The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLUA-05-118~ ~ 1i) ci. 0.. PORTION SE 1/4, W.M. OF NE 1/4, SW 1/4, TWN 23N., R5E, SEC 4 ",,;3I4f1 ",..,k "-'~II .... 110111 "'1-"'1 ",1'1.1,.,.8. f f f· CEliEI.QEEB· Elliilli.EEB;. ~ PK ENTERPRjSES PREfERRED ENGlNE£RjNG. u.c INFOOMED LAND SURVEY, u.c 23035 SE 2!3n:1 S'TR£ET PO DOl( ~22 17051 SOUTH SHERIDAN AVE. WAPLE VAl..L.EY. WI. 980J8 FEDERAL. WAY, WA 88093-2422 TM:OMA, WI, 9840:1 g:J~7;~I~ITZES PH(206) 501-5708 , PH(:mJ) 878-2229 * * ~:Jr:~C~~ BLAJR, PE ~~~T:~~~'~R"f'. PLS EMAIl: H)t.lINOPEllC.ORG 0 0 ---I'\.::_ --Vi T _ ~~_ x NE SUN~il . "Mtu LlGHI r.' POI'>£R £J(j ---G. -~--c.: -'cJ;f ---"l--"!Ex-snbN_=,.(~ '\ ~. ~ '--fJUNcn ,. --~=-=--:;;;~-=---.'---"~"-C'k-_- / / IV 82' 22' JJ. IV . 815.00' MCAS. : / /' NO. LEGEND . { f ~,. •• N • ,Not'lhlt -, ..... -- _ .... 0 • m m 0 • --, f· f \ SCALE: ,~j. I \ AllO 0 ~~Jsc::.~i/;o~~~V; ~.~~ ;O;~:;/~~CRfrt: WALk P RETURN TO THE EAST ON rHE EAST SlO£ OF NfI'vPORT AVE N.£. & SUNSET BLVD. CITY R[N roN 8M I 750 GENEBAI. H)'[JROI.OGICAL NOJES' FRONT SETlW:K SIDE SETtW:K ""'" SET1W:l< I SE COR SEC 4-2J-5 (CONG. MON. IN CASE \\ I SE 1121h STREET <k IJ2M AVENUE S.C. ~ [>6.<] CO~STRUCTION REVISION EXISTlHO TOT. PARCEL AA£A -78,512 SF (1.60 ACRES) EXISONO IMP€RVIOUS AREA -1,1Jei SF (0.028 ...cR£S) EXISOOO PERlllOUS AREA -77.215 •• SF (1.77 ACRES) (fOREST CCMR &: GAASS) , LOTS PROPOSED , LOTS PERWITTED TR.f.CT 'A' POND AAEA • HOTS • II LOTS (CITY OF' RENTON WORKSHEET') • 6,a87.1 SF OF" PARCEL GENEfiAl BQUMOARt INFORMATION' TI£ DOUNDtRY SUR\IEY, WAS RECORDED ON JUN[ 2. 1"2 BY THE !lUPERINlDlDENT OF REOORPS rJ11l-1E REQUE3T OF KENNEI'H d. 0'IlER. PI.S UCENSED IN 1HE STATE Of WASHINGTON. ... ....... BY I DATE I APPR -=='1"'11 •• ~I~ --':CjI ~ CITY OF , RENTON CITY Of R£HrOH 1DD5 S. G1W1r WAY RENTON. WA 08050 ~:;4j~~·~-Di~~-.6r~ UNKNOWN ~ .J § cl.. CI.. PEVELOPER' ~ ~ U"IIERPRISES PREFERRED EHGR, u.c MN't.E v,t,U£Y, WI. PO BOX :z5.4Z2 (zoe) 227-7+4& F£DERAL WAY, WA 11809" t:oHtACT: PHIL KrT7ES (206) 501-'708 10' 55 EASEMOO TO BE PRCMDm FOR F1NAL _ APPROV,l,l..; NEGOTIATIONS UNDERWAY WITH NEtGHBORINO PROPERTY OWNERS TO THDR PREFERRED SS LAYOUT, PORTION OF NE TWN 1/4. SW 1/4. SE 23N .• R5E. W.M. 1/4. SEC 4 .. :. ---T-L---T----i---- I I I I ""'«T lIT1'..J """'[NT I ~! N1 .. I Jr---- :=1 ;1 I ·'1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PROPOSED bD / I i~ PROPOS.J ss I ~ J~ ,'ROM PiPE WI HU8 &> TAl< lww ... 0.13' NO.RTrl o~-LINE 1---------I /:-I I ~ ~ -.J Jo .---------!Z[&'.>~ 'I: _ ~ L!X!,TlO 0 PROPOSED WATER BENCh'MARK £i.EVIl nON = 406.77' CHISELED SQUARE N.c, COf?NER CONCRETE WALK RETURN TO THE [,<1ST ON THE EAST SlOE OF NEWPORT All[. N.r, &-SUlliSET BLVO CITY RENTON 8M I 750 ",: '" ;., ~ .. ~ ~.Ll":: ~. i 405';:f:. 24 ~CCP EX SSMH 2J4 m. rn :J+ Q ..t+ / ~ RIM=400.J2· ~-t:'_~,_ _ __ / f£ 22uW=J70.42' M NO. REVISION " DATE I APPR ~~IMC.I-I·.20' -,.,.,.",. .... -:; I ::.;::;::. I m rn :)It f!J. 4+ .. ...l!:1JO'.:'l.l'l! •• ~ NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION NOTE: EX. UTtunES Ntt: APPROXIMATE ONLY CALL 1-800-424-MM BEFORE OIGOlHQ • POTHOL£ UNKNOWN EX. ununES BEfORE CONSTRUCTlOH BEGINS. 1lll SCALE: 1" = 20' TELEPHONE VAULT CAP/I'lUG COUPLING 9E COR Ie 4-2J~·(~~. ~~~~~ SE 112th STREET & IJ211d A VENUE S.f. o • ,STORM DRAIN CATCH BASIN I '~~ >---< >--< STORM DRAIN CULVERT ® @ STORM DRAIN NANHOI£ M£CHAHIC""L 2-~OZZLE HYDRol.NT 8l lIE GATE/GENERAL CITY OF ~ RENTON CITY Of" REHTClN IO!& S. amoY WAY AENtllH. WA NO&e IB lllRUST BLOCK W""TEA WE1[R FLAHGE/tIUNO Fl BlOW-<lfT HONEY CREEK VIEW PLAT 3524 NE SUNSET BLVD RENTON. WA 98056 ~ ~ CL CL DEYELOPER' Fit( ENTtRPRJSES 2303e Sf: 28Jrt! STREET WAfLE VAI..1.EY. WI. ~0J8 (208) 227-7~ 00H'tN:T: PHIL KI1ZES PORTION OF NE TWN ~ PREFERRED ENGINEERING, U.C PO BOX 2M22 FEDERAL WAY, WA 88093-24-22 Pt*(206) ~1~70l1 =,e:~7"""'PE OIAIL: AOWINOP£ll.C.ORG ~ INFtlRWED lM'D SUR\IEY, w: 110" SOUTH SHERllWI AVE. TACOIolA. WA g640~ PH(:ze3) 578-2228 =:tI~!U~\!2SRY, PLS 1 /4, SW 1/4, SE 1/4, 23N., 'R5E, W.M. \ WkA6W'~~\J..\ ,./ ',I --\ --r+:~#~\. -, -~-..... -"' " '-":::::.. -=-...... ---~ '--»-.r .-._ --'--:-, -" '----~ '---= -""'--"' -tf,·\ " \ " " "'~~~~, '-< "-'<0. __ , M'W -"-~~.~ -, "''-~/''-''.'" ''''\''~ffff4i= 1-;:-',..... ,,,.. ."' __ , . __ , ".WhYff..@'ff~ 1 '.~.. " '(." " " ',: <= ,,~ ": .1... . .-•• ,.', , '--', .. , , W'~-= .t-,:,-, ;W' .. .,::-I v I I....", wa .K, -.,.. ",,_ '.,p ,, __ , , \ --tF ¥', , " , . _ _ _ _ _ '.-...., ., SEC 4 ,~ \ \, \,.) '. . '. .\:~ , .... " \ , , , ,. ..... .,~-"'.~ 'V"', -'" .. '"',.-.... , '-'> ' .-< '. Ci., "" \ '.-.'1' ' , "\" ,\ , '.~" '.l{-'" , , \ \ , . -'~,"",~;.,', ',", ~, -, ''''''''-, .. ".t" ',,,! ',', \ ' '1,." """, , '" '" '.-.'_, ":.... .... '"".~. " " "~ , -' .~, '''-'"'" ' '" , , ---, , -,~!',;.., ,'-""'W.., I,.,,, '-.... ~ ""''''"' "" '--...... '. ,.\~ .......................... _ ~'" " " , " ' . .-. ""~ ---, -" '\ \ \ ................ ........ --;-1" '. ,1', " "',:,,__ __,,_ '_ \ " ' __ HM2<" " ~~-\ '\ \ " ... ,-. _~ __ ~" ~~'-\ ___ =--"'-~~ ., , •• ~ " " ,... V Q _._ '" '" " , t'--"s~-"", ~ASW 11' , ,'lJ;;, ~,,, '\ ~",_~_ , "..:_ ~", ", _ "-=-,,,,, .. ,, "" .. , .... , \ , , ... ,-., ------~c:--_" _~." . ", ','" \ "\ \ , "'-''''---'''\i'~::_' ",\:\ , .. til \\ '\ 1 \\ '\ '\ , ...... ---../ ---/ OFJr.).1i-~ , .................. , "\ \ ~" \ CD J" IROM PIPE FO J'(~~RRr::b,-LINE """ ~ ) I'" " ~ /'''''''' ''--'.,,, " , "', , '/0'\, \, .... ..,,_. / "_"\q,,, ".\"." ~I" '\ 1 '\ \" C:."". / • '<Fti'.~..... "~, '.~. , \, '\, ----",., / / -.,!.>\>., ~ '\: "..: ' "'c. ""----'c,---__ ~.~ .. / , __ "~':,_ \ , .1>'", "'_ , _ __ . .. _ _" _ " ~''''A ""-',' _ _ _ _ <""~ " I, '<:, ".h'''''~ ____ --_____ _ -', " .. " '"~''''' --,-----, " 'M' om " " -..... -~iJFl6 ,:, "!.:":t "'~'.. ',.,,-,-- ' """ ' .. ---, , ", ".' '-'" ----, ~,,, ="'"' 14J;tW2 0 "--'\ ----'. " ':c.,,, C:,C":'''...... ),{. I ~i-. 8ENCH.MARKO~~~~.A N.c. CORN~R £~o;;.. $IO[ OF Af-\~ ... C', \ Co) "_'l!SH~" ~ CHISELEO,OS rHE[ASTQN ~~rBL\oV .. '. -• '-~ ". .~, .. ,00 ~_ , "" • ~ ':tt: f '--' ",'-h....,'\ c\\"--\\"-_ G~ '.' _'~" ~!:"::;::' .. , ~ "'" \,-'" --" ,,, '~v-___ -__ ~ ,., ;>" ";;", '!,!,!"" "'J~-~ '"I \' -~ ''iio'''''~~'''''_ ~& lil'f:'l· :XIIi; • .., •• J)'..., .... " -T~£~ ~~.: ,9IM=';OD,g?([) 'I,.ch, -', _ 'i "'. __ <>~,"'.. .,,0>, , ~ ~1f ::G-~~~8...-~~=.oI~ -.....:~~~_"'-_,?_ -'E:lco NC WALK" 'i'. --, --"'~"--L_-L._,__ _ _______ '-'__ _ " '~-'-J>; -~",,-,,,,--_,--,,,__ "_._,,._ ... '''''-". =, "". ',' _I ,1 " "' ,No SUN . 80 V, "'" '.. " WH" ;"''''f"". ,,,~-,----/;. w","" "'" ~--~-,!!,jL_ -~!/iI;:-"" --c -~ ~-. /' /,"u,,-". ' -"", .' '-" "-', ! / u~eOm i!--'~;if --~ -'S" -'''-,---,'" _._ .. -S-"" __ '__,>_~. _,~_~_ ,_ -j,-_ ~"_ _" ~. " hil ./ ./ N 82' 22' Jr w BI6.00' MEAS. : ....-....-': 1 ./ k ___ ~_:H'id~/ 0 -~~D-/I LEGEN * * .. _, 0 0 -- c ~ rn rn --, 0 e ~nn ~_o.lIIIlIIII SCALE: ," -20' I GENERAL HYQRDLOGICAL NOTES' EXIST1HG TOT. PARtO. AREA _ 78.512 Sf (1.80 ACRES) 00Sll1'fO lWPEfMOUS AREA _ 1,135 Sf (0.026 ACRES) EXISTlNG PEfMOU5 AREA • 77,275.4 SF (1.71 ACRES) SE COR SEC 4-2J-5 (CONe. MON. IN CASE) \ I SE /12th STREff '" 'J2M A VfNUE S.[. ~ {FOREST COVER a: GRASS} i>L.<J NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION NOTE: D. UTlUnES ARE APPROKIIU,TE ON:LY ~ 1-300-424-5Me 8EF'ORE DIOCINQ .. POTHOt..E UNKNOWN EX. ununES BD'ORE COHSTRUCT1ON BfGlNS. '"-"'i~1NC.1"""1·_2(l' -,."".,... """ ..:!:I:!"".ll'I., ~ ~ CITY OF RENTON HONEY CREEK VIEW PLAT 3524 NE SUNSET BLVD RENTON, WA 98056 NO. REVISION BY DATE J APPR -... -", 1:i~,1 crtY Of" RENTON 1055 S. QRADY WAY RfNfON. WA aao.'\'5 I i ~ Ii. 11. 11. ENIHl"·~., ~ .......... .....,.".." ~~~~ "~'-r~'~' '~'- , "-' "-\ -1 "-,,-\ . "- ------->-----------+------------'" '" N.I:. SUNS~ BLVD. __ ./ '" , '" ~-/'" ._---------------:----"'--- PLANT LEGEND A-. ~ .......... sP'Mdnote 'AWlMert:IlIMN'" A8 MFtVICIIDClMT' ~AJl(u IMIII._ ,......,'O" .. ,./~~.~A 0.uJ1(u .......... ~'ttol'cwu.uc;r'ItMiCII...a ~-~ .................... ~/'lllC»l'tAtlCIIR.6M G!oItttIIIr <II .. AIIII ~t.,'ifIr. .-.......... , .......... ~ D ... NO. ... ""'" BY NOTa DEC IOUOUS TREE PLANT 1110 DETAI L NO .... t; SHRUB PLANTIND DETAIL NO ..... I. DO NOT DMlIICfI, AU. ~ I.ITI.mIO MAW BIII2N LDCAlIID. 2. ~ fOUIITMtIIMTN f'OOf ~ tn' 0CDCIJItII. 0CINfRACT0R'"-OOO cmGF::U1I NOTIID. ... II.lBdfUDIII!lWol6L BD 0CMtJIlI!D DR R0101'U,ID • CDtCIffJc.':toO NGUFa. ........ V'Y' IOU • 6" DIP'rW J-a&A.T ~ PIlla ClfUotDG.GOU.O ...... DQ~ , .... ,.. TONOIL TONOtL. 8Io&AL1. sa ~ ~ .AU. ~ ........... I. ,. ~ u,TJIA I:fI 0IIIIdrMCC, f'\AftIJIeI.AI. CUL. TIVA'" .. ~ C/II 60" DlIfIII. 6. I" r1HIVt Dfl,-rw PtCI dfIW)Q I!W;( 'I"U,.CW tI PI..A4ft*) BI!CIo, t'U.Q.I e.u.u. 11& \l'R!1! ~ am> NID, '.MfrCJoI, III2IIN6 OR DTMfIII: ~.OIITAI'IIHTAL TO PUNT ClAI:MN." AU. fIUHT 11A'mUL IMoIU. BI MltA&.nn'. NJ..-cD CQrIlOFrtt TO M1IFIIC.MC"t,I6OCIA'hCIII41:f1 ~(oiUfrrUOA.o1IrDrleNC'T~POR M.R6IVIn" 01OQC, ""fUr IIOf'I'JCIN. . .. ~"",TIIRIAL tP 11%1 OR IQCt NOt' AV~ "".,. BIt CUMn'M1lD CM.T UTW~JLtp ~~MC,QitDli1H2A. t.~ cc:M!~ ew.ItI.I. DGI"UHfIC ~ ~ """"""t4di BI06 TOMMLTt4TOTAL ~~'TIAI.t&. .......... TMII,...,-o ......... ea:IH6PI!C1EOTO~fI'AC:IfIER~ ';:; I."""""" ~ eH.AU,. 81 """-MANtI, ""'"' PUHl'N:fI NliIIIo6 """"" ta", a . .-.....ca~A ... tU'U'lQJ6·LllRQMa.tO:.CPOoII'a tt,~,.,.,. ... 'I'rINI'V'II:fI~~~ClPc:wtD. W. "'~ ~.....u. ~MII6ITB-LHrL fltw. Mf'IICTICN.Met JICCIl,..,.....::a8'r~ ~ 244ft __ a.1. =~!':-Ykt ..-. ',";"; , _ ........ CAft I APf'R ~ ~rK ~ OEVELOPMENr PLANNING CITY OF RENTON . I.: "$1' DEC 2 1 2005 .1\ F~J ECE6VED EvtRCREOf 1IIU PLANTING DETAI~ lIIO"'; LAWN I PLANfoING BED DtTA I L MIl"'" , ~ -' .''': " , :1 ' =_ •. ''''!'!'o .. . ",' .. ' ~~ .. :-; .. 0_ COYER SPACINO DqAI~ .......... .".."..CjNCIIQ IfYDROSalu.UJUD,U'lAKllNO STR I~' Pl'lCFCmtClH ,~ .. ~ IIo!tIII lILHIifIIIlt ~ :-a~flPlNllAl.FlrflOR.4I6.,.. .. 'IICIPlleo.D: ... tit weLlCM!Qh! N!P .... UlO./1,OOO til', . -0DaD .... AfIIIRM TWAT NIIII .BNIID GFII:UC oIIND ... T LaAOf 10-JIIFIOf'I .orr A.AKfID f'RInI OR ONRD. UIIQ ~m.T"'''' UIl\:(111 .... » ... N·p..j('lm!L.IZIR .... lPISJOe.:::awRIlInf, NO ~Tm.:,. 4." 1.DO.t:# IIIIXIO ~PlDIRI'V.Qt IIIIfIt ~~NBf tto1ll.L. A.RIA.O TO .. ..,.,.",. C!:DDNJ O~ to I.nTID TO f'WACN I. I'\lT ,. • MaIOf D· --am OMIL\. CCItPCR1 TO GTMC'MADO PCR 'CD'RfI'tIO" 6A.46e Mao a=t DITt'BR. ... ",,""MID II t:IOA "A&Jlt f'CIR GOlD ClRrR:.ATICN", u:rUf~ PK ENTERPRISES HONEY CREEK VIEW CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN OIlY OF RENTON ~ ci ~ ~ 0.. '- ~~~~--=-i~------( '.",IM I I --I ) PAD ELEV, • 373.0 PAD o.EV, • 37UI = ca:::a [EJ [EJ <-<- OJ OJ LEGEND - POWER VAUlT 0 • uruTY Pa.£ D • UTlUTY P'OLE .. "''''' >---< >------< ""","ONE RISER lEUl'HONE VAULT @ @ IlE~~EB' .EllilI.tiEEB:. PKENrERPtUSES PREfERRED ENOiNaRIHO. UC SAN. sno Cl£AN OUT 2.1033 SE 26lRD STREET PO BOX 2&422 WAPLE WU£Y. WII V30J8 FEDERAl.. WAY. WA 1Hl0iJ-2422 =~7p~~KrrzES (208) 2e01-&708 lin SAN. SEYlER IIWIHCU t NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION S'IMW DRAIN CA. TCH BASIN NOTE: STORw DRAII CUL \OT EX. ununES ARE APPROXIWATE ONlY CAU. lHFl:UST 1!I...OQ( 1-600-"24-SM& BEFORE DlOOING 6: POTHOl.[ UNI<NOWN EX. unUTIES BEFORE CONSfRUC'TlON BtCINS . STORM DRAIN WAHH(U to< .. 0A1t/OOI£RAL SCALE: 1"-20' 1~"1'O-' ~o .:01 415 1--1: . I ..... ·f~.--L. 410 I ~I~ ~=. ",. -39<1.0 4051 Hla I CD m P.' <LEV, I I 'II 0: -3.3.0 -~ 4001---- ERY 1 I'-~ g ill 395:-...... ~ + '" 'l' 1 T T k........... N :ll N T -1~uU " r'~! ~ "'" : , ' , :' ,~.. .. " ,", ".. \ " ! , T -j~' ,"" " " ." ~L:"C._ ' ,,~-" '" \ "~ ~ ~ _ _ " "'~ ~",m ,_ ,. • I /' ~~ -'0., T "" " _ ,,_ m • \ ~ 1/ ,""," " =:t,,< \'0 [ 380 '\ 0 • ~o;,. " ~_ T I'" , , \ '""" __ 1 ~.~ , ~ -'. I __ ._. " ' "'_ ' l!,,"'11 ",..:\i~-I I N /12. _ -8. "': '.... I '-PROFIL:~ ~SEll BLO I 1380 ".___ :: "" I I ' I "f~ J i r;~ ,'I ~I 151375 d ffi~1 ;1 -il1~ 370 Q.E i3 I~ V ::1 I I I I I I I I I I 1·:t;~lJl w. , Ie .385 \w ,. :=...ra:.===~~~~"'i:u.T' ," ___ nccmQ1 ___ ~_ar._ l.~_~~ .1 -..cII~ •• n."_""T\£~_. PROPOSED ROAD -PUBLIC RESIDENTIAL ROAD VERTICAL CURB TYPE ROADWAY NO. REVISION BY DATE I APPR ~!~ ~( I")I~ 1+80 --r-5lJ!tYE'rl<lO, DC.lmu. ,-.:zo' -,.,.,..,.. -. -='::IoItI'_ ~ -... I i::'~.1 ....... r:l~ ,.,,", ,.,1" ~:g: ~I~ ~!~ ~I~ 1:(" 1'1~~ !" ~I~ f"l:;;: 2+20 2+60 PROPOSED ROAD ~ CITY OF RENTON ~~~ro;,· ~Aa~BOV;~ 3+40 HONEY CREEK VIEW PLAT 3524 NE SUNSET BLVD RENTON, WA 98056 PREFERRED ENGINEERING, LLC \ ;!II '.", I...J{J/O& !!G~D J • J&ININININIAJAI Phil Kitzes PK Enterprises 23035 SE 263rd Street Maple Valley, WA 98038 tel: 206-227-7445 PARTIES OF RECORD HOINIEY CREEK VIEW ESTATES LUA05-118, SHPL-H, CAR, ECF James & Minoo Costello 22814 77th Avenue SE Woodinville, WA 98072 tel: 425-486-8101 (owner) Charles & Mahwash Price 16102 NE 175th Street Woodinville, WA 98072 tel: 425-481-9589 (owner) eml: pkenterprises_mv@yahoo.com (applicant / contact) Ali & Farideh Mastan 13910 SE 42nd Place Bellevue, WA 98006 tel: 425-74"7-5858 (owner) Updated: 01/19/06 Arthur E. Eastman 3533 NE 17th Place Renton, WA 98056 (party of record) . A.L. Meakin 7100 S Taft Street Seattle, WA 98178 (party of record) (Page 1 of 1) .. ,eL.~~ .~.. ,. No. '&~L-.E' . '. t \ j I i .~.~ .a·/~ 13 w~~r:G~~ o'·f-· 'REGISTERED ~QSCAPE:ARCHn'le'f' ~pjg!<n_ WNNEi'l.KUHU\Wla . _. . .... . I' 'Y <> q,e--'-fA'r ;r:-' J 'iii it." .u..t ~TlU'Q;7tJQ •• ..54 ... ._ ..••. ........"i. ;";"....;.;/ J.JN.' 3·~1. '" ~ ~~ I .. >'A'A"~ ). . --.. ~ ?:tc")~b: :A.. :0.:.14' iA.'"""." ,\S': ,.. . ~>AJj) ;:",.,,:= ), , .A' IV~ , t-<QP _ 1 LS' \ ~r' . : '50A LE~J'(:::-10 1_0 '.1 rAT'! Or tz--EN17JN <;~::.~~.~~ lif;~f~ ~',~,,;-' f .. (#. ' •. ; .. '., 5' <' 1. t 27207 8th Avenue S P. O. Box 13309 Des Moines, Washington 98198 Des MOines, Washington 98198 Phone: 253.941.9399 0 Fax 253.941.9499 (\) E-mail: soilsengineering@aol.com Mr. William Hughes WH Hughes Homes 14401 Issaquah-Hobart Rd. SE Issaquah, Washington 98027 Richard A. Bergquist, P.E. Principal 27207 8th Avenue S, Des Moines, Washington 98198 Phone: 253.941.9399 Fax: 253.941.9499 E-mail: SoilsEngineering@aoLcom DoWN To EARTH ENGINEERING SoLU1l0NS Dear Bill: August 14, 2013 . Re:. Geotecnnical Engineering Services Honey Creek View Short Plat 3524 Sunset Boulevard Renton, Washington King Co. Parcel No. 0423059090 BES Project No.: 201334, Report 2 As requested, I reviewed the existing site conditions along the north property line relative to the steep slope buffer of 15 feet and the building setback of 10 feet that was recommended in my original report dated July 22, 2005. The slope discussed in that report was near-vertical, whereas, the current slope is at a declination of about 23 degrees on an azimuth of zero degrees. Accordingly, based on current site conditions, I recommend that the building setback may be reduced to zero if the foundation loads are transmitted far enough below grade so as not to impose and additional vertical or horizontal loads on the existing slope. Isolation of vertical and horizontal loads can be ensured by placing the footings deep enough so that an imaginary line drawn down at a 45-degree angle from the toe of the foundation does not intersect the face of the DoWN To fARTH ENGINEERING SoLUTIONS WH Hughes Homes. Issaquah, Washington BESProjec' jumber: 201334,·Rep~rt 2 August 14, 2013 existing slope. ·The geotechnical engin~er shall monitor excavations along this slope to· . ensure that the slope will remains stable. Excavations on the slope shall not be performed during the wet season . . I appreciate the opportunity to be of service to. you on this project. If you have . anyquesti6ns concerning this report, or if we may be of additional sCerVice,please ~ . .. -. . . ",. .. contactfTle .. Sincerely; Bergquist EngineeringServiCes· 14, 2013 Bergquist Engineering Services Richard A. Bergquist, P.E. Principal ,~ , Page2of2 ..... ) ... ~.~I~I I.~ . ~I~= " Jg~~isE:iheetih~' , 27207 6th Aven~ S P.O. B<;>x 133(>9 Des Moines, Washington 96196 , , Des Moines, Washington 96196 Phone: 253.941.9399 () FOx 253.941.9499 0 E.,maH: soilsengineeiirig@aoI.com , Mr. :William Hughes WH Hughes Home~ 144()1lssaquah·HobartRd. SE Issaquah. Washington 98027 Dear Bill: Augtlst 8. 20i3 Re: Gaotechnical Engineering ~ervices Honey Creek View Short Plat 3524 Sunset Boulevard Renton, Washington King Co. Parcell No. 0423059090 BES Project No.: 201334, Report 1 At your request. I visit$d the reference project yesterday to observe the slope c9nditions along the northeast prop~rtyline. I walked the slope down to and along the split-rail fence'thatparallels the crest of the steep-slope. sensitive area th~t slopes down to Honey Creek. The, surface soil,S on face of the slope that grades up to the hqme sites are Silty SANDS (SM) some gravel to SAND (SP) with silt, some gravel. There,were no signs of slippage. slope failUre. or significant erosion on the face of the slope. Erosion control netting was present on the fage of the slope. Numerous pine and alder saplings have spr~uted through the netting. Some of the s,aplings are founo six feet tall and some are less thans,ix inches tall. It appears that the slope is b~coming w~1I vegetated. WH Hlighes Homes Issaquah, Washington BES Project .lumber: 201334. Report 1 AUQust 8~ 2013 On an azimuth of 70 degrees; the declination of the slope was measured to be 31 degrees at its steepest. The flJrther north along the slope~ the gradient flattens. In my original geotechnical report. d~teti February 12. 2006.1 es,timated that the alluvial soils at this site had an angle of internal friction of 36 degrees and a cohesion of 50 pst. The current. steepes~ northeast facing slope is about 31 degrees, which is less tOa.o the natural angle of repOse. Therefore. the slope isstabfe and the stability should improve dver time with the continued growth of vegetation. The vegetation on the slope shall be maintained throughout th~ life of the development and debris and landscaping waste shall not be placed on the face of the slope. Surface water and roof water shall not discharge over or onto the stope. The foundations of the p~opose;d houses,shaU be located far enough away from or deep enough so as not to impose toads on the slope. J appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project If YOll have any questions concerning this report. or if we may be of additional service. please contact me. Bergquist Engineering Service$ Sincerely. Be~gquist Enqineering Service!; Richard: A. Bergquist. P.E. Principal Page2qf2 · , 27207 8th Avenue S P.O. Box 13309 Des Moines, Washington 981 98 Des Moines, Washington 98198 Phone: 253.941.9399, Fax: 253.941.9499, e-mail: RBergqu510@aol.com Mr. Phil Kitzes PK Enterprises 23035 SE 263rd Street Maple Valley, Washington 98038 Geotechnical Engineering Services Preliminary Site Evaluation Honey Creek View Short Plat 3524 Sunset Boulevard Renton, Washington King County Tax Parcel Number 0423059090 BES Project Number: 200504, Report 3 Dear Mr. Kitzes: February 1 2, 2006 DEVELOPMENT PlANNING CITY OF RENTON FEB. 1 3 2006 . [gi~lC~~~~[c) This report should be used in conjunction with Reports 1 and 2 and presents the results of the test pits performed on February 4, 2006, revised slope stability analyses, and additional site characterization and geotechnical engineering recommendations required by City of Renton Municipal Code (RMC). Specifically, this report addresses the requirements of Table 18 -Geotechnical Report -Detailed Requirements of RMC 4-8-120D. The proposed project involves design and construction of a nine-lot subdivision of single-family, residential structures. In order to accommodate the sloping site, near vertical cuts protected by either rockeries or retaining walls will be constructed on the common lot lines to form steps in the grade The buildings will be relatively lightly loaded, wood-framed, with cast-in-place concrete foundations. Actual foundation loads were not provided at the time this report was prepared. Therefore, we have assumed that individual column loads will not exceed 70 kips and continuous wall loads will not exceed three (3) kips per lineal foot. If the actual foundation loads are greater than those stated herein, the geotechnical engineer must be notified to determine whether the recommendations presented herein require revision. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION BES Project Number: 200507, Report 3 ... . PK,E~t~rprises·. .' . ~l' • -",j('if\AapleValley,'Washington . ". . february 17, 2006 .,--.. A5ihdicat~d'on:' Table 18, eleven itenis~eed·to be addressed due to site soil ~o~diti~ns~a~d~slopes; Each' oftheiiems are'nddressed in the'following sections~ . <1) 'CharbCterizesoils, geo~ogy(Jnd drainage:· According ,to the Generalized .. '·.··Geologic!Vt;p·Of Seattle and Suburban kas byR. W. Galster ahd W.T. Laprade,J 991, the site is urld~rlai~ by Vashon. till. Accordihg · to. subsurface irifO~ati6n obtained' b y: on-sit' t~t pits,till is ; ." . . covered with ~ediumdense' to dehse alluvial SAI\I[) (SP) and, a cap of loose SAND:-SILT (SM)., The . , ," ,oJ , , alluvial SAND (SP) s~ils-are relatively clean and free' draining. The engineering properties of Vashon till is'characterized by having ve~slow infiltration ratrs, excellenHoun~ation stabili1y, stands 'on steep "" naturaland'cut slopes for Ie>ng periods, and good s~ismic:stabilify: .; -.'. . . The ground .surface ofthedevelbpable site 'naturally sl6pe~ down toW'ards th~ nqrth.;. . ".' .. n~rtheastfro~a·h·igKelevati6nofabouf404 fe~t MSLdown'to'a lowelev~tionofabouf358 ; feetMSL Beginning inthesbuthwest conier'of the site, the .slope gradient initially range~: '. from 1\ to i,4:percent fora horiz~rital distariceofabout 85fe~t.the~ the slope:~teepens to· .. . agradl~nt rarigjngfrom.25 to 39 percent over a horizontaldisfance of 75 feet. The 'ground . • ~urfaceth~nflattens toa gradient rangingfr~m13to16 percent over a:hoi;~ontal distance: • of about 80 feet beyond which the 'siopesteepens 'to about 40perc~nt overal:lbut ,),0 feet ·"hori:zontaL The site then slOpes down at about60 tb 70 percent over a horizoiitaldistance of . 'obtiutib feet. .•. At the bottom of the steep slope, the ground surface f1dttensat Honey Creek andai.o-footwidegravel road. , !(ainwaterappearsto infiltrate the s~rface soils since there does"not appear to be any rills or gullie~due t6 surface runoff. . " ':2) Describe and depict allnak.'ral and ~anmade features\Nithin 150feetorthe .<:" ,siteboundarY:NESunsetBoulev~rdforms a.portior:lofthe south boundary of,the~.site. There,,' . is' ~. one-storYiwood~framedresid~ntial 'building, circa '1918, onthepr6p~r1y at3524NE, .... ·Su~setBpuleva~d.This building Will b~ demolished j~ thede.velopmentpro~ess. Ai 3516NE:< ",,' , Sun'setBoulevci~d there exists a ohe-sttiry,wood-fram~d residential building, circa 1920. This . "huildin~ , will remain ~.Surroundin~the ~ubi~9 property,'~re cd:>ouf' seven~ "wood-framed, '. " 'single-f~miIY. r~identi~1 st~cturesbuilt from as early as 1904 to as,: lat~ asl 980., None' of .. these 'build.ingswill be-alter~dor affected by'the proposed proj~ct.· At thebottorn of the steep .' 'slope along the north~st portionofth~ subject p~oper1y, there, is a gravel ro~d' and ~. catch . . ·basin\YithCl,15:-inch.ABS culvert:" , . .' . -.. ~., -"- .'" .- . BergquisfEi1gi,~eeri~g Services _ Page 2 of 6 ... , .,.' . '<-";' . '-:.-. ," , . :'.'. '!.. ,PK Enterprise~ . .... " . ' , ,i"f\1apleValley, Washington ,: ' ;:-. :' " '. \. . . , .• BES Project Number:'200501, Reporf3 ..' '. February }2, 2006 ·.··3)·· 'ldentirYany areas thath~ve,previ~usly b~n disturbed ~r degraded py huma~' acti~i~or'n~tural p~ocesse!i.· The site.~upports second and .fhird: growthtimber(md vvas. " ,. probably I~gged'~ome thirty'andsiXfyyearsago, Minimal clearing of trees~as done for the ·"·:·con~tructi~n 'oftne' existi~gbuilding.and· tile liU"-shaped ,ckive'thatprovidesing~ess ~nd. ·egre~S·t6jh~'property. 'Som~ construdionactiVify was done 'at .the bottom' of thest~pslope . ,'"-' ." . '. -: '-", · to c~~struct·the.gravelroadiccitch basih,an~ cufvert.· '.', ", .:'4) "Characterize grou~dwater.;conditions·induding· and public or 'private wells .' '" ~ithin~~e~quarter (1/4) mile ~f the site..Groundwat~rwas riot encountered in any :of the test' . :':.·pi~,e~c;;~at~d.·9n·t·he site·.Gr~urid:"';~ter· re~dings .in . granula'r soils, such' as th~s~' ... '. e~counteredat'thissite,··are· gene~allyaccu~ate ev~nafter short periods of observation. . .. ' .. ' ,:.... " '\Ajher~as'; th~ .gr~~nd~~terl~vel··'in fine·.;g~ained. '(siltcmd: clay) soils 'may' require 'several days ' " -, ofobse~ati6n before it becomes .stable clhd clccurate .. " ... '-, . , •... I . ,." . .. " . 5l:~Pr~vide' asite'ev~luationre~~wof ~vaiiable inforrhatiol1 regarding·: th~site~ " Thescop~of serVices for this. report included monitoring theexcavcitionand'logginRthe 'syhsufface soil conditions in four test· pits excavated on February 4,2006,'perfOn'iil1g sl~pe stability ~nal~ses' based on thesubsurfa~es6i1 conditions asaeterh,inedbythetest pits, ., engiri~ering ancllysis/~ndreport p·reparation. . " . 6) Conduct a surf~ce reconnaisSance of th:esite and. adjacent areas.' Theg~technical . · engineer has performed several reconnaissances since May·2005. The site conditions have: · been descril:>edin' previous ~eports and i~ earlier paragr~phsofthis report. In summ~ry,the . ground surfaceis so~ wi~habour a foot~thick layer of organic-rich' soil ~rf6rest duff that is ' cov~redwithsomesword fern qnd blackberry bush~>Th~canopy: includes numer~us' '. Douglas fir trees; maple and alder trees, b few ceddrtrees, ~nd fewermedrona andh~mlock' -,'. · trees.' "'"' ... ,: :,', -. ',-. 7) .. "Co~ducta: s~bsurfQceexplorationof soilsandnydrologic'conditio~s., On: , '" February 4, 2006~ R .. Bergquist, P.E.monitoredthe: e~cavation' of four test pits (It the subject . site .. The ~pproxi~ate locations of th~t~st pits ·areshown on theattached5.ITE PLAN on page , :. A 1.·.The. 's6il'stratific~tjons'were:iogged . and soil samples \vere 6bt~ined' for ·visual ,'classification. The site. is cov~red withe six~inch thick layer of topsoil cohsisting'of dark. '. . .b~0~ri;160se Silr('SAND'(SM) with root5':aridfo~estdufLUnderlyi~g th.e tops,?il, bro~n' to' '~ddish 'broWh(lo~se; SAND-SILT (SM) ~omegravel, occasiC>n'al cobble' ...vas encountered to a: Page 3 of 6 .. . ;". .. ' .. :-;' ., -,':.' . . i.' :0" . ,:. -', ~. " ,', ~ ,.; :.' .. '. .' ... - PKEnterprises .' . ',;:' Mapl~Valley, Washington ,': ?:. ... BES Project N~mbe~: 200507, Report :3" . ,,' . '. , ',' FebruaryT2, 2006 ' .. ' .'. :: .. .'" . depth ranging from tWo and one-half (21/2) fe~t t6four.(4)Jeebelow the surface. Underlying , " the 16o~e :SAND~SIL 1. sciHin Test Rits'l, 2; ani3;graY-brown·:to' gray, den~e'to\lerYdense ...... " GRAVEL-SAND:'~cc~sional cobbl~·:~oSAN[)·o~casio~Clf. cobble .(GP-SP) was ~ncountered to,' .' the' ter~inationdepthofT est-Pits (and Zand to ~depthoflO1h feet in:Test Pit 3~ Fr~m a, . ·depth···of101h'feetandeXt~nding·~toadepthof '13%fee((the. termin~ti~~depth), 'gray, very . .. hcird.:GRAVEL-SAND-SILT ·(GM),. o~casi6nal'cobble' (glaciaHIII)was·.en'countered. · .. ·In Test Pit '. . '.' ~ .. ":'> ." ::.' ....... . ····4; gr~y/v€lry hdrd GRAVEL~SAND-SIL l(GM), occasi6nal cqbble:'(glad~1 till) w~s e~countered" " ' :~~uriderlying' the)~ddishbrown;··106seSAND~SILT.(SMr~tad~pth otab~utthree cmd three-~ . . '.quarte~· (33j4) feet .to six-j6) :feet~:·th~. terrnination d~pth .. ·. A"of the' test pits were dry on: .completioin~'· " .".' ,.; . . ' .•. : .. 8); Provide a. slopestcibility analysis .. The slope stability analyses for', this studywere ".'. '. perfb~ed using XSTABL·~o~ar~.devel~ped by Interactive Software' Designs, Inc.XSTABL. ·perfo;.msQ'two·dim~nsi~nalli~iteq~ilibdum analysis:toc:~mpute :the factor()f sofety for a'" I~yen~d slope :acco~ding to e.ither~:'(1' (~GeneraIUmit 'EqOilibriu'~(GLE)'tv1eth~d, (2). Janbuis : .. Generalized P~oc~dureof Slices (Gp'S);(3) Simplified Bishop, or (4) Simplified Janbu~ XSTAsL" .' 'calcul~tesa FOS(factorof safety},~hich is the result of dividing'thetotal forcessupporti~gth~ :. slope. by the'tdtalforces th~t 'are tending to destabilize th~ slope. 'If the FOS is greater tha~ .' LOO;:the slope is considered stable; if theFOS is less thOn_,1.00,theslope isc6nsidered to be" 'unstable. A FOS. ofl.Odindi~ateS the 'slope. is inperfect equilibrium . . :., ' . '. '., . .' ~. T ABlf 1:. EsTIMATED ENGINEERING PRoPERTIES ' .... .' '. The ,program Was instructed tc>calculate theFQ~ 'f()r .1600 potenticish~ar sorfaces .' : ·····'duri~g'eb~h iteration using one of the descriooc{ methods;' The attached . graphs. show' thEt,·· .' I~~ati~ns of the'weakest surfaces analyzed within th~sl6pe segmentselect~d f6r. an~lysis, with· the ,stirface ~a~ingthelo ..... est F()Shighlighted .. ~· .... . '. .. . .... , . . , ." i,Tdble 2 presentS· theestima~edminimumfadors 9(safetyfo:r'the existing slopes with " horiz~ntal seismiC loads of 0.20dgaret~bulatedbelow (See pagesbegi~ni~gat A9.) . .' . .,'" .... '. . : .... ~. .... . . ,",:: .• ":: .. '. , ... '.; . . .... . ' .. . • .~ :. & •• '":" .: . -.;'. .' '" . :', 'BergquistEngil1~ering Services': '. . Page 4of~': . ......• '.' .:: . "~ . ." . .. 'PK Ent~rPdseS " :BES'l'rojed Number: 200507, Report 3 ... · •• ·f' :;:.'Maple Valley~ Washington:.;':,' , ',.,: ' February 12,<2006" . ,."-. ,' ... ; '> .. ... ~' . ".' . . '.:.'.' .:-:." : TABLE 2: EsTIMATED MINtMUMFAClORSOF SAFElYWrrn' EAArHaUAKE LOADS ,9): Address' pri~iple!i ~f erosic>n ~ontro'-in pro~ qesign~ Due to the existing slopes : and 'fhe'~pe~ofsolls on 'this; site, site cleari~~rand ~rthworkshaUbe perforrned6rilyd~ringthedry" .' ·.md~thsof theyear~ stray bciles shall be pidce at.appiUp~atelbcati~ns to reduce the velocify'of runoff .•. . .••• and silt fences sh~1I be placed to 'p~Ventrnigration-Of 's~i1' off-,site.· Soil stockpileS shall be covered: J.'. .' • . • .. ' with heavy plastic sheeting wDennotiriuse . '; .... ,' ... . ' 1.0) ". P~vide a~ ~~~i~is of propOsed~learing, grrxJin9andronstrudio~ adivitieSinciuding'" 'ooristructibn sCheduli~g; .'Analyze pOtenfialdi~' and indirect' 6n~sitea~ Off::sifeimpacts .fr6m '. -·d'evelop~nt. It)s ourunde~1pndingthat this will be,donewhenfinal design plans are completed.' ,--.... '.. . . .' .. ' '. .' '.' '.' ... -., ."..... '... :.. . ..... ; -':.', .-. ' . . , 1-1) .•... Propose mitigation measures, such as any special conStrudion~hniq~, monoorlng,'" , or inspe9ion progrtu~, erosion or sedimentafion programs during 000 Offer colis1rudion, surface " . water rnanagementrontrOls~ b'uffers; ,reinediaoon, sfubiliiI:rti6n, etc. Much of this will:. be' ,aa:ompH~hed when the ;findl grading' and ~6ns1ructi~n' pla'~s' ~recomplete., Because limited ,': ·.constructio~will be perfofmednearth,e steep sIOj:>e,it is likely that rninimalmitigation or monitOring of .the~lope~lIbe requirec!:' .' . .' . ,,' . It' is anticipated that shallow' excavations (less than thr~efeet· in depthJ will stand open" . . '. with vertk:al.side. slopes fOr short ,dJra'tions;; however;· according to'Chapter296-1,55, Part N:,. " ..... ,,: of the Safety Standards 'lor ConstrucfJ~n . Work in'the,·State.ofWashington,· the· sjt~· soils".,' • • < • • ' • • •• • • .' '.' -.', dQ~sify~s TypeC. Thereforeiside slopesofexcavCltionsd~eper,tnqnfourH) feet must be no' steeper 'than one and one-haW (1.5)-hQriz~rital fo on~ (1') vertical (l.5H:1V). ,If the' .' dim~nsions of the sit~preventthe:use()f' m~xirTlumsl,opes of-l.5H; TV; . the. slopes must . be .~' ···.stabilized: or' shoredto'f~dlitatesafe·exc~~atiqns .. ···· The .·.geotechnical engineer .must . be .... .•. ...• contacted for Qdditi6n~1 recom~endati6nsif such techniques 'are goingtobee~ployed. . ~. . '. . . ;,'. .'. :'. <, .•.. • ~ ; <' ., +: . :.'.' ; ", -,.-. . > .. ~: ::. . .. --,' . '.' '.' .. :. '., .. : .. ' . . '-. , ' . ". , .. ', . ' .. :" -.... ';'.-' ." -. .. . -". ". '. '. :':PageS'of 6' ... >::. '.' , .. , '-: " ... :'.: . ,: ... :." :"'; .' , '.". . ',: :< .. ' ' ..... . .< ,.' . ., , .' PK EnterPrises . .... i'" ",' 4MapleValley,,:Washihgton" .; .' . -- .. ~ BES ProjectNumber:. 200507, Report 3 ..: " ... '" . F~bruarY' 12,2006 .l· .'. : '.;, .'" : .. ,Ifyou have any: questions, orii we.may·be~ffu~er service, pleasecoritaCt ~s~,' ' .. ' . " . -.' -.. " . . '.. :Si~ce:ely, .. ' . . " .. ':-" .. . Bergquist Engineering Se(Vit:e$ .. . . . ~. ' ,. :,.". ,.... ',--,_ . '. :.'1 EXPIRES." r.$,{.· p~~ . ·,RichqrdA Bergquist, P.E. '...,. '. ..... f '.' ',' '. ..' Principal ... , , . .-,,-~. '. " '-," . '. " .' AttOchmen1s: ... A 1 .' Si1e Plan .. A2' Logs of T ~Pits. . .A6 . JeSt PitLog N0i9s N3Unified Soil Classification SyS1em (USCS) .. . . " A9$lope Stabili1V P~ntou1s " . , : , . "Copiesto: ····Addressee (5) . . . ~ , '., , .. ' ' .. ': '. " ,,: ' . . : -.,. .." ... ',.J; ' .. _ ....... :'''' . .-",.: ," , ...... ' :'.: . . , "., , .. ' .. ' .~ .. :-" " . , . :.: -.. " . .,' , -.. ' "", ',-:-.. ; .' ," ..... ;. '. :Be~gquistEngi~leering Services' ...... . . '. .' . ~ Page 60f6 . . .. ' .. , . . ' " : '-~" " .' :. ,',' . .' .', .. \ . ..,,' , SITE PLAN " , Bergquist Engineerin~., '·tp;F;.;' o;,;.r:...,P;..;,h_il ... Ki ... ·fza,;· e-.s..,.' ,:-' ~----..;.o..,;,"";"""';'--'"'!'""--Il .~ 'ServiceS'" : 0.' BES ProiedNumber: 200426~3 ' .... :., " : ,'<At. .to. ' .. :." . .:::: .' ...... . .. ', .. .. ~. . i .• •·· '. P~ojef::t: . Honey C~ek View Plat' . ,(~ation: "Renton"Washington . BESProjed No.: 200507.;.3 '.:, . ' ,Date Exca"ated: February ,(2006 ' ' .... .... :., ':. " ~'. ' ";,' ::.,.2_ \.' ',' _3.:. -: ,,:- 6 7· . 11' ,- 12 ..... '. ,.'. : .. -, "" . ,.SM . :.: ···SM GP > GP, SP ~ . .' . . ': ~ i',· " :·log of Test, Pif 1 ' .. . '" Exc~~ation Rig: C~t 31SBL,36D Bucket . '. Excavated By: CDI . ~." .-'.logged.BY: R. A Bergqu'ist, ~.E~ • Appr~xim~teGroun'~ Surface Elevation: 388' . • > ~ .' '. . :.:.- " ",' ..... . '_ ~_. p_olk_bIPt'_n .. JQ~Q 1iil1Y_S~.,Q .Y{i!h. !:qQ~ JI QP~Qi!L ___ ~ ___ ' __ _ 1 ,2 '" B~own,Joose SAND-SILT, som'egra~el ',3 ....:., . '.. •.... ' .. , '" .. ' . ....... ····4 ---~ -----.-.~-~ --.-~---------,--~---------,-------------.- ..... ':5 . . . . ' . ... '" BroWn, dense GRAV~l-SAND, sO-me silt . '~. '.' Gray, dehseto very dense GRAVEl~Si\ND . --___ .:._ .:.---~~-------~-----------------~.;.--::--_,.. ~-'-'--3. 10 . 11. :. ; -', " -.. ' ...... -',. Gr~y~brownto gray, very den~e SAND, occasional" , . gravel, trace cobbles .' ' .,,:0"' l2 .ENDOF TEST PIT. DRY AT.COMi>LETION .. 13 -:.;.< '. ",,-'.·14 . ~ ," "; -~:" ...... :.: . .... ,' . "::' , '. " . , A2< .. ;". ;".: . '~ . :, .. ,. t. ~ _ . f'·· • .. .' ... ' : ','. . . .. , ',' ' . .... Pr~iect: Hone~ Creek.Vi~'" PI~t location:. Renton~ Washington .' . BESj)rojed No.:·200S07~3 . . : . Date .Excavated:Fe~ruaryA; 2006 , .. ;~. .' . 2.· '. ~ . ',', " .·.··SM· ;", ' .'. \ . .. : '.:: -.-:of :..;,. ..... ,. '5' ." -'.- ·6 " .... --]~ .' GP 10 '11 .. 12 13 14 ~'. ' .. .... '. log of t ~st Pit 2 . . Excavatio~Rig:C~t'31SB~ 36nB~cke; . ·Exc~vatedBy: COl Logged By: R. A. Bergquist, P.E. Approximate Ground Surface Elevation: 368' .. 'Reddish~brow~, loose SAND~SILT, trace gravel, occasional '. cobble 3 .~s_ 6. 7 - Gray-brown, dens~ to very dense GRAVEL-SAND '8 -9 10· 11 12 .END OF TEST PIT~ DRY AT COMPLETION. -; . ~. 13 '14 .' . ",. :", ""', ," .. ~ . . 'A3·· '\.' .' ,,", ....... ' ,".'. Co', ,'~ ': .. ; . .:.", '. . ~ . ". " . Project: Hon~y CieekView Plat' location:' Rentori,'Washington . 'DES Projed No.·:,'200S07"3· '. '. . Da~ EXcavated: FebruarY'4; 2006· 3 .. ' . """'4' _10c..; 11 14 -.:-:,' SM .," .' '.' Gp'toSP GPtoSP ···GM·· 4.5+" " . .~"'. .. .. ,. ,c -. . . log' of Jest Pit 3 ", -~; , . . Excavatiorl · Rig: Cat .31SBl, 36'~ .Bucket, . . ., . Excavated By: COl· . '. . i.ogg~d By: R. A. Bergquist, P.E ... . Appr6~im(Jte Ground Surface , Elevati()n: 364'< .' . . - '--=.:' -: .. ~ . -': ,-.~: " -':':::::':" ~_> '.~' . ,.~: ... r.~_ ":.,., ~~" ,:Oe~ctiP.~?n:(~nJJi~d"S·oi~:'c:la~i~.~atiori.~ystein),: . '" . ::.::.;'\ .. ~;: -_~''''... ',,', :;t.-, ~:.~':. : .... \ ",,' .. :~.::,. "':, :'~ .. ".', "".' ... :~' "', ,':.' ",' ,'. . ,,"' .. ' '. ' 't"' __ :. __ ... Qc;n:!<Jn:Q'@ .. lQ.Q.S!l)i~.P..-.slIJ/;.~i!b. !Q9~_U PP~9Ut ~ ________ ,,;. __ ';': '. 1 . Reddi,~h~broWn, loose.SAND-SILT, with gravel, occasional~obble' 2 . ."'. -. .. ---------------,-------------------------------------------. -.. -. ,GrOy~br~wn, d~nse to very dens~ GRAVEL-SAND, occasionril . . . cobble, to SAND, OCcasional cob~le .3 :.4 :-;. --'--.---'. ------.-~---~ -~---~----.------..:. --~---:. --'-";:"_--~'---:..~-. Gr~y, d~nse to very dense. GRAVEL-SAND, occasional cobble to . .' SAND, 'occasional cobble . ". . 8 9 10 --- -~ -.-----.-- - ---- --.-----~ --. - ---- ---- ---- --: - - -~ ----~ - - - -",!"-.-. "-, ", ." .", Gray, very hard GRAVEL-SAND-SILT!oc~asional cobble (Gladal '~12_ .', '. . . till) ,'. . .. .' END· OF TEST PIT. DRY AT COMPLETION. : .. ~ ." .. ::':",. ' .. ,.' 'A4 ., .; .. " -... ' .. 13 14. '. . . ; . ,." .. ... -, ~ .' ... '.' ',~ ·.·.1 , . ..... :. Proie<f Honey Creek' Vie;;':; Plat· . •.. location: R~ntan,'Washingtcin . . ,DES Pr~edNo.:·20d507~3 . 'Date EXcavated:. February: 4, 2006· . . . . . .. . log of Test Pit'4: . . -," ." Excavation' Rig: Cat 315Bl, 36" Bucket " '" . Excavated 8Y:COI . Lpgged By: R. A. Bergquist, P.E. '. . ApprC;;ximate Ground Su~ace Elevati~n: 390' ~--~~----T-~~~~~~--~------~----~--~----~~------~---------' --: :', .~. --t •. . '-.~.' ... :0..'" ',~~",~~.:!<:~ . .; <':", : ,,",-" ", ).'" . ." ..~\~~>, . .;.~~ . t ; .", •• ;" •• : .:,': ' ~ ' •. ·.i',:O~criP~~~·:ldni6~dSoil.21~~ifi~ti~:System) ; .. ::, • , ., ~ .. '" .:.",. . '~~-" . , ;.:,," -.... " -; 5", :,~ '-' " . < '" . " -: --..,'".:', . "~'.~ .",: ..... ~ , .' .~ . ~. .' ": .: ,'._. ___ J;>9~ .prQ)!{!l .. lQQliEtSU1Y_~~.Q Yl.i1!'-tQ.Q.~ lIc;U2liQiD_ ~ '-_____ ~ ___ ~ '. 1 1···· : '~'- Reddish-brown, l60se,SANO-SILT; with gravel; o.ccasional '. "cobble ..' .' . '. ~2 ·SM.· -2 '" :-'"3:" ',' , . --':"-------.. ---~'---::.. ---.~ ------.-'-.;. :.--.':. --. --..: --.'.-.~ -,.. -.'--.":3· .' '. 4, .. : ~ . Gray-brown to '~ray, verY hard GRAVEl-SAND-SILT, .,occasionalcobble (Glaaaitill) .. · . 'GM .. 4,5+ . 5' 6' 6 ENDOF TEST PIT. 'ORVAT COMPLETION. 7 . ..;.. -. . - S 9' , -- .-. 10 10 · .. n 11 -'_12..:, , ... -" .... ' .. '. 12 13' .. : .-. 14 14 ", J. .. "'". . , ... " ,'. ;' ' .. :.: ...... " .. :' ... ' .•.. :',' . " ." .... AS·" , . . . .' '.' .' . ,.' .: . " • •••• < ,~ . .~. ": .. ' .> •••••• "'TEST PIT lOG NOTES .". ,'" -'., .. ~ .. ' -.:' • .' I . . 'These n~tesarid t~st Pit:logsa~~c' intended for use with thisg~otechnical report for :the·. '. purposes' cnd prOject d~scribed ther~in::Thetestpitlogs depict BES's . interpretation of .' ." '. subsu'rface conditions at the location ofthetesf. pitOn the 'date noted .. SLibsurfacecoriditions· . m~yvary, 'and 'grou~dw,ate~levels may change, because",ofseasonalor numerous ot~er' 'fcictors.,AccordingIYithe test pit I()gsshouldriot b~ made a partof.c:onstruction plans'or-be : ,·used to define construCtion conditions.' ", ','.':.t , .. '.. . ' . . 'The approxil11at~-locatio~s 'of th¢'te~t'pi~"cirJ' shdwn6n'fhe Site Plan .. The test pits were '~Iocatedin the field bYeStiinating distances fro'm E3xisting site features .. The-ground surface . elevqtions were ir,terpolatedfro'm . .o ,topographic map prepared by others.' . . , •... ' ,1'S~rT1ple T YPE3" refers to the samplinginethod ahd equiPment usedd~ring exploratiorlYlhere:' . ':', . . 0 '. "BS"i~di~at~sa bulk sample take~frornthegrounds~rfaceor'fro~.the b~tkhoeb~cket . .. . ' . . '.' .' ",., .' '. . ." . '.' ': . ~ : ..... ' .. ~:'MoistureContenf" refers to the moisture content of the soil. expressed in percent by 'w~ight as. de~erminedin the laboratory. . . .,'., . . .' ./lDescription,ahef CI~ssification" . refertothematerialsencoDritered ,in' the test pit" The·' descripti6nsClnddassificationsare generallyhased on Visual examination in the field and . 'Iaborator" • Where noted,Jaboratory tests were performed to determine the soil classification. -The,terms :and ,symbols used in the test . pit logs are in general accordance with: the Unified . . Soil Classification' System. Laboratory tests are performed in gener~'1 accordance with . applicable procedures described by theAmerican Society for Testing and Materials . . /I':"lnclicate~l~catioh of gr~u'ndwater' attha tinie~oticed. .' . ' ...... .... ~lridic~teS location· of s~epage of water ~nd the ti~e noticed .. -. . .: .' ". ;. , . . , .... , ;. 'TERMSfor RElATIVE DENSITY of NON:C()HESlvE SOIL: .'Term ,.". " Very ,L()ose .'. . Loose···.· . .' , ',Medium6eris~ " , . ' , ... ' Dense. ". ", '. V~rY' De;nse. . ." . , , .... / . ';-. ',".:'" " '.'. . ..... Standard Penetrbtion Resistance ~N';' ,.' ...• 4 o· 'r les's . '. ' .. '. ',' '. Sto 10 1 l'to30 31 to 50 Over 50blows/foot:' e" .:: ..... :. .. ': " ... ·A6 . ':. , .: ..... " " .' " . .:." . -... -,. '.:".' " . '. ".', ':Co "' ,.' .': , ~. . . . .., ':. , . . . .. ;. TESJPIT LOG NOTES' coritin~ed. --, ~.' ,.:. . .' .. : ,-~ . .~ ..... ~.' . ',' . , ' •. ' ....> 'TERMs for RELATIVE CONsisTENcY of COHESIVE SOIL •... .: j" .~ .. . .. ' :" . .-...... ,. ".' . ..... '. Term': . , . ' .' .. Very Soft ' .. . " ':.' .-. .:, '.Unconfi~~d Co~pressi~eStrength .... , . , ... Soft .. Medium S~ff .' ',-' >, :"·,Stiff·, . V~ryStiif Hard . " "OtoQ,25 tonsisquare-foot ..•. , .Q.25·fo 0.50tsf .: ." 0;50 to r~OOtsf ." '1.00to 2'.OOtsf .. '~: ." <- .. ~. : ,2.00to4.00 tsf .", . Over 4.00tsf ..... -,"' '. DEFINITION of MATERIAL by' DiAMETER:of PARTI,CLE . ' . . .. ", ... ..: : . ...... '. .' -, . ',::-.' Boulder;.' . "Cobble'" "Gravel . -' . CoarSe Sand '. M~diu'mS'and ... -, " . Fine ~and ' Silt.:" . Clay . ". :. ~ .. ' .': , ~ '. .,~ . . '.' '. 8-ihches+. ..' 3 to Rinches • . ,'. 3 i~che~tb 5min' :' .. 5mmto 0.6mm . 'O.6mm tc)0.2mm ", , .' 0.2mm to 0.074mm. '0.074 toO.005mrii ' 'less than O.005mm .. ,." . :'" . . '.' . .', .' ... -,,- " > " .~" . ",', .. ' .;., ............ . . ........ " ',~' : ' .. , . . . :, -,'. "'., .. -: . ...... , .... . . . . . ". " ...... t : .... , '. :,' ',<; ! .--." ..... . " ~ ".: . '-,' . '. ,:.'.; . .-.:; .. : ........ " :' ." . ... ; .... ' ... : -',' -.:- •... .. . . .' .. ~ ,o.' . .: ":" . . . ~ . .... :'.' ':,. . ~; ...... .. , .. :.,: .... ::. -.' ::' ." .:.-., .. : .... , A7. .' . ..:'.", . :", .;:' '. , ' ~.' . .. , : ". ,', .: : .... . " . ".' . .. ' .. . '(' . ',' .... . ,,:-'." " ~. . "., ",' '::. ~ '> --'. " .', ; .. ,~ ... .... ,:. .. ~ . UNIFIED SOIL ClASSIFICATION SYSTEM (USCS) ..... ~'---'---~~-----':---''----,''--~-''---,-''''::C:-:::O~A;-::R::::-SE::::-:::G::::-RA-;-:I::-:N=-ED=-=S-::::O'-:;.ILS~--'--. -".' .-'--,---~-.---'-'--c:-----::-'---~ (Less than 50%fines.Jines aresoilspassing the :(1200 sieve:) .;, , . GROUP SYMBOL . DESCRIPTION ' .. MAJOR DIVISIONS '. ;·"GW' . GP Well-graded GRAVELS or GRAVEL~SAND mixtures; .' iess tho'n 5% fines. . . P~rly graded GRAVELS or GRAVEL-SAND mixtures, . GRAVELS . ·Iess thon 5% fines ... I--'---'-'---'--'---'-'--'--~+'--'---'----'---'-----'---'---'----l' •• 'M~;e thon hOlf of coarse fradion is lorg~r. Silty GRAVELS, GRAVEL-. SAND:SllT miXtures, more . . . ,':' ",.'_. " ·GM . .GC : SW . h 120i fi· .. than -No. 4 'sieVe . . tan. 10 ·nes. .'. Clayey GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-CLAYmiXtures,' mo~th:.n '12% finci~ Wj3I1-graded SANDS or Gravelly SANDS mixtures, , . I~ than 5% fines. . Poo'rly gradec!sANDSor Grovelly SANDS mixtures; . . less ~n 5% fines:·" ...... SANDS' 1-7----:-~-----"_:__---__,:+-. '-S-ilty-' '-SAN:-' -D"-S-;-S-A-N-D-.-SI""LT'-m~ixtu-res-;'-.,.~-'o-re""t-ho-n-·-l2%~ . More thon half of coarse fradion issm~lIer . SM . • fines. ~. • than No. 4 sieve.' ." .. , SC Clayey SANDS;SAND~CUW ~ixtures,,!,ore than 12% fines· . .' Note: Coarsecgrained soils receive dual symbols if they contain ~etWeen 5 and 12 per~ent fines .... " .... .' . ' ~ .. : FINE-GRAINED SOILS (More than 50% fines.,' Fines' are materials passing the # 200 sie~e) . GROUP SYMBOL DESCRIPTION MAJOR DIVISIONS . Ml CL Ol ';-, MH :·.".CH'· PT Inorganic SILTS,Very fine SANDS, ROCK flOUR, , Silty or Clayey SANDS lno;ganic CLAYS of low to medium.plaSticity; Grovelly CLAYS, SandyCLAYS, SiltY CLAYS, Lean, CLAYS " O,ganic SILTS, or Oiganic Silty CLAYS of low plcistidty , ., ;Ino,.ganic SILTS; MicciceousorDiOtom~ceOus fi~ " SANDS or SILTS,Elastic SILTS , Inorga~ic CLAYSoIhighpla~icity.fatCLAYS .' PEAT, MUCK, and other highly organic soils' . .' . "liquid limit lel!s than 50 SILTS and CLAYS liquidlimitgre~terthan 56 " '. ' .. Highly organic soils ',' .: Note: Fine~grciineq soil~ ~ecEiivedual symbols if their limits plot left of the "A" line aildhave q pla~ticity inoex. (PI) of 4 .to 7, . ,,' . percent. 1-~--~~----'--~~~~~~~--~'-~~~~----------------~~~------------~-4 . UN IFIEDSOilCLASSIFICATION SYSTEM "', . .... , . BergquistEngineering·.·' , : "', SerVices' " " ,' .. -.,' ." ;.'. . .' ", : ' .. -AS' "" ' .," . ;IJ .... ;: "( J~ . -..... . . "". '0. .. ' ", .'" .. " .. PKHNYAA2 '. 2~05~06.11: 14 '.' "\.:' ,:' '380 ""'j "" : ... " .: 360 :,' . ".......... -+-CD 340 CD . . <+-.' "-.....;/ ..,". (i) '. ·X· ..... . «320 '. ,,:·1.··· >-... ". 'f" • '·300 280 '<; . :,'.' :." b '. "'". HONEY'CREEKVIEW PLAT .... RENTON> 1"6 mO s·{~~ritic 01 surf ace s ;MIN I MUM B IS,HO P F0S' ':',: .,::" 20 40" ".' . .. '. 6q .. ' ,,: 80'·.,<~ 00· . X ~:AXIS. (teet)·, ", .' '," ,.' : ; . 120 ,.,', . -t·" ,,',,' . '. 2'.327'" '-,.> .. .:, . .,:" .! ," "", 140, , .. 160 . , .. : " . ' ... XSTABL' F'ile :". PKHNYAA2 .": , . ~ . .. ".' . ,", \ ", ", :,-.; ".:',,-,' :'"':-, .,' .. '," ," .~", --' .... ***** * * ***.; * ** ** ** ***'.* ... :if ** * * * * * ~** ** * *** '* * * , .. : ...... .:.'.* 1t .. :* * 1t * * .* . .'.* . • * . X'S"T A B L Siope'Stabi'li t;An~lYSiS * * ". * . ·.usingthe,.· . "Method of Slices'" . '.::. * _ .. ~ * . . '.' ','. ,Copyright'· ·.(C) 1992 -99 . . Interactive '.SoftwareDesigns,.· Inc .. ' .Moscow,: ID 838'43, U ~ S .A:. . All . Rights ·R~served . * * . : 1t .. .* * .' . *. .* ..... . ..... '* * ·Ver. '5. 204' . 96 1760'* :problem Descl:'iption : '. HONEY CREEK VIEW PLAT RENTON .. ' SEGMENT BOUNDARY·COORDINA.TES .... 9~ .. SURFACE boundary segments .",.: . x-right ',·y-right . Soil Unit Segment ..... '., NO. x-left (ft) Y-left ". (ft) . (ft) (ft) B~iow Segment· 1· 2," 3 310.·0 . 310.0 320.0 330.0 '28.0 41 .. 7 56 ~O· 71~8 91.0 3io~0 320 ~.O .. 330.0 3.40~0. 350.0' T 1 ·1 .•. 1 1 . . 4 5· . 6. . ' .. 0 28.0 '41.7 56.0 . 71.8 91.0 340.0 '350.0 354.0.': '. 356.0 : .. ··.·358.0 '105.0 .. "119.0.' . 354.0 " '2' ...... . :;":;' 7 .. ·13 ' 9 , .... 105.0 .. 119.0 130.2 '130 ~2 ..... . ',143.5 i . SUBSURFACE·bourtda.ry .. segmE:mts . ..... 'r • • 356.0 358 ~ 0 .. 360'. Q' .. S~gment··· ··,:,x':left .. ' .' y-left .. ·.x-right "y-r:Lght . ' .. No~ . (ft) . ,(ft)· . (ft) .. 3. (ft) . :: , ,-: .- 1 91.0 •. 350.0 143;.0 350 .. 0 ~_~~~.i~~~~~~~ _____ ~~~':~ __ ': ·j:SOTROPIC. Soil Pa.rametei-s· ., --~~~-----~~----~----~-~~- "·2 '2 .2. . . r/,' ',' Soil Unit Below -Segment. ," " " ..... . . ', . ...... 2'80il unft<'~rspec:ified . .'J '.. .. .... __ , . " •.. ' . ··· .. 86i1 ... :'. 1:Tllit Weight .Co&esio.n\ 1 'Fr'iction" ,.', .·.Pore Pressure ":;, '" ~- '. -'. ~:' .' , " . , . -~ . ····r· . '.:. .. '.;' .: .. ~ .: ,' .•...... ' .. ".: .' . .. .' Unit· : Moist Sat . Intercept No. '(pcf)' . (pcf) <,(psf) , AriglePararneter . Coristant .. (deg) '" Ru.: . . (psf). . ,1 ··.·135.0'137.4 2 130 .. 0 134.7 ..... , ': .. 1500.0 50.0 3S~00 36.00' . ... ' .A.hori:#mtalearthql.lakeload:lng coefficient' of, .200 has, been assigned" . ,' . . ';. .. ,. " . '. .... . . '~ . ,A vertical .earthquake loadingcoef ficiemt. of.OOO has been assigneq. .000 .000 . :". .0 .0 Surface No~ o o· Acritic'cii fa:i:..ltire sUFface sea~chirtg. method, usihg a.iandom' . . ,t:eclmique'. for generating CIRCULAR :suifaceshas ~beenspecified .. 1600 trial surfa'ces"will be generated andanaly~ed.' . " 4"0 Surfaces:Lnitiate fromeachpf" 40 points equally spaced alOng,the ground surface between " X= '. 1.0, 'ft .' , . . ... and' x=100.0, ft '." .' ,'-1 . . : ........ . .... - EaQh surface terminates between and x = ····.:SO.O ft.' '. ". x . . 14:0.0ft ," ..... .. .. "'UlJ;~e'ssfurther limitations were imposed, .' the m,inimumelevation at' which a. surface extends is' y = .0' ft· S.O ft line segtilertts define eacl'i trial failure surface. ' ... ' ,. '., . '." .. :';. :.-: .": : '. -'. : . "'The ,f:irst.segmentof .. each::failure ·,surfa.cew:lllbeincliried'·· within, 'the 'angular range,defined,by":" .. ' ·-45 .0 degrees . (slope, angle 5 .~. 0)' degrees .' .. Lower angular. 1 imi.t . ' .. '. Upper' angular . limit . : = . --'. -" ,'" . .... . . " .~ . . '. *******'***********'*********.********************************************* '. >~':'.WARNING "'-... WARNING ." WARNING· ~.':'>'·WARNING '_._" (#AS) ', .. ****************fr********************~****~***************~************* .. : Nega,tive 'effective:'strEisses werecalculatedatthe·base.ot:.a·.slic'e." . 'This·.wa.rning 'is usually reported for cas,es' ~heresliceshave ,lowsel!': .' ". weight and a . relatively high" cll . shear,streIlgth pararneter~ . In . such , . cases.lthiseffect·canorily beef.ilalinatedbY reducing the',"c"vaiue~ . " : ~ .' .. . ".' . ,.' ( ,". " ......... . . . . . . : .. ::~. : .. ' .... ".' *, ... ;. ', .. , . /. . ' .. ~ ',*.* '. ; This'will be ignored for final .sununary of results· ** . . '* ** * ... * * *.*'* **.** ... * ** *** *"*** * .... * * * * *' *** * * * 'it *: * * * * * *.* ** * **** * *.* ** * *' .. ' -." . . ,-.' .. .... .' .... . '. Circular surface .(FOS= 23. 5435) is defined by,: .xcenter = .91.32. ·8.00 ,.y~enter ='359.64 : Init ~ Pt; - . ,89. 85 Seg~Lerigt.h ',._ ~':-: :...._:..-~ '":"" ":"'~._ ~_.:.:: -: -: _._ .;...,. __ : ___ ~ __ . ___ ..... _ -:-: _:_.~: __ .~ __ .~ _ ":".~ __ . __ ..... _____ "",:," __ " ___ ._:':':' ~ _k_": . . ,':-,~ . " ; . '. ,-".'. : . ", :"',,- ,',': .; .... . ",":' ," . ',. , . .-~ .' '. Fa.ct6rs ··bfsafety have been ~aitul~t:ed by the'· ···OSIMPLIFIEDBlsHOi? . M~riIorii .* .** ', .. : ._ . .. ' ,,..', .- Themostcrftical circular'failure ~urface . ·isspecifieq. by 6coordinat:e,.points· .' -7,." . -,,',:. .. ' .. Point: .! No. .'. l' ,~ ··3. 4 5 6 .x-:surf (ft) . 92.38. "100~ 38 '108.35 '. 116.15 .. '123.65 128.09 . '. -. '. y-stirf . . (ft) .; ' . .350.40 ..... 3SCL 02 350.72 .' . 352.48 . '-355.26 357.62 •. *~** .... Simpl~fiedBISHOP. FOS = . 2 .. 327 .**** : ,':.-': *" *' .,', ... .'.: -**********~*~**************~********~***~~*~***********~********.*** **'. ** **Out of the 1600 surfaces generated and analyzed by XSTABLi** '** 13 surfaces were f6undtohave.MISLEADINGFOS values. '** .** **. 'The foilbwingiSa summaryof.·:the TEN most.critical.s~r~aces . Problelll Des'cription": ·.HONEY CREEK VIEW·.PLAT':' REN'I'ON;,' . ',... -.. ' :,.' . ", ,-.. ·.FOS·· (BISHOP): ',.-. ~:~ircleCent~~~' x-coord y-coord ,'(ft) .. (ft.)" ,Radius' . Initial Terminal ...• Resisting x-coord x-coord Moment: (ft) . (ft) '.' . (pt-lb)~-'.' . 1:::2.327 :',,' ,99.is . 409'.79 . '59.78 92.38' 128 .09S.~96E+05 . 2. ,'2 .j38: '106.10 '.416. 7i ·':66.5'3' 94.92 ,139.86 ,,1. 024E+06 " '322'.343.' "96'.89'372.34 '22.41:' '~n.38' i10 ~21 7.757E+04 " 4.' .: 2.348 >97.6-2' . 415.72' ." 95. 53 '92~ 38 127.46.5,.628E+OS 5.,2.4'59' .'. -100 .:48 ·40S. 96 ' . 55.12,94.92' 126.32 3. 909E+OS' ' '. 6~ 2.474.'; 104:. 87, .. 431998' <,~. 8.-A. 2·.· ... · .••. ··.68~ ~7' . 97.46' i35 ~7i '.6. 5491H-OS 7. ·'2 .481 ~ .. ,:. 112. 52 ~147. 34.' 100 ~OO.· 139.-12',,6. 509E+05, .... ' , .. ' ',6 > ...... .. ',-; -.... ..... ,8:~ 9'. io"~ , 2.501 ' 2.504" 2.,508 .' ~ . . :. ~", ' ... ~, 109;46 -35186 '42<6'6 " 'Or :.;'l,: "; .': * 417,;i6 44'3".27 426 .. 30 , ," 65.27 132~78 1;l7~81 * ," El\1I) QFFILE , ..... )\13 * ioo.oo 28.92 23~85 * 139.84, 138.61 139.56 .~. : .'.' :. ~ , . ,,6.'971E+05 4.616E+07 4.653E+07 " .~ .. ' ',. : » ...... ~ ;', .: .... : PKHNYBD2 ',.,.,. . '-,' ":375 ,350 .,;.-... :. -+-. . ·Q)325· . Q)' . '+-..... '.' '-...,;../' , .... ,. if) X .~ 300. I' . r- 275.' 2~05-06. ·10:59 . ''',' :.' .'~' ,,'. HONEY:CR[EK •. VIEW,:PLAT ":'.RENTON . '.~. . . -',' . .'. . . '. '. , '. ".' '", : .,'. ,. ,1 Q.mosfcrificalsurfac·es, MINI,MWMBISHOp·fO~., 2.81~- /'. " >:,' " " ... : ... '~ , '.:', .. ' C$jI {(K =:"1 ..... : •.• ,. ~ ). ',' . ",i: ....... , ~' ~ --.--":" ;;:.;.;.:;.::...~ -:-'.;"':" :..--::~w 1 . .~: . :.:',' '.,' . ~', . .: "':"; > ; ,',': '. ;: .;' : r ',' ': ":" ~\ " .. 1" ':,,' .. :'" ." .:', ;:. ... " .;.:: , " .,!" ""',.' 250:-. . ~------~~·rl--~--~·.TI----~--'j~·--~--~r---~---r~~----'-----~~r-----~-r--~~~T-~-----'--~~~-r--~--~~~~---,--~--~,.jr·--~~--~~~~~,'j o 25 50, 200 1;50 75· .. , . ..100. . '. 125 X~ AXI S'. (f~et) .. 175 "', .... ,. .f· >' -, .,' ,':'" .'>;. . .:.-: \' . . ~. -, . '.' '-. '.' ",,' !"'6 ," a'., ' .. it " ~ >XSTABL' File: . PKHNYBD2· . 2;05.-06 .. 10:59' . . . . . . , .. ~ , . '. . ~ , ',". -: ..... . ~; '. * ** *** * * *' * * * * * * * *'* * * * * * ** *** ** * * * ** * * **** * . -// .. " x'S 'I' 'A B' L * . *'" .* * '* .,', Slope'st~bility AhaiYsis., •. .•. ..., . usi:ng . the.· ...' ·'Method·of. Slices:' '* . * . ". . :.Copyright.(C) .. 1992, ::"99 . ". *' Int'e~activeSoftware: Designs ,. ··Iric. <*.', '. . " .. Moscow, I:O:8384.3,> u.S.A ..•• * " *. . * " . . .... 'AIlRights:ReserVed' < .' • 1. .' • . '.~_ .. *.' '''* .* * . *. * .. '* '.* . * . * .. Ver. :'5.204': 96 1760* . "I< *' * * * ** * * '/I( * * *** * * * *' * * *' * * * ** *** *.* * * * * * ** *.:;. * ,'., " '", HONEY. CREEK' VIEW PLAT -, REN'l:'ON. :;.:' '~' .. ,,: > . ' '. , , " : "~. . ;", \' .. ''" .. . .. :';. ',' .: -' '., , '.. ' : -~.------------------:--~,-----~:-- .' SEGMENT BOUNDARY COORDINATES 12·' SURFACE • bound~rY ," segm~nts .. " . . y-left '. x-right 'y:-rigl1t '" .. . ' .... :, . Soil Unit '. , Segment Nci. x-:-left· eft) (ft) . "(ft) (ft) Below' Segment, ·1 2" . 3 .. 4 .• ·:5 .. .. '., '6 '7 8; ·9 . .':10 .. . ·11·.···· '··12' ·.·.1· ·~o 9.8 . 38.5' .. 40~ 3' 62.7' 80.5 .< " • ·99.4 '128.4 . i38.4 138 .. 5 . '·153.5' .i53.6, ; .. : . '. ~. 310.0 ;308.0 308.0' 310.0 320~0 330.'0 . '340.0· . ·.350.,() ·350.0 . "·:·338.0 ': 338.0' •. 350.0 'y~left . (ft) " : . . ' . ISOTROPIC Soil·; Parameters . ..."~ . . ., ----~---~~~-~--~-------~-~: .:. ~ . 9.8 '. !~:~ '.' 62.7 80.5 99.4 12804·' 138.4 138.5 . 153.5 153.6 168.0 . ',' j08~ 0 ' ..•. . 308.0 . 310.0 .. '. 320.0 330.0 '340.0 . ,.' 350'.0 350.0 '338:.0 33'8 ~·O ·350.0 , 350: 0 1,., 1 1 1 1 '1 '. l' "·2. 2" 1 ,'2 2 x":right·.· y-right· (ft) . eft) . Soil Unit. . .. ' Below Segm~nt· . ·16~LO. ' ;:338 ~o .,1 .. , : A15 ", . . . .' :.:., ':. .... '.-j If "'" ~'; . , . ~~'sclii ·unit.{s) specif~ed . . ,~ .. ' , .. : .: .. . .~ , .. . . . . ' . : .. Soil,Unit W¢ight •. ·.·Cbhes;ion . Unit '. Moist ' ...... Sat.·· . Intercept No. . (pcf) .:(Pt=~). ' ,(psf) , '.' . Friction .~. ,', ,Pore Pressure Angle .. Parameter' . Con~tant , <9:eg) .', Ru .··.··{pS.f}· ~;ijs~o .' .137~4 2 .. 130.0134 .. 7 ,1500.0 ' ... 38. 00 .," .' .000 .000 .. '., 7: .. ··. ;.0." -SO.O 36.00 '~O 1-Water surface'(s) have been : s~e6ifie(i .. ' ' ...•.. . ' : ,'. ~'u~it we~ght of water;,:::',,' '62 ~40 :' (p~fJ" .:., .' " wate!:" Surface No .. J' specified by" 2~o~~dinate . poin~s; . ;,.* * *'** ***, * * * * ** '* * '* * * * * * * * * *'.* ** * * * * *' . PHREATIC ,SURFACE,. ~~~***~****~******~***~*~**********~ ··point····· '. "" < No. '. ,,1:, 2' 'xc,:wa'ter ; (ft) :. "".00 '167.00 y-water (ft) 300.00 . '310.00 w'_'" .~ ~: .... W~IN~ ".;....,.~ _.~ _ ~ ~ _"_ -:. ~ ___ .. ~. __ .'_. __ . ~ __ ~ _. __ -. ~ ~ ~ _ ~ -:" __ . ~ ____ 0 ___ ~._ ...; _ '. ~:. .' Water surface number 1 has been defined ·btitis'hot··· used by anysol.l unit. Theanalysf.s will IGNORE' water surface # 1.,' Please make sure . that this.. .... .'. • assumption is consistent with your 'stibsurf~ce model. '. . ~~-~-~~-----~~~-~-~---~--~~-~------~~~---~-----~-~~-~--~--- ..... '. A ,horizontal ea.rthquakelo9-ding.coefficierit .. :"o~,,··. 200 "has ,been assigned ", " .. , . :.~ .. :. '. - -":.' , ,A "erticalearthquake loading coefficient .• of· .000 has been assigned' . -~.:,;~.:" ..... --. -~ -.:.. -'~'--. .;.. .' . . -'. '. BOpNDARY. :LO}U)S . , , LO~Cl': :No: .... , .' , '<1 " . ',:'1.'.':':' x-left (ft) " .. x-right , .. , '(ft) . . ' ,.".', Intensity': . (ps,f) . ' ",,' .. ' .. Direction .' . ,'Jd,eg) , " wate~ Surface' ·N:o .. . 0" o· . . : .' :;,. . '"'138.5,, 1'53.5 . ·~o ... '. ' .. , ' .. ,', NOTE:.. Intensityis"sp~cif:ied ,a~'a 'uniformiy:distfib~ted . . ' .foic:ea9t~rig:on .. a ·.HOR7fPfI'ALLY ;projected surface.'.' ' .. , '.-' , : . ." . • c • ., .;~. (t .. t.J ;' " .. ... ',; ,., , A critical failure surface searching method, .. using :arandom '. ·technique. for generatiI).g CIRCULAR surfaces has been specifie~L .:,~ . I' . . " .. 1.600 trial ~urfac~s wilt be· gene~~ted and analyzed. 4o;sui:faces' initiate . fr~rri~each. of 40pbints equallY<epaced ' ...... ~a.l;6ng. the . ground -surface'. between x = . . i.o ft' . .' ~:. ' . :~ . . :,. ". ~:, .. and • x '. 100 . 0 f t ~ .·Each: sU,rface terminate.s between ····and , .... -. ..' '. ". x = x· = . 80~O ·it·· . -168.0 ft' . "/' ~" , Unless further limitatIons were 'inipos~d, themininium';elevation ~ '. 'atwl:1ich a surface extends is y ~= .:.0 ft :'. ' :.: ~:. . . ". . ' ..... . .8. Oft line sE!gme~t~ define each trial' faillire surface'. .: ....... . . ~--~~--~---~~---~-~-- :ANGULAR RESTRICTIONS, ------~~-~--~-~~-~-~- ...... : " " The :'first 'segment of .·each·failure. sul;face. will :b~. iriclined' ", witllinthe,angular range defined by : .. , , .. ' ~ ., .. . ..... ' .... .'. "', Lower angular limit .- UPI>er a1:1gular . limit , -45.0 'degrees ", " .. ' {slope angle -5.0 L degre.es . -~ -: . . . ~ . ' ... ' '--~ '. WARNING . WARNING WARNING'· * * * ** * it*'* '* * ** * it * *' ** * **** * *** ** '.it. ** ** *.* '* ** ** * '* ~ * ****** ** ** ** * '* ****** *** *: * *. Negative effective strei;3ses were calculated at. the. base.ota. slice.: .. . "Thi~,warnirig is usual~y repor~edfor. caseswhere'Sl;j,ces have,' iowself.' • weight arid CI,.rEHativelY ,high,"c"shearstrength·parameter. :In such '.' ..... . '. cases,'this:,effect can ·.onlyb.eeliininatedby .reducing the "c"value. " .. *** * * '* *'** * * *********',,: * *** *** *** * * ******'*** * * * *******,* *** *'* *'1\"**** * *.*** * * *' --~--------~--~----------~--~---~------------~----------~----. 'USER ··SEL;BCTED. opti'bn tO~'m~:drit:ain s brength .'. greater. than ',' zero' , .. ' - --:~ -~---'--.~ ~ -~'-'~ -'--.:....~ --: - - - - - - - - -'--' - - ---c' --:--';';" "';;'-- --' - - --.--'-~ -__ --', ... :; . . :'* ~'*~ * *.* *J** * *~ **.-tr.*-**.* * * * *~****** ~*** ***** *** ** * *1r ***-ic**'* *" * * *:~ .. **.: '" ~actor'of:,safety' qalcuLitionfor surfa¢e# •. '1091 -1;*. '**"failed'toconverge withiriFIFTY iterations **- ' .. ** ,,' '. **, . ,**: .. <The la~t ·CCi.lculated.value:6f·theFOswas·· ,~004,4. **' ** .. i:.This will be ignored for. ..firialsummaryof results .. ' '.** ..... ~********~*~********'********~~*************************~***' .. i.': , .' -:' . . ' .. ," , ~ ... circular ·surface.· (FOS= ' .. ~ 0042) is qefin~d by: ,xcenter = ;'-. ".ycen:ter =.,. 363.04', .... In~·t., Pt.· = .. ···-1-00.0·0 " .,,> Seg ... Leng~h:· .. = 98.80' 8 .. 00 :-,:. .'. '", . ." . '. F.actors of safety. have.been 'c~iculated'l>y the . " , ,"." : . '.' * .*. *.* *' . , .... ' . .. * .. ** * .*'. ·.SIMPLIFIEDBISHOP . METHOD ':', .. ' . The'.mostc·riticai . circular failU:re,' surf~lCe is specified by i5~.·coord,iIlate ·ppints.· ' ," ," ""'-::-.. . Point' 'No .• .. '.:." .. '.: 1.' ;:. 2 3····· '4'· 5 6 : . 7' -. 'x:"'surf .Cft}.·.' , . 39,~0~ ' .. ' '46.92· 5.f.87· 62.86 . . ,70.85 .......•. 78.80 '. J '. 86.64 ... y,-surf . (ft): .. 308'.64' 307.07 306~lj . , ~. . .... 8 .9 :10 .... 94.33' 3b5~ 81 .' 306:'.'14 ·307.09 .. 308.67 :310.87 313~67 317.05 . ,',:-..... 11 12 . ·13. .. '14' 15, 101.'82 ",109:.07 . ,. 116.03 122 ~ 65' 128.90 134.73 ':'138.48 321 ~.OO ···325.49 330.49 ... , 335.96 340.09 **** . SiTnplified BISHOP.' FOS::: . 2~ 813 ****.' :', . -- .**,' **. **. Out of the' 16'OC): surfaces generated arid' anaJ,yzed byXSTABL,** .. :17surfaces . were ,found· ~O have MISLEADING FOS' values .':" *-ir' ",-:.: .... ," " " ..... ~ . . TheJ,ol16~i~g is a SUtmnary of the,' TEN most critical sti~fabes:. "I,' Problem Description : HONEY CREEK VIEW PLAT -RENTON t· ~ ", -. ", ,,' . .:".' . . '", ..... ,- . FOS .,CircleCe~tei (atsHOP).x.,.coord y-coord" '(ft) . ',> (ft)'. Radius Initial TerminaL~Resistlng' . '. '.' "·x-coord x'-.coord· Moment' :.(ft) '··(ft)·· '. ,"(ft). (.ft·-lb}·;. ,1." 2.813" 62. 80 4'd6.7~i8' '10()~89 j·9.08· . 13S .48.~ ~ 465E.f07 : .. . ', :.~ ", . ~. ' . . :.,~ ~··r "~:'~";.' .. :' .. : .. ...... ..•. .~ .. > . ',' "J.' 2. " ' 2.820 3;' 2.829 4. 2.-833' ",,5." ,2.833 6.'" ,.2-:839 ",7. -:; -' '2 .?43 ,-, 'S. . 2.852 ,9< 2~858 1'0. 2; 859 . , '. 65.87 i82:i1 -8i~23 58. 33 ' 391 ~ 01 87 . 25 ' 56~62 394.38 -'91.52 ,_ 56.56, 39,6~ 71 91.53 , -66 .10,_ ' 3-90. 40 83.48 :- '57-.66 '400.17 ,',' '99:~ 08 " , 61'·~ 16408 .76105.04 63.53 401.78,99.11 '64~4~ 377.53 76~96 34~00 " 138~43 ·3.l48E~07 ~31.46, i35.28 _ 2.902E+oi" 26.38, 136.65: 3. 2i5B+07 :- 34.00 ,135.19' 2.845E+07 . 4'1;62,-, '138. 4i,' :2 ~ 6i6B~07 21~31-138.4:'6.4.037B+07 31.'46' 138.714 .005E+07 ,- 31.,46, 13~.343.941B~07 31 A6 136.262. 962E+07 '* ** 'END 'OF FILE " * *-* ;. . . ,,:.": '., ' . ' .. '" . '.': . '-. ""'.' . " '. < •• ':", , A19 "; . ':",'., ,,' '. ' ..... ,'.,( .'. " , ,. .' . . , ,.,:,:,.,' '. "; .. .. , .. : .. ", ..... ::. ,,': '. ',: -.. ' .' " , ·i ......... . . " ' .. ',' .~ , : .. ,". '" ',' 27207 8th Avenue S POBox 13309 Des Moines, Washington 98198 Des Moines, Washington 98198 Phone: 253.941.9399, Fax: 253.941.9499, Email: RbergquS10@aol.com Mr. Phil Kiizes PK Enterprises 23035 SE 263rd Street Maple Valley, Washington 98038 July 22, 2005 Re: Geotechnical Engineering Services, Preliminary Site Evaluation, 3524 Sunset Boulevard, Renton, Washington, King County Tax Parcel Number 0423059090, BES Project Number: 200504, Report 2 " Dear Mr. Kitzes: As requested, I reviewed the steep slope buffer and building setback for the north p~opertyline for th"e ref~renced project. In our report number 1, we recommended a steep slope buffer of 1 0 'feet from the crest of the slope and a building setback of 1 0 feet from the buffer 'line. The buffer along the north property line can be reduced to zero if the building footings, or a retaining wall footing, are extended to a sufficient depth so as not fo impose any additional vertical or horizontal loads on the existing near-vertical slope. Isolation 'of vertical and horizontal loads can be ensured by placing the footings deep enough so that an imaginary line drawn down on a 45-degree angle from the toe of the footing does not intersect the existing, near-vertical steep slope. If you have any questions, or if we may be of further service, please con1oct us~ Sincerely, ·ff~· ;:-. . . •. ; < .~ .,'- Principal I EXPIRES 7/2006 ,- 27207 8th Avenue S P.O. Box 13309 Des Moines, Washington 981 98 Des Moines, Washington 981 98 Phone: 253.941.9399, Fax: 253.941.9499, e-mail: RBergqu510@aol.com Mr. Phil Kitzes PK Enterprises 23035 SE 263rd Street Maple Valley, Washington 98038 Geotechnical Engineering Services Preliminary Site Evaluation 3524 Sunset Boulevard Renton, Washington King County Tax Parcel Number 0423059090 BES Project Number: 200504, Report 1 Dear Mr. Kitzes: May 25,2005 This report presents the results of our preliminary geotechnical evaluation for the proposed subdivision of single-family residences to be constructed on the 1.8-acre site at 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard in Rento·n, Washington. The location of the site is shown on the Vicinity Map on page A 1 of this report. The preliminary geotechnical evaluation was performed by Bergquist Engineering Services (BES) to provide information regarding: e topographic features on the site, €I geologic setting of the site, • relation to sensitive areas as mapped by the city of Renton e readily identifiable geotechnical constraints to the project, • estimated stability of the slopes, • estimated building setbacks from the slopes, and ., preliminary foundation recommendations. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION '. PK Enterprises Maple Valley, Washington BES Project Number: 200507, Report 1 May 25,2005 The proposed project involves design and construction of multi-lot subdivision of single-family, residential structures. In order to accommodate the sloping site, near vertical cuts protected by either rockeries or retaining walls will be constructed on the common lot lines to form steps in the grade The buildings will' be relatively lightly loaded, wood-framed, with cast-in-place concrete foundations. Actual foundation loads were not provided at the time this report was prepared. Therefore, we have assumed that individual column loads will not exceed 70 kips and continuous wall loads will not exceed three (3) kips per lineal foot. If the actual foundation loads are greater than those stated herein, the geotechnical engineer must be notified to determine whether the recommendations presented herein require revision. The scope of services included a reconnaissance of the project site and the slopes to the north and northeast portions of the property by the geotechnical engineer, review of geologic literature, review of. readily available subsurface data from The Pacific Northwest Center for GeologiC Mapping Studies, review of the pertinent Sensitive Areas maps prepared by the city of Renton, review of a topographic map prepared by Preferred Engineering, llC, and engineering analysis that included estimates of the stability of the existing slopes. The, information presented in this section was gathered by BES personnel for preliminary geotechnical engineering purposes only. This site characterization was not intended to provide final design recommendations nor was it to address the presence or likelihood of contamination on or around the site. Specialized methods and procedures, which were not a part of this scope of services, are required for adequate final geotechnical design recommendations and environmental site assessment. The ground surface is covered wi1h second growth alder, Douglas fir, and maple trees. The ground cover includes predominan1fy blackbeny, fern, and lvey. There appears to be a thick layer of forest duff covering the site. , In general, the ground surface of the site slopes down' fTom the south edge of the property towards the north and northeast. Beginning at the south properly line, the ground surface declines at . a grodient of about 1 0 percent for a disiance of about 80 feet. The grodient steepens to about 20 percent over the next 1 00 feet then flattens to a grodient of about seven pert:ent to the north properly line. North of the north property line, the slopes down at about 150 percent at a height of about eight feet. The ground surface east of the proposed development slopes down towards the east- northeast at a grodient of about 63 percent. The ground surface elevation dropS from a high of about 350 feet MSL to about elevation 31 0 feet MSl where it flattens to nearly level beyond the distance fhat would influence the s1abiliiy of the slope. Bergquist Engineering Services Page 2 of 5 ,I ~K Enterprises . Maple Valley, Washington BES Project Number: 200507, Report 1 May 25,2005 According to the Generalized Geologic Map of Seattle and Suburban kas by R. W. Galster and W. T. laprade, 1991; ihe nearsunace soils are mapped as Vashon till. According to subsu"rface informaffon from nearby borings available from The Pacific Northwest Center for Geologic Mapping Studies, the subsurface soils along Sunset Boulevard in the viciniiy of the project site consist of dense to very dense Sihy SAND (SM), which is interpre1ed as glacial till, overlying denSe to very dense, pOorly graded, medium to fine SAND (SP-SM), which is interpreted as advance outwash. The engineering properties of Vashon till is characterized by having very slow infiltrction rotes, excellent foundation stabiliiy, stands on steep natural and cut slopes for long periods, and good seismic stabiliiy. kcording to the ciiy of Renton Sensitive Areas Maps, the site is wiihin an area designated as "moderate" slide potential and it is within an erosion hazard area. ,The site is not within a seismic hazard area. The slope stability analyses for this study were performed using XST ABl software developed by Interactive Software Designs, Inc. XSTABl performs a two dimensional limit equilibrium analysis to compute the factor of safety for a layered slope according to either: (1) General limit Equilibrium (GlE) Method, (2) Janbu's Generalized Procedure of Slices (GPS) , (3) Simplified Bishop, or (4) Simplified Janbu. XSTABl calculates a FOS (factor of safety), which is the result of dividing the total forces supporting the slope by the total forceS that are tending to destabilize the slope. If the FOS is greater than 1 .00, the slope is considered stable; if the FOS is less than 1 .00, the slope is considered to be unstable. A FOS of 1 .00 indicates the slope is in perfect equilibrium. SU1, Advance Outwash SU2, Glacial till TABLE 1: EsnMATEo ENGINEERING PRoP8rnEs 135.0 pcf 137.4 pcf 900 psf, 130.0 pcf 134.7 pcf 400 psf 38 300 The program was instructed to calculate the FOS for 1600 potential shear surfaces during each iteration using one of the described methods. The attached graphs show the locations of the weakest surfaces analyzed within the slope segment selected for analysis, with the surface having the lowest FOS highlighted. Table 2 presents, the estimated minimum factors of safety for the existing slopes with horizontal seismic loads of 0.200g are tabulated below (See pages A3 through A23.) Bergquist Engineering Services Page 3 of 5 PK Enterprises , Maple Valley, Washington BES Project Number: 200507,'Report 1 May 25,2005 TABLE 2: EsTIMATED MINIMUM F,ACTORS OF SAfETy WITH fARTHQuAI(E LOADS , ,', ,Cross Section ,A-A' , '8-8' 8-8' 'With Vault Estima1ed Minimum Fador of Safe1y 2.031 2.254 2.278 See Page f:.3-A9 A10-A16 A17-1\23 , Table 3 presen1s the recommended buffers and building set backs dis1ances. TABLE 3: REcOMMENDED BufFERS AND BUIlDING Srnw:l<s AT Top OF SLOPE Cross SecIion or Area . . .. " (See pagaA2) , A-A' B-B' B-B' with vault North property line ,Minimum' Buffer,' " ' " " ',"''''':''' 15 feet from top of s1eep slope 15 feet from fop of s1eep slope 5 feet from top of s1eep slope 1 0 feet from crest of slope , " ,; Mi~imum'~~i~i~g:~;" ' •. . . . .. ,: "~: ,"' .: , , 1 0 feet from buffer line 1 0 feet from buffer line 5 feet from buffer line 1 0 feet from buffer line Removal of ma1ure 1rees from the slope or from the area between the crest of the slope and the buffer shall not be pennitted. Pennanent building structures shall not be construcled within the area between th,e buffers and building se1back line shall not be pennit1ed. , Conventional, shallow, spread footing foundations are expected to be suitable at this siie based on the area geology and on observations of the exposed soils. Generally, alloWable bearing capacities of these sons are at least 2,500 psf with sefflemenis estimated to be less than one-inch. Properly designed and installed footing drains should be used to control surface weier and pen:hed , groundwater. Rockeries may be suitable for use to protect short (six-foot or less) vertical slopes if they are required for abrupt grade changes. The si1e soils are likely to me.moisture sensitive, therefore, earthwork should be accomplished only during the dry season. Shallow excavations (less than three feet in depth) will stand open with vertical side slopes for short durations: however, according to Chapter 296-155, Part N of the Safety Standards for Consfrucfion Wod-in the State of Washington, the site soils classify as Type C. Therefore, side slopes of excavations deeper than four (4) feet must be no steeper than one and one-half (1.5) horizontal to one (1) vertical (1.5H:1V). If the dimensions of the site prevent the use of maximum slopes of 1.5H: 1 V, the slopes must be Bergquist Engineering Services Page 4 of 5 " P_K Enterprises Maple Valley, Washington BES Project Number: 200507, Report 1 May 25,2005 stabilized or shored to facilitate safe excavations. The geotechnical engineer must be contacted for additional recommendations if such techniques are going to be employed. Based on ihis preliminary evaluation, if appears 1he site could be developed according to 1he current plan. The information presented herein shall, however, be verified and revised as necessary, based on subsurface exploration and engineering analysis targeted to provide final design recommendations for ihe foundations, re1aining/rockery walls, drainage, and earthwork. If you have any questions, or if we may be of further service, please contact us. Sincerely, Bergquist Engineering Services I EXPIRES ~7p I' Attochmen1s: A 1 Kl. K3 Copies to: VICinity Map Site Plan Richard A Bergqu' Principal Compu1er Printoufs of Slope Stability Analysis Addressee (5) Bergquist Engineering Services Page 5 of 5 ., " ington . f ~IID fEU 0 !ll1I IIID UffiIIS PliD!edftcm TOPOl emil NIlliDdCleopphie ~(\lI'WW.tDpuom) VICINITY MAP Bergquist Engineering Services Al For: Phil Ki1zes BES Project Number: 200507-1 -. " 0 1.0 '0 0 N ;.: 111 ...c E :::I <II Z Q) J::! ti 52 Q) if '0 ~ 0... ;.: en 0 w I LL CD I I '" Q) u I 'E Q) Z en I C) ~ c .t: J c.. Q) Q) w c t-'0, c CI') w I -.., '5 I C" E' Q) CD ~ PKRENTA3 4-28-05 12:24 360 340 ,,-..... Q) 320 Q) "+-~ I.f) ->< « 300 I >- 280 260 o NINE LOT SUBDIVISION IN RENTON 10 most critical surfaces,· MINIMUM BISHOP FOS = 2.Q31 \II t DI (J p.. 0 '!J SUl __ --------------------------------~1 Section A-A' , Soil Unit' : c=900 psf, 4>= 38°, horizontal seismic load = 0.200g Soil Unit 2: c=400 psf, ct>= 30°, horizontal seismic load = 0.200g 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 X-AXIS (feet) 160 · . 