HomeMy WebLinkAboutE. Staff Report .—..- ....
DEPARTMENT OF CQM'...�lNITY ""'� CITY OF
AND fCONG1MIC DEVELOPMENT �'-"""""''r�������� � }
A. REPORT TD THE NEARING EXAMINER
HEAR/NG DATE: May 10, 2016
Praject Name; Avana Ridge PUD
Owners: Avana Ridge, L�C;9675 SE 36th St, Ste 105; Mercer Islanci,WA 98040
_
Contact: Justin Lagers;Avana Ridge, LLC; 9675 SE 36th St,Ste 105; Mercer Isiand, WA 98040
File Number: 1UA15-000894, PP, PPUD
Praject Manager: Rocale Timmons,Senior Planner
Froject 5ummary: The appiicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Developrnent and
Environmental (SEPA} Review for the construction of a multi-family devefapment
cantaining 74 units. The vacant 3.78 acre site is (ocated within the Residential
Multi-Family(RM-Fj zoning classificatian and the Residentia! High Density (NQ) land
use designat'san. The development would be comprised of two separate multi-
family residential structures resulting in a density of 20.21 dujac. The subject site
is franted by three public rights-af-way: SE 172nd 5t, Bensan Rd S {108th Ave SE},
and Benson prive 5 (SR-515}. The applicant is propasing one entrance off of SE
172"�St between the proposed buildings, and another entrance off of Benson Rd S.
There is an unnarned stream, classified Ns, bisecting the site which runs from east
ta west. Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050, the applicant is proposing impacts to the
stream buffer through buffer averaging. Additionally, the site contains Coa! Mine
Hazards. 1'he Preliminary PUD would be used to vary street, refuse and recycle,
building height, parking, design, private open space, and retaining wafl standards.
The applicant has praposed ta provide buffer enhancement as part of the
propased PUD public benefit, along with the construction of enhanced open space,
pedestrian amenities, landscaping, and superior site and building design.
Site Area: 164,828 SF Tota!8uilding Area GSF:92,899 SF
Project Lacation: 17249 Benson Rd S
I p! � J�I� I.,�.�k
il
� ��.
� � �
�� ,.
,�' I ..� .d
�
� aRR
M
fau�,
Project Location Map
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUD LUAIS-000894
City of Renton Department of Co: unity& Economic Deve%pme�t Nearing Examiner Recommendatian
AVANA R/DGE PUD LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
— --___ ---:.-------
�. ..— -=----- �_..—... _._._—___ _.__..._--–;__----
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 2 of 44
---—
B. EXH1BlTS:
Exhibit 1: ERC Report,dated Aprii 11,2016
Exhibit 2: Site P(an
Exhibit 3: Landscape Pian
Exhibit 4: Elevations
Exhibit 5: Grading Plan
Exhibit 6: Geotechnical Report, prepared by Earth Solutians NW (dated December 21, 2015)
Exhibit?: Coal Mine Nazard Study, prepared by Icicie Creek Engineers(dated March 22,2004j
Exhibit 8: Coai Mine Hazard Study, prepared by icicie Creek Engineers (dated January 20, 2009)
Exhibit 9: Drainage Repart, prepared by D.R.Strong{dated December 28, 2015)
Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Sewell Wetland Cansulting(dated December
Exhibit 10: 22, 2015j
Conceptual Stream Mitigation Plan prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting(December
Exhibit 11: 28, 2015)
Habitat Data Report, prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting(dated December 22,
Exhibit 12: 2015)
Exhibit 13: Arborist Report, prepared by Greenforest Inc. (dated December 16, 2015j
Exhibit 14: Tree Re#entian Pfan
Exhibit 15: Traffic Impact Analysis(71A}, prepared by TraffEx(dated February 2, 2016)
Exhibit 16; Public Comment LettersJEmails
independent Secandary Review–Traffic Study, prepared by TenW (dated March 21,
Exhibit 17: 2016}
Response Memo -independent Secondary Review, prepared by Traffex tdated March
Exhibit 18: 26, 2036}
Exhibit 19: Staff Recommendation to the Hearing Examiner, dated May 3, 2016
Exhibit 20: SEPA Determination and Mitigation Measures(dated April 11, 2016�
Exhibit 21: CI 73–Residential Building Height
Exhibit 22: Elevation Perspectives
Exhibit 23: Transportation Cancurrency
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUD_LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Community&Ecanomic Development , Hearing Examiner Recornmendatron
AVANA R/DGE PUD ° LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
--- _—.� _.— _— — —
Pa e 3 of 44
Report of May 3, 2016 �
-- _--- ._, __—
— _ _ _- —._.�.._�
C. GENERA!INFQRMATION:
,__ __ .�—___�. �.�.----. � — _. _�.—
Avana Ridge, �LC
1. Owner(s)of Recard: 9675 SE 36th St, Ste 105
Mercer Island,WA 98040
2. Zoning Ciassif+catian: Residential Multi-Family(RMF}
3. Cornprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: Residential High Density(HD�
4. Existing Site Use: Vacant
5. Neighborhoad Characteristics:
a. Narth: Existing Sing/e Family Residentrat(R-8 Zone)
b. East: Daycare(RMF ZaneJ
c. Sou#h: Vacant(RMF ZoneJ
d. West: Multi-�amily, Public Starage, and a Denta/Office (CA Zone)
6. Site Area: 164,827 SF(3.78 acres)
_ .._—... — _� — — ---- �__
, _ _. _ _ —___�_.._.—._._..--
�D. H/STG1R/CALjBACKGROUND:
Action land Use File No. Ordinance No. Date
Comprehensive Plan NJA 5758 06/22/2015
Zoning NJA 5758 06J22 f 2015
Annexation N/A 5327 03/01/200$
5pringbroak Ridge Apt PUD LUAQ9-Q24 N/A 49/24j2009
(Expired}
...._ _� _._..:--_. __.f_ . __ _ .
-- ----_—_._—_— .__—. __._.._�
� E PUSCIC SERVICES:
1. Exis#ing Utilities
a. Water: Water service is provided by Saos Creek Water and Sewer District.
b. Sewer: Sewer service is pravided by Soos Creek Water and Sewer District.
c. SurfacelStorm Water: There is partial starm water conveyance systems along Bensan Drive S,
Benson Rd S,and SE 172"d St.
2. Streets: There are partial street impravements along Bensan Drive S, Benson Rd S, and SE 172°�St.
3. Fire Protectian:City of Rentan Fire Department
_ _..,—_ __�� _.—_ .�
_ ____ _ — —_--_ _.—...—_.__.__ ---�
f APPLfCABLE SECTtQNS OF THE REN7(?N MUNICIPA!CODE.
1. Chapter 2 Land Use districts
a. Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent af Zoning Districts
b. Sectian 4-2-070:Zoning Use Table
c. Section A-2-110: Residential Development Standards
Z. Chapter 3 Enviranmental Regulations
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUD LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Community&Ecanomic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendatinn
AVANA R/DGE PUD s LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
—� — __.—.— , . _—_—---_---------
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 4 of 44
a. Section 4-3-100: Urban pesign Regulatians
3. Chapter 4 Property Qevelopment 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
__. —_ — . ,. �_..�... .—.�..�
C,. APPLICABLE SECTlONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
1. Land Use Element
--
_ ----_ _ . � — - — �- --
H. fINDllUGS Of fAC7'(FQf):
1. The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development (PPUD) and Environmenta!
(SEPA} Review far the construction of a multi-family development containing 74 units, in two four-story
StCUCtlIC�S.
2. The subject site is currently vacant.
3. The development would be comprised of two separate multi-family residentiai structures resulting in a
density of 20.21 du/ac. 7he proposed 74 units would be comprised af (28) 1-bedroam units, (29) 2-
bedroorn units, and {17�3-bedroom units.
4, The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application far review on
pecember 3p, 2015 and determined the application complete on lanuary 13, 2016. On February 15,
2016 the project was piaced on hold pending receipt of an Independent Secondary Review of the
provided Traffic Study. The applicant submitted ali necessary documentation and on March 3Q, 2016
and the project was taken off haid. 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 Mult's-Family {RM-F) zoning clas�ificat"son, the Residential Nigh
Density (NO)Compre�rensive Plan land use designation,and Design District 'B'.
7. Surraunding uses include: a daycare facility abutting the property ta the east (zoned RM-F}; existing
single family residences to the north (zaned R-8}; southeast af the site, along 108th Ave SE, a vacant
parcel (zoned RM-F); and across Benson Drive S, to the west, uses cansists of multi-family, public
storage, and a dental office �zoned CA).
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 paints 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 tatal of 94 parking staHs waufd be provided in the surface parking area. An add'rtional
20-parking stalls wo�ld be provided along the street.
NEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUD_LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Community& Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation
AVANA R/DGE PUD � LUAIS-000894,PPUD,ECF
_._ - -..__ ,_,:_.:-:__
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 5 of 44
10. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmenta) 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
(ERC) 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 4-9-1506.3).
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 4-2-110A 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
HEX Staff Report Avana Rrdge PUD LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Community& Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation
AVANA RIDGE PUD �, LUAIS-000894,PPUD,ECF
_ —__..._.—.T_..--- ---- --
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 6 of 44
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 94
Parking, Loading, and minimum and maximum of 96 parking spaces within surface parking areas.
Driveway Regulations spaces would be allowed in order to The proposal does not comply with
meet code. 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 retainingwalls 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 else intersection is proposed at a height
where 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 the 4,156 SF of private, attached open
exclusive use of the occupants of that space through the use of private
unit in compliance with dimensional balconies for some of the units
standards. 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-OS0. 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 of fill.
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 Community& Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation
AVANA RIDGE PUD � LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
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 all conditions of approval are met:
Compliance I Comprehensive Plan Analysis J
� 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
� i 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-51: 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-52: 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-53: Orient buildings in developments toward the street or a common area,
rather than toward parking lots.
Policy L-57: 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 Avana Ridge PUD_lUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Community& Econamic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendotion
AVANA RIDGE PUD ` LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
_-- _.�..._.:_ _ _—..�_. .��-------------..__
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 8 of 44
23. 2oning Development Standard Campliance: The RMF Zone provides suitable environments for multi-
family dweliings. It is further intended to conditionaily allow uses that are compatible with and support
a muiti-family environment.The RMF ailaws for the development of bath infill parcels in existing multi-
family districts with campatible projects and other multi-famity 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 approva(
are met:
Comptiance � RMF Zone Deve3ap S#andards 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 af sensitive areas, areas
intended for public right-of-way, and private access easements.
'� Staff Comment: After deducting 2,237 square,feet for access eosements and 4,015
square feet for critica/ areas, fram the 264,827 gross square faotage of the site, the
net square foatage would be 159,574 sguare feet (3.66 net acresJ. The 74 unit
proposa!wauld arrive at a net density of 20.22 dwelling units per acre (74 units j3.66
acres = 20.21 du/ac1, which fa!ls within the permitted c�ensity range for the RMF
zoning classifkation.
Lat Dimensians: There is no minimum iot size required in the RMF zone. A minimum
lot width af 25 feet is required (30 feet far corner lats)for townhouse development. A
'� minimum lot depth af 50 feet is required for townhause development.
Staff Comment: The praposal does not indude a/terations to lot lines.
tot Caverage:The allawed lot coverage is 35°la. A maximum coverage of 4�5°lo may be
allowed thraugh the Hearing Examiner site devefopment plan review pracess.
✓
Staff Comment: The lat coverage for the entire development is at approximately
13.8%.
Setbacks:The rec}uired setbacks attached dwellings in the RMF zone are as follaws:
frant yard is 20 feet, the side yard is 0 feet for the atiached sides and 5 feet far the
unattached sides (per Cl-76}, side yard along the street is 2Q feet, and rear yard is 10
feet.
Staff Comment: The praposed buildings would have a front yard setback af 20 feet
and from the front(SE 172"�St)property line which exceeds the maximum frant yard
Compliant if sefback. The proposed west-bui�ding wou/d have a side yard along-a-street setback of
Canditions o,� 24 feet from the Bensan Drive/SR 515 which exceeds the maximum side yard a/ong-a-
Approvat is street setback. The side yard setback,from the eastern praperty line is 33 feet and 4-
Mer inehes exceeding the 5 foot requirement. 7'here is not a rear yard for the site g+ven
street frontages surrounding the site.
The project is however proposed to be built across a partian of the common boundary
between existing property lines. Therefare, staff recommends as a condition of
approval the applicant be required to record formal Lot Cambination or Binding Site
Plan in order to ensure the praposed buildings are not built across property lines. The
instrument shall be recorded prior ta building permit approval.
Requested ta Building Standards. The RMF zane has a maximum impervious surface coverage o#
be Madified 75%a.A Cade Interpretation {Cl-73) {Exhibit 21}was adopted regarding building height
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUp LUA15-000894
City of Rentan Department of Community& Ecanomic Developrnent Hearing Examiner Recornmendation
AVANA R/DGE PUD LUA15-000894,PPUD, ECF
�..�_....—_ _.. _ _ __..—.�� _
- _—
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 9 of 44
_ __ _ __
_ __ _
Through the requirements in residential zanes. In the RMF zone, a maximum building height of 3
�'v� stories with a wali plate height af 3d 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 rooftap features, such as chimneys, may project an
additional four(4}verticai feet from the raof surface. Non-exempt vertical projections
(e.g., decks, railings, etc.j shali nat extend above the maximum wall plate height
uniess the projection is stepped back one-and-a-half (1.5) horizontal feet from each
fa�ade for each ane (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 maxirrtum 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 resident+a(dweliing structure may be obtained
thraugh the pravisian of additianal amenities such as additianal recreatian faciiities,
underground parking, and additianal landscaped apen space areas; as determined
through the site developmen# plan review pracess and depending on the
compatibility of the propased buildings with adjacen# or abutting existing residential
devefopment. fn no case shall the maximum wali plate height of a residential
structure exceed thirty-five feet(35'}.
Requested to be modified�khrough the PUD
Staff Comment: The overall praject has less impervious surface than otherwise wauld
be expected. Based on the provided T�R the site wauld contain approximately 40.1%
impervious surfaces for the overall site. This would include building areas, associated
wa/kways, driveways,parking and drive aisles.
The tallest point of the structure would be approximately 46 feet and S-inches fram
average grade to the highest peak af the tallest shed roof element. The PUD seeks ta
modify the minimum pitch from 4:12 to 2:12 as weN as the maximum wall plate
height. The requested mod+fication wou/d stNl give the appearance of pitched shed
roof from rhe pedestrian perspective fExhibit 22). The varied cambination af parapet
and roof s/ape, combined with cornice detai/s and trellis elements achieve a visua/ly
interesting break rn the roafline intended ro be created with roof pitch requirement.
The propased roof profiles effective/y achieve the intent of the cade by breaking up the
massing and providing vrsual int-erest to the build+ng raoflines. AdditionaHy, the
proposed height serves to concentrate deve/opment+n orre area of the site preserving
opportunities for meaningfu!open spnce.
Therefore, staff is in suppart of the requested roof pitch and height modification, as
part af the PUD, if all conditions of approval are met.
Landscaping: The City's landscape regulations (ftMC 4-4-07Q} require a 10-foot
landscape strip along all public street frantages. Additiana4 minimum planting strip
widths between the curb and sidewalk are established according to the street
Compliont tf ��velopment standards of RMC 4-6-Q60.
Canditians o� Staff Comment: Tfre applicant i►as proposed /andscaping a/onq the frontages of the
Approvat is s,te (Benson Dr+ve S, Benson Rd S, and SE 172°�St) exceeding the 10 foat landscape
Met requirement. i"he applicant has alsa thougirtfully incorporated landscaping
throughout the s+te in arder ta create active and passive recreatian apportunities as
well as to separate parking and drive aisles into smaller areas.
A conceptual landscape plan was submitted witn the project application (Exhibit 3J.
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUD_LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Community&Economic Development Nearing Examiner Recommendation
AVANA R/DGE PUD � LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
�---- _ _ __—.----.__.._._._-----
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 10 of 44
The landscape plan includes a planting plan which contains severa!different tree and
shrub species but daes not pravide specific detail far the nurnber or types of trees and
shrubbery. Therefore staff recommends, as a condition af approval, the applicant be
required to submit a detailed/andscape plan to the Current Planning Praject Manager
prior to construction permit approva/complying with RMC 4-4-070.
See additiana! dlscussion betow in fC?F 26: PtJD D�C1510n Criteria,
�andscaprngjScreening.
Tree Re#ention: The City's adopted Tree Retention and Land Clearing Reguiations
require the retention of 20 percent of trees in a residential development.
Significant trees shall be retained in the fo4lowing priority order:
Priarity One: Landmark trees; significant trees that form a cantinuaus canopy;
significant trees an slopes greater than twenty percent (20°10); Significant trees
adjacent to critical areas and their associated buffers; and Significant trees over sixty
fieet(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 alf other trees have
been evaluated for retention and are nat able to be retained, unless the alders andf
or cottonwoods are used as part of an approved enhancement project within a
critical area or its buffer.
Far 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 af existing
trees, replacement trees, trees required pursuant to RMC 4-4-070F1, Street Frontage
Complianiif �andscaping Required,or a combination.
Conditivns af
Appravat is Staff Camment: The site is turrently forested with mixed canapy daminated by
Mer pouglas fir, red cedar, big leaf map/e, Scou/er's willow, and black cattanwood. The
site's understary is dominated by /ndian p/um, hazelnut, Himilayan b/ackberry, sword
fern, and creeping b/ackberry. The applicant pravided a Tree Protectian Plan/Arbarist
Repart, completed by Greenforest Inc., dated December 16, 2015 (Exhibit 13J. Based
on the provided tree inventory, 429 trees are lacated on the subject site. There are
114 trees located in critical areas and associated buffers; 67 trees were identified as
dead, diseased, or dangeraus; and 37 trees wou/d be located within proposed rights-
of-way. This results in the exclusion of 218 trees fram retention calculatians. As such,
211 trees were utilized to calculate retention requirements af 20% of the significant
trees located an the site.
Therefore, the applkant wou/d be required to retarn at least 42 trees on srte. The
provided Tree Retention Plan depicts the retention of 46 trees autside af the critical
areas and their associated buffers which serves to meet tree retent�on requirements
(Exhib�t 13).
Additionally, tite project site is approximately 165,000 SF square feet. As a resu/t, a
total af 132 trees are required to be located on the srte in order to meet tf►e tree
density requ+rements of tire cade (165,000 square feet/5,000 square feet x 4 trees =
132 trees). The appJicant's prapased landscape p�an inc/udes the p/anting of severa�
trees, in addition to the 4b trees proposed for reientfon, but does not pravide specific
detail for the number or rypes of trees. Therefore, staff recommends as a conditio» of
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUp_LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Comrr?unity&Economic Develapment Mearing Exarrriner Recamrrtendatian
AVANA R/DGE PUD �. LUA15-Q00$94,PPUD,ECF
_._—._.—�..__ ___.. _—_._f�_ �w---._�_..__ —.__—._—._,._.—
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 11 af 44
appraval, the applicant be required to submit a detailed landscape p/an depicting at
least 132, twa-inch caliper, trees (or the gross equivalent inchesl on site; nat including
the those trees located within the Native Growth Protection Easement. The detailed
landscape p/an shall be submitted to, and appraved by, the Current Planning Praject
Manager prior to construction permit approval.
Parking. The parking regulations, RMC 4-4-080, require a specific number of aff-
street parking stalls be provided based on number of bedraoms proposed per unit.
Repuested to be modified tF�rouph the PUD
Staff Camment. The following ratios would be app�icable to the site:
Use #�residentia/units Ratio Required Spaces
Attached 28—1 bedraoms 1.0 spaces f 1-bedroom 28
Residential 29_2 bedroams 1.4 spaces j2-bedroom 41
Units
17—3 bedrooms 1.6 spaces/3-bedroom 27
....... _. _.
