHERLY OF ON RIW, AKA.: PT OF $W4SE4 & SE:4SW4 LYING SOUTH OF BN RJW (20,23 acres) M27792 000 91'21/1990 8URLINGTON NORTHERN. ET At DOC 26 N 12 E 30 E ./3RnS OF S 314TH OF #9010a10136 SE4SE4 (20 acras) M2779:) 000 9r'21J1990 BURL.INGTON NORTHERN -ET AL DOC 26 .N 12 E 31 N2NE4HE4, W2NS' LESS eN #9010310136 RR RIW, AN D LESS COUNTY RO; GOVT LOTS " 2, 3, 4, SE4 LESS BN R1W; PT OF N2SE.NE4 LYING WEST OF FOSS RIVER & EAST OF BN RlW LESS 100' GREAT NORTHERN RJW; E2W2 LESS COUNTYRD, LEsseN RIW, LESS PT LYING WITHIN THE SHORELINES OF THETYE FUVER (548.8 acres) 1.12779. 000 1211J198:3 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL BOOKIPAGE 26 N 12 E 31 S2NENE OOC.'840725 0112 M217S5 ODO 31211967 BURL.INGTON. NORTHERN -ET AL SOOK/PAGE 26 N 12 E 31 PART OF NE4NW4 LYING AF#U1Q20610 SOUTHWESTERLY OF 75 SKYKOMISH RNER & NORTHEASTERLY OF US HWY 2 (2.7 acres) M21796 aDO 9121/1990 BURL.lNGTON NORTI-lERN· ET AL. DOC 26 III 12 E 3' NENW #9010310136 M27796 000 0121J1990 BURL.lNGTON NORTHERN· ET Al DOC 26 N 12 E 32 NwSE #90103.10136 M217516 aDO 9121J1990 BURL.lNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL DOC 26 N 12 E 32 SWtIE #9010310136 M21796 ODO 9/21J1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL DOC 26 N 12 E 32 PT NW4NE4 LYING SOUTH OF #9010310136 8N RIW. SE4NW4 LESS aN ft/4, SB4SW4 LYiNG EAST OF BN RlW, W2SW4 LYING WEST OF eN Rf'tN. NE4SW4 LESS BN RIW (19 acres) . Page 54 0166 Interest 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.000000000 1,00000000 t.ooOOOooo 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 '" '" ~ '" "> t. .:: ~ '" <> " ... ., <> <> " f:l o 2 ~ .., .., o ~ " • .0: j o 2 " .., § ; ~~ ," " "'", " "> 0" 0<> ," "> ..,,, .~ '. " " o • ~.., !1:! " ::: r' '" !!l 0 0 '" 0 N ~ Exhibit A 00 0 AtUlched to ilnd INd •• Pilrt of that certain Statemer"t of Claim to Mlneralln\orest d"atod NowmtKtr 21, 2008 for King Count~. WA 0 N File" SuNix Dated Grantors Book . ~~~e T R Soot aa Roc:optlon Number Logal Doscrlption Interest .. , .. ,-,., .... ' .. . -_ ........ __ .... _---,.'._._' --,--, --. --." M27797 000 9121/1990 eURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI. DOC 26 N 12 E 3. N2NE4. NW4NW4, lESS 9.30 1.00000000 #9010310136 AC 8N RJW AKA: N2NE4, NW4NWII, LESS PT LYING WITHIN BN RI'rN (11Q.7 ~es) M2779S 000 9121/,900 BURLlHG'I'ON NORTHSRN· E. ... AL DOC 26N13E 5 NENE AKA Lot 1 (39.36 acres) 1.00000000 '901D310136 M27798 000 0/21/1990 BURUNGTONNOkTHERN-eTAL DOC 26 N 13 E S NENW AKA Lot 3-(39.04 acres) 1.00000000 "010310136 '" .. M277aS 000 9/21/1990 eURU'IIGTON NORTHERN -ET AL DOC 26 N 13 E S NWNE AJ<A Lot 2 (39,2acre5) 1.00000000 ... '9010310136 0 M27798 000 9f2111990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL DOC 26 N 13 E S NWNW AKA. Lot 4 (S8.flS acres) 1.00000000 .... #9010310136 .. M2779S 000 9121/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· Er AL DOC 28 N 13 E S 52 1.00000000 ~ #9010310136 M27798 000 &12111 990 BURLINGTON NORTHeRN· ET AL DOC 26 N 13 E 5 il2N2 1.00000000 ~ .. #9010310136 .... M27799 000 &121/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL DOC 28 N 13 E 7 E2 1.00000000 '" .. 19010310136 '" M27799 000 9121/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL DOC 26 N 13 E 7 E2W2 1.00000000 <:> #9010310136 '" .... M27799 000 912111900 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL DOC 2e N 13 E 7 NWNW AKA Lot 1 (44.11 acres.) 1.00000000 cO .9010310136 <:> <:> M27799 000 912111990 eURLINGTON NORTHeRN· ET AL DOC 26 N 13 E 7 NWSW AKA lot 3 (43.99 acres.) 1.00000000 '" tJ;90t0310136 i:l M27799 000 El121/1eao BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL DOC 26 N 13 E 7 SWNW AJ<A Lot 2 (44.05 acres.) 1.00000000 u #9010310136 0 M27799 000 912111990 IlURLINGTQlII NORTHERN -ET AL. DOC 26 N 13 E 7 SWSW 1.00000000 '" #9010310136 "AKA Lot 4 (43..93I1Cte$) ~ M27800 000 9121/1990 eURLlNGTDI',I NORTHERN· ET AL DOC 28 N 13 E Q ALL 1.00000000 '" 19010310136 '" ... M27801 000 512611968 BURLINGTON NORTHERN ~ ET Al BOOKIPAGE 26 N 13 E 13 PART OF W2NW4, NW4SW4 1.00000000 ~ 8806280227 WEST OF OMDE (40 acres) i! M27802 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At. BOOKIPAGE 26 N 13 E ,. HWY RJW ACROSS NE., SW4, 1.00000000 k saoe280227 PART OF NE4 LYING NLY OF ~ NLY RIW LINE OF HWY ,.15 I'! (113.56 oiii1cr"-) M27803 000 5126/1988 BlJRL.INGTON NORTHERN· ET N.... BOOKJPAOE 26 1\1 13 E ,. S2NE4 SOUTH OF STATE 1.00000000 B806280227 H(GHWAY. S2 LESS 23.76 AC ... ~ HrGHWAY RNI (356.44 acre$) § M2780~ :Jce ~f2~JH'9C S:":RL.:NGTCN fljCRTHE~,," • ET Ai.... DOG 26 jot 13 E 17 ALL 1.00000000 #9010310136 u 0 M27805 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET I't.. BOOKIPAOE 26 N 13 E 21 HWY RJW ACROSS E2 (55.55 1.00000000 " "" ... 8806280227 acres) § ~ M27806 000 512811988 BURLING rON NORTHERN· ET N.... BOOK/PAGE 26 N 13 E 23 ALLLE$S 2s.o AC 8N RJW 1.00000000 ~I 8806280227 {615 acres) "" '-' «", hge 5S of 66 "" .. ~ .. 0<:> "" .. ....... Q, '0-1 '. b ~ ~] . ' ::: ~' '" ... g g ~ -ex> o ~ Exhibit A Attached to and made a part of that certain Stat9ment of ClatJn to Mll1Orallntorest datoCSWowmber 21, 20Ga for King County, WA Fire. Suffix Dated "", '" "Gralltcws , Book P .. go T R Sect QQ RocuptlonNl,lrnber LogaloescrfptlQn Interest M2ie07 000' 5126/1988 BuRLINGTON 'NORTHERN'~' ET AL" . BOOJ<JpAGE 26 N 13 E 27 HIGHWAY RJW ACROSS 1.oo0oo00D eS062B0227 N2NW (11.63 actes) M2780S 000 S/26J19t1B ElURUNGl'ON NORT~N -eT No BOOKIPAGE 26 N 13 E 27 ALL LESS 1S.76AC RlW '.00000000 M27809 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al M27B10 000 12/1/1983 eURllNGtON NORTHERN· ET No. M27810 COO 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AI.. M27811 000 61'2611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· El.AI.. M27811 000 512611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. ET AL M27812 000 W21/1990 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27813 000 1113/198~ BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27B14 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al M27815 000 12/1/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHeRN -ET AL M27816 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET Al Page 660f66 6$062802.27 (624.24 acres) BOOK/PAGE DOC-'840725 0712 BOOKIPAGE DOC..#840725 0712 BOOK/PAGE OOC.#8«J726 0712 BOOKIPAGE 8806280227 BOOKIPAGE 8806280227 DOC #9010310136 BOOK/PAGE AFiJ91020010 . 7. BOOKlPAG~ DOC. 8407250712 BOOKIPAGE ooc~ 8407250712 BOOKlPAG~ DOC' S4C172S0712 26 N 13 E 28 SWSE 26 N 13 E 29 S2NWSE 28 N 13 E 29 2G N 13 E 29 NESE 26 N 13 E 2!i1 26 N 13 E 30 26 N 13-E 30 24N4E8 1.00000000 1.00000000 THAT PART OF S2SE4, 1.00000000 SE4SW4, S2NE4SW4 lYING NORTHERLY OF RiW, INCLUOING 0.28 ACRE RIW IN SW4SE4 (106.66 acres) 1.0000000D N2NW4SEA. lESS GN RR RIW 1.00000000 (11.72acre&) THAT PARr OF SE4 LYING 1.0aoooooo SOUTHWESTERLY OF BN R/W, AKk. SE4LESS BN RIW AND LESSPTlYiNG NORTHWESTERLY OFTHE NORTHERLY BN RJW LINE AS DEEDED TO STATE OF WASHINGTON UNOER RECOfWING NUMBER 902100863 (143.76 acres) THAT PART OF N2SE4 LYING 1.00000000 NORTHEASTERLY OF eN RiW (5.2" acres) CITY OF SEATTt.E, PART OF 1.00000000 VACATED 8TH AVE SOUTH LYING .BETWEEN LOTS 12 TO 15 INCLUSIVE IN BLOCK 248; AND lOTS 6 TO 9 INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 24 •• ACCORDING TO PLAT THEREOF (.4S acres) SEA-TIlE. CITY OF. BlK 135. 1.00000000 SEA TILE -TIDE LANDS, PART OF lOT 4 AND. PARTS OF VACATED ALLEY IN LOT 4 SEAme, CITY OF. SEATTLE 1.00000000 TIDE LANOS, 8lK 139, PARTS OF LOTS8.10 ~ .... o ., '" i E '" " '" ... ., " " '" ~ 8 ::- " " .., ~ " • ,0: .., I o Q " .., in ~~ ." tl .. ", '. '" ~., 0<> ." '" .., .... . * .. " " o ~ ~" ~ ~ ::: ~' en CD § !;j -00 ~ Exhibit A AttachlXl to and made a part of that certain Sla.WmQnt of Claim to Minerai Intere'5t datQd Novombor 21, 2008 ror KlnS County, WA File # Suffix Dated "Grantors Book Page T R $oct QQ RoceptEon Numbgr LIl'gal DQ3crIptJon Interast M27817 000 1211/1983 eURL1NGTON NORTHERN· ET AL BOOt<IPAG~ SEAlilE, CITY OF, BlK 140. 1.00000000 M27B18 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27819 000 12/1/1'983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27820 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27821 000 12/1/1983 BURliNGTON NORTHERN. ET AL M27822 000 1211/19a3. BURliNGTON NORTHERN· ET AL Page 57 oU$ DOC. SEATlE TIDE LANOS, PARTS 84072150712 OF LOTS 1.3,1"·16, AND lOT. AND PARTS OF DOC* 84<17250712 BOOKIPAGE DOCO 84<17250712 BOOKIPAGE DOCO 8407250712 BOOK/PAGE DOC# 84C17260712 BODKIPAGE DOC# 8407250712 24 N 4 E a 24 N • E 8 24 N 4 E 8 24N.4E 8 24 N "E 8 VACA TEO ALLEY THEREIN SEAlTLE, PART Of VACATED 1.00000000 8TH AVENUE SOUTH BETWEEN BLOCKS 243 AND 250, SEATTLE TIOELANDS ADDITION SEATrlE. B1.OCK245, 1.00000000 SEATTLE TIDE LANDS, LOT 5, LOTS 6 THROUGH 9 SEATTLE. CITY OF. BlK 248. 1.00000000 SEATTLE TIDE LANOS SUBDIV, STRIP OF LAND 32' WIDE EXTENDING NORTH & SOUTH THROOGH eLK 248. ALSO PRT OF LOTS 16 TO I., BLK 246 LYING EASTERLY OF' A LINE PARAllEL AND CONCENTRIC WITH PERPEN~CULARl Y DISTANT 17.0' EASlERL.V OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF 8TH AVENUE SOUTH, AS ESTABlISHED BY ORDINANCE NO. 23591. (.46 acres.) CrrYOf SEATTLE, BLOCK 1,00000000 24/;1, SEATfLE TIDE LANDS, WEST 27.50 FEET OF EAST 50 FEET Of LOTS 12 THROUGH 14 CITY Of SEATTL.E. BLOCK 1,OOOOClOOO 250, SEATTLE TIOE LANDS -SUBOMSlON, WEST 225 FE~ Of LOrS 1 THROUGH 11. EXCEPT WEST 114 FEET OF LOTS ., 10, AND 11 AND WEST 114 FEET OF S2.25 FEET OF LOTS ~ ~ ., .... ~ ~ S ., o '" .... 0> o o '" ~ " ~ '" .. ~ :i! ~ ~ :1! .. i 8 " .. .. H ," " "., ...... 