'XSTABL File: PKRENTA3 4-28-05 12:24 ****************************************** * XSTABL * * * * Slope Stability Analysis * * using the * * Method of Slices *. * * * Copyright (C) 1992 -99 * * Interactive Software Designs, Inc. * * Moscow, ID 83843, U.S.A. * * * * All Rights Reserved * * * * Ver. 5.204 96 -1760 * ****************************************** Problem Description NINE LOT SUBDIVISION IN RENTON ----------------------------- SEGMENT BOUNDARY COORDINATES ----------------------------- 9 SURFACE boundary segments Segment x-left y-Ieft x-right No. (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 .0 310.0 28.0 2 28.0 310.0 41.7 3 41.7 320.0 56.0 4 56.0 330.0 71.8 5 71.8 340.0 91.0 6 91.0 350.0 105.0 7 105.0 354.0 119.0 8 119.0 356.0 130.2 9 130.2 358.0 143.5 1 SUBSURFACE boundary segments Segment No. 1 x-left (ft) 91.0 y-left (ft) 350.0 ISOTROPIC Soil Parameters 2 Soil unites) specified x-right (ft) 143.0 Soil Unit Weight Cohesion Friction y-right (ft) 310.0 320.0 330.0 340.0 350.0 354.0 356.0 358.0 '.360.0 y-right (ft) 350.0 Soil Unit Below Segment 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 Soil Unit Below Segment 1 Pore Pressure water .. . " Unit No. Moist (pcf) Sat. (pcf) Intercept (psf) Angle Parameter (deg) . Ru Constant (psf) Surface No. 1 2 135.0 130.0 137.4 134.7 900.0 400.0 38.00 30.00 1 Water surface(s) have been specified Unit weight of water = 62.40 (pcf) .000 .000 Water Surface No. 1 specified by 2 coordinate points ********************************** PHREATIC SURFACE, ********************************** Point No. 1 2 x-water (ft) .00 140.00 y-water (ft) 300.00 310.00 .0 .0 WARNING ------------------------------------------------Water surface',number 1 has been defined but is not used by any soil unit. The analysis will IGNORE water surface # 1. Please make sure that this assumption is consistent with your subsurface model. A horizontal earthquake loading coefficient of .200 has been assigned A vertical earthquake loading coefficient of .000 has been assigned A critical failure surface searching. method, using a random technique for generating CIRCULAR surfaces has been specified. 1600 trial surfaces will be generated and analyzed. 40 Surfaces initiate from each of 40 points equally spaced along the ground surface between x = 1.0 ft and x = 100.0 ft Each surface terminates between and x = x = 80.0 ft 140.0 ft Unless further limitations were imposed, the minimum elevation at which a surface extends is y = .0 ft o o • t/-, 8.0 ft line segments define each trial failure surface. ANGULAR RESTRICTIONS The first segment of each failure surface will be inclined within the angular range defined by : Lower angular limit .- Upper angular I imi t : = -45.0 degrees (slope angle -5.0) degrees ************************************************************************ WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING (# 48) *******************~*******************~******************************** Negative effective stresses were calculated at the base of a slice. This warning is usually reported for cases where slices have low self weight and a relatively high "c" shear strength parameter. In such cases, this effect can only be eliminated by reducing the "c" value. ********************************************************************~**~ USER SELECTED option to maintain strength greater than zero ************************************************************* ** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1194- failed to converge within FIFTY iterations ** ** ** ** The last calculated value of the FOS was 22.5067 ** ** This will be ignored for final summary of results ** ************************************************************* Circular surface (FOS= 22.5067) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 361.03 Init. Pt. = 74.62 Seg. Length = 71.68 8.00 ---~--------------------------------------------------------------- ************************************************************* ** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1343 failed to converge within FIFTY iterations ** ** ** ** The last calculated value of the FOS was 29.6939 ** ** This will be ignored for final summary of results ** ************************************************************* Circular surface (FOS= 29.6939) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 4225.11 Init. Pt. = 84.77 Seg. Length -1476.32 = 8.00 ----------------------------~------------------------------~------~ ************************************************************* ** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1356 failed to converge within FIFTY iterations ** ** ** ** The last calculated value of the FOS was 27.2226 ** ** This will be ignored for final summary of results ** ************************************************************* Circular surface (FOS= 27.2226) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 361.46 In'it. Pt. = 84.77 Seg. Length = 83.39 8.00 ************************************************************* ** ** ** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1359 failed to converge within FIFTY iterations The last calculated value of the FOS was 24.9567 This will be ignored for final summary of results ** ** ** ** ** ************************************************************* Circular surface (FOS= 24.9567) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 355.85 Init. Pt. = 84.77 Seg. Length = 85.69 8.00 ************************************************************* ** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1361 failed to converge within FIFTY iterations ** ** ** ** The last calculated value of the FOS was 24.6409 ** ** This will be ignored for final summary of results ** ************************************************************* Circular surface (FOS= 24.6409) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 355.38 Init. Pt. = 87.31 Seg. Length = 89.19 8.00 ---~---------------------------------------------~----------------- ************************************************************* **' ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1397 failed to converge within FIFTY iterations ** ** ** ** The last calculated value of the FOS was 30.0842 ** ** This will be ignored for final summary of results ** ************************************************************* Circular surface (FOS= 30.0842) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 354.83 Init. Pt. = 87.31 Seg. Length = 89.17 8.00 -----------------------~----------------------~-------------------- *********************************************.*************** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1437 failed to converge within FIFTY iterations ** ** ·,' . . The last calculated value of the FOS was 28.3930 This will be ignored for final summary of results Circular surface (FOS= 28.3930) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 359.64 Init. Pt. = 89.85 Seg. Length = Factors of safety have been calculated by the : * * * * * SIMPLIFIED BISHOP METHOD * * * * * The most critical circular failure surface is specified by 16 coordinate points Point x-surf y-surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 28.92 310.67 2 36.92 310.56 3 44.91 311.01 4 52.85 312.01 5 60.69 313.57 6 68.41 315.66 7 75.97 318.29 8 83.32 321.44 9 90.44 325.10 10 97.29 329.24 11 103.83 333.84 12 110.03 338.90 13 115.87 344.37 14 121.31 350.23 15 126.33 356.46 16 127.00 357.43 **** Simplified BISHOP FOS = 2.031 **** 91.32 8.00 ******************************************************************** OUt of the 1600 surfaces generated and analyzed by XSTABL, 7 surfaces were found to have MISLEADING FOS values. The following is a summary of the TEN most critical surfaces Problem Description : NINE LOT SUBDIVISION IN RENTON ** ** ** ** FOS Circle Center Radius Initial Tenninal Resisting (BISHOP) x-coord y-coord x-coord x-coord Moment eft} eft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft-lb) 1. 2.031 34.50 425.31 114.77 28.92 127.00 2.773B+07 2. 2.034 2.8.61 431.04 120.37 28.92 123.24 2.615E+07 3. 2.042 35.86 443.27 132.78 28.92 138.61 3.763E+07 4. 2.044 22.62 449.26 138.73 28.92 126.49 3.016E+07 5. 2.047 42.00 405.12 96.39 26.38 125.53 2.607E+07 6. 2.051 34.03 . 400.98 90.45 28.92 111.81 1.740E+07 7. 2.053 18.09 472.11 161.79 28.92 133.18 3.762E+07 8. 2.064 42.66 426.30 117.81 23.85 139.56 3.830E+07 9. 2.070 36.98 423.30 114.75 18.77 131.42 3.319E+07 10. 2.070 41.19 429.42 121.06 21.31 139.99 3.961E+07 * * * END OF FILE * * * » -" o PKRENTB2 4-28-05 15: 15 375 350 .--... -t- . Q) 325 Q) ~ , '-" (/) ->< <! 300 I >- NINE LOT SUBDIVISION IN RENTON 10 most critical surfaces, MINIMUM BISHOP FOS = 2.254 __ -r"nn .y) ;titJ2 SUl _-----.-----w 1 275 J Section 8-8' Soil Unit 1 : c ' 900 psf, <1>= 38°, horizontal seismic load = 0.2009 Soil Unit 2: c=400 psf, <1>= 30°, horizontal seismic load = 0.2009 250 o 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 X-AXIS (feet) 200 ... XSTABL File: PKRENTB2 4-28-05 15:15 ****************************************** * XSTABL * * * * Slope Stability Analysis * * using the * * Method of Slices * * * * Copyright (C) 1992 -99 * * Interactive Software Designs, Inc. * * Moscow, ID 83843, U.S.A. * * * * All Rights Reserved * * * * Ver. 5.204 96 -1760 * ****************************************** Problem Description NINE LOT SUBDIVISION IN RENTON -~---------------------------SEGMENT BOUNDARY COORDINATES ----------------------------- 8 SURFACE boundary segments Segment x-left y-Ieft . x-right y-right Soil Unit No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Segment 1 .0 310.0 9.8 308.0 1 2 9.8 308.0 38.5 308.0 1 3 38.5 308.0 40.3 310.0 1 4 40.3 310.0 62.7 320.0 1 5 62.7 320.0 80.5 330.0 1 6 80.5 330.0 99.4 340.0 1 7 99.4 340.0 128.4 356.0 1 8 128.4 350.0 168.0 356.0 2 1 SUBSURFACE boundary segments Segment x-left y-Ieft No. (ft) (ft) 1 128.4 350.0 ISOTROPIC Soil Parameters 2 Soil unit(s) specified Soil Unit Unit· Weight Moist Sat~ Cohesion Intercept x-right y-right Soil Unit (ft) (ft) Below Segment 168.0 350.0 1 Friction Pore Pressure Water Surface Angle Parameter Constant . , No . 1 2 (pcf) 135.0 130.0 (pcf) 137.4 134.7 . (psf) 900.0 400.0 (deg) 38.00 30.00 1 Water surface(s) have been specified Unit weight of water = 62.40 (pcf) Ru .000 .000 (psf) Water Surface No. 1 specified by 2 coordinate points ********************************** PHREATIC SURFACE, ********************************** Point No. 1 2 x-water (ft) .00 167.00 y-water . (ft) 300.00 310.00 .0 .0 ,WARNING ------------------------------------------------ Water surface number 1 has been defined but is not ~sed by any soil unit. The analysis will IGNORE water surface # 1. Please make sure that this assumption is consistent with your subsurface model. A horizontal earthquake loading coefficient of .200 has been assigned A vertical earthquake loading coefficient of. .000 has been aSSigned A critical failure surface searching method, using a random technique for generating CIRCULAR surfaces has been specified. 1600 trial surfaces will be generated and analyzed. 40 Surfaces initiate from each of 40 points equally spaced along the ground surface between x = 1.0 ft and x = 100.0 ft Each surface terminates between x = 80.0 ft and x = 168.0 ft Unless further limitations were imposed, the minimum elevation at which a surface extends is y = .0 ft No. o o 8.0 ft line segments define each trial failure surface. ANGULAR RESTRICTIONS The f-irst segment of each failure surface will be inclined within the angular range defined by : -45.0 degrees Lower angular limit := Upper angular limit := (slope angle -5.0) degrees ************************************************************************ WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING (# 48) ** * *****-**** * * * * * * * * ** * * *** * * * * ** * * * *** * * * ******** ** *** * * * * ** * * * ** * * * * * * Negative effective stresses were calculated at the base of a slice. This warning is usually.reported for cases where slices have low self weight and a relatively high pc" shear strength parameter. In such cases, this effect can only be eliminated by reducing the ncR value. ************************************************************************ USER SELECTED option to maintain strength greater than zero -----------------------------------------------~------------ ************************************************************* ** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1344 failed to converge within FIFTY iterations ** ** ** ** The last calculated value of the FOS was 25.0648 ** ** This will be ignored for final summary of results ** ************************************************************* Circular surface (FaS= 25.0648) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 350.43 Init. Pt. = 84.77 Seg. Length = 81.93 8.00 ************************************************************* ** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1347 failed to converge within FIFTY iterations· ** ** ** ** The last calculated value of the FaS was 23.3610 ** ** This will be ignored for final summary of results ** ************************************************************* Circular surface (FaS= 23.3610) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 342.44 Init. Pt. = 84.77 Seg. Length = 85.23 8.00 ************************************************************* ** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1378 failed to converge within FIFTY iterations ** ** ** ** The last calculated value of the FOS was 22.0379 ** ** This will be ignored for final summary of results ** ************************************************************* Circular surface (Fbs= 22.0379) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 341.'77 ,Init. Pt. = 87.31 Seg. Length = 88.63 8.00 ------------------------~---------------~-------------------------- ************************************************************* ** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1506 failed to converge within FIFTY iterations ** ** ** ** The last calculated value of the FOS was 32.1861 ** ** This will be ignored for final summary of results ** ************************************************************* Circular surface (FOS= 32.1861) is defined by: xCenter = ycenter = 346.77 Init. Pt. = 94.92 Seg. Length = 95.71 8.00 ************************************************************* ** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1515 failed to converge within FIFTY iterations ** ** ** ** The last calculated value of the FOS was .0048 ** ** This will be ignored for final summary of results ** ************************************************************* Circular surface (FOS= .0048) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 354.10 Init. Pt. = 94.92 Seg. Length = 92.64 8.00 ------------~------------------------------------------------------ ****************~*********************~********************** ** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1546 failed to converge within FIFTY iterations ** ** ** ** The last calculated value of the FOS was 36.8515 ** ** This will be ignored for final summary of results ** ************************************************************* Circular surface (FOS= 36.8515) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 492.02 Init. Pt. = 97.46 Seg. Length = 53.04 8.00 ************************************************************* ** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1582 failed to converge within FIFTY iterations ** ** ** ." ** The last calculated value of the FOS was 25.9239 ** ** This will be ignored for final summary of results ** ************************************************************* Circular surface (FOS= 25.9239) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 347.46 Init. Pt. = 100.00 Seg. Length = 102.79 8.00 ************************************************************* ** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1584 failed to converge within FIFTY iterations ** ** ** ** The last calculated value of the FOS was 37.4967 ** ** This will be ignored for final summary of results ** ************************~************************************ Circular surface (FOS= 37.4967) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 374.89 Init. Pt. = 100.00 Seg. Length = 95.59 8.00 ************************************************************* ** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1594 failed to converge w~thin FIFTY iterations ** ** ** ** The last calculated value of the FOSwas 23.8643 ** ** This will be ignored for final summary of results ** ************************************************************* Circular surface (FOS= 23.8643) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 358.41 Init. Pt. = 100.00 Seg. Length = Factors of safety have been calculated by the : * * * * * SIMPLIFIED BISHOP METHOD * * * * * The most critical circular failure surface is specified by 19 coordinate points Point No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 x-surf eft) 36.54 44.44 52.40 60.40 68.40 76.36 84.26 92.08 99.76 y-surf (ft) 308.00 306.75 305.99 305.74 305.98 306.72 307.96 309.69 311.91 100.79 8.00 .. < ~ .". 1.0 1.07.30 31.4.60 1.1. 1.1.4.65 31.7.76 1.2 . 1.21..78 321..37 1.3 1.28.68 325.42 1.4 1.35.31. 329.90 1.5 1.41..65 334.78 1.6 1.47.68 340.04 1.7 1.53.36 345.68 1.8 1.58.67 351..65 1.9 1.61..28 354.98 **** . Simplified BISHOP FOS .= 2.254 **** ******************************************************************** ** ** ** OUt of the 1.600 surfaces generated and analyzed by XSTABL, ** ** 9 surfaces were found to have MISLEADING FOS values. ** ** ** **************************************.***************************** The following is a summary of the TEN most critical surfaces Problem Description : NINE LOT SUBDIVISION IN RENTON FOS Circle Center Radius Initial Terminal Resisting (BISHOP) x-coord y-coord x-coord x-coord Moment (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft-lb) 1.. ·2.254 60.50 433.64 1.27.90 36.54 1.61..28 4.366E+07 2. 2.258 55.31. 459.25 1.52.41 36.54 167.31 5.180E+07 3. 2.263 63.01. 417.33 112.49 36.54 156.10 3.801.E+07 4. 2.276 60.88 408.69 104.22 34.00 1.48.95 3.290E+07 5. 2.278 56.66 413.53 107.94 34.00 145.77 3.075E+07 6. 2.279 67.36 430.89 125.48 39~08 1.68.00 4.769E+07 7. 2.282 67.17 419.04 113.92 39.08 1.61.29 4.094E+07 8. 2.284 58.53· 441..51 137.94 23.85 166.57 5.448E+07 9. 2.287 49.36 453.52 145.24 39.08 155.1.8 3.948E+07 10. 2.288 60.29 405.32 101.50 31.46 1.47.09 3.225E+07 * * * END OF FILE * * * » ..... 'I PKRENBD2 5-26-0511 :24 375 350 ~ "CD 325 Q) ~ ""-/ (/) -X « 300 I >- 275 250 NINE LOT SUBDIVISION IN RENTON· 10 most critical surfaces, MINIMUM BISHOP FOS = 2.278 -~;~ _~.=s; i==_---------------W 1 o 25 50 75100 125 150 175 X-AXIS (feet) • 200. c@I. ... '\I'~ XSTABL File: PKRENBD2 5-26,-05 11:24 . , ****!********~***~****************~******* '* , * * * * XSTABL Slope Stability Analysis using the . , Method of Slices * Copyright (C) 1992, -99 . * ' Interactive Software Designs , Inc;. * MOSCOW, ID~3843, U.S.A. * " * All Rights Reserved .' * * * * * * * * * '. if * * * Ver. 5.204 96 -1760 * , , * * * * * -it * *'* * * * * * * * *'* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * . PI:obtemDescriptioil... NINE LOT SUBDIVISION IN RENTON .. . . --------------~----~---------"SEGMENT 'BOUNDARY COORDINATES , , ~ -----~ ---'--~. -----------~ ---.---- 12 . SURFACE boundary segments Segment x-left y-left x-right, y-right Soil. UIiit:' No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Belew Segment 1 .0 310.0 9.8 2 9.8 '.308.0 3.8.5 3 38.5 308. O. 40.3 ·4 40.3 310~0 62.7, 5 62.7 320.0 80.5 6 80.5 330.0 99.4 7 99.4 340.0' 128.4 8, 128.4 350.0. 138.4, .' 9 138.4 " 350~0 . '13,8.5 .10 138.5 338.0 153.5 11' +53.5 338.0 153.6 12 ~ 153.6 '3,50 ~O' 168.0, 1. SUBSURFACE boundary segments . Segment No. . x';"left . (ft) y-l~ft (ft) 338.0, ISOTROPIC Soil Parameters. x-right (ft)· 168.0 308.0 308.0 310.0 320.0 330.0 340.0 35~LO 350.0 338 .. 0 , 338.0, 350.0 ' 350.0 y-right ,(ft) . 338.0 1 1 1 .1 1 1 1. 2 2 .1 2 2 Soil Unit, Below Segment-,' 1 . -.. 111 .... " 2 Soil unites) specified Soil Unit Weight Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Unit Moist Sat. Intercept Angle Parameter Constant No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Ru (psf) 1 135.0 137.4 900.0 38.00 .000 2 130.0 134.7 400.0 30.00 .000 1 Water surface(s) have' been specified Unit weight of water = 62.40 (pcf) Water Surface No. 1 specified by 2 coordinate points *****************~**************** PHREATIC SURFACE, ********************************** Point No.· 1 2 x-water (ft) .00 167.00 y-water (ft) 300.00 310.00 . . .0 .0 WARNING ------------------------------------------------ Water surface number 1 has been defined but is not used by any soil unit. The analysis will IGNORE water surface # 1. Please make sure that this assumption is consistent with your subsurface model. -----------------------------------------------------------. . A horizontal earthquake loading coefficient of .200 has been assigned A vertical earthquake loading coefficient of .000 has been assigned BOUNDARY LOADS 1 load(s) specified Load. No. x-left (ft) 138.5 x-right (ft) 153.5 Intensity (psf) 650.0 Direction· (deg) .0 NOTE -Intensity is specified as a uniformly distributed force acting on a .HORIZONTALLYprojected surface. Water Surface No. 0 0 A critical failure surface 'se'archingmethod, using a random technique for, generating CIRCULAR surfaces has been specified., , ' 1600 trial surfaces will be generated arld analyzed~ 40 Surfacesirtitiat'efrom .each \,f' , 40 points equally. spaced along the ground surface between x = 1.0 ft ,and x'=100:0 ft, Each surface terminates between and 80.0 ft 168~Oft Unless further limitations 'were imposed,the ,mininrumelevation' at which a surface extends iay= ~ 0 ft 8~0 ftline segmeritsdefi.ne each'trial failure surface. "-.----.--------"--------. ' • ANGULAR RESTRICTIONS , ' , '. ~ ---------------------. -. The first segment of each failure surfa,ce wi);l be"inclined "within t,he angular range defined by : Lower angular limit Upper angular limit := -45.0 degrees (slope angle -5.0) degrees, ~ . . ***.*********.*********~***********~************************************ WARNING WARNING W~ING.' WARNING *********~******~**~*********~******************~**********************. l\rega,tive e~feGtivestresses were calctil~t~d'atthe baseofa· sl'ice.' . This,' warning is usually reported for ,cases where slices 'have 'low, self' weight and a relativel¥high."c" shear strength parameter~ In such cases; this effect can only be eliminated by:,reducing the I'C" value. *********************************************~********~****~************ ------~----~--~~-~----~------~-----------~--------~---------USER SELECTED option to 'maintain strength greater ,than zero· ' --------------~--------~------------------------------------ *~***************~***~*******************~********~****~**~** **Factorofsafety calculationfbr surface # '1396 ** **failed to c(:mverge withill FIFTY iterations ** ** ** ** The last c'altulated value of the FOSwas·25. 0732 ** **This ·will be ignored"for final summary of results, ** ****~******************************************************** ...... ,I Circular surface (FOS= 25.0732) is defined by: xcenEer = ycenter = 351.77 Init. Pt. = 87.31 Seg. Length; 84.47 8.00 ************************************************************* ** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface. # 1399 failed to converge within FIFTY iterations ,** ** ** ** The last calculated value of the FOS was 23.3664 ** ** This will be ignored for final summary of results ** ***********************************~************************* Circular surface (FOS= 23.3664) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 343.78 Init. Pt. = 87.31 Seg. Length; 87.76 8.00 ************************************************************* ** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1432 failed to converge within FIFTY iterations ** ** ** ** The last calculated value of the FOS was 22.0665 ** ** This will be ignored for final summary of results ** ************************************************************* Circular surface (FOS= 22.0665) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter ; 343.12 Init. Pt. = 89.85 Seg. Length; 91.17 8~00 ----------------------------~-------------------------------------- ************************************************************* ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1527 ** ** failed to converge within FIFTY iterations ** ** ** ** The last calculated value of the FOS was 26.1038 ** ** This will be ignored for final summary ~f results ** ************************************************************* Circular surface (FOS; 26.1038) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 361.73 Init. Pt. = 97.46 Seg. Length = 95.49 8.00 ************************************************************* ** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surfac~ # 1544 failed to converge within FIFTY iterations ** ** ** ** The ia,st calculated value of the FOS was 29.8054 **' ** This will be ignored for final summary of results ** ************************************************************* Circular surface,(FOS= 29.8054) 'is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 39.4.65 Init. Pt." = 97.46 Seg. Length = 85.66 8.00 _ ..... oj ..... It ************************************************************* ** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1568 -failed to converge within FIFTY iterations ** ** ** ** The last calculated value of the FOS was 31.6362 ** ** This will be ignored for final summary of results ** *~*********************************************************** Circular surface (FOS= 31.6362) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 350.60 Init. Pt. = 100.00 Seg. Length = 101.82 8.00 ------------------------------------------------------------------- ************************************************************* ** ** ** Factor of safety calculation for surface # 1577 failed to converge within FIFTY iterations ** ** ** ** The last calculated value of the FOS was 33.6169 ** ** This will be ignored for final summary of results ** ************************************************************* Circular surface (FOS= 33.6169) is defined by: xcenter = ycenter = 363.04 Init. Pt. = 100.00 Seg. Length = Factors of safety have been calculated by the : * * * * * SIMPLIFIED BISHOP METHOD * * * * * The most critical circular failure surface is specified by 16 coordinate points Point No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 x-surf (ft) 34.00 41.83 49.78 57.77 65.76 73.68 81.46 89.06 96.41 103.45 110.13 116.41 122.23 127.55 132.32 135.19 y-surf (ft) 308.00 306.37 305.43 305.18 305.64 306.79 308.63 311.14 314.30 318.10 -322.49 327.45 332.94 338.92 345.34 350.00 98.80 8.00 ****Simplified BISHOPFOS = 2;278,**** ** ** ** Out of the .1600 surfaces generated and'an,alyzed by XSTABL; **- ** 7 surfaceswere·,·foundto have MISLEADING FOS values. . ** ** ** *~***~************~*********~*************~*~***;*~*******~********* . The following is a sununary of the TEN most critical surfaces . . ~ " , . _Problem Description : NINE LOT, SUBDIVIS.ION IN RENTON FOS qircle .Center ' Radius' Initial Terininal' Resisting (BISHOP) x-coord y-coord 'x-coord x-coord' . 'Moment' (ft) ... ,. (ft) (ft) (ft) (.ft) (ft-lb) " 1. ' 2 ~278 56~56 396.'71 91.53 34,.00 135.19' 2.287E+07 2. 2.289 62.80 406.70 100.89 ,39.08 138.48 2.819E+07_ 3. 2.290 48.62 422.67 116.80 .26.38 13e.42 2.927E+07 4. 2.292 52.14 . 429·09 115.60 23~85 138.46 3.287E+07 58~33 391.01 87.25 31.46 135.28 .' 2.352E+07 5. 2.293 6. 2.300 56.62 394.38 91.52 26.38 136~65 2.610E+07 7. 2.304 58~48 4i8.08 107.'32 ' , 44.1,5 138.43 2.266E+07 8. 2.311 ,51.64 416.01 112.90 18.77 138.45 " 3.410E;+07 9-.. 2.317 54.46 431.21 119.93 44.15 ,138 ~44, 2.439E+07 10. 2.317 3'4.48 484.02 175.44 39.08 138.46 3.678E+07 -."; * * * ,.;END OF FILE * * * " ClI1f~FRENTON Kathy Keolker. Mayor July 19,2006 Phillip Kitzes PK Enterprises 23035 SE 2~3rd St. Maple Valley, WA 98038 ' Re: Honey Cn::ek View E~Ultes Preliminary Plat, LUA-0,5-118, PP 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard Dear Mr. Kitzes: City Clerk Bonnie I. Walton At the regular Council meeting of July 17, 2006, the Renton City Council adoptedth~ recommendation of the hearing examiner to approve the refere~ced, preliminary plat; subject to conditions to be met at later stages of th'e 'platting process. ' , Pursuant to RCW, a final plat meeting all requirements of State law and Renton Municipal Code shill be submjtted to the City for-approval within five years of the date of preliminary plat approval. If I can provide additional ill.formation or assistance, please fed free' to calL Sincer~ly, BonnIe 1. Walton City Cl(:rk cc: Mayor Kathy Keolker Council P~esiderirRandy Corman , Jennifer Hetinin~, Principal Planner , ' , -,-----,--------'----'-~--' '~ 1055 SouthGiady Way -Reriton, WaSbitigton 98055 -(425) 430-6510 I FAX (425) 430-6516 R E-N T, 0 N ..m.. ,,', AHEA'D OF THE C.uRVE W This paper oontains 50% recycled material, 30% posiconsumer July 17,2006 Renton City Council Minutes Page 248 --"--~-------_.,,.~ ________ c.::........ ______ .~ ________ --""--_ Annexation: Querin II, Hoquiam Ave NE Plat: Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat, NE Sunset Blvd, PP-05-118 Airport: Department of Natural Resources Aquatic· Lands Lease CAG: 06-039, Water Main Replacement, VJM Construction' Comprehensive Plan: 2006 Amendments UNFINISHED BUSINESS Planning: Highlands Area Redevelopment Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department recomme_nded a public hearing be set on 8/7/2006 for the proposed Querin II Annexation (located in the vicinity of Hoquiani Ave. NE and SE 1 12th St.) and associated zoning, the boundaries of which were expanded by the Boundary Review Board from 7. 18 to 24 acres. Council concur. Hearing Examiner recommended approval, with conditioI.1s, of the Hpney Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat; nine single-family lots on 1.8 acres located at 3524 NE Sunset Blvd. Council concur. Transportation Systems Division requested approval to terminate the Washington State Department of Natural Resources aquatic lands lease agreement, and accept the new aquatic lands lease agreement for the Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base at the Airport. Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Committee. Utility Systems Division submitted CAG-06-039, Water Main Replacement Pwject -N. 31st, N. 33rd,and NE 24th Streets; and High Ave. NE; and. requested approval of the project, authorization for final pay estimate in the amount of $1 ,360, commencement of 60-day lien period, and release of retainage in the amount of$12,352.53 to VJM Construction Co., Inc., contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur. . MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. Mayor Keolkc;:r noted that one of the added proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments, listed.in the above consent agenda; concerns the Wonderland Estates mobile home park property. Council President Corman brought forward a proposal concerning the Highlands area redevelopment. He explained that the City Council continues to be committed to the revitalization of the Highlands community, especially the subarea that has been the focus of the City's attention most recently. Mr. Corman recommended that additional Committee of the Whole meetings be held, after any appeals regarding this matter have been resolved, to finalize a rezoning of the Highlands Subarea that will meet the needs of current property owners, while also providing new opportunities and encouragement for developers to make an investment in this community. He also recommended that the local residents be engaged in this planning process. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY LAW, THAT BECAUSE A GOOD DEAL OF NEGATIVE ATTENTION HAS BEEN FOCUSED ON THE' STATE'S COMMUNITY RENEWAL ACT, PARTICULARLY THE PORTION THAT ALLOWS FOR THE POTENTIAL USE OF EMINENT DOMAIN, THE ADMINISTRATION: .• CONTINUE WORKING 'WITH THE COMMUNITY ON DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES, THROUGH APPROPRIATE REZONING OF THE AREA, WITHOUT THE USE OF THE COMMUNITY RENEWAL ACT, OR EMINENT DOMAIN, TO ACHIEVE THESE GOALS; • CONTINUE THE USE OF AN AGGRESSIVE CODE ENFORCEMENT EFFORT TO TARGET THOSE PROPERTIES THAT VIOLATE CITY CODE AND ARE A PUBLIC NUISANCE; AND C" ) OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA .JL , / rIN~#~:~.--'~~.~/~.------------· Submitting Data: For Agenda of: 7/17/2006 DeptlDivlBoard .. Hearing Examiner Staff Contact.. .... Fred J. Kaufinan, ext. 6515 Agenda Status Consent. ........ , .... X Subject: Public Hearing .. Correspondence .. Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat Ordinance ............. File No. LUA-05-118, ECF, PP Resolution ............ Old Business ........ Exhibits: . New Business ....... Hearing Examiner's Report and Recommendation Study Sessions ...... Legal Description and Vicinity Map Infonnation ......... Recommended Action: Approvals: Legal Dept. ...... . Council Concur . Finance Dept. ... . Other. ............. . Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... NI A Transferl Amendment ...... . Amount Budgeted ...... . Revenue Generated ........ . Total Project Budget City Share Total Project. SUMMARY OF ACTION:. The hearing was held on May 9,2006. The Hearing Examiner's Report and Recommendation on the Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat was published on June 12,2006. The appeal period ended on June 26, 2006. The Examiner recommends approval ofthe proposed preliminary plat subject to the conditions outlined on pages 11 and 12 ofthe Examiner's Report and Recommendation. Conditions placed on this project are to be met at later stages oftheplatting process. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat with conditions as outlined in the Examiner's Report and Recomrriendation. Rentonnetlagnbilll bh June 12, 2006 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON Minutes APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME; LOCATION: SUMMARY OF REQUEST: SUMMARY OF ACTION: DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT: PUBLIC HEARING: Phillip Kitzes PK Enterprises 23035 SE 263rd Street Maple VaHey, WA 98038 Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA 05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard Approval fot a 9-10t 2-tract subdivision of a 1.8- acre site intended for the development of single- family detached residences. Development Services Recommendation: Approve subject to conditions The Development Services Report was received by the Examiner on May 2, 2006. After reviewing the Development Services Report, examining available information on file with the application, field checking the property and surrounding area; the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: MINUTES ThefolWwing minutes are a summary of the May 9,2006 hearing. The legal record is recorded on CD. The heariitg opened on Tuesday, May 9,2006, at approximately 9:01a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the recor~: Exhibit No.1: Yellow file containing the Exhibit No.2: Geotechpical Engineer's Site original application, proof of posting, proof of Plan Sheet A2 Showing Cross Sections publication and other documentation pertinent to this project. Honey Creek View Es 3 Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-05-l18 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12,2006 Page 2 Exhibit No.3: Preliminary Plat Plan Exhibit No.5: Preliminary Grading Plan Exhibit No.7: Critical Area Exemption Letter Exhibit No.9: Zoning Map Exhibit No.4: Preliminary Storm, Sewer and Water Plan Exhibit No.6: Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit No.8: Boundaryffopographic Survey Exhibit No. 10: ERC Mitigation Measures The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Jill Ding, Senior Planner, Development Services, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98055. The property is zoned Residential-l0 dwelling units per acre (R-1O) and is located in the Comprehensive Plan designation of Residential Medium Density (RMD). The existing site contains a single-family residence that is proposed to be removed. The property is located north ofNE Sunset Boulevard, NE 17th Place is northeast of the subject site and the property is west of Union Avenue NE. The neighborhood surrounding the proposal is primarily single-family residential and the site is approximately 1.8 acres. The proposal would include 9 single-family lots and 2 tracts, Tract A for stormwater and Tract B is a sensitive area tract. Within Tract B is Honey Creek, Class 3 Stream, some protected slope areas and a wetland in the SE comer. The proposed lots would range from approximately 3,000 square feet to 4, 333 square feet. A Class 4 stream was identified on the property to the northeast of the subject site, the applicant has proposed to connect to the existing sewer line to the north and would have to run under a piped section of the stream. The applicant has proposed a vault for the stormwater in Tract A, from that vault a stormwater outlet pipe would go down the protected slope area within Tract B and would outfall into Honey Creek. A Critical Exemption letter to locate the stormwater pipe within the stream buffer was approved, a variance is required for any impacts proposed to a protected slope. Access to the proposed lots would be provided through a 42-foot wide internal access road (Road A) that will access off ofNE Sunset Boulevard on the southern portion of the subject site. Road A terminates in a hammerhead turnaround, at the northern terminus of the hammerhead a modification has been granted to reduce the right-of-way width to 20 feet. . The EnvironmentalReview Committee issued a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M), which included 8 mitigation measures. No .appeals were filed. An addendum to the DNS-M was issued on May 3, 2006, which discloses the presence ofa stream. No appeal period is required for an addendum. Honey Creek View Estat,-..... reliminary Plat ' .. File No.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR. V-H, ECF June 12,2006 Page 3 The proposed plan is consistent with the Land Use Element, Community Design Element and Environmental Elemerit of the Comprehensive Plan Designation. The proposed plat has a net density of 9.57 dulac, which complies with the density requirements for the R-IO zone. All lots appear to be in compliance with the required lot width, depth and size standards as prescribed in the R-8 zone. Proposed Lots 3-6 would have rear yards abutting an R-8 zoned property, these lots will be required to provide 25-foot rear yard setbacks. The proposed lots appear to contain adequate area to provide for the construction of single-family residences. All setbacks will be verified prior to issuing individual building permits. The proposed lots will be limited to one single-family dwelling unit per lot, the face of the final plat will have a note stating that no more that 1 single-family dwelling unit is permitted on each . lot. An existing residence is proposed to be removed from the subject site. The demolition permit and all inspections must be completed prior to final plat approval. A conceptual landscape plan has been provided that proposes a 10·-:£00t landscaped strip along the Lots 1 and 9 within the NE Sunset Boulevard right-of-way and a 5-foot landscape strip within Lots 2 and 7 along the proposed frontage of Road A. Approximately 11 trees are proposed for the front yards of just about every lot. The lots appear to comply with arrangement and access requirements of the Subdivision Regulations. The proposed lots appear to have sufficient building area for the development of detached. single-family homes .. All corner lots at intersections of dedicated public rights-of-way shall have a minimum radius of 15 feet. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement for the development will be required for any common improvements and/or tracts within the plat. Traffic, Fire and Parks Mitigation Fees have been imposed on the project. The project site slopes down from south to north at approximately at 19.7% slope. There are moderate landslide hazard areas, erosion hazard areas and' sensitive slopes located on the portion of the property that is proposed to be developed. Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and the use of Best Management Practices would - serve to mitigate potential erosion and off-site sedimentation impacts. The project will be subject to the 2001 Department of Ecology Manual regarding erosion control. The City's critical areas regulation require that critical areas be protected under a Native Growth Protection Easement. Tract B will have a NGPE recorded prior to or concurrently with the recording of the final plat map. The majority of the vegetation would be removed for the construction of the short plat improvements, driveways, and building pads. Twenty-five percent (25%) of the existing trees are required to be rep~aced on development within the City. The retention of trees outside of the Honey Creek View Est Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12, 2006 Page 4 sensitive area tract on this site is not possible due to the small size of the lots, any trees that would be retained would significantly hinder the proposed development due to the extensive amount of grading that is required. The applicant has proposed to remove all of the trees and has proposed a landscape plan that includes the installation of 11 Serviceberry trees, which is a replacement rate of I 1% of the existing trees. The site is located within the boundaries of the Renton School District and the district has stated that they can accommodate the proposed 4 additional students.' The existing surface water runoff sheet flows to the north into Honey Creek. The proposed onsite vehicular flows and other impervious runoff would be treated within a two-cell detention and water quality vault. The proposed vault would be located within the north central portion of the site within Tract A and would discharge into Honey Creek. The project is required to comply with the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention and water quality improvements. A landscape plan should be submitted for review and approval prior to recording of the plat. The development is located within the City of Renton's water and sewer service area. There is an existing 12-inch water main inNE Sunset Boulevard that can deliver a flow rate of 4,500 gallons per minute. Water main improvements require an 8-inch extension within the new street and frre hydrants capable of a minimum of 1,000 gpm must be located within 300 feet of all of the new structures. A sewer main extension along the proposed Road A will be required, any sewer mains outside of the right-of-way require a 15-foot utility easement with a drivable access through the easement. A sewer easement will be granted by the property owner to the north of the site, if the applicant is not successful in obtaining this easement, an alternate sewer location will be required and additional land use approvals may be required for the installation of the sewer main. Variance Criteria: A variance is required in order to locate a stormwater discharge pipe on a protected slope. The granting of the variance would provide better protection of the protected slope in this case. The denial of the variance would force the discharge of surface water to be at the top of the slope causing the water to flow down the slope and could cause potential erosion and compromise the stability of the slope. The stormwater discharge pipe would serve the surface water runoff needs of the residents of the subdivision and prevent any excess surface water runoff from leaving the project site and damaging properties downstream. The impacted area is proposed to be restored and replanted with vegetation that would have roots that would not impact the integrity of the stormwater outlet pipe. It would not jeopardize any endangered or sensitive species. The location within the protected slope area is the minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose and the variance is based on the best available science. ,. Honey Creek View Esta~ Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-05-IIS PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12,2006 Page 5 Phillip Kitzes,23035 SE 263rd Street, Maple Valley, WA 98038 stated that he is the applicant and contact person for the new owner, Price Propeny, LLC, 1201 Monster Road SW, #320, Renton 98055. They concur with the conditions that staff has presented. As to the sewer easement with the property owners to the north, (Arthur and Wauneta Eastman) they have met several times. The actual alignment of where the sewer is to be located is going to be more apparent at final engineering. It will be an I8-inch culvert with a birdcage at the entrance to it, it is completely piped and controlled with manholes on site, a catch basin on site and finally goes down the slope and is released. He has not put together the [mal easement documents, but they are in . communication with the Eastman's. They would like to see some fencing along the property line and planting of new vegetation and some repair work on the existing wall that is there. He would propose that the fencing on Tract B would be from the future residences only, going all the way around the property was not what they were looking for. The soils are excellent and very stable. The project works and meets all the codes, and meets the land use and intent that the City of Renton would like to see developed. The storin drainage will use the method that will have the leaSt impact and not be a major disturbance. The roof drains will be captured, treated·in the pond and then released. Neil Watts, Director Development Services stated that the geotech report addresses the existing soil conditions, the soils on this site are very good for development there are no unusual circumstances with the soil. The future reports will need to address the fill materials that will be brought into the site as well as specifics on certain construction aspects. The vault itself will need a buildmg permit due to its very nature. The comprehensive plan forthis area would allow for a variety of different zoning to be placed on this property, however the choice of preference would be the detached housing that has been chosen for this site. In the past this would have been treated as a short plat, with the new regulations, any site with 10 or greater lots, tracts, etc is treated as a preliminary plat. Therefore, rather than the Examiner making the final decision this request mu.st go through an additional consideration with the City Council for final approval. . . There have been some Unforeseen delays associated with this project and so it has been asked that, if possible it would be appreciated if the process moves along as quickly as possible. The tightline system recommended for this project required the variance, a sheet flow system would not have an impact to the slope, but in practice as time goes on it is very hard to keep those functioning. If it gets a little out of level the water tends to come out at one point versus a sheet flow and that is where the erosion problems begin on the slope. There is a lot of code support for tree replacement for projects, tree retention is not specifically spelled out but they are aiming for 25% retention. In the more open space lots they have been able to achieve the 25%, on this particular property the trees in the sensitive areas are not Honey Creek View Est Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12, 2006 Page 6 counted, there did not appear to be any reasonable way to get to the 25% without setting aside an entire lot to be filled with trees. They looked carefully at the landscaping plan to include trees that would get them to the II % ratio. There are substantial trees in the critical areas and those trees will be retained. For this project the soil types are very amenable to infiltration, the difficulty is when you get to the size of lots to have a reasonable place to dig infiltration pits. They should be a certain distance from the homes so that there is the ability to go in and do maintenance without undermining the structures. To be practical the design does call for tightIining the roof drains to the drainage system and down to the creek, which is allowed by the King County Surface Water Manual that will be used in this project. The property owners to the northwest seem to be very amenable to granting the easement. In order for this project to proceed, they will need the sewer easement. In the past plats have been approved where street systems required the approval from an adjacent plat that was in the preliminary phase. This plat will need a condition that in order to proceed they will have to have the sewer easement. There is a sewer main in Sunset, however the line is too high and would require a pump station and the City sewer utility is not approving a pump station approach for this site. There also is a sewer main along Honey Creek, the sewer line cannot be placed at the surface, it would have to be bored or trenched in some fashion. Any fencing would be along Tract B and the frontages with the new residential lots being created in the plat. The rest of the sensitive area extends off the property and they would be running fences that would not really make any sense. The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at approximately 10:06 am. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The applicant, Phil Kitzes, PK Enterprises, filed a request for a 9-10t Preliminary Plat together with a variance to allow stormwater line intrusion across a sensitive slope. 2. The yellow file containing the staff report, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit #1. 3. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official issued a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M). 4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. '. Honey Creek View Esta: heliminary Plat File No.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12, 2006 Page 7 5. The subject site is located 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard. The subject site is located on the north side of Sunset between Monroe Avenue NE on the west and Redmond Avenue NE . on the east. . .. 6. The map element of the Cotriprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of medium density residential uses, but does not mandate such development without consideration of other policies of the Plan. 7. The subject site is currently zoneo R-1O (Residential Options -10 dwelling units/acre). 8. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 1631 enacted in August 1957. 9. . The subject site is approximately 1.8 acres or. 78,512 square feet. The parcel is L-shaped or panhandle shaped. The parcel is approximately 464 feet wide at the northern property line, 218 deep along the western property line, approximately 137 feet wide along the eastern property line and has approximately 190 feet of frontage :ilong Sunset Boulevard. 10. An existing home located in.the southeast comer of the subject site would be removed if the plat were approved. . 11. The subject site slopes downward to the north and northeast as it drops down to Honey Creek. The site slopes at an average of 19.7 percent. Moderate Landslide Hazard Areas, Erosion Hazard Areas and Sensitive slopes cover a majority of the subject site. Steeper, protected slopes, over 40 percent, are located along Honey Creek. Honey Creek runs at a diagonal across the, eastern panhandle of the subject site and most of this area will be maintained as natural open space in Proposed Tract B. (See below for storm drainage exception) 12. Honey Creek is a Class 3 Stream. There is also a Category 3 wetland south of the creek in the extreme southeast comer of the panhandle of the site. Both of these areas as well as their required stream and wetland buffers would alsO be contained with Tract B. 13. The site is covered with a variety of second growth vegetation including Alder, Douglas Fir and Maple trees and ground shrubs including ivy, fern and blackberry. Most of the vegetation outside of the protected area would be removed to allow the development of homes, roads and driveways. 14. The plat will contain nine (9) single-family lots as well as two (2) separate tracts. The lots will be arranged around a hammerhead roadway that enters the site from Sunset Boulevard. Proposed Lots 1 and 2 are located west of the new roadway. Proposed Lots 3, 4, 5 and 6 are located along the north side ofthe hammerhead while Proposed Lots 7 and 9 are located east of the hammerhead and Propgseo Lot 8 located east of Proposed Lot 7. The proposed lots will range in size from approximately 3,000 square feet fo 4,333 square feet. Honey Creek View Est Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-OS-II8 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF Jooe 12,2006 Page 8 IS. Two tracts would also be created. Tract A would contain the stormwater detention system and it would be S,S87 square feet. It would be located east of Proposed Lot 6. Tract B would contain the sensitive slopes, Honey Creek, the wetland and the creek and wetland buffer areas. It would be approximately 34,389 square feet. Tract B encompasses most of the eastern panhandle that extends off the northern portion of the site. 16. As noted, a hammerhead roadway would provide a 42-foot right-of-way into the site. A 20-foot east to west roadway will provide access to Proposed Lots 3, 6 and 8. A modification was granted to allow this portion of the road to be 20 feet wide. 17. The density for the plat would be 9.57 dwelling units per acre after subtracting sensitive areas, in this case, wetland, creek course and steep slopes, and roadways. The R-IO zoning permits a variety of housing types including the proposed detached single-family units. Staff did recommend that a condition restrict each lot to only one dwelling. 18. The subject site is located within the Renton School District. The project is expected to generate approximately 3 or 4 school age children. These students would be spread across the grades and would be assigned on a space available basis. 19. The development will increase traffic approximately 10 trips per unit or approximately 90 trips for the 9 single-family homes. Approximately ten percent of the trips, or approximately 9 additional peak hour trips will be generated in the morning and evening. 20. Stormwater currently sheet flows into the adjacent Honey Creek. Stormwater that falls on paved surfaces will be treated in a water quality vault on Tract A before being released to Honey Creek. The ERC imposed a condition requiring the higher 200S Manual requirements for flow control. The vault will be required to have a building permit. The applicant has proposed releasing the stormwater at a point down the slope adjacent to Honey Creek. In order to install a pipe to convey water to the creek a variance will be necessary to intrude onto the steeper slopes above the creek. 21. Domestic water and sanitary sewer service is provided by the City in this area. The main sewer line along Sunset Boulevard is apparently too high to serve this site by gravity. The sewer line would require cooperation from an adjacent owner or a new plan will be required in order to provide sewer to the subject site. CONCLUSIONS: Critical Areas Variance 1. A variance may be used to locate certain necessary infrastructure in critical areas. "Special Review Criteria" (Section 4-9-2S0B(10) must be evaluated before granting a variance. to locate such infrastructure in critical areas containing protected slopes, wetlands, geologic hazard areas, etc. Public/Quasi-Public Utility or Agency Altering Aquifer Protection, Geologic Hazard, Habitat, or Wetland Regulations: In lieu of the variance criteria of subsection BS of this Section, applications by public/quasi-public Honey Creek View Estat.. )reliminary piat File No.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12,2006 Page 9 utilities or agencies proposing to alter aquifer protection, geologic hazard, habitat, stream and lake or wetland regulations shall be reviewed for compliance with all of the following criteria: " a. Public policies have been evaluated and it has been determined by the Department Administrator that the public's health. safety; and welfare is best served; b. Each facility must conform to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and with any adopted public programs and policies; c. Each facility must serve established, identified public needs; d. No practical alternative exists to meet the needs; e. The proposed action takes affirmative and appropriate measures to minimize and compensate for unavoidable impacts; f. The proposed activity results in no net loss of regulated wetland area, value, or function in the drainage basin where the wetland is located; g. The proposed activities will not jeopardize the continued existence of endangered, threatened or sensitive species as listed by the Federal government or the State; h. That the proposed activities will not cause significant degradation of groUIidwater or surface water quality; and 1. The approval as determined by the Hearing Examiner is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose. (Ord. 4835,3-27-2000; Amd. Ord. 4851, 8- 7-2000) Section 4-9-250B(1 0) contains the following language: "Special "Review Criteria -Public/Quasi-Public Utility or Agency Altering Aquifer Protection, Geologic Hazard, Habitat, StreamlLake or Wetland Regulations: In lieu of the variance criteria of subsection B5 of this Section, applications by public/quasi-public utilities or agencies proposing to alter aquifer protection, geologic hazard, habitat, stream and lake or wetland regulations shall be reviewed for compliance with aU of the following criteria:" (Emphasis supplied) . It would appear that these criteria may be used to grant a public or quasi-public agency the ability to apply for a variance to place the storm line down the steep slopes but this- does not extend to a private entity such as the applicant or the successor-in,;,interest, homeowners association. It would appear that variances from the critical area protections were intended for larger public projects that affect the overall public health, safety and welfare. One might also surmise that public agencies might be able to deal with any monetary consequences should the utility fail and jeopardize a hillside or creek or " wetland. This office does not believe it can grant a variance to a private entity in this matter. Honey Creek View Est, Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-05-11S PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12, 2006 Page 10 Preliminary Plat , .. : 2. At the public hearing the parties acknowledged that they were dealing with a problematic property and that it took a concerted effort to design a project that could meet the City's development regulations. As can be seen by the difficulties in dealmg with both stormwater and sanitary sewer waste, the site is constrained by its physical location. The reality is that while developing this parcel serves the applicant's property interests and even serves the City's interests in creating new, affordable housing tracts, sometimes a site has severe limitations. With that in mind, this office will recommend that the City Council approve this plat but only after the applicant succeeds in overcoming the remaining obstacles. This office will need to see how the applicant will create acceptable sewer and stonnwater solutions before forwarding the matter to the City Council. 3. Subject to the first conclusion above, the proposed plat appears to generally serve the public use and interest. It provides additional single-family detached housing in a growing suburban community. It will also provide small-lot housing for those who did not want to maintain larger lots. The plat also accommodates its sensitive area and site. The applicant will be protecting almost three-quarters of an acre of creek bed, wetlands and steep slopes in Tract B. 4. The ERC has imposed mitigation fees to help offset the impacts on the roads, emergency services and the city's parks. The development of the plat should also generate additional taxes that offset the impacts of this development on the City. 5. The applicant will have to provide written assurances in some form or other that a sewer line can serve the subject site. Currently, the applicant proposes connecting to a system northwest of the subject site but has not yet received the necessary right to make that connection. Before a plat can be approved, a known method of accommodating its sanitary sewerage is required. 6. The applicant will now, also, have to come up with a method that deals with its stormwater. Even the variance criteria pertaining to public agenCies required that "no practical alternative exists to meet the needs" of the proposal. The applicant will have to come up with some other practical method of handling stormwater for this site. Again, an actual design plan will be required so that this office can assure the City Council that this plat is appropriate and will not burden the City or its eventual homeowners with potential problems. 7. In summary, the Preliminary Plat is not ready to be forwarded to the City Council. The applicant will have to provide necessary assurances that it can provide sewer service to the nine lots and also provide a method of dealing safely and affectively with its stormwater. Honey Creek View Estatl.. ATeliminary Plat File No.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR, V -H, ECF . JWle 12, 2006 Page 11 RECOMMENDATION: When the applicant has appropriately designed its sanitary sewer and stonnwater conveyance system, the City Council should approve the Preliminary Plat subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with all requirements ofthe Detennination of Non- Significance -Mitigated that were issued by the Environmental Review Committee on March 14,2006. 2. A note shall be recorded,on the face of the final plat stating that no more than one single-family dwelling unit is pennitted on each lot. 3. A demolition pennit shall be obtained and all inspections completed on the demolition of the existing residence prior to final plat approval. 4. The applicant shall be required to place "No Parking" signage along the hammerhead prior to final plat approval. 5. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement shall be created concurrently with the recording of the final plat in order to establish maintenance responsibilities for shared roadway, stormwater and utility improvements. A draft of the documents(s) shall be submitted to the City of Renton Development Services for review and approval by the City Attorney and Property Services section prior to the recording of the final plat. 6. A Native Growth Protection Easement shall be recorded over Tract B prior to the recording of the final plat map. 7. The proposed sensitive area tract (Tract B) shall b~ delineated with a split rail fence and identified with signage as approved by the Development Services Division Project Manager. A fencing and signage detail shall be submitted to the Development Services Division project manager at the time of Utility Construction .Pennit for review and approval and that such fencing and signage shall be installed prior to the recordingof the final 'plat. 8. The landscape plan shall be revised to show that 2-inch caliper trees shall be provided within the interior of the plat as opposed to the 1 Yl-inch caliper trees proposed. Arevised landscape plan shall be submitted prior to final plat . approval. . 9. A trail easement within Tract B shall be dedicated to the City of Renton Parks Department for the Honey Creek Trail. The easement shall be required to be dedicated prior to or concurrently with the recording of the final plat. 10. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan for the storm water detention tract (Tract A). Proposed landscaping shall either be drought tolerant or irrigated. Honey Creek View Est Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12,2006 Page 12 The landscape plan shall be submitted at the time of Utility Construction Permit application to the Development Services Division project manager for review and approval. The landscaping shall be installed prior to recording of the final plat. 11. The applicant shall provide documentation that they can effectively provide sanitary sewer service to the subject site. The applicant shall provide written approval by the City's utility division that their proposed method meets City criteria. 