—
&ased on the proposed uses, a minimum and rnaximum of 96 parking spaces wauld 6e
required rn order to meet code. The appticant is proposing a total of 94 spaces within
structured and surface parking areas. The praposa/ does not campty with the
minimurra requirements by two statts. 7he appticant r`s proposr'ng to modify the
Requested ta �J�jmum parking requirements through the PUD.
be Modified
Throuqh the While the proposal does not meet the minimum number of parking stalls required by
PUD cade the requested modification conforms to the intent and purpose of the parking
regulations by providing sufficient on-site parking for the amaunt necessary for the
new development. The applicant is requesting a very small reduction, of/ess rhan 3%.
Additionally, the proposal includes 20 puta�ic stalls provided a/ong SE 172"d St which
would serve as overflow parking for the propasal. Therefare, staff is in support of tf►e
requested modification, as part of the PUD, if alJ conditions of apprava/are met.
The parking conforms to the minimum requirements for drive aisle, parking stall,
dimensions and the provision af ADA accessible parking stalls.
Per RMC 4-4-080F.I,T the num6er of b+cycle parkir►g spaces shal! 6e ane-haif (0.5)
bicycle parking space per dwelling unit for a totat of 37 bicycle parking staNs. The
applitant is propasing 21 bicycle parking spaces within a bike room in the West
building. An additiona! 20 bicycle parking spates would be prauided within a bike
room in the East 6uilding, for a tota/ of 41 spaees. The appticant wr!l be required to
demonstrate spaces meet the requirements of R11rJC 4-4-OSOF.11.c as part of building
permit applrcatrans.
Refuse and Recyctabies: Per RMC 4-4-090 for multi-family developments a minimum
of 1 % square feet per dweliing unit is required for recyclabie deposit areas and a
minimum of 3 square feet per dwelling unit is required for refuse deposit areas.
Requested ta There shall be at least ane deposit area/callectian point for every thirty (30) dwelling
be Modified units,
rhrough the Staff Comment. Based on the praposa!for a total 74 residential units, 333 square feet
PUD o f refuse and recyde area us required to be dedkated. The proposal inrludes a 436
square foot area dedicated to refuse and recyde which complies with the area
dedication requirements.
Thraugh the PUD the applrcant is requesting a madificatian in order ta provide a
__
__
NEXStaff Report Avana Ridge PUD_LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Com.^�unity&Economic Deve%pment Hearing Examiner Recommendcrtion
AVANA RIDGE PUD ' LUA15-OQ0894,PPUD,ECf
—___,...,,___—_ ..— _ .—.__.—..——
___....—_ _ _....---._� ..—_ _ -_ _ —____.�.
Report of May 3, 2Q16 Page 12 of 44
._ _
combined refuse/recycle enclosure. The refuse/recyde storage location wou/d be
central/y lacated between both buildings at the center of the site, away from public
view. Ta reduce architectura! bulk and scale the twa separate/y-required storage
locations have been proposed in one enclosure. A single enclosure would provide ease
of access to residents of both buildings in additian to allowing for one, easily-
accessib/e, pickup point for waste management services. Therefore, staff is in support
of the requested modification, as part of the PUD, if all conditians of approval are
met.
See additiona/ discussian be/ow in FOF 29: Design Distrrct Review, Service Eler»ent
Design and Locarion.
_
Fences and Retaining Watls: In any residential district, the maximum height of any
fence, hedge or retaining wail shali 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
waUs abutting public rights-of-way.
Requested to be modified thrvuqh the FUD.
Staff Comment: The site can best be characterized as hil/y generaCty sloping south
taward the stream on site and Benson Drive S. S/opes on-site range from 8 to 15%
with a topographic relief of approximate/y 35 feet. The steepest slope on the site is
approximately 20°o in the proximity of the stream an site. The proposal complies with
the retaining wa/l height requirements of the cnde with the exceptions of two areas
on site.
A section af the keystone-type wr�ll proposed near the manument sign at the Ber�son
Road/Benson Drive ir�t�ersectinn is S�eet and 6-inches tall. 7his wall would face the
street. Imposing the 4 foat maximum height wau/d Fequire a 4 foot wide terrace and
Reguested to add 1Q5 linear feet of a 2.0- to 1.5 foot ral/ wall. The wal!would a�so�equire removal
be Modified vf three additiona/trees.
Through the
PUD Additionarly, a section of Che keystane-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 +s preferabie to a terraced
confrguration because it provides a contiguaus landscape buffer. The walJ cau/d be
limited to 6 feet by steepening the grade of the landscape 6uffer. However, this was
not pursued in an effort to mirrimize vrsual impacts ta the adjacent day care faciliry
thraugh the use of Jandscapirrg.
The requested modifications to the retaining wa/l height requirements are minimal in
bath cases and strict compliance wau/d create impacts such as the removal of existing
vegetation or the interruption of landscape buffer. However, given the location of the
wal/s are adjacent to, or in many cases within, rights-af-way the proposal would very
much benefit from Jandscaping between the sidewalk and praposed retaining walls in
order to provide visua/ relief. The code requires a minimum t�hree foot landscaped
setback at the base of retaining walls abutting public rights-of-way. Therefore staff
recommends, as a conditian af approval, the applicant submit a revised landscaping
p/an depicting a minimum three faot Jandscaped setback from the sidewalk at the
base of retaininq walls abutting, or within, public rights-of-way. Candscaping shall
include a mixture of shrubs and groundcover(trees are optianatJ in confarmance with
the standards of RMC 4-4-070H4, Perimeter Parking tot Landscaping. The revised
HEX Staf�Repart Avana Ridge PUR_LUA15-QQ0894
City of Renton Department of Cornmunity&Ecanomic Develapment Hearing Examiner Recommendation
AVANA R/DCyE PUD LUA15-000894,PPUD,EtF
--. _ ,_.. —
--- -- ------:. �_.._____.�__--
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 13 of 44
.
landscaping plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project
Manager prior ta engineering permit approval.
Staff is in support o,f the requested madrfrcation for the retaining wa!l heighr, as part
of the PUD, if a!1 canditions of approva/ are complied with indudrng the provision of
�andscaping between the sidewaNk and the retaining wcrll.
24. Critical Areas: Project sites which contain critical areas are required to comply with the Critica! Areas
Regulations (RMC 4-3-050). The proposa! is consistent with the Critica! Areas Regulations, if all
conditions of approval are complied with:
Geoiogicaily Nazardous Areas:
Staff Carr�ment:A coa/mine was operated historica(ly within the southern partion af
the site, alang the southwesterly property line. According to the Coa/Mine Hazard
Study,prepared by Icide Creek Engineers on January 26, 2009, the coal mine is
designated a High Caa/Mine Hazord(CHJ as defined by RMC 4-3-050(Exhibir 8). The
dassification was affirmed by Earth So/utions IVW in the provided Geotechnical Report
(Exhibit 6J.
High Caa!Mine Hazards are considered areas with a6andoned and improperly sealed
mine apenings and areas underlain by mine warkings shallawer than 200 feet in
depth for steeply dipping seams, or shaJlawer than 15 times the thickness of the seam
or workings for gently dipping seams. These areas may 6e trffected by coilapse ar
other subsidence. The rrtain entry and arrshaft for the Springbrook mrne is also
t'ompliant rf located on srte. lcicle Creek Engineers encauntered approximately IS feet of fill at
ronditran of whot ap�ears to 6e the mine entry, estimated to be S to S feet in diameter, and
appravat is inclrned at approximately SS to 60 degrees ta the south jExhibit 8).
met
Severa/ 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 contralled density fill (Exhibit 8J. However,
these recommendations were based on a former deve/opment praposal which
included structures in the southern portion of the site. The propased deve/opment is
setback approximately 125 feet from rhe coal mine hazard and would likely not have
the same impac#s as the former development. However, there are some grading
activities and smal/er recreational improvements in the proximity of the coal mine
hazard which may patentially be affected by mining re/ated subsidence.
A mitigatian measure was issued requiring an updated Coa/ Mine Hazard Report
demonstrating the proposa/would not increase the threat of the geo/ogical hazard to
adjacent ar abutting properties beyond pre-development conditians and the
deve/opment can be safe/y accommodated on the site(Exhibit 20J.
Streams:
Staff Comment: The applicant submitted a Wet/and and Supplemental Stream Study,
prepared by Ed Sewel/ Consulting Inc., dated December 22, 2015 (Exhibit 10J. The
report states there are na wet/ands located on site. An unnamed seasonal stream
(Stream AJ has been identified on the subject site. Stream A bisects the northern and
sauthern 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
flaw and lack of fish use. Class Ns streams have a standard buffer af 50 feet as
measured from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) as well as a 15 foat setback�
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUD LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Community& Econamic Development Hearing Examiner Retommendation
AVANA RIDC;E PUD LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
-_._ _ -- .,_._—.�
Report of May 3, 2016 � � Page 14 of 44
frnm the edge of the buffer to any structure. The applicant is proposing buffer
averaging for portians of the stream buffer. Additionally, the applicant is propasing
an alteratian within the stream and its associated buffer far a pedestrian crossing. It
shou/d be noted that the Na6itat Biologist for WDFW concluded the on-site stream is
not a jurisdictional water, or a "water of the state". As a resu/t no Hydraulic Permit
Approval(HPAJ permit is required from Washington Department of Fish& Wild/ife.
Stream Buffer Averaqinq Propospl:
RMC 4-3-OSQ.l,1 allows for critical area buffers to be reduced to no less than a 25-faot
tnrnimum for Type Ns streams. The aaplicant has proposed buffer averaging, with
reductions of the buffer down to 25 �eet, for Stream A. Overall the appticant� is
proposing buffer reductions in the amount of approxirr�ate/y 8,&35 square feet to be
mit�gated with buffer additians in the atnount of approximate/y 9,527 square feet.
The applicant is a/sn proposing buffer enhcrncement for those portions of the 6uffer
which would be reduced. Pursuant to RMC, buffer width averaging may be allowed by
the reviewing offida!only where the applicant demonstrates al!of the following:
i. There are existing physical irnprauements in or near the water 6ody and
assaciated riparian area;and
ii. 8uffer width averaging will result +n na net /oss of stream/iakejriparian
eco/ogical function;and
' iii. The tota� area contained within the buffer after averaging is na /ess than
that contained within the required standard buffer width prior to averaginq;
and
iv. The proposed buffer standard is based on consideratian af the best available
science as described in WAC 365-195-905,•and
v. Where the buffer width is reduced by averaging pursuant ta this subsection,
buffer enhancement shall be rec�uired.
The existing stream buffer, whrch separates the north apartment buildrng area frorra
the southern open space, is mostly existing forest (primarily Alder and CottonwaodJ
with an understory dominated by invasive Himalayan b/ackberry. 7he buffer wnuld be
enhanced through the removal of the invasive bCackberries and other undesi�ab/e
vegetation and replaced with native understory vegetatian. There are existing road
improvements within the buffer on bath the east and west sides of the stream. The
applicant's Supplementa/ Stream Study conc/uc}ed the buffer reduction, through
averaging, wau/d have the physical characteristics that can protect water quality and
functions of the stream on site(Exhibit 10J.
Staff has reviewed the stream buffer ave�aging proposal for Stream A, and agrees
that the proposa/ meets all requirements found in RMC 4-3-D5Q.1.1. However, the
pravided stream study does nox �ndude a demonstration of rampliance with criteria
faund in RMC 4-3-OSQ.H.2. Therefore, staff was unable to verify that through the
enhancement of the buffer and the use of low rmpact deve/opment� strateg�es the
reduced buffer wi!!functian at a higher level than the standard buffer. While staff
believes the proposa!for a reduced buffer wouldn't negatively impact the function of
the stream, this cou/d not be affirmed. As a resu/t staff is recommer�ding a condition
of apprava!requiring the applicant subrrait a revised Mi�igation �lan which ac�dresses
the criteria faund in RMC 4-3-OSO.H.2 demonstrating the reduced buffer wauldn't
negatively impact the function af the stream. The revised mitigation plan sha!l be
submitted to, arad approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to
engineering permit approval.
,
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUD_LUA15-000894
City of Rentan Department of Community&Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recornmendation
AVANA RIDGE PUD LUA15-000$94,PPUD,ECF
_ --- ---�-- _ _—._.___:;:_ — -.
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 15 of 44
Stream Alteration Proposal:
RMC 4-3-QSO.l.2.a al/ows for the construction of non-vehicu/ar transportatian
crossings. The applicant has prnposed a pedestrian bridge trai'crossing ave�Stream
A. Pursuant to RMC, crossings may be permitted by the reviewing official on/y where
the applicant dernonstrates al!of the foltowing:
i. The proposed route is determined to haue the least impact on the
environment, while r»eeting City Camprehensive P1an Transportation
Element requirements and standards in RtV1C 4-6-d6Q;and
ii. The crossing minim+zes interruption of downstream movement af wood and
gravel;and
iii. Transpartation facilities in buffer areas shal� not run paralle/ to the water
body; and
iv. Crossings occur as near to perpendicu/ar with the water body as possible;
and
v. Crossings are designed according to the Washingtan Department af Fish and
Wildlife Fish Water Crossing Design Guidelines, 2013, and the National
Marine Fisheries Service Guidelines far 5a/monid Passage at Stream
Crossings, 2000, as may be updated, or equiva/ent manuals as determined
by the Administrator;and
vi. Seasona� work wrndows are r�etermineci and made a condition of appraval;
and
vii. Mitigation criterra of subsection L af this Sertion are met.
The proposed path wou/d connect the north and south sides af the buffer, crossing
over Stream A, via a pedestrian bridge. The bridge would also serve to cannect ti�e
propased structures to the proposed apen space on the souti►ern portian of the site.
The bridged trai! crossing would be /ocated within a narrow portion of the stream,
above the ftow path of water, and wou/d be perpendicular to t�e water body.
Staff has reviewed the a/teration proposa/for the bridge across Stream A, and agrees
that the proposal meets all requirements found in RMC 4-3-OSO,l.2. However, the
provided stream study does not include a demonstration of compliance with criteria
found in RMC 4-3-QSO.H.2. While staff be/ieves the propased bridged crossing
wouldn`t negatively impact the function of the stream, staff was unable to verify. As a
result staff is recammending a candition af approval requiring the applicant submit a
revised Niitigation p/an which addresses the criteria found in RMC 4-3-OSO.H.2
demonstrating the bridged crossing wou�dn't negative�y impact the function of the
stream. The revised mitigation plan shall be submitred to, and approved by, the
Current P/anning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval.
�ina/ly, in arder to preserve and protect the stream and its associated buffer staff alsa
recommends the applicant establish a Native Growth Protection Easement over that
part af the site encompassing the stream and buffer prea and place split rail fencing
and signage along the outer edge of the 6uffer. i"he Fina/ Mitigatian p/an shaH
include all specifications far fencing and signage and shall be submitted to, and
approved fay, the Current Planning Project Manager priar ta engineering permit
appraval.
25. PUD Applicabi{ity Standards: Rursuant to RMC 4-9-1508, any applicant seeking to permit development
which is not limited by the strict application af the City's zaning, parking, street, and subdivisian
regulations in a comprehensive manner shall be subject to applicability standards. The follawing table
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUp LUA15-000894
City of Renton Departme�t of Community& Econamic Development Nearing Examiner Recommendation
AVANA R/DGE PUD ` LUA15-000894,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 Appficability Criteria and Analysis �
In approving a planned urban development,the City may modify any of the standards
Compilant if of RMC 4-2, RMC 4-3-100, RMC 4-4, RMC 4-6-06Q, and RMC 4-7. All modifications
COA(�I1'1Qq5 Of shall be considered simultaneously as part of the planned urban development.
Approval Are St�ff eomment:All standards requested ro 6e madified are contarned within the cade
Met sectrons tisted a6ove with the exception af the Private Open Space modification. See
discussion under fiOF 28:PUD Development Standards, Private Qpen Space.
An applicant may request additionai madifications from the requirements of the
Rentan Municipal Code. Approval for modifications other than those specifically
Campliantif described in subsection RMC 4-9-1506.2.a shall be appraved prior to submittal of a
Candittons o� preliminary planned urban development plan.
Approva!are
Mer St�ff ����ent: A!! requested modificatians are outlined a6ave under Finding 13.
Staff is in support af al! requested modifications, with the exception of the private
open space request, if all conditians of approval are complied wirh.
A planned urban development may not autharize uses that are inconsistent with
thase uses aliowed by the underlying zane, or averlay district, or other location
,i restriction in RMC TitEe 4, including, but not limited to: RMC 4-2-010 to 4-2-080, 4-3-
010 to A-3-040,4-3-090, 4-3-095, and 4-4-010.
Staff Comment:Attached residential units are a permitted use in the RMF zone.
The number of dwelEing units shall not exceed the density al(owances of the
applicab(e base or overlay zone or bonus eriteria in chapter 4-2 or 4-9 RMC; hawever,
averaging density acrass a site with multiple zoning classifications may be al#owed if
'� approved by the Community and Ecanomic Deveiapment Administrator.
Staff Comment: The proposal complies with the density requirements of the zone. See
discussion in FOF 23:Zaning Development Standard Compliance.
26. PUQ Decision Criteria Analysis: Pursuant to RMC 4-9-150D, each planned urban develapment sha�l
demonstrate compliance with the Planned Urban Development decision criteria. The following table
contains project elements intended to camply with the Planned Urban Deve{opment decision criteria,
as outlined in RMC 4-9-150D:
Compliance PUD Decisian Criteria and Analysis
Demonstra#ion 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 praposed development wN! be
superior to that which would result withaut a planned urban development, and that
the development will not be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties.
`� Staff Camment: If the canditions of approval are met, the applicant will have
demanstrated cornpliance with the PUD regu/at+ons and the Comprei�ensive P/an. The
applieant will have demonstrated that the development is super+or ta that wftich
wau/d resuJt without a PUD and requested modffications will not 6e detrimenta/ to
surrounding properties. The deve/opmen[ of this site as a PUD results in a super+or
design than what would resu{t by the strict application of the Development Standards
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUD LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Cornmunity& Economic Development Mearing Examiner Recommendatian
AVANA RIDGE PUD ` � LUA15-000$94,PPUD,ECf
_.__ :_ , — — ---_ ——_._ �.�----��--_._a .-_._--
Report of May 3, Z016 Page 17 of 44
for the fo/lowing reasons: natura/ features, averall design, and buildin� and site
design. The proposed design provides far the retention of the natural grade on site,
significant trees and a noteworthy amaunt of landscaping and re-vegetation.
Additionally, the plan provides for bath active and passive recreation spaces
significantly beyond the standard cade requirements. The praposed design can
provide for the aforementioned amenities because of the modifications requested in
F�F 13:Requested Modifications from RMC above.
The site is designated Residential Hrgh Density (MD) on the Camprehensive P/an tand
Use Map. See Compreherasive P(an analysis under FQF 22: CQmprehensive Plan
Analysis.
Pubiic Benefit Required: Applicants shall demanstrate that a proposed development will pravide
specifically identified benefits that clearly outweigh any adverse impacts or undesirable effects of the
propased p(anned urban development, particuiarly those adverse and undesirable impacts to
surrounding properties, and that the proposed development will provide one or mare of the foilowing
benefits than would result from the development of the subject site withaut the proposed pianned
urban development:
a. Critical Areas: Protects critica!areas that would nat be protected otherwise to the
N/A same degree as without a planned urban developrr►ent.
b. Naturat Features: Preserves, enhances, or rehabilitates natural features of the
subject praperty, such as significant woodlands, native vegetation, tapography,
or noncritical area wildlife habitats, not otherwise required by ather City
regulatians.
Staff Comment: The primary natura/features of the property include retention of 114
existing trees in the critica/ area, in addition to the 46 trees proposed for retention
outside the critical area. The number of trees proposed far retentian resu/ts in minimal
adverse disturbance to existing vegetation, minimize surface water and groundwater
runoff, aid in the stabilization of soils, minimize erosion and sedimentation, and
minimize the need for additional starm drainage facilities caused by the destabilization
Compliant i}' of soils. Additional/y, the cluster of trees praposed for retention wou/d serve to abate
Canditian o}' naise, provide wind protection, and reduce air pallution.