00> 00 ," .... ..... . ~ .. " " o • ~" Jill! " i g en <> N ~ :g ~ Exhibit A Attacbed to and made a part of that certain Statomont of Claim to MlnorallntorQt cLatod Novambor 21, 200B ret 1(1ng County I WA File _" SU,fflx, ,[l",ted _, _ _ , Gr4l1Rtors, Book Pago T R ~. Soct QQ Reception Number Lega.De$CrEptiCIoI1 M2is23 000"" i2{1iig83"Bi.iRLINGTOHNORTHERN~·ETAl BooKiPAGe-24 N 4\ E 8 $EATTU~, BLK 252, SEATTLE M27S24 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al M27825 000 121111081 eU~INGTON NORTHERN· ET AL M27826 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· 5T AI. M27B27 000 12/1/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET Ai. COCtI TIDE lANDS, PARTS OF LOTS 8407250712 3, 4,17 -20; PARCEL CALLED PARTS Of LOTS 1,2,3,20.21.22. BLK 252, ALSO PARTS OF LOTS 7,8,9,10,11, elK 252; PARCEL CALLED PART Of LOTS 1.2.3,4,5.6 IN 8LK 252; PARCEL CALLED PORTIONS Of LOTS 12 THROUGH 18 INCLUSIVE AS ESTABLISHED BY ORDINANCE NO, 23691, ALL DESCRIBEil MORE fULLY IN DEED TO MILESTONE. BOOKIPAGE OOCI 8407260712 BOOK/PAGE DOCI 8407250112 BOOKll'AGE OOCI $407250712 BOOK/PAGE OOCI 8407250712 24N4E 8 24 N 4 E 8 24 N 4 E 8 24 N 4 E 8 seA TILE. CITY OF. BlK 2:;3. SEATTLE nOE LANDS, LOT t1 AND AU. THOSE PARTS OF lOTS 1 TO 10 LYING SOUTHEASTERLYOF A LINE DISTANT 15' AS MEASURED RADIALLY FROM RAILWAYTRACK CENTERLINE DESCRIBED BY METES AND BOUNDS IN DEED TO MILESTONE; ALSO PARTS OF LOTS 6 TO 9 IN au< 253. DESCRIBED AS SEPARATE . PARC~LIN. DEED. SEATTLE, CITY OF, BLI(254. SEATnE TIDE LO.NOS, flART OFLOTS 7-9 (.23 acres) SEATTLE, CITY OF. BLK 255, SEATTl.E TIDE LANDS, EAST22.5 FT OF lOTS 1-5, WEST 22.5 FTOF LOTS 6-10 SEATI1.E, CITY OF, BU< :!56, SEATII.E TIDE LANDS, ELY 25 FiOf LOTS 1-4, WlY25 FTOF LOTS 19 AND 20 ~Ilterest 1.00000000 1.00DOOOOO 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 M27628 000 12/1/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERtoI· ET No.. BOOK/PAGE 24 N 4 E 8 SEATTLE, CITY OF. BLK 278, 1.00000000 OOCII SEATILE TlOE lANDS, 6407250712 EAST270 FT Of LOiS 17 THROUGH 19 page is 0'66 ~ ~ ~ i r< ~ '" Q " r< '" Q Q '" ~ 8 ~ '" " ~ " • :1! .. i u o " "" .. !l! ~ ~I "" u "", ,,'" ~'" OQ "" '" ..... . ~ .. " " o • . " !II !t ," ':! ~ ~ o 5: ~ ~ N Exhibit A Attached to and made ill part oJtnat certain Statomont of Claim to Mlnorallntorost dated Novomber 21,2008 for Klng County, WA File # Suffix Dated Grantors M'27s29' 'oocr-'12i111"gii3--sLIRijNGTo-H-NoR"THERN'~ ET At. M27830 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27831 000 12/111983 BURLINGTON: NORTHERN· ET AL M27832 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN" ET AL M27-B33 000 12/1/1983 8URLINGTON NORTHERN-I';T AL M27B34 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27835 000 1211/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M278S6 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AI.. M27837 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN-ET AI. Page 59 Of 66 Book P41ge ··-SOOK/PAGE ... . DOC. 8407250712 BOOK/PAGE DOC# 6407250712 BOOK/PAGE DOCO 8407250712 BOOK/PAGE DOC# 8407250712 ·BooK/PAGE DOC# 6407250712 BOOKJPAGE DO"" 8407250712 BOOK/PAGE " DO"" 8407250712 BOOK/PAGE 00C# 6407250712 aOOIQPAGE DOC# 8407250712 T ~ 24 N "' E 24 N 4 E Soet • e 25 N 3 E 14 QQ ~ec~ptlon,.N~~~!~" ..... ____ ~.9!:1.I:).e~_~rJpUon SEATTLE. CITY OF, BLK 297, SEATTLE TIDe LANDS SU80IV PART OF N 50" OF VACATeD HANfORD 5T ADJOINING E 183' Of LOT 24: AND EAST 183' OF THE SOUTH 20' OF lOT 15; THE EAST183' OF LOTS 16 THRU 24 INCLUSIVE, BLt( 297. SEATTLe, CITY OF, BlK 300, SEATTLE TIDE LANDS, PART OFL01S 1 THROUGH 5 CITY OF SEATILE. BlK 103, DAVID T OENNYS 1ST ADDITION, LOTS 11·14, L.ESS EAST 17'. lESS NORTH 11.36' OF LOT 14 AND lESS WEST 5' CITY Of SEATTle, BLOCK " GILMAN'S ADDITION, EASTERLY 60 FeeT OF lOTS 20 AND 2': THOSE PORTIONS OF lOTS 4, '9, 20, 21 AND PORTION OF VACATED ALLEY, DESCRIBED BY METES AND IIDUNOS IN DEED TO MILESTONE SEATTLE, CITY OF, BlK 101, DAViC T DENNV$ ADcmON. lOTS 11 AND 12 SEAlTLE, CITY OF, Bl.K 1, BN NORPAC iNOUSTRIAL OIST al1 LOT 7 &8 (2.14 acres) SEATTLE, CITY OF, BlK-4 lOTS 1·5 & E 110' OF LOT (S . (7.41 acres) SEATTLE, CITY OF, BLK 18, LAWTON PARK SUBDIVISION, ALL lOT 4, PART OF lOTS I!I·U WHICH ARE LYING SOllTHWESTERl Y OF GILMAN AV SEATTLE, CITY OF, LADe'S 1ST ADOITION. PARTS OF LOTS 8-10 (.35 acres) Inter&6t 1.()OOOOOOO 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1,00000000 1,000000000 ::: ... o ... '" i!. <l! ... ::l '" Q '" ... ., Q Q '" f1 a ~ '!i ~ " ~ :1! ., i Q o " '" ., § ~ ~~ " .. u «", .. "> .co OQ " .. "> ., .... 0. ·rot '. " " Q • ~'" ~J:j I: '.': ~' en :g 8 ~ -"" ~ Exhibit A Attached to and made a part of tnal certain Statement or Claim to Mlnoral Interest dated Novcmb&r 21, 2Q08 for King County. WA FIID II Suffix, Dated ". .... .Gnmtora Book Page T R Soct QQ Roc,optlon Numbor Legalo.SCt1pUon Interest M2is38 'CiOO" ·1-v.,i,ila3· BURLiNG10N NORTHERN'-ET'AL BOOK/PAGE 24 N 4 E 6 .... _. -,. .. -SEATTLE, CITY OF, BlKS 5. 1.00000000 OOC# 12, DAVID S MAYNARD'S 8407250712 OOHATIOtoiCLAIM NO. 43, N. 3D' LESs STREET OF LOTS 5,6 BLK 12; NORTH 16' LOT 5, elK 5. (.08 acres) M27839 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN· ET At BOOK/PAGE 24 N 4 E 6 SEAmE, ell"'( OF, BLK 5, 1.00000000 M27640 000 1211i1!J83 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET AL. M27841 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET Al M27&4;Z 000 1211/1!J83 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ETA\" M27843 000 12111t983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN -ET A1. M27a44 000 12/1/1983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN-ET Ai.. M27-845 000 61811989 BURL.lNGTON NORTHERN -ET AL M27-S46 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN_ ET Ai M27847 000 1211/1983 BUA.L.INGTON NORTHERN -ET AL. PBge600166 DOC# DAVID S MAVNARD'S 8407250712 DONATION LANDCLAIM NO. BOOKIPAGE DOC. e407250712 BOOK/PAGE 000# 8407250712 BOOKIPAGE 000# 8407260712 BOOKIPAGE 000# 8407250712 BOOK/PAGE 000# 8407250712 BOOK/PAGE 8907070392 BOOKIPAGE DOC# 6407250712 BOOKJPAGE DOC# 6407250712 26 N 3 E 2 25 N 3 E 2 25 N·.3 E 2 25 N 3 E 2 26 N 11 E 35 20 N • E 25 24 N • E 2. 43, N. 15' OF LOT 5 (,01 ...... ) BAlLARO, CITY OF, BLK B. BRYGG~RS 2ND HOME ADDITION.VACATED STREETS ADJOINING SUBDIVISION BALLARD, CITY OF, BL~ 11, BRYGGERS 2ND HOME ADDITION.PART OF lOTS' AND. BALLARD, BLK 6, BRYGGERS 2ND HOME ADDITION, PART OF $AlOBLOCK (.28 acrea) BAllARD, CITY OF, 8LK 7, BRYGGERS 2ND HOME ADDITION, PART OF LOTS 5-7; PARTS Of LOTS 2 AND S; A TRIANGULAR PARCEL IN THAT PORTION OF WEST 57TH STREET, VACATED BYOROINANCe NO. 8.2757, ALL PARCElS OESCRIBED IN DEED TO MILESTONE CITY OF SKYKOMISH, BLOCK 3, TOWNSITE LOTS 11 AND 12 '.00000000 1,00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 CITY OF ENUMCLAW, BLK 5, 1.00000000 o H DICKSON CORRECTION PLAT, lOTS~, 4 (3.16 acres) CITY OF SNOQUALM(E FALLS, 1.00000000 BLOCK 24. NORTHEASTERLY 80 FEET OF LOTS 17 THROUGH 20 AND SOUTHEASTERLY 15 FEET OF NORTHEASTERLY 60 fEET OF LOT 16 (.18 acres) EARUNGTQN,CITYOF, 1.00000000 EARLINGTON lNDUSlRIAL PARK '1, LOT 6 (l(l,Ol 8CfeS) ~ ~ ::l il, ~ .. .... ::: '" c '" .... '" c c '" f:l 8 ~ " " ~ " ~ ~ " i ~ Q .• " ~ & ~~ .~ U "'", '. '" .'" oc .~ '" " .... . ~ " " " o G ." 1'~ !: _. '" :g 8 ~ -CO ~ Exhibit A AttachlBd to and made a part of that certain StatDmont of Claim to Mlnor;lll Interost<latod NovombQor 21, 2008 for King County. WA File # Suffix Dated GnlOtor, Book Pago T R Sect QQ Roception Numbor L-egat Detscrlptlon M302ia"ooa '12ii6J198S-eURLINGTON-'NORTHE'RN"iiAiiROAO'COMPANV DOC" 20 N 6 E 28 .. _ .. __ .. _ .... , ................. ,. PART OF SE4SW-4 M30278 000 12J1BJ19S8 BURI-INGTON NORTtlERN RAILROAO COMPANY 88122\)1307 DOC 8812291307 M30278 000 12116/1968 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY DOC 8812291307 M30278 000 1211611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY DOC 8812291:307 M30278 000 12/1611988 BURLlt-lGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY DOC 8812291307 M30278 COO 1:211 6/198a BURLINGTON NORTHERN IVJlROAD COMPANY DOC 8812291307 M30278 000 12/16/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY DOC 8812291307 M30278 000 1211611988 BURL1NGTOfi NORHtERN RAILROAD COMPANY DOC 8812291307 M30278 000 12/1611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY DOC 8812291307 M30278 000 1211611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAIlROAD COMPANY DOC 8812291307 M30278 (JO(J 12116/1988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAJLROAO COMPANY DOC 8a12:291307 M30278 000 12/1611988 BURL.INGTON N~RTHERN RAILROAD COMPANV DOC 8812291307 M30278 000 12/1611988 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAlLROAO COMPANY DOC 8812291307 M30290 000 21511991 PCTC INC. DOC '9010310136 ivi~2S1 we. iiii2."ii~ we. PGTe ii>iC DOC t90103t0136 M30292 000 9/2111990 peTC INC DOC t901031.0136 Page 810166 22 N '" E 13 22N6E27 22N6E 34 23N4E24 2:3N5E B 23 N 5 E 17 2"'N4E8 24N6E23 24N6E28 24N6E27 24NeJE30 24N7E29 26 N 12 E 25- 26N12£2i< 26 N 12 E 32 CI'N OF KENT. RAMSEY ADDITION, BLOCK 1: LOTS 1,2.11.12. BLK2:LOTS 1,2,10,11,12. PT LOTS 3,8.9. aLt< 3: lOTS 106; SlK 3, LOT 12 PARTOFW2SE PART OF SE4S£4 PART OF NE4NW4 PART OF SE4KE4 AND ,« AC PARCELJN SE. CITYOF RENTON, PARCEL A, SHORT PlAT NO 094~8S RECORDED FILE.8e02269002. AND CITY OF RENTON, SHORT PLAT NO SP S79-79, N 240'OF PARCEL 8. RECORDED AUDITORS FILE #7909249002 CITY OF SEATTLE, SEATILE TIDElANDS, BLOCK 282,. lOTS 6 AND 7 PART OF 52 PART OF E2 PART OF E2 PART OF 52 PARTOFSW4 PART OF S2 LYiNG SOUTHERlY OF BN RIW (2322 acres) PART OF 52 lYING SOUTHER!. Y Of BN RR RIW (17.258ete-i) ALL.-lESS 7.06 AC BN RR RMI (632.94 acres) Interest 1,00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1,00000000 1.00000000 1.00-000000 1,00000000 1.00000000 1.0000000a 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 '" '" ~ ::l ~ ~ s '" <:> '" ... <>0 <:> <:> '" ~ ~ '" .., • ~ " • ~ .., i o o " '. .., 51 ii H ;;it> '" .. ,,> .<>0 0<:> .,", '" ..,,, .~ " " " o w ." .!!I!:i ',I I,! ~ '" ~ ~ N ~ :g o N Exhibit A Attached to and mad. a part of that cor1aln Stiltom'll'nt of Claim to lPtllInorallntotOat ~atod Novembor 21, 2008 for King County. WA _FII&:' Suffix Da~_8d__ _ ___ Grantol'$ Book Page T R Soct QQ RecoptionNumbor L.egaJOOSCtlptkm M303lJa-000-12I'i/1990-GlAcIER-PAAK-COMPANY BOOJ<lPAGE 26 N :3 E 14 CtTYOFSEATTLE,GILMAN'S M30401 000 1:2/111990 GLACIER PARK COMPANY M3040a. 000 1211/1990 GlACIER PARte; CO~PANY M30411 000 1211/1990 GLACIER PARK COMPANY M30568 000 61811969 peTC INC M30566 000 61811989 PC'TC INC M30see. 000 61811969 PeTC INC M30563 000 61811969 PeTe INC 91040501a2 ADDITION, BLOCK 1, THAT PART OF LOTS 1, 2 ANO 3 LYING NORTHEASTERLY Of BOOKJPAGE 9104050185 BOOKIPAGE 9104050184 BOOK/PAGE 9104050183 BOOKIPAGE a907070397 SOOKIPAGE 8~0707~97 SOOK/PAGE 8907070397 BOOKIPAGE S907Q703Q7 24N4E 6 25 N .. E 31 21 N 6 E NENW 21 N (I E NESW 21 N 6 E 1 NWNW 21 N 6 E 1 S2NW THE SOUTHWESTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTHWEST ROW Ll'<E OF GILMAN PLACE WEST SEAnL.