12. The applicant shall provide documentation that they can effectively provide stormwater service to the subject site. The applicant shall provide written approval by the City's utility division that their proposed method meets City criteria. ORDERED THIS 12th day of June 2006 ~~. FREDJ.KAh1! ~ HEARlNGE R TRANSMITTED THIS 12th day of June 2006 to the parties of record: Jill Ding 1055 S Grady Way Renton, W A 98055 James & Minoo Costello 22814 77th Avenue SE Woodinville, W A 98072 Arthur E. Eastman 3533 NE 17TH place Renton, W A 98056 Neil Watts Director, Development Services City of Renton Charles & Mahwash Price 1~102 NE 175th Street Woodinville, W A 98072 A.L. Meakin 7100 S Taft Street Seattle, WA 98178 TRANSMITTED THIS 12th day of June 2006 to the following: Mayor Kathy Keolker Stan Engler, Fire Philip Kitzes PK Enterprises 23035 SE 263rd Street Maple Valley, WA 98038 Ali & Farideh Mastan 13910 SE 42nd Street Bellevue, W A 98006 Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Jennifer Henning, Development Services Stacy Tucker, Development Services King County Journal Larry Meckling, Building Official Planning Commission Transportation Division Utilities Division Neil Watts, Development Services Janet Conklin, Development Services .. Honey Creek View Esta\.~_ Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12,2006 Page 13 Pursuant to Title N, Chapter 8;Section 100(G) of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., June 26, 2006. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision .. Thisrequest shall set forth the specific . ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may , after review of the .. record, take further action, as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title N, Chapter 8, Section 110, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of $75.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall. An appeal must be med in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., June 26, 2006. If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants, the executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or {"mal processing of the fIle. You may contact this office for information on formatting covenants. The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision-maker concerning the proposal. Decision-makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all interested parties to know the·contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence .. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the iriitial public hearing but to all requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. . • 1 tR-l I BS -9 T2.3N l\SE E III _. ___ .... t-d1t.T J.ImltIf D5 4-T23N R5E E 1/2, . . S304 i i goo.oere £tISIW£E!l. ~=:S..... ::'~ u.c PORTION OF NE 1/4, SW 1/4, SE1/4, SEC 4 IJOOl m-?<oo __ .... IMIm -I'I1II.-_1101_ ---T-L--- I I ': ~m1- , ~! )~--- E: 8, I I I I I .... ----~-- TWN 23N., R5E, W.M. I I I _be ~ot J'D I .. I I -___ ...1 ____ • I 'i>fi" I t1- .:. -~ '~,J, BDICH"~R/( ntVA new • 4~. ,,. -+ ,~;]----. 1-=: ~ ~ -no ~ CHlstLtD SQl/ARC N.t. CQRN01 CONCl/Crr: WALK • I ..~', EX p" R£TIIRII ro 7H£ eAsr (IN TflE tASr Sloe OF ....;.~r..<l, Jt~~ 7 ,', ___ --I.!-NEl'lPCllrAI£N.£..t$tJ/IstrB<"Il. .... ~ -~ ~ !, --~~l -~ aryRCHrrJNB" I 150 _01 CEl CD ~ m CD ~ A A NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION NOTE: ~Ml_ltCto:t_ ' lx.1I!1.InII'"L~.='- 'w' '~ SCALEt 111 • 20' 1 '~~ _OffE VloUI.f CAl'M --IITOAII_ CUI.\OIf -, @ II!> ~-.~ _ColI. _IIIDOC 2-l4om.t K'fIlAANT III III _,n.,. Wl1IR ~I\ ~ ... ' "IIi J .' .~ .... < t; 0 i .~ tI fi ... ~ !:! <> w 0 t I I I I I ~2. I I i I I I I • AFlFIDA VI1' OF SERViCE BY MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON) ) ss. County of King ) Nancy Thompson being first duly sworn, upon oath, deposes and states: That on the lzth day of June 2006, affiant deposited via the United States Mail a sealed envelope(s) containing a decision or recommendation with postage prepaid, addressed to the parties of record in the below entitled application or petition. Signature: Application, Petition or Case No.: ,2006. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at ~4 e ( I , therein. Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat FileNo.: LUA 05-118, PP, ECF, CAR, V-H The Decision or Recommendation contains a complete iist of the Parties of Record [ __ H_E_ARI_N_G_E_XAM __ I_N_E_R_'_S_RE_P_O_R_T __ J .' 'l June 12, 2006 O~CEOFTHEHEAruNGE~R CITY OF lRJENTON Minutes APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME; LOCATION: SUMMARY OF REQUEST: SUMMARY OF ACTION: DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT: PUBLIC HEARING: Phillip Kitzes PK Enterprises 23035 SE 263rd Street Maple Valley, WA 98038 Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA 05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard Approval for a 9-10t 2-tract subdivision of a 1.8- acre site intended for the development of single- family detached residences. Development Services Recommendation: . .' Approve subject to conditions The Development Services Report was received by the Examiner on May 2, 2006. After reviewing the Development Services Report, examining available information on file with the application, field checking the property and surrounding area; the Examiner conduc;ted a. public hearing on the subject as follows: MINUTES The following minutes are a summary of the May 9; 2006 hearing. The legal record is recorded on CD. The hearing opened on Tuesday, May 9,2006, at approximately 9:01a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirffied by the E~a:miner. .. . The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No.1: Yellow file containing the Exhibit No.2: Geotechpical Engineer's Site original application, proof of posting, proof of Plan Sheet A2 Showing Cross Sections publication and other documentation pertinent to this project. Honey Creek View Estatb Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12, 2006 Page 2 Exhibit No.3: Preliminary Plat Plan Exhibit No.5: Preliminary Grading Plan Exhibit No.7: Critical Area Exemption Letter Exhibit No.9: Zoning Map Exhibit No.4: Preliminary Storm, Sewer and Water Plan Exhibit No.6: Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit No.8: Boundaryffopographic Survey Exhibit No. 10: ERC Mitigation Measures The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Jill Ding, Senior Planner, Development Services, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98055. The property is zoned Residential-IO dwelling units per acre (R-lO) and is located in the Comprehensive Plan designation of Residential Medium Density (RMD). The existing site contains a single-family residence that is proposed to be removed. The property is located north ofNE Sunset Boulevard, NE 17th Place is northeast of the subject site and the property is west of Union Avenue NE. The neighborhood surrounding the proposal is primarily single-family residential and the site is approximately 1.8 acres. The proposal would include 9 single-family lots and 2 tracts, Tract A for stormwater and Tract B is a sensitive area tract. Within Tract B is Honey Creek, Class 3 Stream, some protected slope areas and a wetland in the SE comer . . The proposed lots would range from approximately 3,000 square feet to 4, 333 square feet. A Class 4 stream was identified on the property to the northeast of the subject site, the applicant has proposed to connect to the existing sewer line to the north and would have to run under a piped section of the stream. The applicant has proposed a vault for the stormwater in Tract A, from that vault a stormwater outlet pipe would go down the protected slope area within Tract B and would outfall into Honey Creek. A Critical Exemption letter to locate the stormwater pipe within the stream buffer was approved, a variance is required for any impacts proposed to a protected slope. Access to the proposed lots would be provided through a 42-foot wide internal access road (Road A) that will access off ofNE Sunset Boulevard on the southern portion of the subject site. Road A terminates in a hammerhead turnaround, at the northern terminus of the hammerhead a modification has been granted to reduce the right-of-way width to 20 feet. The Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M), which included 8 mitigation measures. No appeals were filed. An addendum to the DNS-M was issued on May 3, 2006, which discloses the presence of a stream. No appeal period is required for an addendum. ·' , \ , ) Honey Creek View Estates'Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12, 2006 Page 3 The proposed plan is consistent with the Land Use Element, Community Design Element and Environmental Element of the Comprehensive Plan Designation. The proposed plat has a net density of9.57 dulac, which complies with the density requirements for the R-I0 zone. All lots appear to be in compliance with the required lot width, depth and size standards as prescribed in the R-8 zone. Proposed Lots 3-6 would have rear yards abutting an R-8 zoned property, these lots will be required to provide 25-foot rear yard setbacks. The proposed lots appear to contain adequate area to provide for the construction of single-family residences. All setbacks will be verified prior to issuing individual building permits. The proposed lots will be limited to one single-family dwelling unit per lot, the face of the final plat will have a note stating that no more that 1 single-family dwelling unit is permitted on each lot. An existing residence is proposed to be removed from the subject site. The demolition permit and all inspections must be completed prior to fmal plat approval. A conceptual landscape plan has been provided that proposes a 10-foot landscaped strip along the Lots 1 and 9 within the NE Sunset Boulevard right-of.,.way and a 5-foot landscape strip within Lots 2 and 7 along the proposed frontage of Road A. Approximately 11 trees are proposed for the front yards of just about every lot. The lots appear to comply with arrangement and access requirements of the Subdivision Regulations. The proposed lots appear to have sufficient building area for the development of detached single-family homes. All corner lots at intersections of dedicated public rights-of-way shall have a minimum radius of 15 feet. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement for the development will be required for any common improvements and/or tracts within the plat. Traffic, Fire and Parks Mitigation Fees have been imposed on the project. The project site slopes down from south to north at approximately at 19.7% slope. There are moderate landslide hazard areas, erosion hazard areas and sensitive slopes located on the portion of the property that is proposed to be developed. Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and the use of Best Management Practices would serve to mitigate potential erosion and off-site sedimentation impacts. The project will be subject to the 2001 Department of Ecology Manual regarding erosion control. The City's critical areas regulation require that critical areas be protected under a Native Growth Protection Easement. Tract B will have a NGPE recorded prior to or concurrently with the recording of the fmal plat map. The majority of the vegetation would be removed for the construction of the short plat improvements, driveways, and building pads. Twenty-five percent (25%) of the existing trees are required to be replaced on development within the City. The retention of trees outside of the Honey Creek View Estate;) Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12,2006 Page 4 sensitive area tract on this site is not possible due to the small size of the lots, any trees that would be retained would significantly hinder the proposed development due to the extensive amount of grading that is required. The applicant has proposed to remove all of the trees and has proposed a landscape plan that includes the installation of 11 Serviceberry trees, which is a replacement rate of 11 % of the existing trees. The site is located within the boundaries of the Renton School District and the district has stated that they can accommodate the proposed 4 additional students. The existing surface water runoff sheet flows to the north into Honey Creek. The proposed onsite vehicular flows and other impervious runoff would be treated within a two-cell detention and water quality vault. The proposed vault would be located within the north central portion of the site within Tract A and would discharge into Honey Creek. The project is required to comply with the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention and water quality improvements. A landscape plan should be submitted for review and approval prior to recording of the plat. The development is located within the City of Renton's water and sewer service area. There is an existing 12-inch water main in NE Sunset Boulevard that can deliver a flow rate of 4,500 gallons per minute. Water main improvements require an 8-inch extension within the new street and fire hydrants capable of a minimum of 1,000 gpm must be located within 300 feet of all of the new structures. A sewer main extension along the proposed Road A will be required, any sewer mains outside of the right-of-way require a IS-foot utility easement with a drivable access through the easement. A sewer easement will be granted by the property owner to the north of the site, if the applicant is not successful in obtaining this easement, an alternate sewer location will be required and additional land use approvals may be required for the installation of the sewer main. . Variance Criteria: A variance is required in order to locate a stormwater discharge pipe on a protected slope. The granting of the variance would provide better protection of the protected slope in this case. The denial of the variance would force the discharge of surface water to be at the top of the slope causing the water to flow down the slope and could cause potential erosion and compromise the stability of the slope. The stormwater discharge pipe would serve the surface water runoff needs of the residents of the subdivision and prevent any excess surface water runoff from leaving the project site and damaging properties downstream. The impacted area is proposed to be restored and replanted with vegetation that would have roots that would not impact the integrity of the stormwater outlet pipe. It would not jeopardize any endangered or sensitive species. The location within the protected slope area is the minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose and the variance is based on the best available science. Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12,2006 Page 5 ;, Phillip Kitzes, 23035 SE 263rd Street, Maple Valley, WA 98038 stated that he is the applicant and contact person for the new owner, Price Property, LLC, 1201 Monster Road SW, #320, Renton 98055. . They concur with the conditions that staff has presented. As to the sewer easement with the property owners to the north, (Arthur and Wauneta Eastman) they have met several times. The actual alignment of where the sewer is to be located is going to be more apparent at final engineering. It will be an 18-inch culvert with a birdcage at the entrance to it, it is completely piped and controlled with manholes on site, a catch basin on site and finally goes down the slope and is released. He has not put together the [mal easement documents, but they are in communication with the Eastman's. They would like to see some fencing along the property line and planting of new vegetation and some repair work on the existing wall that is there. He would propose that the fencing on Tract B would be from the future residences only, going all the way around the property was not what they were looking for. The soils are excellept and very stable. The project works and meets all the codes, and meets the land use and intent that the City of Renton would like to see developed. The storm drainage will use the method that will have the least impact and not be a major disturbance. The roof drains will be captured, treated in the pond and then released. Neil Watts, Director Development Services stated that the geotech report addresses the existing soil conditions, the soils on this site are very good for development there are no unusual circumstances with the soil. The future reports will need to address the fill materials that will be brought intothe site as well as specifics on certain construction aspects. The vault itself will need a building perInit due to its very nature. The comprehensive plan for this area would allow for a variety of different zoning to be placed on this property, however the choice of preference would be the detached housing that has been chosen for this site. In the past this would have been treated as a short plat, with the new regulations, any site with 10 or greater lots, tracts, etc is treated as a preliminary plat. Therefore, rather than the Examiner making the final decision this request must go through an additional consideration with the City Council for final approval. There have been some unforeseen delays associated with this project and so it has been asked that, if possible it would be appreciated if the process moves along as quickly as possible. The tightline system recommended for this project required the variance, a sheet flow system would not have an impact to the slope, but in practice as time goes on it is very hard to keep those functioning. If it gets a little out of level the water tends to come out at one point versus a sheet flow and that is where the erosion problems begin on the slope. There is a lot of code support for tree replacement for projects, tree retention is not specifically spelled out but they are aiming for 25% retention. In the more open space lots they have been able to achieve the 25%, on this particular property the trees in the sensitive areas are not Honey Creek View Estate:> Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12, 2006 Page 6 counted, there did not appear to be any reasonable way to get to the 25% without setting aside an entire lot to be filledwith trees. They looked carefully at the landscaping plan to include trees that would get them to the 11 % ratio. There are substantial trees in the critical areas and those trees will be retained. For this project the soil types are very amenable to infiltration, the difficulty is when you get to the size of lots to have a reasonable place to dig infiltration pits. They should be a certain distance from the homes so that there is the ability to go in and do maintenance without undermining the structures. To be practical the design does call for tightlining the roof drains to the drainage system and down to the creek, which is allowed by the King County Surface Water Manual that will be used in this project. The property owners to the northwest seem to be very amenable to granting the easement. In order for this projecHo proceed, they will need the sewer easement. In the past plats have been approved where street systems required the approval from an adjacent plat that was in the preliminary phase. This plat will need a condition that in order to proceed they will have to have the sewer easement. There is a sewer main in Sunset, however the line is too high and would require a pump station and the City sewer utility is not approving a pump station approach for this site. There also is a sewer main along Honey Creek, the sewer line cannot be placed at the surface, it would have to be bored or trenched in some fashion. Any fencing would be along Tract B and the frontages with the new residential lots being created in the plat. The rest of the sensitive area extends off the property and they would be running fences that would not really make any sense. . The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at approximately 10:06 am. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The applicant, Phil Kitzes, PK Enterprises, filed a request for a 9-10t Preliminary Plat together with a variance to allow stormwater line intrusion across a sensitive slope. 2. The yellow file containing the staff report, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit #1. 3.. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City.'s responsible official issued a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M). 4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. ., ) Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat . File No.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12, 2006 Page? 5. The subject site is located 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard. The subject site is located on the north side of Sunset between Monroe Avenue NE on the west and Redmond Avenue NE on the east. 6. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of medium density residential uses, but does' not mandate such development without consideration of other policies of the Plan. 7. The subject site is currently zoned R-1O (Residential Options -10 dwelling units/acre). 8. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 1631 enacted in August 1957. 9. The subject site is approximately 1.8 acres or 78,512 square feet. The parcel is L-shaped or panhandle shaped. The parcel is approximately 464 feet wide at the northern property line, 218 deep along the western property line, approximately 137 feet wide along the eastern property line and has approximately 190 feet of frontage along Sunset Boulevard. 10. An existing home located in the southeast comer of the subject site would be removed if the plat were approved. 11. The subject site slopes downward to the north and northeast as it drops down to Honey Creek. The site slopes at an average of 19.7 percent. Moderate Landslide Hazard Area's, Erosion Hazard Areas and Sensitive slopes cover a majority of the subject site. Steeper, protected slopes, over 40 percent, are located along Honey Creek. Honey Creek runs at a diagonal across the eastern panhandle of the subject site and most of this area will be maintained as natural open space in Proposed Tract B. (See below for stonn drainage exception) 12. Honey Creek is a Class 3 Stream. There is also a Category 3 wetland south of the creek. in the extreme southeast comer of the panhandle of the site. Both of these areas as well as their required stream and wetland buffers would also be contained with Tract B. 13. The site is covered with a variety of second growth vegetation including Alder, Douglas Fir and Maple trees and ground shrubs including ivy, fern and blackberry. Most of the vegetation outside of the protected area would be removed to allow the development of homes, roads and driveways. 14. The plat will contain nine (9) single-family lots as well as two (2) separate tracts. The lots will be arranged around a hammerhead roadway that enters the site from Sunset Boulevard. Proposed Lots 1 and 2 are located west of the new roadway. Proposed Lots 3,4,5 and 6 are located along the north side of the hammerhead while Proposed Lots 7 and 9·are located east of the hammerhead and Proposed Lot 8 located east of Proposed Lot 7. The proposed lots will range in size from approximately 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Honey Creek View Estate::; Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12,2006 Page 8 15. Two tracts would also be created. Tract A would contain the stormwater detention system and it would be 5,587 square feet. It would be located east of Proposed Lot 6. Tract B would contain the sensitive slopes, Honey Creek, the wetland and the creek and wetland buffer areas. It would be approximately 34,389 square feet. Tract B encompasses most of the eastern panhandle that extends off the northern portion of the site. 16. As noted, a hammerhead roadway would provide a 42-foot right-of-way into the site. A 20-foot east to west roadway will provide access to Proposed Lots 3, 6 and 8. A modification was granted to allow this portion of the road to be 20 feet wide. 17. The density for the plat would be 9.57 dwelling units per acre after subtracting sensitive areas, in this case, wetland, creek course and steep slopes, and roadways. The R-IO zoning permits a variety of housing types including the proposed detached single-family units. Staff did recommend that a condition restrict each lot to only one dwelling. 18. The subject site is located within the Renton School District. The project is expected to generate approximately 3 or 4 school age children. These students would be spread across the grades and would be assigned on a space available basis. 19. The development will increase traffic approximately 10 trips per unit or approximately 90 trips for the 9 single-family homes. Approximately ten percent of the trips, or approximately 9 additional peak hour trips will be generated in the morning and evening. 20. Stormwater currently sheet flows into the adjacent Honey Creek. Stormwater that falls on paved surfaces will be treated in a water quality vault on Tract A before being released to Honey Creek. The ERC imposed a condition requiring the higher 2005 Manual requirements for flow control. The vault will be required to have a building permit. The applicant has proposed releasing the stormwater at a point down the slope adjacent to Honey Creek. In order to install a pipe to convey water to the creek a variance will be necessary to intrude onto the steeper slopes above the creek. 21. Domestic water and sanitary sewer service is provided by the City in this area. The main sewer line along Sunset Boulevard is apparently too high to serve this site by gravity. The sewer line would require cooperation from an adjacent owner or a new plan will be required in order to provide sewer to the subject site. CONCLUSIONS: Critical Areas Variance 1. A variance may be used to locate certain necessary infrastructure in critical areas. "Special Review Criteria" (Section 4-9-250B(lO) must be evaluated before granting a variance to locate such infrastructure in critical areas containing protected slopes, . wetlands, geologic hazard areas, etc. Public/Quasi-Public Utility or Agency Altering Aquifer Protection, Geologic Hazard, Habitat, or Wetland Regulations: In lieu of the variance criteria of subsection B5 of this Section, applications by public/quasi-public ~, ) Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12,2006 .) Page 9 utilities or agencies proposing to alter aquifer protection, geologic hazard, habitat, stream and lake or wetland regulations shall be reviewed for compliance with all of the following criteria: a. Public policies have been evaluated and it has been determined by the Department Administrator that the public's health, safety, and welfare is best served; b. Each facility must conform to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and with any adopted public programs and policies; c. Each facility must serve established, identified public needs; d. No practical alternative exists to meet the needs; e. The proposed action takes affirmative and appropriate measures to minimize and compensate for unavoidable impacts; f. The proposed activity results in no net loss of regulated wetland area, value, or function in the drainage basin where the wetland is located; g. The proposed activities will not jeopardize the continued existence of endangered, threatened or sensitive species as listed by the Federal government or the State; . h. That the proposed activities will not cause significant degradation of groundwater or surface water quality; and 1. The approval as determined by the Hearing Examiner is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose. (Ord. 4835,3-27-2000; Amd. Ord. 4851,8- 7-2000) Section 4-9-250B(10) contains the following language: "Special Review Criteria -Public/Quasi-Public Utility or Agency Altering Aquifer Protection, Geologic Hazard, Habitat, StreamlLake or Wetland Regulations: In lieu of the variance criteria of subsection B5 of this Section, applications by public/quasi-public utilities or agencies proposing to alter aquifer protection, geologic hazard, habitat, stream and lake or wetland regulations shall be reviewed for compliance with all of the following criteria:" (Emphasis supplied) It would appear that these criteria may be used to grant a public or quasi-public agency the ability to apply for a variance to place the storm line down the steep slopes but this does not extend to a private entity such as the applicant or the successor-in-interest, homeowners association. It would appear that variances from the critical area protections were intended for larger public projects that affect the overall public health, safety and welfare. One might also surmise that public agencies might be able to deal with any monetary consequences should the utility fail and jeopardize a hillside or creek or wetland. This office does not believe it can grant a variance to a private entity in this matter. Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12, 2006 Page 10 Preliminary Plat 2. At the public hearing the parties acknowledged that they were dealing with a problematic property and that it took a concerted effort to design a project that could meet the City's development regulations. As can be seen by the difficulties in dealing with both stormwater and sanitary sewer waste, the site is constrained by its physical location. The reality is that while developing this parcel serves the applicant's property interests and even serves the City's interests in creating new, affordable housing tracts, sometimes a site has severe limitations. With that in mind, this office will recommend that the City Council approve this plat but only after the applicant succeeds in overcoming the remaining obstacles. This office will need to see how the applicant will create acceptable sewer and stonnwater solutions before forwarding the matter to the City Council. 3. Subject to the first conclusion above, the proposed plat appears to generally serve the public use and interest. It provides additional single-family detached housing in a growing suburban community. It will also provide small-lot housing for those who did not want to maintain larger lots. The plat also accommodates its sensitive area and site. The applicant will be protecting almost three-quarters of an acre of creek bed, wetlands and steep slopes in Tract B. . 4. The ERC has imposed mitigation fees to help offset the impacts on the roads, emergency services and the city's parks. The development of the plat should also generate additional taxes that offset the impacts of this development on the City. 5. The applicant will have to provide written assurances in some form or other that a sewer line can serve the subject site. Currently, the applicant proposes connecting to a system northwest of the subject site but has not yet received the necessary right to make that connection. Before a plat can be approved, a known method of accommodating its sanitary sewerage is required. 6. The applicant will now, also, have to come up with a method that deals with its stormwater. Even the variance criteria pertaining to public agencies required that "no practical alternative exists to meet the needs" of the proposal. The applicant will have to come up with some other practical method of handling stonnwater for this site. Again, an actual design plan will be required so that this office can assure the City Council that this plat is appropriate and will not burden the City or its eventual homeowners with potential problems. 7. In summary, the Preliminary Plat is not ready to be forwarded to the City Council. The applicant will have to provide necessary assurances that it can provide sewer service to the nine lots and also provide a method of dealing safely and affectively with its stormwater. ) Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat FileNo.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12,2006 Page 11 RECOMMENDATION: J 'y - When the applicant has appropriately designed its sanitary sewer and stonnwater conveyance system, the City Council should approve the Preliminary Plat subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Determination of Non- Significance -Mitigated that were issued by the Environmental Review Committee on March 14,2006. 2. A note shall be recorded on the face of the fmal plat stating that no more than one single-family dwelling unit is permitted on each lot. 3. A demolition permit shall be obtained and all inspections completed on the demolition of the existing residence prior to final plat approval. 4. The applicant shall be required to place "No Parking" signage along the hammerhead prior to fmal plat approval. 5. A homeoWner's association or maintenance agreement shall be created concurrently with the recording of the fmal plat in. order to establish maintenance responsibilities for shared roadway, stormwater and utility improvements. A . draft of the documents(s) shall be submitted to the City of Renton Development Services for review and approval by the City Attorney and Property Services section prior to the recording of the fmal plat. . 6. A Native Growth Protection Easement shall be recorded over Tract B prior to the recording of the fmal plat map. 7. The proposed sensitive area tract (Tract B) shall be delineated with a split rail fence and identified with signage as approved by the Development·Services Division Project Manager. A fencing and signage detail shall be submitted to the Development Services Division project manager at the time of Utility Construction Permit for review and approval and that such fencing and signage shall be installed prior to the recording of the final plat. 8. The landscape plan shall be revised to show that 2-inch caliper trees shall be provided within the interior of the plat as opposed to the 1 Yz-inch caliper trees proposed. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted prior to final plat approval. . 9. A trail easement within Tract B shall be dedicated to the City of Renton Parks Department for the Honey Creek Trail. The easement shall be required to be dedicated prior to or concurrently with the recording of the fmal plat. 10. The"applicant shall submit a landscape plan for the storm water detention tract (Tract A). Proposed landscaping shall. either be drought tolerant or irrigated. Honey Creek View Estatt:~'Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12, 2o~A Page 12 The landscape plan shall be submitted at the time of Utility C~mstruction Permit application to the Development Services Division project manager for review and approval. The landscaping shall be installed prior to recording of the final plat. 11. The applicant shall provide documentation that they can effectively provide sanitary sewer service to the subject site. The applicant shall provide written approval by the City's utility division that their proposed method meets City criteria. 12. The applicant shall provide documentation that they can effectively provide stormwater service to the subject site. The applicant shall provide written approval by the City's utility division that their proposed method meets City criteria. ORDERED THIS 12th day of June 2006 FRE~~~ HEARINGE R TRANSMITTED THIS 12th day of June 2006 to the parties of record: Jill Ding 1055 S Grady Way Renton, W A 98055 James & Minoo Costello 22814 77th Avenue SE Woodinville, W A 98072 Arthur E. Eastman 3533 NE 17TH place Renton, W A 98056 Neil Watts Director, Development Services City of Renton Charles & Mahwash Price 16102 NE 175th Street Woodinville, W A 98072 A.L. Meakin 7100 S Taft Street Seattle, W A 98178 TRANSMITTED THIS 12th day of June 2006 to the following: Mayor Kathy Keolker Stan Engler, Fire Philip Kitzes PK Enterprises 23035 SE 263rd Street Maple Valley, W A 98038 Ali & Farideh Mastan 13910 SE 42nd Street Bellevue, W A 98006 Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Jennifer Henning, Development Services Stacy Tucker, Development Services King County Journal Larry Meckling, Building Official Planning Commission Transportation Division Utilities Division Neil Watts, Development Services Janet Conklin, Development Services ) Honey Creek View Estates' Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-05-118 PP, CAR, V-H, ECF June 12, 2006 Page 13 Pursuantto Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 100(G) of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., June 26, 2006. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take fin1her action, as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of $75.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall. An appeal must be fUed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., June 26, 2006. If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants, the executed Covenants will be required prior to' approval by City Council or final processing oCtile fIle. You may contact this office for information on formatting , covenants. The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur concerning pending land use decisions., This means that parties to a 'land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision-maker concerning the proposal. Decision-makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communieation permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. ' l----==------:::----:-::::=""-=--' --~ R-l _, __ -IlentoD Gt,y Um1tIr D5 4 T23N R5E E 1/2 '. S304 ~ ~ "" IM1IN'OISI:S ...... u_mm ~VAI.LE'f',WAt803!I _1227-7"'1 _ .... oar:a PORTION OF NE 1/4, SW 1/4, SE 1/4, SEC 4 TWN 23N., R5E, W.M . ~ __ u.c PODOlC_ FEDI:fUL WAY, WI. 08003-.2422 =1I01-&7D1 ua-ll1f1 _1lWI,1'I: -..-.c.o1OO . ---.. -~ __ UI<O _. u.c \ -=....~::J:W' M. == .,.,.. * ~ * --=PHJI._.", 0 0 -- ,,. "--CD '::). ~ ....... " ~" ,:~> ,-.. ~ -t: ..... --(7:. ........ ....... -.... NO, --0 • ---CD CD =- A BENCHMARK £l.CVAnON • ~.7r PA ItO V CHIS£l.£D SQUARE N.C. COIIH£I! CClNCRErE WAU( R£JVI1N 10 TltE CAST ON TIt! EASr SIDE OF NCMPORT AI£.II.£. .t SUNSrr BLt.Il. cm' R£NroH s.w I 7'0 G£NEBAL H)'DRQbQCICAL HQTf'.S· - __ lOT, .....a. _ • 7I,Itli " (tAO .ctoI:I) _ -""'" • ..,.,,(O.II2t.cllEl) __ PUMO<II _ • 17,27M U (1.77 >CIItI) (IOIUrCMII .. 1lt\\JS) 8'1' 1~n:1APPR mALP"""'-H'tA -YIN. LDT NtI4 "'*' \Dr NtI'A tIUI\lW!I.lUII_ 11I.<C!'r_ I'IUP SLOPC • OHW MIA • 1TRIIT ROW IQ " --.... --.,..,. '''''''-,um _ lIIOCT '1>I1'aND >ltV. \ SC"LE: ," _2\ I· \ 1 se COR sec 4-2J-' (CONe. liON. IN CAst \\ I se ,,21. S/R£Er.t IJ2rod .~E S.E., ~ t>.6,<l CO~STRUCT10N DMl.opEBo ~ ... __ -.u.c """'I: v.tWY. ... "" 4IOlC 2AW (200) 221-1... """"'" _. "" ..... COKI..:tt ..... ICItD(lIIO)IIO'-G1OiI I I ~: ... 1 ___ _ ;r 5: a\ I I I I I. J t I PORTION OF NE 1/4, SW 1/4, SE 1/4, SEC 4 TWN 23N., R5E, W.M. ... ......... L~,,,.;... O,IJ NOliTH 01" LINE 1-----.... ---I!lIift--eb I ! 0 IE OJ CD :tt: ~ A A NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION NOTE: ~""_ONI.Y_ be. \IM'G~~"a:::u-" IlD. SCALE: , ... 20' .f' \II '.,.. " I ~VAU..T 9. ! --~ 1 I ~ ".'N ___ W'~ S£ '12th sTII.cr., 'J2nd AVCNUC S£ 1!LIPHOfCI o II I1'OFt:W ORNN CAn::H BASIN YAU!.T Cl#fl'\.U4 )0----( >---< I1(JIAM ORJr,!N C:UL.~" t><l CCUPfJltO , @ ® t'I\lIIll_.~ ts. "'OtAHIc.I. 1HRIJtT1II.QQ< 2-HOml_T IB IB WA'TIR WI1IR 1U fI.AHCEI1IUHlI I\. ' . . . \ \ I~ I--r---i 1 B~ t I Ii 5 I , ~2. / I , I I ,m , I , I I ! ! , S j Ii /t, I \ I -... : \ \ I I I . co., ! I I I II, II 'II . 11 j I ~ • II IJ ~ ~ll ~ .:. (Ie a I '.~ . .. CITY Of RENTON -~-'-fDETERM~NATION OF NON-SHGN!FICANCE-MUTIGATED M~T~GAT~ON MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA05-118,PP, CAR, V-H, ECF APPLICANT: Phil Kitzes, PK Enterprises PROJECT NAME: Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to subdivide an existing 78,512 square foot (1.8 acre) parcel located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation into 9 lots, a stormwater detention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The lots range in area from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Access to the lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as right-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A class 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portion of the -subject site; in addition Protected Slopes and a category 3 wetland' are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LEAD AGENCY: MITIGATION MEASURES: 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard The City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section 1. The earthwork activities to be conducted onsite shall only be permitted to occur during the dry months of the year. 2. The applicant to comply with the recommendations found in the preliminary geotechnical site evaluation prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services dated July 22, 2005 and the follow up geotechnical evaluation dated February 12, 2006. 3. The applicant shall be required to provide a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) designed pursuant to the Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements outlined in Volume II of the Storm water Management Manual and provide staff with a Construction Mitigation Plan prior to issuance of Construction Permits. This condition shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division. 4. The applicant shall be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Wetland Study report prepared by Habitat Technologies dated September 23,2005 and the Supplemental Stream Study and Mitigation Plan prepared by Ecological Land Services, Inc. dated December 9, 2005. 5. The detention system for this project shall be required to comply with the requirements found in the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention (conservation flow control -Level 2) and water quality improvements. 6. The applicant shall pay a Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per each new single family lot prior to the recording of the final plat. 7. The applicant shall pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee in the amount of $75 per net new average daily trip prior to the recording of the final plat. 8. Staff recommends that the applicant pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on $488.00 per new single family lot prior to the recording of the final plat. ERe Mitigation Measures Page 1 of 1 STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Jody Bartqn, being first duly sworn on oath that she is the Legal Advertising Representative of the King County Journal a daily newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continuously as a daily newspaper in King County, Washington. The King County Journal has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the King County Journal (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a Public Notice was published April 28, 2006. The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $126.00. egal Advertising Representative, King County Journal Subscribed and sworn to me this 28th day of April. 2006. \\ \ \ " II " 1/11 \\\ t II ~, Con 01. /// ~ \) •••.•• Or./~ .$I'<Q ... ~\s:rOn·;.'J r-:~. ~ ··o~ .... ..;~"I~~ ',::.. CaaJ.i ~:0 ''',;'. ';:. /6 D:Li(}Y). ~ :.;t MO{Ch ''''~'';~ B D Cantelon =-* : 2010 r:: .:::: Notary Public for the State of Washington, Residing in Kent. Washirigtpn (:." .'': -:::. .v/ '0 .) .. PO Number: /i Il"~) Of\·,-~:~·,···,0 .• " 'A ~. It .,,~ '\.'" ....... '/ ' ,.,,,.' '0' ,~ . /////OfQrv ,?0 \\ .... " III/II'! j';'\\\ tI,'I;d NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON HEARlNG EXAMINER RENTON, WASIDNGTON A Public Hearing will be held by ihe Renton Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington, on May 9, 2006 at 9:00 AM to consider the following petitions: Honey Creek View Estates LUA05-118, PP, CAR, V-H, ECF Location: 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard. Description: Subdivi- sion of an existing 78,512 square foot parcel. located within the Residential-10 (R-IO) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation into 9 lots, a storm water detention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The proposed lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The proposed lots range in area from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Access to the .proposed lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as right-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A class 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portion of the subject site, in addtion Protected Slopes are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. A variance to the Critical Areas regulations has also been requested for the placement of a stormwater pipe on the Protected Slope . All interested persons are invited to be present at the Public Hearing to express their opinions. Questions should be directed to the Hearing Examiner at 425-430-6515. Publication Date: April 28, 2006 Published in the King County Journal April 28, 2006. #860345 . e. .. ',,} . '-:,. . ,:.i, .-:., . June 21·, 2006 ' ..... , ' .. -"'; . ... "' . ". ' '. wa~ne;~Orle$~' .:; ,: ..... Lakeii~geOev~iopment;' Inc .. PO Box':146' '.' .' : REmtdri':WA '9'S'O!57 :' .'. . ~ '.. . . . . .', . ~, SUBJECT: ... "',; .... :. " ."'.'. . " ~ . \. ~ .... '. ~.' 1:. . .~ . ( '.'- J ~ : :" , \-, . . '. ','! ,.:.,::' .. : ... ' .,: ". ~.'>"""' .. : .... , ............. . . ".,' C,.., ,CI1['~. ''If; .RJE·NT·ON·' .~. .'. :. . ,,~. '-. . "'., .;.. : ." . . .. ,.' ',." . . ~ " . ~. :: ,.! ." "';'~' P!ariningIBuiidip~~bl~cWo~fs:Dep~nie~~·. . ·.GreggZiIDli!e~ari P.'~.'.A,dmin~t~a.tor. .. .~ : ...... . . . ... .', ...... =. .\. ... ',' .. ,', :.- • • • c , .': '.,. ,.' .' :.'~ '. ~ .. ' ",.' .. -:~ . .'. '. . ' ... .. t •• , . :., ,.. " .. ','-" .": '. ',: . ·1 ~., .. ' . . ~'\. '.- ' .. " .. :. ~ . .", . . .... ' ..... .-: . ' ..... : .... ' . ..., . . ," . ~ , :." :.:. ,'.' . . K.\: . :-:. '.;.: • ,.:. r' ,.' ..... '. ~ : < • .-.. ...:.' .. " .:_' .·,.f.,-:',-; ; .. > /' , • ....... ,. . .-\ ,~ .,. ; . : ~ , "'.' .. ~ ~ .. ; -.; . ,-'. , .-~ . ~.' ~. '." .' . " .-~ " , ... , ' .. " . :-:: .. ',' '.:. ': .~ .... , .. , " "l~::: ... ~ " .' ,~; . " . ". ,"~, ". ~ :-";."" : . :: ,.': ~. ~ .":.'. !ENVURONMENTAl REMIEW'~G~O~MMlrrEE ..... MEETiNG-Nolictf"" February 2Jf 2·f)06 ,'. To: Gregg Zimmerman, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator Dennis Culp, Community Services Administrator From: . . Meeting Date: 'Time: Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief Alex Pietsch, EDNSP Administrator Jennifer Henning, Development Planning T uesday,Februa'rry 21 , 2006~ . 9~OI1h~:M ~ ',. Agenda listed below. Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat (Ding) LUA-05-118, PP, CAR, V-H, ECF The applicant is proposing to subdivide an existing 78,512 square foot (1.8 acre) parcel located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation into 9 lots, a stormwater detention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The lots range in area from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Access to the lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as right-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A class 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portion of the subject site; in addition Protected Slopes and a category 3 wetland are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. cc: K. Keolker, Mayor J. Covington, Chief Administrative Officer B. Wolters, EDNSP Director ® J. Gray, Fire Prevention N. Watts, P/B/PW Development Services Director ® F. Kaufman;;Hearing Examiner S. Engler, Fire Prevention ® J. Medzegian, Council P. Hahn, P/B/PW Transportation Systems Director R. Und, Economic Development L. Warren, City Attorney ® CITY OF RENTON IDETERMHNA THON OF NONI-SfiGNBFBCANCE-MITfGATEID MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA05-118,PP, CAR, V-H, ECF APPLICANT: Phil Kitzes, PK Enterprises PROJECT NAME: Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAl: The applicant is proposing to subdivide an existing 78,512 square foot· (1.8 acre) parcel located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation into 9 lots, a stormwater detention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The· lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The lots range in area from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Access to the lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as right-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A class 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portion of the . subject site;· in addition Protected Slopes and a category 3 wet/and' are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. LOCATION OF PROPOSAl: LEAD AGENCY: MITIGATION MEASURES: 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard The City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section 1. The earthwork activities to be conducted onsite shall only be permitted to occur during the dry months of the year. 2. The applicant to comply with the recommendations found in the preliminary geotechnical site evaluation prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services dated July 22, 2005 and the follow up geotechnical evaluation dated February 12, 2006. 3. The applicant shall be required to provide a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) designed pursuant to the Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements outlined in Volume II of the Stormwater Management Manual and provide staff with a Construction Mitigation Plan prior to issuance of Construction Permits. This condition shall be subject to the review and appr~val of the Development Services Division. 4. The applicant shan be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Wet/and Study report prepared by Habitat Technologies dated September 23,2005 and the Supplemental Stream Study and Mitigation Plan prepared by Ecological Land Services, Inc. dated December 9, 2005. 5. The detention system for this project shall be required to comply with the requirements found in the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention (conservation flow control-Level 2) and water quality improvements. 6. The applicant shall pay a· Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per each new single family lot prior to the recording of the final plat. . 7. The applicant shall pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee in the amount of $75 per net new average daily trip prior to the recording of the final plat. 8. Staff recommends that the applicant pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on $488.00 per new single family lot prior to the recording of the fini31 plat. ERe Mitigation Measures Page 1 of 1 f'· " ",.~. .,~ .' -. Order Number. 205115003 EXHUBIIT "A" THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF TIiE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST. W.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID SUBDMSION 373 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHERLY MARGIN OF STATE HIGHWAY NO.2 (SUNSET HIGHWAy); THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SUNSET HIGHWAY 300 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTHERLY PARALLEL WITH SAID EAST LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION A DISTANCE OF 145 FEET; " THENCE EASTERLY 300 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID EAST LINE WHICH IS 145 FEET NORTH OF THE NORTHERLY MARGIN OF SAID SUNSET HIGHWAY; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION, BEING 11iE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 484.62 FEET TOA POINT WHICH IS 170 FEET EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID SUBDMSION; THENCE SOUTH, PARALLEL TO SAID WEST LINE TO THE NORTHERLY MARGIN OF SUNSET HIGHWAY; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID SUNSET HIGHWAY TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; . . EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONDEMEND IN KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NO. 742207 FOR SUNSET HIGHWAY. . t . ~ ____ ------~. ~,~ ____ ~~ __ -=~~~~--~'----~n-~==~J < R-l 'U s::: N C? ~ D5 4-T23N R5E E 1/2 . . S304 .• CITY OF' RENTON • DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCEwMITIGATED MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA05-118, PP, CAR, V-H, ECF APPLICANT: Phil Kitzes, PK Enterprises PROJECT NAME: Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to subdivide an existing 78,512 square foot (1.8 acre) parcel located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling unit per acre zoning deSignation into 9 lots, a stormwater detention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The lots range in area from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Access to the lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as right-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A class 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portion of the subject site; in addition Protected Slopes and a category 3 wetland are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LEAD AGENCY: MITIGATION MEASURES: 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard The City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section 1. The earthwork activities to be conducted onsite shall only be permitted to occur during the dry months of the year. 2. The applicant to comply with the recommendations found in the preliminary geotechnical site evaluation prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services dated July 22, 2005 and the follow up geotechnical evaluation dated February 12, 2006. 3. The applicant shall be required to provide a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) designed pursuant to the Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements outlined in Volume II of the Stormwater Management Manual and provide staff with a Construction Mitigation Plan prior to issuance of Construction Permits. This condition shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division. 4. The applicant shall be required to C9mply with the recommendations found in the Wetland Study report prepared by Habitat Technologies dated September 23, 2005 and the Supplemental Stream Study and Mitigation Plan prepared by Ecological Land Services, Inc. dated December 9, 2005. 5. The detention system for this project shall be required to comply with the requirements found in the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention (conservation flow control-Level 2) and water quality improvements. 6. The applicant shall pay a Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per each new single family lot prior to the recording of the final plat. 7. The applicant shall pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee in the amount of $75 per net new average daily trip prior to the recording of the final plat. 8. Staff recommends that the applicant pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on $488.00 per new single family lot prior to the recording of the final plat. ERe Mitigation Measures Page 1 of 1 r .. ·CITYOF·RENTON "'" ADDENDUM 'TO ENViRONMENTAL DETERMINATION OF"" NON,.SIG.NIFICANCE ~ MITlqATED(DNS-M) Pursuant to WAC1fj7-11-'600(4) (c)andWAO 197-11-625 , ,~ , " ----. -, -. ' . -. . --.... Addendumto Honey'C'reekView Estates Preliminary Plat Determinatio~ of Non- ., ···.·Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M) (LUA05-118'ECF,·PP,v;.H} . . . Delte of Addendum: May 3,2006' Date of Original Issuance Qf SEPA Threshold Determina~i6n:' March 14, 2006 Proponent: Application File: · Project Name: Phil Kitzes, PI< Enterprises LUA05-118, PP, ECF, V-H Honey Creek View Estates Prelimi'nary Plat'; Proposal 1 Purpose of Addendum: The applicant has requested review ofa . SUbdivision of an existing 78,512 square foot parcel located within the Residential-tO (R-. 10) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation into 9 lots, astormwaterdetention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing residence is proposed to be removed~ The proposed lots would be proposed' for the future construction of detached single family residences. A class 3 stream· (Honey Creek)' flows across 'the eastern portion of the subject site, in addition Protected Slopes are, Jo~ted on tile eastern portion of the subject site. A variance tothe.Critical Areas. regulations ha~ (3lso b~en requ~step for the placement of a stormvvater pipe on the . · Protected Slope. After the original SEPA threshold Deter(T1ination of Npn:-Significance..:. .' Mitigated (DNS-M) was issued an 6ff site streamw<:is identified on the. properties located to the north and east of the project area. A Class 4 stream required a 35-.f06tbuff~r. ·It ' has been determined that neither the stream nor its buffer would extend. ontO the project site. However, a proposed sewer connection for-the proposed development Would cross·. under the streama'nd some impacts to the stream buffer may occur as a result of the installatiohof the sewe{' Any impacts to the stream or it!? buffer would require'mitigation per the City of Renton's Critical Areas Regulations (RMC 4-3-050) . . It hasb~en d~termined that. theenvironmentalimPCictsof th~ new proposal~re adequately addressed ; tinder the analysis ofsignificannmpactsconfakled'within the '.' previously adopted ,DNS-M.' Based on WAC 197-11-600(4)c; the addemdum process · may be used if an,a,lysis or information is added that does not substantially change th~ ) analysis of, significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. Therefore, the SEPA addendum proCess has been utilized for the necessary Environmental Review of the proposed development. location:·· ·3524 NE Sunset Blvd, Renton, WA 98056; KCA No. 0423059090 lead Agency: City of Renton, Planning/Building/Public Works Department Review Process: Individual development proposals for the Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat site will be reviewed under SEPA Rules and City· of Renton policies and regulations applicable to the development. Additional Information: If you would like additional information, please contact Jennifer Henning, Principal Planner, City of Renton, Development Services Division, Planning/Building/Public Works Department at (425) 430-7286. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE SIGNATURES: -f(D Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Terry Higashiyama, Administrator Community Services Department larry Rude, Interim Fire Chief Renton Fire Department Alex Pietsch, Administrator EDNSP DATE DATE DATE CITY OF RENTON CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT.OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 3m day of May, 2006, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Phil Kitzes Contact/Applicant James & Minoo Costello Owners Charles & Mahwash Price Owners Ali & Farideh Masten Owners Arthur E. Eastman POR A.L. Meakin POR (Signature of Sender): ~ " -1;,/ / ~ ~ STATE OF WASHINGTON )(J ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy Tucker signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. ........ "'~~~~\"". ':-.d \. ... "","'9 N;.! ~6~ .r '"""'\\\\"11"-"* do. -...-.":;:~'~\ON I111 ~ Dated: ~ --;>, -O<a .:;F-.,-I, Notary. (Print): 8VY\be.c t. ynoHoWmo. V) My appointment expires: d -\ q ~ (v Project Ncijne:: . Honey Creek View Estates -- Project Numbeic: LUA05-11B, PP, CAR, V-H, ECF PROJECT NAME: Honey Creek View Estates PROJECT NUMBER: LUA-05-118, PP, CAR, V-H, ECF PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval and Variance approval for the subdivision of a 78,512 square foot (1.8 acre) site located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling units per acre zone into 9 lots and two tracts. The proposed lots would be developed with single family residences. An existing single family residence will be removed. The lot sizes would range from approximately 3,000 sq. ft. to 4,333 sq. ft. Access to the. proposed lots would be provided via a new road (Road A) off of NE Sunset Boulevard and terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A stormwater detention tract (Tract A) and a sensitive area tract (Tract B) are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. HEX Agenda 5-9-06 PUBLIC HEARING City of Renton Department of Planning / Building / Public Works PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER A. SUMMARY AND PURPOSE OF REQUEST: Public Hearing Date: Project Name: Applicant/Contact: File Number: Project Description: Project Location: May 9,2006 . Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat Phil Kitzes; PK Enterprises, 23035 SE 263rd Street, Maple Valley, WA 98038 LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H Project Manager: Jill K. Ding, Associate Planner The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval and Variance approval for the subdivision of a 78,512 square foot (1.8 acre) site located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling units per acre zone into 9 lots and two tracts. The proposed lots would be developed with single family residences. An existing single family residence will be removed. The lot sizes would range from approximately 3,000 sq. ft. to 4,333 sq. ft. Access to the proposed lots would be provided via a new road (Road A) off of NE Sunset Boulevard and terminatesii1 a hammerhead turnaround. A stormwater detention tract (Tract A) and a sensitive area tract (Tract B) are located on the eastern portion of the SUbject site .. 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard \ City of Renton PIBIPW Department / HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT I Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: May 9, 2006 ' Page 20f14 lB. HEARING EXHIBITS: Exhibit 1: Project file ("yellow file") containing the application, reports, staff comments, and other material pertinent to the review of the project. Exhibit 2: Geotechnical Engineer's Site Plan sheet A2 showing cross sections (dated May 2, 2005) Exhibit 3: Preliminary Plat Plan (dated 9/2212005) Exhibit 4: Preliminary Storm, Sewer, and Water Plan (dated 9/22/2005) Exhibit 5: Preliminary Grading Plan (dated 3/312006) Exhibit 6: Conceptual Landscape Plan (dated 9/22/2005) Exhibit 8: BoundarylTopographic Survey (dated 9/22/2005) Exhibit 9: Zoning Map sheet D5 East 1/2 (dated 12/28/2004) Exhibit 10: ERC Mitigation Measures Exhibit 11: Critical Area Exemption letter (dated 3/3012006) c. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1. Owners of Record: James & Minoo Costello, 22814 77th Avenue SE, Woodinville, WA 2. Zoning Designation: 3. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: 4. Existing Site Use: 5. Neighborhood Characteristics: 98072 ' Charles & Mahwash Price 16102 NE 175th Street,Woodinville, WA 98072 Ali & Farideh Mastan 13910 SE 42nd Place, Bellevue, WA 98006 Residential-10 (R-10) Dwelling, Units per Acre Residential Medium Density (RMD) Single-family residence to be removed North: Single family residential; R-8 zoning East: Single family residential; R-10 zoning South: Single family residential; R-8 zoning West: Single family residential; R-.10 zoning 6. Access: NE Sunset Boulevard 7. Site Area: 1.8 acres 8. Project Data: Existing Building Area: New Building Area: Total Building Area: Hexrpt 05-118.doc Area N/A N/A N/A Comments Existing residence to be removed N/A N/A " City of Renton PIBIPW Department ) HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTA 7ES PRELIMINARY PLA T Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H PUBLIC HEARING DA 7E: May 9, 2006 D. HISTORICAUBACKGROUND: Action Annexation Comprehensive Plan Zoning Land Use File No. N/A N/A N/A Ordinance No. 1631 5099 5100 E. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE: 1. Chapter 2 Land Use Districts Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts Section 4-2-070: Zoning Use Table Section4-2-110:· Residential Development Standards 2. Chapter 3 Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts Section 4-3-050: Critical Areas Regulations 3. Chapter 4 Property Development Standards Section 4-4-030: Development Guidelines and Regulations Section 4-4-060: Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations Section 4-4-080: Parking, Loading and Driveway Regulations Section 4-4-130: Tree Cutting and Land' Clearing Regulations. 4. Chapter 6 Streets and Utility Standards Section 4-6-060: Street Standards 5. Chapter 7 Subdivision Regulations . Page 3 of 14 Date 8/13/1957 11/01/2004 11/01/2004 Section 4-7-050: General Outline of Subdivision, Short Plat and Lot Line Adjustment Procedures Section 4-7-080: Detailed Procedures for Subdivision Section 4-7-120: Compatibility with Existing Land Use and Plan-General Requirements and Minimum Standards Section 4-7-150: Streets -General Requirements and Minimum Standards Section 4-7-160: Residential Blocks -General Requirements and Minimum Standards Section 4-7-170: Residential Lots -General Requirements and Minimum Standards 6. Chapter 9 Procedures and Review Criteria 7. Chapter 11 Definitions F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENS8VE PLAN: 1. Land Use Element: Residential Medium Density objectives and policies; . 2. Community Design Element. 3. Environmental Element. G. DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval and Variance approval for a 9-lot subdivision of an 18.13- acre site located within the Residential -10 (R-10) dwelling units per acre zone. The applicant proposes the eventual development of single-family detached units. An existing residence will be removed. The proposed lot sizes range from approximately 3,000 sq. ft. to 4,333 sq. ft. Two tracts are proposed to be created as a result of the proposed subdivision. Tract A is proposed as a stormwater detention tract and would be approximately 5,587 square feet in area and Tract B is proposed as a sensitive area tract and would be approximately 34,389 square feet in area. The following sensitive areas have been identified on the subject site: moderate landslide hazard areas, erosion hazard areas, a class 3 stream, a category 3 wetland, sensitive slopes, and protected slopes. A class 3 stream requires a 75-fool buffer, however when the stream buffer falls within a protected slope area, the stream buffer shall extend to the boundary of the protected slope. The category 3 wetland requires a 25 foot Hexrpt 05-118.dOc "-City of Renton PIB/PW Department ,. HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: Mayg, 2006 .preliminaty Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-11B, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H Page 40'14 buffer. A class 4 stream was identified on the property to the northeast of the subject site. A class 4 stream requires a 35-foot buffer, it does not appear that the buffer extends onto the subject site however impacts to the stream buffer may occur through the installation of a sewer main through the property located to the north. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) imposed the following setback requirements from the protected slope as recommended by the applicant's geotechnical report prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services: Cross Section of Area (see page Minimum Buffer Minimum Building Setback . A2/Exhibit 2, attachedl A-A' 15'feeHrom top of steep slope 1 0 feet from buffer line B-B' 15 feet from top of steep slope 10 feet from buffer line B-B' with vault 5 feet from top of steep slope 5 feet from buffer line North Property Line 10 feet from crest of slope 10 feet from buffer line The protected slope area, stream, and wetland would be protected within the proposed sensitive area tract (Tract B). The applicant has requested a Critical Area Exemption letter to locate a stormwater outlet pipe within the required stream buffer. The requested Exemption has been granted. In addition a variance has been requested to locate the storm water outlet pipe on a protected slope. Staffs recommendation for the requested variance is contained within the body of this report. The subject site slopes from south the northeast to west and has an average slope of apprOXimately 19.7%. The site is currently forestea with a mix of deciduous and evergreen trees, shrubs, and emergent vegetation. As proposed approximately 60% of the existing veg~tation will be removed during the construction of the proposed .plat improvements. Preliminary earthwork quantities are estimated at approximately 7,000 cubic yards. Access to the proposed lots would be provided through a new 42-foot wide internal access road (Road A) that will access off of NE Sunset Boulevard on the southern portion of the subject site. The proposed access road will terminate in a hammerh_ead turn around. The new right-of-way would include 32 feet of pavement, with curb gutter and sidewalks on both sides of the street. A modification has been granted reducing the right-ot-way width at the terminus of the hammerhead to 20 feet. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.21C, 1971 as amended), on March 14, 2006, the Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M) for the Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat. The DNS-M included 8 mitigation measures. A 14- day appeal period commenced on March 20, 2006 and ended on April 3, 2006. No appeals of the threshold determination were filed. 3. COMPLIANCE WITH ERC MITIGATION MEASURES 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: 1. The earthwork activities to be conducted onsite shall only be permitted to occur during the dry months of the year. 2. The applicant to comply with the recommendations found in the preliminary geotechnical site evaluation prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services dated July 22, 2005 and the follow up geotechnical evaluation dated February 12, 2006. 