Approval is
Met F'n�«Y. the large /andscaped eommunity open space provided at the southern portion
of the site totaling 19,795 square feet and the 49,918 square�eet o�critica(area and
associated buffer wou/d remain in a vegetativejopen space state providing a
sanctuary for the animals that reside in tne area.
The trees proposed for retention may be +rnpacted after initial clearing,final grading,
due ta changing site conditions. Therefore staff recommends, as a conditian af
approval, the applrcant be required ta provide, to the Curre»� Planning Praject
Manager, tree retention inspectianjmonitvring reports after initia! cleoring, fina!
grading, and annually for twa years by a quaJified professronal farester. The
inspettianJmonitarrng reports shalt identify any retarned trees that devetap problems
due to changing site conditrans and prescribe mrtigation.
c. Pubfic Facilities: Provides public facilities that could nat be required by the City for
NjA development of the subject property without a planned urban development.
d. Use of Sustainable Development Techniques: Design which results in a
�j,q sustainable devefopment; such as LEED certification, energy efficiency, use of
alternative energy resources, low impact development techniques,etc.
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUD_LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Community& Economic Development Hearing Exominer Recomtnendation
AVANA R/DGE PUD ' ' LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
-- --- --_ ..---:—� ---- —_ �—_.—_.�..__.._______.__�_.._.
Report of May 3, 2p16 Page 18 of 44
__ _ _ .
e. Overall Design: Pravides a planned urban development design that is superiar to
the design that would resuit from develapment of the subject praperty withaut a
planned urban development.A superiar design may inctude the foliowing:
i.Open SpacelRecreatian.
(aj Provides increased open space or recreational facilities beyond standard code
requirements and cansidered equivalent to features that wauld offset park mitigation
fees in Resolution 3082; and
(b) Provides a quality environment through either passive or active recreatian facilities
and attractive common areas, including accessibility to buildings from parking areas
and public walkways;or
Staff�amment: The applicant has provided a variety of recreation apportunities and
apen spaces throughout the development. Without the use of the proposed PUD the
applicant has indicated that the proposa!wauld have likety elimrnated the opportunity
for a cancentrated recreation space.
The applicant is praposing 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 sidewa/k linking the space to the
public righC-of-way. A central path and complementing pedestrian bridge crossing
wou/d be constructed to create an access point ta the community apen space from the
surface parking lat. The large area wou/d be ample usable space far passive recreation
and special events such as picnics,parties, weddings, movie night in the park, cancerts,
Compliant if etc;. promoting community invo/vement. Additionally, the space would take
Conditions af pdvantage af and dispiay the attractive territarial views ta the West. Finally, the space
Apprava/are w�utd serve to preserve and enhance existing vegetation and natura/ character
M�= through tree preservatian, remova! of extensive invasive B/ackberries, and
replacement with native understory vegetation to be maintained through the /ife of
the deve/apment.
The space features a large, central, gently sloping /awn for casua! seating and
recreation. The lawn is ariented to s/ope down towards an open pavilion whose
intended use includes perfnrmances, and cammunity gatherings. The pavilion is also
sited to capiure and frame the attractive territoria/views to the West.
A smatl fenced off-Jeash dog run is provrded at the east srde of the site between the
buffer and the parking lot among a grove af existing trees ro 6e preserved. The dog
run would be a pervrous woad-chip surface.
The app/icant has indicated that there is an opporrunity to include interpretive
signage/information regarding differentiating elements (trees, landscaping, drainage,
arci►itect ure, etc.j of the proposed development at a strategic place(sJ on site. The use
of interpretive signage wau/d result in an increase in public benefit for the overall
project. Ti�erefore, staff recommends as a condition of appraval the applicant provide
interpretive signagejinformation regarding differentiating elements (trees,
landscaping, drainage, architecture, etc.) of the praposed development at a strategic
p(ace(s) on site. The site p/an depicting the signage sha�l be submitted to, and
approved by, the Current P/anning Project Manager prior to building permit/�ina/P/at
apprava/wh+chever comes first.
The resident amenity lounge located on Leve/1 of the West building takes advantage
of outdoor space and integrates an outdoor plaza intended for gathering spaces,
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUD_LUA15-000894
City of Rentan Department of Community&Economic Development Hearing ExamiRer Recomrrrendotion
AVANA R/DGE PUD � ° LUA15-OOpS94,PPUD,ECF
-------— ---
_ _._� _�_ _ —_.. ...__._ . _ _.____.._ —___—__-----
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 19 of 44
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 wou/d normal/y be cansidered the "side" elevation of the
project.
ii. Circulation/Screenin�: Provides superior circulation patterns or lacation or
screening of parking facilities;or
Staff Comment: The proposal includes through access resulting in a superior circutation
pattern ro that of two separate entrances into the site wfrich do not connect. tn
additian ta through vehicular access the applicant is praposing to provide street
improvements along SE 172r°St, 8enson Road 5, and portions of 8ensan Drive S.
The project wou/d provide sufficient vehicle access for the proposed development and
the proposed public and private streets could accommodate emergency vehicles and
the traffic demand created by the development if all conditians of appraval are
complied with.
Atl surface parking areas are rnterna! to the project and are pulled away from
neigh6oring praperi�ies. Where grades are steep, landscaping is proposed to screen
sur�ace parking as rrruch as possi6le from pedestrian paths atang the perimeter of the
devetopment.
internal to the site, pedestrian pathways continue throughout the deve/opment along
the interna/ caurtyard and through the open space areas. The site design promotes
social interacrion and wou/d promote a leve/of safety achievab/e through the use of a
PUD. If all conditions of approval are complied with, the pedestrian circu/ation system
throughout the development would be well designed, would encourage wa/kability
throughout the neighbarhaod, and potentially reduce the vehicu/ar traffic and impacfis
on the neighboring community.
iii. Landscapin�lScreenin�: Provides superior landscaping, buffering, ar screening in or
around the propased planned urban development; or
S�aff Comment: CanceptualJy, the proposed Jandscape plan for the entire site is
superior to what wauld be required by Rentan's Municipal Code (Exhibir 3).
Thematically the praposed landscapirrg weaves in a cansistent theme thraughout the
deve/opment and ties a!1 proposed open spaces together. The propased /andscape
plan inc/udes diverse candidate planting Jist: vine map/e, coral bark lapanese mapie,
katsura, Autumn briltiance serviceberry, dogwood, Washington hawthorn, flowerrng
crabapple, sargent cherry, Japcxnese snow6etl, A/asko yeNaw cedar, cypress, pine, fir,
Western cedcrr, and rraountain hemlock trees. The pra�osed shru6 p/antrng list indudes
more than thirty shru6 options. The applicant would be required ta provide cx detaited
landscaping p/an prior to engineering permit approval with specifrc plant details.
The building and parking Iat/andscaping has been designed to meet severa/objectives
including: reductions in the overall sca/e of the building; breaking up of/arge areas of
parking lot pavement with interiar and perimeter landscaping; perimeter landscape
buffer and screening; help define circulatian routes and frame or enhance views;
provide environmenta� benefits such as shade, improved air qua/ity, natural
stormwater treatment, and wildlife habitat.
Underground sprink/er systems are required ta be installed and maintained far al!
landscaped areas. The sprink/er system is required to pravide full water coverage of
the planted areas specified on the plan.
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUD LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Community&Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendatiar�
AVANA R/DGE PUD � LUA15-000$94,_PPUD,ECF
—.-- ._:,.,---- ----.,— ._ _..-
�. _------_.---
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 20 of 44
Details for potential fencing were not provided with the application. Therefore, a
detailed fencing plan shal/ be provided identifying the location and specifications far
a1J fencing on site. A!l fencing shal/be made af quality materia/s in keeping with the
architectural aesthetic of the proposed structures. The fencing plan shal/be submitted
ta, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit
approval.
iv. Site and BuNdin� Desi�n: Provides superior architectural design, placement,
relationship or orientation of structures,ar use of solar energy;or
Sta{�Comment: The p/acement of the bui�dings an s+te would al/ow for natural ligirting
opportunities, and is respectfu/ of tf�re neighboring residential-sca�ed neighbaring
properties througi► the use of modest/y-sloped roaf forms and adherence to building
set-back and landscape requ+remer�ts.
The building placement al/ows the majority of the surface parking to be screened from
public rights-of-way and works together with the on-site landscaping to keep internal
service elernents screened.
The architecrural design af the praposed residenticrl building camplements the
character af the surrounding community through the use o� residentiaily-scaled
windows, frequent r»odulation of the facades, and pedestrian friendly access points,
signage, and proposed p/an�ings.
The p/acement of the buildings a/ong SE 172"�Sfi allaws buffers and additiona/distance
from the other two rights-of-way (Benson Rd S and Bensan Drive SJ alang the
perimeters of the deve/apment. The buildings also serve to screen the parking from the
residential properties to the IVarth, and are pulled away from the neighboring day care
property to the East.
The applicant has reduced the scale of the develapment with the use af twa structures
as opposed to the consolidation of units into one structure. The two structures also
serve ta reduce cangestion on the site and allow for multiple views as well as
modulated facades cvmpared to one cantinuous structure.
A!f visible buildrng materials would fo!!aw a tohesive calar scheme. A variety of
materials and colors are 6eing prapased as part of the calor palette for the building
design aesfhetic. Materials wauld have a variety of patterns and textures induding
pane! cortfiguration, harizont�a! board configuration and revea! patterns consistent
with window placement and proportion. The materia/ palette indudes concrete
masonry, brick, rnetal canopy, cast-in place concrete, fiber cemer�t boar�d, and waod
e/ements. A!l concrete walls wiN be treated with texturing andJor reveals. Artwark is
also propased throughout the community open space and at speci�ic burldrng fa�ade
locations.
Hawever, opportunities exist to enhance the building design in order to provide a
superior presence a/ang SE 172"�St. As such, staff recommends a candition of approva!
requiring the provisian of addit+ona/ground leve/details jsee discussian under FO�29:
�esign District Review, Ground tevel Detai�s).
Building and Site Design.
Compliant if
Candition vf i. Perimeter: Size, scale, mass, character and architeetural design along the planned
Approvat r's urban development perimeter provide a suita6le transition ta adjacent or abutting
Met Iower densityJintensity zanes. Materials shall reduce the patential for light and glare.
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUD_LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Commu�ity& Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation
AVANA R/DGE PUD F LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
—�__ _ _ ..._. --
--.__.._�—:. -- _ �
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 21 of 44
. .
Staff Camment:
The proposal inctudes ample buffers between the proposed structures and property
/ines through the use o,f additional setbacks from code rrtinirrrums. 5pecifr"cally, atong
the eastern praperty line the increases in setbacks allow for naturaf daytightrng
opportunities for the daycare. Additronally, landscape buffers wouid provide a soft
transition between building and daycare.
On the south perimeter, the buildings are set back significantly from a/l property lines,
and allow t�he park amenity to be unobstructed in its day lighting opportuni#ies. Due to
the location of the buildings to the north af the open space, na shadows from the
proposed buildings wou/d be cast at any time of year or day. !3n tire West perimeter,
the build+ng wou�d have minimal impact to views across the site, as bath buildings are
oriented NorthjSouth.
On the North perimeter, the adjacent residential dwellings would be screened from the
surface parking lot thraugh the use of landscape buffers, building modulatian and new
propased street trees. The canceptual landscape plan demonstrates the frequency,
type and number of�he street trees and interior p/antings proposed. These techniques
wou/d successful/y serve to mitigate the fength of the two buildings and reduce impact
to existing neighboring properties if al/conditions af approval are complied with.
Comptiance with aN recommended conditions af approvat would provide a suitable
transizion fror» the adjacent lawer density srngle family residential uses to the more
intense commerdal and multi-famrly uses located to the South and West.
tandscaping and rerracing has been incarporated a/ang Benson Drive 5 in order to
detract attention fram the parking area which may be visible fram this paint of view.
The new development is anticipated to fit into the existing developed fabr�ic o}� the
neighborhood. Staff wi!l be recammertding, as a condition of approvc�l, the applicant
pravide a materials board to the satisfaction of the Current P/anning Project Manager
(see discussion in FOF 29: Design District Review). The materia/s board would also be
used to canfirm that siding materials are non-reflective whkh wot�ld reduce glare.
Each unit would have windows, which could s/ight/y ref/ect light from the building but
nat to an extent beyond any typica!mulri family develapment.
The applicant has inditated that the proposa!would not resuit in excessive glare anto
adjacent properties, in the sub+nitted design dfstrict compliance narrative. However, a
lighting ptan was not submirted with the apptication package, as such, staff
recommends a candition of appraval that requires the applicant t�a pravide a lighti»g
plan that adequately provides for public safery without casting excessive gtare an
adjacent properties; crt the time of engineering permit review. Pedestrian scale and
dawnGghting shaN be used in alt cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicutar
movement, un�ess alternative pedestrian sca/e righting has been approved
adminrstrative/y or is specifitally listed as exempt from provisions located in RMC 4-4-
Q75 Lighting, Exteriar On-Site.
ii. Interior Desi�n: Promotes a coordinated site and building design. Buiidings in
groups should be related by coordinated materials and roof styles, but contrast shouid
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 Comrnent: The praposed buildings appear to have been designed to be built in a
coordinated fashion, utilizing a cansistent set of materia/s. Differentiation throughout _
NEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUD LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Community& Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation
AVANA RIDCiE PUD LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 22 of 44
'I the design is provided with the use of different materials and colors.
The interior design of both buildings has been integrated with the overall 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 s/oped at 2:12, rather than 4:12, the sloped roof portions of
the building reduce the shadow cast on the residentia/properties 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 approval, the
applicant provide a materials board to the satisfaction of the Current Planning Project
Manager (see discussion in FOF 29: Design District ReviewJ. The materials board
wou/d also be used to confirm the use of varied materials and architectural detailing
for the proposal. Additional/y, staff wil/ 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 DetailsJ.
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.
Requested to
be Modified iv. Provides safe, efficient access for emergency vehicles.
Throuqh the Reauested to be modified throuph the PUD.
PUD
Staff Comment: The applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis prepored by TraffEx,
dated February 2, 2016(Exhibit 15J. The provided TIA was found to meet the intent of
the TIA guidelines and is generally acceptab/e 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"d St entrance and potential
impacts to the neighboring single family residentia/development to the north as we/l
as additional impacts to queueing delays at Benson Rd 5 and Benson Drive S (Exhibit
15J.
Based on public comments received, staff required an evaluation by an independent
qualified professiona( regarding the app/icant'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
17J. In general, the secondary review affirmed the overall trip distribution patterns.
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUD LUA15-000894
Crty of Renton Department of Community& Economic Qeveloprrtent hlearing Examiner Recommendation
AVANA R/06E PUD f � lUA15-000894,PPUD,ECf
__._.___ ._:._.,..., _ ---
Report of May 3, 2Q16 Page 23 af 44
_ _ _ ,
The report however, recommended revisions be made to the traffic counts to consider
the worse-case traffic scenaria given the observed intersectian queuing at 108`h Ave 5E
and Benson Rd 5. The applicant provided a memo, dated March 26, 2016, in response
ta the recommendations induded in the secondary review (Exhibit 18J. The memo
generally concurred with the recommendatians of the peer review wrth the exceptian
for the removal of the site driveway access restrictions to SE 172nd Szreet. The
applicant's respanse 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 origina!Traffr'c lmpact Anatysis(Exhibit 15), lndependent Secondary
Review (Exhibit 17), and the applicant's response rrtemo (Exhibit 18) staff provided
applicabte corrtrnents below�ar each Transportation subject.
Access: The applicant is proposing twa points of ingress and egress into the site in
order ta meet Fire Department requirements for access. The applicant praposes one
entrance off of SE 172nd St between the praposed buildings, and one entrance aff af
Benson Road South. Ti►e two access points converge to farm drive-through access
througi� the site, Severa/ public camments were received requesting access be
eliminated from SE 172°d St, in order ta mitigate anticipated cut through traffic on
neighboring roads to the north. In addii-ion, concerns were raised regarding the
b/acking of the propased access, along 8enson ftd S, during PM peak hour traff+c. The
applicant has praposed a driveway configuration which would attempt ta restrict
movements to /eft-injright —out anly as way ta mitigate cut thraugh traffic on
residential streets ta the north.
Access and propased mitigatian, was analyzed as part of the Independent 5econdary
Review prepared by TENW(Exhibit 17J. TENW general/y affirmed the trip distribution
assumptions made by TraffEx and substantiated the need for two access points. With
respect to praposed mitigation, TraffEx determined that the praposed SE 172"d St
driveway configuration would be ineffective in limiting impacts to neighboring
residential streets ta the nnrth. In addition, it is anticipated i�hat restrictions to the SE
172"d driveway wauld encourage u-turns and associated impacts to existing residential
driveways a/ong the narth side of 5E 172"d St. Therefare, staff is recommending a
candition af Hearing Examiner approval, the elimination of the proposed access
restrictions alang SE 172"d St in order ta provide ful/access along SE 172"d St. A revised
site plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Plan Reviewer prior ta
engineering permit approva�.
In order to address anticipated impacts on neighl�oring streets eaused by cut-thraugh
traffic, a traffk ca/ming SEPA mitigatian measure was required in lieu vf the foregoing
site access restriction (Exhibit 20J. Specifically, E/ectranic Speed Radar Signs are
required to be instatled in the northbound direction on both 106kh Ave SE and 104`�'Ave
SE.
teve! of Service: It rs anticipated that the proposed develapment would generate
approximately 492 average daily trips with 38 AM peak-haur trips and 4b PM peak-
hour trips. The provided report analyzed three intersectron/ocatrons(Exhibit 15):
Intersection 1: Site Access/SE 172"d St
lntersection 2: 108`h Ave SEjBenson Rd SjSE 172"d St
lntersection 3: Site Access/Benson Rd S/108"'Ave SE
�
NEX Staff Report Avana Ridge Pl1Q_LUA15-OQ0894
City of Renton Department of Comr�unity& Ecanomic Qevelopment Hearing Exarniner Recornmendatron
AVAfVR RlDGE PUD ` LllA15-OQ4894,PPUD,ECF
---.�._— —__ .._. __.__ r ---- —�
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 24 af 44
__
_ __ _ __ _ _ _ ,
The provided analysis notes that al/intersections will operate at an acceptable level of
service with the proposed development. Therefore, the proposa/ wou/d not be
required to mitigate at any intersection. Analysis of future conditior►s address
cumu/ative impacts of the proposed project and traffic growth in the study area.
Traffic signal warranty analysis was also provided at the intersection af SE 172�d St and
Bensan Rd 5. The report states there is no need for a signa/ at the intersection as a
result of the project.
Nowever, the 7ranspartation Department conducted a mode! to assess any possible
salution to address the dtizen's concerns regarding the backing af queue on Benson
Road fram the intersection with SR 515 tQ SE 172"� Street. tlnfortunately, staff is
unabte to provide an upt�ate on the model conducted at this time.
Increased traffic created by ti�e development wauld 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 far a building
permit in December of 2015. The fee in 2015 was assessed at $2,214.44 per new
mutti family unit. The fee is estimated at approximate/y $164,000. The fee shal/ be
payable to the City ai the time of building permit issuance.
Site Distance: The provided 7'raffic Impact Analysis states sight distance requirements
are met at the site access driveway anta SE 172�d St and with vegetation trimming,
within the right of way, at the site access driveway to Benson Rd S(Exhibit 15J.
Street lmprovements: Street Impravements are regulated by RMC 4-6-060 – Street
Standards.See 6elow:
Bensan Drive S – eenson Drive S (SR 515) is a principa/ arteria/ and a state route
roadway a/ong 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 p/anter
strip existing a/ong the Benson Drive 5 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 impravements are
required on principal arteria/ streets. The applicant is praposing to maintain the
existing right-of-way. Due ta critical areas along portions of the frontage, the
applicant has requested a modification through the PUD to allaw the sidewa/k to
remain in the current location for thase areas where critica/areas are locared.