~ CITY OF, GII.MAN PARKADOITION, BlK 7r), ALL OF L.OTS a, C, AND 22·24 SEATTLE. CITY OF. SEATTLE nOE LANDS. BLOCK 297. LOTS 15TH ROUGH 24, INCLUSIVE AND BLOCK 313, LOT515 THROUGH 24,INClUSIVE, DESCRIBED BY METES AND BOUNDS IN OEED TO MERIDIAN OIL. INC. SEATTLE. CITY OF. SEATTLE TIDE LANDS. BL.OCK 188, THE WESTERLY 16' Of LOTS 1, 2, 3 AND 4. ACCORDING TO THE PLATTHEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME ST OF PLATS, PAGE 1. KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON, AKA lot 3 (42.88 acres) AXA Lot 4 (43.09 acres) lmerest 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000- 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 M:30592 000 61811989 BURliNGTON NORTHERN El Al SOOK/PAGE 21 N 6 E 2 A PARCEL OF LAND lYING 1.00000000 8907070391 Page 62 of6e SOUTHERLY OF THE aN RR RlWAND NORTHERLY OF THE RAVENSDALE·BLACK DIAMOND ROAD LOCATED IN THE NEf4 MORE PARllCULARl Y DESCRIBED IN DEED TO PLUM CREEK TIMBER CO INC (,7 ..... ) ~ ~ " '" ~ .:: S '" <> '" ... Co <> <> '" I:l " .!l ~ !'i o :Il " • ~ j o o " ' . .., H " <J "", .. ,,> "Co 0<> " "> "" 0, '00[ '. n .!Ill ,,' '::: .. ' ~ o o ~ ~ :;:: Exhibit A Attached kI and made a part of that cert4lln St,~ol!'lont of Claim to Minerallnlorost datod Novomber' 21, 2008 for King County, WA File # Suffix Dated Grantors Book Page T R Soct QQ RecepUon Number Legal Descrtption Intwest 'M30642' 000 '1V1i1'9i3-"eu'RU"NGTON N'ORi~N'ET AL ---SOOK/PAGE 24 N 4 E e SEATTLE, CITY OF, $EATII.E 1.00000000 M30643 000 12/1119$3 BURLINGTON NORTHERN ET AL M30691 000 12{1f1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD CO M30S92 000 1211/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD CO Page 63 of6S N/A l'JOE:LANOS ADDITION, SLK "'S, ALL THAT PORTION OF THE MOST EASTERLY 50' OF LOTS 12 TO Hi,lNCLUSIVE ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, DESCRIBED MORE FULLY IN DEED TO MILESTONE. BOOK/PAGE NlA SEATILE NORTH, CITY OF. UlK 101 0 T OEtfNY'S 5TH ADDITION, lOTS 7-10 LESS THE WEST 4' THEREOF 1.000QOOOI) BOOK/PAGE 8407250712 24N4EB SEATTlE. CITY OF, BLKS24S, 1.00000000 BOOKJPAGE 8407250712 .2GO, SEAITlE llDELANDS: BEING TH E WeST 60' OF lOT 6 EXCEPT THE SOUTH 10' THEREOF: THE WEST 52' OF THE NORTH 22' OF LOT 5 WHICH LIE SOUTHERlY OF A LINE PARALLEL TO AND 15' SOUTHERLY OF THI: DESCRIBED CENTERliNE BEING BLOCK 243, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF; THOSE PORTIONS OF LOT 17 AND 18 OF BLOCK 250 WHICH UE EASTERLY Of 8TH AVENue SOUTH AS ESTABLISHED BY ORDINANCE NO. 23591, AND SOUTHERLY Of A LINE PAAALLEL TO AND 15-' SOUlHERLYOF CENTERLINE DESCRIBED IN DEED TO MILESTONE. SEATTLE, CITY OF, LAWTON 1.00000000 PARK AOOITION t BLK 7, THOSE PORTJONS OF HARLEY AV AND LOTS 1-4 AND 15 AlL OF WHICH IS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED IN A DEEO TO MllSTONE ~ ~ l2 & ~ ... "' ~ '" <:> '" "' ., <:> <:> '" El u g ~ !i ~ ~ ~ ::0: ., i u o " "" ., iii • ~I ;;!U '" "" "' . ., 0<:> "" "' ., .... ·ft ' . .. ~ " . ~" !'~ , ~. m CD o o g ~ ~ ex> o o N Exhibit A Attached to and made a part of that certain Slatomont of Claim to Mlnorallntorost dated Novamber 21,2008 for King County, WA File # Suffix Dated Grantors Book Page T R Sett QQ Reception Number Legal DescripUon Interea~ MJ0693' 000 "12J1j'983"'S'URL'INGTON -NOfi'THiiR'j;jAA1LROAO co BOOK/PAGE 2S N 3 E 11 THAT PART OF SEC 11 1.00000000 M30694 000 121111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD co M30694 000 12J1/11W3 BURUNGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD co M30895 000 1211/1983 BVRUNGTON NORTHeRN RAILROAD co M30698 000 121111983 BURUNGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD co M30B97 000 12{1/19S3 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD co M30698 000 12/111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD co M30699 000 12/1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD co p~ge64 of 66 8407250712 BEGINNING AT THE CORNER OF COMMON SEeS 11, 12- 1::1 & 14; 1l1ENCE NORTH ON THE LINE BETWEEN SECTIONS 11 & 12, 0:2.1' TO BOOK/PAGE 21 N 4 E 8407250712" BOOK/PAGE 21 N 4 E 8407250712 BOOK/PAGE 21 N 4 E 84Q7250712 27 E2BE 27 NE 3' NWNW THE SOUTH MARGINAL LINE OJ:: $Hu..$HOLE AVE; THENCE N 66 DEG 18 MIN WAlONQ SAID MARGINAL LINE 362' TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE FOLLOWING SAID MARGiNAL LINE N 66 DEG 16 MIN W,150'; THENCE N 23 OEG 42 MIN E,15'. & PARAL.LEl. TO THE SOUTHERLY MARGINAL LINE OF SHILSHORE AVE, 150~ THENCE N 23 DEG 42" MIN E, 15', 1,00000000 1.00000000 1.00000000 SOOK/PAGE 23 N 5 E 18 PORTION OF SW4 1.00000000 84Q725Q712 BOOK/PAGE 8407250712 aoOKIPAGE 8407250712 BOOK/PAGE 84'07250712 23 N 5 E ,. 23N5EUI 23N6E3 DESCRIBED BY METES & BOUNOS IN DEED TO MILESTONE. (4.8 acte$) THOSE PQf:tnONS OF 1 ,00000000 TRACTSB& 9, SUPPLEMENTAL MAP OF RENTON SHORELANDS. ANDTHE SE4SW4 DESCRIBED BY METES AN 0 BOUNDS IN OEED TO MILESTONE. . PORTION OF GOVERNMENT 1.00000000 LOT 1 DESCRIBED IN DEED TO MILESTONE. (1,63 aereS) PART OF E2SE4 BEING A 1.00000000 STRiP OF LAND 16' '«IDE DESCRIBED IN DEED TO MILESTONE, (4.23 acres} :g ':l ... ... 3- 0': .... '" ... '" '" " .... '" '" '" " i':l u o " ~ '" .. o ~ k ~ ~ .. i u o " '. .. ~ i ~~ ~<.> '" .. ., 0'" 00 '" ., .. " ,~ " k " U W -" Jg~ l' '" : ~' en '" 0 0 0 en 0 N ... Exhibit A CO 0 0 Attached to and made a part of that certaIn Statemont of Claim to Mlnerallntoros' datod Novcmbor' 21, 2008 for' King County. WA N File'" Suffix Dated Grantors Beok page T R Soct QQ Roe~~!~~ .~u_,!,~.r, _ .Ltlgal D8~ripUCN1 Intel'el!it "M30700 DOD 12i1-/19B3 -BURLiNGTON' NOfUHERN 'fWlROAO CO BOOK/PAGE 2. N 7 E 3 100' WlOE Sl'RIP RUNNING 1.oo00DOOO 8407250712 ACROSS LOT' & PORTIONS OF THE S2NW4.NE4SW4, AND S2SE4 DESCRIBED MOR E FULLY IN OEEOTO MIL.ESTONE, (14.63 acres) M30701 000 1211/1993 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAiLROAD co BOOKIPAGE 24 N 6 E 21 SE04 lESS LESS 1.12 AC BN 1.00000000 8<107250712 RR ROW (38,88 acre.) .. M30702 000 1211Jt gsa BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD co BOOK/PAGE 21 N 7 E ,. 100' STRip ACROSS NE4NW4, 1.00000000 '" 8407250712 S2NW4 & E2SW4 LESS AND ... EXCEPT SUCH PORTION OF 0 SAIO STRIP AS MAY BE WITHIN .... THE NORTHeRN PACifiC '" 400' WIDE ROW ACROSS SAID il. SECTION. (9.89 acres) MaO?O;;! 000 121,/19B3 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD CO BOOK/PAGE 26 N 10 E 11 NESW AI<A Lot 9 (39.1 acres) 1.00000000 .l: 84·7250712 SE$W 1.00000000 ... Ma070a 000 12/1J19t13 BURLINGTON NORTI-ffiRN RAILROAD CO BOOK/PAGE 26 N 10 E 11 .. 84-7250712 AKA Lot 14 (34.45 acres) '" M3C703 000 12/111983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD co BOOKIPAGE 28 N 10 E 11 W2SW 1.00000000 .; Q 84·725071:2 '" ... Ma07i6 000 6/8/1989 PeTC INC BOOKtPAGE 21 N 7 E 11 NESW 1,00000000 .; 8907070397 Q M30716 000 61811989 PCTe INC BOOKJPAGE 21 N 7 E 11 NWNW 1.00000000 Q '" 8907070397 El M3071S 000 61811989 PCTC INC BOOKol'AGE 21·N 7 E 11 NWSE 1.00000000 8907070397 0 0 M3071S 000 618/1989 PeTC INC 800KIPAGE 21 N 7 E 11 S2NENW 1.00000000 Q 8907070397 ~ M30716 000 618/198$) PCTC INC BOOKIPAGE 21 N 7 E 11 THAT PORTION OF S2NW4 1.O<lOOOOOO 8907070397 LYING NORTHEASTERL V OF .c: THE CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ... ~ Sl PAUL & PACIFIC RR RJW ~ AND NORl"HERLY OF SE HUOSON ROAD (I'ORUERLV S ~ E 304TH STREEn ANO THAT ~ PORTION OF THE E2 SE4 AND ~ S2NE4 LYING NORTHERLY OF SAID SI: HUDSON ROAD ... AND SOUTHERLY OF SE ~ COURTNEY RD. (1£i3 acres) ~ M30hll oao lZJ11l983 BUA.UN(jTO~ NORTHERN RAiLROAO COMPANY I3QOKlf>AG£ 23 N 1:1 E 5 100' ROW ACROSS LOTS $, " 1.00000000 8407250712 SW4NW4 (2 ..... 068C1l!S) 0 0 MJ0781 (lOO 11J1/1983 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAIlROAD COMPANY BOOK/PAGE 24 N 7 E 31 100' ROW ACROSS NONE, 1.00000000 '" '. ... 8407250712 NENWANO LOT 1 (SEE TRACT !:! ~ 1 FOR ACREAGE TOTAL ~I THIS RECORD) ,"' tJ "", Page 65 of 88 ,,"> .'" OQ ,"' "> ....... Q, '0-1 " " " " w 0" !'.t! :: ... i ~ '" ~ co o ~ Exhibit A Attached to and made a part or that certain Slatomon! of Claim to Minorallntoro&t datod NovombOr 21, 2008 for King County, INA Flle'# Suffix Dated Grantors Book Page T R Soct QQ Ra-eeptton Number I..ogal aescrlptlon Int.rest M307a1 000'" 121111"983'" -eu"R'i,IHGTON "NO'RTHERN-RAILROAO COMPANY BOOKIPAGE 24 N '1 E 35 50: ROW ACROSS N2NW. ,00' 1.00000000 6407250712 ROW ACROSS NWNW (SEE TRACT 1 FOR ACREAGE TOTAL T~IS RECORD) M30'16i 000 12/1/19B3 BURLINGtON NORtHERN RAlL.ROAO COMPANY BOOKIPAGE 8407250712 M31003 000 6JaJ1S89 BURL1NGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD BOOKIPAGE 69070703S7 M31064 000 61811 g89 BURliNGTON NORTHERN RAlI.ROAO COMPANY BOOKiPAGE 8907070397 M31067 000 61811989 peTC INC M31D68 000 61.$11989 peTC INC M31069 000 618/1989 peTC INC M31070 000 61811£189 peTC INC M31071 000 618/1969 PCTC INC M3l0n 000 61811989 PCTe INC Page 66 of 66 BOOKIPAGE 8997070392 BOOKIPAGE 1I90707C392 BOOKIPAGE 8901070392 BOOKIPAGE 8907070395 BOOKIPAGE 8$01070395 BOOK/PAGE 8907070395 23 N 6 E 17 SWNWNWSW 22N6E35 22N6E36 21N7E21 21 N 7 E 2. NENE 24 N 7 E 31 21 N 6 E 2. 21 N 7 E • 21 N 7 E 9 1.00000000 THAT PORTION OF THE 1.00000000 W2SW4l YJNG SOUTHERLY Of THe BURLINGTON NORlliERN RAJLROAD ROW (65 acres) THAT PORTION OF A TRACT 1.0oo0DOoo IN THE SW4 DESCRIBED BY METES AND BOUNDS IN DEED TO PLUM CREEK TIMBER CO. INC. (45.8 ~crfl) RAILROAD ROW IN E2SE4 AS 1.00000000 CONVEYED TO CHICAGO, UILW., ST PAUL & PACIFK: RR CO BY DEEDS RECORDED UNDER NOS. 672093 & 686291, EXCEPTTHAT PART LYING WITHIN KUZACK ROAD. (7.5 acte1l) 1.00000000 THE SOUTH 100' OF mE 1.00000000 NORTH 1st)' OF THE NE<I-(5.38 acres) PRT OF GOV'T LOTS 2,3& 1.00000000 SW4SE4 DESCRIBED MORE FU I.l. Y IN DEED TO PLUM CREEl( (54 acres) PRT OF NE4SE4. PRT OF NE4, 1.00000000 SW4NW4, N2$W4 MORE FUU. Y DESCRIBED-IN DEED TO PLUM CREEK (93 acres) BNRC ROW ACROSS NE4 & 1.00000000 NW4 DESCRIBeD IN OEED TO PLUM CRE~ (16.39 acres} :g .. o ~ & 8! ... ::l '" c '" ... '" c c '" El 8 ~ .., .. ~ §! ~ ~ :1! .. ~ o o " .. .. ~ i .