3. The applicant shall be required to provide a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) designed pursuant to the Department ot Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements outlined in Volume II of the Stormwater Management Manual and provide staff with a Construction Mitigation Plan prior to issuance of Construction Permits. This condition shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division. Hexrpt 05-118.doc City of Renton PIBIPW Department HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTA TES PRELiMINARY PLA T • Preliminary Re~rt to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: May 9, 2006 Page 50f14 4. The applicant shall be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Wetland Study report prepared by Habitat Technologies dated September 23, 2005 and the Supplemental Stream Study and Mitigation Plan prepared by Ecological Land Services, Inc. dated December 9,2005. 5. The detention system for this project shall be required to comply with the requirements found in the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention (conservation flow control -Level 2) and water quality improvements. 6. The applicant shall pay a Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per each new single family lot prior to the recording of the final plat. 7. The applicant shall pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee in the amount of $75 per net new average daily trip prior to the recording of the final plat. 8. Staff recommends that the applicant pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on $488.00 per new single family lot prior to the recording of the final plat. 4. STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS Representatives from various City departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and address site plan issues from 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 the report. 5. CONSISTENCY WITH PRELIMINARY PLAT CRITERIA: Approval of a plat is based upon several factors. The following preliminary plat criteria have been established to assist decision makers in the review of the subdivision: A. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan Designation. The subject site is designated Residential Medium Density (RMD) on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The RMD designation is intended to create the opportunity for neighborhoods that offer a variety of lot sizes, housing, and ownership options. Residential Medium Density neighborhoods should include a variety of unit types designed to incorporate features from both single-family and multi-family developments, support cost-efficient housing, facilitate infill development, encourage use of transit service, and promote the efficient use of urban services and infrastructure. The proposed plat is consistent with the following Residential Medium Density policies and objectives: Land Use Element Policy LU-161. Support residential development incorporating a hierarchy of streets. Street networks should connect through the development to existing streets, avoid "cul-de-sac" or dead end streets, and be arranged in a grid street pattern (or a flexible grid street system if there are environmental constraints). The proposed access to the new lots would be a new 42-foot wide right-of-way (Road A), which terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A through street connecting to the north the NE 1 ih Place is not required due to the topography of the subject property. In addition if a through street were required the property owner to the north would be precluded from subdividing due to the requirement for providing the remaining road connection between NE 1ih Place and Road A. Policy LU-162. Development densities in the Residential Medium Density designation area should range from seven (7) to eighteen (18) dwelling units per net acre, as specified by implementing zoning. The proposed plat would result in a net density of 9.57, which is within the density range permitted. Policy LU-164. When a minimum density is applicable, the minimum development density in the Residential Medium Density designation should be four (4) dwelling units per net acre. . The proposed plat would exceed the minimum density of 4 dwelling units per acre required. Hexrpl 05-118.doc , . City of Renton PIBIPW Deparlment , , Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTA TES PR€LiMINARY PLAT " LUA-05-118, ECF. PP, CAR, V-H PUBLIC HEARING DATE: May 9, 2006 Page 60f14 Policy LU-165. Provision of small lot, single-family detached unit types, townhouses, and multi-family structures compatible with a single-family character should be allowed and encouraged in the Residential Medium Density designation, provided that density standards can be met (see also the Housing Element for housing types). . The proposed development would result in the creation of small single-family lots and would comply with the density requirements. Objective LU-II: Residential Medium Density development should be urban in form and fit into existing residential neighborhoods if developed as infill projects. The proposed development is urbaninfill as the proposed lots are small and the front yards are oriented towards the proposed street. In addition the proposed single-family lots would be compatible with the existing development in the surrounding neighborhood. Policy LU-171. Buildings should front the street rather than be organized around interior courtyards or parking areas. All of the proposed lots would have front yards facing the proposed street (Road A). Policy LU-174. Single-family detached building types in the Residential Medium Density designation should have a maximum lot coverage by the primary structure of fifty (50) percent. , The R-10 zoning regulations permit a maximum building lot coverage for detached single-family structures of 70%. No single family residences will be permitted which would exceed the 70% maximum permitted under the R-10 zoning regulations. Community Design Element Objective CD-C: Promote re-investment in and upgrade of existing neighborhoods through redevelopment of small, underutilized parcels, modification and alteration of older housing stock, and improvements to streets and sidewalks to increase property values. The proposed subdivision would upgrade the existing neighborhood through the replacement of the existing residence with 9 new single family residences and landscaping improvements. The proposed new homes would update the existing neighborhood and increase the surrounding property values. Policy CD-12. Infill development, defined as new short plats of nine or fewer lots, should be encouraged in order to add variety, updated housing stock, and new vitality to neighborhoods. The proposed plat would create 9 lots for the construction of 9 new single family residences, updating the housing stock iii the existing neighborhood. Environmental Element Objective EN-C: Protect and enhance the City's rivers, major and minor creeks and intermittent stream courses. The' proposed subdivision would protect the stream flowing across the north eastern portion of the property and it's associated buffer. Policy EN-70. Land uses on steep slopes should be designed to prevent property damage and environmental degradation, and to enhance greenbelt and wildlife habitat values by preserving and en- hancing existing vegetation to the maximum extent possible. The protected slope areas on the subject site would be protected within a sensitive area tract. No residential structures are proposed on the protected slope or within the recommended protected slope buffer area as speCified in the applicant's geotechnical report. A stormwater outfall pipe is proposed on Hexrpt 05-118.doc :1. City of Renton PIBIPW Department HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTA TES PRELIMINARY PLA T PUBLIC HEARiNG DA TE: May 9, 2006 ipreliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H Page 7 of 14 the protected slope through a sensitive area.variance. See further discussion below in the Variance Section. Policy EN-71. AI/ow land alteration only for approved development proposals or approved mitigation efforts that will not create unnecessary erosion, undermine the support of nearby land, or unnecessarily scar the landscape. The applicant has proposed to alter the protected slope area for the installation of a stormwater outlet pipe on the slope and has requested a variance from the City's sensitive area requirements for the installation of the pipe. See further discussion below under the Variance Section. B. Compliance with the Underlying Zoning Designation. The 1.8-acre site is deSignated Residential -10 Dwelling Units per Acre (R-10) on the City of Renton Zoning Map. The proposed development would allow for the future construction of up to 10 new single-family residential units. Density -The allowed maximum density in the R-10 zone is 10.0 dwelling units per net acre (dulac) and the minimum density permitted is 4.0 dwelling units per net acre (dulac). Net density is calculated after public rights-of-way, private access easements, and critical areas are deducted from the gross acreage of the site. After the deduction of 7,524 square feet of proposed Road A and 29,947 square feet for the sensitive areas on site from the gross lot area, the proposal for 9 lots would result in a net density of 9.57 dwelling units per acre (78,512 gross sq. ft. -7,524 sq. ft. -29,947 sq. ft. = 41,041 sq. ft. or 0.94 ac, 9 units I 0.94 acres = 9.57 dulac). The proposed plat appears to comply with density requirements for the R-10 zoning designation. Lot Dimensions and Size -The minimum lot size required is 3,000 sq ft. The minimum lot width required is. 30 ft for interior lots and 40 feet for corner lots; and a minimum lot depth of 55 feet is required. Proposed lot widths range from 36 to 60 feet and lot depths range from 66 feet to 100 feet. The proposed plat would create 9 lots with the following lot sizes: . Lot Number Lot Size (square feet) Access 1 3,437 Road A 2 3,793 Road A 3 4,333 Road A 4 3,208 Road A 5 3,194 Road A 6 3,708 Road A 7 3,000 Road A 8 3,358 Road A 9 3,419 Road A As proposed, all lots appear to be in compliance' ""ith the required lot width, depth and size standards as prescribed in the R-8 zone. In addition, the proposal includes 2 tracts one is for stormwater detention, one is for sensitive areas. The proposed stormwater diction tract (Tract A) is 5,587 square feet in area and the proposed sensitive area tract (Tract B) is 34,389 square feet in area. Setbacks -In the R-10 zone, the minimum front yard setback is 10 feet for the primary structure and 20 feet for an attached garage, the side yard along a street setback is 10 feet for the primary structure and 20 feet for attached garages, which access from the side yard, the Sige yard setback is 5 feet, and the rear yard setback is 15 feet, however if the new lot abuts an existing lot zonedR-8 then a 25-foot setback is required. Proposed Lots 3-6 would have rear yards abutting an· R-8 zoned property; therefore these lots shall be required to provide 25-foot rear yard setbacks. All other proposed lots would have a 15-foot rear yard setback. The proposed lots appear to contain adequate area to provide for the construction of single family residences' after the consideration of the setback requirements. Compliance with these setback standards will be verified prior to the issuance of individual building permits. Hexrpt 05-118.doc City of Renton PIBIPW Department }. HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTA TES PRELiMINARY PLA T PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: May 9, 2006 __ ) Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H Page 80(14 Building Standards -The R-10 zone permits one residential structure per lot a residential structure may be permitted with up to 4 residential units. However, the proposed subdivision limits the number of dwelling units permissible on the subject site'to 9 units. Therefore, the proposed lots will be limited to 1 single family dwelling unit per lot. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that a note be recorded on the face of the final plat stating that no more than 1 single family dwelling unit is permitted on each lot. An existing residence is proposed to be removed from the subject site. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of plat approval that a demolition permit be obtained and all inspections completed on the demolition of the existing residence prior to final plat approval. Accessory structures are permitted at a maximum number of two per lot at 720 sq ft each, or one per lot at 1,000 sq ft in size. Accessory structures are permitted only when associated with a primary structure located on the same parcel. Building height in the R-10 zone is limited to two stories and 30 feet for primary structures and 15 feet for detached accessory structures. Maximum building coverage is 70% and the maximum impervious surface area permitted is 75%. The proposal's compliance with these build,ing standards would be verified prior to the issuance of individual building permits. . Parking -Each detached dwelling unit is required to provide two off-street parking stalls per unit. The proposed building pads appear to be adequately sized for the provision of the required parking. Landscaping - A conceptual landscape plan has been provided that proposes a 10-foot landscaped strip along the properties NE Sunset Blvd frontage, and a 5-foot landscape strip within Lot 2 and 7 along the frontage of proposed Road A. In addition 11 Serviceberry trees are proposed within the front yards of the proposed lots. The proposed landscaped strips would be vegetated with Newport Dwarf Escallonia, Dwarf Mugo Pine, and Fountain Grass. The applicant will be required to submit a detailed landscaping plan to the Development Services Division for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. C. Compliance with Subdivision Regulations Lot Arrangement: Side lot lines are to be at right angles to street lines, and each lot must have access to a public street or road. Access may be by private access easement per the requirements of the Street Improvement Ordinance. As proposed, the lots appear to comply with arrangement and access requirements of the Subdivision Regulations. Lots: The size,shape and orientation of lots shall meet the minimum area and width requirements of the applicable. zoning classification and shall be appropriate for the type of development and use contemplated. Each of the proposed lots is rectangular in shape, oriented to provide front yards facing a street, and satisfies the minimum lot area and dimension requirements of the R-10 zone. When considering the required setbacks, as well as access points for each lot, the proposed lots appear to have sufficient building area for the development of detached single family homes. Property Corners at Intersections: All lot corners at intersections of dedicated public rights-of-way. except alleys, shall have minimum radius of 15 feet. . Access and Street Improvements: Access to the site is proposed via a new internal access road off of NE Sunset Blvd, which terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. Full street improvements (including paving, sidewalks, curb and gutter, storm drains, landscaping, street lighting and signage) will be required along the frontage of NE Sunset Blvd and new Road A. A modification was granted February 16th, 2006 to allow for a reduced right-of-way width at the northern terminus of Road A down to a minimum width of 20 feet. In order to ensure efficient emergency access to the development is not obstructed, staff recommends' as a condition of preliminary plat approval the applicant be required to place "No Parking" signage along the hammerhead prior to final plat approval. In addition, staff recommends a condition of approval requiring the establishment of a homeowner's association or maintenance agreement for the development, which would be responsible for any common improvements and/or tracts within the plat prior to final plat approval. Hexrpt 05-118.doc City of Renton PIBIPW Department HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: May 9, 2006 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-11B, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H Page 90'14 To rnitigate impacts to the local street system, the City's Environmental Review Committee imposed mitigation· on the project in the form of the requirement for payment of a Traffic Mitigation Fee. The Traffic. Mitigation Fee is based on $75 per net new average daily trip attributed to the proposed subdivision. The proposed 8 new residential lots would be expected to generate approximately 76.56 new average weekday trips (8 new homes x 9.57 trips per home = 76.56). The fee for the proposed plat is estimated to be $5,472 (76.56 total trips x $75.00 = $5,472) and is payable prior to the recording of the plat. Topography and Vegetation: The topography of the subject site slopes from south to north and has an average slope of approximately 19.7%. Moderate Landslide Hazard Areas, Erosion Hazard Areas, and Sensitive Slope areas are located on the majority of the subject site. Protected Slope Areas (slopes greater than 40%) a class 3 stream and a category 3 wetland are located within proposed Tract B. Two preliminary site evaluation reports (Reports 2 and 3) prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services dated July 22, 2005 and February 12, 2006 were SUbmitted. The soils underlying the development area consist of Beausite gravelly sandy loam (BeC). Based on the existing site topography, the applicant's project engineer estimates that approximately 5,000 cubic yards of fill and 2,000 cubic yards of cuts (which will be used as fill elsewhere on the site) will be required to achieve proposed elevations. The subsurface conditions of the subject site were evaluated by excavating four test pits. The report states that the test pits were excavated to a maximum depth of 13.5 feet. A surficial layer of topsoil and sod was identified within the first 6 inches of soil at all of the test pit locations. Underlying the topsoil, brown to reddish brown, loose, SAND-SILT (SM) some gravel, occasional cobble was encountered to a depth ranging from 2.5 feet to 4 feet below the surface. Underlying the loose SAND-SILT soil in Test Pits 1-3, gay-brown to gray, dense to very dense GRAVEL-SAND occasional cobble to SAND occasional cobble (GP-SP) was encountered to the termination depth of Test Pits 1 and 2 and to a depth of 10.5 feet in Test Pit 3. From a depth of 10.5 feet and extending to a depth of 13.5 feet (the termination . depth), gray, very hard GRAVEL-SAND-SIL T (GM), occasional cobble (glacial till) was encountered. In Test Pit 4, gray, very hard GRAVEL-SAND-SILT (GM), occasional cobble (glacial till) was encountered underlying the reddish brown, loose SAND-SILT (SM) at a depth of about 3.75 feet to 6 feet, the termination depth. No ground water was encountered in any of the test pits. Due to the soils located on site, the geotechnical engineer recommended that earthwork activities be limited to occurring during only the dry months of the year. . Tempof(:lry Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (TESCP) and the use of Best Management Practices would serve to mitigate potential erosion and off-site sedimentation impacts. The project application includes a Construction Mitigation Plan, which is subject to final approval prior to the issuance of construction permits for the project. In addition, the project will be subject to the 2001 DOE manual regarding erosion control, as conditioned by the ERC. Staff from the City's Plan Review Section has reviewed the submitted geotechnical information. Due to the existence of steep slopes in the site and the soils classification (potential erosion) shown on the . Preliminary Site Evaluation dated February 12, 2006 staff advises that prior to any construction a complete Geotech Report be provided. The Geotechnical Engineering Services -Preliminary Site Evaluation dated July 22, 2005 and dated February 12, 2006 do not provide sufficient information regarding earthwork, site clearing, excavation, soils materials and erosion. The City's critical area regulations require that critical areas (including protected slopes, wetlands, and Class 2-4 streams) be protected under a Native Growth Protection Easement (NGPE). Therefore, Tract B shall have a NGPE recorded over it. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that a Native Growth Protection Easement shall be recorded over Tract B prior to the recording of the final plat map. In addition, staff further recommends as a condition of approval that Tract B be delineated with a split rail fence and identified with signage as approved by the Development Services Division Project Manager. A fencing and signage detail shall be submitted to the Development Services Division project manager at the time of Utility Construction Permit for review and approval and that such fencing and signage shall be installed prior to the recording of the final plat. The subject site is primarily vegetated with second growth alder, Douglas fir, and maple trees. The ground cover includes predominantly blackberry, fern, and ivy. The information submitted by the applicant indicates that the majority of the vegetation located on the western portion of the site would be Hexrpt 05-118.doc City of Renton PIB/PW Department , HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTA TES PRELIMINARY PLA T PUBLIC HEARING DATE: May 9, 2006 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-11B, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H Page 100f14 removed for the construction of the proposed short plat improvements, driveways, and building pads. RMC 4-4-070 indicates that existing trees and other vegetation shall be used to augment new plantings for landscaping where practical, and RMC 4-7-130 requires that a reasonable effort should be made to preserve existing trees. A Determination was made by the Director of Development Services that the retention or replacement of 25% of the existing trees would achieve these requirements. As significant grading is required on the subject site for the construction of Road A and the proposed building pads, the retention of existing trees outside of the sensitive area tract (Tract B) is not possible. A landscape plan was submitted with the project application proposing the replace the 103 existing trees with 11 AB Serviceberry trees, which would result in the replacement of 11 % of the existing trees. Staff has reviewed the proposed landscape plan and due to the small size of the proposed lots, it appears that the proposed replacement of 11 % of the trees is the maximum number of trees than can be replaced on the subject site. The proposed replacement trees would be 1 Yz inch caliper trees, the City's determination specifies that the replacement trees shall be a minimum of 2-inch caliper trees. Therefore, the proposed tree replacement plan is approved subject to the condition that the caliper of the replacement trees be increased to 2 inches. As previously noted, a Category 3 wetland is located on the eastern portion of the subject property. A Category 3 wetland requires a 25-foot buffer. No impacts are proposed to the wetland or its buffer. A Class 3 stream runs through the northeastern portion of the subject property. A Class 3 stream requires a 75-foot buffer; however as the stream buffer is located within a Protected Slope, the buffer extends to the top of the slope. A storm drainage outlet pipe is proposed to be located within the proposed stream buffer. Storm drainage facilities are permitted within stream buffers per RMC 4-3-050C and a letter of exemption for the location of the storm drainage outlet pipe within the stream buffer has been granted. A mitigation plan was submitted with the project application and proposes to replace' the vegetation removed for the storm drainage outlet pipe with vegetation that will not impact the pipe. No other impacts are proposed to the stream or its buffer. Relationship to Existing Uses: Single family residential homes surround the subject site. The proposed detached single family residences would be compatible with the surrounding development D. Availability and Impact on Public Services (Timeliness) Police and Fire: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicate that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development, subject to the applicant's provision of Code required improvements and fees. Therefore, the City's Environmental Review Committee is requiring the applicant to pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on $488.00 per new single-family home. The fee is estimated at $1,952.00 (8 new lots x $488.00 = $1,952.00) and is payable prior to the recording of the plat. Recreation: The proposal does not provide on-site recreation areas for future residents of the proposed plat. There are no existing recreational facilities in the immediate vicinity of the subject property and it is antiCipated that the proposed development would generate future demand on existing City Parks and recreational facilities and programs. Therefore, the City's Environmental Review Committee is requiring the applicant to pay a Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per new single-family home. The fee is estimated at $4,246.08 (8 new lots x $530.76 = $4,246.0~) and is also payable prior to the recording of the piaL The City of Renton Trail Plan identifies a potential link to the existing Honey Creek Trail on the eastern portion of the .subject property within Tract B. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval the dedication of a trail easement within Tract B for the Honey Creek Trail. The Parks Department has indicated that a portion of the Parks Mitigation Fee may be waived with the dedication of the easement. Schools: The site is located within the boundaries of the Renton School District No. 403. According to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the City of Renton Land Use Element (January 16, 1992), the City of Renton has a student generation factor of 0.44 students per single-family residential dwelling. Based on the student generation factor, the proposed plat would potentially result in 4 additional students (0.44 x 8 = 3.5). The schools would include: Sierra Heights Elementary School, McKnight Middle School, and Sierra Heights High School. The school district has indicated that they would be able to handle to addftional students coming from the proposed development. Hexrpt 05-118.doc City of Renton PIB/PW Department HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTA TES PRELIMINARY PLA T PUBLIC HEARING DATE: May 9, 2006 j Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H Page 11 of 14 Storm Drainage/Surface Water: A preliminary storm drainage report prepared by Preferred Engineering, LLC, dated September 22, 2005 was submitted with the project application. The existing surface water runoff sheet flows to the north into Honey Creek. The proposed onsite vehiclJlar flows and other impervious runoff would be treated within a two cell detention and water quality vault. The proposed vault would be located within the north central portion of the site within Tract A ahd would discharge into Honey Creek. The City's Environmental Review Committee imposed a mitigation measure on the project requiring that the storm drainage system comply with a higher standard for flow control. The project is required to comply with the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention (conservation flow control -Level 2) and water quality improvements. The proposed vault is required to have a separate building permit. The applicant shall submit separate structural plans for review and approval under a separate building permit for the proposed vault. A special inspection from the building department is required during the construction of the vault. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that thestormwater detention tract (Tract A) be landscaped, and irrigated (unless drought tolerant plants are used) appropriately. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan for the review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager prior to recording of the plat. A Surface Water System Development Charge, based on the current rate of $759.00 per new single- family lot, would be required prior to the issuance of construction permits for the plat. Water and Sanitary Sewer Utilities: The proposed development is within the City of Renton's water and sewer service area. The project is located within the 565-pressure zone. There is an existing 12-inch water main in NE Sunset Blvd that can deliver a flow rate of 4,500 gallons per minute (gpm). The static water pressure is about 70 psi at street elevation (see City water civil drawing no. W-0315). The proposed project is located within the Aquifer Protection Zone 2. Water main improvements within the new development will be required to provide the required fire flow demand and for domestic water service for this project. The improvements will include but not be limited to the following: II A water main extension (8-inch minimum diameter) within the new street. The maximum available flow rate from -this water main extension will be 1,250 gpm (unless looped system is in place). It Fire hydrants, domestic and landscape water meters. All new construction must have a fire hydrant capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 gpm and must be located within 300 feet of the structures. Existing hydrants will require a quick disconnect Storz fitting, if not already in place. The Water System Development Charge (SDC) would be triggered at the single-family rate of $1,956 per new single-family per building lot. This fee is payable at the time the utility construction permit is issued. A sewer main extension along the new street will be required. All sewer mains outside Right-of-Way require a 15-foot lltility easement with drivable access throughout the easement Existing septic systems shall be abandoned in accordance with King County Health prior to recording of the plat. Sewer main shall be extended to provide separate side sewers _stubs to all lots. This parcel is subject to the Honey Creek 8611 Special Assessment District (SAD). The fee is $250.00/lot. Fees are collected at the time the utility construction permit is issued. This parcel is also subject to the Honey Creek frontage 8612 Special Assessment District (SAD). The fee is $74.38 per ft offrontage along Honey Creek. The Sanitary Sewer System Development Charges (SDC) is $1,017 per lot. This fee is payable at the time the utility construction permit is issued. The proposed plat layout indicates that sewer would be provided to the subject site via a sewer easement granted from the property owner to the north. If a sewer easement is not granted for use by the subject site, an alternate sanitary sewer location must be provided. An alternate sewer location may require additional land us~ approvals prior to the installation of the sewer main. Hexrpt 05-118.doc City of Renton PIBIPW Department, J HONEY CREEK ViEW ESTA TES PRELIMINARY PLA T PUBLIC HEARING DATE: May 9, 2006 5. CONSISTENCY WITH VARIANCE CRITERIA: ,Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-118 ECF, PP, CAR, V-H Page 12 of 14 The Hearing Examiner shall have authority to grant a variance upon making a determination, in writing, that the conditions specified below have been found to exist. Section 4-9-250B.10 lists 10 criteria that the Hearing Examiner is asked to consider, along with all other relevant information, in making a decision on a Variance application. These include the following: 1. Public policies have been evaluated and it has been determined by the Department Administrator that the public's health, safety, and welfare is best served; The proposed variance is requested to permit the location of a stormwater discharge pipe on a Protected Slope. The granting of the variance would permit the development of the property in a manner that would provide for better protection of the slope than if the variance were denied. The denial of the variance would require the applicant to discharge the surface water at the top of the slope, which would then flow down the slope and into Honey Creek. If the surface water were discharged at the top of the slope, the stormwater could cause erosion on the slope and compromise the integrity of the slope. Therefore the granting of the variance would be in the best interest of the public. 2. Each facility must conform to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and with any adopted public programs and policies; The proposeclstormwater detention facility is part of a residential subdivision proposal, see discussion above for compliance with the Comprehensive Land Use pOlicies. 3. Each facility must serve established, identified public needs; The proposed stormwater discharge pipe is anticipated to serve the surface water runoff needs of the residents of the subdivision and prevent and excess of surface water runoff from leaving the project site and damaging other properties downstream. 4. No practical alternative exists to meet the needs; There is not practical alternative to placing the stormwater outlet pipe on the slope, the alternative would involve discharging the stormwater at the top of the slope, which could cause erosion on the slope and compromise the stability of the slope . . 5. The proposed action takes affirmative and appropriate measures to minimize and compensate for unavoic)able impacts; A stream buffer mitigation plan was submitted with the project materials to mitigate for the impacts of removing vegetation from the Protected Slope, which also functions as the stream buffer for Honey Creek; The impacted area is proposed to be restored and replanted with vegetation that would have roots that would not impactthe integrity of the stormwater outlet pipe. 6. The proposed activity results in no net loss of regulated wetland or stream/lake area, value, or function in the drainage basin where the wetland, stream or lake is located; The proposed pipe would not impact any wetlands or streams. The proposed stormwater outlet pipe would comply with the requirements found in the 2005 King County Stormwater Management Manual as required by the City's Environmental Review Committee. 7. The proposed activities will not jeopardize the continued existence of endangered, threatened or sensitive species as listed by the Federal government or the State; The proposed pipe would not jeopardize any endangered, threatened or sensitive species. 8. That the proposed activities will not cause significant degradation of groundwater or surface water quality; The installation of the proposed stormwater outlet pipe will be required to comply with the requirements found in the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual to ensure that no surface or ground water quality would be degraded. Hexrpt 05-118.doc City of Renton PIB/PW Department HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT PUBLIC HEARING DATE: May 9, 2006 IPreliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-118, ECF, PP CAR V-H . Page 13 of 14 9. The approval as determined by the Hearing Examiner is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose; and The proposed location of the stormwater outlet pipe within the protected slope area is the minimum variance that will accommodate the purpose of discharging stormwater from the stormwater detention system constructed for the proposed plat into Honey Creek. 10. The proposed variance is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195;,905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4- 9-250F are followed. The location of the proposed pipe was based on the analysis done by the applicant's engineer that the location on the protected slope was the preferred location. The mitigation plan prepared by Ecological Land Services, Inc. dated December 9, 2005 to mitigate for the impacts to the stream buffer was prepared in accordance with best available science. H. RECOMMENDA TION: Staff recommends APPROVAL of the Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat and Variance, Project File No. LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, V-H subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated that was issued by the Environmental Review Committee on March 14, 2006. 2. A note shall be recorded on the face of the final plat stating that no more than 1 single family dwelling unit is permitted on each lot. 3. A demolition permit shall be obtained and all inspections completed on the demolition of the existing residence prior to final plat approval. 4. The applicant shall be required to place "No P~3rking" signage along the hammerhead prior to final plat approval. 5. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement shall be created concurrently with the recording of the final plat in order to establish maintenance responsibilities for shared roadway, stormwater and utility improvements. A draft of the document(s) shall be submitted to the City of Renton Development Services Division for review and approval by the City Attorney and Property Services section prior to the recording of the final plat. 6. A Native Growth Protection Easement shall be recorded over Tract B prior to the recording of the final plat map. 7. The proposed sensitive area tract (Tract B) shall be delineated with a split rail fence and identified with signage as approved by the Development Services Division Project Manager. A fencing and signage detail shall be submitted to the Development Services Division project manager at the time of Utility Construction Permit for review and approval and that such fencing and signage shall be installed prior to the recording of the final plat. 8. The landscape plan shall be revised to show that 2-inch caliper trees shall be provided within the interior of the plat as opposed to the 1 /'2-inch caliper trees proposed. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted prior to final plat approval. 9. A trail easement within Tract B shall be dedicated to the City of Renton Parks Department for the Honey Creek Trail. The easement shall be required to be dedicated prior to or concurrently with the recording of the final plat. 10. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan for the storm water detention tract (Tract A). Proposed landscaping shall either be drought tolerant or irrigated. The landscape plan shall be submitted at the Hexrpt 05-11B.doc City of Renton PIBIPW Department HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT PUBLIC HEARING DATE: May 9, 2006 ! Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H Page 14 of 14 time of Utility Construction Permit application to the Development Services Division project manager for review and approval. The landscaping shall be installed prior to recording of the final plat. EXPIRATION PERIODS: Preliminary Plats (PP): Five (5) years from final approval (signature) date. Hexrpt 05-118.doc ~ .... -- .( , \, ---- ..... . " 0 .", I(') '0 0 ~ t; CI) ..0 E <-::J Z U CI) '0 ~ 0- f I I I I I w t:: I CI') I ~ ~ fI1 0.. 0.. pEVEIOPER' PI< EIITtAPR ... 23Q3S SE 2!3n1 S'IREE'r WFLL VALLEY. 'itA ~e038 ~o':l~'~fk .. PORTION OF NE 1/4, SW 1/4, SE .1/4, SEC 4 TWN 23N.,R5E, W.M. f. ~ PRUERRED ENQINEERtNO. u.c PO BOX 284:H F'EM:RAL WA't, WA D1!IOI3-2422 PHC~!> 501-5708 ~~:~EUlR,P!: EW.n..: A/)WltoIOPE\.LC.ORO ~ INF'ORWEO WIt) SURYE'r', LLC 1701 SOUTH SHERJ[Wt I'NE. TACOWt. 'itA P8405 i~II18-2:tU fX:tS3 1527-~170 , PM ""'RI'. PLS * o * o NO. I r-_~"II""\ --o •. "EIIIlIIIMIIIU ... ~ OJ III w:r--- IN THE em rw MJrI1tIH. OOUKIY Of' ICIJrI2,. IrATE Of ~. o ~~~f;:'~~R:O&~~iA~'t: C';:r/~~CR£T£ WAI.K RETURN ro THE EAST ON THE EAST SIDE Of' NE"MJORT AV£", N.E. oet SUNSeT 8£.\ID, CITY RENroN 8M , 750 GENERAL HYDROLOGICAL NOlES' . . , .. '1"'" ...•• , I "".r ..... ,\.~: , ,~ . 1 ," f TOTAL PARCn MEA ZONINO MIN.lDT'Nm """ LOr AREA ~LOr""" TRACT 'It AR£A _ STUP Sl.OP£ ,. OH'IIIN NttA • STREIT ROW 8Q " _ FROHT ....... -"""""" ..... ..,...... 'LOTS~ • • LOTS f . f,· .~"". .... ,.,._~I""" . \ SCALE: ," -2~' I SC COR SEC 4-2J-5 (CONe. MON. IN CASF: \\ I SF: 112 •• STRUT" IJ2M AVCNUF: 5... ~ CCS'T1tfQ TUT •• rTO_ ......... •• '-'. ,.,.,. ... (,.so ......, D!ST1NO IWPmVIOUS AR£A DI1SI1HO_""" (nmm c:rMR It ClR.ISS) • t.l~ ". (0.028 ACRES) , LOTS P!IIIGT1Q) • • LOTS (CnY OF RENTON ............, 1>6<1 COtTRUCTION REVISION ~:' ~:. !!l:a ~:I!/ ;f "': BY I ~TE I APPR • 17.2'''' ., (1,17 .... 1:1) TJW:f 'A' POND MIA • e..aB1.1 SF' (If PNICO. ~~~~~u;-.~ ~ --lUI """b I ~:.-; I DEVELQPER' ~ .. .,.,..".,... _ ...... w: WAPlE 'W'AU.lY. WA PO BOX 2&4U (:l.O8) 221-744& ~ WAY. WA 1OD8J CON1ACT: PHIL Kll2D (201) 8Ot-0700 PORTION OF NE 1/4, SW 1/4, SE 1/4, SEC 4 TWN 23N., R5E, W.M. .. "' .. ---T----t----r---- I / I I I L JCINf • m • ..! wo.£NT I . I •. _.) I I ~I =, ----~r ;, :j L,,'rr~ .. O. tJ NoRTH OF UNE: p........,b. -..JSS JI~ I -~--__ J i "''''' r~ _,\S~ I +V" I ~i-I 0 BENCHMARK ELEVA nON _ _ __ _ _ __ ~ EX PATIO CHISE:L£O SOUARE -406.77' ., N ....,...... ... ... _ -I..! _ REruRN TO mo 'A"s~· CORNER CONCRETE: WALK 4.: :: .. FiH. -~~ to Nr'-PORT A 110. N £ .. ~NUN mE EAsr SIO£ OF -Lo..~ •. ,; .• ,. _. CITY RENTON BI>i i 750 SET BL w, -!--. [£J [£J m m :j::I: :jI¢: P. ,fA. 4+ NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION NOTE: IX. un.rne:s ME APPROXIWATE ONLY CAU. t ....eoo-.42.-MSO BEFORt DICCINQ 6; POTHOU: IJMKHOWN EX. IJfLIT1ES BOOR! COHSTRUCnOfrt BtQIHS. 1l!l SCALE: 1" .. 20' ! --~ 1 I POYt'ER VAULT 9,~ ,.-"-,,,~ _ •• "~ ttLEPH""E ~£ "2th iTri££r .t~n~! ~~ i~N VAUl.T CAP/PUJO >--< STORt.I DRAIN CULWRT >--< I> <l 6. COUPUNQ; @ @ STORIoIDlUAN ..... ou; W£QiANCAl 'THRUST 8LOQ( 2 ... NOZZLE HlCRJ.HT 8l III TEE PBEUMINAAY ~ c ~ c.. L 1 -~1~-------' ==~~~~~~~==~~~I ) PQ'ELEV • • 3113.0, II I I I .38I!.S II p~~:II' , ,-I _~~ .1 " I---,-J , PAD '£LEV • ...... PROPOSEO ,,\ CLEARING UMITS = c:a:e. m m E-E- m m M .. ~ 415 I .. '6E~Eb!Q R<lCIWt< D POWI[R VAULT· 0 ". 'UlLITY N.I UnUTY IPCU " 0 .. .. ,.,.. ~>----< lUEPHCII<I: ~"" .;, 1EuPHH VAULT @ @ IlATt/ODIEAAl. ' VI 5Tft. =j 1+55 P~ ELEV· ... ~91.~~ A,D ..... -J,OO ' ~. SDII!R a.£AN til! 8M. SlIER WANHDL£ " 8TtIIW ORAiN CA'IOt 84SN , S,TCIRW GRAIN CUL'4:RT 11<RUST ...... : S'FORW DRAIN IUoNHCU PEVELOPER' PI( ENTtRMlSiES :uo.ss SE 21JAD STREEr • WAPLE VN.L£Y. WA 8II03B (:t081227-7 ... , ccwtACf: PHlWP I<fT'ZE!i ~ PRUEARED £NrJlNI:ERWIt, LLC PO aox 2&4.22: . FtDeRAL WAY. VIA,98083-2422 ('DO) ZlIOI-4108 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION I NOTE: EX. ununm 1M. APPROX1W.TE ONLY CAIJ. _ 1-800-424-1$5156 B£FCRE DIOOINCil .. PCmiOt.£ UNKNOWN • EX. UfumES BEf'OR£ CONSTRUCTlON B!OIN9. t SCALE: 1"-20'- iD.Ei1ifO ~ ~---101 I 410~ ~i J I 50,OO'r t II I I I: .,8 7t ~ OJ) .. _ 0 j y 410 .... 0 ' i!:@; " 4051--.J: '" ~ I--I. ,I, -r---=42ll ' "l, ",~-' -.--. 400 ~ .' ~ ~ . ,'~'~=5~~u 115 I 1" T , ~, '" , " 50.00' YC !i1 r 1 405 400, . _. ~ '.0'" '" 395 ' ' ." '-~ " ~. ~ ! I I I 1 '1 . ,..... ' " ., , I ,I ~ .. ' H .' 1,,' ......~ \ "-, ." I r I l-l Il,; , , if'""' ' " ~~ :'''"_ ' 0 M''''"~" '" . ,:;"~ ~ ~ V" L _~ 0,,00 ~_, ." .,' • ,....,.-.,T "1 , c_' _ ro. . \ c- 395 390 1- Nf:WPORT A\o£" .. • .' ; ,,~ , CITY Rf:NrON," 380 " ' " ' -5,0 -<.t.dO. .. ~" .00;.,.... 'rl " ," . ..,.~ , . 1 .. ~ .. ,' '. ,~" "~ . ' I,~ ,.",,", ___ ~. , l' " ' o· '''~ " m -",.M;\r--,,' " .. _-. N ",.;",," ' • ,. ' " -~ w .... "_ "~ , ", I' ~.'~ ::: LII,' I ' I ' I .' . '-'-'--~ Ih 365 380 ,..". I'W I ~v r.;,.-r-.--r. ~E.:.::r", ~_ I r ,,1--"<- -~-/~ :~~ +--';'~" , : 1:11'011"'. .. --=.." ,I I r§1"370' I' I ,I ' .... ~ ~,~ I l 49' ---' ~ I~~ .. I I I ' '~~o3~~"" '. ~~p65 " ! I I ~~T~~IN~ »;~ I) \ I J I ---·I..JOV 'C " '" 3+00 " .; :l! '" .,; ill 3+40 :!' "~ I -" -.-01".1 "~ '~t.~~:::r.,arr~ "~~~~.( t.':;"_~ " "_tHE~~. "'~ •• "'-:C-~-;;:I-I'-".,....,- ~i.' "0\1 .0Ir , PROPOSED RO;AD PROPOSED ROAD -,PUBUCRESIDENTIAL ROAD VERTICAL' CURB TYPE ROADWAY NO, REVISION ~ I' DATE I APPR ~, -.... =;;; l!.~·1 Am CITY OF ~, RENrON ~~~ro~. ~~a~e~<g" "1 HONEY CREEK VIEW PLAT 3524 NE SUNSET BLVD , RENTON, WA 98056 I...:£'/DO ,lAHNINININIAfAI I I ~ ---............... ~. ~' ~., .... ~ ........... \~'i"'~ : --L\~ ... ". ' .. ~ .. "~''''' .............. ,.-, \_~·i:' .. < .. ' . .. ,., .... f::: '~;",., . " ' "------\~---_l ____ '_~-________ _ / N.e. SUNSET BLVD. .-' ..-, /' ., --' !-/,o' ._--------------... -- PLANT LEGEND -fit::::;) ~: . ..........., .... ".,. ........ ""'IIIMN'/Io8~"" ~l .. " ........ !l..uUD"II • ....,.~ ~,fo I HII&fI'OAT DIUAtQIloc.AU.atlA G>~;..,., ..... 'fIIIMII.,.":I)UW:III'tiICkJ .... Ci)-f"'oIrIl ...... ' ...................... 'fIIO.Ittt ..... OFtA06 GIIo!IaItI: .. JiIII ~1f:,"tIr. D_ D_ , .......... -t D'" N IIOTES DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING DETAIL RO_' SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL MOJOjiji" L DO NOT DfQ WfTl. .-u. lDCIITIN/I UTlUTIU ...... 'V\'I DIIIZN LDCAmt>. I. IIIIJI!IaIIUOBO TO ~ VIdmI flCOT'~CIUI) DT ~ CCINTlIUCTOI'III '1M.I!60 --. ... tlJl!ldlUCa DlU.lJ.I!II6CNIIPI!D OA PIOTOFII.JJ!D P CQtI)IT\CIN6 fItIQ./RL "" wu.W acu •• " CIIf""f'W '44" fOPIOOlL. MI!II~ ICm,6 .... OI!P'tN J .... ,. fOPlOll.. TONCIl. IIIMALJ. .,. PUoCIH) "AU. ~ .......... I), ,. DmI'n4 UaTlJlt 011 QP:ItAC 1'1A'I'Ilf:UI. ClLtlVATIID ... ~ CIt' .. EmlP. .. I' I'1NtU1 otPfN fIfG 0RAI)8 DNIC. ~ N PL.AH1'IO BlD6.I"I.A.OI ew.tU. sa: RaIl Cf' IIIrID OlIO. T.aJrrfrOr\ IItI&IO ~ 0MDt CCIr'PQ.IrC6 Clmtf'llNfAL. to fILM 0A0IIrM. '\,AU. PL.JH1' I')AlIULt4 e.w.&. sa t4IAl.nrr.N.J. NO CCNJICIl:P1 TO ~~TICIHIJ!/I ~t~OfUCDRCOf~f'iOR N.NCfIIft' 01'CCX. iJI'fDT 1CImcN. . .. ......,.., ..... nDeAI. tIP 01%1 OR.eN) NC"f AVAILAaU """Y DB CI.IBO'tIMDD c:tt. T UfH~A&.(JP L,MCICICNIIlAACNITIrC:rAftC/M(lI;trClR. .ORGVO c:DI!1JPO 0N0Ii0a. DII ~I') ~ fMAl)JQlofCIU1' P\",MI('J'I!tO MZ)' TOFlllN.THfOfAL ~1I'n4"'JTUA6. ID, AU. maa IItf6 ~ DB -..cTID TO HII./fIIID ,."..,..,. ORANACliI. C n. I"OIITI'¥'I DMIH.IIrdI ~ sa """""MNlD.1"!C»D f"UN7:INIt NIIUO MINI'V1 QI, D • ........:Il 1foIIMI6'" P'I",,"" (116" ""'"' IMCIC ~ CI.PtIl D,~TP:IUIt ... "IJICI'V'tQ1Q·II'RI:lt'IID.AOC.(JPc:u=mr. "'''MGOCN'B ~fiU.LL.I"IAH1''''''' omr «HTn. ~ MPltCTICIN.Met ~.MCaDT ~ ~ l ... ~wrw ...... Cl.1!. eptNoOl .. ...... ,..,."., PIX (110).84'.''''' A1fIr ~~. ·' .\ EV£RCREDI TREt PLANT I NO DETA I L ...... 10 LAWN I PLANTJHO em DETAIL ...... ; --~. ,. ........... , ........... . , . ," .. . ~ ... ',": .. : .. : In....., ... ',' ' .. : ..u.w. I • GltOUJlO CCMR SPACINO DUAIL ......... GIIQIW $WOO HYDROSUD MIlt I'OR PLAflTJNO STR I 1" ~I'" ~ DX..I!!IIlIII1 IIIIIiI:IlIWDI ~~A't"IClrR4Moo'" to PNI fIUCUII .... tID ,..",,!CAnPiIM'm .·.I.D6./I,dII:IO". -CIEl) ...... ARIM """"t AlaI DMI:II: GAC:UC .fN) .... , LIM' 0" HIDI1 Mr PU:Iftm) n=aD CIA ~ u= ~'f!!." -.." Le6. t'.P -.,.6-,. "-p.t( IIIAfIUmR PUR tDIDO ec:a.w:a FlUff, NC ~TUL" 4,.46", CP l1OOO CIlW.LOCZ ftDIRtt.LC:t4 PIA ""'" IQlAfID I'nT t( AU. AAIlM to ... -0CRrDH3i tII.AIOCIH ~ I.rttrIO 10 ...... ACN .. ~., lit. AUr2UOt It· """"""" iIIrID 0MItI.L. o:HCR1to OT~ fICIIlII "CIIRr'I'lIO" GlUM OI!D OR GCI'tTDI\ AI CJIIrLIrCU) .. teeM "FU.IO POR GUO ClATPICATtON-, LArarl!D\TlClN. . ;--.. '-- ~ .e ..q- 0 W (/) ,f' .......... W (/)-2 ,f'!i .......... -~w 3:[{) (/}O:::: -,f'z .......... 1'0 ~N WZ z3: f-LL 0 z 0 i= 0:::: 0 (L ~ €I e ~~ ~. !IDfil!1 II!~ ~ ~ l! d i ~~ I ms~ ~ Ilf' Hi Iltl! =ja~ ifBUI " 'N :.. w ..J < U III ) -----~----------z o >= o ::J ~ 5 o tr o "- f-o Z ZONING PIB/PW TECHNICAL SBIlVICD JlIJ8I04 R~ ~ 1 "'00 4!f0 1:4800 D5 4 T23N R5E E 1/2 . . S304 C~TY OF RENTON DETERMINAT~ON Of NON-SIGNlf~CANCE-M!T~GATIED MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA05-118, PP, CAR, V-H, ECF APPLICANT: Phil Kitzes, PK Enterprises PROJECT NAME: Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to subdivide an existing 78,512 square foot (1.8 acre) parcel located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation into 9 lots, a stormwaterdetention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The lots range in area from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Access to the lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as right-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A class 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portion of the subject site; in addition Protected Slopes and a category 3 wetland are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LEAD AGENCY: MITIGATION MEASURES: 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard The City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section 1. The earthwork activities to be conducted onsite shall only be permitted to occur during the dry months of the year. 2. The applicant to comply with the recommendations found in the preliminary geotechnical site evaluation prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services dated July 22, 2005 and the follow up geotechnical evaluation dated February 12, 2006. 3. The applicanf shall be required to provide a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) designed pursuant to the ,Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements outlined in Volume II of the Stormwater Management Manual and provide staff with a Construction Mitigation Plan prior to issuance of Construction Permits. This condition shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division. ' 4. The applicant shafl be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Wetland Study report prepared by Habitat Technologies dated September 23, 2005 and the Supplemental Stream Study and Mitigation Plan prepared by Ecological Land Services, Inc. dated December 9, 2005. 5. The detention system for this project shall be required to comply with the requirements found in the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention (conservation flow control -Level 2) and water quality improvements. . 6. The applicant shall pay a Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per each new single family lot prior to the recording of the final plat. 7. The applicant shall pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee in the amount of $75 per net new average daily trip prior to the recording of the final plat. 8. Staff recommends that the applicant pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on $488.00 per new single family lot prior to the recording of the final plat. ERe Mitigation Measures Page 1 of 1 / .~~-~~~\ ". ~1' DATE: LAND USE FILE NO.: PROJECT NAME: OWNERS: APPLICANT: PROJECT MANAGER: PROJECT LOCATION: . " March 30, 2006 LUA-05-11B, PP, ECF, V-H, CAR Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat· James & Minoo Costello; Charles & Mahwash Price; Ali & Farideh Mastan Phil Kitzes, PK Enterprises Jill K. Ding, Assoicate Planner 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard PROPOSAl: The installation of a stormwater outlet pipe within the Honey Creek Stream buffer. The proposed stormwater pipe would convey stormwater from a proposed stormwater detention system to be constructed outside of the stream buffer to a discharge outlet, which would dissipate the energy of the stormwater prior to it entering Honey Creek. The detention system is required to detain and treat stormwater for a proposed 9-lot subdivision. . CRITICAL AREA: Honey Creek stream buffer (Class III) EXEMPTION JUSTIFICATION: Pursuant to RMC section 4-3-050.C.7.a.ii Stormwater Management Facilities are permitted within stream buffers. An exemption from the Critical Areas Regulations is hereby granted for the following reason(s): x Stohnwater Management facilties in Buffer: Stormwater management facilities in critical area buffers including stormwater dispersion outfall systems designed to minimize impacts to the buffer and critical area, where the site topography requires their location within the buffer to allow hydraulic function, provided the standard buffer zone area associated with the critical area classification is retained pursuant to subsection L or M6c of this Section, and is sited to reduce impacts between the critical area and surrounding activities. DECISION: The proposed development is consistent with the following findings pursuant to RMC section 4-3-050.C.5: 1. The activity is not prohibited by this or any other chapter of the RMC or state or federal law or regulation; . . . Honey Creek View Critical Area Exemption.doc Page 1 of2 2. The activity will be conducted using best management practices as specified by industry standards or applicable Federal agencies or scientific principles; and, 3. Impacts are minimized and, where applicable, disturbed areas are immediately restored, unless the exemption is a wetland below the size thresholds pursuant to RMC 4-3- 050.C.5.f.1 and f.2. SIGNATURE: Neil Watts, Director Development Services Director EXPIRATION: Five (5) years from the date of approval (signature date). Honey Creek View Critical Area Exemption.doc date Page2of2 • NOT~CE PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington, on May 9, 2006 at 9:00 AM to ! consider the following petitions: Honey Creek View Estates FILE NO. LUA05-118, PP, CAR, V.H, ECF Location: 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard DeSCription: The applicant Is requesting Preliminary Plat approval and Variance approval for the subdivision of a 78,512 square foot (1.8 acre) site located within the Residential -10 (R·10) dwelling units per acre zone into 9 lots and two tracts. The proposed lots would be developed with single family residences. An existing single family residence will be removed. The lot sizes would range from approximately 3,000 sq. It. to 4,333 sq. ft. Access to the proposed lots would be provided via a new road (Road A) off of NE Sunset Boulevard and terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A stormwater , detention tract (Tract A) and a sensitive area tract (Tract B) are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER'S OFFICE AT 425-430-6515 DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION CERTIFICATION I, j)~(e./L Jo("cC:"" , hereby certify that 3 copies of the above docum~~\\~"\,,, were posted by me in ~ conspicuous places or nearby the described property~_ ~ "::'~I~" ~ :. _,',','ON :iI." ",'~. . :: ~~'-..... ~III ~ DATE: l:1tlOb SIGNED: DR. .: ff,f ,?,0 T4.-,?.,L \\\.~ I ; ::0 ~~x~ . '" ~ -• -tJj~ ~ i' -: _ ., ATIEST: Subscribed and sworn before me, a Notary Public, in and for the State of Washington residin~tP~ ,0, 1". f:: T.\:..\~ ,11:\, \V :~- . . '1' I" i?, : '~. ~.::-= . 'I. "II! 1~1-,\)",,~O~ ~ ,(), B'\~ a \ \. h,,, ..• ~".r')-~ \ ~\ (! , on the &>~ day of ?P .. . ,,;~'~;\'~~$ UC SIG ft\\'\\'", ...... PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner in the CouncDl Chambers on the seventh floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington, on May 9. 2006 at 9:00 AM to consider'the following petitions: Honey Creek View Estates FILE NO. LUA05-118, PP, CAR, V-H, ECF Location: 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard Description: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval and Variance approval for the subdivision of a 78,512 square foot (1.8 acre) site located within the Residential -10 (R-10) dwelling units per acre zone into 9 lots and two tracts. The proposed lots would be developed with single family residences. An existing single family residence will be removed. The lot sizes would range from approximately 3,000 sq. ft. to 4,333 sq. ft. Access to the proposed lots would be provided via a new road (Road A) off of NE Sunset Boulevard and terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A stormwater detention tract (Tract A) and a sensitive area tract (Tract B) are located em the eastern portion of the subject site. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER'S OFFICE AT 425-430-6515 DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION o· .... ' '" .•.. J. Kathy Keoiker,Mayor . 'April ,14,2006 Phil'Ki~es .• ' . PK Enterprises '. ~3035 SE 263rd Street . Maple valiey, WA 98038 j' . C.JTY' PlannlngtBtiilding!PublicWorkS Department' , , . Gregg zuD.mernianP ~K, Ad~istrator '. RE: H'oney Creek View' Estates 'Preiiminary Plat (Renton FileNp.I!.VA05~118) bear Mr. Kitzes; 'The 9ity of Renton has· received th~ informcdion requested in 'my letter to you dated' APril. 12, 2006 and the project is now being taken.off hold. The public,nearing ha$been rescheduled for May 9,2006 at 9·a.m. on the7th flpor in 'the CounCiIChambers;'~,· , .' ..•.. '. . " -.' .: .. ", ' -" .. . Upon 'further review' ifadditiohal· information is, required you will b:enotified atthat time. 'PI~ase contact me 'at(425) 430-7219 if you have any.que~tions.·· .' , . . .. " '-' . . . ' ·Sincereiy, ' . . . . . ··w.-aCJ·· .. -.... Jill K. Ding .' .' '~., , ' .. Associate Pla~ner ." ~,.' . " .. "".-, 'J. cc: James & Minoo COl?tello, Charles·&,M~hwash'Price, Ali &rarideh Ni'astan'/ Owners .. Parties of RecOrd ' .. . --." . . ',' . ,'" . '-' .. ,'",. ~ ":. . .. '" I, . j, ; .... - •• ', .r • ~~~----~1-0-55-S-o-uili-·~Gm~·-~-W~~~·'-~.~-~-t-on-,-W-.~-hln-·-~-on--98-0-55-·~----~-.~, ~~ . . AHEA'D'OF THE CURVE.' ) . ..... -. .: -. Kathy Keolker. Mayor Planning!Buildip.glPublicWorks Department Gregg Zini~erinan' P.E., A:dminist~ator , '. .~ ·PhirKhzes , PK Enterprises 23035 SE'263Td Street, . Maple Valley, WA 9803? ··.Subject: . Administrative Deterrilination ofUn-omapped·Stream Classification Projec~: 'Honey Creek view ;Estates Preliminary'Plat .' Dear Mi. Kitzes: ' This purpose of-this letter isto provide a Classificationof"allUn;.niappedstre~ in· . accotdiIDce withRMG4-3~050L l.cjii. A stream studypreparedby Ecological Land, '.'" " :Seivices, mc. d;it~dApril14, 2006 was svbtnitted identifyingaQ.d proposing ,a '. ,classification for the ~ai>ped stream. . ' ., ,. " , , 'jiACKGiROUND . A$tteam Study·prepared by Ecolbgical Land Services; Jnc: dated April 14, 2006 WaS, submitted to.the'City of Renton ",ith the pre1iminai-y plaUipplications for the Honey Creek View EstatesPrellminruy PIat. The'report identified 1 stream located offsite on .the properties to the' northwest of the project area; ,The; report 'recomIneilded two classifications for the sn:eani, b~ed'on a portionc,fthe'stremnlJeing'located within an 18- inch culvert which discharges to Honey Creek and another portion ofthe s:tream being '. ' , , located,within andopen,cliaiin:~L 'The report r~co'imnende,4 a,~l~s ~ class'ificatiolJ-for . the portion ofthe streaIll tl)at flows within the culvert and'~i Class '4 claSsjfication fOJ;-the . portion ofthestreanl tliat fl~'ws;within an open ch.anrtei .• The City has revjewed the " . ," ' . 'submitted stream stuqy;'in' additiorrstaff reviewed tile City',s'cJassific(ition criteria of .. . streams (RMC 4~3~050Ll ; a);, ' '. '.' '. ' .. ' Per SectionRMC'4.:3-050L.i.9.iiiofthe City's criticahlteastegulatiQns, "Classifi~ation . of an ilinnapped stre~ or: lake is effective upon exprratiop'of the fcmrteen (14} day'" . appeal period follo\~ing'tl.IeAqminisfrator's determinati6n;~', T4e' Administrator has • " reviewed the City's critical areas regulations (RMC 4:-3-050), and the Streaffi Study ,.prepared by EcologIcal Lalld ServiCes; ~I11c and has, reridered a deCision. , . FINDINGS/CONCLUSION: '. 1. An, unmapped: stre~ ,has been identified' oil the properties located to the northwest ofthe propose<;l Honey Creek View' EstafesI>reliminary PIaL' 2. The applicant submitted a Stream Study prepare,d by Ecological L~d Services, . Inc. dated April 1'4~' 2006, ' .' , . . , . , .. I • ~ , . ~'.'."':"'.""'" .,'. ~< ,,', . -~. . -. . . --------'-10-5-5 -So-u~th-,Grad---" . ""---y-W-a-y---R-en-to-n-, W-as-hi-·n-'-'gt-on-9--'-80-5-5--,.-'---~-"-R E N T ci N '. " AHEAD .OF THE CURVE' : .\ ': .. " ~'.' . .... . :. : J';: ,.-:. . ~, -"" . :'-'. " -:-- '::, , ~t: " .', \,' '.' ",' -.. ;" " " ".' '" .. :'.':-'.' . . ",': . :.' :':., . ''!, ,~. 1· ' . . ' r. : .''- ): . 3.',Th~GitY; s Administrator has. ~(:viewed the Stream' st~dyp.tepar~: by ,Ecqlogical .. ..... ·:,UmdSeiYic~s;Jn9: dated April 14';'2006 and applicable critIcal area regulatlons· '. ",' ·'.found iriRMC,A;,3-050. '.' " .. . . . . I ': I .. , .' ~~ '.' , · 'DECISION _ . , ,' ... , , ..:. :":' . '. · .... The CitY co~curs thaJ p()rtiQri of the stn~am ,flo~irtg ~iihirithe' operi ch~~l wouidm~e(. ',', the'qty'.scriten~ for, a Class 4 '~trean(. IIowever;' t4~,City doesndt concut that the:. : ". 'portiol! ofthestreain flowing \yitlllntliecuivert tneetsthecri'tena for a clruis 5i '. 0, • " unregUlated str~aID~ ,the City has:conclud~9 that if,the"flow were' rioU6cated ~ithin the .. 'culvert that-a natUtally defmed channel would have fon;ned, over time and that'the '~ . c(>Iistr4ct~on;'of the 'culvertsimply precluded this: occujTcnce::' As the flow from the open ' .' . .'charinelc:ontinU:es-:!hroughthe culvert, the' entirtdength otthestreain shcuild therefore be . . CIassifi.ed. as: a ClaSs 4stteam; .' ...., , :~.iU:coNS1iJj~.~iION.· Witlrin 14:,daY~>9fthee(f6ctive daic,ofthe: deci~ion,'anY party . '.' ' .. ·may.r~uesft11at tlie,Admiriistt:atoi:re<)ii~n,';i:a~C'i:§IOi1,:;JJie Adrllinistrator, may 'modif)dus· .... . ' .' ~ decision i(inaierial'eyidence nolre~~iry':disc,overable 'pnOtJo the original decision is . found.or ifh~ fin~ there waS\msfep,feserl1ltioA' ~ffa¢(A:ft'trtreview of the ," , reconsideration' request, iE the' Adminrstrator 'finds--irtsufficie~f;e:vidence to amend,the · origimiLd~cisi.(m,. there ~ilJ~ be no "further extensiori· oftQ.e-l~ppe)~t,period. ,Ally pe~~o~ '. · '. wishigg'to;take' furthei";ftcti<>n'f¥rtst ;PJJ~ ,~({{ffu'~Jf}~Q.i,,~~l wJtllii{ih~rfollo~ing~ppear: .. .,ti~efr~e: .', ~ 'oj ':Lb,·i'~.; ;;;tr:~t€~'i,;:~;A'~~':~J\::' :-i~·j2.o '~:.: , . ;..:''-':> ' . o APP~A~L.l'.his a~m.i~istratiye de "1; "A '].~"".' m~,r~arifnoJ appe~Iedli][lwdjing ',to the HeaiVillg EX3miBpj'er OIlQ,r b¢f()F.~;:~:OO:·il.~~_9n~pr:il28,2(jQ6~. Appea~sto:the:. , "Exami.n~r·~e;goveme.d~bYGi!Y~orR:ehtoi{Munlctp~f·C<?,de;Sec;ti()n4-8:-ll.b .. ·.AddlHo~al·. . . '.' . '. ",.' . ", .. '. ".. . .•... , ""J;.", "" ....... ,.. . ... , 'iilfofIllation regat<iing. tn~i app~AI.pr()cess may beobt~m:~:;tfi~riv;the·Renton City Clerk '~ Qfflcy,(~??!~~O-?5l'O:ABR~aiw~Uit';b~Jil.t:~,i~:,#tiIf~;)<?:$~(her \Vi~hthe. r¢~uiI:e4:' $75.00:app4c,ation~e~, to:~e~~.:Ex~m~r,Cl~%:~~~~Qn,'1055 SmIth (}rady W~y; .' ,Renton;.WA9,~055. . <", 'Y,,, ".,5;P." .,' " '. .' ":.' " . . ." , . '. '. "/",,, """';':-"<'~':;~«:~:!>:.: ,".. .... .... . . .:, ' .. . ,. .' .Ifyoiihave:any'questiori~, yOJI may ¥()ntact JillDing;Asso~i~fe' Planner ~t-425~4?O~1~19: \ . '.' "r ' ' ,,,. ", ",', • . • • .' •• ' • .,: '" .". • "'; ~." .;;: .-.: " , • .~ ':;" " .. ',.-' .,-' "0 '.~ , , '.,. .' . .' ~ : ' .. S~re;~iY,.-'··" .~ '.' .' · ," ·Nat{j;Jdfr~' NeilWitis ,f" .,.... .' .Devdopin~rit services' Director , ' ... ~\ . ' .. ; ',/.. . , .. ' ,..,-'., ... . .... ', .. cc>J;»tOJ¢ctFile.' . .• J~rill~fer 'H~miing' . Jilii)iflg', . . . ' . '. ·'Owners" ..., .. '. . ' .. ,Parti~§"bfRecord ' .. " ':, . .,'-' , ':., .' .,' ,-'.~"'.:. . '" .. " '-' :. ,.~. : '. ,"' ~ ·f·. .', ':,' . .' ~ ," . ,.', ,. ,." "". ': .' ,""', ,r ,". ' ,.: .' , "', L ,',' :~'. . .. ' .... . ... ; ..... ';', , ';" . "'., ' '.,'; . ",' '. , .. ,', " .. ", ECOLOGfCALLAND SERVICES, INC:' .. .. . . . . , .' " .'~ ,:>~NN\NG -c\lt:LoPtc!\Ei';..,'c .. ..jTOt>·\ . u,-"c,rrY Of r'~\ .' . , ' .'Apri114, i006 : APR '~1.0OG Neil Watts :~~CE\\fEO · Development Services Manager ' City {)f Rento.n . ' . ' Rento.n~ Washingto.n 98055. . : .... : .: .... · Regarding: Honey Creek view Plat (Co.ntact, PhilKitze~)' ' ... M~.Watts, This letter addresses' it streimidetermiriatio.n' affecting ,sewer· co.nnections fer the :Ho.n~y Cre~k View Pbit: The propo.sed'develo.pment is lo.cated at 3524 NE Sunset Blvd. on parcel number 0423059090 in. the SE 'l4 ofSectio.n 4 TownsIllp23 No.rth, Range5 East o.f'the Willamette . '. Meridian:, Existing and propo.sed sewer features 'are shoWn on: Figure 1, arid, site pho.togniphs are 'sllOwn ·o.n, attached pho.to.graphs (see Figure. 1 and pho.to.plcites).' The applicantpropo.ses to. co.nnect sewers at' Ho.ney Creek View with existing sewers no.rtho.f Lo.t 3 at the end o.f NE i 7th .' 'Place;.ho.wever, a. small 'stream. dTainage catjjes stom1waterfrom Suns~t . Blvd 'to an 18..,mch' · corrugated metal' culvert (CMP) installed by 'the City 0.[ :Rento.n near the' propo.sed 's.ewer line· , co.nrtettio.ri.to. the ,existing system. this letter addresses the' stream-cla~sdeterminatio.h, requi~ed stream btiffers,andwhetherproposed wo.rk ~llimpactthe stream Dr stream buffers. . . Site Conditions . ,'. .', .... . The'draii1ag~ ~ea'bet~eenSunset Blvd.'aridthe 18-inch culvert passes, ~o.ugh a wo()ded ~orridor on single-family residential 100ts.Vegetation is.'a Inix'of conifers,ivy; small maples,and n()U: native blackberries. '. The slope from Sunset Blvd begins as Ii gradual slo.pe·that alternates between steeper arid flatter areas in a stair-step fashio.n. . ' , '.' :'.' Streain Dra:in~ge CharaCteristics. . '. .. 'The small stream drainage receivesstormwater runofffro.m n~arby residentiallots.and areaS south of Sunset Blvd~ "The owner, o.f tli.eproperty to the north'states' that thes~all stre~ drainage has." · so.me water flo.wing after iairifall events with seepage thro.ughourthe .year. The seepage may be" due. to. leakSfro~large water~sto.ragetariks located south o.f Sunset Blvd.: . , · , As sho.~ o.n Pl)Ot~graphs' # i ~#2~.and, #3 tak~ on April 7 2006, th~'stieaindrainage is small and , enters the 18~inch culvert with 'Ii width ofap'pro.~imately-S inches' between o.rdinary high water marl<s .. Therejsno sign o.f debris, which would indicate that 'water backS up behind'the culvert dui'ingperiods of heavy, rainfall. The culv~rt is bUried' appro.Ximately 0.5 feet below ground surface, allowing. storriiwat~r to. . flow bentiaththe. existing ia.wn area. Sto.rinwater theri flows, fro.in the culvert into. a catch baS~n thatco.rinectS to. apip:eI.ine buried beneath the steep wooded slope to Ho.ney Creek. ibepipeline delivers stormwatet to. Ho.ney Creek, which flo.ws· irito.May Creek, a . . . tributary to. Lake Wa:shingto.ri~. Horiey Creek is'a DNR Type Nstream' irithe proje~tvici~ty :and ';;,t 1157 -'sid Avenue; Suite 220· Longview, W~lngton98632 • (300) 578-1371'· ,Fox,(360) 414-93,05 . . .... " . Prius Triland, LLC -Honey Creek View Page 2 of3 Ecological Land Services, Inc April 14, 2006 becomes a Type F stream near its confluence with May Creek. Chinook salmon in May Creek are federally listed as a threatened species. Proposed! Sewer Connection Figure I shows existing and proposed sewer locations. The applicant proposes to install a sanitary sewer manhole on the northwest comer of the Honey Creek View plat and connect an 8- inch sewer line to a second proposed manhole, northward beneath the I8-inch culvert to a third proposed manhole to be installed asphalt driveway, then westward to the existing manhole located at the end ofNE 17m Place. A directional boring from the second to the third proposed manhole will allow installation of a new sewer line beneath the existing I8-inch culvert. The northernmost boring locations will be located in the existing asphalt driveway and the southernmost boring will be approximately 30 to 35 feet away from the upper end of the culvert in an area of mowed lawn (see Photograph #1). Condusions Stream Classification The tributary to Honey Creek is not classified on the City of Renton Water Class· Map. Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-3-050L1c(iii)(c) states that if the unmapped channel is upstream of an existing, enduring, and complete barrier to salmonid migration, and the channel contains water only intermittently upstream of the barrier during years of normal rainfall, then the channel is considered non-salmonid-bearing. The unnamed tributary to Honey Creek meets this definition based on the following reasons. The combination of the pipeline, catch basin, and culvert constitute a complete barrier to salmonid migration according to the definition in RMC 4-11-190, because they are human-made barriers and they are a complete barrier to salmonids based on hydraulic drop (a 75-percent slope and catch basin at the top of the slope). Because criteria for salmonid barriers were met and the channel contains water only intermittently, the class can be assessed according to definitions in subsections Lla(iii) through (v). The portion ofthe stream from the I8-inch culvert to Honey Creek meets the defmition ofa Class 5 streanl in RMC 4-3-050(L)(1)(a)(v), because it flows within an artificially-constructed channel where no naturally-defmed channel previously existed. The portion of the stream channel between the culvert and Sunset Blvd. is an open-channel and meets the definition of a Class 4 stream, because it is non-salmonid-bearing with intermittent flow during years of normal rainfall. Stream Buffers The portion of the unnamed tributary within project boundaries between Sunset Blvd. and the 18- inch culvert is a Class 4 stream and requires a,35-foot buffer. The lower portion of the stream is a Class 5 stream, which is exempt from Sity reg\ilations, including stream buffers. Affect of Construction on Class 4 Stream B;uffer Most of the proposed sewer-line construction will take place outside the lower point of the Class 4 stream, which has a required buffer width of 35 feet. The southernmost directional boring will be approximately 35 feet from the stream; however, it will be within an area maintained by the landowner as a flat, mowed lawn that is separated from the stream by a garden wall approximately 2-feet high (see Photograph #1). Proper construction BMPs will be used during Prius Triland, LLC -Honey Creek View Page 3 of3 Ecological Land Services, Inc April 14, 2006 the installation and it is unlikely that sediment or other pollutants would be transported over the garden wall into the stream .. If this project requires further reporting such as a Stream Study or Stream Mitigation Plan, we can provide them prior to the fmal engineering approval. If you have any questions or comments, we can be reached at 360-578-1371. SiI1cerely, cc: Phil Kitzes, Prius Triland, LLC t.