Staff is in support of the requested modification. ey maintaining the existing sidewa/k,
the need for terraced retaining walls would be eliminated and impacts to the stream
buffer a/ong Benson Drive 5 wou/d be minimized. The applicant has also proposed a
walking path interna/ ta the site to promote pedestrian connectivity. Staff
recommends a candition of approva/requiring the applicant to dedicate 1 foot behind
the sidewalk in addition to right-of-way dedicatian for luminaire foundations along
Benson Drive S. The dedication shall be required prior to temporary occupancy
approval.
Bensan Rd S – &enson Rd S is a minor arteria! atong the projeet's east property 1ine.
Malf-street frontage irrtprovements are required to be provided on the side af the
street fronting the deve/opment. Per code, the minimum right-af-way width required
far a minor arterial is 91 feet. The avaitable right-of-way width on the &ensan Rd S
frontage, per the King County assessor rrtap, is 100 feet and wautd not necessitate
additional rr'ght-of-way dedicatron. 7he required paved width on this street is 44 feet,
which ir�c/udes three travel lanes and a S foot wide bike /ane ort 6orh sides o� the �
HEX Staff Repart Avana Ridge PUD LUA15-OQ4894
Gty of Renton Department of Community 8c Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recorrtmendatian
AVANA R/DGE PUD r LlJA15-OQ0894,PPUD,ECF
-----,_—_ _�. ____ _.--- -. ....—.--.._—__.
Report of May 3,2016 iV Page 25 of 44
street. Frontage improvements wauld include the following: a O.S faot wide curb and
gutter, an 8 foot wide landscaped planter, an 8 foot wide sidewa/k,street lighting, and
stormwater improvements are required. The applicant is proposing street
improvements along eenson Rd 5 which camply with code.
SE 172"d St-5E 272"d St is a commercial mixed use and industrial access street along
rhe project's north property line. Hat�street frontage improverrtents are requrred to be
prc�vided on the side of the street fronting the development. Per code, the minrmum
right-of way width required for a camtnerciat mr"xed use and industrial actess street is
b9�eet. The availab/e right-of-way wrdth on the SE 172"d St frontage, per the King
Caunty assessor map, is 60 feet and would require additional right-of-way dedication.
Frontage improvements would include the foltowing:an 8 foot parking lane, a 0.5 foot
wide curb and gutter, an &font wide landscaped planter, a 6 foot wfde sidewa/k,
street lighting, and stormwater improvements are required. The applicant is
proposing street impravemen�s, along SE .272"d St, whrch comp�y with cade. The
applicant however has requested a modificatJon rhrough rhe PUQ to reduce the
required dedication from 4.5 feet to 3 feet. Staff is recommendir�g apprnva! of the
requested modification. Staff recommends a condition of approval requiring the
applicant to dedicate 1 foot behind the sidewalk in additian to right-of-way dedicatian
for luminaire foundatians olang SE 172"d St. The dedication shall be required prior ta
temporary occupancy approval,
Tem�orary /rr+t�acts: Given the concentration of deve/opment to occurring in the
immediate vicinity of the praject site, staff anticipates that the propased praject wauld
contribute to shart term impacts to rhe City's street system. Therefore, staff is
recommending a condition af approva! requiring the applicant create a pubJic
outreach sign in coardination with City of Renton ta cammunicate with road users, the
genera!public, area residences and 6usinesses, and appropriate public entities about
praject infarmation;road conditrans rn the wark zone area;and the safety and mabifity
ef,fects of the work zone. The srgn shal! be ptaced an site prior to construction
commencemen�.
Pedestrian Impravements: As part of the propased project, sidewa/ks wau/d be
constructed a/ang the frontage af the site and wau/d connect to the existing sidewalk
system. Hawever, safety cancerns have been raised with respect to pedestrian
cannectrvity off site due ta missing sidewa/k linkages approaching the intersectron of
8enson Rd S and SE 172"�St. Given the number of units propased it is very like/y that a
large influx af people would utiJize the public sidewa/k system as weN as the
anticipated schaa! 6us stop across 8e»son Rd S. Providing pedestrian connecCions to
abutting properties is an impartant aspett of cannectivity and encourages pedestrian
activity and is required to be considered when reviewing the subject appliration. The
conditio» of tl�e existing protruded cur6, approaching the inrersection of SE 172"d St
and Benson Rd S, has been targely disturbed and does not pravide a safe route for
school children and or fesidents watking ta and from the srte. As a resutt, a SEPA
mitigation measure was issued requiring the applrcant to pravide an off-site sidewalk,
along the south side of SE 172"d Sf and the wesi'side of Benson Rd S, approaching the
intersettion (Exhibit 2QJ. A street/rghting analysis is a/so required to be conducted by
the deve/oper at the southwest corner of the intersection af SE 272"d St and Benson Rd
S.
Concurrency-Staff recommends a transportatian concurrency approva/based upon a
test of the citywide Transportatian Plan, cansideration af growth levels included in the
tOS-tested T�ansportation Plan, payment of a Transportation Mitigation �'ee, and an �
NEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUQ LfJA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Community& Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation
AVANA RIOGE PUD � _ _ _ • LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 26 of 44
� I application of site specific mitigation (Exhibit 23J. �
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 J
; 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 f/ow requirements for this project, as proposed, is 2,250 gpm. A
minimum of one fire hydrant is required within 50 feet of all fire department
� '; connection for standpoints and sprinkler systems.
A Fire Impact Fee, based on new multi family units is required in order to mitigate the
' proposal's potentia/ impacts to City emergency services. The applicant would be
; required to pay an appropriate Fire Impact Fee. The fee is payab/e to the City as
specified by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of building permit application. A
i building permit application was submitted in December of 2015. The 2015 fee was
assessed at$463.66 per multi family.
Parks and Recreation: The proposed development is anticipated to impact the Parks
', and Recreation system. The applicant would be required to pay an appropriate Parks
Impact Fee. The fee wou/d be used to mitigate the proposal's potential impact to
✓ ' City's Park and Recreation 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.
Schools: It is anticipated that the Renton Schoo! District can accommodate all
' additional students generated by this proposal at the following schoo/s: Cascade
; Elementary (1.2 mi/e from the subject siteJ, Nelson Middle School (0.8 miles from the
' subject siteJ and Lindbergh High School(2.1 miles from the subject siteJ.
' Future students are designated to be transported to school via bus for Elementary, and
Compliant if High School. Students would be within walking distance to designated midd/e school.
Condition of For safe wa/king conditions, see discussion under FOF 26: PUD Criteria and Analysis,
Approval is ' Circulation.
Met A School Impact Fee, based on new mulri family units, will be required in order to
mitigate the proposal's potential impacts to Renton School District. The fee 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 $1,339.00 per multi family 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 B/ack River drainage basin and Panther
Creek drainage sub-basin. Upstream runoff enters the site in two locations. Portions of
SE 172"d St and 106`h Ave SE direct upstream runoff across the northern property line.
Upstream runoff from the west side of Benson Rd 5 flows into a ditch a/ong the east
HEXStaff Report Avana Ridge PUD LUA15-000894
City of Renton pepartment of Community&Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recammendation
AVANA R/DGE PUD ' LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECf
- — ...— ,_.. — -----
__ __— -- --------
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 27 of 44
_ ,
property line. Runnoff currently discharges at the sites western property line, at two
lacations, and heads north through a conveyance system in Bensan Drive S. The flows
eventually cross under Bensan Drive S and conveyed a westerly direction in a series of
pipes and catch basis eventually autfa/ling into Panther Creek.
This project is required to comply with Che 2009 King County Surface Water Nlanual
and the City of Renton Arnendments to the KCSWM, Chap£er 2 and 2. Based ort the
City's flow contra/ map, t�his site falls within the Flaw Cantro/ Duration Standard,
Forestec� Conditions. This project is subject ta fu/l drainage review. 7he applicant
subm�tted a Preliminary Drainage Repart prepared by D.R.Strang, dated Decerra6er 28,
20.25(Exhlblr 9).
The report also+ncludes a detailed summary of the pre and post developed conditions.
The si-armwater detent+on and water qualify treatment wou/d be provided within a
camb+ned detention/water quality vault under the parking area/ocated in the western
portron af the srte. The combined deientionjwater quality vault wauld be followed by a
media filtration system to accommadate the Enhanced Water Quality Treatment
requirerrrents for mult+family deve/opmer►r. For water quaNty features that are nat in
the City Amendments or the 2009 KCSWDM, and which have the Genera/ Use Jevel
designatian through the state Department of Ecology's Techno/ogy Assessment
Pratocol — Ecology jTAPE) program, an adjustment pracess request is requtred.
Conditrons assaciated with Frelrminary PUD approva/wii! likely include a requirement
for the subrrrittal, and appraval, of an Adjustment in order to utilize water quality
features whrch are nat in the City Amendments or the 2009 KCSWDM.
Water and Sanitary Sewer.
Staff Comment: Water and sewer service is pravided by Soos Creek Water and Sewer
� Distrrct. A water and sewer availability certificate from the Soos Creek uti/it�y district
was submitted to the City with the /and use appfication. Approved water and sewer
plans from Soos Creek are required to be pravic�ed during utility construction permit
approval.
Ciusters or Building Groups and Open Space: An appearance of openness created by
ciustering, separation of buiiding groups, and through the use of we11-designed open
space and landscaping, or a reductian in amount of imperviaus surfaces not otherwise
required.
Staff Camment: The proposed deve/opment is designed specifica(ly to increase the
access and opportunity for open space. The multiple open spaces throughaut the site
are wel/designed and provide a variety of recreatiana/oppartunities both passive and
active. The proposed structures are clustered to the interiar of the site allowing far
large open spaces.
✓
The Pt1D places the buitdings paraNet to the neighbaring properties to the north. This
rrtaximizes the oppartunity for surface parking screening and a targe, uninterrupted
open space to the south. Due to the presence of a stream a/ong the lawer area of the
site, a natural barder exists. A pedestrian bridge crosses the stream �v tink the open
space and the residenria/developments.
The overall project has less impervious surface than otherwise would be expected.
Based an the pravided TIR the site wauld contain appraximately 40.1% impervious
surfaces for the overa�l site. This wou/d include building areas, associated wa/kways,
driveways, parking and drive aisles.
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUD_LUA15-000894
Crty of Renton Department af Com^+unity&Economic Development Mearing Examrner Reeomrrrendation
AVANA R/DGE PUD ° ` L!lA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
- -- ---.�.__.
.___--- ------ --- _
Report of May 3,2016 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 praperties. Fences, insulation, walks, barriers, and landscaping are
used, as apprapriate, far the protectian 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. Windaws are
piaced at such a height or location or screened to provide sufficient privacy. Sufficient
iight and air are provided to each dweliing unit.
Staff Comment: Dwelling units are designed such that no two outdoor decks are
directly adjacent to one anather. Decks and buitding moc�ulation have been designed
cohesively to allow scr-eening by the bui(ding to decks for resident privacy. Units within
✓ each building are oriented to the narth and south, and mimic the residential character
of the properties to the north.
The applicant has ut+lized /andscaping and building screening techniques throughout
the development to promote privacy and discourage the use of window screening
elements as a privacy-creating element that b/ock apportunities far natural light.
tiving area windows are large and aim to bring as much natura!light inta every unit as
passib/e, whr`le bedroom w+ndorus are adequately sized for Iight while stHl providing
ample privacy through the use of raised sill heights. tandscape buffers aJso exist at
ground-level uses to aid in noise reductran from the street.
The placement of the buildings, oriented to apen space, provides separation and
privacy for the residents while maintaining a communal atmosphere.
See additional discc�ssron under FOF 2�:Design District Review, Ground Cevel Details.
Building Orientation: Provides buildings oriented to enhance views from within the
site by taking advantage of topography, building location and style.
'� Staff Comrr►ent: The bu�ldings are orientated toward the open spaces or toward the
offsite view vistas afforded in the naturally etevated site location. There is mrnimal
orientation toward off site non view areas.
Parking Area Design: Provides parking areas that are campiemented by landscaping
and not designed in iong raws.The size of parking areas is minimized in comparisan to
typica( designs, and each area related to the group af buiidings served. The design
provides for efficient use of parking, and shared parking facilities where appropriate.
Staff Comment: Parking across the site wou/d be hand/ed in way as to nat have large
✓ surface parking areas. Instead the applicant is proposing the use of parallel parking
stalls a/ong the perimeter of the proposed drive aisle.
The surface parking design is comprised of 9Q-degree statts to moke maxirrturrt use of
parkrng area and peovide clear, safe vehicular circutation that�promotes visibrlity. The
use of compact stalls is minimr�l and rs well under the code-required maximums for
compact stal/caunts.
Phasing; Each phase of the praposed development contains the required parking
NfA spaces, apen space, recreation spaces, landscaping and utilities necessary for creating
and sustaining a desirabie and stable environment, so that each phase, together with
previaus phases,can stand alone.
HEX Staff Report Avaraa Ridge PUD_LUA15-OQ0894
.������i����
City of Renton DepartmenT of Comrnunity&Economic Development Mearrng Exar»iner Recommendation
AVANA R/DG'E PUD ` LUA15-QQ0894,PPUD,ECF
� __----._ �—_ ——.— ------ -<--
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 29 af 44
28. PUp Development Standards: Pursuant ta RMC 4-9-150D.4, each planned urban development shall
demonstrate campliance with the development standards far the Planned Urban Development
regulations. The following table contains project elements intended ta camply with the devetopment
standards of the Planned Urban Development regulations, as outlined in RMC 4-9-150E:
Cornpliance � PUD Develapment 5tandard Analysis
L COMMON OPEN SPACE STANQARD: Open space shall be concentrated in (arge usable areas and
may be designed to provide either active or passive recreatian. ftequirements far residential, mixed
use,commercial,and industrial developments are described below.
Standard: Mixed use residential and attached housing developments af ten (10) or
more dwelling units shail provide a minimum area of common space or recreation
area equal to fifty (50} square feet per unit. The common space area sha�l be
aggregated to pravide usable area(sj far residents.The location, iayout, and propased
type of common space or recreation area shail be subject ta approval by the Hearing
Examiner. The required common open space sha11 be satisfied with one ar more of
the eiements listed below. The Nearing Examiner may require more than one of the
foliowing elements for developments having more than one hundred (100) units.
(a�Courtyards, plazas,or multipurpose open spaces;
✓
(b} Upper level cammon decks, patios, terraces, ar roaf gardens. Such spaces above
the street level mus# feature views ar amenities that are unique to the site and
provided as an asset to the deveiopment;
(cj Pedestrian corridors dedicated ta passive recreation and separate fram the public
street system;
(d} Recreation facilities including, but not limited to: #ennis/sports caurts, swimming
paols,exercise areas,game roam�, ar other similar facifities;or
(ej Chiidren's piay spaces.
Standard: Required landscaping, driveways, parking,or other vet�icular use areas shal#
✓ not be caunted toward tl�e comman space requirement or be located in dedicated
outdoor recreatian ar cammon use areas.
Standard: Required yard setback areas shail not count toward outdoor recreatian 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 ful(y usabie area accessible to all
residents af the development.
� Standard: Private decks, balconies, and private ground floar apen space shall not
count toward the common space/recreatian area requirement.
Standa�d: Other required landscaping, and sensitive area buffers withaut comman
./ access links, such as pedestrian traiEs, sha#I not be included toward the required
recreation and cammon space requirement.
Standard: All buildings and developments with aver thirty thousand (30,000) square
feet af nonresidential uses (excludes parking garage floorplate areas} shall provide
N�,q pedestrian-oriented space according to the following formula:
1% o# the lot area + 1% of the building area = Minimum amount of pedestrian-
ariented space.
NEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUD_LUA15-OQ0894
City of Renton Department of Com^�unity&Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation
AVANA RIDGE PUD � LUAIS-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�q 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 residentia! units have designated
Compliant if private open space. As such, staff recommends a condition of approva! that the
Conditions of applicant provide a revised site p/an demonstrating compliance with the private open
Approva/ are space standard of at least 15 feet in every dimension for all ground related units. The
Met revised site plan sha/l be submitted to, and approved by, the Currenf P/anning Project
Manager prior to building permit approval whichever comes first.
Additional requirements for ground related private open space can be found be/ow
under Ground Level Detai/s.
Compliant ;f 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
Approva! are open space).
Met Staff Comment:See comment 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(S').
Staff Comment: Not all upper story residentia/ units appear to have private open
Compliant if space dimensioned at 60 feet. The applicant has requested to vary this standard as
Conditions of pprt of the PUD. However, the City is unable to modify any of the provisions of the
Approva/ are planned Urban Development Regulations. As such, staff recommends a condition of
Met ppprova/that the applicant provide revised e/evations 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.
c. Installation and Maintenance of Common Open Space:
,i IStandard: 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
HEXStaff Report Avana Ridge PUD_LUA15-000894
.�.�
City of Rentan Department of Community&Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation
AVANA R/DGE PUD ` 1UA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
---— --:-- :,,:-- ^. _ .._.....—_
Report of May 3, 2016 � Page 31 of 44
by the property owners' assaciation, or the agent(sj thereaf. In the event that such
faciiities are not maintained in a responsible manner, as determined by the City, the
City shali have the right to provide for the maintenance thereof and bill the owner ar
property owners' association accordingly. Such bili, if unpaid, shall become a lien
against each individuai praperty.
Staff Comment: Priar to the issuance of any occupancy permit, the developer sha/l
furnish a security aevice to the City ir� an amount equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-
06Q. landscaping sha/l be planted within one year of the date of fina/ approval of the
planned urban development, and maintained for a period of 2 years thereafter prior to
the re/ease of the security device. A security device for prvviding 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 sha/l be kept on file with the
Planning Division. If this condition of approval is met the proposal would satisfy tnis
standard.
d. instaliatian and Maintenance of Common Facitities:
Standard: prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits, al! comman facilities,
induding but not limited to utilities, storm drainage, streets, recreatian facilities, etc.,
shall be completed by the developer or, if deferred by the Administrator, assured
through a security device to #he City equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060, except
for such common facilities that are intended to serve anly future phases of a planned
N/A urban development. Any common facilities that are intended to serve both the
present and future phases af 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 af such security and deferral, the City
shall determine what portion of the costs of improvements is attributable to each
phase of a planned urban devetopment.
Standard: All common faeilities not dedicated ta the Gty shall be permanently
maintained by the pfa�ned urban development owner, if there is onfy one owner, or
by the property owners' associatian, 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#or the maintenance thereof and bill the owner or
property owners' association accordingly. Such bill, if unpaid, shalf become a lien
against each individual property.
Staff Comment: Based on the proposed application the anly area to be dedicated ta
the City is the required right-of-way and the drairrage detention pond. As such all
other facilities shall be permanentfy maintained by the property awner.
29. Design District Review: The project site is located within Design District 'B'. The following table
contains project elements intended ta comply with the standards of the Design District '6' 5tandards
and guidelines, as outlined in RMC 4-3-100.E:
�
Compliance � Design District Guideline and Standard Anaiysis
1.SITE DESIGN AND BUIIDING LC1CATtON:
ln#ent:To ensure that bui(dings are iacated in relation to streets and other buildings so that the Vision
of the City af Renton can be realized for a high-density urban environment; so that businesses enjoy
visibility from pubiic rights-of-way; and to encaurage pedestrian activity.
HEX Staff Repnrt Avana Ridge PUD LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Community& Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recornmendation
AVANA R/DGE PUD { LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
Report of May 3, 2016 � Page 32 of 44
a. Building Location and Orientation:
Intent: To ensure uisibility af businesses and to establish active, lively uses along sidewalks and
pedestrian pathways.Ta organize buildings far pedestrian use and so that natural light is availabfe 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,
Guidetines: developments shall enhance the mutual relationship of buildings with each other, as well
as with the roads, open space, and pedestrian amenities whiie working to create a pedestrian
oriented environment. lots shall be canfigured 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 re#lected) and direct sun
✓ exposure to nearby buildings and open space (except parking areasj shall be
cansidered when siting structures.
� Standard: Buildings shall be oriented ta the street with clear cannections ta the
sidewalk.