~ ! "", .. ,,> "'" 00 ." "> ...... . ~ '. o .. • -1l )!J !! First American Owner's Pol icy Owner's Policy of Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company POllCY NUMBER 5011453-740833 Any notice of claim and any other notice or statement in writing required to be given to the Company under this policy must be given to the Company at the address shown in Section 18 of the Conditions. COVERED RISKS SUBJECT TO THE EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE, THE EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE CONTAINED IN SCHEDULE B, AND THE CONDITIONS, FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Nebraska corporation (the "Company") insures, as of Date of Policy and, to the extent stated in Covered Risks 9 and 10, after Date of Policy, against loss or damage, not exceeding the Amount of Insurance, sustained or incurred by the Insured by reason of: 1. Title being vested other than as stated in Schedule A. 2. Any defect in or lien or encumbrance on the Title. This Covered Risk indudes but is not limited to insurance against loss from <aJ A defect in the Title caused by (i) forgety, fraud, undue influence, duress, incompetency, incapacity, or impersonationi (ii) failure of any person or Entity to have authorized a transfer or conveyance; (iii) a document affecting Title not properly created, executed, witnessed, sealed, acknowledged, notarized, or delivered; (iv) failure to perform those acts necessaty to create a document by electroniC means authorized by law; (v) a document executed under a falsified, expired, or otherwise invalid power of attorney; (vi) a document not properly filed, recorded, or indexed in the Public Records including failure to perform those acts by electronic means authorized by law; or (vii) a defective judicial or administrative proceeding. (b) The lien of real estate taxes or assessments imposed on the Title by a governmental authority due or payable, but unpaid. (c) Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land. The term "encroachment" includes encroachments of existing improvements located on the Land onto adjoining land, and encroachments onto the Land of existing improvements located on adjoining land. 3. Unmarketable Title. 4. No right of access to and from the Land. (Covered Risks Continued on Page 2) In Witness Whereof, First American Title Insurance Company has caused its corporate name to be hereunto affixed by its authorized officers as of Date of Policy shown in Schedule A. First American Tille Insurance Company flr-/44 Dennis J Gilmor~ Pres.!(ltont J~)' S RobInson S9(reilVY (This Policy is valid onlv when Schedules A and B are attached) This lacket was created electronically and constitutes an original document Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Titte Association. All rights reserved. The use of this form is restricted to ALTA liCensees and AlTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land TItle Association Fonn-S011453 (7-1-14) '-'---"-~Page-l'(jf 8---" I .------------~-.--'.~--.. '"--.-.. ---.... " .. ---._--_...-.!_-----------_._- ALTAOwne,;sP()!icYOf Tttie~Irlsurance(6~ i7:06J! Washi~~~ • COVERED RISKS (Continued) 5, The violation or enforcement of any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to (a) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; (b) the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; (e) the subdivision of land; or Cd) environmental protection jf a notice, describing any part of the Land, is recorded in the Public Records setting forth the violation or intention to enforce, but only to the extent of the violation or enforcement referred to in that notice. 6. An enforcement action based on the exerdse of a governmental police power not covered by Covered Risk 5 if a notice of the enforcement action, describing any part of the Land, is recorded in the Public Records, but only to the extent of the enforcement referred to in that notice. 7. The exercise of the rights of eminent domain if a notice of the exercise, describing any part of the Land, is recorded in the PubliC Records. 8. Any taking by a governmental body that has occurred and is binding on the rights of a purchaser for value without Knowledge. 9. Title being vested other than as stated in Schedule A or being defective (a) as a result of the avoidance in whole or in part, or from a court order providing an alternative remedy, of a transfer of all or any part of the title to or any interest in the Land occurring prior to the transaction vesting Title as shown in Schedule A because that prior transfer constituted a fraudulent or preferential transfer under federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws; or (b) because the instrument of transfer vesting Title as shown in Schedule A constitutes a preferential transfer under federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws by reason of the failure of its recording in the Public Records (i) to be timely, or (ii) to impart notice of its existence to a purchaser for value or to a judgment or lien creditor. 10. Any defect in or lien or encumbrance on the Title or other matter induded in Covered Risks 1 through 9 that has been created or attached or has been filed or recorded in the Public Records subsequent to Date of Policy and prior to the recording of the deed or other instrument of transfer in the Public Records that vests Title as shown in Schedule A. The Company will also pay the costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses incurred in defense of any matter insured against by this Policy, but only to the extent provided in the Conditions. EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The followill;! matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy, and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attomeys' fees, or expenses that arise by reason of: 1. (a) Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to (i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; (ii) the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; (iii) the subdivision of land; Or (iv) environmental protection; or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion l(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5. (b) Any governmental police power. This ExclUSion l(b) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 6. 2. Rights of eminent domain. This Exdusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8. 3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters (a) created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; (b) not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public ,Form 5011453 (7-1-14) Page 2 of8 Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; (d) attaChing or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 9 and 10); or (e) resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Title. 4. Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws, that the transaction vesting the Title as shown in Schedule A, is (a) a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer; or (b) a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 9 of this policy. 5. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching between Date of Policy and the date of recording of the deed or other instrument of transfer in the Public Records that vests Title as shown in Schedule A. ALTA Owner's Policy of Title Insurance (6-17-06) Washington CONomONS 1. DEFINmDN OF TERMS The following terms when used in this policy mean: (a) "Amount of Insurance"; The amount stated in Schedule A, as may be increased or decreased by endorsement to this policy, increased by Section 8(b), or decreased by Sections 10 and 11 of these Conditions. (b) "Date of Policy": The date designated as "Date of Policy" in Schedule A. (e) "Entity": A corporation, partnership, trust, limited liability company, or other similar legal entity. Cd) "Insured": The Insured named in Schedule A. eil The term "Insured" also includes (A) successors to the Title Clf the Insured by operation of law as distinguished from purchase, including heirs, devisees, survivors, personal representatives, or next of kin; (8) successors to an Insured by dissolution, merger, consolidation, distribution, or reorganization; (C) successors to an Insured by its conversion to another kind of Entity; (D) a grantee of an Insured under a deed delivered without payment of actual valuable consideration conveying the Title (1) if the stock, shares, memberships, or other equity interests of the grantee are wholly~ owned by the named Insured, (2) if the grantee wholly owns the named Insured, (3) if the grantee is wholly-owned by an affiliated Entity of the named Insured, provided the affiliated Entity and the named Insured are both wholly-owned by the same person or Entity, or (4) if the grantee is a trustee or beneficiary of a trust created by a written instrument established by the Insured named in Schedule A for estate planning purposes. (ii) With regard to (A), (B), (C), and (D) reserving, however, all rights and defenses as to any successor that the Company would have had against any predecessor Insured. (e) "Insured Claimant": An Insured claiming loss or damage. (f) "Knowledge" or "Known"; Actual knowledge, not constructive knowledge or notice that may be imputed to an Insured by reason of the Public Records or any other records that impart constructive notice of matters affecting the litle. (g) "Land": The land described in Schedule A, and affixed improvements that by law constitute real property. The term "land" does not indude any property beyond the lines of the area described in Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest, estate, or easement in abutting streets, roads, avenues, alleys, lanes, ways, or waterways, but this does not modify or limit the extent that a right of access to and from the land is insured by this policy. (h) "Mortgage": Mortgage, deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law. (i) "Public Records": Records established under state statutes at Date of Policy for the purpose of imparting constructive iForm 5011453 (7-1-14) i Page 3 of 8 notice of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without Knowledge. With respect to Covered Risk Sed), "Public Records" shall also include environmental protection liens filed in the records of the clerk of the United States District Court for the district where the Land is located. U} "Title": The estate or interest described in Schedule A. (I<) "Unmarketable Title": Title affected by an alleged or apparent matter that would permit a prospective purchaser or lessee of the Title or lender on the Title to be released from the obligation to purchase, lease, or lend if there is a contractual condition requiring the delivery of marketable title. 