{ ~ -J.~tl'\..'v'\.. ,( , ~(,'-.A...--~ ~I Lynn Simpson Environmental Scientist .. r-" .'.; :-" . . ~ ".:. :, ',: .. "" ',',1', ' , ..... 4/ ... i ,',l,-, ,.",' 'V'fM ',saM a6ue~ '4IJoN d!4SUMO.l '# uO!J!las 10 uO!lJod UOi6u!45eM 'Aluno:> SU!>! 'uo,ua~ 10 iii!:> aal uaAalS aw~pa!OJd d'o'V'I3.llS ~ runS[,! f; ''-, j I! w :~ .J 0 W Z I Z Z :; B <r "" 0-X Z 0 W , "" <r ... ! W U '" ;: ~: , ~ 0 w <r .J ~ '" " w w u VI 0-0 VI .J X <=> Z ~ :~ 6 > 0-W "" "" "" VI "-<r w 0-: 0 0 0-> (I] -:" "-0-Z 0 0 .J in -.:' "" I <r :::J :,'.!.' " i',. "-"-VI U (") :.: I \ i . I .' X I --~ -i VI I .' VI ! .' ~r,:,: --"'-':-:'---::. -_: .. '". -~----":. - ':.< .".-..•. --,' , • 't,- o I '" '.; ":0' " .~ ,.,r ," ::·_--t· -.... ;'.:.-----.. -.-c-: ~-.. ---~i . ,l , I Looking south at culvert area on property north of Honey Creek View. Directional borings and sewer manholes to be located in lawn and asphalt driveway. Drainage as it enters 18" CMP culvert. Ordinary high water marks are less than 18 inches wide. ECOLOGICAL LAND SERVICES, INC. 1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220 longview, WA 98632 (360) 578-1371 Fax: (360) 414-9305 Apr 14, 2006 -1I.06o.M DATE 04-14-06 OWN. APF APPR. PROJ.# 1299.03 Photoplate 1 SITE PHOTOS Honey Creek View Steven Lee City of Renton, King County, Washington Portion of Section 4, Township 23N, Range 5E, W.M. S.\Klng-VA\Renton\1299-Lee\1299.03-Hon .. y Cr .... k View\J299.03-Figures\1299.03-ph-J-2-04142006.clwg ~~Y~:~~".~.~iU'-.\,: .~~~"~_.~., Looking southwest at drainage upstream of 18" CMP culvert. Rocks near culvert entrance placed to dissipate any flow due to heavy rain. Drainage flows due to rainfall are intermittent with seepage throughout the year. ~N::CES.INC 1157,3rd Avenue Suite 220 Longview, WA 98632 (360) 578-1371 Fax: (360) 414-9305 Apr 14, 2006 -II,Q7oM DATE 04-14-06 OWN. APF APPR. PROJ. #1299.03 $,\Klng-INA \Renton\ 1299-Lee \ 1299.03-Honey Creek View\1299.03-flgures\ 1299.03-ph-1-2-04142006.dwg Drainage upstream of 18" culvert consists of overland flow without a channel until it reaches culvert entrance. Photoplate 2 SITE PHOTOS Honey Creek View Steven Lee City of Renton, King County, Washington Portion of Section 4, Township 23N, Range 5E, W.M. ;;., o CJITY )F RENTON Kathy Keolker, Mayor PlanningIBuildingIPUblic Works Department " Gregg Zinimerman P;E., Administrator April 12, 2006 'Phil Kitzes PK Enterprises 23035 SE 263rd S,treef Maple Valley. WA 98038 , ' ' ,RE: Honey Creek Vi~~Estates Preliminary Plat (Renton File No, LUA05-118) Dear Mr. Kitzes; ,The informationrequest-edin my April51h leiterto,youhas ri,?t beerireceived, therefore the;,City' ,has placed the' Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat on hold.' The public hearing for the 'proposed project scheduled for April 181h willnotbeheld:, Once the information requested 'in my April l5th letter (see list ofjtem~ below) has been;received a 'public hearing Will be rescheduled. ,', Please submit 3c~piesof the following: 1. A Stream Study, which complies With the criteria, set forth' !Jnder RMC 4-8-1200, (attached); ", . ,2. A Supplemental.Stream Study, which complies with the criterIa set forth under RMC.4- 8-1200' (attacheq);' ' . 3. A Stream Mitigation Plan if iiis,c;t,eterrnined necessa"ryu~der the Supplement~1 Stream Study,which complies with'the criteria -set forth-under' RMC 4-8-1200 (attache9); and -. , , " ' 4. A Revised Preliminary Plat and 1 reduc~d8 Yz x'11 PMT :showing the stream ~ndits buffer. ." . If additionalinf6rmation is required you will be notified at that time .. Please contact me at (425) 430-72,19 If you have any questions. .' ' ; , , , Sincerely; -.«l;Jf( cl2 '~. ~I K. Ding " . 7\),. Associate Pla'lner .' , " cc:James & Minoo_Costello'; Charles & Mahwash price, Ali & Farideh Mastan I Owners Parties ot'RecOrd " '. ' --~--~-----10-5-5~So~u-fu-G-r~oo-y-w-a-Y---R-ro-ro-n-,w--~~h-in-~-OO--9-80~5-5----~------~ . ~ Thi!=.~nPrNlOt::l~~ fill%.~·m~tp';::'1 ~n%'~~tl~ . AHEAD OF THE CURVE ;:.,:' ; .. .:. ,.'..: .,: -~-.-. cnri"plF REN,][,~~~ ," ", ,,' " '.' ":PlailI\~~iiding/P~blicWO~ks D~~artrit~il~~~ .~ ~.' ' , . :. . . " . Gregg iiil;ti:nerman p.E:,Adininistrator ~~~~~~~~'~"~~ __ ~,_~_._~_~_,~~~ __ ~~~.~,c;'~·:~"'.¥~,~.,.~'~~'_~'~ __ '~'~'~'~'~'~-~'~"'~.~~~.~ .. ~.,,_ ". . .... , .. . . ' '. ~;. :'-.. ,'- . .... ~.~ .' ' .. ' .. -, :i .. , . o ' . , . ~ . . ', ,'1', , " ..•.. Phil Kitzes '. : ".' , " .', .' : .. . / . ~ :." .' .. -..•. ~K Ent~rpris(;s' ,23035 'SE 2631'!1'Street ,,: , .' , , -: ' . :: Mapl~ v~liey,'v\tA 980~8."· .\.' .:-'.-.. ;. :: ',. , .-~'t.". - '. RE:.· Hone~'Greek Vie~'~st~t~~' Rj-~Jimi.ri~~Plat (Rent6n FileNQ:'lUA95-}tB) ~ . --.... . ,;' . .;. ~ . : . ,. . -' --.'.. . . - '.".' .' ,', " .~. -.' '. .' . ~. ~ . .:'_ _. • .' -;'00;: .~. '. .. ~. '. . 'On Ma~ch29~,oJu'liari~ F~I~~~·€~gin~~ri~g··p.lan RevieWer; ~r:I((i'(\iiS.it¢~.the sitEdpcat~, cUreelly ..... , . . nerth'{3.533. N~E :·1 ,til PI~cer.6Vlie·:pr,6PQs,ed . f,JoneyCrtlek View;I;stafes:.PreliiiiiharyPlaf.Qurif.l{t -- 1 [, ,~ .:r , ~h~.site'vislt,staf{ identifieda\¥ater.,.Cplir~.~:f1owing onto theprope~~a!t(j.then:acro~~ the prop;erty .' . via anunderg~otind 'culvett:;itappe~rs.1hatthe· water cou~s~:rri~fme~f.th~ Pi!Y:s ~efiniti~n9f a· .. . . stream' (pec; Rrv,C;4~ 1.1-1~Q:· 8tta6he,d):,\ln addition'"a crossing:"of,'the. wClfer'course woul~' ~e.: ", :r¢quired'fOr: ttie'p~oposed. seW'er;cbftnectibr;i.· . <.; ," ';<'--; .,: •.... . .' '.< .. j .;: ...... , .. ' '. ~~ .... '. . .' ;", '. .' Th~ q~~ c~iti~al'area~' regci~ati6n~. '(R~d-4-3~050L.3.a) requ'irE/~' SJream ·Study, f~r wat~t' bOd;e~ . -i, , I~ted ol1.the subject site 'or .within :1 OO"Jeefof the subjljlct site. ,A,':Supplementat ,S~e~m. Stli<;fy is' req~iredvlhen' alt~ration~ ~fe': :propps~d;~{o. the stream 'orit,s. ·I?,~e(·(R.MC 4~3-050L.:3.b). : As 'a '. seiNer line is preposed to:cto~sJlie·,tip,Q~i:gr()lmd. culv~rteCl' portlQn4of:th~;·str:ean:i"a' $upplemejJtal ",:" ,: .. -r .. ; '\ • ", ' .. ,' . -~: ,.;;' { . Stream' Study ·wciuld·f)tl.req,un:ed.·. ':11: i6e:'I(ripacts to:ihe strea'1l:Qf. Jt~'buffer are:propos~;'thEm,;a. . ... Stream>Mitiga,tiQ~,: PJa!;l' s~~U ,~~;:~,uti'tniije(L:i)er RMC 4~3~OpO.i,;:~A. ('StfearTl;buffers'ar¢::'~~ot , .measured·from',.cUlvefted·:sth~ams,'peri':RMC 4;.3:.050L.5.aji·,::th~ref()re . ,staff was unatile .to· .. d~tenTiineIfa,:~'!igation·pl~d.w:bU·iti'):i~:f~:quired fodhepi:oP9.~~C($.yl)diviSt6n::. If,ttleCl.ppUcarlt .. ·can shoyv ,th~t, nei,netth, '~~re.ai#:npfit~ buffer 'vV0u1d' b~ir!lp~c.:tec(~yttfu~prop~s~d plat • then·~Str~~nfMi~.igaticnl·PI~n;:~?u,td;~c,t:~e r:equirt!d. ·· ... ·.o.::! ':~.;;:~'C.: /,' . . ... ,. y .:":~:'.~:\.,,: . UtUi~Y cros~ipg~~~(e .~emJit1~H~ uhd~.t;:~MC4~3:'090L.8'.b. (~tt~Ch~d{~YtsUaJ1nO th~::crU6ric{Hsted under that sectiQn. The ~uppl,eri)enta(";$tfeam Study should addre~s. how the 'proposea sewer '. crossing: Woula' Gbmply; with: tne,s.ecriteria:, , .,' , .. /: . ". : ' . . T8~r~for~;. the~t~Ject i~ bei~~';~I~t~~/bh~116Id uritii add;ii9.n~1 i~forrii:~tion i~ s~bmitte~{ f~iH~~ie~ .... . Glpd approval. ·Please:subm·ir3.~.,pi~,s:~Qnh~ following: : .~. :.':'> (:'~ .... . .. '. " .. "~/' -, --:"': .. ~:~.-", .~~'.~>.: ..... :~ .. ,.;(:.~,: i' ..... , -_ ',," . :':;':.';.,: .... ,'. ;,.::, , j _. -'i, ~.~ .1.'. A. p~ream Study; which . cO\TIplies' with the criteria.seCfQr,thunde.,rRMC4:S:t20D . (attached);"" ". '.' . ., d' '. ',~ ",. .' ..,.. ~ '.!:, , " ... "" .. , 'c' " , -~ • '-:' : • ..- 2 ... ,A,$uRpleqtental Stream.Study; whi~h complies with the' crit~~ia set forth under RMC 4: aC'120D'(cjttached); ", ..... ~ -.' .,. :.':',."." " ",. .' 3 .. ASt;~~m Mitig~ti~ri 'p.ia,n·,If.>:{t is determhled ~ece~:~~r:Y::~.ndetth~5.~'ppi~~~~t~I.·:·· $tieClrrl :: $tudy, whiCh 'col11plies with the criteria set'; forth .un<;IJ~r R~G 4~a-;-l20D; (atta~~ed.j.; .. an? ;c . .-:: :<~ ,:" . ',' _:. '< :,::~.: ... ' ':'. ". '. .;;~ . ,-., ',4.' A Revised Preliminary Plat 'artd ,1 reduced 8 Yz ?C 11' PMT'showing .the. stream and'its buffer: -" . ' . ',:: ',.' ,'" ' ~~1 .-' -• ':< .. . :.' . , :'---:", _. ', ..... ~ : .... '; -:' : (. .. / .. ,.' .'l :. '. -.. .-' :t: :- ;'" . . ; ~ '. t;-• ,-'. ' '. '; .' ... ' . . . ~ . ~ : ... J ..... : :",- ') ...... \ -,' : ... ; .. ., . ".- ; .:-;. ·~·:!~·~~~~~-1~~~5-'S-O-~-.-o~~~~~1~Y~~~~-~~~~~~~~:"~~-~-'-~-OO~.~~-O-S5~~.~~-;~~=:~~~:·-;~~·~:-~}ki~:TO~:~\j '. ;'.' ~~~~~~~~%~~.30%~cons.m:<· ,<~, ., 'AIJE~DOF' TiIE' C'UR~E' . :-'., . '.': ,':., ).; '< ~>"~~}_(~~ ~ f _ .' ., r;; -~." -. , :,.,:.,' ~" .. - "-':.-. . ~' : ...... "-J _ .;: ~ . ";!,. ':'., ' .... ' . .::." ... :' >. ~ ... ',. " .:~ ~. .. < -"f~ •• '."',,' .. ~ r:.' . ' : ;, STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } , AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION , PUBLIC NOTICE Jody Barton, being first duly sworn on oath that she is:the Legal Adv~~tising', Representative ofthe ' King County Journal a daily newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continuously as a daily newspaper in King County, Washington. The King County Journal has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the King County Journal (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a Public Notice was published on March 20, 2006. The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $155.40. "".;"~""'~","(,\\, ' ~ _--' 'f,ATHY'" . . : o ...... e.1l O,t~If'l --••• 'J~"'!"i p". 4-'1(." I. ~ .: ···o"",oc,-,.,,,., : ." Ci . v.-r .. \\;11 ', ~,_ : NO....· {', ., 0'\ ~ J '" YJ • 'A ...... ·' Y n ' : -f : ~~. ';:.: G> ~ Legal Advertising Representative, King County Journal ~ ~ ~ "'~;.." o',\;;, '.f_ /S : : nd sworn to me this 20th day of March, 2006. ~ to \:0 ~t:.jG C;'/ ! ',0""<" ." .. , ", ;.(\ ~<·P.·07"'··· .i 'I tf, ...••.•••.•• O~ .: , 4, ~8HI·"'G"\ ..... .:-l;t I'd ... .. , 'I., ... ,"""', ... ... r the State of Washington, Residing in Covington, Washington NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE & PUBLIC HEARING , RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Com- mittee has issued a Detenninatiou' of ·Non-Significance-Mitigated for the fol- lowing project under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code. Honey Creek View Estates Pre- liminary Plat· LUA05-118, PP, CAR, V-H, ECF Location: 3524 NE Sunset Boule- vard. The applicant is proposing to subdivide an existing 78,512 square foot 0.8 acre) parcel , located within the Residential-l0 (R-lO) dwelling unit per acre zon- ing designation into 9 lots, a storm water detention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing resi- dence is proposed to be removed. The lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The lots range in area from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Access to the lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as right- of-way. The proposed Road A ter- minates in a hammerhead turn- around. A class 3 stream (Honey , Creek) flows across the eastern portion of the 8ubjectsite; in addition Protected Slopes and a category 3 wetland are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. Appeals of the environmental de- tennination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM on April 3, 2006. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fcc with: Hearing Exam- iner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner arc governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Sec- tion 4-8-1l0.B. Additional infonnation regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers, City Hall, on April 18, 2006 at 9:00 AM to consider the Preliminary Plat. If the Environmen- tal Detennination is appealed, the appeal will be heard as part of this public hearing. Interested parties are invited to attend the public hearing. Publication Date: March 20, 2006 Published in the King County JoUrnal March 20, 2006. #848989 ',- . CITY OF RENTON E X EM P T iON FROM CRITiCAL AREAS REGULATIONS DATE: LAND USE FILE NO.: PROJECT NAME: OWNERS: APPLICANT: PROJECT MANAGER: PROJECT LOCATION: March 30,2006 LUA-05-118, PP, ECF, V-H, CAR Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat James & Minoo Costello; Charles & Mahwash Price; Ali & Farideh Mastan Phil Kitzes, PK Enterprises Jill K. Ding, Assoicate Planner 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard PROPOSAL: The installation of a stormwater outlet pipe within the Honey Creek Stream buffer. The proposed stormwater pipe would convey stormwater from a proposed stormwater detention system to be constructed outside of the stream buffer to a discharge outlet, which would dissipate the energy of the stormwater prior to it entering Honey Creek. The detention system is required to detain and treat stormwater for a proposed 9-lot subdivision. . . CRITICAL AREA: Honey Creek stream buffer (Class III) EXEMPTION JUSTIFICATION: Pursuant to RMC section 4-3-050.C.7.a.ii Stormwater Management Facilities are permitted within stream buffers. An exemption from the Critical Areas Regulations is hereby granted for the following reason(s): X Stormwater Management facilties in Buffer: Stormwater management facilities in critical area buffers including stormwater dispersion outfall systems designed to minimize impacts to the buffer and critical area, where the site topography requires their location within the buffer to allow hydraulic function, provided the standard buffer zone area associated with the critical area classification is retained pursuant to subsection L or M6c of this Section, and is sited to reduce impacts between the critical area and surrounding activities. DECISION: The proposed development is consistent with the following findings pursuanUo RMC section 4-3-050.C.5: 1. The activity is not prohibited by this or any other chapter of the RMC or state or federal law or regulation; Honey Creek View Critical Area Exemption.doc Page 1 of 2 2. The activity will be conducted using best management practices as specified by industry standards or applicable Federal agencies or scientific principles; and, 3. Impacts are minimized and, where applicable, disturbed areas are immediately restored, unless the exemption is a wetland below the size thresholds pursuant to RMC 4-3- 050.C.5.f.1 and f.2. SIGNATURE: Nei, Watts, Director .. date Development Services DireCtor EXPIRATION: Five (5) years from the date of approval (signature date). Honey Creek View Critical Area Exemption.doc Page 2 of 2 " I ) t~ , Kathy Keolker, Mayor March 28, 2006 Phil Kitzes PK Enterprises: 23035 SE 262rd Street, Maple Valley, WA 98038 CiTY, ~ ~ RENTON Planning/BuiIdinglPublic Worlcs Department , Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator RE': Property Services COmments for Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat (File No. LUA05-II8) Dear Mr. Kitzes: , - Please find attached comments from the City's Property Seriri~es Section .. The~e , coinments will·guide you in the preparation of the ffuaJ plat map for recordiIig, , ' . . -. .--. -.-'. '. '. if you have any questions feet free'to contact'me'at(425r430-7219~ . , .... . , Sincerely, " " (lPf'1(, 3)74'" an K.Ding '. ,'.,' U ' ASSOCiate Planner ' ',', Enclosure 'cc:. Property Owners Parties of Record ~ .. ' . , , .. -------------IO-55-S-o-u~ili-G-rn-d-y-W-a-y--R-e-n-to-~-W-~-hl-·-n~-o-n-9-8-o5~5------------~ ~ This oaoercorrtains 50% recvded material, 30% DOS! con""""" AHEAD OF THE CURVE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION & PUBLIC HEARING ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON-5IGNIFICANCE -MmGATED (DNS-M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: Honoy C .... k View ~ P",llmlnary Plat PROJECT NUMBER: LUA05-118, PP, CAR. V-H, ECF LOCAT10N: 3524 NE Sunoet Boulevard DESCRIPTION: The appllcan11s propoalng to subdivide an existing 78,512 aquo", fool (1.8 aero) parcel located wfthtn the R •• ldentf .... 10 (R .. 10) dwetnng unit per al;J'e zoning destgnatton Into 9 lots, a slormwater detention tract (Tntct A), and • native growth prolecllon tract (T",ct B). An existing .... ldenco Is proposed to be removed. The lots woutd be proposed for tho future construction of detached amgle family residences. The tots range In area from 3.000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Aceess to the lots would be provtded via B new 42 .. foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as r1ght-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates In a hammerhead tumaround. A class 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the oastem portion of the subject site; In addition Protected Slopes and a category 3 wetland are tocated on tho eastern portion of the subject; $fte. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the environmental determination must be flied In writing on or before 5:00 PM on April 3, 2006. Appeals must be filed In wrftIng together with tho required $75.00 application too wfth: Hearlng Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Coda Sectfon 4-8-110.B. Addttlona' Infonnatlon regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Reftton City Clerk'. OffIce, (425) 430-6510. A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS ON THE 7TH FLOOR OF CITY HALL, 1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY, RENTON, WASHINGTON, ON APRIL 18, 2006 AT 9:00 AM TO CONSIDER THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND VARIANCE REQUEST. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, THE APPEAL WILL BE HEARD AS PART OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DMSION AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION .' , CER.TIFICATION I, Derdc--Jor~" , hereby certify that :3 copies of the above document were posted by me in ~ conspicuous places or nearby the described property on DATE: ?:f 1110-6' . ____ ~_L-L~j~~~------SIGNED:~ &(>,~ '-I" . , on the} 'J day of yY\o.. -rc. ~ ,ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION & PUBLIC HEARING IssuANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS-M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED, PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: Honey Creek View Estates PreliminarY Phit PRQJECTNUMBER: L,.UA05"1jl3, PP, CAR, V-H, eCF . LOCATION: 3524NESunset Boulevard D.ES.CRIPTION: The,~pplicant is proposing to subdivide an existing, 78,512 square foot (1.8 acre) parcel located within the.'Resldential"10 (R,10) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation Into 9 lots, a stormwater det~ntlon tract (Tract A), and a native growth pr9tectlon tra~ (Tr;tct B). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The'lots would be proposed for the fUture construction of detached single family residences. The lots range in area. from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Access to the lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicat~d as right-of-way. The proposed Road, A terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A class 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portion of the subject site; In addition Protected Slopes and a category 3 wetland are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. , THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT,' . Appeals ofthe environmental determination must be filed In writing on or before 5:00 PM· on April 3, 2006. Appeals must be filed in writing together With, the reqlJired$75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South GradyWay, Renton, WA98055. App~als to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B.·Additional ·informatlon regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)430':6510. A PUBLIC HEARING WILL: .. BE HELD BY THE RENTON HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCILCI::IAMBERS ON THE 7TH FL60ROFcrtY HALL, 1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY,RE;NTON, WASHINGTON:'ON APRIL 18, 2006 AT 9:06 AM TO CONSIDER THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND VARIANeE REQUEST. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, THE APPEAL WILLSE HEARD-AS PART OF THIS PUBLIC I-i~RING. . . PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEVELOPMENT . AT ' .. " r', . . . : .( ).' Kathy Keolker, Mayor . Match ·16,2006 · .' Phil Kitzes PK Enterprises 23035 SE 263rd'Street MapleVal'ley, wA ga038 'CiTYr' . ylF ~~1rON . PlanningiBuiIdingiPublic,Wb~ks' Departme~t Gregg ZiilimermanP.E~; Adiinnistrator . . '" . -. . ' . · . SUBJECT:' . Honey Creek View Estates Prelif\linal'y Plat LUA05-118, PP,CAR,V-H;ECF ' "., Dear Mr. Kitzes: .Thjs letter is written on behalf ofth~Environrrieh~aIHeview Committee (ERC)-to advi~e.you that they have completed .their r~viewoHhe, subject proj~ctand have 'issued a threshold' Detemination of Non- Significance~Mitigated with Mitigat,on Me;35ures. p'lease refer-to the enclosed. ER'C Report an~l Decision, Section C for a list of the' Mitigation ryt~asures: .. . . . ,.," . -, . " .....;. _ .. _ t'· 'Apj:ieal~ oftti~ environmental~~t~rroination nlustbefiled in writing on-or bef~)r~:"~::OOPM on .ApriL ~; 2,006, I\ppeall>'illust be fileg ihwfiting.;together with the' required' $75:00applic~tionf~:e 'iiith:. Hearing Examin.er, City of R~nton, 105~,SOl:l.th,GiadY',Way, Rempri,'WA 98055.· Appea'I~,tcj'~h~'Ex'aminer a,fe gqiierned by City otHenton f\1u,llicipaJ(;Qde .'SeetionA.:'a .. j 1 O.B:·Additiona,1 irlform'ation .regarding the appealprocess maybe obtairi~d~frorrlthe RentorltityClerk~s'Office, (425) 430,,(3510;' .. . ~ . -": :" ,,~ ',.' .,'. , .. ' . -. ',-- At3ublic.Heari~g will be h~;({fl;Yi~e :R~nt~n'He~i:ih~ Examiherif! the coLif!~iI,':d'l1a~b~~~ on.the sev~nthfloor of City Han; 10'SS:S'Quth.Grad.yWiiy; RintQn;,Washirigt~n; on,APri(:18;;,~006 a't 9:00 '. · AM'loconsider the PreliminarY:"PI~t/arldVariance request. The' appli~ntor'r~pr~sen~tive(~) 9f the" . appl,icar:lt is required,tobe pres$iit afthe'public heaririQ;,,A; cppyofthe staff reporhvill.j)e,'malled to you ' . . one' we.t3k before the hearing. 'If tlieEnvlronmentarDet~rrniriatibn is appealed; the,appeal.Will,:be heard as. partof-thJs:p~tilic hearing. "'<::";;.' .";".,'" ,.' ~,:)': ,".,,: , . iI, -ct" • 1. . ,Th~. p~ec~ding' info~matio~ . ..viii ,a:~~istYOu)o. planning :fbfimpiem!3~ation of yo~r! pr.oje~{~ricl:,~~able you t~; '.' . C,ex~[cise your app,ei:1I rights ni6r~;ftlUy;;:if you cho9sei'to do so: .' If youh~ve a~y:questidns 'or oesire . clarificatio~ of the above, please.'~llrne at (425) 430-721~ ..•. ,: . " ,., :', , Fdrlhe E~vironment~' Review'Committee, . -'. '. ,~ '., . ), .,~ ,-, ," ".;.;;" .. :"J'''.->. · .. c/(ji{p~ ~Ding ..• //' .' . Associate Planner If' , . t._ • '.~" . -: -.' ~ --.. " .. :"'".: .... cc: , . James & Minoo Costello, Cha'rles,&Mahwash Price: Ali & FaridehiV1astan, t Owner(s)' Arthur & Wauneta Eaitr:na'n·,'Ai..Meakinl Party(ies) of: Reconl '-.:;;, . .. '.'.-.' .. '.. ., ." Enclosure • ---'--~----:-. ..o..lO~5"':""S-SO-U-th-G-t __ -ad-:-;-W-"-:-:Y--"'<"':""R-en--:'to-n-; W-as-hi-'n-gt"-on--:9-80-:-:'5-~""" -------:--.• ~ ~ . .' ., '. , . . ,A.HEAD' OF'THE CURVE . ~ This~coniainS 50% recvded material, 30% POSt oo..,;ume~ .. '.: ... .... r. "'.;' : , , .. . , ,,~ . . .'. c -...... -, "::- ,:". ,:;-.'.": :. :". ':." -. ' : ,~ '. -~. -..; : ) CIrTYI IF' RENTON PlanningtBuildinglPublic Works Department Gj,'egg~lDmerman r.E.~ Adminis~rator :, Washington State ,Department of Ecology .En~iror~mentcll Review Section POBox 47703 . Olympia, WA 98504-7703 ' . ~u'bject Environmental ~beterminations . Transmitted herewith is a cOpy ofthe Environmental Determination fof'ihe foUolJVingpn::iject reviewed by the Environmenlal ReviewCommi~ee (ERC) on March 14,2006: t)ETERMINA liON .OF NON~SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED PROJECt NAME:' PRO,JE~T NUMBER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: Honey Creek View Estates. Preliminary Plat . LUA05-1.18jPP; CAR, V~H, ECF . '3524 NE Sunset Boulevard ',. ' Theapplicanns pro'posing to subdivide' a'nexisH!l9 7S,512 square foot .. {'tS·ac.rej:parcellocated within,th~.Resideiitiai-1Q'(R-1Q) dwelling unit per 'acrezonjng,~esignation into 9., lots, ,~ stormwat~r deteiltion:tr~ct (Trac;t A), .and.a· nati\'e" growth, protection, tr~ct(Tr~ct,B)~ .... At1 e;istinj;jresidence is . ,'.pr~po.sed.to· ber~moved; , The'Jots"';~)llld:: be ,pro'p,osed:' for the future ., ::i'cons~n-:l,ction of detached single family resi~~nce$.· th~lots:·tange in area, .. fr~1Jl 3;O(m squiuefe,et to 4,333 sq4ar~Je.et:.; ~CE!SS to the lots ,would be • . 'i>r~vided via'~a. riew'42-foot wide;'rQac:l(Ro~dA) i?roposedto ,bE! de,dicated ,'as. right;.of~way .. The proposed~'Road A ·termilJatesiri:a 'J1am'merhead ': Jt;irriarouil~; 'A' class 3 stream' (HoneY;.Cre~kl flows, a'crc)ss'tt~e eastern ',portii?n of the 5ubJectsile; in addition. Prot~ct~d'Slopes and a catego'ty 3 Wetl,md are located onlhe easter~~portion' of-thesubjecf,site, ' .' ':". . .. '.' .. " ."".'" '. .' ..... '. .' .". -~ -. ". ? , . AppE!a~s of the .~nvironmental ~etE!rr:ni,l1.atiC?n, must be filed in. .vv:riting, Qnor'before5;:O.q: PM on April 3, 2006.' Appeals must ,be fil~9iry;Writing,t9g~th'er with the.requif:ed~$75'.OO.applica'tiorifee,wit~:' Hearing Examiner, City of Renton; 1055 South Gra.dy Way, Renton,WA98055. Appe.als to' tM B<aminer are governed. by . City of Renton"' l\1uflicipaLGode: Section 4-6~1.10·.B·. ,', . Additional: information' regarding the appeal process may be obtained' frol)1 the Renton City Clerk's 'office, (425) 430~651 Q. .". . .. ' : _ ; . . . '. ,,:., . '. .-..... '. 'OJ '.-', cc: . ;. ': . ", .. -" .' ~--. . -.. - . ! .~ ..... : . ... :-' ..... ) CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNifiCANCE (MITIGATED) APPLICATION NO(S): LUA05-118, PP, CAR. V-H, ECF APPLICANT: Phil Kitzes, PK Enterprises PROJECT NAME: Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to subdivide an existing 78,512 square foot (1.8 acre) parcel located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation into 9 lots, a stormwater detention tract (Tract A), a'nd a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing· residence is proposed to be removed. The lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The lots range in area from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Access to the lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as right-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A class 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portion of the subject site; in addition Protected Slopes and a category 3 wetland are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LEAD AGENCY: 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard The City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment.· An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under their authority of Section 4-6-6 Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM on April 3, 2006. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton MuniCipal Code Section4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office. (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: March 20, 2006 DATE OF DECISION: March 14. 2006 SIGNATURES: ~f1k1n AfeXietSCh, Administrator Date EDNSP .... '- , , ':. " ,", ,'.' -.. '. ",. : ".; , , ~ ,: ~,:. ~ :'" . ' •. ' .. ·C'jiY'OFRENTON··-:· •. ' : . ":, '~ . , . ~ DETERMINATI0N·. 'O'FNONDSIGNlflCANCE-M~T~GATED: . ,"", ,,' '.'. ,:' .. . "' ..• l\ffl'r~GAT;ON M'EASOJRE~f·· ., .' -. . . '" . ,.. . .. ~ . "~' ."";' ... :'. . '. • ~ i. . , ,.~., '.", 'APPLICATION N'o(S): .... LlJAOi:118,PP; CAR,V:H, ~CI=:>, : ,.~PhilKiizes, pK Enterprfses, , . ':' .. ". '. "".: .' (': ,-,r -:. , APPlicANT: ' .. \' , . ',.' H6'ney Creek View EstatesPreiirilimity Piat '. .. . " . .~' .' -.' 'PROJECT NAME: .. "' ·;,DESCRIPTION.OF PRO~O,~AL:' , ..• Th~ applicant is propo~ing to ·suDdivide ~n existing 78,512 ';quare fm?t (1.8 acre) parcellocated'within the Re~id~ntial-10 (R-10) dwelling unit per:acre zoning designatidn'into 91.o~s, a ' sttirrnwaterdetention tract:(Trcict A);andailative growth' protectiob·.tract(Trac~ B). An'existing: resipehce i~ proposed to berel11oved.: The lots would' be proposed for the future ,ccih,struction.bf detached single family '. reside!1ces. The Jots r~rig~. hl are.a from: ~,()()O,square feet to 4;333; sq'liarefeet.· Access to the lotswOLiid be :proyided via anew 42-fobt~ide road',(Road I\yproposed to' be dedicated as right::af-,way. ,The' prdP9se~;Rdad A " .. '. '. ~erminates in a han:lI:nerl:leadtufDarO,u,ntr'A ¢Iass '3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portion' btthe '. subject site; in additioli ProteCtedSI6pes arid a, category 3 wetland ate' located, on the easternpoition: of the .. subject site, . ......., ... '. '. ' ........ , , :;,: . ',. . . --.' . . " . .', ' . lOCATION OF PROPOSAL:, ': ....• .352~hNE;;Sunset:Boulevard . •. ,)<,,1'~:':~~';\ "%':f .'W"~'?~,;,;,_ ,', .. ' . ,F ifhe City o( Renton . ::;" -.s ' , ~ .. ~, ".~. " ~ .'.:.---" : -'''' .... ,~ :. .' .}-" ,'. Depa!1Jj:)ent,of. F'lann!ng/B'l,lildiu9/PubUc Works ,/P:.". ''':D~velopment Plannilig Sectiori"~., ' , . LEAD AGENCY: ._;:.~~:;:' I' y.. . ;,:~IT.I?A:ri,~N,MEASURES: ;: ,: it ~i';~!i<t<r';:~~(.~:';'~~·:~~r:;:~;;;,::;,,:;. ;':~:.:" "::.,, .' " . '~. ' ':.' ,1. :·.',<the·,earlbwork activities to:be:copduqted 9nsit~~sfiai "ly.,6e;p~rmitb~d'to:occ.ur~~.~ring<the dry.:month~,-of the.year.. ~" _'.-: .. 'r;' '" . .• .,; ;. . i';;... ~. '<'. ~.:, ,,_~":::'.' •.. ,~.~;:':::J --., ). :.: _.f!i-'-.... ~' .. '.' .'. '. .... .: " ...... '" , .- ,'2;' :T,he)pplicant to·complyWit!l'·iq~~f:eCQmn1'~n; .. ; .' fj~~~~:tME;-:prelim~harx1g~feCl:II-;iCaI'si~ee\tal~atiof:l,:P,rejJ,ar~d by .. ·.',:-Berg'quistEngineering ,Services ~~ated ·JLi!y 2'?;",~Q riO{JI)El, followupg,eoteGf:\ilical:evaluation"dated;Februaiy 12. :}~06:.. . ',:::~~:",,~"\\ ,"'"~';.·';~:Y'tc:;/;c:,:".:·*:';, '. " . ",:., : .. ,·3.~ :-jheappJicant shall be requ ii"eq , .to\fpfQvit!Er,.f~Teri1p'orarY Erosion. alJd~,§edifhe'tion.control Pian (TESCP)' gesigned, . ...., "' .. ~,pursuarifto the Departmenfo~· E<i6i~rM$·,*~Qs.i(:)D;·and Sedime,nt"CqijtrQj: rt ul(er'nents outlined in V;oiurhe~Jr of, the , " "~I:' ;'$tqrmwater Management"M~nua,t· i':ih_dp}:6v,i,d~(~~aff',with. :a' Con~ruslion,::~i!ig~tion pian·.prior ,to .:iss1l8,nce of •. "., ~.. . 'Gbh~ttt;Jction' Permits. This ',eohditi()n 'os~2IH~~~' st),~j@c~' (6 -tVe revje~; .. ~a~q~pi:>ro.val of the, DevelopmeQtServices . '. ",:DiV!~iOn; , ' ,,' . '. ". . ">;;,,;.;-;~:, .v, '. ",,' ,; c~" .':: .' '. .' . ,,' "'4: ~ The applicant shall be required', to ~mply with theTecomme'l),dations foul)d' i~ 'the. Wetland Study report prepared by :;,j~at?JfatTechnologies, dated'$l~p.tembei 2~; . 2'Q05!;and ,til'e SupplementaIStieam;'Studyal')dMitiga~k)h"PJ<!lii,prepared '. ,,':~Y:E:COI9giCal Land .services',J~f:d~~ed;.Decembe:r~~;~005, " "<::, ~.':. ~.'",: ',' '" .:; '.~< : .. ' :'<'.' " ' .' ,5. '-.::rne, 'detention system'for th,is,.prpjec,t'sh.all' be'. required ,to comply with ,th~':requi~E!liJeRts fbund,itJ the,2005,King. c,,,:: .G?UDJY Surface Water, ,[jesi~~:Manu~r to: !lleetbQ~~de~erition (conservation,fl9yV:,ee;,rltJ:oi -.: L~ver~) :ah.dwatEiiquality ; ·'irnp'r,Qvements. . .' . ';',\' . '. ./ ." '(.' '" , " ,,,.r·, . , . 6. -The.,aPRlicant shall pay a Parks 'Mitlgation 'F~~ based on $530.76 per each,ne~ single family· lot prior to the recording , .-bfthedinal plat.' ~:,,',' , ,", ' " :) -, '" ,'., .. . ;:. ' . . :: '. 7~' 'The:appij(:ant shall pay a 'Traffl.t ,M11igation Fee .inthe~·mount of $15 per net:ni?w' averag'e' daily tdp.p':iorto the ,.:,'. f,ecor~irigofthefinalplat.';>·1:: '~.:":,'. .' '. " '.' ::i,'.,<,·'· . ,:-' "':' :.'. . --' 8 ... ·: Staf{recommends that the' app,iicanrpay a fire Mitigation Fee based 'on $488:.00 per I)~W single',family lo~ pripr 't9 the recording of th~ final pla.t. ': . ". " .' ' .,.. ....' " , '.,,' , ,-.... -' . , .. ' . ,./: " . ,' . . ', .. \ .".'-, ". ". ' .. \.: . ".;".'., .. >:. -',: ,. " :.' :', '.' .. ', .;.' , . " , :'.:.; :::. ! . :".Page1 of 1 .' • <. ' :'::; .... , .' .•.. - .. :. ' , ..... J: ',' ' , .. ',.': ,: ,', , ',' . , '\ '.' .r' , .-~: .. ' " "\'" ' '_ , :, ,-(, ,l\".",,~ ,~fry Qf'.·~E·NTON :"',J",::L,,~:',>,,;, '" " '" '~ , DETERMINATiON (j't NONaSIG'NDFICANCE;,;MDTB.GATED,' ';. :APVBSORY NOTES",:', <,::\', ,>', ,', .\," ., '.,' ". ~ . : APPLlCAt'IONNO(S): ' APPLlQANT:, U;A05-118; pp~ CAR~ V-H; ECF :~' , '~' :< ... PhilKltzes. Pi< Enterprises ., ' '. '.' .. :. , ' .. ', PROJECj'NAME:" 'Haney CrEiek'View Es(ates'P.r~lin1inarY:,PIi3t " .' .: (' '" .. ' .. ~.: ;.~ .. , ",', " .,.,,' ., . " . ." '.':' .. ; . '.; , , DESCRIPTION' OF PRbPOS;~l:' .,:' :,TheapPlica~t i~ proposing to);~bdj~id'e: ah':existing 78:512 ,~quare 'foot " ,';, (1.8 acre) parcelloCateci within the.-Residential:'10(R-.10) dwelling unit.p~r aC(~t9rJi.hg d~,sigm~tlai'! inta 9 fotS. a ", , starmwat~r ,oetehti.on tract(T rqct' Ak'<;lnd: ,a n'ative growth, protectlan ,t(act ,(T raef B).' An e~isting re'~iden'ceis "prapas~ tp 1;>9' 'reiTlaved. The :Iats-',waulci be prapased far'tI)e futiJre con'$t,i-u-ctiori' .of detached single ,family' ;',' resicfences': ' The, Jots range il) are'afrom 3;000 square feet'to 4.333squaretee.t: )~C¢el)S' ta the Jats Vl(auld ti~' • 'provid~d Yla a' riew 42-foat wide'road:CR,oad 'f..} prapased tabe dedicated'a~ right-af~w~y. The proposed Raad A' " terminatesit1ahammerheaat:umaroul1d,: A Class 3 streplJl (Han,ey'Creek}flows'a~rO:s.s the easte'mpbrtion of the",' subj~(;t site;:'i~ additian PrQte~t~d Slopes arid a categol"y3 -wetland 'ar-elqcatedofJtneeastem portianaf the " , ' ,suDj,e~t,site.. ,> ,,",' ":'<.",' .' .. ~,.: ' ' " "',,,-:' , , ' ,',,'.' '.;: :' .... . ;".' "'. '. sta~icwater pressure is ~bPut. at stre~tel~vatio~ (see City wat~r CiVilan91 n~:;·W'-~3;t5). The proposed " '. projeCt is located within theAquiferProteGtipnZolJe 2: '. ....... . . .:' .. : ''':'.\' '. .... . . .' _. 2 .. ; Water .service stubs are,requiredtQ. be iDstalied to ttjeeach building lot prior to reqd,rdi~gj)fthef plat. .. . '. ~ .': " • -,' ~!".' • '. • .',' -' •••. "'. . ~ ~ • .' "/ ~ ',': ... .' "','. "'. '.. •••. '.", . ~ , -. .' :~" ; :", . -"" ,"".' • • • !.. . , .' .' 3. " W~ter-m;:iin. improvements within' the ,new 9~velbpmeht wiU-bereq-uired to provide, tl)ere.q'uirea fire' flow . dem,and ~nd fordbmestic water servi~ forthis, p'roject.The· improvements willinclude{ but riofbe:',mited ·to . th~ folloWing: a :water m~.ifloex~en~ion· (~.-inch,· minimum di~".)etern·~ithin;the n~~ street The rnaxirii~&<c:t.~~iI~bleflowrate from thi$ . water main extension will· be 1,250 gpm (unless /ooRedsystemls In place). .' .", .. " ", '. . , !: 0':, . . , ,_ ... ' ' .' . _ . . ,; ; . -.' . . . " .:' .' :';'~':-'" '.' .' .:. ," " .... .',~' . ~ ; -J ,';" . ".:' . ,,' ... ··4. ,The Watet' System DevelopmentCharge'(SDC) woufd be'triggered atthe·sing'I~;.farhiiy,taie,of $1.956 per ne\N single-· familyperpuilding lot. ThiS fee: is payable at the time tl1eutility constriJction'p~rmitis.j~sue(j:· ' .•. ' . . , Plan RevieW--Sariitart Sewer .. /," r' ,:, . . ,1. Th~re'isai:2"s~\I\'erlTIainalongthe:Hoqey,treek(nciittl·side ofthe creek).' .. '., .," . '. 2., Anyexistiryg septic system~haH pe abandbhedin accordance. with King CO!Jnty)-i~~ltti DElpartmerit prior to bliilding perrriiloccupancy: ....... '... -,:.. ." . ' 3. , Separate 'side sewers stubs are required ill,¢ach buildirig ,lot No duai,sidesew(miare;a,,0W~d.· 4:'As~werrriain' extension aJ(>ng·th~ hew stre~tiwillbe,requ·ired.' '. ,::/. : ... ,,' •.•.... ·5. ,All seWer' .mains, oUfside. Right,,:of-Way' require a 1~foot utility easement with' . drivable access throughout the _easerru3nl-: " --.:"~ ". . . . "-.. j'~~".'.'. . .' 6 .. ltiis'parGelaresubject to the Honey.'Cre.eK8611 Speclal·Assessrrient District (SAbr:"pi~'feeis $250;001l0t. Fee~ are 'i::oll~cted-atthe time theLitilityc9n~tructlbn ,permiti.~ i~~~4.iifg~., .' .' . ,..:.:':,:"..... . ", .'. . • . •• '.' .• . ,.,...~_~ .... "::l. __ ;:l.)"_'<":_~ •• , ••.• ' ....... ,, -.. ':< '.'_, '. ~" . • ',' 7. This :parcel·isalso slibject to;th~ Hori'ey<Cregl<jift(ill,t~ge~8612'Sp,~cial AssessmentDi~ttjct (SAD). The fee is $74.38 '. perft:offrontagealong Honey Cree~.;:,;jf)i;'t''', fc<.~/ ... '. ",\,,'2;;. '. " r:';'i.;> .. · . '. '" . ,'. 8: The S~n!tary Sewer.System D.evelo~g;le~\tC~arQ,es,(~~.9 is $1.9117 ppr·;'!9t. ~his fee:is;payable ~t the time the u!ility construction permit is issued. i:"":" • ' .' -. " '" ,t" -; ":' .: 'PtahReview;~n~nsportati6ri iir;~" \, )/' ""~;' ,,;..,f' 'o.;~~;... ; I, " 1. . ~tr¢er.improvemen~sincluding •. out rioHifQjf~d\t.o pa\liQg .. ~ioe,w.alks,'>cprb· and'~utter; storyn drain, lanc:lscape, street .. . : ligh.ti,n~fal:J.d:street signs win be~'~qpiff!!d i=iIoh~;~Yn§~tE3Iv.9:':t.:JE\~~~d .~Iqng ttie.i1~w,:~,ti:e.~rij;Jteiiort6.the plat. .. ~2.. Corneflo~,s.shall. dedicat~a mir;!jJTIU.!)1J~a.iusl,9Jf;~ .,"",.'" ~~~t":"':':./;V/·· ~. ~ ·.~t-, <-; ',~:;::" :".;~ " .' . :.3·~AII wireuti!iti~s shi:llrbe'insfalleW~f,g~rgI?iJ~(jf~ ~ 'lQ~fae'nton. ynd~1~ro~P9ili~tPf;~,i.p.~rice. PianReView,~:;,:,'General , . ~:} :.: .'~',';':h;.":i];]ii:;i , .·"'5f~i;k, }' 'isF" ,::,}'~"" ' .. '.1.. ···AII plans' shall conform .to the.R.e.nton"D~aftiri~t,Starjda ,ds;,";;ii,i~ /: '. . N "". :. ', .. , .. .. '. . .... ..' , ~."," .... .' "._.' .. ~'" '_-$"':'.' \t>', ',' ." ,,_,",. .1, ", '. ".!ff ",,' ',' .~.1 .. " • _',' . '. 2. Due-to/th,eex.istence.O.f steep slC?~~ftrr\m~~site:ai1dthe~oils ClassJfic~!i.on'(;(p2t~iltiaF.~rQ~ioN)h,oiNn on':the. . Prelirriinary .Site. Evaluation datedifEebr'!Jary,\2f,.2006staff :advis.e~rtJjat,prio~;Jo aQyc(jri.~t(Uctibri:a complete" ~~ot~ch' . -. .. .--' ,'" .... ' ... ~~\.\' .t ..... '.\\'J' .'(~ "." ,.~. ~ •. ~ .I~:'''.:'',,"':I .",<.' '"..~'. t,' ~ ~;', ~"'" '. ., , .' . Report.,beprovided. The Geotecl:lhicaV8rigji:leeriiig:;SelNices~~ Rrelimihary;;Site Evaluation: dat~d July22,2005'and ' _ ...... ~ •• , •. ~ , '. . .• ··Vl'Cf;\. .~'.J: .. ,-.. ",~ ... ' ~ . '~\' .. ':1"." '''-; ':"",J ... • _ ~' ............. , _. . ..• , ', .. -•. " dat~.q Febr~ary 12; 200~ do riotproVip~,~~ffifjel)t ;ihf2rn1atiop reg.~[9iiJJ¥earthwork; s.it~:c}~a.rin9;'excavation;soils '. ,·materials.and.erosion. . -: ". "~~';;>.~' -i. "~~~' .».,~;,;~' . ',;.,' , . , Property·$'ewices. , '\", ;.,,-:;':1',-, . .,' ,. ): ' , ' '. '.. -. ~. "i '. • • .' ... , 1 ..• Under:separate,cover. . .. ".' . " ". .. ' . ~-' . . ".' ... ) ." :.~ ). ", ';i, .,: ;ERC; Advisory Notes ~? ..... ..: .- • ",I',,: . '", ..... :. .~' .. " . '. . .:. . , .', . 0; ..•.. . ,. .> ",' "" . .\ '",.". ' .. '" ",',' , " ' .. ':, .. ~< .. , ' .. ~ . .' ... " " '. -. ~ Page 2 6[2 '. \.: '" . "", STAFF REPORT ( ) ."'- ) City of Renton Department of Planning / Building / Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT A. BACKGROUND . ERC MEETING DATE Project Name: Applicant/Contact: File Number: Project Manager: Project Description: Project Location: Exist. Bldg. Area gsf: Site Area: RECOMMENDA TlON: Project Location Map March 14, 2006 Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat Phil Kitzes, PK Enterprises 23035 SE 263m Street Maple Valley, WA 98038 LUA-Q5-118, PP, CAR, V-H, ECF Jill K. Ding, Associate Planner The applicant is proposing to subdivide an existing 78,512 square foot (1.8 acre) parcel located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation into 9 lots, a stormwater detention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The lots range in area from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Access to the lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as right-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A class 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portipn of the subject site; in addition Protected Slopes and a category 3 wetland are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. (Project description continued on page 2). 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard N/A Proposed New Bldg. Area: N/A 1.8 acres Total Building Area gsf: N/A Staff recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M). LUA05-118ercrpt ) PROJECT DESCRIPTION. CONTINUED.' The applicant is proposiogto subdivide the subject site into 9 single family residential lots and two tracts (Tracts A and B).-The lots are proposed to range 'in size from 3:000 square feetto 4,333 square-feet with a resulting net densit}t'of approximately 9.57 dwelling units per acre (1.8 gross acre site -.0.69-acres. seQsitive areas, -0.17 -acres public streets = 0.94 net acre~9units J 0.94'net acre = 9.57 dulac). "LandsCape; roadw<iy;and utility improvements would be . installed with the preliminary plat. Access to the project would be provided via residenti~r"driveways onto flew. Rqad A. . -. . The applicant has identified steep slopes, a c:ategory 3 wetland, and a class 3 stream (Honey Creek) on the subject. site. A category 3 wetland requires a 25 foot buffer and a class 3 stream requires a 75 ·foo~ buffer. One slope that exceeds 40% was identified on the project site;·Slopes. that exceed 40% for a height grealerthan 15 feet are considered~protected slopes. The majority oftheslopeslocated on the wesLcentral portion of the subject.siteare . between 25and40 percent gra~e,whichare classified as S~nsi~iveSlopes:, . . B. .. RECOMMENDATION' DETERMtNATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE, IssueDNSwith 14 daA eal Period> , Issue DNS with·15 dayeol11memt Period' with Concur(ent'14 day Appeal Period. C~ MITIGATION MEASURES . , -. DETERMINATION OF . XX NON -SIGNIFICANCE ;.IIIIITIGA TED. Xx' Issue DNS,.Mwilh14daA ~aIP~riod: Issue DNS-M~ith 15 day Comment Period' with Concurrent 14dayAppeal Period~- 1. The earthwork activities to be conducted onsiteshall only be permitted to ~bcur during the dry months of the year. 2. The applicant to comply with the recommendations found in the, preliminary geotechnical site evaluation prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services dated July 22, 2005 and the follow up geotechnical evaluation dated February 12,2006. '. ..' . -. 3. The applicant shall be required to provide a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) designed pursuant to the Department. of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements outlined in . Volunie II of the Stormwater Management Manual and provide staff with a Construction Mitigation Pial' prior to issuance of Construction Permits. This condition shall be subject to the review and approval ofthe Developmen,t Services Division. - 4. The applicant shall be required to ~omplY with the recommendations found in the ,Wetland Study report' prepared by Habitat Technologies dated September 23,.2005 and the Supplemental.5tream Study and Mitigation Plan prepared by EcologicalLandServices,lnc~dated December9, 2005. ' . ' 5. The detention ,system for this project shall be required to comply with the requirementsfourid fn the2005'Ki'ng'~' . County Surt'ace Water Design ManLialto meet both detention (conservatiQn flow contror-Level 2) 'j:mdwate(' quality improvements. -. . ..., " '. ' -' '. _ ' -. 6. Theappii~nt shall pay a Parks Mitigation Fee based. on $530.76 per e~ch new single famiIYlo~pr.iorto·the recording of th'e final plat. . ' . . 7. The applicant shall pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee in the amount of $75 per net new average daily trip priortothe recording of the final. plat. .". 8. Staff recommends that the applicant pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on $488.00 per new single .family lot prior to . the recording of the final plat. Project Location Map LUA05-118ercrpt City of Renton PIBIPW Department LT HONEY CREEK VIEW PRELIM/MAR. ~ En(' 'mental Review Committee Staff Report ! LUA-05-118, ECF,PP, CAR, V-H REPORT March 14, 2006 Page 30t7 D.ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS In compliance with RCW 43.21 C. 240, the following project environmental review addresses only those projecUmpacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. 1. Earth Impacts: The subject site is designated on the City's Critical Areas Maps as containing steeply sloped areas that qualify as either sensitive or protected slopes. The topography of the subject site is hilly, generally sloping from south to north. Slope with greater than a 40 percent gradient are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. No development is proposed within the protected slope area. The subject site is primarily vegetated with second growth alder, Douglas fir, and maple trees. The ground cover .. includes predominantly blackberry, fern, and ivy. The information submitted by the applicant indicates that the majority of the vegetation located on the western portion of the site would be removed for the construction of the proposed short plat improvements, driveways, and building pads. The soils underlying the development area consist of Beausite gravelly sandy loam (BeC). With the project application, the applicant submitted a preliminary geotechnical site evaluation prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services dated July 22, 2005 and a follow up geotechnical evaluation dated February 12, 2006. Based on the existing site topography, the applicant's project engineer estimates that approximately 5,000 cubic yards of fill and . 2,000 ctJbic yards of cuts (which will be used as fill elsewhere on the site) will be required to achieve proposed elevations. . T~e subsurface conditions of the subject site were evaluated by excavating four test pits. The report states that the test pits were excavated to a maximum depth of 13.5 feet. A surficial layer of topsoil and sod was identified within the . first 6 inches of soil at all of the test pit locations. Underlying the topsoil, brown to reddish brown, loose, SAND-SILT (SM) some gravel, occasional cobble was encount€.lred to a depth ranging from 2.5 feet to 4 feet below the surface. Underlying the loose SAND-SILT soil in Test Pits 1-3, gay-brown to gray, dense to very dense GRAVEL-SAND occasional cobble to SAND occasional cobble (GP-SP) was encountered to the termination depth of Test Pits 1 and 2 and to a depth of 10.5 feet in Test Pit 3. From a depth of 10.5 feet and extending to a depth of 13.5 feet (the termination depth), gray, very hard GRAVEL-SAND-SILT (GM), occasional cobble (glacial till) was encountered. In Test Pit 4, gray, very hard GRAVEL-SAND-SILT (GM), occasional cobble (glacial till) was encountered underlying the reddish brown, loose SAND-SILT (SM) a~ a depth of about 3.75 feet to 6 feet, the termination depth. No ground water was encountered in any of the test pits. Due to the soils located on site, the geotechnical engineer recommended that earthwork activities be limited to occurring during only the dry months of the year. Staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the earthwork activities to be conducted onsite shall be required to occur during the dry months of the· year. The geotec nical report recommends the ollowing buffer and building setbacks from the top of slope: h f Cross Section of Area (see page A2, Minimum Buffer Minimum Building Setback attached) A-A' 15 feet from top of steep slope 10 feet from buffer line .. B-B' 15 feet from top of steep slope 10 feet from buffer line '1 B-B' with vault 5 feet from top of steep slope 5 feet from buffer line North Property Line 10 feet from crest of slope 10 feet from buffer line Staff recommends a mitigation measure, which requires the applicant to comply with the recommendations found in the preliminary geotechnical site evaluation prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services dated July 22, 2005 and the follow up geotechnical evaluation dated February 12, 2006. . . Due to the slopes located on the subject site, the potential exists .for erosion to occur from the subject site. Staff recommends a mitigation measure that requires the applicant to comply with the Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements as outlined in Volume" of the Stormwater Management Manual. . Mitigation Measures: 1. The earthwork activities to be conducted onsite shall only be permitted to occur during the dry months of the year. LUA05-118ercrpt City of Renton PIBIPW Department HONEY CREEK VIEW PRELlIVIINAR • ..k T REPORT March 14, 2006 'mental Review Committee Staff Report } LUA-65-118, ECF,PP, CAR, V-H Page 4 of7 2. The applicant to comply with the recommendations found in the preliminary geotechnical site evaluation prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services dated July 22, 2005 and the follow up geotechnical evaluation dated February 12,2006. 3. The applicant shall be required to provide a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) designed pursuant to the Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements outlined in Volume II of the Stormwater Management Manual and provide staff with a ConstruCtion Mitigation Plan prior to issuance of Construction Permits. This condition shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations 2. Water -Stream/Wetlands A Wetland Study report prepared by Habitat Technologies dated September 23, 2005 and a Supplemental Stream Study and Mitigation Plan prepared by Ecological Land Services, Inc. dated December 9, 2005 were submitted with the project application. The reports identified 1 stream (Honey Creek) and 1 wetland on the subject site. Honey Creek is classified as a Class 3 stream at the project location. The wetland (Wetland NB) was classified as a Category 3 wetland. A class 3 stream requires a 75-foot buffer and a category 3 wetland requires a 25-foot buffer. No development is proposed within the wetland or wetland buffer. Temporary impacts are proposed to the stream buffer for the installation of a stormwater detention vault, stomwater outlet pipe, and an outfall structure. The stream study identifies a total of 615 square feet of proposed stream buffer impact. Themitigation plan proposes to restore the disturbed stream buffe'r area with the planting of native shrubs and herbaceous ground cover and enhancing the buffer with 4-5 pieces of large woody debris to improve wildlife habitat. No new trees are proposed to be planted in the disturbed area so as to ensure the roots do not affect the underground stormwater pipe. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Wetland Study report prepared by Habitat Technologies dated September 23, 2005 and the Supplemental Stream Study and Mitigation Plan prepared by Ecological Land Services, Inc. dated December 9, 2005. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations 3. Water -Stormwater A Preliminary Storm Drainage Report prepared by Preferred Engineering, LLC dated September 22,2005 was submitted with the application materials. According to the report existing stormwater runoff sheet flows to the northwest across the subject site into the Honey Creek stream channel where it flows to the northwest eventually to the creek's confluence with May Creek. The drainage report proposes to treat the onsite vehicular flows and impervious surface runoff within a two cell detention and water quality vault located on the project site within Tract A The vault will discharge down the protected. slope and directly into Honey Creek. The City~s Plan Review Section has reviewed the submitted drainage report and due to downstream flooding and erosion problems, staff is recommending a SEPA condition requiring this project to comply with the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention (conservation flow control -Level 2) and water quality improvements. Mitigation: The detention system for this project shall be required to comply with the requirements found in the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention (conserVation flow control -Level 2) and water quality improvements. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, King County Surface Water Design Manual 4. Plants The subject site is forested and is primarily vegetated with second growth alder, Douglas fir, and maple trees. The ground cover includes predominantly blackberry, fern, and ivy. The tree cutting and land-clearing plan submitted by the applicant indicates that the construction of the proposed subdivision would result in the clearing . of approximately 60% of the subject site. The proposed clearing limits encompass all of the proposed lots and the proposed roadway. Additional areas outside of the proposed lots and roadways would be cleared for the installation of utility lines (storm drainage). Mitigation: No further mitigation is recommended LUA05-118ercrpt City of Renton PIBIPW Department HONEY CREEK VlEII!! PRELIM/NAR . 24 T Err -'vnental Review Committee Staff Report ) LUA-05-118, ECF,PP, CAR, V-H REPORT March 14, 2006 Page 50f7 Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations 5. Recreation The proposal does not provide on-site recreation areas for future residents of the proposed plat. It is anticipated that the proposed development would generate future demand on existing City parks and recreational facilities arid programs. Therefore, staff recommends a mitigation measure requiring that the applicant pay a Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per each new sirigle-family lot. The fee is estimated at $4,246.08 (8 lots x $530.76 = $4,246.08) and is payable prior to the recording of the final plat. Mitigation: The applicant shall pay a Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per each new single family lot prior to the recording of the final plat. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations 6. Transportation Access to the project would be provided via a 42-foot wide residential access road (Road A) off of NE Sunset Blvd, which terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. The City's street standards require that residential access roads have a right-of-way width of 50 feet with 32 feet of paving, sidewalks, curb and gutter, and street lighting. The applicant has requested a modification to the City's street standards to reduce the right-of-way width to 42 feet at the intersection with NE Sunset Blvd and 20 feet at the terminus of Road A. To mitigate for the increased number of trips resulting from the proposed plat, staff recommends a mitigation measure requiring the payment of a Traffic Mitigation Fee in the amount of $75 per net new average daily trip. This fee is estimated at $5,742.00 ($75 x 9.57 trips x 8 new lots = $5,742.00) and is payable prior to the recording of the final plat. Mitigation: The applicant shall pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee in the amount of $75 per net new average daily trip prior to the recording of the final plat. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations 7. Emergency Services The proposal will add new residential units to the City that will potentially impact the City's Police and Fire Emergency Services. Staff recommends a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to pay a Fire Mitigation Fee, based on $488.00 per new single family lot. This fee is payable prior to the recording of the final plat Mitigation: Staff recommends that the applicant pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on $488.00 per new single family lot prior to the recording of the final plat. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations E. COMMENTS OF REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS The proposal has been circulated to City Departmental/Divisional Reviewers for their review. Where applicable, these comments have been incorporated into the text of this report as Mitigation Measures and/or Notes to Applicant. L-Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File. Copies of all Review Comments are attached to this report. Environmental Deterrmination Appeal Process Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM April 3, 2006. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. Planning . 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Commercial, multi-famil Ie famil and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to LUA05-118ercrpt City of Renton PIBIPW Department . HONEY CREEK VIEW PRELIM/NAR. JA T Err 'mental Review Committee Staff Report ! LUA-05-118, ECF,PP, CAR, V-H REPORT March 14, 2006 Page 60f7 the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to toe hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 3. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1st and March 31st of each year. The Development Services Division's approval of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of the permit. Fire 1 .. A fire hydrant with 1,000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of all new single-family structures. If the building square footage exceeds 3,600 square feet in area, the minimum fire flow increases to 1,500 GPM and requires two hydrants within 300 feet of the structures. 2. Street address must be visible from a public street. 3. Existing and new hydrants will be required to be retrofitted with a Storz "quick disconnect" fitting. 4. Fire department access roads are required to be paved 20 feet in width. Dead end roadways over 150 feet in length are required to have an approved turnaround. . Plan Review -Surface Water 1. The Surface Water System Development Charges (SDC) is $759 per building lot. This fee is payable at the time the utility construction permit is issued. Plan Review -Water 1. The proposed development is within the City of Renton's water service area and in the 565-pressure zone. There is an existing 12-inch water main in NE Sunset Blvd that can deliver a flow rate of 4,500 gallons per minute (gpm). The static water pressure is about 70 psi at street elevation (see City water civil drawing no. W-0315). The proposed project is located within the Aquifer Protection Zone 2. 2. Water service stubs are required to be installed to the each building lot priorto recording of the plat. 3. Water main· improvements within the new development will be required to provide the required fire flow demand and for domestic water service for this project. The improvements will include but not be limited to the following: a water main extension (8-inch minimum diameter) within the new street. The maximum available flow rate from this water main extension will be 1,250 gpm (unless looped system is in place). 4. The Water System Development Charge (SDC) would be triggered at the single-family rate of $1,956 per new single-family per building lot. This fee is payable at the time the utility construction permit is issued. Plan Review -Sanitary Sewer 1. There is a 12" sewer main along the Honey Creek (north side of the creek). 2. Any existing septic system shall be abandoned in accordance with King County Health Department prior to building permit occupancy. 3. Separate side sewers stubs are required in each building lot. No dual side sewers are allowed. 4. A sewer main extension along the new street will be required. 5. All sewer mains outside Right-of-Way require a 15-foot utility easement with drivable access throughout the easement. 6. This parcel are subject to the Honey Creek 8611 Special Assessment District (SAD). The fee is $250.00/10t. Fees are collected at the time the utility construction permit is issued. 7. This parcel is also subject to the Honey Creek frontage 8612 Special AssessmEmtDistrict (SAD). Thefee is $74.38 per ft of frontage along Honey Creek. 8. The Sanitary Sewer System Development Charges (SDC) is $1,017 per lot. This fee is payable at the time the utility construction permit is issued. Plan Review -Transportation 1. Street improvements including, but not limited to paving, sidewalks, curb and gutter, storm drain, landscape, street lighting and street signs will be required along Sunset Blvd NE and along the new street interior to the plat. 2. Corner lots shall dedicate a mini,mum radius of fifteen feet. ' 3. All wire utilities shall be installed underground per the City of Renton Undergrounding Ordinance. Plan Review -General 1 . All plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. 2. Due to the existence of steep slopes in the site and the soils classification (potential erosion) shown on the Preliminary Site Evaluation dated February 12, 2006 staff advises that prior to any construction a complete Geotech Report be provided. The Geotechnical Engineering Services -Preliminary Site Evaluation dated July 22, 2005 and dated February 12, 2006 do not provide sufficient information reaardina earthwork, site clearing, LUA05-118ercrpt City of Renton PIB/PW Department \_ HONEY CREEK VIEW PRELINIINAR . ...,LA T REPORT March 14. 2006 excavation, soils materials and erosion: Property Services 1. Under se arate cover. LUA05-118ercrpt En ,mental Review Committee Staff Report ) LUA-05-11B, ECF,PP, CAR, V-H Page 70(·7 ~ ~I N i : ~ ~r=~==~~~~~ i_LT"· -+~~t=--t=:-~U....---'--·~}jE~L!:::;i_~=·i~==l-==~t=:J:::::;:·~==+~:!:::;:!; ...... ~ R-l ..... -.-r" ....... _"._. I ! . ~ ii i --. iC If. 1 l ! -R-ML .. -F---- ES • 9 T23N R5E E 112 - - - -_ton CiV Umiflol bL 2M91,fO 1:4800 D5 4T23N R5E JE 1/2 . . S304 ~NING MAP BoeX BESIDENTIAL ~ Resonl"ce Conservation ~ Residential 1 dulac g Residential .. dulac ~ Residential 8 dulac ~ Residential Manuf$ctured Homes I R-IO I Residential to dulac I R-l04 1 Residential .4. dulac I RH-rl Residential Multi-Family I RM-T I Residential Multi-Family Traditional IRM-U I Residential Multi-Famil,. Urban Cent,.,r" MIXED liSE CENTER ~ Center VUlege lut-Htl Urban Center -North 1 !uc-N21 Urban Center -North 2 [ED Center DOlmtown· @] Commercial/Office/Residenlial COMMERCIAL o Commercial Arterial- @] Commercia) Office-o Commercial Neighborhood INDU5TlUAL W IndustrIal -H.avy o Industrial -Medium CD Industrial -LlCbt (P) Publicly o""e" ____ Renton City Limits ___ Adjacent City Limits _ BOQk Pages Boundary KROLL PAGE • May Include, Overlay Districts. See Appendix ma.ps. For addiUona] reguJaUoDs in Overlay, Districts. pl ....... ee RIoIC 4-3. PAGE# INDEX Printed by Print & Mall Svr;s, City of Renton ) ) I I I , ........... 'l<, I I I I IB 18 I I B I D ID I-l~ 11. II' " 19 16 Z ~ 0- w !:: en ..-. ..... o 1.0 '0 o N I/) CI) u "2: CI) en C) c: ";:: CI) CI) c: "m c: w -I/) "5 . C" ~ CI) !XI ~ W t-en d.. 0. QEVELOPER' IPK £NTtItPRISES 230"" SE 203rd stREEr ~L£ "..u.n. WA 88038 ~~:i~1p.;,t'kES PORTION OF NE TWN 1/4, SW 1/4, SE 1/4, 23N" R5E , W.M. ~ PREFERRED DIGII«ERINQ, u.c PO DOX 2&422 FEDEAAL "AY, VIA SlI!I()gJ-2422 PH(2~ :501-0708 FX(.2&.3 330-1"7 CONT: : R.ctWft) MR, P'E QIAIL: ADWINOPOJ.C.ORO ~ LEGEND INFORMED LAND SURVEY. u.c 1701 SOUTH SHERU)Nt1 AVE. = ~=::8!= . * * --~~ ~!ai~1~RY. PLS 0 0 -- _ r· ... ".,:~':~ . ~-~',,:: -:~ :: " ~ ~~.9·) , '~::i: ':::>1 ::: ,,', ' \ , ';" ~ '1.<:::" \ \ /0. ~;~.:B®-\ 3000.'A<I, If--. I ... A'~ __ '" /' '1·\ \ --~: .:: ","<)-+-~--., -=--=----.L:--_ .... L'L 4!.:.. _ .J _ ..JIJ~ _ -'--. CD --0 • [!J [!J 0 ~ SEC 4 ""'11',,, "'0te!1II "." ... 1.,-.",( Jo""'''''t f • -... ~ ! f "'7faIL f • .r=.IfELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON DEC 2 1 2005 RECEIVED \ SCALE: 1 ~-2\' ,':, '1....... lj "',) ... "-,.'-.:'" ""f:. ... :.-...... ?,', TjO 0 ~~~Sc;;.~;R:ot~~v:~.~~ Ca:~:;/~~NCR£r£ WALK R£1lJRN TO THE EAST ON THE EASr SIDE or- N[WPORT AVE'. N,E. &-SUNSET 8LVD. CI rr R(N roN 8M I 750 FRONT S£l'BllCK SlOE SETBACK BlCK S£1lIoIiCK 1 5£ COR SEC 4-2J-5 (CONe. MON. IN CASE \' ~ SE 112!h STREET" 1J2nd AVENUE S.E. \J ---"'r--.o!L \'" M1£Q B9,x_!'I,I -~~cf-~ __ .1.:, :<'·~-:"-"-'S=..::.:-~~-:"-~"~C'_i!:'""~ ___ ~ / /" IV 82' 22' Jr w ' 816.00' "CAS: / , NO. REVISION ,,: ",. 'f..:. 1!J!!l ..... o.rj ::!',"'0 "', GENERAL HYDROLOGICAL NOTES, EXISTlNO TOT. PNtCll. AREA _ 71.:112. SF' (1.10 JICMS) £XISTlNQ IWPDMOUS NtEA • 1.135 Sf (0.025 ~ , LOTS PROPOSED I LOTS P<RlII1TED -. LOTS -I LOTS (ctrr or RENTON WORI<SHm') EXISTING PVMOUS MEA _ n,275.4 SF (1.17 ACRtS) (FOAEBT C<MR • ORASS) TRACT 'A' POND NflA • &.587.1 SF' OF PAACEL. \W'#I:t.l;J,oiilN;W~.I'~~'_ L 1M2 '" "'" .........",.,. ..--40S·± :!4"CCP -"" --.. BY I [)ATE I APPR Of RttORDS 11'1' Ttl[ REDUE3T Of KENN!TH ~. Q't'LDI. ~ LIttNSID IN M ST ..... n "'''''''NOION. I::~.I ft CITY OF , RENTON ""''''-10eD S. 0IW7r WAY RDOtJN. WA lBOCIO C>6<l NOT FOR cJSTRUCTION E~~7~::-~i£~~Q~f.a2.§.!oL£ lmKHOWH '-....-- OEyELOPER' ~ PK £KTtRPR1SD PREnRRED 1EN00, u.c ~ ,,~, WA PO BO)( 2&422 floe) 227-744.5 f£D£RAL WAY, WIt Ql083 toHt-.cr: PHil. KfTlES (208) &01 -~108 PORTION OF N"E 1/4, SW 1/4, SE 1/4, TWN 23N., R5E, W.M. SEC 4 • .... 1S,O' ---'----1----,---- / I I ~! ;;, ~~---- "' ~i L.oM un, EASEMENT : I I I I I ~------- PROPOSED ~D )1 I ... JH IROM PIPE HUB &-TAX L.,p ..... O.7J NORm OF LINE I I ss J~ ~--__ J ____ ; PROPOSED WATER !Z~&S~ ,t ~ L!?!ATlO~ 8ENC!-iMARX ELEVA nON _ 406.77' CHISELfD SOUARE N.£. CORNER CONCRU[ WALK RUURN TO THE EAST ON THE EAST SIDE OF N[IYPOR r A \1£'. HE d:' SUNS£ r BL VD. CI rr HEN rON 8M I 750 '" ",. ~is .... :11} ~':'l/'j ...--4D5'± 2"~CCP EX SSMH 2J4 / RIM=4GO.J2' ... /~ ~~:~-~?9'~~: [£J [£J OJ OJ :j:j: :)Ii: Q A 4+ 4+ I><l .. ~""'."., ~I~ --~ DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON DEC 2 j 2005 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION NOTE: D. tm..mES M[ APPROXIWATE QNl.Y CALI. 1-800-424-&555 B[FQRt DlQClNO .. POTliOl£ lIHKNOWN EX. IITtUIlES BEFlJR[ COHSTRUCT1OH BtGINS. IlD SCALE, 1" -20' I TIl.£PHOHE VAUl.T CAP/pWC STORW DRJJH QJl \r'tRT I '~ [>6<1 COUPUHD @ ® M[CHANlCAl. 2-HQZn£ HYDRANT IS IS ,.. QATE/OEHERAL CITY OF ~ RENTON STORt.I DRAIN YAHHQ,£ lHRUST Bt.Oa< WAttR WED ........ /bUI<D fl. IILDW-<lFf" HONEY CREEK VIEW PLAT 3524 NE SUNSET BLVD RENTON, WA 98055 ~ q .~ CI.. CI.. L ~~~~--7)------1 P:D3fir' PAIl ) • 3:i.o£V, LEGEND CEl/.ELQE!E;B· ~ r PO""""""",, ~ DCOtNaRIHO, u.c = """""y ~ SEW!R o.EAN OOT :t.'l03S SIt te3RO smEEr PO 80x e.u tWtt.I VIUlY. WA 08038 f!DERAL WAY. WA D81»J-2422 m ~ ~VAULf =221-7445 (200) 2SQ1-57!lO Ii 0 • ......... III>IIHQL :N:TI PH!IJ.F' KmES t \: U11U!Y POLl NOT FOR CONSTRU'CnON 0 • ITClRI.t DfWN CATDt BASIN E--""",",POLl ON,""" NOTE: ->--< STlIftU DRAIN ClA.WR1' I· .......... EX. U1UI1D .w: _Tt ONLy CALI. ..... lHIIUSTlI.OCI< 1-800-424-UM 8£FCR[ OIDCIINO II PImtOl! UNKNO'IIm EX. IJ1'1UTIES DEFORE CONSIRUCnDN etoINS. CO CO lUDH .... v ..... ' 0 ® ..... DRAIN ........ M .. .. ,.,...,...... SCALE: 1".20' P:o~. .. 41.HJ1 £$19' JO-'0 .. ----AG r---I-~ J.V1 ST. U 1+55 II) PYI ELEV -401.23 415 A.D. u -MD ;. ...... ~ 5! . 50.00' C ~::t:::±j:===;;::::~ 410 -Ii! 0 .., .< 1 I I I , 'I ' . ! ~-, " . , . • 3"" 3; @I .;; " 405,-_0'" ~~ 0" ~ I I ., ": V1 STA a 2+~5 @I T 1 .,.,:w' f-.f--~ • , ' .~.~" • !. 400 r-~ ~'. ~ A:·a=5.1~0 Il'l I "1 . '" . 50.00' Vc 5 ~ " 395 .', ~2 If -:I .5 410 405 400 395 ..... ~~ ",' i5' , ;', ''I · , ., .~" \' " T 1 ,", '" " ' . "" , ,,' " ' ~ -'-' \" -, " __ .::.:: ,"",,<0 =':.t' '" ' '-." I,' ............ T l' " .. z>=,~,l' \ ""'''--V ., ClrY R,NT'ON' . " -0.00 ~ 380 ,,-.... I 1 1: "M_'" •. " ~ -___ '" _ ' " ,~-_ M-' _._ .. __ .. __ p: ' '" " l!!ilFl &.11'l1li " 390 385 380 .~;.d."'. ~: ,,,III' II I 'I I I I' I"~ IT t " I I ~I-," 5 sl I~ -r~370 ;1 I~ ."'" I i ~-11 e!:t~~ _ ..... ~1/ 1-'·'- ,.~~ .11101:1.1 ~~I-=+ -~~~~~ ~W~ 5!!f.A'=1tIIt -I. ::-t.~~~~o:g.ca:m.~'?*' "~_"CII'r"IDIII;Io_......,.,._cm~ '"~~~. > .J.. __ 1tIIlL •• ". ___ ncliUll/lpll~ PROPOSED ROAD -PUBLIC RESIDENTIAL ROAD VERTICAl CURB TYPE ROADWAY NO. R(\IISION :1 I I II I I I I I I 1 ~::VJ t fs'J65 , \ ... \ BY I DATE I ,apPR ~""!"'I....".,.,... ..... ~CQ. --.; I!.~l * PROPOSED ROAD ft CITY OF RENTON ~~~~o~· ~:;'°'lls:'l iill~ ~91 HONEY CREEK VIEW PI.ATI~/I>I 3524 NE SUNSET BLVD RENTON, WA 98058 ~ . . PPGRAD PREFERRED ENGINEERING. LLC • • &IN!N!N!NIAlIl I Il i I. ~ 0.. 0.. " ,/ X",?'! _____ \ '~--I -~ __ _ \ , " ---'--'~----l ____ '_~ _______ _ /' N.e. SUNSETslVO. ,/ /' ,/ /' ,/ /' 8_ /' . ~~.---- PLANTLEGENO 4ItI>IZ. ~.~~_: .. r· ... ~ .. Wltlldltlorf '~l\IIIII 151'lIIr.nco'/AD.tIRlllca:DlM"I" .... ,,~ • .ultu 1.u'IGwIII~' Dwti' I~~~. 0....x.... .. Irut ""9''PI.IIIIIIo·'ow.i.I=Pl'''UIlO".... ~-~_.~IdDI ......... ."/JIO..Hf~C11R.U6 -.rIJJ: ., .. .. 11m ~~:,~: ....."... OQ"",,,," , ..... "" ~ ••• NO. R£\'ISION ----- BY .' DEC I DUOUS TREE PLANT! NO DETA I L Noo.ILLO, .. SHRUB PLANTI NG DETA I L "NO-kil. NOTES L 00 NOT DIO> ~TIL "'-I. IX\ITtO UTIL.tTlI!O 104A'II! ~ LOCAfED, 2, eueotUOel TO wtTl-IlH IIWTW I'OOT ~oeo eoy 0IINI.R0tL. CONTRACTOR \tU!16 O'M!!RI'M NOTIO. :t, ~a &IoUtU. fill! ecAFm'1!O OR IIOTO'TILUD • COICIITIOe lIIII!Gl.lliCII!I. <t, .... ....,.. eou ••• OIJ"'l'H , .... y TOI"eOlL..IIRt!II OAlllNNl 80ILI .... Dafl"n.l IoWAT T~L.. TOfIOOIL. ew.Ai.L ee P'L.AeI!D IN AlLL. PLANfMi.4Rl!A6. _,l" OePTI-I L. ... y!R 0fIJ QF::G;&NICM""TIRIAL. QlLTIVATll:O AMINII"U'1 Cf' •• 0&8,. ., 2'!1lN1!"U1 O!