� Standard: 7he frant 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 grosand floor residentia! uses raised above street level for
Requested to residents' privacy.
be Modified
Through the $faff Comment: The applicant is propasing ground related residentia/ uses along
PUD var+ous facades. Due ta the unique s+te conditians and tapographic chaNenge.s a/ong
the applicant is proposing to pravide some of the ground floor residential uniLs at or
be/ow grade as part of the PUD. Constructing all ground re/ated units abave grade
would require increases to the herght of the structures and signrficant site disrupt+on.
Therefore, staff is in support of the requested modificatian, through the �UD, rf a1J
conditions of apprava!are met.
b. Building Entries:
Intent:Ta make building entrances convenient to (ocate and easy to access, and ensure tha# building
entries further the pedestrian nature af the froniing sidewalk and the urban character af the district.
Guidelines: Primary entries shali face the street, serve as a focal point, and allow space for sacial
interaction. All entries shali include features that make them easily identifiab�e whiie 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 shal) be pravided
and shali enhance the overali quality of the pedestrian experience on the site.
Standard: A primary entrance of each building shall be located on the facade#acing a
✓ street, shal! be prominent, visible from the street, connected by a walkway to the
public sidewalk,and include human-scale elements.
Compliant if Standard: A primary entrance of each building shall be made visibly prominent by
�°"'�rtt°n°f incorporating architectural features such as a facade overhang, trellis, large entry
Approvat is
Met doors, and/or ornamental lighting.
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUD_LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Com^�unity& Econamic Development Nearing Examiner Recommendation
AVANA RIDGE PUD LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
_----- -._
—._�._ � --.___ . .--- -----�_—.—.._.----
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 33 of 44
Staff Comment:5ee Ground Level Details be/ow.
Standard Building entries from a street shali be clearly marked with canopies,
architecturaf elements, ornamental lighting, or landscaping and include weather
protection at least four and one-half feet {4-1j2'} wide. S�ildings that are taller than
thir#y feet (3Q') in height shall alsa ensure that the weather pro#ect'san is proportional
to the distance above ground level.
Compliant if Staff�Comment: The applicant is proposing ground related residentia/ uses along SE
Condition af 1�2 $t• Staff is recommend+ng a condition of approval requiring entrances and
Approvai is P�dest-rian connections from proposed patios to the public sidewa/k system (see
Met discussian below). As a result, staff recommends that building entries from a street be
clearly marked with canopies, architectura/ eJement�s, arnamenta/ lighting, andjar
landscap+ng and include weather prot�ection at leasr four and one-half feet (4-1j2`J
wide. The revised e/evations shall be submitted to, and appraved by, the Current
Planning Praject Manager priar to bur/ding permit appraval. The applicant is
encouraged to mimic the canopy used for the primary entrances in a smaller
applicatron for ground related unit entrarrtes.
� Standard: Building entries fram a parking lot shall be subordinate to those related to
the street.
Standard: Features such as entries, lobbies, and disp€ay windows shall be oriented to
t1tjA a street or pedestrian-oriented space; atherwise, screening or decorative features
shauld be incorporated.
Standard: Muitiple buildings an the same site shall direct views to building entries by
✓ providing a continuous network af pedestrian paths and open spaces that incorparate
landscaping.
Standard: Ground floor residentiaf units that are directly accessible from the street
shall include entries fram 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.
Sta Comment: Ti�e applicant is propos+ng ground re/ated residentia/ uses a/ang ti�e
5�172°�St. The proposal partially complies with the.standard with the use of patios.
Compliant if However, the proposal does not include entrances and pedestrian connections from
Cond+r�an o� proposed pat+os ro the public sidewalk. Therefore, staff recommends as a condit+on of
ApprovaJ is approval rhe applicant be required to submrt a revised site and landscaping p/an
M�� depitting entranees and pedestrian cannections fram ground related residential units,
alang SE 172�d St, to the public sidewalk. The revised landscape and site plan sha!l 6e
submrtted ta and approved 6y the Current Planning Froject Manager prior to building
permit approval. Staf�is aware there may 6e topographic challenges with entrances
a/ong SE' 172"a St and the applicant is encouraged to pravide stairs to the units or
demonstrate separate entrances are not feasibte prrar to building permit approvat.
If this condition of approval is met the proposa/wou/d satisfy this standard.
c.Transition to Surrounding Development:
in#ent: 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 ta 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 LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Co��nunity&Economic Development Nearing Examiner Recommenc�ation
AVANA R/DGE PUD LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECf
Report of May 3, 2016 ' � Page 34 of 44
Standard: At least one of the fallowing design elements shall be used to promote a
transition to surraunding uses:
1. 8uilding propartions, including step-backs on upper levefs in accordance with the
surraunding planned and existing land use forms;or
2. Building articulation to divide a larger architectural e�ement into smaller
✓ increments; or
3, Raof lines, roof pitches, and roo# shapes designed ta reduce apparent bulk and
transition with existing develapment.
Additianaliy,the Administra#or may require increased setbacks at the side or rear af a
building in arder to reduce the bufk and scale af larger buildings andJor so that
sunlight reaches adjacent andJar abutting yards.
d.Service Element Lacation and Design:
Intent: Ta reduce the potential negative impacts of service elements (i.e., waste receptacles, laading
dacks) by Cocating 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
iandscaping and an enclasure with fencing that is made of quality materials.
Standard: Service elements shall be located and designed to minimize the impacts an
� the pedestrian environrnent and adjacent uses. Service elements shall be
concentrated and located where they are accessible ta service vehicles and
convenient for tenant use.
Standard: In addition ta standard enclosure requirements, garbage, recyciing
caliection, and utility areas sha(I be enclosed on ali sides, inciuding the roof and
screened around their perimeter by a wall or fence and have seif-c(osing doars.
Complr"ant rf
Candrtivn of Staff Comment: The applicant is proposing a refuse and recycle endosure at a central
Approval is �ocation 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 enc/osure e/evations which inc/ude a raof. The revised
e/evatians shal/ be submii�ted ta, and approved by, the Current P/anning Praject
Manager prior to building permit approval.
� Standard: Service enc(osures shaN be made of masonry, arnamental metal ar wood,
or same combination of#he three {3).
Standard: If the service area is adjacent ta a street, pathway, ar pedestrian-oriented
N/A space, a landscaped planting strip, minimum 3 feet wide, shail be located on 3 sides
of such facility.
2.PARKING AND VENICULAR ACCESS:
Intent: To provide safe, convenient access ta the Urban Center and the Center Village; incorporate
various modes of transpartation, including pubiic mass transit, in order ta reduce traffic volumes and
ather impacts from vehides; ensure sufficient parking is provided, while encouraging creativity in
reducing the impacts of parking areas; allaw an active pedestrian environment by maintaining
contiguous street frontages, withaut parking lot siting a�ong 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 LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Co�^�unity 8c Econamic Develapment Hearing Exarrtiner Recornmendation
AVANA RIDGE PUD � LUA15-OOp894,PPUD,ECF
Report of May 3, 2016 � � � Page 35 of 44
di5triCt.
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. �.arge areas of surface parlcing shalf alsa be designed ta
accarnmodate future infill develapment.
S#andard: Parking shall be located sa that no surface parking is located between:
✓ (a}A building and the frant property line; andjor
(b}A buiiding and the side property line (when on a corner lot).
f Standard: Parking shall be Iocated so that it is screened fram surrounding streets by
buildir�gs, landscaping,and/or gateway features as dictated by location.
b. Structured Parking Garages:
Intent: To promote mare efficient use af land needed for vehicle parking; encourage the use of
structured parking; physically and visually integrate parking garages with other uses; and reduce the
overal! impact of parking garages.
Guidelines: Parking garages shail not dominate the streetscape; they shail be designed to be
campiementary with adjacent and abutting buildings. They shall be sited to complement, not
subordinate, pedestrian entries. Similar forms, materials, andjor details ta the primary building(s)
should be used ta 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 (7S%) 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 ��rcumstances. !f allowed, the structure shall be set back at least six feet (6')from the
sidewalk and feature substantial landscaping. This landscaping shall include a
combinatian af evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs, and ground cover. This
setback shal! be increased to ten #eet (10'} when abutting a primary arteria! andJor
minor arterial.
NfA Standard: Public facing facades shal) be articulated by arches, linteis, masonry trim, ar
other architectural elements andjar materials.
�fA S#andard: The entry to the parking garage shall be located away frorrt the primary
street,to either the side or rear af the building.
Standard: Parking garages at grade sha11 include screening ar be endosed from view
NjA with treatment such as wa11s, decorative grilles, trellis with landscaping, or a
combination of treatments.
Standard: 7he Administrator af the Department of Community and Ecanamic
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. Possibfe treatments Co reduce the
setback include landscaping camponents plus one ar more of the fallawing integrated
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUP LUA15-000894
City of Renton Departrnenf of Con^^�unity& Econornk Development Hearing Excrminer Recommendatian
AVANAR/DGEPUD LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
---.�_ _�_..—— -._ . — _
Report of May 3, 2016
Page 36 af 44
with the architectural design of the building:
(a}Ornamentai griilwark{other than vertical bars);
(b) Decorative artwork;
(c) Risplay windaws;
(d) Brick,ti1e,or stone;
(ej Pre-cast decorative panels;
(f}Vine-covered trellis;
(g) Raised landscaping beds with decorative materials; ar
(h)Other treatments that meet the intent of this standard..,
c. Vehicular Access:
Intent: To rnaintain a cantiguous and uninterrupted sidewalk by minimizing, consolidating, andJor
el'rminating vehicular access off streets.
Guidelines: Vehicular access to parking garages and parking iots shali not impede or interrupt
pedestrian mobility.The impacts of curb cuts to pedestrian access an sidewalks shali be minimized.
� Standard: Access to parking lots and garages shall be from alleys, when available. If
nat available,access shall occur at side streets.
� Standard: The number af driveways and curb cu#s shall be minimized, so that
pedestrian circulatian along the sidewalk is minimally impeded.
3. PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT:
intent:To enhance the urban character of development in the Urban Center and the Center Village by
creating pedestrian netwarks and by providing strong links from streets and drives ta building
entrances; make the pedestrian environment safer and mare convenient, comforta6le, and pleasant
to waik between businesses, on sidewalks, ta and fram access paints, and through parking (ots; and
promote the use af multi-moda! and public transportatian systems in order ta reduce ather vehicular
traffie.
a. Pedestrian Circulation:
Intent: Ta create a network of linkages for pedestrians ta imprave safety and conuenience and
e�hance the pedestrian environment.
Guideiines: The pedestrian environment shall be given priority and importance in the design of
prajects. Sidewaiks and/or pathways shali be provided and shall provide safe access ta buildings from
parking areas. Praviding pedestrian cannections to abutting properties is an important aspect af
connectivity and encourages pedestrian activity and shall be considered. Pathways shali 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 praperties shall be pravided.
'� {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_LUA15-000894
Crty of Renton Department of Community&Economic Development Nearing Examiner Recommendation
AVANA R/DGE PUD LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
---- —._..-------------,_�..�—_ �______.,------
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 37 of 44
development.
Standard: Pathways within parking areas shall be pravided and differentiated by
materia! or texture (i.e., raised walkway, stamped concrete, or pavers) fror» abutting
paving materia{s. Permeable materiais are encouraged. The pathways shall be
perpendicular to the applicable building facade and no greater than one hundred fifty
feet(150'}apart.
Comp(iantif Staff Comment: The applicant has proposed a series of pedestrian cannections
Canditions of
Approvol are throughout the site however it is unclear if there is a differentiatian of mai-eriats
�vret across the drive aisles (Exi►ibit 2). Therefore staff recommends, as a condition af
approval, tire applicant revise the site p/an to depict a differentiatian in materials for
all pedestrian connections w+thin parking areas andjor drive a+sles on site. The revised
site p/an shall be submitted ta and approved by the Current P/anning Project Manager
prior to buildingJeng+neering permit approval, If this cond+tian of approval is met the
propasal would satisfy this standard.
Standard;Sidewalks and pathways along the facades af buildings shall be of sufficient
width to accommadate 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 shai! inciude an 8 foat minimum unobstructed
,i walking surface.
(b) interior pathways shall be provided and shall vary in width to establish a
hierarchy. The widths shall be based an the intended number of users; to be na
sma�ler than five feet(5') and no greater than twelve feet(12').
(c) For all other interior pathways, the propased walkway shall be of suffident
width to accommodate tne anticipated r�umber of users.
NjA 5tandard: Mid-black connections between buildings shail be pravided.
b. Pedestrian Amenities:
tntent: To create attractive spaces that unify the buiiding and street environments and are inviting
and comfortable far pedestrrans; and provide publicly accessible areas that function far a variety af
year-raund activities, under typical seasonal weather canditians.
Guidelines: The pedestrian environment shall be given priority and importance in the design of
prajects. Amenities that encourage pedestrian use and enhance the pedestrian experience shall be
included.
Standard: Architectural elements that incorporate plants, particularly at building
entrances, in publicly aceessible spaces and at facades alang streets, shafl be
Campliant if provided.
Condition of
Appravat is Met Staff Comment:See Bui/ding Entries and Ground tevel Details discussion below.
Standard: Amenities such as autdoar group seating, benches, transit shelters,
Compliantif fountains, and public art shail be provided.
condition o}' (a) Site furniture shall be made of durable, vandal- and weather-resistant
approva�is+vtet materials that da not retain rainwater and can be reasonably maintained over an
extended period af time.
NEX Staff Repart Avana Ridge PUD_LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Community&Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendatian
AVANA R/DGE PUD LUA15-000894,PPUD, ECF
___--.�_..:_..—� -.
_._...__.�--- _..� .;:_ .— ____ �.V.�_
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 38 of 44
_ .__ _ ___ ,
(b} 5ite furniture and amenities shall nat impede or block pedestrian access to
public spaces or building entrances.
Staff Comment: The comrrrunity open space includes lawn to allow for active
reereation and more intimate /acations featuring pknic tables and 6enches. Also
included is an ornarr�enta! pavition intended to pravrde views from the site and for
public gathering opportunities, ornamental p/ant�ngs and scu(ptural facus po�nts. The
proposal did not include specifkations for proposed pedestrian c�menit�es. Therefore
staff was unable to verify the whether site furniture is compliant wrth the standard.
As such, staff recommends a condition of approval requ�ring the applicant pravide
detailed specifications for all site furniture, and art, in arder to ensure durab/e, vandal-
and weather-resistant materials ore used. The specificatians shall be subrr�itted to,
pnd approved by, the Current P/anning Project Manager priar building permit
approval.
4. RECREATION AREAS AND CaMM(3N OPEN SPACE:
Intent.To ensure tnat areas for bath passive and active recreation are available to residents,warkers,
and visitars and that these areas are of sufficient size for the intended activity and in canvenient
locations. To create usable and inviting open space that is accessible to the public, and to promote
pedestrian activity on streets particularly at street carners.
Guideiines: Develapments lacated at street intersections should provide pedestrian-ariented space at
the street corner to emphasize pedestrian activity (illustration belaw}. Recreation and common open
space areas are mtegral aspects af quality dewelopment that encourage pedestrians and users. These
areas shal! be provided in an amaun#that is adequate ta be functional and usab#e; they shall also be
landscaped and lacated sa that they are appealing to users and pedestrians
Standard: All attached housing developments shall pravide at least one hundred fifty
Requested ta (150) square feet of private usable space per unit. At least one hundred (100) square
be Madified feet of the private space shali abut each unit. Private space may include porches,
Thraugh the balconies,yards, and decks.
PUD
Staff Comment:See discussion above under Private Qpen Space.
5. BUILDING ARCHITECtURAL DESIGN:
Intent:To encaurage building design that is unique and urban in character, comfartabfe on a human
scale, and uses appropriate building materials #hat are suitable for the Pacific Northwest climate. To
discourage franchise retai!architecture.
a. Building Character and Massing:
lntent:To ensure that buildings are not bland and visualfy appear ta be at a human scale; and ensure
that al!sides af a building,that can be seen by the public,are visually interesting.
Guidetines: Building facades sha#I 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, modulatian, and their intervals should create a sense of scale impartant
ta residential buildings.
� Standard: All building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of
no mare than twenty feet(20').
� Standard: Modulations shatl be a minimum af two feet(2'} in depth and four#ee# {4')
in width.
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUD 1UA15-000894
��s
City of Rentan Department of Cotrmunity&Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation
AVANA R/DGE PUD ? 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 af
the facade; or provide an additianal speciai feature such as a clock tr�wer, courtyard,
fountain, or public gathering area.
b.Ground-Level Details:
Intent: To ensure that buildings are visually interesting and reinfarce the intended human-scale
character of the pedestrian environment; and ensure that all sides of a building within near or distant
public view haue visuaf interest.
Guidelines: The use of materia4 variations such as colars, brick, shingles, stucco, and harizontal wood
siding is encouraged. The primary building entrance should be made visibly prominent by
incarporating architectural features such as a facade averhang, trellis, large entry daors, andJar
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.
Standard: Human-scaled elements such as a iighting fixture, trellis, or other landscape
feature shall be provided alang the facade's graund fioor.
Staff Comment: The applicant has proposed some human sca/e elements including
landscape features, large windows and varied material patterns at the primary
entrances. Windaw patterns vary based on interior layout, but all facades feature a
variety af window types. Wall areas visib/e from public streets and sidewa/ks are
treated with trellis elements at the upper Ievels, canopies at pedestrian entries and
ameniry spaces, and with landscaped vinery walls and plantings. Landscaping and
artwork are a/so prapased to break up public fronting facades where windaws are
impractica/ due to interior configuratians. However, the proposa/ does not comply
with the entrance and connectivity standards for ground re/ated units a/ong SE 172nd
Campliantif St. The ground floor facades, specifical/y the ground related units along SE 172"d St,
Condition of are in need of additional human scale elements in order to reinfarce the pedestrian
ApprovolisMet orientation of the development used to justify the PUD request. Architectural
detai�ing elements including entrance detailingjweather protection for graund related
units, fencing, connectivity, lighting fixtures, contrasting mafieria/s, and/or special
detailing would bring the proposa!inta compJiance with the intent of this standard to
create human-sca/e character in the pedestrian environmenfi. Therefore, staff
recommends as a candition of appraval, the applicant submit revised elevations
depicting entrance detailing/weather protection for ground re/ated units, fencing,
pedestrian cannectivity, lighting f+xtures, contrasting materials, andjar special
deta+ling a/ong SE 172"°St. The revised elevations shall be submitted to and approved
by the �urrent Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval whici�ever
comes first.
If this condition of approva!is met rhe proposal would satisfy this standard.
Standard: C?n any facade visible ta the public, transparent windows andJar doors are
Compliantif req�'sred #a comprise at least SQ percent af the portion of the ground floor facade
Condition of that is between 4 feet and 8 feet above ground (as measured on the true elevat'san).
Approva!is Met
Staff Comment:See discussion above.
Standard: lJpper portians of building facades shal! 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 shafl be
5Q percent.
HEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUP LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Co�^^�unity&Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation
AVANA R/DGE PUD LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 40 of 44
N/A Standard: Display windows shall be designed for frequent change of inerchandise,
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 15 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.
Compliantif 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 LUAIS-000894
City of Renton Department of Community& Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation
AVANA RIDGE PUD � � LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
---------- �
___.,_,_..._._.,._-_
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 41 of 44
Approval is pre-finished metal, stone, steel,glass and cast-in-place concrete. J
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 shal/include color and
materia/s for the following: guardrails, fa�ade treatments, retaining wplls, raised
planters, siding, windows/frames, and canopies. Acceptab/e materra/s include a
combination of brick, integral/y colored concrete masonry, pre finished metal, stone,
steel, g/ass, cast-in-p/ace concrete, or other superior materials approved at the
discretion of rhe Administrator.
If this condition of approva/is met the proposa/wou/d 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.
l. CONCLUSIONS:- -------- ---—. I
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 al� 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.