2, CONTINUATION OF INSURANCE The coverage of this policy shall continue in force as of Date of Policy in favor of an Insured, but only so long as the Insured retains an estate or interest in the Land, or holds an obligation secured by a purchase money Mortgage given by a purchaser from the Insured, or only so long as the Insured shall have liability by reason of warranties in any transfer or conveyance of the Title. This policy shall not continue in force in favor of any purchaser from the Insured of either (i) an estate or interest in the Land, or (ii) an obligation secured by a purchase money Mortgage given to the Insured. 3. NOTICE OF CLAIM TO BE GIVEN BY INSURED CLAIMANT The Insured shall notify the Company promptly in writing (i) in case of any litigation as set forth in Section S( a) of these Conditions, (ii) in case Knowledge shall come to an Insured hereunder of any claim of title or interest that is adverse to the Title, as insured, and that might cause loss or damage for which the Company may be liable by virtue of this policy, or (iii) if the Title, as insured, is rejected as Unmarketable Title. If the Company is prejudiced by the failure of the Insured Claimant to provide prompt notice, the Company's liability to the Insured Claimant under the policy shall be reduced to the extent of the prejudice. 4. PROOF OF LOSS In the event the Company is unable to determine the amount of loss or damage, the Company may, at its option, require as a condition of payment that the Insured Claimant furnish a signed proof of loss. The proof of loss must describe the defect, lien, encumbrance, or other matter insured against by this policy that constitutes the basis of loss or damage and shall state, to the extent possible, the basis of calculating the amount of the loss or damage. S, DEFENSE AND PROSECUTION OF ACTIONS (a) Upon written request by the Insured, and subject to the options contained in Section 7 of these Conditions, the Company, at its own cost and without unreasonable delay, shall provide for the defense of an Insured in litigation in which any third party asserts a daim covered by this policy adverse to the Insured. This obligation is limited to only those stated causes of action alleging matters insured against by this pOlicy. The Company shall have the right to select counsel of its choice (subject to the right of the Insured to object for reasonable cause) to represent the Insured as to those stated causes of action. It shall not be liable for and will not pay the fees of any other counsel. The Company will not pay any fees, costs, or expenses incurred by the Insured in the defense of those causes of action that aUege matters not insured against by this pOlicy. ALTA Owner's Policy ofTitle Insurance (6-17-{)6) Washington CONDmONS (Continued) (b) The Company shall have the right, in addition to the options contained in Section 7 of these Conditions, at its own cost, to institute and prosecute any action or proceeding or to do any other act that in its opinion may be necessary or desirable to establish the Title, as insured, or to prevent or reduce loss or damage to the Insured. The Company may take any appropriate action under the terms of this policy, whether or not it shall be liable to the Insured, The exercise of these rights shall not be an admission of liability or waiver of any provision of this policy. If the Company exercises its fights under this subsection, it must do so diligently. (c) Whenever the Company brings an action or asserts a defense as required cr permitted by this policy, the Company may pursue the litigation to a final determination by a court of competent jurisdiction, and it expressly reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to appeal any adverse judgment or order. 6. DUTY OF INSURED CLAIMANT TO COOPERATE (a) In all cases where this policy permits or requires the Company to prosecute or provide for the defense of any action or proceeding and any appeals, the Insured shall secure to the Company the right to so prosecute or provide defense in the action or proceeding, including the right to use, at its option, the name of the Insured for this purpose. Whenever requested by the Company, the Insured, at the Company's expense, shall give the Company all reasonable aid (i) in securing evidence, obtaining witnesses, prosecuting or defending the action or proceeding, or effecting settlement, and (ii) in any other lawful act that in the opinion of the Company may be necessary or desirable to establish the Title or any other matter as insured. If the Company is prejudiced by the failure of the Insured to furnish the required cooperation, the Company's obligations to the Insured under the policy shall terminate, including any liability or obligation to defend, proserute, or continue any litigation, with regard to the matter or matters requiring such cooperation. (b) The Company may reasonably require the Insured Claimant to submit to examination under oath by any authorized representative of the Company and to produce for examination, inspection, and copying, at such reasonable times and places as may be designated by the authorized representative of the Company, all records, in whatever medium maintained, including books, ledgers, checks, memoranda, correspondence, reports, e-mails, disks, tapes, and videos whether bearing a date before or after Date of Policy, that reasonably pertain to the loss or damage. Further, if requested by any authorized representative of the Company, the Insured Claimant shall grant its permission, in writing, for any authorized representative of the Company to examine, inspect, and copy all of these records in the custody or control of a third party that reasonably pertain to the loss or damage. All information designated as confidential by the Insured Claimant provided to the Company pursuant to this Section shall not be disclosed to others unless, in the reasonable judgment of the Company, it is necessary in the administration of the daim. Failure of the Insured Claimant to submit for examination under oath, produce any reasonably requested information, or grant permission to secure reasonably necessary information from third parties as required in this subsection, unless prohibited by law or governmental regulation, shall terminate any liability of the Company under this policy as to that daim. iForm 5011453 (7·1·14) Page 4 of 8 I 7. OPTIONS TO PAY OR OTHERWISE SETILE CLAIMS; TERMINATION OF LIABILITY In case of a claim under this policy, the Company shall have the following additional options: (a) To Payor Tender Payment of the Amount of Insurance. To payor tender payment of the Amount of Insurance under this policy together with any costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses incurred by the Insured Claimant that were authorized by the Company up to the time of payment or tender of payment and that the Company is obligated to pay. Upon the exercise by the Company of this option, all liability and obligations of the Company to the Insured under this policy, other than to make the payment required in this subsection, shall terminate, including any liability or obligation to defend, prosecute, or continue any litigation. (b) To Payor Otherwise Settle With Parties Other Than the Insured or With the Insured Claimant. (i) To payor otherwise settle with other parties for or in the name of an Insured Claimant any claim insured against under this policy. In addition, the Company will pay any costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses incurred by the Insured Claimant that were authorized by the Company up to the time of payment and that the Company is obligated to pay; or (ii) To payor otherwise settle with the Insured Claimant the loss or damage provided for under this policy, together with any costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses inamed by the Insured Claimant that were authorized by the Company up to the time of payment and that the Company is obligated to pay. Upon the exercise by the Company of either of the options provided for in subsections (b)(i) or (ii), the Company's obligations to the Insured under this policy for the claimed loss or damage, other than the payments required to be made, shall terminate, including any liability or obligation to defend, prosecute, or continue any litigation. 8. DETERMINATION AND EXTENT OF UABILITY This policy is a contract of indemnity against actual monetary loss or damage sustained or incurred by the Insured Claimant who has suffered loss or damage by reason of matters insured against by this policy. (a) The extent of liability of the Company for loss or damage under this policy shall not exceed the lesser of (i) the Amount of Insurance; or (ii) the difference between the value of the Title as insured and the value of the Title subject to the risk insured against by this policy. (b) If tile Company pursues its rights under Section 5 of these Conditions and is unsuccessful in establishing the Title, as insured, (j) the Amount of Insurance shall be increased by 10%/ and (ii) the Insured Claimant shall have the right to have the loss or damage determined either as of the date the claim was made by the Insured Claimant or as of the date it is settled and paid. (c) In addition to the extent of liability under (a) and (b), the Company will also pay those costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses incurred in accordance with Sections 5 and 7 of these Conditions. ALTA Owner·s Policy ofTitle Insurance (6·17·06) Washington CONOITIONS (Continued) 9. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY (a) If the Company establishes the Title, or removes the aUeged defect, lien, or encumbrance, or cures the lack of a right of access to or from the Land, or cures the claim of Unmarketable Title, all as insured, in a reasonably diligent manner by any method, including litigation and the completion of any appeals, it shall have fully performed its obligations with respect to that matter and shall not be liable for any loss or damage caused to the Insured. (b) In the event of any litigation, including litigation by the Company or with the Company's consent, the Company shall have no liability for loss or damage until there has been a final determination by a court of competent jurisdiction, and disposition of all appeals, adverse to the Title, as insured. (c) The Company shall not be liable for loss or damage to the Insured for liability voluntarily assumed by the Insured in settling any claim or suit without the prior written consent of the Company. 