~!IIHI GflADB DoAII:Kr'U.CIoIlN 1"L,u.rr1NQ 1!mD6.l"IJI..ew~ I!l! IIAEIB CfI III!!P enD, T.tHiN. RUM OR 0'!lLIII: ~ DflT'Rf"II!NT .... TO flLAHT O~", Al.L. Pl.AN1' f"JAtI£_~ .w.w.u. I!N! ICALfJ.IT, N.J. NCI CQfIOAM TO AI'1I!R1CAN .46OOCUr.TION Of' ~ (""""WQFUD£O.4NO erAN).AROl'I'QIIII: ~ IJOCIC,.lATUT I!DlrlON. •• PI."tNT MATe"'AL CfI OfZl OR KINO NOT AVAQ...ieI.I MAT M: euel6nM'RP GIN. T WfT/oI~AL "" ~AoACI-IIT.ecrAND/ORO\IIte1I. I.~CO\'I!_06oIA.LL.eB~CCNT~T~ I'ILAHTtODeD6 TO RlUll.l.TIHTorJU. ~UTIo4INJTaAM . WI,...u. TAU: "ITO ~ ee INtInCTEO TO ........ ~.oIt4lllAOB. Il ~TMI ORAtuOI .......u. ea ,."...."..QIIED. MOLM> I"'UN'!'ING ALCII!.46 MtllI'U'1 t2", D. II'LACe Jt.Ae6 .. 11ft""'" "" o· ~ eoIIQ( CIt' cu:e. D,M..oIICI TJI:I!!6;t,1"\lH:P'U"I Cfl42"1"9I/IClt'I &AoCK CfI CURe.. 14, l,;oIIHI)eclAl"'I!Ii CONnuc::TOA: OI-IAU. ~lNr"IN .ITS IM'II. IlIItI.AI. ~C'k::N. AND A.CC!~ArNC8 aT ICIINtR. OAT[ lAPPA ~ 2 ...... ~ "'~ A" •. c~, Eo ~~,\IlA,"la' FI'1oIw J 'ax n~;u~·n. 1.1ft ...,. ,--10" . iiioiiOUIX 1/:;'; I tWi6 ~~ ....1:1:."'~~ ® DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON DEC 2 f 2005 IRECEOVED EVERGREEN TREE PLANTING DETAIL ... ..... LAWH / PLANTING BED CETAIL ... ..... .......... Nd.. :.-' _., .. _.:. .'".wICtI "" .. ' ':: .. •........... ~, .......... " .U'2..-.e -I I .,~ ClROUNC COYER SPACING DETAIL .... i1i."iiIiIiM'''t.IItd HYDROSEEDMI X_'_ORfLAHlLNGSTR If "'--'/ ....."..".,,,,.. '-......./ ~ ~~ T~I"L8I:lLINC"'~R't'BQ:IIIL46I· ,.,.,. ~G:LIA.L'TY 'INDJIIlDeloll! APe-'c:AT1CI.I BAIQ •· .. I.D6.f~.". tQIU ... .. .. eID ALL AAaAe TMAT.4RI! eAIIII OJIIOIK) At() ... T L!AlT 16" MOM ANT PLNolrED TAU OR 6I4U'J,. llI!III ~)(I1"'rrLY 'II.'" LM, ~ 11).2".2. "".~.IC.'l!""'l.imR IIIR .... ec:w.FIII .. UT.ANC ... ~II'1 ... TlLT ... • ... LU.Cf'lIIJOOD atL.I.\LOII PlDUl ""-Of I"IlIllHCl ~ 'RIT ... ALL AAIoU TO DI6UD!D. 6B!.DIHOI OIlAoOOH 16LI1(.,.~TO~I· MAY". ALIQUOT II-OCTODItI;L ealD OIaLL ~ TO 6T~!'OR 'CllfltfND" OfU60 IUD OR DITT8A. .... CUTLNW IN ueo ... "JU..I& fIOR OIIaP g.-rPfC..4fION". LATE!OTHDI'I'IOH. PK ENTERPRJSES HONEY CREEK VIEW CONCEPTUAL LANOSCAPE PLAN CITY OF RENTON City 0 ilton Department of Planning / Building / Pu. Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 27, 2006 APPLICATION NO: LUA05-118, SHPL-H, CAR, ECF APPLICANT: Phil Kitzes, PK Enter rises PROJECT TITLE: Hone Creek View Estates SITE AREA: 78,512 s uare feet BUILDING AREA ross: N/A LOCATION: 3524 NE Sunset Blvd I WORK ORDER NO: 77485 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Subdivision of an existing 78,512 square foot parcel located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation into 9 lots, a stormwater detention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract 8). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The proposed lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The proposed lots range in area from 3,000 square feetto 4,333 square feet. Access to the proposed lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as right-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A dass 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portion of the subject site, in addtion Protected Slopes are located on the eastern portion ofthe subject site. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Infonnation Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housinq Air Aesthetics Water UqhVGlare Plants Recreation LandlShoreline Use utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public SeNices ty Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources PreselVation Airport Environment 10.000 Feet 14.000 Feet B. POLiCY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELA TED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional infJ ation is needed to properly assess this proposal. 3-ZiJ·-ob Date DATE: ·TO: FROM: SUBJECT: . CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM February 15th 2006 Jill Hall Juliana Fries (x: 7278) Honey Creek View Estates.~LUA 05 -118 3524 Sunset Blvd NE ) I have reviewed the application for this 9-lot plat, located at 3524 Sunset Blvd NE and have the following comments: EXISTING CONDITIONS WATER SEWER STORM STREETS The proposed development is within the City of Renton's water service area and in the 565-pressure zone. There is an existing 12-inch water main in NE Sunset Blvd that can deliver a flow rate of 4,500 gallons per minute (gpm). The static water pressure is about 70 psi at street elevation (see City water civil drawing no. W- 0315). The proposed project is located within the Aquifer Protection Zone 2. There is a 12" sewer main along the Honey Greek (north side of the creek). This project is located at the edge of a drainage basin with both sub-basins draining to Maplewood Creek. A storm drainage plan and drainage report was provided. The applicant is proposing one detention and water quality pond that will receive runoff from both sub-basins. There are no curb/gutter, sidewalk or streetlights on 138th Ave. There are nopaving, curb, gutter, sidewalks, and streetlights on SE 132nd Street, fronting the site. CODE REQUIREMENTS WATER 1. Water main improvements within the new development will be required to provide the required fire flow demand and for domestic water service for this project. The improvements will include but not be limited to the following: o A water main extension (8-inch minimum diameter) within the new street. The maximum available flow rate from this water main extension will be 1,250 gpm (unless looped system is in place) .. o Fire hydrants, domestic and landscape water meters. All new construction must have a fire hydrant capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 gpm and must be located within 300 feet of the structures. Existing hydrants will require a quick disconnect Storz fitting, if not already in place. . . 2. The Water System Development Charge (SOC) WOUld. be triggered at the single-family rate of $1,956 per new single-family per building lot. This· fee is payable at the time the utility construction.permit is issued. SANITARY SEWER 1. A sewer main extension along the new street will be required. 2. All sewer mains outside Right-of-Way require a 15-foot utility easement with drivable access throughout the easement. 3. Existing septic systems shall be abandoned in accordance with King County Health prior to recording of the plat. 4. Sewer main shall be extended to provide separate side sewers stubs to all lots. 5. This parcel are subject to the Honey Creek 8611 Special Assessment District (SAD). The fee is $250.00l10t. Fees are collected at the time the utility construction permit is issued. 6. This parcel is also subject to the Honey Creek frontage 8612 Special Assessment District (SAD). The fee is $74.38 per ft of frontage along Honey Creek. 7. The Sanitary Sewer System Development Charges (SOC) is $1,017 per lot. This fee is payable at the time the utility construction permit is issued. . SURFACE WATER 1. The Surface Water System Development Charges (SDC) is $759 per building lot. This fee is payable at the time the utility construction permit is issued. TRANSPORTATION 1. Street improvements including, but not limited to paving, sidewalks, curb and gutter, storm drain, landscape, street lighting and street signs will be required along Sunset Blvd NE and along the new street interior to the plat. 2. Corner lots shall dedicate a minimum radius of fifteen feet. 3. All wire utilities shall be installed underground per the City of Renton Undergrounding Ordinance. PLAN REVIEW· GENERAL 1. Due to the existence of steep slopes in the site and the soils classification (potential erosion) shown on the Preliminary Site Evaluation. dated February 12,·2006 staff advises that prior to any construction a complete Geotech Report be provided. The Geotechnical Engineering Services -Preliminary Site Evaluation dated July 22, 2005 and dated February 12, 2006 do not provide sufficient information regarding earthwork, site clearing, excavation, soils materials and erosion. 2. All plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards CONDITIONS 1. The traffic mitigation fee of $75 per additional generated daily trip shall be assessed at a rate of 9.57 trips per single-family residence. 2. Due to downstream flooding and erosion problems, staff is recommending a SEPA condition requiring this project to comply with the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention (conservation flow control-Level 2) and water quality improvements. 3. The applicant shall be required to provide a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) designed pursuant to the Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements, outlined in Volume II of the 200:1Stormwater Management Manual and provide staff with a Construction Mitigation Plan prior to issuance of Construction permits. 4. ~ cont::.. .,0 I)n the Prell'm'lnary SI"te The applicant shall c.r with the recommendation __ Evaluation, dated February 12, 2006, Geotechnical Engineering Services, regarding earthwork be performed only during the dry months of the year. cc: Kayren Kittrick ~1 City ~ Department of Planning / Building / Pu. h _ .,5 ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 27,2006 APPLICATION NO: LUA05-118, SHPL-H, CAR, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 13, 2006 APPLICANT: Phil Kitzes, PK Ente rises PROJECT MANAGER: Jill Din PROJECT TITLE: Hone Creek View Estates PLAN REVIEW: Juliana Fries SITE AREA: 78,512 s uare feet BUILDING AREA LOCATION: 3524 NE Sunset Blvd WORK ORDER NO: 77485 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Subdivision of an existing 78,512 square foot parcel located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation into 9 lots, a stormwater detention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The proposed lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The proposed lots range in area from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Access to the proposed lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as right-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A dass 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portion of the subject site, in addtion Protected Slopes are located on the eastern portion of the subject site, A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information . Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics .. Water UghtIGlare Plants Recreation LandlShoreline Use Utilities Animals T ransf)Ortation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ HistoriclCultural Natural Resources PreseNation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS ~ We have reviewed this application w' particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where ditio I information i needed to properly assess this proposal. 02/15:106 Signature Date City _ Department of Planning / Building / pu __ s ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 27,2006 APPLICATION NO: LUA05-118, SHPL-H, CAR, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 13, 2006 APPLICANT: Phil Kitzes, PK Ente rises PROJECT MANAGER: Jill Din PROJECT TITLE: Hone Creek View Estates PLAN REVIEW: Juliana Fries RECEIVED SITE AREA: 78,512 s uare feet BUILDING AREA LOCATION: 3524 NE Sunset Blvd WORK ORDER NO: 77485 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Subdivision of an existing 78,512 square foot parcel located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation into 9 lots, a stormwater detention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The proposed lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The proposed lots range in area from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Access to the proposed lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as right-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A dass 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portion of the subject site, in addtion Protected Slopes are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Infonnatlon Impacts Impacts Necessary EnvIronment Minor Major Infonnation Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water LightIGlare Plants Recreation LandlShoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ HistoriclCultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS .$e£ ~ We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas whe additional inform n is needed to properly assess this proposal. rized Representative Date ,'. ;, Project Name: Project Address: \.\o\-..\~ c,~ v,,~w 5SThU3S 3~L\ N~ Su~-. '5\\lcA Contact Person: --a.y....l."...Ll,u.\----"~~".:...ZE;;....;;;..;>~ _____ ......._- .., S# to 70 Permit Number: U.) f\ bS-\\ <0 --~------------------------------------------- Project Descroption: q LoT $£\2-f\~ l)J JO~IZ EN-\~~~ \*ou~t Method of Calculation: landl ~ype: t:J ResidentiaH D R.etail ff--ITE Trip Generation Manual, 7th Edition D Traffoc Study D Other (2-~oY~\ 9 .~7/LOr D Non-retail • ;C$iC:lLli~tion: ... ~ ," - .'.~ q~) .:::-;;g;~ 'v.1/~7 _-:-.<~~, S~ J\6T": ~. . --."",-.. _ ... --,' _-::;,-_'~ --~ IS ,~:-$ 5)1 t1 d-, (tV 1\Q,~ '1---._---. , .. :', Tr4!lnsportation : ,MB~Dgation .Fee: ._ ,-CaBculated by: -":£...0:0;. • '1'. '. -'i, Da~e of. Payment: _ ........ ____ ~----~-___ ----- . -:. '. : ~~ . -.,: " :,. City _ Deparlment of Planning / Building / pu_s EN VIRONMENTA L & DEVEL OPMENT A PPLICA TION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: It COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 27, 2006 APPLICATION NO: LUA05-118, SHPL-H, CAR, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 13, 2006 APPLICANT: Phil Kitzes, PK Ente rises PROJECT MANAGER: Jill Din PROJECT TITLE: Hone Creek View Estates PLAN REVIEW: Juliana Fries SITE AREA: 78,512 s uare feet BUILDING AREA ross: N/A j LOCATION: 3524 NE Sunset Blvd I WORK ORDER NO: 77485 BUILDING DIVISION SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Subdivision of an existing 78,512 square foot parcelloeated within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation into 9 lots, a stormwater detention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The proposed lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The proposed lots range in area from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Access to the proposed lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedieated as right-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A class 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portion of the subject site, in addtion Protected Slopes are loeated on the eastern portion of the subject site. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housinq Air AesthetiCS Water UqhtIGlare Plants Recreation LandlShoreline Use Utilities Animals T ransf)Ortation Environmental Health Public Services Energyl HistoriclCultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10.000 Feet 14.000 Feet 5~ #(070 B. POLICY-RELA TED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELA TED COMMENTS o.tL-~. We have reviewed this applil:iation with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas ~ additional info ~tion is needed to property assess this proposal. ~11s1()6 Date DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MITIGATION ITEMS: FIRE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM January 19,2006 Jill Ding, Associate Planner . James Gray; Assistant Fire Marshal ...... ~1i-' Honey Creek View Estates, 3524 ~ Sunset Blvd. 1. A fire mitigation fee of$488.00 is required for all new single-family structures. FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. A fire hydrant with 1000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of all new single- family structures. If the building square footage exceeds 3600 square feet in area, the minimum fire flow increases to a minimum of 1500 GPM and requires two hydrants within 300 feet of the structure. 2. Fire department access roads are required to be paved, 20 feet wide. Dead end roadways over 150 feet in length are required to have an approved turnaround. Maximum grade for access roadways is 15 %. 3. Street addresses shall be visible from a public street. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. i:\ercplat.doc City oelt, Department of Planning / Building / pu_s ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: fire.., COMMENTS DUE: JA' ~~~~ l~~:iii ~ 111 f' I ~R*,· 0 \:i tb rml APPLICATION NO: LUA05-118, SHPL-H, CAR, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: JA~[j~~ 13, 2006 . 11 iii I II /1 APPLICANT: Phil Kitzes, PK Enterprises PROJECT MANAGER: J ililJJ JA~ ~ 31 2005 II Ujl PROJECT TITLE: Honey Creek View Estates PLAN REVIEW: Juliana ries l I I SITE AREA: 78,512 square feet BUILDING AREA (Qross) N/A CITY OF RENTON I f:IPf: n~D' DTHC' 'T , _".L •.• LOCATION: 3524 NE Sunset Blvd I WORK ORDER NO: 77485 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Subdivision of an existing 78,512 square foot parcel located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation into 9 lots, a stormwater detention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The proposed lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The proposed lots range in area from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Access to the proposed lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as right-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A class 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portion of the subject site, in addtion Protected Slopes are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water UghtIGlare Plants Recreation LancJIShoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public SeNices Energy/ HistoriclCultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10.000 Feet 14.000 Feet B. POLICY-RELA TED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELA TED COMMENTS [ c; It-e C OfYIJIVt J[ 7$ We have reviewed his application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additi nal information eeded to properly assess this proposal. I It /P ~ Date r? DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: • CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM February 2, 2006 Jill Ding ~ Sonja J. Fesser}~ Honey Creek View Estates, LUA-05-118-SHPL Fonnat and Legal Description Review Bob Mac Onie and I have reviewed the above referenced prelimipary plat submittal and have the following comments: - Comments for the Applicant: This subdivision is being reviewed as a plat (9 lots plus 2 tracts), per RCW 58.17.020 (6). Note that the sewer easement, as noted on "Tract B" is "EXISTING". The lot lines for the proposed lots should be shown as solid lines, not dashed. At a minimum, the elevation of the primary contours for the site, as it exists, need to be labeled and the contour intervals noted on Sheets 1 & 2 of 5. Information needed for final plat approval includes the following: Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA-OX-XXX-FP and LND-1O-0444, respectively, on the drawing sheets. The type size used for the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action number. Please note that the land use action number for the final plat will be different from that noted as the preliminary plat number and is unknown as of this date. Note two ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network. The geometry will be checked by the city when the ties are provided. Provide plat and lot closure calculations. \H:\File Sys\LND -Land Subdivision & Surveying RccQrds\LND-IO -Plllts\Q444\RV060201.doc February 3, 2006 Page 2 • Note the date the existing monuments were visited, per WAC 332-130-150, and what was found. Complete City of Renton Monument Cards, with reference points of all new right-of-way monuments set as part of the plat. Required City of Renton signatures (on the final plat submittal) include the Administrator of Planning/BuildinglPublic Works, the Mayor and the City Clerk. An approval block for the city's Finance Director is also required. Appropriate King County approval blocks need to be noted on the plat drawing. All vested owners of the plat property need to sign the final plat document. Include notary blocks as needed. Include a dedication/certification block on the plat drawing. Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the comers of the proposed lots. On the final submittal, remove all references to utility facilities, topog lines, asphalt and other items not directly impacting the subdivision. . Remove all references to building setback lines. Setbacks will be determined at the time of issuance of building permits. Note encroachments, if any. Note all easements, agreements and covenants of record on the drawing. Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. The city will provide addresses for the proposed lots after the preliminary plat is approved. The addresses (and street names) will need to be noted on the plat document. Note whether the adjoining properties are platted (give plat name and lot number) or unplatted. Remove all references to density and zoning information from the final plat drawing. If there is a Restrictive Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions document for this plat, then reference the same on the plat drawing and provide a space for the recording number thereof. Note that if there are restrictive covenants, easements or agreements to others (neighboring property owners, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawings and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The plat document will be recorded first (with King County). The recording number(s) for the associated document(s) (said documents recorded concurrently with, but following the plat) need to be referenced on the plat drawings. H:\File Sys\LND -Land Subdivision & Surveying Records\LND-JO -Plats\0444\RV060201.doc\cor February 3, 2006 Page 3 • There is to be a Homeowners' Association (HOA) for this plat; therefore, the following language concerning ownership of "TRACT A" (detention) and "TRACT B" (access road, lowlands, step slopes) applies to this plat and should be noted on the final plat drawing as follows: Upon the recording of this plat, Tract A is hereby granted and conveyed to the Plat of Honey Creek View Estates Homeowners' Association (HOA) for a detention area. All necessary maintenance activities for said Tract will be the responsibility of the HOA. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non-payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in the Tract previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. The same language, noted in the previous paragraph, is needed for Tract B, with revisions to said paragraph as is needed. Is the "JOINT UTll-ITY EASEMENT", shown over the north 15 feet of proposed Lots 3-through 6, a private easement or is it to the city (public)? Since the new lots created via this plat are under common ownership at the time of plat recording, there can be no new private easements created until ownership of the lots is conveyed to others, together with/or subject to specific easement rights. Add the following Declaration of Covenant language on the face of the subject plat drawing, if. the previous paragraph (regarding a private easement) applies: DECLARATION OF COVENANT: The owners of the land embraced within this plat, in return for the benefit to accrue from this subdivision, by signing hereon covenant and agree to convey the beneficial interest in the new easement shown on this plat to any and all future purchasers of the lots, or of any subdivisions thereof This covenant shall run with the land as shown on this plat. A new private utility easement requires a "NEW PRIVATE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS & UTll-ITIES MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT" statement noted on the plat drawing. See the attachment. Fee Review Comments: The Fee Review Sheet for the preliminary plat review is provided for your use and information. H:\File Sys\LND -Land Subdivision & Surveying Records\LND-1O -Plats\0444\RV06020I.doc\cor • Title for both of the following paragraphs: NEW PRIVATE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS,EGRESS & UTILITIES MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Use the following paragraph if there are two or more lots participating in the agreement: NOTE: NEW PRIVATE EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS,_ EGRESS AND UTILITIES IS TO BE CREATED UPON THE SALE OF LOTS SHOWN ON THIS SHORT PLAT. THE OWNERS OF LOTS SHALL HAVE AN EQUAL AND UNDIVIDED INTEREST IN THE OWNERSHIP AND RESPONSffiILITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT APPURTENANCES. THESE APPURTENANCES AND MAINTENANCE RESPONSffiILITIES INCLUDE THE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PRIVATE ACCESS ROAD, DRAINAGE PIPES, AND STORM WATER QUALITY AND/OR DETENTION FACILITIES WITHIN THIS EASEMENT, PRIVATE SIGNAGE, AND OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE NOT OWNED BY THE CITY OF RENTON OR OTHER UTILITY PROVIDERS. MAINTENANCE COSTS SHALL BE SHARED EQUALLY PARKING ON THE PAVING IN THE ACCESS EASEMENT IS PROHffiITED, UNLESS PAVEMENT WIDTH IS GREATER THAN 20 FEET. Use the following paragraph if there is one lot subject to the agreement: NOTE: NEW PRIV ATE EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS; EGRESS AND UTILITIES IS TO BE CREATED UPON THE SALE OF LOTS SHOWN ON THIS SHORT PLAT. THE OWNER OF LOT SHALL HAVE OWNERSHIP AND RESPONSffiILITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT APPURTENANCES. THESE APPURTENANCES AND MAINTENANCE RESPONSffiILITIES INCLUDE THE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PRIV ATE ACCESS ROAD, DRAINAGE PIPES, AND STORM WATER QUALITY AND/OR DETENTION FACILITIES WITHIN THIS EASEMENT, PRIVATE SIGNAGE, AND OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE NOT OWNED BY THE CITY OF RENTON OR OTHER UTILITY PROVIDERS. MAINTENANCE COSTS SHALL BE SHARED EQUALLY. PARKING ON THE PAVING IN THE ACCESS EASEMENT IS PROHffilTED, UNLESS PAVEMENT WIDTH IS GREATER THAN 20 FEET. .... ' PROPERTY S~ FEE RlEVJ[EW FOR SUBDIViSiON~ --" ...... 3L--__ COSTS:! J D ,IA~SJt )...(' .... '00 I . RECEIVED FROM ___ ----,-_...,....-_ (date) JOB ADDRESS, 03Sz:4 ·LJE: e/)....,e~ ~ ::17465 NATURE OF WORK I ,.. ! :() )-,1 -~ i' ;(-:" IBN n-X"1 I fu -04-44 X PRELIMINARY REVIE\v 'f>F SUBDIViSioN BY IiiNG PLAT, NEED MOIi? ~TION: -LEGAL DESCRIPflON SHORT PLAT, BINDING SITE PLAN, ETC. -FINAL REVIEW OF SUBDIVISION, THIS REVIEW REPLACES PRELIMINARY FEE REVIEW DATED _____ _ SUBJECT PROPERTY PARENT PIDI 04e.o05 -goqO -PID.I's SQUARE FOOTAGE FRONT FOOTAGE -VICINITY MAP -OTHER X NEW KING CO, TAX ACCT.I(s) are required when' assigned by King County. It is the intent of this development fee analysis to put the developer/owner on notice, that the fees quoted below' may be applicable to the subject site upon development of the property, All quoted fees are potential charges that may be due and payable at the time the construction permit is issued to install the on-site and off-site improvements (i.e. underground utilities, street improvements, etc.) Triggering mechanisms for the SOC fees will be based on current City ordiriances and determined by the applicable Utility Section. Please note that these fees are subject to change without notice. Final fees will be based on rates in effect at time of Building Permit/Construction Permit application. I~:,:~ -The existing house on SP Lot I , addressed as has not previously paid I'~t;. --=--:--_-::-SOC fees, due to connection to City utilities prior to existance of SOC fee Ord. SP Lot# will be subject to future sDC fees if triggering mechanisms are touched within current City Ordinances. -We understand that this subdivision is in the preliminary stage and that we will have the opportunity to review it again before recordation. The following quoted fees do NOT include inspection fees, Side sewer permits, r/w permit fees or the cost of water meters. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISI'RICT PARCEL METHOD' OF ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS NO. NO. ASSESSMENT UNITS OR FEE Latecomer A2reement (pvt) WATER -0 - Latecomer A2reement (pvt) WASTEWATER -0 - Latecomer Agreement (pvt) OTHER -0 - / ~; Special Assessment DistrictIW A TER /' -0 - .~:;~. t-4oUE'( C~EEK.. S.b.l::> exp I I ~ 250·00 X UJ.....lrT9 q $ e ,Z~ ,..". :~}';"·~.gSpec~iial~Assessm~~~en!!.t~D~ist~n~·ctIW~~AS~·!.!I'E~W~A~'~I'E~R~-+~sa~~Je~~ __ ---iJ$~13~7 •• ~lq~')(Y2~p!i!J~4-_.J' IL;:. :3~··~:::L....1 _~$~4-~S~54~~. 7ig;~~1 0"L-~J=om~t~~=_s~e_~~_~~leem~=en~t~~~~I'~R_O_) __________ ~------~-------L--~--.------re---(~--, _)L_ ________ ~----------~ 'c'. Ir Local.u..u.vrovement District * ~JIr-~T~ndfl~~lc~B~en~e~fi~lt~Zo~n~~~~---------------r$~7~5~.OO~P~E=R~TR1Pr=~,~C=AL~CULA~~TED~~B~Y~TRAN~~~S~PO~R=T~A=TI=O~N~ __ ~------~--~ :,t.> FUTURE OBLIGATIONS .. J~.~======================~====~====k=~========*=======~======~ , .. '"t, SYSTEM' DEVELOPMENT CHARGE -WATER -Estimated I OF UNITS/ SDC FEE ,~1tlr-~-~Pd7-Pr~e~V~.~-~P~.rurtmn~·~~~P~d~(L~td~·7E~xem~~~tti~·0~n)~_-__ N~e~v~er~P~d~ ____________ ~S~Q~~~FT~G~. ____ ~ ________ ~ __ ~~ __ ~~~ ;f:", , Sinde family residential $1,956/lIDit x p.. ~ 's G48.OC: [ }t Mobile home dwe~ unit $1,956/unit inpark 1~~~~A~~~·I~===e~n=t~C=on=d=0~$~I~,~17~4~/wu==·~t=no=t~m=.~C=D~or~C~O~R~ro==n=~~x ________ --~----~------------4-----------------------~ li~Ir-~C~0~mm~e~r-cmum~~d~ustri~·~al~,-$~0~.2~n~~~q .• ft7=.0~f~p~1r~0~~rty~(~no~t_l~ess~,th~a~D~$~1~,9~56~.00~)~x~~ ____________ ;-______________________ ~ i ~1:: Boeing, by Special AgreementlFootprint of Bldg plus 15 ft perimeter (2,800 GPM threshold) SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE '" WASTEWATER -Estimatoo 1 ~}.?,,'.Ir---=p~d~Pr~e~v.~--~P~art~iall~~=P~d~(Lt~d~Ex~em~~~tt~w~n~) ___ -~N~e~ve=r~P~d~ __________ ~~----------_r------------±_~--~~~1 '.' Single family residential$l,017/unit x . q ~ q '5.~.OC Mobile home dwelling unit $1,017/unit x "/ Ap~ent, Condo $(il0/unit not m CD or COR zones x ':~, .. Ir~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--~~~~~-----r------~----+---------------~----~ CommerciallIndustrial $O.I42/sq. ft. of property x(not less than $1,017.00) ,,~,; SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE", SURFACEWATER .. Estimated '1<'}' -Pd Prev. -Partially Pd (Ltd Exemption) -Never Pd ~t>Ir-~==~-===~~======~_I1:~ __ ~=---------~~--=~'----~------~~-'_--'_--_~ ->;', Sin2le family residential and mobile home dwe~ unit $759/unit x 1"\ ,p (0. 0 1L~.Dt.1> . ;~~:.,' All other pro~rti~ $0.265/sq ft of new im~rvious area of pro~rty x -~'~i (not less than $759.00) ,,~\,Ib:~;":;;;~~;;;;;;;";';;;;===================rI=PRE=L=IMIN="=AR===Y=T=O=T=AL=="=~:============:5:=::7,:-:-''-J..=q-SZ~!!r=r~~·'' V\tPrnJ'n J a (+1 t.onEJ.. J ("') I /~, J ("')~1 g Signaturefi Revi@g Authority DATJt ~ . .. ·If subj~pro~rty is within an LID, it is develo~rs responsibility to check with the Finance Dept. for paid/un-paid status. ~ ~. rJJ Square footage f"lgures are taken from the King·County Assessor's map and are subject to change. Current City SDC fee charges apply to _______________________ _ f..) EFFECTIVE January 8, 2006 i;~ : 0;: ::s o City _n Department of Planning / Building / pu_s ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Pr"....,...~·/L Svcs APPLICATION NO: LUA05-118, SHPL-H, CAR, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 13, 20 APPLICANT: Phil Kitzes, PK Ente rises PROJECT MANAGER: Jill Din PROJECT TITLE: Hone Creek View Estates PLAN REVIEW: Juliana Fries SITE AREA: 78,512 s uare feet BUILDING AREA ross: N/A LOCATION: 3524 NE Sunset Blvd I WORK ORDER NO: 77485 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Subdivision of an existing 78,512 square foot parcel located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation into 9 lots, a stormwater detention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The proposed lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The proposed lots range in area from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Access to the proposed lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as right-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A class 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portion of the subject site, in addtion Protected Slopes are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impat;Js Impacts Necessary Earth HousinQ Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation LandlShoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health PubliC SeNices Energy! HistoriclCultural Natural Resources Preservation '" , ' . Airport Environment 10.000 Feet . ~ 14.000 Feet B. POLICY-RELA TED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date --o5-/a~ A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS "It is anticipated that the proposed development would generate future residents that would utilize existing City park and recreation facilities and programs. The City has adopted a Parks Mitigation Fee of $530.76 per each new single family lot to address these potential impacts." /1_ ~ r-r! @. ~A'r7YJ~"A/l d ~t7Y} 10 .R415h~ Iv/~ Ie lhu aLi~7~lo'P~" . ~ 13 a ~67t/Y7 q( ~ ;OCVJk~.. ~cuY .·.A •• .IJ0 hr~ ~ cr ~c7 .b-~~' ~ .. ~,c~~. p; ~ .9--;(t0f-ir;y. ~ £1: rT1~ ({?/ /Ja/YJ~.. ~.cL ~.' I~ y:t1qt(}v1u ~ A/Y7CZ01~cI ~ ~y-- g, !4c~d 0~cvffY7 ~ fhx, ~ 1-0 ~.Cff7n~?v7w" /Zk, Parks Mitigation Fee City a. Deparlment of Planning I Building I PtiaS ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COIIIH\RENTS DUE: JANUARY 27,2006 APPLICATION NO: LUA05-118, SHPL-H,CAR, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 13, 2006 APPLICANT: Phil Kitzes, PK Enterprises PROJECT MANAGER: Jill Dina PROJECT TITLE: Honey Creek View Estates PLAN REVIEW: Juliana Fries SITE AREA: 78,512 sQuare feet BUILDING AREA (Qross): N/A LOCATION: 3524 NE Sunset Blvd I WORK ORDER NO: 77485 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Subdivision of an existing 78,512 square foot parcel located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation into 9 lots, a stormwater detention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The proposed lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The proposed lots range in area from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Access to the proposed lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as right-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates in a . hammerhead turnaround. A class 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portion of the subject site, in addtion Protected Slopes are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the ProbBble Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment . Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth HousinQ Air Aesthetics :~ Water UQhtlGlare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals TranSDDrtation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources PreseNation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELA TED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS Signature 0 irector or Authorized Representative Date City a. Deparlment of Planning / Building / pu.s ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: r~~ti Q(\ COMMENTS DUE: JANUARY 27,2006 APPLICATION NO: LUA05-118, SHPL-H, CAR, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 13, 2006 APPLICANT: Phil Kitzes, PK Enterprises PROJECT MANAGER: Jill Ding PROJECT TITLE: Honey Creek View Estates PLAN REVIEW: Juliana Fries SITE AREA: 78,512 square feet BUILDING AREA (gross): NlA JAN. 1.'.3 2n06 LOCATION: 3524 NE Sunset Blvd I WORK ORDER NO: 77485 BUILDING DIVISION SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Subdivision of an existing 78,512 square foot parcel located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation into 9 lots, a stormwater detention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The proposed lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The proposed lots range in area from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Access to the proposed lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as right-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A class 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portion of the subject site, in addtion Protected Slopes are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable lVIore Element of the Probable Probable lVIore Environment lVIinor Major Information Environment lVIinor lVIajor Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water UghtIGlare Plants Recreation LandlShoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public SeNices Energy/ HistoriclCultural Natural Resources PreseNation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet , 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELA TED COMMENTS C . CODE-RELA TED COMfVlEN:'~ ~ . -J. _ _ _ r-.. jJ .))~~.~. We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where dditional infonnation is needed to property assess this proposal. Sig Date -' . .... ,.' " . "", . . : . ". .. "'\ ,'~:1'[~~T }T[;'" ];CD 1p'~Tn;r., trj.,:Th..,T . '. f.~'1! .lL ,'li-;' .ID ~.l.~ ':11 'l..P'.1f~ .-. ,.' . ::' ".:-.-... , 1'·-~ -; , .. p:lannhtg$tiild~gfPtibiicWorksDepiu:tIij.en.t . '. ;. . . ··.G .. egg~ZimtnerInan· P.E~ AdroiiJ.~tr2!or . March 9, 20ot) .. . ;-: ,Phil.Kities'''· , . PK Enterprises·' . 230355E 263ro Street . Maple ~ailey.', WA'9~03~ ~ " ,", ' , . ... . ' . ":-.. ;'.- RE: Ho.ney, c;reek ViewEs~te~ Preliniina'iy.Plat(Rentonj=ile·Nb.iJjAO~118) . .'.' ,,-. "{' " '. " ..... :. ". :-.:" . ,-' . " Dear Mr., Kitzes;. . '. " , .. '. , The' City~. of 'Ren~Q~ has r:eceived·· theinformati,ljn -(~q'uEf~~ed .in., myl~tte~ ;to' you' dated: M~rch. 2, '2006-and the proj~c:t i~ . now. being taken 9lf~I1c)I~k Tlie~proje¢t ·has been~scheduled. to go Defore . '.,. ',,' , :' . the EnVironment~l Review ,Corrimitt~. on Macch;l4,; 200~,ahd isterit~,ti'.(ely sCheduled for <3: Public· , , " Hear:i'ng'dn:AptiI18;'2006~'~ ':. . .. ":-" ',:;,;. ".:" . , ' ',' . .' '. up~n' fu·rt~~r:r~~ie~.ifadditional 'irifO~~~on"ii r~q~ir~~·y'.ou wiil 'be n~tified' at that ti~e: Please,: .. ,' :', .'. :colJtact me at:(425r43~7:219jf youhave:any;questions;··; .' . , ", "", ' ....... " ..• : .. ,~, ·r. .. ':' '_.. • ,:' •. ;~. -.,,' '/':'::":"';'~ '.:'7 '.,:) -. ' .. ~. ~ . " . "f. . -.~. ,~Sincerely. k·· '-..' -, .... :... ' ..... + ";.' " ".: ".: .;(;JJj .1.1; -u: ' -:" ;.:' '::, ".:., . < P~illl<' Oing . 71;;:. .. ", , ~ ::' Associat~ Planner" .: ...;.,,;~:«" ,t.' ,; :,' .~ .. -'. '. , ..... -. . ,:': ~{ jarrie~' &M'ind~ Cost~~'iO;:Ch~des ·&~M:h~~~hP»~~,.AI~'~ Farideh:~~St3nl OwnerS . . ,:: . . Parties ofReeo(d. >"~', . .. :.";~~' T.> .....:., ," ,,:;: . "~ -; ~' : '. -, .. "'-:' ''';'-' . . ;:., . ~.~ .' ,". , . -.' 1 .... :.. ~:. ,.7, • '.; ~ . ~ , -' ... -' ...... , . i .. ; ,'. 'j'''' " .... ", r' "M '1.'.: , ,'. • ._ ••. ~ ': "r', • ~ • . " . ~ ... '( , '. :' '! . ..... " ',.-.: .. , , .. ". '. " .' ~ . ,,' .... ,. , :. .... .' " ,'... ,~.' , . , .. . --. "':.>' 1" .\ ..... -•. : " . ~ ~." . ~. ~ -~ . .' . ~ ,~ .. -' ..... '. ... :'-' .' ., . ,~' , -.~ : .. :.' . , .. ' ..... ~ .' ,-. . ' ',:,' ';", ' '. ,j '~ . ... ', : .. .... ,., .. ' , ' "-. " ..... " " '";. ....• , - .~ . ;.. ." . / .".", , ~'.: ,', .. . ,'. ,., , '-/',' "':" .. >, ;, ~"., ~ -..:.....-,..--..:..--,---'10'-5-5-S~-u--'-th---'·Gr'-:-· ~ad....:...y-W.:,-.a-y-.. "--'-·R-en..:,.,t~,....;·n'--, :"::"W-as~hi-"--'Ii~gt-on-'-9-80"""'?-5-'-: -=----~-----'---R·lE]\T TO N . . . . " ' .. $Th;';paperCXll1UlinS~%~~, 3(J%po;.t~ . " AHE'AD Of THE C'URVE ',. -' . ;.: March 2. 2006 . .Phil Kitzes I?KEnterprises .. 23035SE 263rdStreet Maple VaHey. WA 98038 PlanningIBuilding/Pub'lic Works Deptlltm~nt Gregg ZimmermanP.E.; Administrat~r .. RE: Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat (Renton File No. LUA05-118) Uear Mr. Kitzes; Per our phone conversation February 28, 2006. the City's Environmental Review Committee h'as r€lViewe~ the proposed Honey Creek View Est~tes Preliminary Plat and, has determined that a SEPA threshold determination cannot be issued pending the receipt of. additional information. The revi.sed grading plan .that wassubmit,t~d February 24. 2006 proposed a. 2:1 .or '50% slope · across the northern portions:of proposed 3~6: ASO% slope would meet the City's definition of a 'protected slope and would therefore be regulated :as a critical area. The City's critical' ~m~as '. :regulations do' not permit any construction 06 it protected 'slope and the area located within the · protetteqslope Js required to. b~ subtracted from the. gross site areafor·the :plirposes of ca:Jculating'density. .' '. '.Rerour phone conversation; you indicated\hat you did.not'intend· to create.the proposed 2:1' · slope a!) was indicated on YQurpreli,minary~.grading plans:, It' was tht;ln requested that a preliminary cross 'section be submittedshowil?lg the gradin·g,.tl:iat is:being proposed for!he proj·ect. You, subniitted proposed cross sections of Lots 3-6 March 1. 2,006 .. The Development 'Services .. · Directs.·has reviewed the cross sectiO"msandhas :determinedthiitl:ie propo~ed gri3.dingwould . comply . with the City's requirements; . Therefore, 'please subrn,it a, revised grading plan reflecting , "the proposed grading identified in, the .most recentcross:sections submitted . .-' have.~attached. a " 'copy"ofihe,.-requirementsfor a gradillg plahsubmittal a~,listed ·onthe thecldis,t' ftjr'a, .St,lort , Plaflf?relirni'1aryPlat.ln, addition th~rgrac;ting {cut and fjll).q~cllJtitiesneeded .for ttjeconstnJction ofttie: plat.improvements (incluqing· b~ildirig pads, and road improvements ) need to be, subm-itted. · The proposed prqject is being piaced Oil hOld pending thEfr~ceipt,of 5copiesarid.1,'reduced'8 Y:!" xH,;'PMTof a revised grading p,lall and thegraqing' quariti~ies.' , . The' p[oject:~as been taken off the schedule for the Hearing . Exam.iner pending the" receipt of the · reque$ted:information. Once YO!J have :;tub!1litted the requested information,: ttie projecCwilt be· . . . schedlileaJor Environmental ReviewCoinmittee arid the public hearing with fhe Hearing .: Examiner.: ·Ifadditional information is required you will b~ notified at that time; Please.contact me at (425) 430-72t9if you have, any questions. " Sincerely; . ' ~" . ' 1(. . . -.. . :. . . ' . " . ~ 'Jill K. Din9, .,' ,:!lJr:J . . . Associate P.lanner . cc: Jam,es& Mill00 Costello. Charles & Mahwash Price, Ali. & FaridehM~stan I Owners Parties of Record ' ... " . '." ". ,.' " r.·' . .:...... ~.' --~"-------'--1-O-55-S-0-uth-Gra-dy-W--'-aY---R-en-to-n-,-w-'-as-hi~'n-gt-on-98-'-0-55..:...------,·~ ~ ~, _____ • ___ ._, __ e~, • __ ._,_. __ ._~_, .~, ___ • ____ .. __ • AHEA·D OF THE C'URVE: ,": .. . . .. ' . -"-_; I Kathy Keolker, Mayor .' .-.-." F~bruary 16,2006 Phillip Kitzes '\ .... C1rTY .'~_}<jRJEN1f.ON . Planning/BuildfugJPhblic Works bepartment . . Gregg Z!mrner.nail P.E., Admfuistr~or : ...... ':. . ·.·.£K Enterprises .. "'.' . " , '. 23035 SE 263rdStr~t: Maple Valley, W A 98038: . SUBJECT: Honey Creek View Estates SHPL(LUA05~118 JRequest for Modification -Street Width Reduction :' :. Dear Mr. Kitzes: ... We. have reviewed:the prQposed street modification requ{!st associate'd wiih~ the proposed single~ family residenti~l short plat'lOc.ated.gen~rally;antie intersection of'Pierce Avenue NE and ~ .. ,SQnsetBou·levard. This is an infH~:devel<)pmenl in: an. existing-neighb6m<j6~with one proposed . -":. < . " ',a¢cess p·oint endjng iha:harwnerh~adi : The e~i~ting stre~t is desigIi(it~ as ,SR900artdpaved"with . spme improvements:'Th~ pfoP6se~rmo.ditlc~tion~¢quests to"a.Ho~.th~'prQPos,~d newTQad wjdth.: . . to be reduced to 42f~etrapd;tfieJ)am.merhead. 'll{!gs:' reduced t~ 20, {eet::.':.;,· . .' . .,' .' .. C". • • _ • ',,~", '.' •• • _ • ,:' " ',_ , _ .:... .," •• ' q tf Code 4-6-050' (Street Standa,tdS) requires' t~'pstre~t imprqvem~nJsJor alhldjac~nt rightS~of:,. '. :., way for, within,andded.i2at~lby.~ plat.tb~i~ are also certain st'andar~'fot width of dedlcation_ ..... for proposed streets to:b,e: added·t~ttie' City grid. ' One is to reduce ~~e,iIliili~u.Ih requjredwldth" . ~ r .. '. " ." ···:to 42 feet with 32 fee(of'pavemeIi( aild'fiye feet (5') of sidewalks/curb;"<wdglitter on·bothsi·des. ; . ~ . . ". '.. " . ~ ~ '... . . . - ".:"- . : tbe City can modif:Y.':~tr~et i.mprovem~nts for n~~'~l~ts if the~e' 3!epr.~6tic:al~difficultie~.· in'.·. . . ". 'c~in'g mit the. ptovisionsbftheStreetiiripr6vement OrdInance .. The'Modif,icatiQnPrdcediJre~, .~ . .-,. c' as defined in Section 4-cj-:i~OD~ Clearlystates··the·ctiteria for approvalbythedel?artment' .' . '.'~'~ .,' AdminIstrator. In' order f6ra,modiiicati6ii to',be approveg, thed¢pWtmeriX:Adininistrator mQ~t, .... '; .... ,~';:': '~.;" . fjnd that a. spechi(indiv:idlHll rea§on·:inakes':the·strict iettei. of.this0taji~~n¢e im.practi~af,. that , .' -.ihe.IT,lodification is 'ill cbnfOrinitywitf(ihe:inte~t and purpose.ofthi~' 6rdi~aiice;_and~ that suc~ .:. '. :',' "modification: ,.... .., , ' .. :;" ." .. . .• J _:; ~. -,.: . , '. .'. (a)' Will meet the obj'edives 'and safety; fun~~io~: appearance, e~vironmental protection, ~d' ~ maintain;:tbility inte~ded by this O,rdinartce; based upon sound engUieering judgment; and . . ; 1.' . (b) Will not be inlunous toothe~ property(lel))in.·~he·vicinity; and '.' ..... . . "(c) Conform to 'the intent' allq pjirpose of the C9d~'; and -,\. ; -' ~ ..... ........ Phillip Kities . .. f¢biu~y 1~; 2006 .. Page 2 of3 ~, .. Cd) Can b¢~.shown t~.bejustified~nd ~quired for tbeuseandsitu~donint~nded; arid (e) 'WiU'Q9t c;~ateadVer$eiilipaCts to other properties iIi th~ vici~ty:" Mee~s objedtiveS and'safety, functi6n: Due to the physical terrain,or'the parcel at this 10catioQ, and the constraints of the e;x.istirig street; staff supPPrt~ the rriodl:fication request. The.inteht of .. pu~licaricl ~mergency access and pedestrian amenities'is meLwhhthe proposal, as there 'is rio . ieductioninthe'payemenfwidth :below fire lanest~indardsor~ideWalks. The proposedTo~d cross-sect,i~>ri meets :them,iIiimurn sta"U9~~'s';pfrit;T~ilIi~lrt'Y,~(2} iane,s of traffic, fire access, and' 'sidewalks througho,ut the deveIoppieqt;·{fhe Pf:9posed 20~1~:et<J1~mrnerhead legs meet the' minimum requlrementsforjo~lJedri~ewa,ys _:'!J1d;em~tgeri,~ ,aCj~' ·ortumaround.' . . .... . . . . ... ; ".' .{;<" > .. -.: ' r~. ;t~~~ "" '. . . ':(~!~>" 'd<~~:' .' ' " , ' . .' Not iiljurious6i: adverselyinu)ad'adHlcentproperties: AdJa~~n, .. " .' :erties arenotinjiIted:nOI' adversely'imp~ctedas all <!¢di2~ti6fi{aJ;:~~fr4iP?iJ1~~pr.QP9,sed~hita!id.~1l0w future extensions and drctilati'O~:as.dheloproe~f o~~UFSf 1\'thtl~~~:pi,rc~~~(l't~t5iSOlJth 4~velop, this modification . allows the!9ad·t<fbe desi~~a~fb tJatiSiti~nr;fi?pr.~Rpat~)~. .J"".~ ." ,'. . '. :. . .J; . . " ~·;'0::ii,;~.}¥t,:; "I~~\;'{:,k,":' ':},,' "l ' ....' . Conforms to;;the'intent ,of tl1ecode;'/I.'he~int~'rit, of pr~Yi'dihgfotJhe Qitystreet network is met . ' . (. ". ';" '," • ", ". . " :,,;<. " -rt.'1J,:-' '1.'. '. . " ,')", .' ·Y .. '< ~ ;"j'-.". .. ' ':C';: ".' with the dedi'cation and extensiondfEierce Street NE.· . NO''C.gune'ctiP'n is required to the 'Iiorth . '..' .' " • ' • • > • • ~~.;.. ~ ?~/'1:;;.. .' '':,''. . . ',,<:0:') ;;r....... J';' .. . due' to t.he,-teijaiq and theexisting~'de.~elqpe.plot. ....• ,: .. p.' :>':"::'<' . . . '.. ',' .... .' . . . ,~::~,,:<.:(:.,.(": :.-, , .,. ~'i\' <7 .' . . Justified 'arid required for use and:sltuation!i'nt(mded:,;!.:r!l~:~9,· Mfpf tl1is parcel is R-8,Single . . .' . . .. ,. '... .. , .' .,~ •.. , .. ... .'. ~"~"". " '. .', .' -, Family.· The modifications 'as request~d'r~llQw.tll,e<:m~i:mumJI~m·sity'and number Of lots that still . ~eet theY~1I104i setbacks andaceesscriteria; The plat provJd~sihe.rii.inirrium n,ecessaIy f()r full,· . use-f(jf ac¢es~';' emergencY.·(lIlcl domestic, ~~ well asparking·:~~ ·p¢rlestrian . amenities. :~'he . ll1oc:lific:;ttio~ihave the furthe'[ a9\;ant~ge o'f reducing the'h~a, sUi"faces on a slope as well as reducingth'ea~oiirit of ~adirigandfili: " .', .-. ' '. The Street Modification is apptoved,with,one conditionf, . . . ' ".N~ Pai~rtg" signs shalt be instal.Ied at any 10catiQn where the pavement width. is less thai1')we~ty-eight feet (28'). . . '" . 1. . This decisioiftoapprove the proposed Street ModifiCatIon is subject to a fpurteen-(14) day . appeal period froin the date of this letter. AnY'appealso(the~dmihis'trative decisionmust.be filed with the City of Renton Hearing Examiner by5:00p.m., March 2, 2006. '. '.' . ." '. 'f' .... ,. c", ;-. ,,,,,,,~ '., , .......... ~ .. : .. ' : .... ' .. ,.' , . " . , :- ,-,;. " .... '·Y . . ' " ," ..... : ...... , ...... ,' . ~ '.:: • '.r, -"J •• ,. ' ...... ) :.', ~.,: -. .'.' . .' '. ~', -:',' " .... "PhiIlii>Ki~S>? , .-: Feb.-qM,y"it{ZOO6 " . Page3;()f-3~""" "", ,'. • ••••• ..>. ," . " ' .... . ,' ~ . ., ",' J', .. "' . ...•. : : ~",:' " ". ". ~.' APp~als'rr:i~~~'b~;fii~~ in writing..tog~fh~r with:~he'i~uiie4'-$75.00~i>~11~atiofi'f¢· wifh~' ~eanhg 'Exarriiner,/City ot"Reiiion, 'lOSS SOoth GnidY,Way.Renton,'WA 986S5,,:CitY.:OfE.eiiton, ',' , , ,.Mllnicip£JiC04e S~cti~n4~~,.rio~gdvem~~app~hl~~() the Exanuner. AdditiOnal iIlfoiITIatio'n" . , <'regatding#1e ~pperu 'process rriay be'obtruned from::thtfRentdn' CityClerk'sO(tlct(425) 4'3()~ , .65'10/' . . .' .. ,"'" .. . . . .. " .... • '" .> •• " • • ,,' • ~ .'-,. tf YOll' h~y~ ,:~;, qri~st1ons,: please;'cod~ac~Jili I>i~i~, S-ellibf 'Pl~~~r: at (425)~3&~12i 9; . : . _ ...• ': " . ,.' : .. ' .; ..... -.. -~. -'.' ~ .:~ ~:.~. ~ ,-. ~.., . ' .. , ... .. ~~·.~ ••• ··.~~.~ft···;·l '. '. ~T • ~;.~: •• ".: •• "' ••• "{' '" ,,:~_' •• ', / -'4'; ;"', . ':'. -':. " " :K.;tyren Kiftjick .' _. d .,~~{';>/' f ' ,', D~V~lopft.l~niErigiheeringlSuQ~tff$:or , • ".""'.' " ,,' :t. 2· ~ .. ,"-;,::',': . ~ , ':' . PublibW.ork& :t:nsp¢ctions':&H~fIlljts~f ..: '.: ,"',';.',' :~~,,' "i'~;t:· Fl:~:~ti; . cc: ,:" 'NellWatts:Developme~t Sei:.vic~ Director::,::; .' ,StaI{~rtgIer;~jie Marslit!~¥~f:\:\':. ' :' ", AiJl' Ding; Senior Plamierl;~,/ ,lftf9 " '.. .. Eand-UseFiie ;'" '. ~. .~:-' ., ", " . . .... '. \ . . ~.' -' '," . . ,' '.' . ~, ,- ":,' ". " . ~ . '.:; , . " 'r' " ';--'. ,',: . " ..,' . '.' . ", '., .~~ '. :.' ~ ~ .. , ,'~ .. ':. ~. 'i ... -"-'.' '., ." <-' .. -,,' ,.' , . :' ., >~" ), .. " . ... " ~ . '_.'" '.~. ' ' . ;") . . .• -,"": ~ . " .' .< ,', .'.' .' .. ,'. ~ . '--' .'., > . ; DATE: February 15. 2006 lNIIl USE NUMBER: LUA05-118. PP.CAR. V-li. ECF PROJECT NAME: Propooed Ml1Jgation _: The ~ Mitigation -... will likely be impo;ed on the proposed project. These ...eommended Mitigation Meesures address pmjed imp8cIS not co.aed by e><is\Ulg codes and regulations as died above. n.e.""ncant will be requited to pq the ~ Tram;porlatIon Afl1iIpdIon Fee; n.e applicant will be rvquired to pay the ~to FIn> MiII9..-Fee; • n.e __ will be rvquired to pay the ~ _ Mit/g<I6on Fee; • n.e _1_ will be requited to comply _ the __ $ found In the submitted geote<;hn/tal tep«f; • n.e appI~..,lI be requlm '" comply _the _datlomi bind In the _dtep«f; • n.e applicant win be requlm to comply _ the reeommend_. found In the supplemental stream aooy; •. n.e appIk:ant will be l'Oqulted to comply _ the ",q.,f,ements of the 2005 KIng County SU".,., W_ DesIgn Afa~uaI for $Utfaoe water fUnoff management; end • n.e appllcanl will be l'Oqulted to comply _ the 2001 Depanment of Ecology Stomtwater /IIanagement Manual for emsion and sedimentation conttol. PROJECT DESCRIPTION; Subdivision of an existing 78.512 sq.,are loot pan:eI _ within Ihe ". _,0 (R-l0) dweIIlng unit po.-acre zoning deslgna1ion into 9 lots. a ___ tJaoI (Tract A). and a I Conunanb on the ab<MI """,kation must be subm_ in writing to JRI Ding. _ pmn-. DeveIoprhont _ growl!> protection tract (Trod a). An existing residence is proposed to be _ The proposed lots would be I . -Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on Man:h I, 2006. This _is - proposed for the future oonstrudion of detache<I single r.omily rasidenoos. The proposed lots range In area from 3.000 tontatlvely --for a pubRc: hearing on Man:h 21, 2006, ot 9:00 AM. Council Chambers, SewnfIt~, - square feet \0 4.333 square feet. Access \0 the proposed lots would be prov;dod via a .-42-foo1 wide road (Road A) \ City Hall, 1055 Sou1h Grady Way. -. If)OO are InteresIed In attending the hearing. please contad Ihe 00wI0pmen1 proposed \0 be de<focafBd as righI-<>f-way. The proposed Road A term ...... in a ham'-flJmaround. A ctsss 3 SerW:es DIvIsIon to ensure thai Ihe hearing has not been _ at (425) 43G-nB2. H comments cannot be s1I8am (Honey Creek) flows aaoss the eastern ~ of the S\lIljecI sIIe. in -. _ ~ ora _ on the I submitted In writing by the dale Indicated above. )00 may still _ at the hearing and present your comments on the eastern port;on of the S\lIljecI sIIe. A __ to the Critica. Areas reguIa!ions has also bean I'!!!!IeSI!!d for the proposal before the HearIng ExamIner. H)OO haw quesllons about 1his proposal. or wlsh to be made a party of - placement of a 5lDm!W!!ter pipe on the Protacled Slope and receive ad<f_ ~ by mail. please contad the projed manager. Anyone who submits -. comments wiIIaulDmatically become a party of _ and will be notified of any dedsion on this project. PROJECT LOCATION: 3524NE __ OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIACANCE, MITIGATED (DNs.M): As Ihe lJ!a<I Aqesw;y. the City of _. CONTACT PERSON: has _ !hat significant _ impads are unIilIely \0 result from !he proposed project. Therefore. as perml!tad Wlder the RCW 43.21C.l10. the City of Renton Is using the Optional DNs-M """"""' \0 give _thai a DNS- M is likely \0 be issued. Comment periods for !he prOject and the proposed ONS-M "'" integrated into a single ~ period, There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold ~ of Non-SIgnIficanoa- Miliga1ed (DNs-M). A 14-<1ay appeal period wID follow the Issuanc:e of the DNS-M. PERMIT APPUCATIDN DATE: December 21. 2005 N~ OF COMPLETE APPUCATION: January 13. 2006 APPUCANTIPROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Phillip Kltzes, PK Enterprises; Tel: (206) 227-7445; Eml: plcen!atprises_m'l@yahoo.com PennitslR.view Requested: Environmental (SEPA) Review. Hearing Examiner Short Plat _va, . Other Pennito which may be requinld; R~ed studies: UtIlity, Fire. Consbvdion, & Building Pennito SupplemantalStream study. Wetland, Geotachlnit;aJ and Drainage Reports ~ where _fiQ1IIon may be revlewed: PUBLIC HEARING; CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: ZonIng/Land Use: Planning/Building/Publlc W_ Depar1men!, ee ... lopment Services Division, Sixth Floor RAlnton CIty Han, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. WA 98055 Public hearing is tentatiyefy scheduled for March 21, 2006 before the Renton Hearing E.xi!miner In Ren!Dn Cound! Chaf!l!>en;. Hearings bagIn at 9:00 AM on the 7th fIoa of the now Renton City HalI_ at 1055 South Grady Way. The subjeclsite is designated _ -10(R-l0)on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and Residential M edium Density (RMO) on the City's ZonIng Map. Jill K. Ding. Associate Planner, Tel: (425) 430-7219; Eml: jding@cj.renton.wa.us EnWoomenIaI Do<:umenIs thai Evaluale the ~ Project EnviTonmen1a1 (SEPA) ChedcIIs1 H you would like to be made a party of record to receive further infonnalion on this proposed project. complete this fonn and return 10: City of Renton. Development Planning'. 1055 SO. Grady Way. Renton. WA 98055. Development RegulationS Used For Project M;ijgallon: The project will be subject to the City'. SEPA onlinanoe. RMC 4-4-{)30 Development Guidelines. 4-3-050 Clitlcal Areas. MHl30 Drainage and othel appllcabte codes and regulations as appropriate.. I NameJFile No.: Honey Cree!< Voew EstatesII.UA05-118. PP. CAR. V-li. ECF NAME: ____________________ ~ ____________________________ ___ MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: CERTIFICATJION I, j, '( I :J), '~ , hereby certify that 3 . copies of the above document were posted by m n ~ conspicuous places or nearby the described property ~n DATE: 0l..1{-5/0~ SIGNED: ~ 1i.~ n:~;::'WOI:;C:~~'N~1Pu;;~rurofu~~ ;~L: ;-'':'. ,.; -'.' " .. ~ N TARY PUBUC SIGNATURE: \ vn. '1t'(L::.o j-. KUi\v':'O 'I ~ NOTARY PUBur t ~ STATE OF WASHINGTON I COMMIS~,Q~j ;::Y.P!~lI:::S " '18 • -'" "~ __ I llJ:;ORCH 1 P -; ":" -:-" ....... ,--_~"'7"........ • r .. ~~ .... ./ \ !1b ) CITY OF RENTON CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 15th day of February, 2006, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Revised NOA documents. This information was sent to: Name' Agencies Surrounding Property Owners Phil Kitzes, PK Enterprises James & Minoo Costello Charels & Mahwash Price Ali & Farideh Mastan WSDOT (Signature of Sender):~ ~ STATE OF WASHINGTON } } SS COUNTY OF KING } See Attached See Attached Contact! Applicant Owners . Owners Owners Agency I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy Tucker Representing '\ .:....-~ ,'~~.,-"""":'-,-~,,!,!: .---. -' -......... ~~ /; CH ARI i=~ F. 1(01<i{0' ';j NOTARY PUBLIC ~ )jj' STATE OF WASHINGTON \ COMMIS:;;ON \:=XPlfl::S ~~-~~ signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: -z... /1 L /0 (. , / Notary Public in and for the Sate of Washington Notary (print}:_~C-=-;-'~--7-' V:-;-=:.:L'7-' -,--=,f--=-/~--=--A-:---,i£lo;;..=..· _' __ " __ ' __ My appointment expires: "S/ fey foc Project Name: Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat Project Number: LUA05-118, PP, CAR, V-H, ECF template -affidavit of service by mailing Dept. of Ecology • Environmental Review Section . PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region * Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers· Seattle District Office Attn: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Jamey Taylor * Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Servo Attn: SEPA Section 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt ) AGENCY (DOE) lETTER MAILING (ERe DETERMINATIONS) WDFW -Stewart Reinbold· Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. * clo Department of Ecology Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 3190 160th Ave SE 39015 -172ndAvenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008 Auburn, WA 98092 Duwamish Tribal Office * Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program * 4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert Seattle, WA 98106-1514 39015 172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Office of Archaeology & Historic Environmental Planning Supervisor Preservation * Ms. Shirley Marroquin Attn: Stephanie Kramer 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 PO Box 48343 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: Mr. Micheal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director 13020 SE 72nd Place 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle, WA 98059 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Municipal Liason Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Joe Jainga 6300 South center Blvd. 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01W Tukwila, WA 98188 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Title Examiner 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, PMT's, and the notice of application. * ' Also note, do not mail Jamey Taylor any of the notices she gets hers from the web. Only send her,the ERC Determination paperwork. template -affidavit of service by mailing Phil Kitzes PK Enterprises 23035 SE 263rd Street Maple Vall.ey, WA 98038 tel: 206-227-7445 ) PARTIES OF RECORD HOINIEY CR.EEK view ESTATES LUA05-118, SHPL-H, CAR, ECF James & Minoo Costello 22814 77th Avenue SE Woodinville, WA 98072 tel: 425-486-8101 (owner) Charles & Mahwash Price 16102 NE 175th Street Woodinville, WA 98072 tel: 425-481-9589 (owner) eml: pkenterprises_mv@yahoo.com . (applicant / contact) Ali & Farideh Mastan 13910 SE 42nd Place Bellevue, WA 98006 tel: 425-747-5858 (owner) Updated: 02/15/06 Arthur & Wauneta' Eastman 3533 NE 17th Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: 425-255-0751 (party of record) A.L Meakin 7100 S Taft Street Seattle, WA 98178 (party of record) (Page 1 of 1) ) REVISED NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON ... SIGN1FICANCE .. MIT~GATED (DNS-M) DATE: February 15, 2006 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA05-118, PP, CAR, V-H, ECF PROJECT NAME: Honey Creek View Estates PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Subdivision of an existing 78,512 SQuare foot parcel located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation into 9 lots, a stormwater detention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The proposed lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The proposed lots range in area from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feel Access to the proposed lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as right-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates in a hammerflead tumaround. A class 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portion of the subject site, in addtion Protected Slopes are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. A variance to the Critical Areas regulations has also been requested for the placement of a stormwater pipe on the Protected Slope PROJECT LOCATION: 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS-M): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that Significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS-M process to give ,notice that a DNS- M is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS-M are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non-Significance- Mitigated (DNS-M). A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: December 21, 2005 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: January 13, 2006 APPLICANTIPROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Phillip Kitzes, PK Enterprises; Tel: (206) 227-7445; Eml: pkenterprises_mv@yahoo.com PermitsIReview Requested: Environmental (SEPA) Review, Hearing Examiner Short Plat approval Other Permits which may be required: Utility, Fire, Construction, & Building Permits Requested Studies: Location where application may be reviewed: PUBLIC HEARING: CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: Supplemental Stream Study, Wetland, Geotechinical and Drainage Reports , . PlanninglBuildinglPublic Works Department, Development Services Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 Public hearing is tentativelv scheduled for March 21. 2006 before the Renton Hearing Examiner in Renton Council Chambe'rs. Hearings begin at 9:00 AM on the 7th floor of the new Renton City Hall located at 1055 South Grady Way. The subject site is designated Residential-10 (R-10) on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and Residential Medium Density (RMD) on the City's Zoning Map. Environmental (SEPA) Checklist The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-4-030 Development Guidelines. 4-3-050 Critical Areas, 4-6-030 Drainage and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. Proposed Mitigation Measures: The following Mitigation Measures will likely be imposed on the proposed project. • D • • • • These recommended Mitigation Measures address projed impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above. The applicant will be required to pay the appropriate Transportation Mitigation Fee; The applicant will be required to pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee; The applicant will be required to pay the appropriate Parks Mitigation Fee; The applicant will be required to comply with the recommendations found in the submitted geotechnical report; The applicant will be required to comply with the recommendations found in the wetland report; The applicant will be required to comply with the recommendations found in the supplemental stream study; The applicant will be required to comply with the requirements of the 2005 King County Surface Water De~ign Manual for surface water runoff management; and The applicant will be required to comply with the 2001 Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for erosion and sedimentation control. Comments on the above application. must be submitted in writing to Jill Ding, Associate Planner, Development Services Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, by 5:00·PM on March 1, 2006. This matter is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on March 21, 2006, at 9:00 AM, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. If you are interested in attending the hearing, please contad the Development Services Division to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled at (425) 430-7282. If comments cannot be submitted in writing by the date indicated above, you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments on the proposal before the Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional information by mail, please contad the projed manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on ttjis project. CONTACT PERSON: Jill K. Ding, Associate Planner;·Tel: (425) 430-7219; Eml: jding@ci.renton.wa.us I PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMB.ER WHEN.C~~NGFORPROpER FILE ID.ENTIFICATION I If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, Development Planning, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Name/File No.: Honey Creek View Estates/LUA05-118, PP, CAR. V-H, ECF NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: . ..:-. P KEN T E R,P R I S E S February 12, 2006 oevaOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF ~ENTON Ms. Jill K. Ding, Associated Planner FEB 132006 lRl~©~a~~/Q) City of Renton - Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RE: A Variance Request: of an Outfall Pipe for a, Detention Vault on a Protected Slope, Preliminary Plat of Honey Creek View Estates. Renton Application Nos. LUA05-118, SHPL-H, CAR, ECF. Dear Ms. Ding: Per your letter dated February 2, 2006, the City has requested that we submit for a variance for the proposed outfall pipe of the drainage vault over a protected slope, as shown in the plans for the Honey Creek View Preliminary Plat. Included in your letter was attached information of the specific criteria that needed to be addressed per RMC 4-9-250B. The following is are variance request that addresses RMC 4-9-250B( 10), which is the criteria for approval for such a variance. Item 10.a: Public Policies have been evaluated and it has been determined by the Department Administrator that the public's health safety, and welfare is best served; Response: This is a decision that staff needs to make for this request On February 4,2006, we conducted additional geotechnical studies (4 test pits) and the soil stability of the entire site is excellent. A test pit was dug approximately , 15 feet deep where the vault is proposed and adjacent to where the pipe is to be placed over the slope. The material was primarily sand and glacial till and conSidered excellent for construction purposes. The health, safe~ and· welfare of the future residents will be secured and will not be adversely affected by this proposal. (Please see the revised report submitted by Bergquist Engineering Se/Vices.) Item 10.b: Each facility must conform to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and, with any adopted public programs and policies; RespOnse: This request does Conform in that it allows the property to be developed at a density that has been established in the city's comprehensive plan and zoning code. Item 10.e: Each facility must serve established, identified public needs; Response: . The proposed outfall pipe will provide the needed drainage conveyance system for the development; While protecting the integrity of the slope. 23035 SE 263"0 STREET' MAPLE VALLEY, \VA • 98038 PHONE: 206.227.7445 • FAX: 425.432.9397 • E-MAIL: PKENTERPRS@AOL.COM -2-February 12, 2006 Item 10.d: No practical alternative exists; Response: Given the topography, this is the only practical location for the drainage pipe. The vault is at the lowest point to serve the development and convey surface water runoff from the roads and future residences. There is an existing residence to the north which is not suitable to bring surface water runoff through their yard. The pipe is being extended to a low point along the slope and will be engineered and constructed to meet all city standards. Item lO.e: The proposed action takes affirmative and appropriate measures to minimize and cOmpensate for unavoidable impacts; RespOnse: Again, we have conducted additional test pits to detennine the geotechnical integrity of developing within the sensitive and/or protected slopes. The drain pipe minimizes the impact to the slope and is unavoidable given the existing topography. Item 10.f: The proposed activity results in no net loss of regulated wetland or stream/lake area value, or function in the drainage basin where the wetland, stream~ or lake is ' located. . Response: This is not applicable nor does it cause any net loss of area or value of the abovementioned sensitive areas. Item 10.g: The proposed activities will not jeopardize the continued existence of endangered, threatened, or sensitive species as listed by the Federal government or the State; Response: This action does not affect endangered, threatened, or sensitive . species, as listed by the state or federal govemments. Item 10.h: That the proposed activities will not cause significant degradation of ground or surface water quality; Response: The on-site surface water runoff will be captured and treated in a vault whereby it will be conveyed down the sensitive and/or protected slope area (within the proposed stann pipe) to the creek. Thus, there will be no Significant degradation of either ground or surface water quality. . Item 10.i: The approval as determined by the Hearing Examiner is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose; and . Response: This proposal is the minimal necessary to adequately develop the site given the existing conditions. . Item lO.j: The proposed variance is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is absence of valid scientific information, the. steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. Response: This variance request is based on the existing conditions of the site, geotechnical evaluation, and engineering considerations. The construction. and design to allow development over sensitive and/or protected slopes will be based on the best available engineering practices. All applicable standards, either local or state, WIll be followed to ensure the impacts are minimized. ) -3-February 12,2006 We appreciate your time and consideration on this matter. As requested, we are submitting five (5) copies of this request along with additional information, as outlined in your letter dated February 2, 2006. If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 206.227.7445. Sincerely, PK ENTERPRISES PHIWP KITZES CC Mr. Steven Lee Mr. Timothy Powers Mr.