_-�I
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 LUAIS-000894
City of Renton Department of Community&Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation
AVANA R/DGE PUD � LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
__ __ _. .__�,.__--- --..–,-- --
_ _ _—.
Report of May 3, 2016 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-
050.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
downlighting 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.
HEXStaff Report Avana Ridge PUD_LUA15-000894
Crty of Renton Department of Cor�munity&Economic Development i hlearing Examiner Recommendatron
AVANA R/DC,E PUD LUA15-Q00894,PPUD,ECF
--.—�__.—::_:—:,.,.._::: - — ------------------
Report of May 3, 2p16 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 temparary
accupancy approval.
15. The applicant shall dedicate 1-foot behind the sidewalk in addition ta right-of-way dedication far
luminaire ft�undations along SE 172nd St, The dedication shall be required prior to temporary
occupancy approval.
16. The appiicant shalt create a public outreach sign in coardination 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 zane.The sign shail be placed on site prior to constructian cammencement.
17. The applicant shall provide a revised site plan demonstrating compliance with the private apen space
standard of at least 15-feet in every dimension far all ground related units. The revised site plan shal!
be submitted to, and appraved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit
approval whichever cames first.
28. The applicant shall provide revised elevatians demonstra#ing campliance with the private apen space
standard af 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 appraved by, the Current Planning Project Manager
prior to building permit appraval v,rhichever cames first.
19. 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 appraval 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 far providing mainfienance of
landscaping may be waived if a landscaping maintenance contract with a reputabie 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 cantract sha11 be kept on file with the Planning Division.
20. The building entries from a street shall be clearly rrrarked with canopies, architectural elements,
ornamental lighting, and/ar landscaping and indude weather pratection at least four and ane-half feet
(4-1/2') wide. The revised elevations shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning
Project Manager prior to building permrt approual.
21. The applicant shall be required to submit a revised site and landscaping plan depicting entrances and
pedestrian cannections from ground related residentia! units, along SE 172nd St,to the public sidewalk.
The revised landscape and site plan sha(I be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project
Manager prior to building permit appraval. Staff is aware there may be tapographic ehallenges with
entrances alang SE 172nd St and the applicant is encouraged ta provide stairs ta the units ar
demonstrate separate entrances are not feasible prior ta building permit approval.
22. The applicant shall submit revised refuse and recycle enciosure elevations which include a roof. The
revised elevations shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior
to building permit approvai.
23. The applicant shall revise the site plan to depict a differentiatian in materials far all pedestrian
connections within parking areas andfor drive aisles an site. 7he revised site plan shal! be submitted to
and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager priar to building(engineering permit appraval.
If this condition of approval is met the propasa!would satisfy this standard.
24. The applicant shall provide detaiied specifications for ail site furniture, and art, in arder ta ensure
durable, vandal- and weather-resistant materials are used, The specificat'rons shall be submitted to,
and approved by,the Current Planning Project Manager prior building permit appraval.
NEX Staff Report Avana Ridge PUD LUA15-000894
City of Renton Department of Community& Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation
AVANA R/DGEPUD ' LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF
Report of May 3, 2016 Page 44 of 44
25. The appiicant 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_LUA15-000894
� .�
' EXHIBITS
Project Name: Project Number:
Avana Ridge Preliminary PUD LUA15-000894, ECF, PPUD
Date of Hearing Staff Co�tact Project Contact/App�icant Project Location
5/10/16 Rocale Timmons lustin Lagers 17249 Benson Rd S Renton,
Senior Planner Avana Ridge,LlC Wq
9675 SE 36th St,Ste 105;
Mercer Island,WA 98040
The following exhibits were entered into the record:
Exhibit 1 ERC Report
Exhibit 2 Site Plan
Exhibit 3 Landscape Plan
Exhibit 4 Elevations
Exhibit 5 Grading Plan
Exhibit 6 Geotechnical Report, prepared by Earth Solutions NW (dated December 21,
2015)
Exhibit 7 Coal Mine Hazard Study, prepared by Icicle Creek Engineers (dated March 22,
2004)
Exhibit 8 Coal Mine Hazard Study, prepared by Icicle Creek Engineers (dated January 20,
2009)
Exhibit 9 Drainage Report, prepared by D.R. Strong (dated December 28, 2015)
Exhibit 10 Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting(dated
December 22, 2015)
Exhibit 11 Conceptual Stream Mitigation Plan prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting
(December 28, 2015)
Exhibit 12 Habitat Data Report, prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting(dated December
22, 2015)
Exhibit 13 Arborist Report, prepared by Greenforest Inc. (dated December 16, 2015)
Exhibit 14 Tree Retention Plan
Exhibit 15 Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), prepared by TraffEx(dated February 2, 2016)
Exhibit 16 Public Comment Letters/Emails
Exhibit 17 Independent Secondary Review—Traffic Study, prepared by TenW(dated March
21, 2016)
Exhibit 18 Response Memo- Independent Secondary Review, prepared by Traffex (dated
March 26, 2016)
Exhibit 19: Staff Recommendation to the Hearing Examiner, dated May 3, 2016
Exhibit 20: SEPA Determination and Mitigation Measures (dated April 11, 2016)
Exhibit 21: CI 73—Residential Building Height
Exhibit 22: Elevation Perspectives
Exhibit 23: Transportation Concurrency
� CITY OF .
en on .� �
._ _...........-
�C4TY QF -
DEPARTMENT t3F C4MMU�.�TY _��,�r�������
-...+..��u�--- S-�'
AND EC4NOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ENVfR01VMENTA!REVIEW COMMlTTEE REPORT
ERC MEETING DATE: April 11, 2016
Project Name: Avana Ridge PUD
_ .
Project Number: LUA15-000894, PPUD,ECF
__ __
Project Manager: Racale 7immons,Senior Planner
C?wner: Avana Ridge, LLC;9675 SE 36t"St,Ste 105; Mercer Island,WA 98040
Contoct: Justin lagers;Avana Ridge, LLC;9675 SE 36th St,Ste 105; Mercer Island,WA 98040
ProjecL Locarion: 172�9 8enson Rd S
ProjectSummary: The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development and
Enviranmental (SEPA) Review far the canstructian af a multi-family development
containing 74 units in two 4-stary structures.The vacant 3.78 acre site is lacated within
the Residential Multi-Family (RM-F) zaning classification and the Residential High
Density (RHD) land use designation. The development would be camprised of two
separate multi-family residential structures resulting in a density of 2p.21 duJac. The
subject site is fronted by three public rights-af-way: SE 172nd St, Benson Rd 5 (108th
Ave SE) and Benson Drive S (SR-515). The applicant proposes ane entrance off of SE
172"a 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. Additionaliy, the site contains criticai slopes and Coal
Mine Hazards. The Preliminary PUD would be used to vary street, buiiding height,
parking, design, open space, and retaining wall standards. The applicant has praposed
to provide buffer enhancement as part af the proposed PUD pubtic benefit, atong with
the construction of enhanced open space, pedestrian amenities, and iandscaping.
Site Area: 164,827 SF Total Building Area GSF:92,899 SF
STAFF Staff Recommendx#ha#the fnvironmenta) Review Cammittee issue a Determination
REC�MMENDATIaN: af Non-Significance-Mitigated f DNS-M).
� yy�
r:$
'
,y) �
Y � ,E
�r
4�� �y�
iF.,,amy�:.a. ,.:
#� .
EXHIBIT 1
Fu11 Document
Available upon Request Pra,jectcocariontvtap
ERC Report Avona Ridge FFUD 13-Ot�894.pd,f
$� �
a� u
� �
� �
�� �
, �� �,,
- �� L
' '� ` i �� ����_ . �� ��� ._ . ,. �� Q
� ,� � �
559.SAJ'PRW.LMIE ` � • r v .-..��,_��__.�._ O
`„ _ _ __ _ - � •
. .;.
' .��ir � � � � �.I�`—awc_�w.� � � �c-...a��'r;r�c-'�+a�_�.�, ' -- --.. ..., , �—.�._ � L
�
� y, I � ..r... � � �___, _ �°V 1".- � "j! ._, . .ie'ar ��r'n�-a'wE^ .�
�,t �
� + ; - • "` ��_ [� ��,�ew_' ,._a _ —..;j--�-Y � ? � r
� � . ; � - , �
�,,,� �,. :,
�.` u��eMuao�i�q _ t � .°°.°/`'�`b00r10a" f� � r.wcFa��n�°rn
a�nwrurwewHr M�a�rtwaauc e i
� _, wenwnrtwcrxr � i�
�`�- - ,. .. :�,
� ___1.,�__�u___.�- ' -- ` � ,;,�,�, �s;u ��_��' °'�
� �
� � . , ��� T ;�: � a
� . ' „ - ._ ---_—
�, �• � ...;• •�� •=: :_.,,._�i T� ,
� � � r 1 ..�' . , . , .�-���� Y . u..�.
'�y;,, � ���. , ` .., , ; , ,r
� �. �' ! , ; ( :?' . . . . , z � . � ' �` . � . , � . E � . : r.,._,._,..�.� � ...�..�
? � 1 �. i LJ � �.` �..� � �.�..
` 4 i ! . .._i..J��.�� i'� _� ����t..q ..,;. 4.� AVANARIDGE
s �'' '`�! � x ✓ �� PLANNED URBAN
O �.j �`�� � . r-i �� ��,�i<i ; ; DEVELOPMENT
r��.
� �_..._.,� �L....}-1-+-�-�:`: ;�,� , tostssetrl�d
O ¢ / �� siae�r.r�raa,wa
gfr�� »M",ww+ � ! l 98055
�/ �
� , ��� O�
� ' f � i �
� ' ;'"f O AVANA RIDGE,LLC
♦/ ` /�l � ��,�--- -
�` ��"`nf ;'�/ :,�.�..o� ,d.�,
� � i^3"J . .. ' � v'
�_,. � „�,,,
� „�y ""�" ' , � � �
♦ `,, �. I�'.` //o f
�� � ,' �'� .. , _ " �� � �. �
' � � ��n i , /! �.
,� NORTH
, ,.`
� .. � -" . �.��,
e�.oarROP, /
\�'�- j/ ' �e na: �r
StTE PLAN PUD
EXHIBIT 2 " �
.����
�...��.�,��,x,�,M�� ,�,,,��w . A1
%�, . .
-4i. �
�
.
i •
�"�`"� ' � ...,� •
�;�«�-�'�s�'��t�s� �. .., f/�� �,,1'� -r . ""� ���4
� ��err�rs _-., ■�r�c �rc�r �r�rr�_
.. � � � , t, �5,��.t�e
..a,e4.���.���•�r+... . k�.y r�Y •yi�i:'� �. i±:�.4'k���.> a. R,iv`5 ��'�. ���'� r�� •
p'k� r:Ft�* �. 1�, ��ir r✓r% E�'S+tJr.K''t�J'A�r� r. ,�'ia � /:�'Ir�`.^__"4...l.�'.= .�,�_aoc
t����i�^��� �y�7��� � ��� , �� � � r ���
�!+T r � �� i ��''_�;
•sc;.�� ` �y��+�i 'y �; _�,�
iy � ;� ,ti,ii1",=.
a'��'•i��.,W i s 'Kfl ':.–;��--�
�*"���� � — �b �� __ ' ���� ; �r, �'��f
� �*• ,
i . . - "
.
�' .... . ,i i +.-n-
���?:j.++ is 0� � ixF �� ���` lyalYllis✓yg *',yY� u_s�+F, i .:/. �'`"
,�,,,d�,,c►'fl 'w
� �, - ?�€�,��a.�s��; _�_ �n 'u
. ,r,�'��'�r'�' �; �� �+;;��r��ry��1.
N r j.�� � ' ��+
� !� ��.��� y L�. �h. ��u l O"/ •¢ Y� ' ' !
wy��:� ��5,� ' °,�� 1��:�.���•a� � •
:�;r� �` `h�._ .. �+ 1�r>�„ i �•
"v,i'�. �s 's��� � �y.�.«�'* �FF� � � c 1
,��� �..�s��_< °°",�,� °„�r., ,�,�:�_ �+�u c:�,�+"' ;�r� �J .aK . `
� �. . . . , �..� � nit� `��w,r�r.�whu..Ka..�au,�":�.�-t�_. n�iT,ri.�� �.'y� f �_;�.
� � �: '�L.wauu,'-+n1�' � rt'e
;', `ey3 ��' %a,
��`�"6r. �'? � �<; �� r,� :�5 �,� p�",'
���•
� �' �s�
♦ � � . � .�. �
� � , � ' ����:
� �
i'���� � . � .���i .:,7 � � M
r �, .�.'� +�.� �,,.
�.,�,, �r�� ���,����� A� �'� !
� .'�t"� ���� ���`L''� �" w�-.. �/i.,� �
I"'l��,i-�'` i*qr�Mi '^y yyS'�1
���,.,���,,�, :�' +�� �s��''+�� #
'�9D�'!'r �•�. `�t?iy! .
�, ;, �
'`� ��±; � .�';{��"'C��' �
� t ��'��� ,�..r�,���►f,��
�+b�� '. ���.�"��y�'�-t%��e3�
� ,,�
�7'i �}�:�r `���4�A'��,�rw ti �
�`c'��"r.:'"'.�11'� �+c«:w.'�` �v :%
�;*�� �a ��
� � +� I%r��
� �.,r
�
A t
��
M
•
Full Document _ - -____�--------e__---
uest _ __ __.
on Req - -- ---
_ _--
----- ------_
Available up ___ __- - --- -------
__ _
w r,� ---____ I �� �
; .,:.. , ,
� � ., ; �� .�..,
� - ,. - r--, � - ----� . f �- - , J- . I s •—
� ; �, i �� L
; -_ ,��;, �, ,-� �� �
��� � � o
� - � �
�-- - - - � - --,
.__, _ _..r- _. _ , . , . -: � � a
�tsw N�'� ' I L/�
u�fe
K�k'Y Pa N 9YERALI EIEYATION.----_._.___.. ,---... I ��
a �- `
�..w�»� � µ�
; , \�;� ,
i
A r�A.Si , 8; C,9C.2;C.3' 'C.6;�.C.B,,D;�D.S� .E,'i F�' 'F3; `F.6; '.G H�H1fH3; iH.e' , i , 'I.S: .'J ;:.,J2�J,3� ;J6;J8jK?iKS�' �\L,:•;M}1 �Nl ,NSlirp,j '
' � �+� ��� ( i _r ��
. ,,.__ K . .� �.�. _ ._- � - - - �- -
- ...y .._..._ � � `-- _ ___.�.._ .
i� . _...._-,,.... _-�`- —,�. , � - � ` .._1
, l_;� �
,. V_ � �' � ....._
. - r
.� , - �� _...� �i..,__. . �_- "'± . ....._. � .� � AVANA RIDGE
�, ' � PLANNED URBAI
! '� ,n_ - .__ i--._. _ ;—.I ; �i � � ( DEVELOPMENT
I I�:�.. �..�_..,
,__ .
., ,_ , .
-- r -- „- -
�� a. - �- -� � �as�esE�rma
� z ---— , s�r,�rrrari,wn
� -.� seoss
� _._____ �
J � J � �j'� (
�''� rr-,
i OVERAlL.BRE•SOUTHELEVATION,- _i�Y � � ''�f•�:F t—r�'t�-
� �
�
I� �` ,� �, ;, � AVANA RID�E,L
. , . �,-a _ Nr� � , -.,- __ . __- -
�+w Ninp�
,� � rKur.*�
'�O�iN.S, '�N �M�,r L; �K.S(K J.B,J.A�(J 3XJ.2;;.J ' ��IS; 1 ' ;H.6`� �li 3; �hi ti(N�' ;�G� 'G ti �P 1� � F/5�F 'D 5^D�'C Ai�C fi?(C.3d,G2!\C! '�B�' �A.S;��A�� � .kn`�"'�+�+.�
i ' . - _ � . . � • . � ' � - - �, .__ . _ _ . .. .. _. � . �. �, �,�.,
I
i
I � �`('� F r __ , �� ', ��2___ ..A
��-1_' ., i.:� , _ T i �"'
' i I �
'-j- ,-_. .�,� �+__., - � ' I
, `�'.' �
,. �. : _ ., ,
�.
�_. � _ = ,
� �
.. _. � ,
_v:
,� , .�._� �- - - ., _ ,.� �,� -;,i �f—:-- ,
i ' ' _ :
__.. . — � _
„ . . . ... . ..._ ....,� .. .. ..._�j. . �_ —�.. _y - ----�E �...�Y _ _ .__ ' -
� '
, ,
��.y �
� , . ..._. _"'' ' ' _ i.�..t'�.�� i �
' � • : � -' > ' 1wn
:_._.. �1 �' . �
' �—- ......
WN�
�..� O�@
, �.��..»..�.��_�., r I, � � �-v �
i _ �__.. .�. �� �11111C_._..___..___ "
, _`_ �! ' rL� 0���.�.
' `�� PROJECT
:..�:7,-C'^-� ELEVATIONS
..s' � `. i m�ru�miwwionea.
OVERALLSITE-NORTHELEVATION I 1 �
' - Y TRTT 301
�,.���� ___------- -- _ ----_
inmwn. �mar.im�n "'_" _' _ " _. _'_.._... __ �i\�BYi ■ � ._"'_' __ "_ __.._�__'_ .",�G.61:IP•�f.p ... .._._ J"''_ -.� � .
'_An �
..."__ '._._'__" ' ' __ '_'_'_'__"_..
�NGE 5 E. W.M, _----
5� ,i� S��n�AVAN�H�R1D�
�-. _1__ --- -� _._-------- _ _ - -,
,.. -_�
_ — -- "_ --- -�'1 `----```""'--_--�'' ' '� �
X _._. �. ----- ' sE,rzr�roS��_,..__.�+�!?—"►a---�.�� - 1
X.� �,F - _.--------�-..�..---�j ��-�;;�' .....- � _1---� - - . 1
X _.... fi, - ---"- -
�:.�. �_, �, - �- ---- -�� - - - -� - - /
_
z�_._ � -- ---- . . .�.-�-,.�.-
_.
:_
�
. __ - - �_ . ,,_
�= ---�.�
--_ ::�—'�� — _ .�y r _ � ''; �� ,�
:::=,�-: r'--_...� ,��'� �sraua.a
�
.
. .
-
} w y ...�"�- _ , -
- o � :�_ y � t � ,�� �
.
. , _
. .;., .
_ ,�' , � ��
`� } ' �� '�., � �srauxar�c '`�-- t �"""�.ti ���
4 ` �_.,._ - - — +-^�^""'� \ � � � - - ' ' ` �
� � � ;t �_ _.._' t .'i ' \� '\ ...---"c"_W. .. -..�.�'{� ��� . ;1!f�
.. `:
. ., .
_ . p
j . .�..,� ��y .. t" . =-• '". ..1.� _ �`w, na�w.
Q �, `\ `• � M �. µ�wv,n _ -�-,=�����:�_�,`j ' - �" I �.�inw'
,
,
\ � .-L .�- ��� 'y � � •_l. , � `""""�_\`S`�* t _� '� � � �.:,�Z,`
. �
. �-'"`
\ `�"`�•�'��� .G��.:• . '. - - � � .._-'""` _ - .� ! ' ��;.--`�y - � �,f �
,.'..; ; � ( "�� , r' , �
�\ � , � \>,,%;�•,,.,. � .. "' � ., _.4���,�.-...+-�""�J; � ����.j;'�i��";�-."'k`��f.t'._' „"�`�-� ' ,/�Ly;�,�
� `..., � ,� -x. ��f� i �, �!`.��
�� \ fi; �' _ q.: . ',:,. ... � �:t ��*,ti �_�� __ _ � � `, �;;
��` �� �.. ��` r, �r�„r'�v�.+'&a�a;�s.�•it�r+''="aR �.
* /'�
`\ 4.' � M .� _. . ' ���`� �. _ • .�'��''t� f,-
,� ,,,. �# 1
`�1 ` �� .�y� MI F� �
;' `!