10. REDUCTION OF INSURANCE; REDUCTION OR TERMINATION OF LIABILITY All payments under this policy, except payments made for costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses, shall reduce the Amount of Insurance by the amount of the payment. 11. LIABILITY NONCUMULATIVE The Amount of Insurance shall be reduced by any amount the Company pays under any policy insuring a Mortgage to which exception is taken in Schedule B or to which the Insured has agreed, assumed, or taken subject, or which is executed by an Insured after Date of Policy and which is a charge or lien on the Title, and the amount so paid shall be deemed a payment to the Insured under this policy. 12. PAYMENT OF LOSS When liability and the extent of loss or damage have been definitely fixed in accordance with these Conditions, the payment shall be made within 30 days. 13. RIGHTS OF RECOVERY UPON PAYMENT OR SETTLEMENT (a) Whenever the Company shall have settled and paid a claim under this policy, it shall be subrogated and entitled to the rights of the Insured Claimant in the Title and all other rights and remedies in respect to the claim that the Insured Oaimant has against any person or property, to the extent of the amount of any loss, costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses paid by the Company. If requested by the Company, the Insured Claimant shall execute documents to evidence the transfer to the Company of these rights and remedies. The Insured Claimant shall permit the Company to sue, compromise, or settle in the name of the Insured Oaimant and to use the name of the Insured Claimant in any transaction or litigation involving these rights and remedies. If a payment on account of a claim does not fully cover the loss of the Insured Claimant, the Company shall defer the exercise of its right to recover until after the Insured Claimant shall have recovered its loss. (b) The Company's right of subrogation includes the rights of the Insured to indemnities, guaranties, other pol ides of insurance, or bonds, notwithstanding any terms or conditions contained in those instruments that address subrogation rights. 14. ARBITRATION Either the Company or the Insured may demand that the claim or controversy shall be submitted to arbitration pursuant to the Title Insurance Arbitration Rules of the American Land Title Form 5011453 (7-1-14) Page 5 of B Association ("Rules"). Except as provided in the Rules, there shall be no joinder or consolidation with claims or controversies of other persons. Arbitrable matters may include, but are not limited to, any controversy or claim between the Company and the Insured arising out of or relating to this policy, any service in connection with its issuance or the breach of a pol icy provision, or to any other controversy or claim ariSing out of the transaction giving rise to this policy. All arbitrable matters when the Amount of Insurl;lnce is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured. All arbitrable matters when the Amount of Insurance is in excess of $2,000,000 shall be arbitrated only when agreed to by both the Company and the Insured. Arbitration pursuant to this policy and under the Rules shall be binding upon the parties. Judgment upon the award rendered by the Arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court of competent jurisdiction. is. LIABILITY LIMIT£O TO THIS POLICY; POLICY ENTIRE CONTRACT (a) This policy together with all endorsements, if any, attached to it by the Company is the entire policy and contract between the Insured and the Company. In interpreting any provision of this policy, this policy shall be construed as a whole. (b) Any claim of loss or damage that arises out of the status of the Title or by any action asserting such claim shall be restricted to this policy, (c) Any amendment of or endorsement to this policy must be in writing and authenticated by an authorized person} or expressly incorporated by Schedule A of this policy. (d) Each endorsement to this policy issued at any time is made a part of this policy and is subject to all of its terms and provisions. Except as the endorsement expressly states, it does not (i) modify any of the terms and provisions of the policy, (ii) modify any prior endorsement} (iii) extend the Date of Policy, or (iv) increase the Amount of Insurance. 16. SEVERABILITY In the event any provision of this policy, in whole or in part, is held invalid or unenforceable under applicable law, the policy shall be deemed not to include that provision or such part held to be invalid, but all other prOVisions shall remain in full force and effect. 17. CHOICE OF LAW; FORUM (a) Choice of Law: The Insured acknowledges the Company has underwritten the risks covered by this policy and determined the premium charged therefor in reliance upon the law affecting interests in real property and applicable to the interpretation, rights, remedies, or enforcement of policies of title insurance of the jurisdiction where the Land is located. Therefore, the court or an arbitrator shall apply the law of the jurisdiction where the Land is located to determine the validity of claims against the Title that are adverse to the Insured and to interpret and enforce the terms of this policy. In neither case shall the court or arbitrator apply its conflicts of law principles to determine the applicable law. (b) Choice of Forum: Any litigation or other proceeding brought by the Insured against the Company must be filed only in a state or federal court within the United States of America or its territories having appropriate jurisdiction. 18. NOTICES, WHERE SENT Any notice of daim and any other notice or statement in writing required to be given to the Company under this policy must be given to the Company at First American Title Insurance Company, Attn: Claims National Intake Center, 1 First American Way; Santa Ana, CA 92707. Phone: 888-632- 1642. ALTA Owner·s Policy ofTitle Insurance (6·17·06) Washington ~,~ First American Schedule A Owner's Policy of Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American TItle Insurance Company POLICY NUMBER 740833 Name and Address of 1itle Insurance Company: First American Title Insurance Company, 1 First American Way, Santa Ana, CA 92707. file No.: NCS-740833-WA1 Address Reference: 17300 Benson Road South, Renton, WA Amount of Insurance: $1,430,000.00 Date of Policy: November 30, 2015 at 2:37 p.m. 1. Name of Insured: Avana Ridge, LLC, a Washington limited liability company 2. The estate or interest in the Land that is insured by this policy is: Fee Simple 3. 1itle is vested in: Avana Ridge, LLC, a Washington limited liability company 4. The Land referred to in this policy is described as follows: LOTS 1 AND 2 OF CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LUA-09-024-LLA LND-30-0349, RECORDED DECEMBER 16, 2011 UNDER RECORDING NO. 20111216900001, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. ---~,--------------.~--~-------,- ALTA OWner's Policy of Title Insurance (6-17-06): .___ _ ____ ._._ .. ~ _______ ~ _____ . __ ._~~~~~~_t~~j · A. r., ~::t.&-First American Owner's Policy of Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Schedule B POUCY NUM BER 740833 EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE File No.: NCS-740833-WA1 This policy does not insure against loss or damage, and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees, or expenses that arise by reason of: 1. Potential charges, for the King County Sewage Treatment capacity Charge, as authorized under RCW 35.58 and King County Code 28.84.050. Said charges could apply for any property that connected to the King County Sewer Service area on or after February 1, 1990. 2. Reservations and exceptions, including the terms and conditions thereof: Reserving: Minerals Reserved By: Northern Pacific Railway Company, a corporation of the State of Wisconsin Recorded: December 19, 1958 Recording Information: 4978462 3. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: December 7, 1967 under Recording No. 6275643 In Favor of: King County Water District No. 58, a municipal corporation For: Watermain Affects: as described therein 4. Reservations and exceptions, including the terms and conditions thereof: Reserving: Minerals Reserved By: Northern Pacific Railway Foundation, a charitable corporation of the State of Minnesota Recorded: April 23, 1969 Recording Information: 6500066 (Affects Lot 1) -"--~--'---.-.-l----------·-----------AlTA-Owner's -Poiicyoffitle -insu;:ance-(6-17~06): --------.-, .. form 5011453 (7-I -14) Page 7 of 8 . ___ , _____ ._. _____ . ____ . _____ .. ______ .. _. _______ ~ ____ t_. __ ._ . _____ .. _., __ ... _. ___ .. __ ... _________ .,,__ _"_ .. _._'" __ . _________ ,,, .. ___ ... _.-__ ~~~ingtoni 5. Reservations and exceptions, including the terms and conditions thereof: Reserving: Minerals Reserved By: Burlington Northern Foundation, a charitable corporation of the State of Minnesota Recorded: October 21, 1970 Recording Information: 6705976 6. Reservations and exceptions, including the terms and conditions thereof: Reserving: Minerals Reserved By: Burlington Northern Foundation, a charitable corporation of the State of Minnesota Recorded: August 28, 1972 Recording Information: 7208280418 7. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Developer Extension Reimbursement Contract 5005 Creek Water and Sewer District" recorded January 20, 1989 as Recording No. 8901200563 of Official Records. (Affects Lot 1) 8. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Resolution No. 2214-5" recorded October 03, 2001 as Recording No. 20011003000193 of Official Records. (Affects Lot 1) 9. Terms, covenants, conditions and restrictions as contained in recorded Lot Line Adjustment (Boundary Line Revision) LUA-09-024-LLA LND-30-0349 : Recorded: December 16, 2011 Recording Information: 20111216900001 10. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Notice of Claim to Severed Mineral Interest" recorded January 25, 2003 as Recording No. 20030125002078 of Official Records. 11. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Notice of Claim to Severed Mineral Interest" recorded January 25, 2003 as Recording No. 20030125002079 of Official Records. 12. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Notice of Claim to Severed Mineral Interest" recorded December 09, 2008 as Recording No. 20081209000691 of Official Records. 13. Any facts, rights, interests or claims that may exist or arise by reason of the following matters disclosed by an ALTA/ACSM survey made by AXIS Survey & Mapping on November 13, 2008, last revised April 30, 2013 , designated Job Number 07-125/13-057: (A) Fence crosses the northerly boundary line of Lot 2 by up to 0.8' onto the subject property; (B) Dirt path crosses the northwesterly corner of Lot 1 without benefit of an easement. 'Form 50114S3 (7+14) Page 8 of 8 ALTA Owner's Policy of Title Insurance (6-17-06) Washington AFTER RECORDING, RETURN TO: AVANA RIDGE, LLC 9675 SE 36'h Street, Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Grantor: Grantee: Abbreviated Legal Description: " Tax Parcel Numbers: , Reference Numbers ()l, Relatedpocuments: DECLARATION OF COVENANT , "~Co' Avana Ridge, LLC, a Washington limited liability comp~nY '0', ' , " , Public ',co LOTS 1 AND 2 OF CITY dj:'RENTON LOtUNE ADJUSTMENT NO. LUA-09- 024'LLA, LND-30'0349, RECORDED DECEMBER 16, 2011 UNDER RECORDING NO. 20111216900001,INKING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. , o~ 2<,)2305'9009&292305,9148 N/A PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT COVENANTS These covenants are recorded in the real property records of King County, Washington, in partial compliance with the requirements of the Conditions of Approval of the application of Avana Ridge, LLC, a Washington limited liability company, ("Grantor")' for approval by the City of Renton, a Municipal Corporation ("Grantee") of a Planned Urban Development ("PUD") under City of Renton file number LUA1S-XXX. These covenants are recorded in compliance with Renton Municipal Code ("RMC") 4-9-1S0G.6 and the Final Decision of the City of Renton Hearing Examiner dated XXXXXXX, 20XX. NOW, THEREFORE, for adequate consideration, receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, and intending to be legally bound, Grantor covenants and agrees to the conditions and agreements set forth below: 1. Legal Description of PUD Real Property. The real property (the "Property") that is the subject of the Planned Unit Development approved under City of Renton:file number LUA1S-XXX, and upon which the Planned Unit Development will be built, is legally descriped in ExhibitA.attached hereto. 2. Description of Planned Unit Development Uses, Densities and Phases. The PUD consists of 74 dwelling units in2 buildings with associated recreation / open space areas, constructed inane PtJ.ilse. 3. Specifications of the PUD and Modifications from Renton Municipal Code R~quirements. Please see Table A in Exhibit B attached hereto. 4. Covenant Regarding PUDof Current Zone Compliance. The lots or structlJresaffected by the code modifications described on Table A shall meet the standard created with the approval of the PUD or current zone in affect at the time of subsequent land use, building or construction permits. 5. Formation of Property Owner's Association Prior to Sale. The Property is currently solely owned by Avana Ridge, LLC, a Washington limited liability company. Prior to any subsequent sale of the Property, or any portion thereof, a legally incorporated property owner's association must be formed for the owners of the Property. 6. Covenants Run With the land. The covenants contained in this Planned Urban Development Covenants shall be covenants running with the land, and shall be binding on the successors, heirs, and assigns of the party(ies) hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Declarant has executed this Covenant as of the date set forth above. Avana Ridge, llC By: ____ ~-------------------- Name: ____________ -------- Its: Manager STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) )ss. ) On , 20~ before me personally appeared ;:-;-;;:-____ --:-;---:-__ -,-' to me known to be the Manager of Avana Ridge, LLC, the limited liability company that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said company, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said instrument on behalf of said company. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. Signature: ______________ _ N,ame(Print):, ____________ _ NOTARY PU BLiC in and for the State of Washington, residing at ___ --:-____ _ My appointment expires: ___ --'-____ _ EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PUD PROPERTY LOTS 1 AND 2 OF CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. lUA-09-024-lLA, lND-30-0349, RECORDED DECEMBER 16, 2011 UNDER RECORDING NO. 20111216900001, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. RMC# EXHIBIT B TABlEA. REgUESTED MODIFICATIONS FROM RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE (RMC} Reguired I!er RMC Reguested Modification ......... I ... «;> .. ;. AFTER RECORDING, RETURN TO: AVANA RIDGE, LLC 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Grantor: Grantee: Abbreviated Legal Description: Tax Parcel Numbers: """;', Reference Numbers of Related Documents: DECLARATION OF COVENANT Avana Ridge, LLC, a Washington limited liability company, Public ", LOTS 1 AND 2 OF CITY OF RENTON LOHINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LUA-09- 024-lLA, LND-30,0349, RECORDED DECEMBER 16, 2011 UNDER RECORDING NO. 20111216900001, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. 292305-9009 & 292305-9148 , N/A PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT COVENANTS These covenants are recorded in the real property records of King County, Washington, in partial compliance with the requirements of the Conditions of Approval of the application of Avana Ridge, LLC, a Washington limited liability company, ("Grantor"), for approval by the City of Renton, a Municipal Corporation ("Grantee") of a Planned Urban Development ("PUD") under City of Renton file number LUA15-XXX. These covenants are recorded in compliance with Renton Municipal Code ("RMC") 4-9-150G.6 and the Final Decision of the City of Renton Hearing Examiner dated XXXXXXX, 20XX. NOW, THEREFORE, for adequate consideration, receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, and intending to be legally bound, Grantor covenants and agrees to the conditions and agreements set forth below: 1. Legal Description of PUD Real Property. The real property (the "Property") that is the subject of the Planned Unit Development approved under City of Renton file number LUA15-XXX, and upon which the Planned Unit Development will be built, is legally described in Exhib'itA attached hereto. 2. Description of Planned Unit Develop'mentUses, Densities and Phases. The PUD consists of 74 dwelling units iri2 buildings with associated recreation / open space areas, constructed in one.phase. 3. Specifications of thePUD and Modifications from Renton Municipal Code Requirements. Please see Table A in txhibit B att~ched hereto. 4. Covenant Regllrding PUD of Current Zone Compliance. The lots or structl.lresaffected by the code modifications described on Table A shall meet the standard created with the approval of the PUD or current zone in affect at the time of subsequent land use, building or construction permits. 5. Formation of Property Owner's Association Prior to Sale. The Property is currently solely owned by Avana Ridge, LLC, a Washington limited liability company. Prior to any subsequent sale of the Property, or any portion thereof, a legally incorporated property owner's association must be formed for the owners of the Property. 6. Covenants Run With the Land. The covenants contained in this Planned Urban Development Covenants shall be covenants running with the land, and shall be binding on the successors, heirs, and assigns ofthe party(ies) hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Declarant has executed this Covenant as ofthe date set forth above. Avana Ridge, LLC By: ____________ _ Name: _~ __ __:__:---- Its: Manager STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) )ss. ) On , 20~ before me personally appeared , to me known to be the Manager of Avana Ridge, LLC, the limited "Ii-"'ab'-;i:;:-lit:-y-co-m-p-an-y--:-;th-a-"t-e-x-e-cu--'t~ed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said company, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said instrument on behalf of said company. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. Signature: ______________ _ Name (Print): ____________ _ NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at ________ _ My appointment expires: ________ _ EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PUD PROPERTY LOTS 1 AND 2 OF CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LUA-09-024-LLA, LND-30-0349, RECORDED DECEMBER 16, 2011 UNDER RECORDING NO. 20111216900001, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. RMC# EXHIBIT B TABLE A. REgUESTED MODIFICATIONS FROM RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE IRMC) Reguired !;!er RMC Reguested Modification " , , , ,,"'," , .... '.,."." " AFTER RECORDING, RETURN TO: AVANA RIDGE, LLC 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Grantor: Grantee: Abbreviated Legal Description: Tax Parcel Numbers: Reference Numbers of Related Documents: .. DECLARATION OF COVENANT •... ... Avana Ridge, LLC, a Washington limited liability company .., ... , Public . ;;" .. LOTS 1 AND 2 OF CITY DFRENTON LOT"l,4NE ADJUSTMENT NO. LUA-09- 024-LLA, LND-30-0349, REtORi:>mDECElV1llfR 16, 2011 UNDER RECORDING NO. 20111216900001,fN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. 