-Mike Davis Printed: 02-13-2006 Payment Made: ~}[TY OF RENTON 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, W A 98055 Land Use Actions RECEIPT Permit#: lUA05-118 02113/2006 03:49 PM Receipt Number: R0600744 T atal Payment: 250.00 Payee: Phillip Kitzes and Kathryn Kitzes Current Payment Made to the Following Items: Trans Account Code Description Amount 5022 000.345.81. 00.0019 Variance Fees 250.00 Payments made for this receipt Trans Method Description Amount Payment Check· 4008 250.00 Account Balances Trans Account Code Description Balance Due 3021 5006 5007 5008 5009 5010 5011 5012 5013 5014 5015 5016 5017 5018 5019 5020 5021 5022 5024 5036 5909 5941 5954 5955 5998 303.000.0~.345.85 Park Mitigation Fee 000.345.81.00.0002 Annexation Fees 000".345.81.00.0003 Appeals/Waivers 000.345.81.00.0004 Binding Site/Short plat 000.j45.81:00.000~ Conditional Use Fees 000.345.81.00.0007 Environmental Review 000.345.81.00.0008 Prelim/Tentative Plat 000.345.81.00.0009 Final Plat 000.345.81.00.0010 PUD 000.345.81.00.0011 Grading & Filling Fees 000.345.81.00.0012 Lot Line Adjustment 000.345.81.00.0013 Mobile Home Parks 000.345.81.00.0014 Rezone 000.345.81.00.0015 Routine vegetation Mgmt 000.345.81.00.0016 Shoreline Subst Dev 000.345.81.00.0017 Site Plan Approval 000.345.81.00.0018 Temp Use or Fence Review 000.345.81.00.0019 Variance Fees 000.345.81.00.0024 Conditional Approval Fee 000.345.81.00.0005 Comprehensive Plan Amend 000.341.60.00.0024 Booklets/EIS/Copies 000.341.50.00.0000 Maps (Taxable) 604.237.00.00.0000 Special Deposits 000.05.519.90.42.1 Postage 000.231.70.00.0000 Tax Remaining Balance Due: $0.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 . , ~. . • -> • ~. , " . -'~.' PI8nriiIigffiUil~giPUbHc Works Dep~ment . Kath~ KooIker, Mayor '. • .. ' ... ' . . . Gregg~ennanP.lE~~-Admin~trator .. . . . February 14, 2006 '.-< • Phil Kitzes ... ~.' PK Enterprises '. . . I.. 23035 SEC 263rd Street· . Mapie Valley; w.A 98038" . " ; , r,' -HE: Honey Creek View Estates Pfelirtliriary Plat (Renton File No .. lUAQ5i:1t8) .. Dear Mr. Kitzes; . '." '" The Cityof'Reritonhas r~ceiyedihe information requested in .my lettert6 you "dated Fel:>ruary 2, 2006 and the project is now bein~;"takerH)ff hold .. The project has been·sGheduledto.go before the EnvironmentalReviewComlJlitteeon'February 21,2006 and is·.tEmtativelyscheduled for a Public Hearing'0f} March 21. 2906: ' . . . . .' .' '. . . . U'pon furthe~ review' it: ad<ii!iopadilf6'rtnatiOriis -required .YOu will"~e, riotitl~<:rat tha( time. ·Please contact me at (425)430.;721g.i(yoLJ, hav~:ariyquestions·. '".: . .. r • . : ~ , ,.Jo -~ :. , ... -' cC: Jam~s&MiriooCosteilo;-Cha'rles& Mcihwash PriCe; Alr&·f;:lrldetl&;a~~jj/(jwne;.s ... -Parties ofaeeord .' ... .. -: .. ',:. -"". ", . ';-" .' . <:. r. ; .- ~'. ;'" . t· -:: ~ '.' "\, . ," <": ;, ,. . ..... -. ,:,-'t" ." '. , . -.,' -. . ", -." -.~ ~ . ,.'-' .. /" . . ~ --------O.--1.0-i5-·:-S0-u-..:.th-'--.Gr-:-.·· -'-ad--:Y"";'W-a:-y~.-'-R-:-en---'to-i1-'-, w-· -as-h-in-gt-on-' --:9-80'-'--5,-:5.-.--:'-· .,-.... _"-c---"~"'--_ R,E. N TON 4l:l:\" .' . . .'. .~HEADoF T·HE CURVE '+(lY. This paper~ 50% reCycioomaterial.30% posio;;.",~ '" ",,- " ,', ..... ' ~. c ' _i ",., ...... ' ) CI-TY'"-t:y ,REl,r1fON .. " •• : .• : ~,:. . 1 • .f· : •• Kathy Keolk~r~Mayor February 14, 2006 PlaimingIBuildirig/Public WorkS Dep3!inie*t. <:' -,-:', ' , ,Gregg '~~erman P.E., Administrator' ' ',' - ..... I,: • , ... ", . -.". .... , Phil Kitzes , , , , PK Enterprises, -, . -'23035 SE 263rd Street-, -MapleValley, WA 9.8038,' , RE: Honey Creek View 'Estates :P~~limirlaiy short Plat (Renton F!le No~ lllA05-118) _ Dear Mr. KitZes; . The City o( Re~tori has mad~ a, c1et~miination February, 8, 200e' thai'theCsubject land use application is in fact a P~eiirninary' Pla~ as' opposed to a Short','Plat per .the Washington State Subdivision Regulations RCW58.~7;020: the WaShington State'SiJbdivisionRegulati6ns define , ashortsubdi:visiona~ ~h'e: C;tivision ,or r~d!vi,sion of land, into fo~r -qr ,fewer lots, ,racts, parcels;- sites. <ir divisions for the purpose Of saJe;,lease, or transfer of ownership. Ho~ever;-the legislative authority'of-any, city'or town may by laca['ordinance increase the nUrTJber~ofklts, tracts; or parcels - ' to be regulated as· short 'J),l,Jbdivision's'to~a maximum of nine. Tlie tegisi~tiveauthorityof any 'county -plarlning 'under HeW -36.70A:040-that' has adopte,d, a~onip-r,ehensive, -plan' 'and ,- - -development regulations in COrPPliance with' chapter 36.70A RCW may by ordinance increase the numtJer of lots, tract~;, or,parcels-to be re"gul!lted as short subdivi~ions' to':a :maximum of nine in any urban growth area~'" , ' ' ' " -_ " , Therefore, per the'WaShlrigtonState,SUb,divisio~: 'Regulations; the lione~:: Creek Vi,ew Estates Preliminary Short; Pial shOUld be proc::~~s~(('~ia -pr~liminary plat as',the'propqsed project. would , ',result in the creation, 019' residential lots 'arld:two"fract~. ' The Pielimin~uy ,Platprocess would' add " , "approximately,4 weeks'toth~,review tim~.<?fthe proposed project .. Th~projeclwould gobefdre, , 'the HearingExa~iner fOr.:;~d iecommend.~tion:,tojlie CityCouncil'QIJ:the'f'reliminary Plat. The ,,-Hearing Examirier:s i'~cqmmendatiol} would be subject to a ,-t\vo~we:ekappeaJ period~' The _, ,application fe~' fora:Pre,l!minary PI~Lis-$2,OOO;theref()re' as' $~ ;OOO:"-vasqriginally paid fQr the '" ',' " short plat, an additional ~tOQO is required to cootinue' processirigjhe:projecL~s a Preiiminary ':,',: ':", • ': "Plat.'" " ' , ' '-'" " Pleasecontac~ me~t(41!5) 430-7219ifyou~ave'anyquestions:,' ~t ' • " , Sincerely, " , , .' ~Ding" ,. ,·'a.'U 1{ ;t21J','~-: , , Associate Planner, " " ·'·i· /' ': '.'. , \: c' " , ~c: james & Minooco~t~lIo:,Charles'& Matlwash Price, Ali & Faddeh' Ma~t~ri/Qw~er~ , Partieso(Record :",<':, ,'-' i ',," " ".-;;'>,; " ',' ,':"., ,.;.. -' " /' .. ' .. :. ; ,0, ...... . .',' ~ -~ :. '. " . . . "'. . .. ~ ~: ____ .................... ,:: ...... .::·~i,· ..................... rl_-........:_I "lnOL _-....._' _,.~ •. , ' ',J ' .. ', . " .,', " " . ," . .: ... .... ) 'CITY «. F lR1E':f~t1rON 'Plariiring/Build,ingIPUblicW Qrlci Department 9reggZimmennan, P~E~.AdlDinistrator. ' --.~ e F~bruary ?, 2006' , Phil Kitzes, " PK Enterprises, "., , ,23035 SE 263rd Street , ,; Maple Valley,WA98038 " _ • _. J • , RE: Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Short Plat (R~notoh File No. -LUA05-118), Dear,\VIr. Kitzes; , The City of Renton hascompieted its fir~t review of the Honey Creek View Estates :PreliminarY ,Short Plat and has determined that 'additional information is required. Per our' phone , conversation ,this morning the, project is b~ing placed Ohhold pending 'the reCeipt 'of the' required , " information. 'Ple~~e submit 5 copies of thefpllbwing:" , , , ',-:- 1:" A revis~d geote¢hnical report complyif'l~:with'the' r~quire~eritsset out und~'RMC4-:8~ 12,OD (attached). The report shClII adpress Irrlp;actS and recomniendecJmitig~~ol),for such , impactS toProtectectand Sensitive':Slopes located on ,the subject site. ProtecteClSlopes ,are define'd as slopes~ INhich~ exce~d,agrade of 4Q percentfora vertical height, of 15f~et,· and Sensitive, Slopes are'defined'as Slopes, which have an average'grad~ be1vl~en 25 percenrand 40 perceht. ",' " ' , ,'" , , ' ,,' ' ", , , 2., A ~IO~~ ~~p ,clearly delineatihg the' location of protect~d and ,Sensitive SI6pe~p~r RMC " 4-3':050J (attached). ' ',' , ',':;' ',' , , '; 3. '.AV~rian~e request, to ,place ,the:,ciutf~ilpipe forth~detel)tion \t~u,lton the ,protectea~lope. ' Tlle'valiance required is, a critiCaI',area variance,' which ',requires Hearing'Examiner, Approval. ,the fee fbr the varici'nce:is· $250 as' the variance is 'associated'Wlth'iinother' landu~e application. Please provide a' ju'stlfi~tidri , for, the variance' based":on the" attaChed critena found i~ RIV!C4'~9~250B (attached). ' c " The projed wiU be Jaken off, the sch~dul~:':{or the E~vi~cinmental: Re~iew Corii~lttee' B,",dJhe Hearing Exarnirierpending ttie recefptof. the}~quested :infofmatio~; . Once you' have.'~ubrnitt~d' " the requesiedir1forina~ion,the proj~ct'Wilr pe scheduled fQr Environmen~1 ReviewCQmmittee a,nd the public heanng with the Hearing Exarl,liner. If additi,orial inforrilatiQ,n is required~ you Will be' notified at that t~me: Please contact me at (425) 430-7219 if you have any questions.', ' , i , Sincerely" . -~ '. " ~' ;,/1 ',1 IJLf/, /f7~" " , 'Ll;, L{ 1lI,d:/---<"7J" -. . . '. :.till K.Ding', " ' , ' " , ~ssociate Planner , " , ',' I;:nclosures . .. . ~ ,'~ --'-:..-.-.----l-O-SS-S-o-uth-Gra-dy-W-ay:-'-' ,--R-e-nt-on-;-'-W-as-hin-' -gt-on-'-'--9-S0-S-S -----,---'-"--~. J,:E','N,T 0 N ,~ This paj,;" contains 50% ~ material, 30% postccinsumer ' 'AHE'AD.oF ",fHE. CURVE 4-3-QSOJ )J--------------,_)J----------.~ hundred (100) year flood zone of Spring- brook Creek. i. An exception to this requirement shall apply where the Federal Emer- gency Management Agency (FEMA) defined one hundred (100) year flood zone is lower than the City model re- sults for the one hundred (100) year future land use conveyance event. ii. . Under the exception, the lower FEMA floodplain elevation shall be usE:KJ. The exception only applies for the reach of Springbrook Creek be- tween SW 43rd Street and Oakes- dale Avenue near SW 41st Street. c. Determining Finished Floor Eleva~ 1!:ions According to FEMA: Although City mOdel results will apply to compen- satory storage requirements, the FEMA one hundred (100) year flood plain eleva- tions shall be used to establish building finished floor elevations to comply with other National Flood Insurance Program requirements. (Amd. Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000; Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005) J. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS: 1. Applicability: The geologic hazard regu- lations apply to all nonexempt activities on sites containing steep slopes, landslide haz- ards, erosion hazards, seismic hazards, and/ or coal mine hazards classified below or on sites within fifty feet (50') of steep slopes, landslide hazards, erosion hazards, seismic hazards, and/or coal mine hazards classified below which are located on abutting or adja- cent sites. a. Steep Slopes: (Revised 6/05) i. Steep Slope Delineation Proc~ dure: The boundaries of a regulated steep sensitive or protected slope are determined to be in the location identified on the City of Renton's Steep Slope Atlas. An applicant's qualified erofessjonal may SIJbstjh,te Doundaries independently derived from survey data for the City's con- slderatiUl I it, detetTntOln91he bound- aries of sensitive or protected steel? slopes. All topographic maps shall -- 3 -20.6 utilize two foot (2') contour intervals or the standard utilized in the City of Renton steep Slope Atlas. -. / ii. Steep Slope Types: (a) Sensitive slopes. (b) Protected slopes. b. landslide Hazards: i. low landslide Hazard (ll): Ar- eas with slopes less than fifteen per-·· cent (15%). ii. Medium landslide Hazard (lM): Areas with slopes between fif- teen percent (15%) and forty percent (40%) and underlain by soils that consist largely of sand, gravel or gla- cial till. iii. High landslide Hazards (LH): Areas with slopes greater than forty percent (40%), and areas with slopes between fifteen percent (15%) and forty percent (40%) and underlain by soils consisting largely of silt and clay. Iv. Very High Landslide Hazards (lV): Areas of known mappable land- slide deposits. c. Erosion Hazards: i. low Erosion Hazard (El): Ar- eas with soils characterized by the Natural Resource Conservation Ser- vice (formerly U.S. SOil Conservation Service) as having slight or moderate erosion potential, and that slope less than fifteen percent (15%). ii. High Erosion Hazard (EH): Ar- eas with soils characterized by the Natural Resource Conservation Ser- vice (formerly U.S. Soil Conservation Service) as having severe or very se- vere erosion potential, and that slope more steeply than fifteen perc.ent (Hi%). C) o \ Q]: \ v-- r ... "~ " ---------.-~---"c.~t7-... \,)0-('\ \ 4-9-250F are followed. (Ord. 4835, \... 4-9-2508 9. Special Review Criteria -Single Fam- ily Residence on a legal lot with a Cate- gory 3 Wetland; or Single Family Residence on a legal lot with a Class 2, 3, or 4 Stream/Lake: In lieu of the criteria shown in subsections 85 and 86 of this Sec- tion, a variance may be granted from any wet- land or stream requirement in the critical areas regulations for a single family resi- dence to be located on an existing legal lot if all of the following criteria are met: ~ 3-27-2000; Amd. Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000) ~ ~ 10. Special Review Criteria -Publici Quasi-Public Utility or Agency Altering Aquifer Protection, Geologic Hazard, Hab- itat, Stream/Lake or Wetland Regulations: a. The proposal is the minimum neces- sary to accommodate the building foot- print and access. In no case, however, shall the impervious surface exceed five thousand (5,000) square feet, including access. Otherwise the alteration shall be reviewed as a Hearing Examiner vari- ance and subject to the review criteria of subsection 86 of this Section; b. Access is located so as to have the least impact on the wetland and/or strearn/lake and its buffer; c. The proposal preserves the functions and values of the wetlands and/or strearn/lake/riparian habitat to the maxi- mum extent possible; d. The proposal includes on-site mitiga- tion to the maximum extent possible; e. The proposal first develops noncriti- cal area, then the critical area buffer, be- fore the critical area itself is developed; f. The proposed activities will not jeop- ardize the continued existence of endan- gered, threatened or sensitive species as listed by the Federal government or the State; g. The inability to derive reasonable economic use of the property is not the result of actions segregating or dividing the property and creating the undevelop- able condition after the effective date of this Section; and h. The proposed variance is based on consideration of the best available sci- ence as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid sci- entific information, the steps in RMC In lieu ofthe variance criteria of subsection 85 of this Section, applications by public/quasi- public utilities or agencies proposing to alter aquifer protection, geologic hazard, habitat, stream and lake or wetland regulations shall be reviewed for compliance with all of the fol- lowing criteria: a. Public policies have been evaluated and it has been determined by the De- partment Administrator that the public's health, safety, and welfare is best served; b. Each facility must conform to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and with any adopted public programs and poli- cies; c. Each facility must serve established, identified public needs; d. No practical alternative exists to meet the needs; e. The proposed action takes affirma- tive and appropriate measures to mini- mize and compensate for unavoidable impacts; f. The proposed activity results in no net loss of regulated wetland or strearn/lake area, value, or function in the drainage basin where the wetland, stream or lake is located; g. The proposed activities will not jeop- ardize the continued existence of endan- gered, threatened or sensitive species as listed by the Federal government or the State; h. That the proposed activities will not cause significant degradation of ground- water or surface water quality; i. The approval as determined by the Hearing Examiner is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose; and Se.e... ------------------------------------------------------------n~f 9 -77 (Revised 12105) ~ 4-9-25OB j. The proposed variance is based on consideration of the best available sci- ence as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid sci- entific infonnation, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. (Ord. 4835, 3-27-2000; Amd. Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000) 111. Special Review Criteria -Construct- ing Structures over Piped Streams: For variance requests involving the construction . of structures over piped streams, the follow- ing criteria shall apply: a. The proposal is the minimum neces- sary to accommodate the structure; and b. There is no other reasonable alterna- tive to avoid building over a piped stream; and . c. The existing pipe stream system that would have to be located under the struc- ture is replaced with new pipe material to ensure long-tenn life of the pipe and meets structural requirements; and d. The piped stream system is sized to convey the one hundred (100) year future land use condition runoff from the total upstream tributary area as detennined from a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis perfonned in accordance with standards detennined by the City and in accor- dance with other City's standards; and e. The piped stream that will be built over will need to be placed in a caSing pipe sized to allow pipe skids and the po- tential need to increase the pipe size by a minimum of one pipe diameter. The cas- ing pipe shall be a minimum of three pipe diameters larger than the diameter of the pipe that conveys the stream; and f. To allow for maintenance, operation and replacement of the piped stream that has been built over, a flow bypass system shall be constructed and access man- holes or other structures of sufficient size as detennined by the City shall be re- quired on both sides of the section of the piped stream that is built upon; and g. There will be no damage to nearby public or private property and no threat to (Revised 12105) 9 -78 )1------- the health or safety of people on or off the property. 12. Continuation of Public Hearing: If for any reason testimony in any manner set for public hearing, or ~ing heard, cannot be completed on date set for such hearing, the person presiding at such public hearing or meeting may, before adjournment or recess of such matters under consideration, publicly· announce the time and place to and at which said meeting will be continued, and no further notice of any kind shall be required. (Ord. 3463, 8-11-1980; Amd. Ord. 4648, 1-6-1997; Ord. 4835,3-27-2000) 13. Decision Process: a. The PlanningIBuilding!Public Works Administrator or HislHer DeSig- nee Shall Announce Findings and De- cisions: Not more than thirty (30) dayS after the tennination of the proceedings of the public hearing on any variance, the Planning/Building/Public Works Adminis- trator or his/her designee shall announce the Administrator's findings and decision. If a variance is granted, the record shall show such conditions and limitations in writing as the Administrator may impose. b. Notice of Decision of the Plan- ning/BuildinglPublic Works Adminis- trator or His/Her Designee: Following the rendering of a decision on a variance application, a copy of the written order by the Administrator shall be mailed to the applicant at the address shown on the application and filed with the Planning/ . Building/Public Works Department and to any other person who requests a copy thereof. c. Rec~msideration: (Reserved) d. Record of Decision: Whenever'a variance is approved by the Planning/ Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her deSignee, the Building Depart~ ment shall forthwith make an appropriate record and shall infonn the administrative department having jurisdiction over the matter. (Amd. Ord. 4835, 3-27-2000; Ord. 5157,9-26-2005) ( :: 4-8-120D proofing methods criteria in RMC 4-3-05013c; and for any nonresidential structure meet the f100dproofing; and e. Description of the extent to which a watercourse will be altered or relocated as a result of proposed development. (Ord. 4835, 3-27-2000) Floor Plans, General: A basic line drawing plan of the general building layout showing walls, exits, windows, and designated uses indicating the proposed locations of kitchens, baths and floor drains, bedrooms and living areas, with sufficient detail for City staff to de- termine if an oiVwater separator or grease in- terceptor is required and to determine sizing "" of side sewer. (Amd. Ord. 4821, 12-20-1999) AQ.,U GJJ ? __ 'i~ Definitions G: ~Q.lf\)o-~~Geotechnlcal Report: A study prepared in ~QJ{) ~ accordance with generally accepted geotech- -I nical practices and stamped by a professional engineer licensed in the State of Washington which includes soils and slope stability analy- sis, boring and test pit logs. and recommen- dations on slope setbacks, foundation deSign, retaining wall design, material selec- tion, and all other pertinent elements. If the evaluation involves geologic evaluations or interpretations, the report shall be reviewed and approved by a geologist. Further recom- mendations, additions or exceptions to the original report based on the plans, site condi- tions, or other supporting data shall be Signed and sealed by the geotechnical engineer. If the geotechnical engineer who reviews the plans and specifications is not the same engi- neer who prepared the geotechnical report, the new engineer shall, in a letter to the City accompanying the plans and specifications, express his or her agreement or disagree- ment with the recommendations in the geo- . technical report and state that the plans and specifications conform to his or her recom- mendations. If the site contains a geologic hazard regulated by the critical areas regula- tions, the preparation and content require- ments of RMC 4-8-120D, Table 18 shall also apply. (Ord. 4835, 3-27-2000) Table 18 -Geotechnical Report -Detailed Requirements ::a:: CJ == l: == en ::» >-::l Q is ::a:: a: is ::a:: a: w CJ w w CJ e:( en :liE s: > z :liE s: N W I I I 0 I I e:( Il. ::a:: 0 III W III in III W Q ... C Q Q 0 Z Z en :; :; :::; a: 0 == :liE z Il. en en en III ~ e:( W Q Q Q ::I: ..J ... 0 REPORT PREPARATION/CONTENT w z z z £! en e:( e:( ... REQUIREMENTS l-e:( :5 :5 iii 0 0 0 en ... ::a:: en 0 0 > 1. Characterize soils, geology and drainage. X X X X X X X X X 2. Describe and depict all natural and man-X X X X X X X X X made features within one hundred fifty feet (150') of the site boundary. 3. Identify any areas that have previously X X X X X X X X X been disturbed or degraded by human activity or natural processes. 4. Characterize groundwater conditions X X X X X X X X including the presence of any public or private wells within one-quarter (1/4) mile of the site. 5. Provide a site evaluation review of available X X X X X X X X X information regarding the site. 6. Conduct a surface reconnaissance of the X X X X X X X X site and adjacent areas. Note: An ·X· indicates that the requirement applies in the identified critical area. (Revised 6105) 8-48 o , ) 4-8-1200 :J: :2 ~ :2 :J: (/) :;) >-:J C i5 ':J: a: i5 ::I: a: w CJ w w ~ < (/) :2 X > z :;;: ::I: N W I I I 0 I I < 0.. :J: 0 W W w en w w ...J C C C 0 ~ z Q (/) :::; :i :i a: Q ~ ::::E z 0.. (/) (/) (/) w :2 < w c c C J: ..I ..I 0 REPORT PREPARATION/CONTENT w z z z ~ C/) « « ...I REQUIREMENTS I-« « « iii 0 0 0 (/) ...I ...J ...J :J: (/) (.) (.) > 7. Conduct a subsurface exploration of soils X X X X X X X X and hydrologic conditions. 8. Provide a slope stability analysis. X X X X X X X 9. Address principles of erosion control in X X X X X X X proposal design including: • Plan the development to fit the topography, drainage patterns, soils and natural vegetation on site; • Minimize the extent of the area exposed at one time and the duration of the exposure; • Stabilize and protect disturbed areas as soon as possible; • Keep runoff velocities low; • Protect disturbed areas from stormwater runoff; 0 Retain the sediment within the site area; .. Design a thorough maintenance and follow- up inspection program to ensure erosion control practices are effective. 10. Provide an evaluation of site response and X liquefaction potential relative to the proposed development. 11. Conduct sufficient subsurface exploration X to provide a site coefficient (S) for use in the Unifortl'l Building Code to the satisfaction of the' Building Official. 12. Calculate tilts and strains, and determine X X appropriate design values for the building site. 13. Review available geologic hazard maps, X X mine maps, mine hazard maps,and air photographs to identify any subsidence features or mine hazards including, but not limited to, surface depressions, sinkholes, mine shafts, mine entries, coal mine waste dumps, and any indication of combustiOn in underground workings or coal mine waste dumps that are present on or within one hundred feet (100') of the property. o Note: An "X"indicates that the requirement applies in the identified critical area. 8 -49, (Revised 6/05) 4-8-120D --------------------,~------------------------------ ~ ::J C w en :2=: w I 0.. 0 W ' .... C en :::; 0.. en w c REPORT PREPARATION/CONTENT III z REQUIREMENTS t-< en .... 14. Inspect, review and document any possible mine openings and potential trough subsidence, and any known hazards previously documented or identified. 15. Utilize test pits to investigate coal mine waste dumps and other shallow hazards such as slope entry portals and shaft collar areas. Drilling is required for coal mine workings or other hazards that cannot be adequately investigated by surface investigations. 16. Provide an analysis of proposed clearing, X .-X grading and construction activities including construction scheduling. Analyze potential direct and indirect on-site and ott-site impacts from development. 17. Propose mitigation measures, such as any X X special construction techniques, monitoring or inspection programs, erosion or sedimentation programs during and after construction, surface water management controls, butters, remediation, stabilization, etc. 18. Critical facilities on sites containing areas susceptible to inundation due to volcanic hazards shall require an evacuation and -emergency management plan. The applicant for critical facilities shall evaluate the risk of inundation or flooding resulting from mudflows, originating on Mount Rainier in a geotechnical report, and identify any engineering or other mitigation measures as appropriate. Note: An ·X· indicates that the requirement applies in the identified critical area. (Ord. 4835, 3-27-2000; Amd. Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005) Grading Plan: A twenty two inch by thirty four inch (22" x 34") pJan drawn by a State of Washington licensed landscape architect at a scale of one inch to forty feet (1" to 40') (hor- izontal feet) and one inch to ten feet (1" to 1 0') (vertical feet) (or other size plan sheet or scale approved by the Development Services Division Plan Review Supervisor) clearly indi- cating the following: a. Graphic scale and north arrow, (Revised 6105) 8 -50 z C) 5: :aE > ::J :I: a: C z !2 w w C) :I: > z :2=: 5: I I 0 I I W w iii w w C C 0 Z z :::; :::; a: 2 :2=: :2=: en en w c C :I: ~ .... .... Z z C) en « < « < iii 0 0 ..J .... Z en 0 0 X X X X X X X X X X X :X X X X X ',. b. Dimensions of all property lines, easements, and abutting streets, en C a: ~ < :I: 0 Z « 0 .... 0 > X X c. Location and dimension of all on-site structures and the location of any struc- tures within fifteen feet (15') of the-sub- ject property or which may be attected by the proposed work, d. Accurate existing and proposed con- tour lines drawn 'at five foot (5'), or less, I~ P KEN T E RP RI S E S January 26, 2006 Ms. Kayren Kittrick. D.E. Supervisor City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 IRE: A Request fOR" a Road DeVDC!lltion fOil" the R.eduction of Right-of-Way on a Hammemead Terminl!.lsto 20 Feet (24 Feet Required), Preliminary Plat of Honey Creek View Estates. Renton Application Nos. LUAOS-118, SHPL-H, CAR, ECF. Dear Ms. Kittrick: Thank you for taking the time today to meet with me on this matter. The request for the reduction in right-of-way for a hammerhead terminus to 20 feet (24 feet reql,lired) pertains to the access street proposed to serve a 9-lot short subdivision known as Honey Creek View Estates. The access road is less than 150 feet long (approximately 138 feet); thus, does not require a turnaround per the current road standards. As depicted on the plat, the "legs" of the hammerhead primarily serve as access points for several lots. Viewing north, the westerly leg will serve Lot 3 and the easterly leg serves Lots 6-8 and access for the storm fadlity. (Note: Lot 7 could have. direct access to the street. All lots will be set back 20 feet for the front yard; thus, there will be additional room to maneuver and for off-street parking.) As designed, the reduction of 4 feet helps reduce the amount of import material and wall height requirements for this project. There is suffident space for vehicular movement while providing access for the development. We appreciate all your time and effort to review this material. Enclosed are 3 copies of this road deviation request to reduce the right-of-way. If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 206.227.7445. Sincerely, PK ENTERPRISES PHILUP KITZES CC Mr. Steven lee Mr. Timothy Powers Mr. Mike Davis 23035 SE 26320 STREET' MAPLE VALLEY, WA • 98038 PHONE: 206.227.7445 • FAX: 425.432.9397 • E-MAIL: PKENTERPRS@AOL.COM o z o z DATE: January 13. 2006 LAND USE NUMBER: LUAOS-118, SHPL·H, CAR, ECF PROJECT NAME: Honey Creek VIeW Estates PROJECT DESCRIPnON: Subdivision of an existing 78.512 square foot parcel located within the Residentia~10 (R-10) dwelling unit per 8a-e zoning designation into 9 lots, a stormwater detention traet (Tract A), and a natNe growth protection trad (Tract 8). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The pro~Sed lots woutd be proposed for the ~re construction of detadled single family residences. The proposed lots range In area from 3.000 square feet to 4.333 square feet. Access to the proposed lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Roa~ A) proposed to be dedicated as right-of-way. The proposed Road ~ lerm~s in ,8 hammerhead turnaround. A class 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows aa-oss the eastern portion of the subject site, In addtion Protected Slopes are bcated on the I eastern portion of the 5Ubjed site. !, PROJECT LOCATION: 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard Proposed Mitigation Measun!S: The foIJowing Mitigation Measures will Ukely be imposed on the proposed projecI. These recommended Mitigation Measures address project impacts not covered by eJdsting codes and regulations as cited above. The ~ wiD be mquJ_1o pqthe app"",,-Tnmsportation f:IitIgation Fee; The ~ wiD be~lopqthe~ R,. Mitigation Fee; • The ~ wiD be mquJ_1o pqthe ~ Paries Mifiilation Fee; • The applicant wig be rvquired to comply with the reeommendatJon.s found In the submit1.od geotechnical report; • The applicant wiD be requi_1o comply with /he recommen_ found bt _ wetland report; The applicant wiD be ~ 10 comply with __ ommen_ons found bt the supplemental stream study; • The applicant wiD be requi_ 10 comply with /he mquJrements of /he ZOOS King Coul'lty _. Water Design Manual fOf'surface water runolf management; and • The applicant wiD be required 10 comply with tho Z001 Depatfment of Ecology SIonnwater -.agement Manual for emslon and sedimenflltlon control. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to JiD Ding. Associate Planner, Development Services Division, 1055 South Grady Way. Renton. WA 91055, by $;00 PM on January 27. 2006. This matter is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on March 14, 2006. at 9:00 AM, Council Chambers, $ewnth Floor, Renton City HaD, 1055 South Grady Way. Renton. If you are interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Development Senrices Division to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled at (,(25) 430-7282. If comments cannot be submitted in writing by the date indicated above, you may sliD appear at the hearing and present your comments On the proposal before the Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional information by maD. please oontact the projec:l: manager. Anyone who submits written r;nmments wiD automatieaDy become a party of record and wiD be notified of any decision on this projed.. OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS~): As Ihe Lead Agency, Ihe Cily of Renton CO~TACT PERSON: has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project: Therefore, as Jill K. Ding, Asso<:iate Planner; Tel: (425)430-7219; End: Jding@Ci.renton.wa.us permitted under the RCW 4321C.110. the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS-M ~ss to g,Ne notice that a DNS- M is likely 10 be issued. Comment periods tor the project and the proposed DNS-M are integrat~ into a slng~ ~ period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non-Significance- Mitigated (DN5-M). A I_V appeal period will follow !he issuam:e of Ihe DN5-M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: Oecember 21, 2005 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPUCATION: January 13, 2006 APPUCANTIPROJECT CONTACT PERSON: PhlUip KiIzeS, PK Enterpri$eS: Tel: (206) 227-7445: PennitslReview Requested: OU1er Permits which may be required: Requested Studies: ~on where application may be reviewed: PUBUC HEARING: CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: ZoninglLand Use: Environmental Ooetlments that Evaluate the Proposed project; Development Regulations Used For Projecl Mitigation: Eml: pko""'rpri$eS_mv@yahoo.com Envtronmel1tal (SEPA) Review. Hearing Examiner Short Plat approval Utility, FIre, Construction, & Building Permits Supplemental Stream Study, Wotland. ~hinical and DRlnago Reports PlanningIBuildingIPublic WOftts Department. Development Services OMslon, Sixth Fioo< Renton City Hal~ 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA _5 Public hearing is tentatively scheduled for Manrh 14 2006 before the Renton Hearing Examiner to R.enton Council Chambers. Hearings begin at 9:00 AM on the 7th floor of the new Renton City HaD located at 1055 South Grady Way. The subjed: site is designated Residential-10 (R-10) on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and Residential Medium Density (RMD) on the Ctty's Zoning Map. Enllironmental (SEPA) CheckUst The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-4-D3C:! Development Guidelines, 4-3-050 CritiCal Areas, 4-6-030 Drainage and othel appficable codes and regulations as appropriate. I If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on 1his proposed project, complete this fom1 and retum 10: City of Renton, Development Planning, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. NameJFile No.: Honey Creek Voew EslatesllUA05-118, SHPl-H, CAR, ECF NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: ," CER'fIFICA 'fION I, Derd:.. ~~ ~ , hereby certify that:3 copies of the above document were posted by me in ~ conspicuous places or nearby the described property on DATE:--:,J.f-/ I;,....~-'-I Q.;::,.;.~=-. __ SIGNED». R, ~ CITY OF RENTON CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 13th day of January, 2006, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Acceptance Ltr, NOA, Env. Checklist, & PMT's documents. This information was sent to: Name Phillip Kitzes, PK Enterprises -Accpt Ltr & NOA Contact/Applicant Charles & Mahwash Price -Accpt Ltr & NOA Owners Ali & Farideh Mast~n -Accpt Ltr & NOA Owners James & Minoo Costello -Accpt Ltr & NOA Owners Arthur E. Eastman -Accpt Ltr & NOA Party of Record Surrounding Property Owners See Attached Agencies See Attached (Signature of Sender): ~'//I ~ ~.vv-- /' STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) /' ) SS ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy Tucker Representing ): CHARLES' F.KOKkoi ~ NOTARY PUBLIC ~ ~ STATE OF WASHINGTON ~ COMMISSION EXPIRES. " MARCH 19,2006 , ~~,t:t'..;-.L •. r_~·~:..'"':''''';"-..... /4 signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. f) ~. . Dated: (~f 1 b~ ~'1.14tItc Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (print):_-----..:::C:::..--', ~---=....,,-ybJ..,..;;:./'=-+-F____l....~--=-A--..:.~ ____ · __ _ My appointment expires: 3/ (~ I be. , Project~Name::' -~ . , Honey Creek View Estates . >. .' .ProjectN~mber:: LUA05-118, SHPL-H, CAR, ECF Dept. of Ecology * Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 O!ympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region * Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers * Seattle District Office Attn:SEPA Reviewer· PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Jamey Taylor * Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Servo Attn: SEPA Section 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt ) AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MA!l~NG (ERe DETERMINATIONS) WDFW -Stewart Reinbold * Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. * clo Department of Ecology Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 3190 160th Ave SE" 39015 -172nd Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008 Auburn, WA 98092 Duwamish Tribal Office * Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program * 4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert Seattle, WA 98106-1514 39015 172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Office of Archaeology & Historic Environmental Planning Supervisor Preservation* Ms. Shirley Marroquin Attn: Stephanie Kramer 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 PO Box 48343 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: Mr. Micheal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director 13020 SE 72nd Place . 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle, WA 98059 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Municipal Liason Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Joe Jainga 6300 Southcenter Blvd. 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01W Tukwila, WA 98188 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Title Examiner 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an ·Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, PMT's, and the notice of application. * Also note, do not mail Jamey Taylor any of the notices she gets hers from the web. Only send her the ERC Determination paperwork. template -affidavit of service by mailing 042305920409 AARON JOSEPH T 3507 NE SUNSET BL RENTON WA 98056 344950010001 EASTMAN ARTHUR E+WAUNETA M 3533 NE 17TH PL RENTON WA 98056 042305920706 HOOPMAN-WRIGHT IDA M 0 12604 SE 26TH PL BELLEVUE WA 98005 344950009003 LAFORD 3501 NE 17TH PL RENTON WA 98056 042305909006 MASTAN AU 13810 SE 42ND PL BELLEVUE WA 98006 344950010506 SWADBERG DAVID W 3425 NE 17TH ST RENTON WA 98056 ) 042305904106; 042305918908 ABRAHAMSON NORMAN R 3408 NE 17TH ST RENTON WA 98055 042305935100 FUNG STEPHEN+LY HAO N 1425 PIERCE AV NE RENTON WA 98056 344950005001; 344950005506 KATSMAN PHIUP 246655TH AV SW SEATTLE WA 98116 042305929806 LEE UB & MARCELLA 9400 37TH AV SW SEATTLE WA 98126 042305907208; 042305909105; 042305912109 MEAKIN AL & VIOLET 7100 S TAFT ST SEATTLE WA 98178 042305904007 TIERNEY J KEITH+FRANCES 3705 SOUTH CLOVERDALE ST SEATTLE WA 98118 ) / 042305935209 BUI THI 1455 PIERCE AV NE RENTON WA 98056 042305930002 HAGEN JAMES E 1429 QUEEN AV NE RENTON WA 98056 344950009508 KUNZ D 3509 NE 17TH PL RENTON WA 98055 042305930200; 042305930309; 042305931208 LYONS JAMES E 208 ORCAS PL SE RENTON WA 98059 042305920607 ROMEROJESUS+OLGA 1435 PIERCE AV NE RENTON WA 98056 ~ ) ~ -,' . . , .. 'Plaririing/Builditl~blicWorks Department . '; 'Gregg ~mmer~n P~E~~ ~"lIiinistJl"ator' January 13, 200p ," ,.-; Phillip Kitzes .' " PK'Eiiterprises . . . 23035 SE 263rd Street . Maple Valley, WA 98'03,8 . Subject: Honey Creek View Estates LUA05 ... 118 SHPL-H CAR ECF: " . ,. .", . . Dear Mr~ Kitzes: . . : . . . . . . "-. - ,', " -.,.- . The Development Pianning Section of theCity,'ofRenton tlasdetel1Tllned that 'th~ subject application is substantially complete according:·Jb ':~l:Jbmittalrequirem~nts:and., therefore, is accepted for review. However; additional ihfofmation'is'reqqired for the: review of the project,' , '. applitati9n:~ ,' .. " . ..,.... .'.: > ..... , '. '.' . .~. , . . . . , ' . 1. 3 copies of -,a modification . tequestto'further'r~duce' the 'right.:of~way:on the proposed .' . hammerhead down ~o 20, feek -. . . ." .. ' '. " . . ;,.-. . . ..-' l!.the modification request is not received prior to Jarmary 27, 2006. the project ~iII be placed: onahold'pending the receipt'ofthe information, > ,';, ' ,,~ ',_' ' It. is t~ntative/y sched.ul~(f :fqr" consideration, by t~e,: EtiViroQmental Review':Committeeori' February 7,2'006 .. ' Prior -'t6<th~t'review. you yiill be 'notified ifanyaddilio'nal information i,5 required'to'ppptinue process,ingY9,urappHcation, . . " '.:' ,.;' .... • ',.:, ,:': " " , ." ... i :.' , ' < •• ,'" '. ' ·.In ~dditi<>r);this matter'is tentatively scheduled fbra·PlJbl.lc'Hearing oncM~rch14,'2006 81'9:00" 'AM;: Council.Chambers. Seventh Floor, Renton City Pfall;,;1Q5'5South :GradYw:aY,Rentdn;Tbe. '.. .'. applicant9rr.~presentcHive(s) oft~e applicantarer~'qUire.d to:bepr~sent at the publiGhearing. A-'.' copy of the:staff repoiiwill be~mail¢d to you b,ne we.ek:before the hearing'.,' . . " ' . " . "'., .' , , , Please c~ntact me at (425)'430-72,19 if you have~ny,questi6ri>s: .. . ~ '. . Sincerely,' . (pJ.1{;l2' . ~K. Ding '-'71. AssoCiate PlanrierV "'. cc: ' Charles & Mallwash Prlce.Ali & FaridehMastan, Jarne~& Minoo Costello,/ Owners' ArtliurE.Eastman / PartY' of Record .,' ..,. , " , , , ~., ---'~--'----'-,-10-5-5-S--ou":""th-Grad--'-' '-y-,w-'-'-aY'---R-en-t-on-'-,-'"-w-a--sh-in-"'~--o-n-9:""8-05-5~-----' RE'NT 0 'N >. ' . . .-* Thispapercontains50%recYdedm~telial:'~%post~ . AH~'AD OF THE. CURVE " "," l,' \' ' ) :-'.:.: . , January 1,3:: 2006 ..... -.. Pl~ingIBuildlnglPublicWorks"Departmenf '-.~-••. _ ..... ~ -'[' + ~ ~ "-.' . • .•• , -". ",':;:~;i"f';":i::~reggZimmen:nan P~ •• Admmastrator -~' ... -:~ . .,' ; . . . ' f:: ',:,:-> ~ . . ,:.:;: """--t,;" ,-t', ' ~.' • -• ~~. :.",. , _ 7 - ~. .' , ;, / ' Superinte~derit's Offic~ , '_ : ' :R~nton Bchpol.District ,#403,' ' '" ',", ; '"300' SW 7th Street-' :-:" . " TRANSP'ORTATION DEPT ~g".' It,{F ' " '-. @~~:';c0,i'l'tj-~ ':" ,?;,;~,,~;'1~~~~{.~~~;@ . "," Renton; WA98055~2307 -, - >Money Creek View Estates '. .' -LU~05-118, "SHPL-H"CAR:'ECF ' ~. ' : '-:, -. -Sl,Jbject: . -; "-'-~ -" ,~ . . -~ .. '''' _ The City' cif R~.ntb~ De'VelopmEint Ser\liGe~ Division na~ (eceiv~d an:11ppiicalion ior:a ,9-iot singi,e:~,': ", family, subdivision locat~d, at 3524 NE Sunset Blyd::' Please See the enclosed,N,otice of ' , -, Applica~ion:f6durther details." _ In ·o~d~.r ~t~ p'ro~ess this:'appiicatiml" the Developm~nt'Se~ices:-Div!si~>ri rieeds't6'-lknow, Which~:, _ , ,,' Renton' SChools woulc;J be' attended' by children liv'i~g )n' resideri~es -at' the location ,indicated>, above .. Please fill' inth.e appropriat~·,schools on, th~list below :-aild, retum:this-,letter' to my:,: " attention; t)evelopmeht Services, Di"i~ion, City of R.~nton, 1055-$outh GraCJyWay:-Renton,c " .' ',;:: Washington 9805,5 bY,Jant'ary,27,200'6,,' " , ' ."... . E,I~me~~~~SC~OOI:\,j(W4~ .,.,'""',, ',; . ,." ..... '.... ,~ •. ' '. Middle Sdlo~i: -'-M cl.4~ ',' -' , '< 'Hi9h'SCh~oi~-:: 0lQ;YUL. ,~-:,,:,' '-,( . '. 'u --;'Will the SChOOIS:'~OU have indi~ated:be~~leto handle'the impact of thEradditio'na'l:stllde~t~ __ -':'estimatedto'come fromttie proposed'developrnent?:'P Yes' ~ >":',' No ... " '" '-, --.' .--.. ". --,. ", -.~ -.. , , . . . , . ~ . --~. , Any' CO!l1mfmts: ___ ;";",,...,..-..:..._~..:-__ ,.--____ .....,...'_' ___ ,..,---:' -,-'-___ ---'-,-_..:.......,._~_'_" ',' '.-".", , " ' '. ,', ... , .. - .: :.: ,., . '" ..... . 1 _ . ~ ",.- . Thank' you for p~oviding this i~portant i~formation., If you have any questions regarding this . ' project, pl~ase contact nie at:(425) 430:-7219. , •• '.. • • '. _ ". ',.., • • : " • _ _ ," '.~ .' • e. -:. _::.. • _ .'. l. , .' , 'Sincerely~:," . -. -. . ~. , }j;1<i?(J' . Associate Planner, . or. , -, Encl. , ~" , ' --,-," ,.,..' ''"'--:-~:,...:--':~,.-, ..• -;-'' -:-:C, ~1-'-O-;-55-S-o--ufu~,-'-Grn-dY'-W-'-ay":::-"~":-en":';'t-'-o~-'-. ,....,..W-,as~hi.....,..n...,.gt-o~:-,.:~>:-'-98-0."....55-,---'::.--.::.···.,:..,..,· ----.:~ •.•• ~., ' . . -. -, ". @ Thispaper~~~~:~postoonsti",;,,~~~, ' _~::~~A~ OF THE ~~~~~-. . " . .. ; . . '."'; ". ~ .j ~ • 1: '. , ~;;r •• ,~ '. .: ... ~.. .. -~," ~~"; ~.~' c' '.r-': .' ' .. :" _ .... , " ...... -; , , -: ~: , ;i-.~ ~ ... , ' !,'_' I.' ~ ... . :~ •. J "/-' ~ '\ .-.. .' \ ~ , '1. ',' '.;.; ,,' . ,',' .... ','." ,.:;: " . ,.'--::."~ -". ',: , " " ' ,< ," :'.'-.' ".,'J":' . ", , ' I'. r '.' • ./ . ~:. '. ; '.,' ,'J ,.' 1(. " .. ' ~ . .. ',. '. ',' } '" ":',.;. " ',' '.: " ' " '':0:, • ! '.1 .. *" .:' "',', .. ' .-' ,t' "-·'.:1" ''to .' , ,:.~, " ' " .."' , , . , ' " '" .,,. ... ,, . :. .. ',".'; ~ ... ".' , , ", ,~ ..... ',. -', ":-j . -~ . ,,::; ~ .", .. " ',' .-j'. :.. .. . " ".;'> , ' . , , . '." , , '" " ' ..•.. >, ... . : ' .. "\." .... , ~.!: -. -I ' " ' " 1,' ~ ': .:-.-. ." ..... 'f, .-', ' .. .J' ,: " .. ~ ~. >. ".,\ :~~ .. , . ',I ., . i:-'.r .~. ~ ~ ': -=.t._ ,.!' ' .. ': ,~ '. :, ' . . --1" :} ",'.' '. ~" .. ;. . ~ ,". <. , . . , . . t ..... ..... " .. , ~ , ! " NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATiON OF NONl-S~GNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS~M) DATE: January 13, 2006 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA05-118, SHPL-H, CAR, ECF PROJECT NAME: Honey Creek View Estates PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Subdivision of an existing 78,512 square foot parcel located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation into 9 lots, a stormwater detention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The proposed lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The proposed lots range in area from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet. Access to the proposed lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as right-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates in a hammerhead tumaround. A class 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastem portion of the subject site, in addtion Protected Slopes are located on the eastem portion of the subject site. PROJECT LOCATION: 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS-M): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21 C.11 0, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS-M process to give notice that a DNS- M is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS-M are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non-Significance- Mitigated (DNS-M). A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M. . PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: December 21, 2005 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: January 13, 2006 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Phillip Kitzes, PK Enterprises; Tel: (206) 227-7445; Eml: pkenterprises_mv@yahoo.com Permits/Review Requested: Other Permits which may be required: Requested Studies: Location where application may be reviewed: PUBLIC HEARING: CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: Environmental {SEPAl Review, Hearing Examiner Short Plat approval Utility, Fire, Construction, & Building Permits Supplemental Stream Study, Wetland, Geotechinical and Drainage Reports . Planning/Building/Public Works Department, Development Services Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 Public hearing is tentatively scheduled for March 14. 2006 before the Renton Hearing Examiner in Renton Council Chambers. Hearings begin at 9:00 AM on the 7th floor of the new Renton City Hall located at 1055 South Grady Way. The subject site is designated Residential-10 (R-10) on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and Residential Medium Density (RMD) on the City's Zoning Map. Environmental (SEPA) Checklist The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-4-030 Development Guidelines, 4-3-050 Critical Areas, 4-6-030 Drainage and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. Proposed Mitigation Measures: The following Mitigation Measures will likely be imposed on the proposed project. • a • II .. • These recommended Mitigation Measures address project impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above. The applicant will be required to pay the appropriate Transportation Mitigation Fee; The applicant will be required to pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee; The applicant will be required to pay the appropriate Parks Mitigation Fee; The applicant will be required to comply with the recommendations found in the submitted geotechnical report; The applicant will be required to comply with the recommendations found in the wet/and report; The applicant will be required to comply with the recommendations found in the supplemental stream study; The applicant will be required to comply with the requirements of the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual for surface water runoff management; and The applicant will be required to comply with the 2001 Department of Ecology Stonnwater Management Manual for erosion and sedimentation control. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Jill Ding, Associate Planner, Development Services Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on January 27, 2006. This matter is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on March 14, 2006, at 9:00 AM, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. If you are interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Development Services Division to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled at (425) 430-7282. If comments cannot be submitted in writing by the date indicated above, you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments on the proposal before the Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional information by mail, please contact the project manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Jill K. Ding, Associate Planner; Tel: (425) 430-7219; Eml: jding@ci.renton.wa.us I PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALUNG FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION I If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, Development Planning, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Name/File No.: Honey Creek View Estates/LUA05-118, SHPL-H, CAR, ECF NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: From: To: Date: Subject: Ms. Nicolay, Creek View Estates PPlat Steve Lee <steve@pellc.org> <lnicolay@cLrenton.wa.us> Friday, November 04, 2005 9:52:04 AM LUA 05-118: Honey Creek View Estates PPlat DEVELOPMENT PLANN1N~ CITY OF RENTON U DEC 2 j 2005 RECE~'VED Richard, from Preferred Engineering, asked me to write you in regards to the above mentioned project. We will incorporate "existing" into the 10' gravel access road and culvert. In addition we will provide preliminary wording for the riprap outfall structure to be proposed above Honey Creeks' OHWM. Also as an update, Habitat Technologies-Tom Deming is currently out of state on family matters (death in family), therefore we have contracted Ecological Land Services to finish up and include a Supplemental Stream & Mitigation Study and Preliminary Wetland Mitigation Plan for any disturbed areas. Thanks for your assistance, Steven PELLC Engineer Kathy Keolker·Wbeeler, Mayor October 7, 2006 --Phil Kitzes - PKEnterprises 23035 SE 263rd Street Maple Valley, Washington 98038 _ G"e{7 tJV.) ') . _ . -:; .~ . ..-/ ,. CCTI1rY '([ Y JRJENT·ON PlanningIBuilqinglPublic Works Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator Subject: Notification of Ine<;>mplete Application Submittal-Honey -Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat, City Land Use File #LUA 05-1'18 . • -Dear Mr. Kitzes: _ Thisletter is sent to advise you that we need~ditional informatio~ in order to begin the land use permit review _ process for Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat. -- -As we discussed on Septeniber"27th when you brought in the appiication; we are still lacking severai standard application materials and are unable to accept your pro+ject as rompleteor begin project review'until we (eceiv~ the following additional informa~on(see also aijached Subr,ri~1 Requirements-for Preliminary Plats for further details): --' : ..' . .. . . 1. 5 Copies of the easements referenced in your title repqrt (#7502140608 and #~08020497). 2. -The following additional inforination iSl!eededon the-,platpllm(12 copieS): e -Add all easements noted on ~tle rePort (indicate width, .type, and recording n!lmber for each). ' .. -Add dimensions in feet for proposed street width and hammemead length:' - 11> Make sure information regardingeriuCal areas squarefooiagesldensities listed on the face of the plat is consistent with other doCuments. Currently square footage infOrmation is not consistent between plat map, density worksheet, and Master Application form. DenSity listed'on face of plat is 8:5 for example. - ,,-Vicinity map on plat map obscures a Portion of the subject property and does not indicate project location . . Please reduce the size of or relocate the vicinity map. - 3. A ~Critical Areas Exemption" is also needed as part of this project Thereis no additiQnal fee for the exemption, but you do need to request it asa part ofthisapplicatiol). You should submit a letter requesting a "Critical Areas - Exemption" pursuant toRMC 4·3-050G4to allow drainage/outfall work to be done in a streainJwetland buffer area; _ 4. You have submitted awetl?nd and "drainage cOrridor" evaluation and delineation report as required by City regulations, but we also need the wetland a~ea discUSSed in the report to be depicted on the face of the plat plan (and identifying the wetland as-a ·Category 3 Wetland" and including the wetland sjze in square feet). The stream is already depiCted nicely on the plan, but please also note its class (Class 3 Stream). 5. Because your proposal includes modification of a regulated stream/stream buffer, we will also need a ·Supplemental Stream Study" and a "Stream Mitigation Plan" meeting the requirements of RMC 4.S.120D19, enclosed. ~ -...,------1-0-5-5 -So-u-th=-G-=--ra-:-dy-W-ay-.-R-e-n-to-n--=, WC::-a-s-=-hl=-' n-gt-o-n-:-9--:--80-:-5-5----'--~--R E N TON ® This paper contains 50% recycled material, 30% post CXJI1SI.Ifi1er -AHEAD OF THE CURVE (fA" :~ Mr. Phil Kitze~ , October 7, 2005 Page 2 ) 6. Also, because yourprqpqsalinclu9es m!)dification ofa regulated wetlandIWetlaiidbuffer, we will alson~ your' wetland spep;alist to analYze "alternative riIetiiods of development" pursuant to RMC 4~8-120D23 and to provide a " Wetland Mitigation /?Ian, Prelimina'Ymootingthe requirements ofRMC 4-8-f20D23,'enclosed," ,.' '. . .,<. '. 7 .. 'Please claritY whether the catCh basin in Hie steep slope area is eXisting o~ proposed. PleaSe darify ~ether the ' 'culvert shown in the stream buffer area and steep slope area is existing or propoSed; If proposed; please give me ' .a call,to disCuss,~fore resubmitting any plansireports as,a Critical area~'varianCe fllay be triggered. If a variance is . triggered; additional ~ubmittal requiremen~ and an additional variance review fee will be, required: 8. Ple~seclarifywhether the~~foorgravel r6ad shownruniling along the north side oltha stream is ~xisting or is , , ,proposed as part of the projeCt. If propOsed, please give me a call to disCuss beforEHesubmitting~ny planS/reports ' as a critiCalareasvariancewlll1 be triggered.' " ,. , , , ' , ......-.,' fT"lL :&/'YIrtF! , ' Laureen'Nicolay" ,i '", ' Senior Planner· ' . enclosures' --. . c:·' James & Min60 Costello: Property Owners , Charles &. Ma,hvash Prtce,-Property Owners Ali and. Farldeh Ma~tan, Property Owners:, ' ' File #LUA05c118' , '.:, . f106./0"1lP 1/. _.!h'" lIB' Coty of Renton llANO USE PERMDT ... Ii::vt;.':-'~TYt:'1 MENT PLANNING '., OF RENTON DEC 2 1 2005 MASTER APPlJCATBON Dteff""eRunrc:fI"\\ PROPERTY OWNER{S) PROJECT DNFORMA110NJ NAME: -::JA,,"\c:S M.. c..o ~ \~'-L"Q t MIN""" <:..~ 5>"1c;.""" PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: Honey Creek View Estates ADDRESS: 1.'"l.'"'t\I. 2.L~'~ Av • S . e. . PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)JlOCATION AND ZIP CODE: CITY: . ZIP: WCo QI C\)V( .... ~c... 9~'I:)'"l... 3524 HE SUnset Blvd, Renton, WA 98056 TELEPHONE NUMBER: LtZ<;-'-t ft, l.. -~ lc,\ KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): , APPLICANT (if other than owner) 0423059090 NAME: Phillip Kitzes EXISTING LAND USE(S): Single Family Residence COMPANY (If applicable): PK Enterprises PROPOSED LAND USE(S): Single Family Residences ADDRESS: 23035 SE 263rd Street EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: Rl0 Zoning ~MO CITY: Maple Valley zip: 98038 PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (If applicable): nla TELEPHONE NUMBER 206-227-7445 EXISTING ZONING: Rl0 .. CONTACT PERSON PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): nla-· NAME: Phil Kitzes SITE AREA (in square feet): 78,512 SF COMPANY (if applicable): PK Enterprises SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED FOR SUBDIVISIONS OR PRIVATE STREETS SERVING ADDRESS: 23035 SE 263rd Street THREE LOTS OR MORE (if applicable):-8,eee SF IJ5.24 $I?r '. PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET CITY: Maple Valley ZIP: 98038 ACRE (if applicable): Density is 10 per acre, not incl. Streets. NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable): See City of TELEPHONE NUMBER AND E-MAIL ADDRESS: Renton Density Calculation Sheet and July 2005 Pre- 206-227-7445, gkenternrises mv@~ahoo.com ~cation Comments, maximum ofea .... , , NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): Based on City of Renton Density Worksheet (8) Q:weblpw/devserv/fucmsJp1anningimastcrapp.doc 09108105 , , . . . ,. .. . ~ '~ '\ PR(Q)JlI..~T BlNlfORMA TIlON (OOfl1ltDlIilflJ)ed~,) NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (H applicable): 1 poor condition bldg SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): 2500 to 3200 SF SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (H applicable): nJa. none to remain SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (H applicable): nJa SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (H applicable): nJa NET FLOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (H applicable): nJa NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): NJA ~~~~~~~~~--------------------, PROJECT VALUE: $900.000 (incl. land acquisition costs) IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA. PlEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (H applicable): [J AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE [J AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA TWO [J }LOOD HAZARD AREA sq. ft. I(' GEOLOGIC HAZARD ;2. 4\ qAt '!s.t.952"' _ sq. ft. [J HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. ~HORELINE STREAMS AND LAKES .Q%. ttiz,ve.-sq. ft. ~~NDS .JaI~al;;eve sq. ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION! OF PROPERlY (Attach Regal descriptDon on separate sheet with the foUlowing informatnon incDuded) SITUATE IN THE __ SE QUARTER OF SECTION _4--, TOWNSHIP _23-> RANGE_S--, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. (042305 90 NE % of SE % L Y NI Of STATE HIGHWAY LESS W 170 fT LESS S 145 fT OF E 300 fT) TYPE OF APPUCATBONI & FEES List all land use applications being applied for: 1. ~r:y Plat Application & ZOOO 3. 2. fAr, FUvIM l. 5170 4. Sfreef 5ftiu ~~f. tJ(C/ C,A,O. t~fYhplwn /V/~ Staff will calculate applicable fees and postage: $ AfFIDAVRT Of OWNERSHIP ~[ l~ of-~ <"""'$ N I. (Pnnt Namels) f.\:vtI:..~ , M.( l\l ~ TEL-c:q declare that I am (please check one) _ the current owner of the property involved in this application or ____ the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. (Signature of Owner/Representative) (Signature of Owner/Representative) 1 certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that j".w.s loste.ll~ ~ M ; "flO l.os~ilo signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be hislherltheir free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument Notary Public in and for the State of VVashington Notary (Print) C h r;' Sfop l.t..i' H Ltt h rSfTh My appointment expires: 3 Ap"..,' I, 'ZoO 7- 09/08105 " . . . , ..... ~~ .. City of Renton lAND USE PERMIT MASTER APPlHCATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) PROJECT ONfOIRMATION NAME' LA,i' (~ y IL S' d-Mvt \ttl '5 fJv., C2 PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: ADDRESS: JJ t::-) ISf/:. <;;« Ii? I D 1... Honey Creek View Estates PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)lLOCATION AND ZIP CODE: ~~:A-\}.1oJ I ~ . ~ fI~ ZIP: 4'60,L 3524 HE SUnset Blvd, Renton, WA 98056 TELEPHONE NUMBER: t-/1$-L-/~ l-Q6'1F1 KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): APPLICANT (if other than owner) 0423059090 NAME: Phillip Kitzes EXISTING LAND USE(S): Single Family Residence COMPANY (if applicable): PK Enterprises PROPOSED LAND USE(S): Single Family Residences ADDRESS: 23035 SE 263rd Street EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: R10 Zoning CITY: Maple Valley ZIP: 98038 PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION TELEPHONE NUMBER 206-227-7445 (if applicable): nJa EXISTING ZONING: R10 CONTACT PIEIRSON! PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): nJa NAME: Phil Kitzes SITE AREA (in square feet): 78,512 SF COMPANY (if applicable): PK Enterprises SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED FOR SUBDIVISIONS OR PRIVATE STREETS SERVING ADDRESS: 23035 SE 263rd Street THREE LOTS OR MORE (if applicable): ~F SF-15~ 7 PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET CITY: Maple Valley ZIP: 98038 ACRE (if applicable): Density is 10 per acre, not inel. Streets. NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable): See CIty of TELEPHONE NUMBER AND E-MAIL ADDRESS: Renton Density Calculation Sheet and July 2005 Pre- 206-227-7 445, ~kenternrises mv@)~ahoo.eom Application Comments, maximum ~ ~ ., NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): Based on City of Renton Density Worksheet (8) Q:weblpw/devserv/forms/planning/masler.lpp.doc 09108105 . " ... ~." .. NUMBER OF EXISTING DWElliNG UNITS (if applicable): 1 poor condition bldg SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAl BUILDINGS (if applicable): 2500 to 3200 SF SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAl BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): nJa, none to remain SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): nJa SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAl BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): nJa NET FLOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if app~cable): nJa NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): NJA PROJECT VALUE: $900,000 (incl. land acquisition costs) IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTAllY CRITICAl AREA. PlEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): Q AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE Q AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA lWO Q FLOOD HAZARD AREA Q GEOLOGIC HAZARD Q HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. ~_ sq. ft. 'Zd\ Q4'l-sq. ft. Q SHORELINE STREAMS AND lAKES sq. ft. Q WETlANDS sq. ft. lEGAL DESCRIPTBONI Of PROPERTY (Attach legal descrftptuon on separate sheet with the folOowina irrrioamatiorn Included) SJTUATE IN THE _SE QUARTER OF SECTION _4-, TOWNSHIP _23-, RANGE_S-, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. (042305 90 HIE % of SE % l Y IN! Of STATE HIGHWAY lESS W 170 FT lESS S 145 fT OF IE 300 fT) TYPE OF APPUCATOON & FleES List all land use applications being applied for: 1. Preliminary Plat Application 3. 2. 4. Staff will calculate applicable fees and postage: $ AFfBDAVUT OF OWNIEIRSHBP ,~I (;:., p,.u::.'.-~, (Print ~am?,s) ~ ... (P5" E, ";".fA A. declare that I. am (please check one) v.... the current owner of the property Involved In thiS application or __ the authonzed representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. (Signature of Owner/Representative) Q:web/pw/devscrv/formslplanninglmastc:rapp.doc I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that . ~ signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be hislh~eeandUTltary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument Notary (Print)I ___ Jtt-__ ~Sto1N'A"07'lt0f1rtrllV""Pyb~IIc .... on ElENA 8 ELUOTT My Appointment ElCpIies Mqy 30.,2009 My appointment eXPires:'iJ:;;;o;;;;~;:;:;;:~;;;;:~~;;;;;~~~=-:j( 09/08105 City of Renton LAND USE PERMIT MASTER APPlRCATBOINl PROPERTY OWNER(S) PROJECT ga\IIFORMlA nON NAME:AL \ ~fAR\~t\-\ MAsThM PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: , 0 ADDRESS: \3'e> \0 $E~2~?L. " Honey Creek View Estates PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)I!-OCATION AND ZIP CODE: ZIP: C{~oo6 CITY: '\:,ELLE-" U\:: , " 3524 HE Sunset Blvd, Renton, \iliA 98056 'TELEPH()NE NUMBER: 42 ~5 -74-7 -585" 8 KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): .. APPliCANT (if other than owner) 0423059090 NAME: Phillip Kitzes EXISTING LAND USE(S): Single Family Residence COMPANY (if applicable): PK Enterprises PROPOSED LAND USE(S): Single Family Residences ADDRESS: 23035 SE 263rd Street EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: R10Zoning CITY: ZIP: 98038 " Maple Valley PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION TELEPHONE NUMBER 206-227-7445 (if applicable): nla EXISTING ZONING: Rl0 CONTACT PERSON PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): nla NAME: Phil Kitzes SITE AREA (in square feet): 78,512 SF COMPANY (if applicable): PK Enterprises SQUARE FOOTAGE OFHOADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED FOR SUBDIVISIONS OR PRIVATE STREETS SERVING ADDRESS: 23035 SE 263rd Street THREE LOTS OR MORE (if applicable): 9,:!!ge SF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET CITY: Maple Valley ZIP: 98038 ACRE (if applicable): Density is 10 per acre, not incl. Streets. TELEPHONE NUMBER AND E-MAIL ADDRESS: NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable): See City of Renton Densihr ~Iculation Sheet and July 2005 Pre-' 206-227-7445, !2kentemrises mV@llahoo.com A . lion Comments, maximum ofdlt ,. ... ....-.... . , NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): Based on City of Renton Density Worksheet (8) Q:weblpw/devsdv/formsJplanninglmasttrapp.doc 09/08105 ' NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): 1 poor condition bldg SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): 2500 to 3200 SF SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): nla, none to remain SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): nla SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): nla NET FLOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS [If applicable): nla NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): NlA PROJECT VALUE: $900,000 (incl. land acquisition costs) IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PlEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): o AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE o AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA TWO o FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. ft. o GEOLOGIC HAZARD ~ _ sq. ft. o HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. o SHORELINE STREAMS AND LAKES sq. ft. o WETLANDS sq. ft. lEGAL DESCRIPTBON OF PROPERTY (Attach legal description om separate sheet with the following information incBllBded) SITUATE IN THE _SE QUARTER OF SECTION _4-, TOWNSHIP _23-, RANGE_S-, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. (042305 90 HE % of SE % l Y N OF STATE HIGHWAY lESS W 170 FT lESS S 145 FT OF E 300 FT) TYPE Of APPUCATDON & FEES List all land use applications being applied for: 1. Preliminary Plat Application 3. 2. 