.� � t,,:a 1
,��yy�(�,�_��y�t�,a�nor� �` '��.� : : .. . ��
CZL.w�"'-- u� KY n¢¢�� . . . . .. . - � tY!F+ r �
L.w , '�
M YP (N "
y��ur �d ms7 l.lN[mo+r.. �k ...�,....._ ... ' '� _ . .-. �
!fN II�K �� �', •" � ' . . , (.�
.�......_......�W � , � . ��
4 MY IfiC 1�����a9�p� �� '�\�` .. � V�
�yy WliaL1�IRIM��¢x�f A(W1���[SIWRF O[MY✓�'v' r ' �.'. . '��`1 � _'.:.. ..;� �.
�u�rts�W�'"K��Kmen��'K a ~�SrsrA� +�.'`:'."' ,'� .✓ .^�t� , .`�. .':.::, ., ,y��`
���,wsn'�,'a." ' ' ,.�,�1'�."�/ °r°� sr fi+'
� `�r� ,, ",� " '` ,..
,a
� .z�" /
(�.�.l��� ; `r � �
����-p�� •y�� u(:��u `�.. �`� .�
pA�R— i��,1�„,i��iI( qy aI/SR . . ' i .
A .�LL fJ1M1US SO�£YVIt tlTV�YWy/f YHMqII��� ,�� /
, ;,,�;��;�:�.9. �Q �: l� ��._ �/� /�,
,�,�, _`'_ .,, u�'" . ` `�l1
� "`"��� '. • P,tC►RTH
cx� ,°°".. `� `''�'' „�,�«�°�"'f �
�� �i e 'i �
..+, 1�
� _ '
` EXHIBIT 5 �a ��� � �
tl ' 1' '�t}1616
� �f, AVANA R1D�P�N�
`� � Y 0{" ��
� � f�:.,==^' j T N e�
E �� M Ri�N.0 a
� ' � '� � �.,. � P� � N
Y �P
f � , p ��� ww ���,���� "'°" �a.�c1 tio.tsoae Ip,—.
, _ � , � s �'r�;;� oo�ts
� � --� �
� ,� � , ,
� _ D.R.3T��EERS � t � ;pr,7E�MP�t�ao
�(�^,/� °9 ���� � �� �
� WSM►�yYOM�a� �f� �t' `i !} .,...:�-��� OO���� f1C.�
811 c,,,, ``!,.-:
s �.,,,,��.�^ . �
�
x �,., ` . .• .. . . . .
,}�z 1 v �' ;;��,��� �1., , .,�.
+ , t� , ,-;w
,.�� �" _ ,
h�.��M�+;kry � + �
#.� �'�� � i � � � • r
f ;� � -
� "
.. "°` ).
� � .r..,,� ��'" �.
" Earth �,.. ���_ - . . � .� � . ._
Sotutions '��r`� �_K . - .�
a j , _,y „��. ,� ;;� �:
{�� �� " . . I A` - �
. i\��..1.�! . •.42 •t� .
t � .. � , _
3 _
4 �� , r • � 1- i: �
�". _.;., . ; . �
.. ,�s t: `- � ti';_ •�{ t
� ��' '-.'cy ;� y� ` y
;�, . —��,,, �,` �`�'' x d:�j.�a� .
-• , # ...� ' .. 'd . . .
— :J,�y !. ::; � . ... �},,, - . .
-• �,v•r ,?id�� ' � a.a � . ,
_ r}�.. �:a� ,
� St �
! M • { � {�, - � �
���, � � . � . �'� ' "
w., j �
t y
' n ' �
�� V
ry r:
h:`� � ����'`,�z: x �,
� �� `�.4 �.. � �k ,
�� r��,� � � `��.�, ' , � � �= �
�� ',�������q,• .r�...<,;� ° ��* . �< � �''�,..�_.T .__ _ ...,�,�.,:
�� ° ' �""
�k � �
#k � � . �` �
� �
�" i
.
.
�"� �`��� � .� . � „�
.� � � �x �„" `
� ��� �� s.`"I, � ,.,,.,.� ��- � ,>
i � _•
:
�
,•-q;-� .r
.
. , _ ,
� . �.. .. , D`
=�: � �. �
' ' 'y�N
<. - _..
y , , , „ „� t�„ •.
�.;�.! !'Y_. ' - r�;�se++��t'.�e ��
� , , .
. . ,,,
.� , -�� _
. �� ���, .� ,�._,,.. �
��, ' _
• ..: . _ � �`
� ' . � ���. _ � - �,t,t�,„ ��� _
�
< � y"� .' '+��,,�,�v',t*r ',';"►"'r.�""� �., �
� r . Me.« :� ....��+�� p r �i�`€���,,,. �� �.
� y .. ,/" ?�,� *w {...
� � k. �'�1 # �`� �,r .. �f�_ ^"""�'����,����
� ��,��.C; � '�..� � r ti3��`��,x k`R'$`� 'k �*"' '?. �'J��.
� ..� �^ --,r T"�"'��• wl�s^rr'�J �`.�� R'+� +� '�G�
.m b # .J�� sy"+F �. 3 Y
�",�. ' °:,r�.�:.� �t�..�.+-� ,:� .��_��� T.�'�
:.r`v - �' t.,� i. �.�r..�aw,,�,,, ,'�-+�ri ,Z� �,��a....
; '�',+� � t'�"y„�����'���l." .r+�`ti, �? �il' �,,,
:� f�°.�a a-.,��"ti,�;
-.� �.�w�'aC"���-� ��
� 3,. �-��;.-�=,.�-�"--,��.��:�.
. .
���
r
3
� � � �
• • � +4<
�"?�.,,
�
I
� � � .
" ' �w.o'��... � .
^�
�
* s ^4'T �`a"„ , r.
�
�
� ��x� �`����, °,_ �r �
. , ,
� v�' . ' . '. '.�
,. � , �„
. „� � �: .,�,,,"�„ �
.t t*. i t '« „a '.` Ar ,;i'(%��j�« � }Y a<i}�;, �. .,�. �'f'�
� . �
,.
� ��.if �A T_Fl '� ' . � . ��� i. .
�. ,,�� ;��. :�. ��..��t•�; x. ���"�` ,�.
a
�rr, ���`� '"�'"'� � �'' "� ` �- �'�",�`w � � '`�
� � 1` ,�• '+�''
....�..�
• Ful1 Document
�- Available uPan Request
. �r
� . Report �
Geo3agical Engineering Services
Coal Mine Hazard Assessment
Cugini Property—Northwest Parcel
Renton �g County),'�Vashington
_ IViarch 22,2084
� ProjectNo..0336-004
Prepared For:
Ateg Cugi�i
Pre�ared By;
Zcicle Creek Engineers,Tnc.
E�HIBIT 7
Full Dacument
Avaitabte upon Request
Report
Geotechnical Engineering Services
Proposed Property Development
Springbraok Itidge
Kia�County Tax Parcel N+ns.
2923059QU9 and 2Q23459148
Re�tou� Washingtan
January 2G,20Q9
Praject No.0336-444
Frepared For:
Alex Cugini
Preparcd By:
Icicle Creek Eng�tueers,Inc.
EXHIBIT 8
Full Document
�►vailabie upon Request
_ _
Pretiminary Technical Information Report
(TIR}
tor
AVANA RIDGE PUC�
17249 Bensan Raad S and i0615 SE 172"d Stree#Renton,Washingtan
OPx�� S
� � was C'O
U�'4.y�.�`` . � '�'�, d`
Z
�e�"
�
� �
� � �,���T�R�° G��ki
�S��NA� ti�
I����.'��,c>/�
DRS Projec# No. i 5U88
Renton File No. PRE15-00�061 i
t?wnerlApp/icant
Avana Ridge, LLC
9725 SE 36`h �treet, Suite 214
Mercer lsland, Washingtan 98040
Repart Prepared by
� � ���
D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers, Inc.
620 7`h Avenue
Kirkland WA 98033
(425) 827-3063
Report Issue Date
�ecemner 2s, 20�� EXHIBIT 9
(G}2015 D. R.S1'RflNG Gonsulting Engineers(nc.
t��tt
II�" `t�� P s.
_ --��"���4` �rt���� Sewa11 Wetland Consult�n+�. lnc.
_ _- __.-- r��sso �a�-���
- -- ----- FaIl Gty,WA'.98(3Z4
Fult Document
Availabie upon Reques�
December 22, 2t�15
Justin Lagers
Avana Ridge, LLC
9675 SE 36� Street, Suite I05
Mercer Island, VVA
RE: Wetland and Supplemental Stream Study-Avana Ridge PUD
City of Renton, Washington
SWC Jab #15-1 S9
Dear Justin,
This report describes our observations of jurisdictional wetlands, streams
and buffers on or within 10Q' of the propased Avana Ridge PUD project in
the Cit� of Renton, Washington €the "site").
,� ,
��'` .u,�:,
�� '
=� �
„ _
_�„'�
�. :
�4� I!� �.d`
�,*.
��
.,
... � � �._
�ip45o T �.
� �,< ..,. . .._.....
Above: tTzcinity Map of site
EXHIBIT 10
�
�
5£172NOSTREE'T ___--------J ��
' _ �{'" - ... _...� I! 1 L� LM`I —i 4 �f �9 �
..
.-
'�-.�. .._.._ W,.�.r..�u' _�_ �':...�..�.._'..___-..- S c 7
y� r�`^^��..�.�.� .. .� .����.� �'1�.��. Y .� � �� �
\ �^� �
`� EII3TBUIiDING � '� �s
� WESTBUIWING � ' �
� �\ I
\ 'L�_.� ~ I
,,� •_�I'�� � �I ( � � \J i � '�=�E � ( I � � i U f � � � . .. --• t ' �
`\ _ t . . � : � � F � ; i I I i � I i �', i � � ,� , � �
L,) i Y
� ' ; ` � ,,.,,�f, � i �
rtw�w�witWllv�4 ___' ` '
p. � �o....� � '.'��..fq'.. ' ' ! i //
� i ��::�'f� �� . / /
ifOOT J'A� �Y, n.�.MT� ��,, . +; �� .l.;.��� J ',! �
rs/q�, \' � ' i,y. .�f'//!J �f f � i _ ) � /
'(" l/�, '�4�'Y/" � ���'J .."�"�;�} ��'4 �,.._ti`ay � !
un�wm -.�° � �.. ._�� :� .a `�� , a �
� s.� � �„''`.� i
� �o,p �W.✓ "'�:�',%;�'�.,;�!3.. �• \ �rF,�,j:,,;�+, +�„ ,
------ svsTuwruinn�[,wwrrehwwn f � � yj y�__ \ J ' � ''!`~.�j �
'1�. 'G':/_�.�.� 1 \ �,�. v, �� �Y->-. ,tj ♦ (3 w
sanssnnru�w�st��cainnx *.`� �`'w„t'=' � ��'�\ ��r�►i�����.v=�'.;i�/`'� � � . 3
�, i � t
'`---�`"_' � � tl 'Z G� �
:.svus�anr�nev+.ra v �^�\ ��f a� �
0 �__-----' t7 �
���� � .
1I,SpeSi(NW{NLf#1!!!iT HM1tMRS.i[f Y(t.tXl�i �� 1
�� � �w = �
uute�,a.rexawa�.iwert�u�+nslt.aeo�.uecer,wi.s �` �� � p^��3 �'.E
-� OIIIIGLYGiGNM'rFATWfiFI1WMf3flfiOillll SFEo[iAKi! '� OPQ � �� _�
� �� � �6 �� I
\` \��� ��`.�1 f, qlwr� M� 4 M
�
, \` �� � �
�..-..__
k�
1.?
� �
r._„__...._�_ , . . , �t 4_:.��-..a�..�.....�,...,.,,�...,,. x� MITIGpTION PI.AN SHEET INDEX: � ' � �a`'a ( ,
. . _
, . _
*'\' ,� ` •.— ; '�*.,' .. wcer oannwx
\ ' 1 _ ...- _-.- - �—' , , � .
_ .� MMrea� � i
� �'__.,.... .
-� -�� ':� ..,, ' . .:'r ' amrw+.na�auswccncw(�na.nmcs
, "N- `-�__ . .-_- ---�� a rthrmncnr�n.r�sMmwwawwr[Mwcc i ' j � � � ;
��' . . _ • _. ' ( '
' _.,_.._✓`� J �.� .'rc:'�.'i.:.. , -� , :
� ;
.\'_ 'ii � ���,-�,,.i g�`>� � MITIGATION PLAN NOTES: �� I � � I � � � i �
\ CO(+ISTRUCfiON SEQUENCE: - i.m�a�no�urnoroaw��rur+wcmruxuuoroaennunTMun.w ' i j ; I � �
� ' GENERAI N07E5: w�srwvneowaineorKcasuinneenwx�eu,�c.Wom��vF. � ; � : �
'
� ' i.fUGtMM11CFlLWtiN&MEA SIWtIINNK�M.AMF4\RIR[IIFN[E:f]�1NlO IFINMOOIiKCNT� �i i ' f
� 1.4lCONST11UCtIDMHIM1�fM111C[MOIW�M'RIIOIVIKIIOi11MIC00E5� .. .... � ' } � �
]IIFWNSIMVOAiTfNUME{UMSfIUCiqNM[RM'6WRNOWNFIIANPCTOi d101NAMQ.5.N10AMM]VEO'l�MITGOMWIpNS. � , � � ' I
\ �. M � �lx1pM !
IhWItTOrilMTW51litt�MM.lONIIqtW19Mi6WFiCSWfliMH1NlIMttNLpMG}110WN9NTMSdFINLTMGFTMMIpI1fWEf0YFOf331W�lMIfiJOf ]CMItM%NaqUfWtE05HM1W115MNTNE��FAtSNOWMINOEfAkI.� i.lfilM[TfiE}TAIROfM1/COM511WC110N.S'llfiON51MKMMIMEflM16MU51 �i , � i I � � I
�(N[4U�F1W[!M fl1Y p MNYW1 iHE C1M'�M14 ANO TNkl.OMAKIM
MEfOLL4VAN0,1W4�{11"11',1N9'CMOq(MISNlC9SpMC1UWM6Y19M�11FNN1�it0`M"�MY'MOpOW iW111�mpYT1[I�itll9N( ��
tMMt1'MOIpOU{WHti/RY.-��.i::<::,':.w:,a.�w�.,; w.ni3T�TPTiK&CA7f�ISIGIIYFMW1YtYTif "�LEl�� i.M11TMtKtTMNMtR{4C51#ET}i. inM/vaiNEitRAVSMUAtfONT*N1fiiXRMMEXEY[lCOM511IUC110NMW M'Ifi]ft�I7013
W�La�IY.���$Sj69liMSyWS�E*[MfMDFMMM651if Md3�ESf MIXIMMf�:4'JS!
S.�VAM41LC11aTMfFOi�lNmry[EWEffll OfSKNw. Ef
(ANc�4fT?pfLL a.iMECCkTi3CiWlM;ltiESF1MNSMlfroI1MOHOWBM[IXfItTEW£QIN�S. OMWN�l:WK
i.4GNiM4M60(MOfit3lMMSt�{ L1iflY4ENLFLMOtECTWEF�aYMM[N�,ilAG6E11fu.�MFMOiHE11NE[OE6 dE4�V: FS
i HCiiRlOi4MWiNOiXWMWWlfM.K12�lAYfMC1��005N1(1LOt.W.LLf�lNIMOGIIlMC1011MOVNRCMOWG.f1![�Y�TOIIWIM YIWHsIOMtlLER111EUf411IALTN��HOSNflYOfTHCtIMIk.N�DTO NIIMY��IyYK�MIOW.
MILtkTYq7�MMM.14W[IISAW.NW4NNOG.iN1FlIIIMMERIOFYFI�fIMYERiMANOlULW16.M/.MIIOIHtlFGWt. )M[I1UfSf1lIOMANO�TflNOMISIfLipNWIYNOWNtX. lWiCC1��OVlRt'eMl[OhNERqMWIt111MfH/IFqIMMICECfMkMdYt CiiM�{M1}{1Y1�
x, wiu�artuuutwaraawruuroMuaeKw+sRwuwuswaoAww*rora.nxxutas�rnw�rtae4�+i sµownan�luauww4sa.mwauwnrrwmT�uvtssewtx*aFwl�n SitR�PF31"i�
FIMMIIT6(OMVtkT[�SWRTYqSWMItYObiYdFfMf{M! YMnVW1TIMlMiNO�M.LLTMf�KFIDWLWlMYLMMTWfICfGff110LW 4NCtlYMNMqUfMP110G11GMSaMWINIMMlMY9N�R.
� ssor�rnvwnEo�r�wr»cmacnowrH.ntiwooEsruu�c�rr�n.00•wunwanwnnhucexseamwwn�wunr ron �cmiw.xc[wm�urvuro�u,unaKmo�aruaum urwmwunr+HsrNoc�,uuneMsnessxowna+nxsauww�,rwn, fl�qXE0US1�!!d
IYNN6ANMFFMI'A9IM1K^Mtl[NIXMSFM[NY. !cart�arornauwE�.neaM.wm�uKsuamea�rrc*bxawe�rte. +acsASFnar+mn�wu.wnorne.wuxxrnwrncse�nocriaar
rutuaeFewre#w.ru[warnwa�aaow�� t„nnmNainnsr.urvunuctpan�trsa+u+Woenx[vwx ausiu+azr�ucnws.n�unotnenouNo�wrws,vmcoxatwnor [411tf4��NOL85
NOXIQUSWEEDCONTRQLREQUIREMENTS: cwnn�nwsw�u�ccorr,wwrfeuiaEnuro�xncrenosnrcnxata�s "'""�o�N115NA5NtlT�'"'�F1f1f0�cor�r,a�o�aanonuunm
�1� ]OOWNEIITO[OMI4lRfVfAKDFMOMrt011WG 40WNOM1MMlAN. 1MA11bNAHOMYTW4AYYtFMCLWYE4.MfIdltlGTf.YllYil'IXMtNp. fHEET
��.� �"'��� .. ._....
u�o-�aaunvnimeauav�unrsrx�ron�sr.nacwaic Z a �
G ld C �.� I .
EXHIBIT 11
}�:��� �
:,:���.�,;��-
� .,k.-������ ��� . -�~ Sewatl Wetland Cansult�nq. 1nc.
..�;..�-
" --.. PC?Srnc8$U P1�:253�853-0525
_ ! Fall C3iy,WA 9�6024
Fult Dacument
Available upan Request
December 22,201 S
Justin Lagers
Avana Ridge,LLC
9�25 SE 3b�' Street, Suite 214
Mercer island,`7Vashingtan 98040
RE: Habitat Data Report—Avana Ridge
City of Renton, Washington
SWC 3ob#15-159
Dear Justin,
This report is in reference to the City of Renton's requirements for a Habitat Assessment
for the Avana Ridge project.
��� Y4asa
�i
,w.nin. ,4'..t .
?'
�
t.
l,OJ . ���7. R f1
.'"� �
+:
3
� ;�
�1065�
& �
Above. Vicinity Map of site . —. _ _,
Ex�ier-r i2
t
Greenforest Incorpara�ted
Fu11 Docum�nt
Available upon Request
December 16, 2015
Justin Lagers
Avana Ridge, LLC
9675 5E 35th St., Suite 105
Mercer !sland, WA 98040
RE:Tree Inspectian; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcei Nos. 292305-9148, -9009; Rentan WA
Dear Mr. Cagers:
You contacted me and contracted my services as a consuiting arbarist. My assignment is to inspect
and assess fihe conditian af 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. I
visited the site on 10J1S/15 and inspected the trees, which are the subject of this repart.
Neither parcel is developed.The site has a 5W aspect with a stream delineated through the cent�r of
the site,east to west. Both parcels are cavered in native vegetation, predaminatefy deciduo�ts tree
species with moderate to dense lower understory.
TftEE INSPECT}ON
My inspection is limited to visual observation from the subject parcels and the �ights-of-way. Both
health and structure were evaluated.A tree's structure is distinct from its heaith. Structure is the
way the tree is put together ar canstructed, and identifying o6vious defects can be helpfiul in
determining if a tree is predispased ta failure. Hea(th addresses disease and insect infestation.