292305-9009 & 292305-9148 . -- N/A . PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT COVENANTS These covenants are recorded in the real property records of King County, Washington, in partial compliance with the requirements of the Conditions of Approval of the application of Avana Ridge, LLC, a Washington limited liability company, ("Grantor")' for approval by the City of Renton, a Municipal Corporation ("Grantee") of a Planned Urban Development ("PUD") under City of Renton file number LUA1S-XXX. These covenants are recorded in compliance with Renton Municipal Code ("RMC") 4-9-1S0G.6 and the Final Decision of the City of Renton Hearing Examiner dated XXXXXXX, 20XX. NOW, THEREFORE, for adequate consideration, receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, and intending to be legally bound, Grantor covenants and agrees to the conditions and agreements set forth below: 1. Legal Description of PUD Real Property. The real property (the "Property") that is the subject of the Planned Unit Development approved under City of Renton file number LUA1S-)(XX, and upon which the Planned Unit Development will be built, is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto. 2. Description of Planned Unit Development Uses, Densities and Phases. The PUD consists'6f 74 dwelling units in 2 buildings with associated recreation / open SPace ar~as,constructed in one phase. 3. Specifications of the PUD and' Modifications from Renton Municipal Code Requirements. Please see Table A in Exhibit B attached hereto. 4. Covenant Regarding PUD of Current Zone Compliance. The lots or structures affected by the code modifications described on Table A shall meet the standard created with the approval of the PUD or current zone in affect at the time of subsequent land use, building or construction permits. 5. Formation of Property Owner's Association Prior to Sale. The Property is currently solely owned by Avana Ridge, LLC, a Washington limited liability company. Prior to any subsequent sale of the Property, or any portion thereof, a legally incorporated property owner's association must be formed for the owners of the Property. 6. Covenants Run With the Land. The covenants contained in this Planned Urban Development Covenants shall be covenants running with the land, and shall be binding on the successors, heirs, and assigns of the party{ies) hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Declarant has executed this Covenant as of the date set forth above. Avana Ridge, LLC By: __ -"-_________ _ Name: __ --_-:'----- Its: Manager STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) )ss. ) On , 20g, before me personally appeared , to me known to be the Manager of Avana Ridge, LLC, the limited ""lia--;b--:i""lit'-y-c-o-m-p-a-n-y-t"h-a-:-t-e-x-e-cu--=-ted the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said company, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said instrument on behalf of said company. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. Signature: ____ ~,,----------- Name (Print):, ____________ _ NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at My appointment expires: --~------ • EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PUD PROPERTY LOTS 1 AND 2 OF CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LUA-09-024-LLA, LND-30-0349, RECORDED DECEMBER 16, 2011 UNDER RECORDING NO. 20111216900001, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. RMC# EXHIBIT B TABLE A. REgUESTED MODIFICATIONS FROM RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE (RMC) Reguired ~er RMC Reguested Modification • • . . I' .. AFTER RECORDING, RETURN TO: AVANA RIDGE, LLC 9675 SE 36'h Street, Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Grantor: Grantee: Abbreviated Legal ..... Description: .... . Tax Parcel Numbers: Reference·Numbers of .. Related Documents: DECLARATION .OF COVENANT .. .. Avana Ridge, LLC, a Washington limited liability company ; T . ... , Public . . LOTS 1 AND 2 OF CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LUA-09- 024'.LLA, LND-30·0349, RECORDED DECEMBER 16, 2011 UNDER RECORDING NO. 20111216900001, INKING COUNTY, WASHINGTON . ••• .r ••• 292305~9009 & 29230S~9148 •• . ., .... : . . .. . N/A .. PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT COVENANTS These covenants are recorded in the real property records of King County, Washington, in partial compliance with the requirements of the Conditions of Approval of the application of Avana Ridge, LLC, a Washington limited liability company, ("Grantor")' for approval by the City of Renton, a Municipal Corporation ("Grantee") of a Planned Urban Development ("PUD") under City of Renton file number LUA1S-XXX. These covenants are recorded in compliance with Renton Municipal Code ("RMC") 4-9-1S0G.6 and the Final Decision of the City of Renton Hearing Examiner dated XXXXXXX, 20XX. NOW, THEREFORE, for adequate consideration, receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, and intending to be legally bound,Grantorcovenants and agrees to the conditions and agreements set forth below: 1. Legal Description of PUD Real Property. The real property (the "Property';.). that is the subject of the Planned Unit Development approved under City of Renton file number LUA1S-XXX, and upon which the Planned Unit Development will be built, is legally described in ExhihitA attached hereto. 2. Description of Planned Unit Development Uses, Densities and Phases. The PUD consists of 74 dwelling units in 2 buildings with associated recreation / open space areas, constructed inane phase. 3. Specifications of thePUD and Modifications from Renton Municipal Code Requirements. PleasE'see Table A in Exhibit B attached hereto. 4. Covenant Regarding PUb of Current Zone Compliance. The lots or structures affected by the code modifications described on Table A shall meet the standard created with the approval of the PUD or current zone in affect at the time of subsequent land use, building or construction permits. S. Formation of Property Owner's Association Prior to Sale. The Property is currently solely owned by Avana Ridge, LLC, a Washington limited liability company. Prior to any subsequent sale of the Property, or any portion thereof, a legally incorporated property owner's association must be formed for the owners of the Property. 6. Covenants Run With the land. The covenants contained in this Planned Urban Development Covenants shall be covenants running with the land, and shall be binding on the successors, heirs, and assigns of the party(ies) hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Declarant has executed this Covenant as of the date set forth above. Avana Ridge, llC By: ________________________ __ Name: _________ _ Its: Manager STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) )ss. ) On ,20M, before me personally appeared • to me known to be the Manager of Avana Ridge, llC, the limited "'lia--'bC-:i""lit'--y-c-o-m-pa-n-y-t"'h-a-Ct-e-x-e-cu-:t-'ed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said company, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said instrument on behalf of said company. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. Signature :. ______________ _ Name (Print): ___ ~ ________ _ NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington; residing at. __ ...... _____ _ My appointment expires: ___ "'-____ _ • EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PUD PROPERTY LOTS 1 AND 2 OF CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LUA-09-024-LLA, LND-30-0349, RECORDED DECEMBER 16, 2011 UNDER RECORDING NO. 20111216900001, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. • EXHIBIT B TABLE A. REgUESTED MODIFICATIONS FROM RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE {RMC} RMC# Reguired !!er RMC Reguested Modification , "" . . <" ., '; .... DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ----~ ... Renton ® AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGN Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 I www.rentonwa.gov STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) S5 COUNTY OF KING ) , I, Justin Lagers duly sworn on oath, deposes and says: being first 1. On the 2151 day of December 20~ I installed 2 public information sign(s) and plastic flyer box on the property located at ",,1:...:06:..:.1:...:5 :...:S E:..:.1:..:.7:...:2n.::d.::S:...:t. .::.& -'.17:.,:2-'.4 9:..:.8:.,:e-'.n5:.,:0:..:." :..:.Ro:.,:a:...:d .::.So:.:u:...:th.:.... __ for the foil 0 wing pro j e ct : Avana Ridge -PPUD Project Name Avana Ridge, LLC Owner Name 2. have attached a copy of the neighborhood detail map marked with an "X" to indicate the location of the installed sign. 3. This/these public information sign(s) was/were constructed and installed in locations in conformance with the requirements of Chapter 7 Title 4 of Renton Municipal Code and the City's "Public InforC:!!9D-S, Instaliatio:~:~alJ.d'3ut package. ;::,l d7t~r sTfn';ture My commission expires on _""B""If-J.f.1...':'f-i.LI..lo.("',, _____ _ } I 6 H : \CE D\Data \ Form 5-T em plates\Self -H e I p Handouts \P la nn ing\pu bsign.d oc Rev: 08/2015 10616 SE 172nd Street The nfOlmatlon Incl..Iood on t his map has been compied by King County staff from a variety of sovrces W'lt1IS sub!ecl to chang e "."thoul notice Kmg County makes no representaltOOS or IW tTSrties expre 55 o r Im~l ed . as 10 accuracy. CO"I1 pleten ass tmeln ess Of rights to the use 01 such rnform"lr(lf1 Tt\js document IS not Intended for use as a survey product King COOJnty shall not be lable for any general , special , "direct, incidental, o r co nseQI,Jentiai damages i~l u,jog, bUl 001 1m lIed to, lost r evenues or pst profits roSlJtmg from the use Of mISuse dlhe rnformat/Jn C«lts lned on Ills map Any sa le 0/ lhismap o rrn focmaliononth4s map is prohblted excePt by wfltlen permission of King Cou nty Date: 12/15/2015 Notes: N A W King County GIS CENTER RECEIPT EG00047374 BILLING CONTACT Michael Gladstein Avana Ridge LLC ... 9675 SE 36th 5t, #105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 REFERENCE NUMBER FEE NAME ,~=~ ~ ~_v~." --,~ --, ~.,,~~,-~.~~,~'"~, LUAI5-{)00894 PLAN -Environmental Review PLAN -Preliminary PUD Fee Technology Fee Printed On: December 3D, 2015 Prepared By: Roeale Timmons «~" ~m ~~- TRANSACTION TYPE -,-~ _~'~~M",0'~' Fee Payment Fee Payment Fee Payment 'M«~ 10555 Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Transaction Date: December 30,2015 PAYMENT METHOD '_"~'M m ~·~'W'<'M"_'_M"'m' Credit Card Credit Card Credit Card SUBTOTAL TOTAL AMOUNT PAID ~~~-, ~- $1,000,00 $2.500.00 $105.00 $3,605.00 $3,605.00 Page 1 of 1