No invasive procedures were performed on any trees.Th� 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
diarneter(DBHj, estimated average dripline and rated the canditian 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 handfu! of bitter cherry are scattered thraughaut the site, and
a!! are viaale. Black cottanwoods daminate the site in numbers, and there are€ar more younger
cottonwoods than older. The oldest and larger trees are in better conditic�n overall, Many of
cottonwoods as edge trees lean excessiveiy away from the stand. Nearly a!f the smalfer cattonwoods
are very sfender. A#though they are heaithy and have na visibEe defects,their trunks are toa tall for
4547 South Lucile Street, Seattle, WA 98118 r��. EXNIBIT 13
SW J/4 SECIttJN 29, FOt�YSHtP 23 N, RAN�E 5 E, W.M.
X A 1/A/VA RIDGE
x
x �.�.
, _ __ _ _._ �
x ., t�,.,,� . .
x _ _ _ _.._
y� a SEITINDSTREET , . .
\
i ` - _. .._._�_._._...----
- �1..__.`..",-....,..._.. '_ ... ' - - -
- ��,r�
— .— ^'^� � - ..��w.�..�.L1aGP-F= �.L._...�1� _. _.�. ..� � .._ — —
�it _ ._. ... ... -� ..._ ._. �- _._._ ._.._ --- —
-_. �
y ,,.,...
�,..,.
� , '_- -- .. .. .._..��
, � -�— __.. .. _ , -- ��-��=—
,
� _ --- ___ ____-_----- -�--r�:�..�- _..�� ��.,�, �
� � � � 1'r�� � _'' r�_ �._.. � ____ . � l
r ,� 1 �� � ' , 3�( �
�
� `` ,��j'.`} �` x ' easreurcoxvcs��(
� ,.. ��,�,,,._._ ��svesreurcn�$( I i � �( �� � �
.\ �_
ti
\ � � �� � � � � �i �
,� . � � �' - - - �
,
_ _
, '�,,.� '`� �_.�-._�� ' _ ; "_ � � ��
M�`� � � �I 'J ' .,,�..,. �-�r..._..__..�__�::.�,.,�
.
, .
_ � .
– . —
_ _
_
, _ , .
\`� �`�`� ,� - ���� � ,=��� ��-����� ��"`�_ ,�,�-�--
� � �
� �`�-,�; , � ,� �, �- �� � � '., '. r� �t _ � �`� ' �_ u,� � � �
`� � ��_�_�_..�;�"�,.. 'i,�r� _ - �,,
� 1 � i �� `�__�� �' f �
\ t. .. (,x;,��y, d � ;� '
\ � :�` ,a.. � .. �,<.r ,x`.�i -�, , �( ',r"
.s�w ' `?p�, •,� ( � 1- ,r<
,\ `"� p �Y', sw �. . {�...- ;-.'''1:.,� � .__� .��`� 1 �
\� ''` p ' _'f''�:, �r' - r� ���) � �/ ��� 74
,� \ £�� � ' � �� ` ,� ,!
tEsc t�c�m i \. `. �:r�M " : . `�: � ''r, � � ". w`} � �r ,
�..�.����; � � ���-,.�:r�� � » +_',-; �
K mn«ru�c�:w nrao°� ' \� � ^'7r � � ,;Mi 'M1 l! ` ' � .',. -
� � ��,�.„�,.n � `�� ;�:,'�- r:.�r ' �. =�'. i,..,. ..;, ..,�, �.. r
}� �-' ,��.«,...n � s's�� � ,�,� /^�� *.� � �.� �,T' ' ('� ��
`'i'�j`��n,wn.nv.�or,+�r.� y�`� :��� '�'t�� V"_ - �i(' ^ , '1'�
!'w
���`�-� �� � � ��,� �___�_� ---- �`' ���f
�. �.���,�� ��, ��
�(�� �+ /,
'j_� �
�� �./n�a�u�w*�� �� ~ y�� /
� � ��%�� '.� � �;'
"'�' ` J�l � .
. _. rc.w aa,um wi a.waHara wrn � � f
O �.�,,.bws.�,�, - �
`��'4 � '` ,
_ _ � }� •
` �Y �.
� rn���nrncw c�ccuunavs ` \ �, '� � :� ,"
e �
, p,� � ^�_-� ,� /
,��a��.� ��
w,.�µa., ' � X i 4
i M T 4LSSS CnZKllli�/PMG�'3 ..
pXi M[S,.....,.; .. , . � ..- !
a `\ �aM` �
AM1FS N Q H t�1MpDOR�S@ \ ~' �'1J� ,,.
f xo�m.arwrr�rca.�.ro �\ �/'� i I
� . .. �._;:.�" .
s `\ � � , �.»'' - N O F2TH
� \ �.�e uaiPlNE�GIE
� `�` Ir�S�h �
� riGN.a6fT
? �,. � � � � � ���` - .- . AYANA RIDGE PUO �tzs.ie 1
' u:*.+vanwwe•rdoa" 2 AR.S7RLN,t[3 � � F ; � I.�s ,��9xmm I•••�•`.», A TREEI�TEN�IONBIAlOC[BAflMOPIAN
� 811 _ �c�orvaucnvo�r,rtr�eRs � � � � �—.p � RE Nrc)N
�IMru�eAw.lLaokno.w !s '� 4i�V ��r I 1 I 1 k—w�-„� 1 0Fi1M1
ao3aH+.atwU � � � ..�..,. � �'�+^�4l�xu.w/rt'umK wans am�
� �„ � � �o,,,����i�
: �
�S���,Na. ,� iAl-1NI���IW�I
EXNIBIT 14
Fu�� Document
Available up,�� ��q�est
AVANA RiDGE APARTMENTS
REVISED TRAFFIG tMPACT ANALYSIS
c�rv aF REr�TON
Prepared far
Avana Ridge, l.E.0
9675 SE 36th St Suite 105
Mercer Island, WA 98Q40
Prepared by
�����
1�C7R TN WES T
TR,A�F,�� E��P'FR T.S
1141 Q N.E. 4 24"' St., #590
FCirkland, Washington 98Q34
Telephone: 425.522.4'!18
February 2, 2016
EXHISIT 15
._ ......... i
Fuli Document
Available upon Request {
,� ; �
�
� � � �
� � � ��' � � �
;. i " fi ,� � y •r m r
ttCi Qt Qt � F"' � � Q • � pr � tv :: `fa
� � m .,,, cu'� 4 l� � �,Q � y°' �y a, � �Q° � ,�m � �
�„ � .!� C 3`
;� � ,y� ,� Q y `� c, 'Z' p F u � 4� i afii � m
.. 'D � � C? �. .�
t� .� � „a � � ty'� ,� L ,� ro O r i
.,tiQQ m !1 h � � Q Q'
2 � fi r
-� m
K � �
� ��
a Hiranaka �Daniel � 1/31(2016 E X X X '�
b �Radtke �1uli and Mike � 1/31/2016 E X X _ X X X X � �
c �N14ss �Mo!!y � 2J31j2Q16 E X X X _r. �
d �Ridenaur �Daniel � 1/32J2016 E X X � X �_— —
e �Braoker �Emiiy ( 1/31J2016 E X X „_— — --—
f �Goods �Doug � 1J31J2016 E X X X X � X
g �Byrnes �Genevieve � 2/1/2016 E X r X X
h �Miller �1erry � 2/IJ2016 E X X ` X `
i �Yadack �Wendy � 2J1j2016 E X X X X
j �Heine �Molly � 2/1/2016 E X X
k �Cantu �Caryn � 2/1/2016 E X X X X X
I �Reitz �Phillip � Z/1/2016 E X X X X X
m �Gray �Andrew ( 2/1/2016 E X _ _ X
n (McMullin �Kimmie ( 2/1/2016 E X � X _ X
o �Murphy �Rhonda Rae � 2/1j2016 E X X � X �
p �Hanawait (lady � 2/1/2Q16 E X X X � X
� Isk�,�s��a ��a�� I ���l�o���� I I x I I ! I ! X I I ( ! I I !
r �Faas (Mark � 1J3Qi2416 E X X x �
s �Cramton �Dawn � 1J30J2416 E X X X �
t �Hanawalt (lody � 2j7J2016 E X �—
u �Miller +7erry � 4/4J2016 t X X X
v �Yadock �Wendy � 4J5/2t316 E X X X
w �Cantu fCaryn � 4/b/2016 E X X X X X
XI I i
Y I I i N I I I I I I 1 ( I I I 1 I I
= I 1 i � I i I I I i i � I I I j ( I
EXHIBIT 1fi
Fult Document
Avai�able upon Re�,.�est ��' TE[y�/i/
Transportation Engineering NarfhWest
NIEMORANaUM
DATE: Mcrrch 21,2Q16
TO: Rocale limmans, City of Renton -Current Planning,Senior Pianner
FROM: Michael Read, PE, Principai,TENW
St3B3ECT: Avana Ridge Traffic Impact Stvdy-Peer Review
TENW Project No.34b2
This memorandum docvments my review of #he Avana Rid,ge Apartments Rewrsed Tra�c lmpact Study,
February 2, 2016, prepared by TraffEx, site plan anc! site accessjfrontage improvemerrP plans prepared
by DRS Cansulting Engineers, tznd fie!d work conducted in February 201 b refated to existing site frontage
conditions, available sight distance, and a genera4 fieic! conditions ta address trip distribufiian questions
outlined by#he City o� Renton.
Avana Ridge TIS Peer Review
The following is c� genera' list of assumptions, methads, and canclusians I have verified or recammend
verifica`ion and or modificQtion in review af the Avana Rid,ge Apartmenis Revised TJS, February 2�1 b:
• The sludy �pplies standard trip generc�tion rates as pub'ished by the (nstitute of Tronspartation
Engineers in ihe Trip Generatian Mar�uaf, 9��' Edition, consistent wi#h standard practice.
• The trip dis�ribution assumptians appear rec�sonab!e ir� general, alt'�oUgh the overal! tatal in Figure
4 only indicates 99/. The totc�! number oE trips during the p.m. peak hour however, appear to be
dis�ributed 10 the proposed site c�ccess driveways. Given o majorily of trips c�re expected to be
clistributed ta/fram the south, the "equitable distribution" of estima#ed trips currently assumed
entering the site frorn SR 515 seems �nlikely given that ca mc�jarity of parking access wi!I be
accessed via the driveway onto Benson Rood. A directiono) split should be identified 6etween
fhese two access points that reflects the ��circuitous rouSe" �fforded by SE 172"d Street versus the
c�irect si�e entry onto Bensan Road f� both entering c�nc� exiting tra{{ic. Also, t{�e tri� c�istri�ution
figure should be s�djusted to better indicate the actua! laccation of the entry driveway onto SE 172�d
Street (immedia�ely east of 106�h Avenue SE�.
• Refated to trip assignment, existing a.m. and p_m. peak hour tra{fic counts between SE 172nd
Street and 10$th Avenue SE should be balanced. !n gsneral, reported troffic counts at the
proposed sike access lacation are directionolly higher along Benson Road at 108rh Avenue SE.
Traffic operational ancrlysis shauld consider the worse-case scenario and given the inlerseckian
Trcnsporfation Planning � �esigr � Traffic lmpacfi 8�Opert�tians
PO 8ox 6525d,Seattie,WA 48 i 55 � Offtce(206}361-
EXNIBIT 17
Full Document
dv� �a'�T�'�- Available upon Request
,����� 11410 h1E 124t
�����t� Phor�e: 425,�
Mr. Justin Lagers March 26, 2016
Avana Ridge, LLC
9675 SE 36th St. Suite 1 q5
Mercer Island, WA 9804p
Re: Avana Ridge Apartrnents— City of Renton
Memarandum - Revisions to TIA per Peer Review
Dear Mr. Lagers:
The purpose of this memo is to pravide revisirmns to the Rvana Ridge Tra�c
Impact Analysis per the recornmendations 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 172"d St. and also the sharter#rip length us9ng the Bensan Rd. driveway
for south oriented trips
• balancing tra�c volumes between intersections
• revising level of senrice calculations due to new trip distribution
• evaluating tra�c queues on Benson Rd. from #he SR 515/Benson Rd.
intersection
• evaluating left turn lane warrants into the site access driveway from Bensan
�taad.
Trip Distribution and Assiqnmen#
Figures R1 and Ft2 shaw the revised trip dis#ribution and assignment ofi site
genera#ed traffic in the AM and PM peak haurs. The revisions refiec# a restricted
access#o SE 1?2n� SE. aliowing anly left#ums into the site and right tums out of the site.
A care#ul design af the site access driveway should effectively eliminate mas#site
generated t�ips to the west on SE '172"� St. and to the nor�h an 'i 06�', 105�' 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 ta SE 172"a
S#reet.
Page 1 EXHIBIT i8
-�,:,, ,
� ,
t�en�s Gaw City of
Ma or � � e �.�Y ��
Y �s ja � �"ae;�:,
�` � � � * i�� '
; i� ,' �. ` ''t'�i pK�
�..,
�� ��
April 15, 2016 Community&Ecanomic Development[?epartment
C.E."Chip"Vincent,Administrator
Washington State
Department of Ecology
Environmental Review Section
PO Box 47703
Ofympia, WA 98504-77t}3
5ubje+ct: ENViRaNMENTAt(SEPAI THRESHO�D DETERMiNAT10N
Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the foilowing
praject reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) an Aprii 11, 2Q16:
SEPA DETERMINATION; Determination of Non-Signi�cance Mitigated (DNSM�
P4tO,tECT NAME: Avana Ridge�UD
PROIECT NUMBER: LUA15-00089d, PPUt?, ECF
Appeats of the environmentai determination must be filed in writ�ng on ar before 5.00
p.m. on Apri129, 2016,tage#her with the required fee with: Nearing Examiner, City of
Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appea(s to the Examiner are
governed by RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeai process may be
obtained fram the City Clerk's Qffice, (425) 430-6510.
Please refer ta the enclosed Notice of Environmental Determination for complete
details. !f you have guestions, please call me at {425�434-7219.
For the Environmental Review Cornmittee,
�!.f�L.�Ld�'�
Rocale Timmans
Senior Planner
E�closure
cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Oivislon Ramin Pazooki,WSDOT,NW Region
Boyd Powers,Department of Natura)Resources Larry Fisher,WDFW
Karen Walter,Fisheries,Muck(eshaat tndian Tribe Duwamish Tribal Office
Me}issa Calvert,Muckleshoot CulLural Resources Frogram US Arrny Corp,of fngineers
Gretchen Kaehler,Off3ce of Archaeology&Historlc PreservatEon
Ful1 Document EXNIBIT 20
Available upan Request
ith Gr�dy Way . Renton,Wasfiingtan 9$057 • rentonwa.gov
,�;;_�.�.�:: _- ..� . _.._,.�....,�a. ,,.�._,.
_ ����� 'r.. -� __
�- ""�" City of ;��
-r��_ �. �.- ��,,.
-�:��°�'`� � - . � g�
s.
:��:���� � � � ; . «
-�--.�:�w_-M-:��_�.�k��.-�.��: �a,� � . � � : � f�� ��
� �. � �A� � , ��
�-. �, � . ,.� �•_ � � . . ��.: :1-1�
Department of Community and Ecanomic Develapment
Planning Division
ADMlNISTRATIVE POLlCY/CQDE INTERPRETATION
ADMINISTRATIVE Futi Document
Po��cY/cooE Availabte upan Request
lNTERFRETATt{}N#: CI-73- REVISED
MUNlCIPA!
CODE SECTIONS: 4-2-110.A,4-2-110.6,4-2-110.D, 42-115,4-11-020, and 4-11-23Q
REFERENCE:
SUBJECT: Residential Building Height (RC thru RMF)
BACKGROUND: Erratum Statement: CI-73 implemented changes to the
method af height measurement for structures in the RC
through RMF zones. This erratum statement affects the
two-stary limitation far R-14 zaned properties by
increasing it to three. Dacket#116 advacates for increased
height and story limits for se}ect zones, including the RMF
zane. 7he R-14 zone is transitianal between the R-1Q and
RMF, and therefore R-14 standards are intended to offer a
compromise between the restrictions of the R-10 and the
aflowances of the RMF zone. By limiting wall plate height
to 24' yet allowing three stories, the R-14 zone would
provide an appropriate transitian between the R-10 and
RMF zanes 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 ta roofed buildings is
incansistent and contracfictory with the intent and purpase statements of
Title IV related to residentia! design tRMC 4-2-115). Furth�er, regulating
the height of non-roofed structures is unenforceable by Title IV (except
for Building Code). The ambiguity and contradictary aspects of the code
exist for twa reasons:
1. Height is measured to the midpoint of a raof; and
2. Flat roofs are abie to be as tail as buiidings w'rth pitched roofs, which
increases the bui{ding's massing.
H:�CED\Planning\Title IV\Oocket\Administrative Policy Code Interpretation\CI-73\Code Int EXHIBIT 21
i - -- - - ------ - - -- - - - — --_--- ---- --- - ------- -- -- — — - - --— -- — -- --- ---- $�
- - a,_,,
� u
< �� �'
�� �� u
� = I �� �
CT .,,� � �� fl.
.... II �
� ' �
G p _ _ . - i � o
C = � � � �� �"!�f j br
�v �m ■ '�r� ,�# � � � ��
' �
� �. � � � .
�:
_�.� . i
� �:
� ■ � � i
ca ��� _�:� ..
� '�,i, _ ���: ` ;
.. �
I :;�,= ------
IAVANA RfDGE
PI.ANAIEd URBAP
� YV�ST BUIEDING FACi_NG NORTHWE$T____ _ __ WE$T B.UILDI.NG FACiNG SOUTHWEST,_.�_�.
�.,,E � �F m I DEYELQPMENT
= I 1D816 SE i72rtd ''
� � STREET,RENTON,WA
� 98055
N I
� �
N i
N � AVANA RiDGE,Lt
" ~ wuuro�s � � ..,a»�°" „�
f� - �
a�i - � . I ---- ---
�� � � �
,�;.
. - k
I� �� .r. � 1,+�
! m :�"� � � _ I c�— -----, i
�� �c�. .
�� j � - E 20N1NG CODE
I
i COMPLIANCE-
_ "�; WEST BUILDING
� :__�.._. _ . ..� ,..
� — ------
�� ��
II
WESTBtlI�QINGFACiNGSQUTNEAST__ . _ WEST_BUILDINGFACINGNORTHEAST ____. I
�� � �" � ao.os
� - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- -- -- -- - — — -- -- - --_ - --- ----_ —� - - - — —
���,.���,�. �o,a,� �,.,,,��
DEPARTMENT OF CUMMUNITY y����,,,,�.•�s ��'`�V'��"`����� {� t��f`}
AND ECC?NOM#C DEVELOPMENT
M E M Ca R A �1 Q U M
DATE: January 11, 2016
TQ: Racale Timmons, Senior Pianner
FROM: Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager
SUBIECT. Traffic Concurrency Test—Avana Ridge East and West;
File No. B1S00$865 and 815008867
The applicant is requesting Building Permits for two apartment buiidings under separate
building perrr�its. Avana Ridge East is 40 units (Permit No. 615008865} and Avana Ridge West is
34 units (Permit No. 815008867). The subject site is iocated at 10619 SE 1725nd Street. The
vacant site is located within the Residential Multi-Family zoning classificatian.
The propased develapment would generate appraximately 572 ne# new average weekday daily
trips. During the weekday AM peak hour, the project wouid 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 24 outbaund}. The proposed project
passes the �ity of Renton Traffic Cancurrency Test per RMC 4-6-07t}.D as follc�ws:
� Traf�c Cancurrency Tes#Criteria � Pass
I lmplementation of citywide Transportatian Plan ( Yes
� I
� Within aiiowed grawth leveis � Yes
� Project subject to transpc�rtation mitigation or impact fees � Yes
� Site specific street impravements to be completed by project � Yes
� Traffic Concurrency Test Passes
Futl Dacument
Avai[able upon Request EXNIBIT 23