4. Staff will calculate applicable fees and postage: $ AffBDAVDT Of OWNIERSHDP !, (Print ~am~s) i\l...' +F(tR\\)E.H tv'{ A-'s, AN • declare that I. am (please check one) )( the 7'-'rr:ent owner of the ~ . . Involved In thiS application or __ the authori:zed representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authonzation) and that the foregOing stat ents and answers herein contai ed and the infonnation herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. /-I1,·t4kh~r/J1~ 4-1\.4 I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Fa H;j~ h I17dJ kq signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be hislherltheir free and Voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument Notary Public in a~d for the State of Washington : f .. \ Notary P",blic Stete of WllGhington ALASTAIR till. BREWER 'i 00y ~ft2mQfta \EnpWo Fob S. _--. intmentexpires: ~ /b5 /~0 ~ J ",. Q:web/pw/devscrv/formslpIanninglmaslerapp.doc 09108105 ) .J PK ENTERPRISES December 20, 2005 Ms. Laureen Nicolay, Senior Planner Caty of Renton Planning Department 1055 South Grady way Renton, WA 98055 RE: Re-SulDmittal for Honey Creek View Estates PreDimfinary Plat, Application No. lUA 05-118. Dear Ms. Nicolay: -PK Enterprises IS submitting the requested information by staff addressing specific issues to outlined in the comment letter dated October 7, 2005. The following is a list of the items with a brief response on how each comment has been addressed in this re-submittal package. 1. 5 Copies· of the easements r~ferenced in your title report (#7502140608 and #8408020497) Response: Please see five (5) copies of the above referenced information. 2. The following additional information is needed on the plat plan (12 copies): " Add all easements noted on title report (indicate width, type and recording number for each). " Add dimensions in feet for proposed street width and hammerhead length. f) Make sure information regarding critical areas square footages/densities listed on the face of the plat is consistent with other documents. Currently, square footage information is not consistent between the plat map, density worksheet and Master Application form. Density listed on face of plat is 8.5 for example. o Vicinity map on the plat map obscures a portion of the subject property and does not indicate project location. Please reduce the size or relocate the vicinity map. Response: Please see revised plan set addressing the above items. In addition we have re-calculated the available area for our density calculations and have revised the density worksheet and Master Application form accordingly-all calculations are consistent with what is being reflected on the plans. . 3. A "Critical Areas Exemption" is also needed as part of your. project. There is no additional fee for the exemption, but you do need to request it as part of this application. You .should submit a letter requesting a "Critical Areas Exemption" pursuant to RMC 4-3-050C4 to allow drainage/outfall work to be done in a stream/wetland buffer area. Response: Please see letter prepared by Preferred Engineering addressing this issue. 23035 SE 263RD S11REET 0 MAPLE VALLEY, \VA • 98038 PHONE: 206.227.7445 -FAX: 425.432.9397 0 PKENTERPRS@AOL.COM 4. You have submitted a wetland and "drainage corridor" evaluation and delineation report as required by City regulations, but we also need the wetland area discu~sed in the report to be depicted on the face of the plat plan (and identifying the wetland as a Category 3 Wetland" and including the wetland size in square feet). The stream is already depicted nicely on the plan, but please also note its' class (Class 3 Stream). Response: Please see the revised plan set depicting this information. 5. Because your proposal includes modification of a regulated wetland/stream buffer, we. also need a "Supplemental Stream Study "and a "Stream Mitigation Plan" meeting the requirements of RMC 4-8-120019, enclosed. Response: Please see the report prepared by Ecological Land Services, Inc., addreSSing these issues. . . 6. Also, because your proposal includes modifications of a regulated wetland/stream buffer, we will also need your wetland specialist to analyze "alternative methods of development" pursuant to RMC 4-8-120023 and to provide a Wetland Mitigation Plan, Preliminary meeting the requirements of RMC 4-8-120023, enclosed. . Response: Please see report and mitigation plan prepared by Ecological Land Services, Inc., addreSSing these issues. 7. Please clarify whether the catch basin in the steep slope area is existing or proposed. Please clarify whether the culvert shown in the stream buffer area and steep slope area is existing or proposed. If proposed, please give me a call to discuss before resubmitting any plans/reports as a critical areas variance may be triggered. If a variance is triggered, additional submitta.1 requirements and an additional variance review fee will be required. Response: The catch basin is proposed specific for this project; however, it is not in the steep slope area. The culvert is existing and was constructed by King County for the existing access road/trail. 8. Please clarify whether the 10-foot gravel road shown along the north side of the stream is existing or is proposed as part of the project. If proposed, please give me a call to discuss before resubmitting any plans/reports as a critical areas variance will be triggered. Response: The gravel road is existing and is a part of an extended trail system being used by the residents in the immediate vicinity. Its' main function is to provide access to the sewer system that runs along the existing creek and was installed by King County. 9. A PMT photo reduction of each revised plan sheet (plat plan, etc.) Response: Please see enclosed PMT photo set of the revised plan sheets. 10. Make sure the information regarding proposed density and critical area square footages that are listed on the master application and the 'density worksheet are consistent with the information listed on the plat plan drawing. Response: All documents have been revised and are consistent with each other. ) We appreciate all your efforts in reviewing this matter. Enclosed are the required copies of the pertinent information as requested by staff. If there. are any questions, please feel free to contact me at (206) 227-7445. Sincerely, PK ENTERPRISES PHILUP KITZES Enclosures CC Mr. Timothy Powers ' " , .".0.'. Order Number. 205115003 EXHUSRT"A" THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., DESCRIBED AS FOllOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION 373 FEET NORTH OFTHE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHERLY MARGIN OF STATE HIGHWAY NO.2 (SUNSET HIGHWAY); THENCE WESTERlY ALONG SAID SUNSET HIGHWAY 300 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTHERlY PARALLEL WITH SAID EAST LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION A DISTANCE, OF 145 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY 300 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID EAST LINE WHICH IS 145 FEET NORTH OF THE NORTHERLY MARGIN OF SAID SUNSET HIGHWAY; THENCE NORTH AlONG SAID EAST LINE TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION, BEING THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE WEST AlONG SAID NORTH LINE 484.62 FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS 170 FEET EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID SUBDMSION; THENCE SOUTH. PARALLEL TO SAID WEST LINE TO THE NORTHERLY MARGIN OF SUNSET HIGHWAY; THENCE EASTERLY AlONG SAID SUNSET HIGHWAY TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; , EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONDEMEND IN KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NO. 742207 FOR SUNSET HIGHWAY. -' PROJECT ) / PRE-APPLICATION COMMENTS -MastaJll Property Short Plat 3524 NE SUlIlset Blvd PRE 05-102 DATE: August 11, 2005 @ 11 :00 a.m. STAFF COMMENTS: FIRE PREVENTION -Jim Gray ) PUBLIC WORKSIUTlOLITIES -Juliana Fries CONSTRUCTION SERVICES -Larry Meckling- PLANNING/ZONING -Nancy Weil SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: ZONING MAP SITEARJlAL WAIVER SHEET CITY OF RENTON MEMO PUBLJlC WORKS ']['0: NancyWeil From: Date: . Subject: Juliana Fries (425) 430-7278 August 8, 2005 PreApplication Review Comments PREAPP No. 05-102 Mastan .Property Short Plat ) NOTE ON PRELIMINARY REVIEW COMMENTS CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT: The foUowing comments on development and permitting issues are based on the pre-application submittals made to the City of Renton by the applicant. The applicant is cautioned that information 'Contained in this summary may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision makers (e.g. Hearing Examiner; Boards of Adjustment, Board of Public Works and City Council). Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by the City or made by the applicant. I have reviewed the preliminary application for this 9-10t short plat, located at 3524 NE Sunset Blvd and the following are my comments: WATER 1. The proposed development is within the City of Renton's water service area and in the 565- pressure zone. There is an existing 12-inch water main in NE Sunset Blvd that can deliver a flow rate of 4,500 gallons per minute (gpm). The static water pressure is about 70 psi at street elevation (see City water civil drawing no. W-0315). 2. Water main improvements within the new development will be required to provide the required fire flow demand and for domestic water service for this project. The improvements will include but not be limited to the following: • A water main extension (8-inch minimum diameter) within the new street to the northernmost property line within the plat. The maximum available flow rate from this water main extension will be 1,250 gpm (unless looped system is in place). o Fire hydrants, domestic and landscape water meters. All new construction must have a fire· hydrant capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 gpm and must be located within 300 feet of the structures. Existing hydrants will require a quick disconnect Storz fitting, if not already in place. 3. The proposed project is located within the Aquifer Protection Zone 2. 4. New water service stubs to each lot must be installed prior to recording of the plat. 5. The Water System Development Charge (SOC) would be triggered at the single-family rate of $1,525 per new building lot. These 'are payable at the time the utility construction is issued. SANlTARY SEWER 1. There is a 12" sewer main along the Honey Creek (north side of the creek). There is also a 24- inch sewer main on NE Sunset Blvd. Mastan Property Short Plat 08/1012005 Page 2 2. Sewer main extension along the new street will be required. 3. Existing septic systems shall be abandoned in accordance with King County Health prior to recording of the plat. 4. Thi~ parcel are subject to the Honey Creek 8611 Special Assessment District (SAD). The fee is $250.00110t. Fees are collected at the time the utility construction permit is issued. 5. This parcel is also subject to the Honey Creek frontage 8612 Special Assessment District (SAD). The fee is $74.38 per ft of frontage along Honey Creek. 6. The Sanitary Sewer System Development Charges (SDC) is $900 per lot. These are payable at the time the utility construction permit is issued. SURFACE WATER 1. The site drains to Honey Creek. Due to downstream flooding and erosion problems, staff will recommend as a SEPA condition this project to comply with the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention (conservation flow control) and water quality (basic) improvements. 2. The Surface Water System Development Charges (SDC) are $715.00 per building lot. These ate payable at the time the utility construction permit is issued. TRANSPORTATION 1. Traffic Mitigation Fee of $75.00 per Average Daily Trip shall be assessed, at a rate of9.57 trips per day per new single-family lot. 2. Maximum grade on any street shall not exceed 15%. 3. Private streets· are allowed for access to six (6) or fewer lots, provided that at least 2 of the 6 lots abut a public right-of-way. Private streets are required to have a 26-feet easement with a 20-feet pavement. 4. Street improvements including, but not limited to paving, sidewalks, curb and gutter, storm drain, landscape, street lighting and street signs will be required along new proposed streets interior to the plat. 5. The plat should be modified to provide stub streets to the west, approximate in the location of lot ... 6. Street improvements including, but not limited to paving, sidewalks, curb and gutter, storm . drain, landscape, street lighting are required along the new street interior to the short plat. 7. All wire utilities shall be installed underground. per the City of Renton Undergrounding Ordinance. If three or more poles necessitate to be moved by the development design, all existing overhead utilities shall be placed underground. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. All plans shall be prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. Permit application must include an itemized cost of construction estimate for these improvements. Mastan Property Short Plat ) 08/10/2005 Page 3 The fee for review and inspection ofthese improvements is 5% of the ftrst $100,000 of the estimated construction costs; 4% of anything over $100,000 but less than $200,000, and 3% of anything over $200,000. Half the fee must be paid upon application. . 3. If you have any questions, call me at 425-430-7278 cc: Kayren Kittrick \ ) ) FIRE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: August 8, 2005 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Nancy Weil, Senior Planner James Gray, Assistant Fire Marshat ii Maston Property Short Plat, 3524 II Sunset Blvd. Fire Department Comments: 1. A fire hydrant with 1000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of all new single- family structures. If the building square footage exceeds 3600 square feet in area, the minimum fire flow increases to 1500 GPM and requires two hydrants within 300 feet of the structure. 2. A fire mitigation fee of$488.00 is required for all new single-family structures. 3. Fire department access roadways require a minimum 20-foot wide paved roadway. Fire department turnarounds are required for Toads over 150 feet in length. The turnaround shall l11eet the minimum dimensions shown on the attached diagram. Maximum Grade allowed is 15 % on access roads. 4. All building addresses shall be visible from a public street. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. i:\mastonsp.doc ~. DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON Plannong/Building/PubUc Works MEMORANDUM August 11, 2005 Pre-Application File No. 05-102 Nancy Weil, Senior PlannElr 425-430-7270 IV/astan Property Short Plat General: We have completed a preliminary review of the pre-application for the above-referenced development proposal. The following comments on development and permitting issues are based on the pre-application submittals made to the City of Renton by the applicant and the codes in effect on the date of review. The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision-makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Zoning Administrator, Board of Adjustment, Board of Public Works, and City Council). Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. The applicant is encouraged to review all applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. The Development Regulations are available for purchase for $50.00 plus tax, from the Finance Division on the first floor of City Hall or on-line at www.cLrenton.wa.us. Project Proposal: The subject property is addressed as 3524 NE Sunset Blvd. The proposal is to subdivide the 1.8-acre site into 9 lots. The applicant is proposing to build a single-family residence on each lot. According to the applicant, the site is currently has one single-family dwelling. Access off of Sunset Blvd is proposed and the site contains critical areas, including steep slopes and a stream. Zoning/Density Requirements: Zoning/Density Requirements: The subject property is zoned Residential -10 dwelling units per acre (R-1 0) zoning designation. The density range required in the R-10 zone would be a minimum of 4.0 to a maximum of 10.0 dwelling units per acre (dulac). The method of calculating net density is as follows: A calculation of the number of housing units and/or lots that would be allowed on a property after critical areas and public rights-of-way and /egally recorded private access easements are subtracted from the gross area (gross acres minus public streets, easements and critical areas multiplied by allowable housing units per acre). Required critical area buffers and public and private alleys shall not be subtracted from gross acres for the purpose of net density calculations. The applicant did not provide a density. The approximate site area was given as 1.8 acres accOrding to King County records. However square footage of proposed street and regulated critical area was not· provided. It appears the proposed 9 lots would be within the required net density but verification and a complete density worksheet is required with the formal land use application. Development Standards: The R-10 zone permits "a maximum of one residential building with a maximum of 4 residential units per lot. The R-10 zone allows a maximum of two 720 square foot detached accessory structures, or orie 1,000 square foot detached accessory structure. Minimum Lot Size, Width and Depth -The minimum lot size requirements of the R-10 zone for parcels, which exceed 1/2 acre, is 3,000 sq ft per dwelling. The minimum lot width for detached dwellings is 30 feet for interior lots; 40 feet for comer lots. The minimum lot depth for all lots in the R-10 zone is 55 feet. As proposed, it appears all the lots comply. Building Standards -The R-10 zone allows a maximum building coverage of 70% for detached units and a maximum of 50% for flats or townhouses. In addition, the R-10 zone limits the impervious surface area on a lot to a maximum of 75% for detached units and a maximum 0(60% for flats or townhouses. One existing dwelling is shown to remain. Therefore, the maximum building and impervious coverage shall meet building standards and be evaluated at the review of the building permit. Building height is restricted to 30 feet and 2-stories. Detached accessory structures must remain below a height of 15 feet and one-story with a gross floor area that is less than the primary structure. Accessory structures are included in lot coverage calculations. Mastan Property Short Plat August 11, 2005 Pi... ~plication Meeting Page 2 of3 Setbacks -Setbacks are measured from the property lines to the nearest point of the structure. The required setbacks for interior lots in the R-10 zone are 20 feet in the front, 15 feet in the rear, and 5 feet on the sides.· Access -The proposed access is off of NE Sunset Blvd with one public street extending north approximately 230 feet terminating in a hammerhead turn around. All 9 lots are proposed fronting this street. Due to the narrow widths of the lots, the applicant may wish to consider a joint use driveway for the lots thus reducing the number of curb cuts along an individual street and thereby improving safety and reduce congestion. The proposed street width was not shown, if the applicant proposes a width less than the city standard of 50 feet, a street modification maybe requested with the formal land use application. City code states cui de sac streets may only be permitted by the Reviewing Official where due to demonstrable physical constraints no future connection to a larger street pattern is physically possible. The applicant is proposing a north south street off of NE Sunset Blvd to the terminate to the site's north property line with a hammerhead tum around. Private streets are allowed for access to six or less lots, with no more than 4 of the lots not abutting a public right-of-way. The street is to include a minimum easement width of 26 feet with 20 feet of paving. Private driveways may serve a maximum of two lots and must have a minimum easement width of 20 feet with 12 feet of paving. Addresses of lots along private streets/driveways are to be visible from the public street by provision of a sign stating all house numbers and are to be located at the intersection of the private street and the public street. . Parking: Each lot is required to accommodate off street parking for a minimum of two vehicles. Driveway Grades: The maximum driveway slopes cannot exceed fifteen percent (15%), provided that driveways exceeding eight percent (8%) are to provide slotted drains at the lower end of the driveway. If the grade exceeds 15%, a variance from the Board of Adjustment is required. Landscaping and Open Sp~ce: For plats abutting non-arterial public streets, the minimum off-site landscaping is a five (5 ft.) wide irrigated or drought resistant landscape strip provided that if there is additional undeveloped right-of-way in excess of 5 ft., this also must be landscaped. For plats abutting principal, minor or collector arterials, the width increases to 10 ft. unless otherwise determined by the reviewing official during the subdivision process. Tree requirements for plats include at least two (2) trees of a City approved species with a minimum caliper of 1 1/2 inches per tree must be planted in the front yard or planting strip of every lot prior to building occupancy. The proposed plan did not indicate existing trees on site; at preliminary submittal a tree inventory will be required for any existing trees larger than 6" caliper at 3-feet above ground. Critical Areas: Steep Slopes -City records indicate that the subject site contains areas identified as sensitive (25% to 39%) slopes throughout the parcel. In addition, the site is located within the Moderate Landslide Hazard area and also within the Erosion Hazard area. As such, a geotechnical engineer report would be required to assess the slope conditions within the project boundary and to provide City staff with any recommended mitigation measures. As required by the City's Critical Areas Regulations, a slope delineation indicating the location of steep slopes will be required as part of the formal land use application. Pursuant to the Renton MuniCipal Code (RMC 4-3-050J) the applicant will be required to obtain a geotechnical report stamped and Signed from a Geotechnical Engineer stating that the site is suitable for development and addresses soils, geology and other key elements. In addition, the report will need to address any special construction reqUirements deemed neCessary by the Geotechnical Engineer. Through the short plat review process, the City may condition the approval of the development in order to require mitigation of any potential hazards based on the results of the. study. In addition, pursuant to RMC section 4-3-050.J.3. the geotechnical report submitted with the application may be required to undergo independent secondary review by a qualified speCialist selected by the City at the applicant's expense. Mastan Property Short Plat August 11, 2005 PI.. _,",plication Meeting Page 3 of3 StreamlwetJand -The City's Water Class map indicates a Class 3 stream (Honey Creek) bisecting the eastern portion of the site. A Stream Study and a wetland report will be required as part of the land use application. The site is within the Aquifer Protection Area 2. It appears the applicant is proposing the 9 lots and site improvements to the western portion of the site. If the protected areas are to left in a tract, staff will required it to be designated as a Native Growth Protection Area tract. This information must comply with the new Critical Areas Ordinanc,e adopted in May of 2005. Environmental Review: The project would require SEPA review as critical areas are present -wetland, stream, protected slope. Critical areas include protected slopes, wetlands, very high landslide hazards and others as defined in RMC 4-11-030. The proposal would be brought to the Environmental Review Committee for review, as it is their charge to make threshold determinations for environmental checklists. Typically, mitigation of impacts is accomplished through fees related to issues such as transportation, fire and parks as well as measures to reduce impacts to environmental elements such as soils, streams, water, etc. Permit Requirements: Short plats ranging from five to nine lots are processed via the Hearing Examiner (public hearing required) within an estimated time frame of 8 to 12 weeks for preliminary short plat approval. The application fee is $1,000, an additional $500.00 would be required if SEPA environmental review is necessary. The applicant will be required to install a public information sign on the property. Detailed information regarding the land use application submittal is provided in the attached handouts. Once preliminary short plat approval is received, the applicant must complete the required improvements and satisfy any conditions of the preliminary approval before the plat can be recorded. The newly created lots may be sold only after the short plat has been recorded. For your use, I have attached a copy of the short plat recording process to be completed after preliminary short plat approval. - Short Plat Expiration: Upon preliminary short plat approval, the preliminary short plat approval is valid for two years with a possible one year extension provided the request is submitted to the decision maker prior to expiration. - Fees: In addition to the applicable building and construction permit fees, the following mitigation fees will be required prior to the recording of the plat (the project will be credited for the existing home): " A Transportation Mitigation Fee based on $75.00 per each new average daily trip attributable to the project (estimated to be $731.25 per new home site); and, " A Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per new single family residence; and, t') A Fire Mitigation Fee based on $488.00 per new single-family residence. A handout listing all of the City's Development Fees is attached for your review. Expiration: Upon preliminary short plat approval, the preliminary short plat approval is valid for two years with a possible one-year extension. . Cc: Jennifer Henning '\ ) ) DEVELOPMENT CITY OF R,..,fJrANNlNG DENSITY WORKSH'EET !::h,Ol\! DEC 2 1 2005 IREc;;n~/~n City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98055 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430"7231 1. Gross area of property: 1. {e/l5I~ . square feet 2. Deductions: Certain areas are excluded from density calculations. These include: Public streets** 7.5"l.. "" square feet Private access easements** square feet Critical Areas* ?-~/c::>4' square feet Total excluded area: 2. ~I 41 I. : square feet 3. Subtract line 2 from line 1 for net area: 3. 4104\ square feet I 4. Divide line 3 by 43,560 for net acreage: 4. O.~~ acres 5. Number of dwelling units or lots planned: 5. __ 9 ___ units/lots 6. Divide line 5 by line 4 for net density: 6. ~. oS 1 = dwelling units/acre *Critical Areas are defined as "Areas determined by the City to be not suitable for development and which are subject to the City's Critical Areas Regulations . including very high landslide areas, protected slopes, wetlands or floodways." Critical areas buffers a~e not deducted/excluded. ** Alleys (public or private) do not have to be excluded. R:\PW\DEVSERV\Fonns\Planning\density.doc Last updated: 1110812004 1 HONEY CREEK \?lEW SHORT PBAT 3524 HE SlllIlnlset BouBewrd, RentoD'll, WA 98056 September 14, 2005 1. Project Narrative. OEVELOPME CITy OF ~fkANNfNG -'HON DEC 2 , 2005 {RflErcEBVED JThe proposed Honey Creek View Meadows is. a proposed nine (9) lot short plat located at 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard in the Otyof Renton, 98056. The land is located on Sunset Boulevard between Newport Avenue NE and Union Avenue NE. The proposed plat is 1.8 acres (78,512.5 SF) with approximately 0.80 acres (33,947 SF) of steep slope area greater than 40% that is not to be disturbed. This development is located within the aty of Renton R-10 Zone (or 10 residential du/acre) with adjacent properties of the same zoning designation. The proposed land use will be for 9 lots with the aty of Renton density requirement met after subtracting for steep slope areas and roadway areas. The current use of the site is a dilapidated 700 square feet single-family residence on the 1.8 acre parce\. An existing 5-feet sidewalk is presently fronting Sunset Boulevard. Proposed improvements will maintain the existing sidewalk frontage along SUnset Boulevard, provide for any public roadway tree plantings as required by the City of Renton development standards, and maintain . any steep slope buffers greater than 40% slope . . The buildable area of the site has an average slope of 10 to 20%, with natural vegetation and site buffers to be maintained for any areas greater than 40% slope .. The north face of the property, which borders an existing 3,000 square feet single family residence, has minimal slopes greater than 40%, but only for approximately 5 vertical feet. The steep slope area is along the Northeast section of the parcel with the parcel also containing Honey Creek at the Northeast edge. An access trail is also located at the northeast area of the parcel. The majority of the site consists of till soils. A gee-technical report has been prepared for this project which further details the type of soils found on- site. Drainage runoff from the site does not-currently collect drainage from Sunset Boulevard. Sunset Boulevard's drainage will be maintained as it currently discharges to an outfall located to the east of this parce\. Runoff from this parcel -drains to the north with direct discharge into Honey Creek. The proposed use for this parcel will be to develop nine (9) single family residences within the R-10 zoning designation, with an average size of the lots being approximately 3100 sq-ft. Proposed access will be through a proposed . . public 42' wide right-of-way road accessed from Sunset Boulevard and aligning northwards into the L -shaped parce\. At the terminus of the proposed roadway will be a hammerhead turnaround provided for fire and truck access. The proposed road will be 32 feet of pavement with 5 feet of sidewalk provided on both sides of the street. Currently a fire-hydrant is located along the frontage of the proposed public roadway and Sunset Boulevard. This fire hydrant will be maintained during and after construction. A sewer manhole is located at the top of the steep slope buffer. The proposed sewer for the site will drain towards this sewer manhole, which ultimately discharges into the Honey Creek Interceptor. Existing trees indude: alder, scotch broom, fir, and other indigenous species. Trees greater than 6-inch diameter to be removed within the development are shown on the plans. 2. Pre-Application Comments. Specific issues were discussed during the Pre-Application Meeting conducted on August 11, 2005 that is imperative to the development to the site. The following is a summary of these pertinent items with a summation relating to the current site plan. A. Water Main Extension to the North Property Une. The initial layout showed the street extending to the north property line with a road gradient of 20 percent. As discussed, this is not allowed in the city; thus, we have had to revise the layout accordingly. (Note: The existing topography is steeper than the allowed 15 percent road gradient and the further down the hill the road is extended, the greater difference there would be between the proposed road elevation and existing ground.) The current site plan shows a shortened public road section designed to meet the maximum allowed road steepness per code. To the north of the site, there is an existing residence that has direct public access to NE 17th Place. Given the topography and existing development, there is feasible way to make a connection to this road without removal of the residence· and considerable grading. In addiqon, there are no easements in place to make a connection to utilities, induding water, to this road. Therefore, the proposal dos not indude eXtending a water main to the north property line. B. Sewer Requirements. The proponent generally agrees with the comments and understands there will be additional permitting processes to gain access to the existing sewer on the property along the northerly edge of Honey Creek. C. Storm Water Requirements. The proponent is in agreement with staff comments. The current proposal indudes a vault system with treatment to control storm water runoff from the development. " D. Transportation. . As previously discussed, the plan has been revised to· reduce the road gradient to not exceed the allowed 15 percent. In doing so, the length has been reduced to minimize the impacts of grading given the steepness of the existing topography. Because the public street is longer than 150 feet, the road will tenninate with a hammerhead designed to meet current engineering and fire department standards. E. Street Modification. As outlined in staff comments, the standard width of a road is 50 feet for a local access road. The city does allow a reduction down to 42 feet with a street modification request by the applicant. As part of this application, we are requesting such modification for the purposes of satisfying the density requirements, providing lots that meet the zoning standards, and to reduce grading and impacts to the developed portion of the site. F. Are Department Comments. Again, the road has been re-designed with a. reduction in gradient (15 percent maximum) and tenninating in a hammerhead per code. G. Zoning/Development Standards. We have calculated the density per city standards and are allowed 8.51, or 9 units. The lots have a minimum width of 36 feet (interior) and 41 feet (comer) and are at least 3,000 square feet in size. Again, access for the subdivision will be via a public road (42 feet wide) and will not extend the length of the property due to topographical constraints. Each lot will be served by a private driveway that will not exceed 40 percent of the width of the lot or exceed 15 percent in grade. . We are providing a landscape plan that meets city requirements and as outlined in your comment letter. H. Critical Areas. As evident by the plans, a portion of Honey Creek traverses the property within the easterly portion in a northwest direction. In addition, there are associated wetlands adjacent to the water body. Rnally, there are steep slopes (excess of 40 percent) within this same easterly area. No development is. proposed within this portion of the property. A habitat/wetland report has been prepared identifying the specific features of the described sensitive areas. Also included with this application is a geotechnical evaluation that reviews the . soils and topographical constraints as it relates to this proposal. ) I. Design Review-Traffic Report. Given the small number of lots, a traffic report has not been prepared, which is a requirement for design review. ," . Purpose of ChecklOst: CBTY OF RENTON, WASHDNGTOIN ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ) The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21 C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instructions for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide· additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." In addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Acti9ns (part D). For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. 1 'J .. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT A. BACKGROUND. 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Honey Creek VieW Plat 2. Name of Applicant: PK Enterprises 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: 4. Date checklist prepared: September 24, 2005 5. Agency requesting checklist: , City of Renton PK Enterprises 23035 SE 26? Street Maple Valley, WA 98038 Contact: Phillip Ktlzes 206.227.7445 6. Proposed project timing or schedule (include phasing, if applicable): Upon application being deemed complete: o Checklist Review: (1-3 months) I\) land Use Review/Hearing: (4-6 months) I\) Engineering Review/Permitting: (4 months) " Construction: (3 months) 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity ,related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. Not at this time. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Geotechnical Evaluation by Bergquist Engineering Services. weUand & Drainage Report by Habitat Technologies, Inc. 2 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 9. Do you know of pending applications for governmental approvals of other . proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. " None are known. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposals, ifknown. • SEPA Review • Preliminary/Final Plat Review • Engineering Review • Right-of-way Agreements (possible) and Utility Easements • Water, Slonn, and Sewer Plan Approval/Pennits • NPDES Pennit • Forest Practice Permit 11. Give a complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in the . checklist which ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. This proposal is for a nine (9) single-family residential lots on 1.80 acres located at 3524 NE Sunset Blvd., Renton, Washington. There are several existing residences on the property that will be removed upon completion of the project. the lots will be varying widths fiDm 36 feet wide'to 42 feet wide and range from 3,000 to 4,300 square feet square in size. Given the topography, storm runoff will be captured on- site (vault) and will be dispersed northeast (down the slope) into an energy dissipating outlet protection area prior to discharge into the on·site stream channel (Please see Preliminary Plat Map Set) 12. Location of the proposal. Please give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your project, including street address, if any. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, please provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Please provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map and topographic map, if possible. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit· applications related to the checklist. (Indicate if maps or plans have been submitted as part of a permit application). Again, the proposed subdMsion is located at 3524 NE Sunset Blvd., Renton, Washington. The property is within the Southeast Quarter of Section 4, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, w.M., and the A.s:s'e.s:sor's Parcel No. is 042305-9090. (Please see attached Legal Description and VICinity Map). 3 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY -. ) ) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS. 11.. Earth. a. General description of the site (tmderline one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, motmtainous, other ______ _ Where development Is proposed, the topography generally is sloped to the north or northeast towarrl Honey Creek. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent of slope): There are slopes In exCl!!!SS of 40 percent In the easter!yportion of the property. c. What general types of soil are fotmd on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, please specify and note any prime farmland. According to the Soil Survey of King County, the soil type is a mixture of AldetwOOd material (Ame) and Alderwood, gravelly sandy loam (AgD). d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the_ immediate vicinity? If so, describe. There are no surface indications of unstable soils on, or in the vicinity of the proposed site location. see Geotechnical Report. -e. Describe the purposes, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. The project will require grading for the construction of the proposed entrance ramp, water, sewer, other ground utilities, and a detention pond. Approximately 3,000 cubic yards material will be balanced over the developed portion of the site. No offsite site work except for possibly within ROW trenching will be conducted. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally desCribe. Erosion could occur during the constroction phase of this project. Appropriate erosion control measures will be induded in the grading plans to minimize the impacts of theprojed. 4 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY ) ) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? The plan depicts there will be about 7166 square feet of impervious surface in the road right-of-way. In addition, approximately 1780 square feet of impervious area per lot (residence, driveway, etc.) is proposed. Therefore, an additional 23,186 square feet of impervious surface will be aeated at final construction. The total impervious area will be approximately 23,186 square feet, or 29.6 percent of the site (total area is 1.8 acres, or about 78,512 square feet). h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Erosion could occur during the construction phase of this project. As required and implemented by the City, appropriate erosion control measures will be included in the final grading plans to minimize the impacts of the project. 2. AIR. a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e. dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction, and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities ifknown. Temporary emissions from equipment and dust will occur during constnJi:tion phase. Construction equipment will comply with applicable air quality regulations. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor which may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None, to our knowledge. c.What are the proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts, if any: None are proposed at this time. 3. WATER. a. Suriace: 5 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT I) Is there any surface water on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, associated. wetland)? If yes, describe type, provide names, and, if kno~ state what stream or river it flows into. Honey Creek (Oass 3) traverses the property within the easterly portion of the property. Adjacent to the creek is a small wetland (Category 3). The proposed development has been designed outside the required buffer width for these areas. 2) Will the project require any work over or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes. 3) Estimate the amount of flll and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from the surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate source of flll materials. None. , 4) Will surface water withdrawals or diversions be required by the proposal? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? Note location on the site plan, if any. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. Not applicable. b. Ground: I) Will ground water be withdrawn or recharged? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, ifknown. No. 6 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 2) Describe waste water material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals ... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Not Applicable. Co Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff and storm water and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will the water flow into other waters? If so, please describe. Storm water runoff from the road and residences will be collected via a series of connected pipes to be ultimately discharged into an on-site detention/water quality vault designed to Level 2 standards with the pre- developed existing condition being all forested. At this point, the water will be treated and conveyed via a dispersal trench system that will traverse down the northwest face of the slope, to a point at the toe, where it will be dispersed to the aeek. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. d. PII"Oposed measuII"e§ to reduce 011" cOlllltrol surface, ground, and nllmoff watell" impads, if any: All development and engineering requirements imposed by the City to control the impacts to the hydrology of the area will be performed by the proponent 7 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 4. PLANTS. a Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: ..1QL deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other ..1QL evergreen tree: fu:, cedar, pine, other ..1QL shrubs ..1QL grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other ..1QL water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other xx other types of vegetation: ornamental (Note: Please see enclosed Wetland Report prepared by Habitat Technologies for a complete listing of on-site wetland plant material) b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Where development is to occur, existing vegetation will be removed for the grading and construction of the project. c. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on near the site. None, to our knowledge. d. List proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: The developer will conform with existing Codes and development standards of the City. 5. ANIMALS. a Circle (underline) any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are knoWn to be on or near the site: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbird. other Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:, ___ _ Fish: bass, salmon, trout, shellfish, other ___ _ 8 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY .. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near· the site. None, to our knowledge. (Note: The report prepared by Habitat Technologies reported that red-tailed hawk and bald eagle may be present within the vicinity of the project) c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Not to our knowledge. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None are proposed at this time. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES. a What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity and gas will be the primary source for power heating the future residences. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? Construction of the new homes will meet or exceed the necessarY energy requirements of the Northwest Energy Code. ,. ENVIRONMENTAL HEAL Til. a Are there any environmental health hazards, exposure to toxic chemicals, including risk of fire and explosio~ spill, or hazardous waste, that occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No. 1. Describe Special Emergency services that might be required. Not applicable. 9 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 2. What are the proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None are proposed at this time. b. Noise. 1. What type of noise exists in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? None to our knowledge. 2. What types of levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Noise levels will increase on a short-tenn basis during the construction phase of the project. Construction will occur during daylight hours as allowed by·aty Code and staff. In genera~ hours of construction will be limited to 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM. 3. What are the proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Inaeased noise levels due to construction will be restricted to the abovementioned hours to reduce any impacts to the neighboring residents. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE. a What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? There is an existing residence on the property. Directly north is a residential project that is fully developed with single-family residences. To the south, the property is also developed with residential uses. To the east, the property is vacant (SeatUe City Light Easement). finally, the land to the west is a single- family residence with associated stivctures. b. Has the site been used for agricultural purposes? If so, describe. Not to our knowledge •. c. Describe any structures on the site. Again, there is an existing residence on the property. 10 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPliCANT d~ Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Yes. The existing residence will be removed upon completion of this project. e. What is the current zoning of the site? The current zoning is Residential, R-l0. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The current comprehensive plan designation is Residential Medium Density. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program environment designation of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specifY. Yes. As stated before, a portion of Honey Creek (Gass 3) traverse the property within the easterly portion of the site. Als'o, there is a wetland (category 3) adjacent to the aeek.· Rnal/y, there are steeper slopes (+40 perrent) within this area, as well 1. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Assuming 2.9 persons per household, approximately 26 persons will reside in this development J. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None will be displaced-the existing house is vacant and boarded up. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY k. What are proposed measures to avoid displacement or other impacts, if any: None are proposed at this time. l. What. are the proposed· measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The proposed 9-lot subdivision is consistent with existing and future land uses, zoning, and comprehensive plan designation and will be compliant with the Code. 11 '. ) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 9. HOUSING. a Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. The proposal includes 9 new moderate-income residences. b~ Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. One moderate income residence WlTI be removed at completion. c. What are the proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None are proposed at this time. 10. AESTIIETICS. a What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s) not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The maximum height of any future residences will be consistent with the existing requirements for the R-IO, which is thirty (30) feet b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. The view.s-are territorial for all the properties in the area. c. What are the proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any? Street landscaping will reduce the visual impacts of the development U. LIGJEIT AND GLARE. a What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The light and glare that will be produced from the site WIll Originate from building lighting, exterior street lighting, and from vehicles using the site. The light and glare will oa:ur in the evening and before dawn. 12 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY ) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your project? None. d. What are the proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None are proposed at this time. 13. RECREATION. a What designated and informal· recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Designated and infonnal recreational opportunities within the immediate vicinity include: North Highlands Park (l/2-mile west), Honey Creek Open Spare (l/4-mile north), and Siena Heights Park (1/2-mile north) . . b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No • . c. What are the proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None are proposed at this time. 13. mSToruc AND CUL 'flORAL PRESlERV ATION. a Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. Not to our knowledge. 13 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT h. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on the site. There are none, to our knowledge. c. What are the proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None are proposed at this time. 14. TRANSPORTATION. a Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any: The proposed subdivision will be directly aa:essible to NE Sunset Boulevard. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? . Assuming 2 parldng spaces per household, there will be at least 18 new parldng spaces being provided upon completion of the project. No· parldng spaces will be eliminated from this proposal d. Will the proposal require any new roads or street, or improvements to any existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Yes. The project will require an additional internal public road (hammerhead terminus) to be constructed to serve the subdivision. Frontage improvements may be required for NE Sunset Boulevard. e. Will the project use or occur in the immediate vicinity of water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? Ifknown, indicate when peak: volumes would occur. Assuming an average of 10 vehicular trips per day, there will be approximately 90 new trips generated from the proposed subdivision (ITE Manualj. Of this amount, approximately 9 of these trips will ocr:ur during peak hours. 14 EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY ) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT g. What are proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: The applicant will be responsible fof any appropriate traffic mitigation fees, which will offset some of the impacts of the subdivision. 16. PUBLIC SERVICES. a. Would the project result in an increase need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Yes. There would be an increased need for Ore and police protection due to an additional 8 lots in the area. AlS'o, there will be an impact on the present school system for any future students residing within the development. b. What are proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any: . Property taxes, building permits and school impact mitigation fees generated from these residences will mitigate impacts incurred from this development. 17. UTILITJIES. a. Circle (underline) utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sariitary sewer, septic system, other: cable television. b. Describe the utilities which are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. IERedridty: GillS: , Water: R.efuse: Teleplhlolnle: Sewer. ICalblJe: Puget Sound Energy puget Sound Energy City of Renton Waste Management Qwest Communications City of Renton Comcast Connection{s} to the above mentioned utilities will be negotiated with the indMdual purveyor during the building permit and constroction phases of this project. There mayalS'o be a need for a right-of-way permit(s) to gain aa:ess to the property at constnJction. 15 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT c. SIGNATURE. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY The above answers are true to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. ~~Y2 Appli~ Date Submitted: "::>. '2 4~ 0 'S 16 Order Number: 205115003 THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION 373 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHERLY MARGIN OF STATE HIGHWAY NO.2 (SUNSET HIGHWAy); THENCE WESTERLY AlONG SAID SUNSET HIGHWAY 300 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTHERLY PARALLEL WITH SAID EAST LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION A DISTANCE OF 145 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY 300 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID EAST LINE WHICH IS 145 FEET NORTH OF THE NORTHERLY rMRGIN OF SAID SUNSET HIGHWAY; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SUBDMSION, BEING THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE WEST AlONG SAJD NORTH LINE 484.62 FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS 170 FEET EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH, PARALLEL TO SAID WEST LINE TO THE NORTHERLY MARGIN OF SUNSET HIGHWAY; THENCE EASTERLY AlONG SAID SUNSET HIGHWAY TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONDEMEND IN KING CoUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NO. 742207 FOR SUNSET HIGHWAY. , . :';' , 1t~~ ~.r; .... ~. R'--~ .~~. ]." . ~ ""0 ~ -1 ' . . !!f. '. ;t .~. 411\".~ .J --. " ...... . f'J () '0 .... 9.8 iiI T.l, s;, KOtt5 i c.k&Jo~n G.lQ ve Earl McLough,lin .' ______ !.!:.! ?.z. .. ,-.jl.~~ . 7:U86 4,96Ac: Wilhelm O. Hei::.inger' ~ \ ~ .. ~ '\ '2:. .. "" .. ~ ~ .. ..... ~ , .... ' r ~ r. ttl .'.:.l.J" f1J 0 <Ll I c c 0 '~ 0 .::t: -I- ~ .'</'1 ~ <I.l ,'ll :::> :r. c 0::' ..s: 0 ·c J .s::: 0 :":)' ) IHIONEY CREEII( VIEW SHORT PLAT 3524 INlIE SlUIlI'ilset BouHevard17 IRemtDn17 WlA 98056 Construction is proposed to be started at the end of April with dirt work antidpated to be completed within two-month duration of the startup date. The proposed end of construction, with seeding/mulching also provided, will be on or around September 15. Hours of construction antidpated will be during normal weekday working hours from Sam to 6pm in order to minimize excessive construction equipment noise on adjoining residential neighbors. Hauling will be conducted through the proposed roadway route and onto Sunset Boulevard, or through a temporary construction easement from the east property owner. During construction and dry weather, airborne dust will be minimized from this construction site by utilizing a water truck to tamp down dusty roads. In addition, a rock construction entrance will be used to extract mud from hauling wheels prior to entry onto Sunset Boulevard to the south of the site. Erosion will be controlled through silt fences and silt ponds, with minimal runoff antidpated due to construction during summer months only. No spedal construction operating hours and weekend shifts will be required on this project. Traffic will be minimized with startup occurring during off rush hour traffic in the evenings along Sunset Boulevard. A traffic control plan is not necessary for this project due to minimal construction disturbance . antidpated along the Sunset frontage because of the presence of existing curb, ~ic;1ewalk, and gutter along the south abutment to Sunset. Estimated Construction Costs: * Road Grading/Lot Prep Vault . Contingency Total Estimated Cost 200 LF 9 lots 1 15% $500.00/LF 15,000/Lot 2oo,000/EA ($435,000> $100,000.00 $135,000.00 $200,000.00 $65,000.00 $500,000.00 *Road Cost includes: Pavement & Curbing (Road and hammerhead), Sidewalk, Water, Sewer, Storm, Dry Utilities, Street lighting, and landscaping. AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGN City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) COUNTY OF KING ) _...:...F_I:..,.....1_·_IL_L-_' _P __ K--..,-I_T_·-z...._c_:::._'?_--,-_.,.--____ ......,..... _____ -,. being. first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says: 1. On the 27 1"1-1 day of Se:.~", ~-e~ ,W 2005' , I installed Or-J'e.(l) public. information sign(s) and plastic flyer box on the property located at ________________ for the following project: l-IoJ'.J e"'f G tz-.\:::'E. \(, V 1 e,,, Profect name P 1-+ 'L.L 'F' 1'-1 i-z..,ES Owner Name <. f"U (U..l-\O.Sdl-/ Del E'l-C ft-n... ) 2. I have attached a copy of the neighborhood detail map marked with an ~XJJ to indicate the location of the installed sign. , 3. This/these public information sign(s) was/were constructed and installed in locations in conformance with the requirements of Chapter 7 Title 4 of. Renton Municipal Code. lnStaJIer iQJ1at(JfE; SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this Q f11day of ~)O~~ , -rn-..'U>O~ ~~.~ NOTARY PUBLIC in a~he residing ~ My commission expires on () Co - ( c, ~ aX Q:\ WEB\PW\DEVSERV\Forms\Planning\pubsign.doc08127/03 State of at .. " .. ,'-', ," , " ,I ,;PJiQ.P.OSEDLANE~l;USIii ACTION 0 ·r~~-··~~r----} ,}l ',' ,ll'Isl;:!Iled~:f.\PPIi¢atit ,,': . \,:j:F:~~~~=~~1\T: ... t..._ ..... _~~:~_~_..:....;.:....-:""!'"_ ...... ~....:J' , >i.::.~Fa,~=: .··.j.=l"E~'·r r ,.... '·~I:.· '·PUBtic·' ,.L rnsiaIr~'by'I" , (~~'43IJ;; .. "T:'Nonce': ! "l~:~pPI~,' . prease!~feI'ciJJCethe FOjeti"~., If 1)0, r8~~~'14· :1·1. . .': , ':. i :0 Jm:;tllller; lnstt!Jf:tior,.s: o~;~ilt~~r~~'~itjk~~i ... t " . ~ , . U;e 4~x 4·x 1~ 'POSTS . ~: ... )('t.'X~Ef~-V09P , . . asc!11'l' x'3li'~. (M B~TS. WIWASHERS ','~~~~G;"" '- > ,.tJSe HEJ..~ ~ruNG, ' , "6IlAcl('6NwH.~~~J{~OVND. : -,': "l' nTI.E3-·AtLcAPs ' O~.R11t2".~r?s,~,~ If.:'~~, CASE , Q:\ WEB\PW\DEYSERV\Fonns\Planning\pubsign,doc08/27/03 :~, .. , .. ~ .. .' " ,0 • N ~ ....... , ....... , . ******************** City Df*;****************** C. enton **************~!y Treasurer "~*******~***+*~ Reg# #/Rcpt#: "002-00~914'" ... ********** " Accounting 0 t. . 46 [ NK ] Date/Time: cri o ;. Frl, Sep 23, 2005 ************~****~;~ 23, 2005 11 : 18 AM 700B/BUSINESS LICENSE *~~****~************ REF#:PK ENTERPRISES . ___ FEE AMOUNT: $13.75 Receipt Tota) _ ------------------- *********************;****"*" $13.75 p ~ ************ Prot# : 1 ayment Data: Payer: PK ENTERPRISES Method: CASH ')l' flD Amount t;/ = $20.00 *************************** Rec .************* ****************elPt Summary - t **********.* . 10 al Tendered _ * *~********** Receipt Total ~ $20.00 $13.75 Change Due _ -------------__ ********************;*****~ $6.25 T ~************* ****************~~~K YOU!! . ********************* PK. C}Ji~cx..CS ~1t.J~~ L1Ge.~SE. ~i=:>1 =# ZSIOc.:, , ) **************************************** DUPLICATE DUPLICATE DUPLICATE DUPLICATE City of Renton City Treasurer **************************************** Reg# #/Rcpt#: 002-00091446 [ NK ] Accounting Date: Fri, Sep 23, 2005 Date/Time: Fri, Sep 23, 2005 11:18 AM **************************************** 70DB/BUSINESS LICENSE FEE REF#:PK ENTERPRISES FEE AMOUNT: $13.75 Receipt Total = $13.75 **************************************** Payment Data: 11 Pmt# : 1 • B { IlV Payer: PK ENTERPRISES {J V Method: CASH (J\ Amount = $20.00 **************************************** Receipt Summary **************************************** Total Tendered = $20.00 Receipt Total = " $13.75 Change Due = $6.25 **************************************** THANK YOUl! **************************************** DUPLICATE DUPLICATE DUPLICATE DUPLICATE DEVELOPMENT P' 1"'1 ", CITY OF REtJr8~; ," --' DEC 2 f 2005 {RECEIVED ~ ~l'Y OF JRJEN'fON '-,1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 . DEVELOPM CITY o~WEfJ..ANNING Printed: 09-27-2005 Payment Made: Land Use Actions RECEIPT Permit#: lUA05m118 09/27/200505:09 PM . IV/Of;.! DEC 2 1 2005 fRfECEIVED Receipt Number: R0505266 Total Payment: 2,500.00 Payee: KITZES PHILLIP & KATHERN Current Payment Made to the Following Items: Trans Account Code Description 5010 000.345.81.00.0007 Environmental Review 5011 000.345.81.00.0008 Prelim/Tentative Plat Payments made for this receipt Trans Method Description Amount Payment Check #1019 2,500.00 Account Balances Amount 500.00 2,000.00 Trans Account Code Description Balance Due 3021 303.000.00.345.85 Park Mitigation Fee 5006 000.345.81.00.0002 Annexation Fees 5007 000.345.81.00.0003 Appeals/Waivers 5008 000.345.81.00.0004 Binding Site/Short Plat 5009 000.345.81.00.0006 Conditional Use Fees 5010 000.345.81.00.0007 Environmental Review 5011 000.345.81.00.0008 Prelim/Tentative Plat 5012 000.345.81.00.0009 Final Plat 5013 000.345.81.00.0010 PUD 5014 000.345.81.00.0011 Grading & Filling Fees 5015 000.345.81.00.0012 Lot Line Adjustment 5016 000.345.81.00.0013 Mobile Home Parks 5017 000.345.81.00.0014 Rezone 5018 000.345.81.00.0015 Routine Vegetation Mgmt 5019 000.345.81.00.0016 Shoreline Subst Dev 5020 000.345.81.00.0017 site Plan Approval 5021 000.345.81.00.0018 Temp Use or Fence Review 5022 000.345.81.00.0019 Variance Fees 5024 000.345.81. 00.0024 Conditional Approval Fee 5036 000.345.81.00.0005 Comprehensive Plan Amend 5909 000.341.60.00.0024 Booklets/EIS/Copies 5941 000.341.50.00.0000 Maps (Taxable) 5954 604~2l7.00.00.0000 special Deposits 5955 000.05.519.90.42.1 Postage 5998 000.231.70.00.0000 Tax Remaining Balance Due: $0.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 ~oo .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 '" 00 .00 .. 00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .. 00 .00 } ,! '\ ',. tij Jennifer T. Henning' From: Kenneth R Anderson <ken@andersonsurveyors.com> Sent: Thursday, August 15, 201312:39 PM ' To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Jennifer, Jennifer T. Henning Bill Hughes Honey Creek View Estates Temp00601.PDF I am sending attached preliminary copy of Sheet 5 of 6 of the above referenced plat with notes added with regard to the buffer area 10' building set back line for your information and use. Please review for approval legend item 13 together with added requirement note added thereon. This added information will be included with final plat mylar submittal. ~ . . If there are any questions or concerns, feel free to contact me. Thank You, Kenneth R Anderson, PLS President Kenneth R. Anderson & Associates, Inc., PS 1720 South 341st Place, Suite C~4 Federal Way, WA 98003 (253) 838-1199 Seattle (253) 838-8164 Fax (206) 730-9050 Cell Email: ken@andersonsurveyors.com 1 HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTATES A PORnON OF ·1HE S.W. 1/4. OF 'THE S.E. 1/4. SEC. 4. mP. 23 N •• RNG. 5 E.. W.tJI •• alY OF RENTON. KING COUNlY. WASHINGTON EASEMENT PROIJISIQNS: AN £AlBI!:NT IS HEREBY ~ FOR AND CRANTrD TO THE OTY (F RDITON, C£N11R!YlJNK. aJlCAST CA8l£. PUG£T SOUND EIOCY, AND THEIR RESl'£CD'o£ SIJ(X[SSQRS AND ASSIGNS. UH1lER AND UPON THE EXTERIOR 10 FED, PARAUB. I01TH AND AIloDNlNG THE STR££T fR(WTAGE (F All LOTS AND TRACTS; IN ~ TO INSTAll. LAY, ClWSTRIJCT. RDIEW. OPE1IAlE AND IlAlNTAlNIJHllER(;R(lJN1 comuns, IIAINS, CA8I£S, P1PfiJN[S, AND aRES 11TH NEC!:SSARY fAClIlJES AND OtHER E!).IIPII[NT FOR THE PURPOSE (F SER\1CE TO THIS SlJ!!IlMSION NIl OtHER PRlFERTY IIITH SElIlR, lfATER. urCTR1C, TEi!I'H(Ji£. CA8l£ TV, GAS. ANDINTERN£T SER\1CE, TOCDHER I011H THE RIGHT TO EJmR UPON 1H( LOTS AT All lBIfS fOR 1H( PURPOSE HEREIN, STATrD. tHES£ EASEllEIITS EIITER!]) UPON fOR lHES[ PIIRPOSES SHAll BE RESTOREO AS NEAR AS POSSIBlE TO THEIR 0R1GINAl CONDITION BY THE UlI.lTY. NO tMs OR OIRES fOR 1H( TRANSIIlSSI~ (J' urCTR1C aJIlIIDIT, TEl£I'H(H' OR CA8l£ TV 9tAl1 BE PLACED OR BE PERlliTTrD TO BE PLACED UPON ANY LOT UNI£SS THE SAM!' SHAll BE \JNIJERCROUHD OR IN COIIlIIT ATTACKD TO A IIUlIIl!NG. "AlIVE IEOYIIH PROJEeDON EASEMOO; 1H( NAD'o£ mowTH PROlECTl~ EASDlENT (NCPEj ~ TRACT "A" IOEHTlFlES PROlECTrD SLOPE AREAS. !HE ClEATION or THE NA D'o£ GROWTH ffiOlE~ EASElIENT (NGPE) ~'o£YS TO 1H( P\J8UC A BI'NEfl(]Al INTEREST IN THE lAND \'lIlHlN !HE EASDI£NT AREA. THIS INl£R[ST SHAll BE FOR PURPOSE or I'RESERW<G NATl'o£ 'o£cnATION FOR 1H( ~TRDl or SURFACI: WAlIR AND EHOS1Clt WAINlENANCE (J' SLOPE STABIUTY. ~Al AND AURAl BUFFERING. AND ffiOlECDON or PLANT AND ANlMAl HAB1TAT. !HE NAT1\{ GROWDl ffiOlECD~ EASEliENT DIPOSES UPON All PRES£NT AND fUTUR[ OM<IRS AND 0C0JP1EI!S or !HE EASDlENT AREA ENFORCEABlE ~ BEHAlF (J' tHE P\J8UC BY THE OTY or RENTON. TO lEA'o£ UNDISTURBED All TREES AND OTHER 'o£cnADON I01THIN tHE EAS£WEIIT AREA. THE 'o£cnATION I01lHlN !HE (NGPE) WAY NOT BE CUT. PRUNED, CO'o£RED BY Fll! RDIO'o£ OR OAWACED WITHOUT OPRESS WRITTEN PERIIISSION fROII !HE OTY (J' REllTON. 1H( RIGHT or EllTRY CRANTrD HERBN SHAll APPlY TO 1H( Awns, REPRESEHTAT1\{S, AND EIIPlOYEIES (J' tHE OM<IRS OR SUBS£OUEIIT OM<IRS or 1H( UNDERlYING PROPERTY. SAWAIY SEWER AND WlilER EASfWH; , AN EAS£MEJlT IS HlRE8Y RES£IMl) fOR AND CRANTrD TO tHE OTY (J' RDlTON PU6UC 1IORKS OEPARTII!Jfl, AND THEIR RESPECT1\{ SUCCESSalS. AND ASSIGNs, UllDER AND UPON, AS SHOI01I HER9I, ~ SHEET 5 (F 6, IN YI1iICH TO INSTAll. LAY, ctJ6TR\JCT, REII£W, OPERA lE AND WAINT AIN IJHllER(;R(lJN1 f ACl1lIES fOR tHE PURPOSE or SER\1CE TO !HIS SI.lBOMSION AND OtHER PRlFERTY IIITH SEWER AND WAlIR SEJMCE, TOC£1H£R WITH 1H( R1GIT TO ENlIR UPON 1H( LOTS AT All 11IIES fOR tHE PURPOSE HEREIN STAlED. TH(S[ EASDIEIITS ENTERED UPON fOR TH(S[ PURPOSES SHAll BE RESTORED AS NEAR AS POSSIBlE TO THEIR ORIGINAl CONDITION BY 1H( UDlITY. COVENANTs: All LOTS AND TRACTS WITHIN THIS PLAT ARE SUB.(CT TO tHE H~Y CRUK \1£W £STAlES HOIIEIlVINERS ASSOOADON £STASUSHIllIN ACCORDANCE IIITH WASHINGT~ STAlE LAW YI1iICH IDENTIfIES EACH LOT or !HIS PLAT AS A IillIBI'R (J' SAID HONEY mED< II![W ESTAlES HOIIEOM<IRS ASSOOATlON, RECOROEl) UIIDER RECORDING NUIIBC:R ________ RECORDS (J' KING COUNTY, WASHINGT~. RESJRICDONS: 1. NO LOT DR PORDON or A LOT IN THIS PLAT SHAll BE IJI\o1OED AND SOlD OR RI:S(l.D OR OIINERSH1I' CHANGED OR TRANSFERRED IlHEREBY tHE 0'0lN£RSHIP or ANY PDRD~ or THIS PLAT SHAll BE lESS THAN tHE AREA REOU1R£I) FOR THE US[ DISTR1CT IN WHICH LDCA lED, 2. NO MORE THEN ~ SINa..E fA/4,Y DWEllJHG UNIT IS PERIIITTrD ~ EACH LOT. 3. THE 10' BUILDING S[T BAC!( UHE. PARAllElJNG 1H( lINE COIIIION TO LOT 4 AND TRACT "A", REQUlR!:MElH WAY BE REDU<lD TO zrno ACCORIlINC WITH RECUlREUENTS S[T FORTH IN BERGOUEST GEOTECHNICAl EllGiNEIRlNG REPmT 1201334-2. OA lED 8-14-2013. . MAXIMUM IMf'fRVlOUS S!JRfAC£S; lOll REDUCED IIIPERVIWS SURFACE BlIP FOR EACH LOT PER R-1O Z~ COIlE. MAXIIIUII 75% 1IIPERVIOUS SURFACE IS Alloe fOR lOll REOUCED 1IIPERVIOUS SURfACE BlIP, 65% YAXIMU\1 lOT NO LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 LOT 4 LOT 5 LOT 6 LOT 7 LOT 8 LOT 9 LOT AREA 4,1105.F. 3.005 5.F. '3,195 SF. 6,610 SF. 3,149 SF, 3,1675.F. 4.825 SF. 4,055 5.F. 3,746 5.F. lUA 13-000703 I..ND-l~0444 65% UAXJMULf 'UPEBWlUS SURfA(J;" 2,6n SF. 1,953 SF. 2,077 SF. 4,004 SF. 2,0475.f. 2,059 SF. 3,136 SF. 2,636 SF. 2,435 SF. SINGlE fAMILY RESDEHDAl FLOW CQNlRO!. BEST MANAGD.IENT PBACDCf; ~GlE fAMILY REgo[NC[S'AND OTHER IIIPRO\flIENTS ClWSTRUClED ~ THE LOTS ClEAlED BY THIS SUBDIVISI~ WUST IIoIPlOONT 1H( flOW ~TRDl BEST MANAGEWEIIT PRACDCES STlPULAlED IN THE AI'PRO'fm DRAINAGE STUDY AND PlANS ON FlU \'liTH 1H( OTY (F RENTON AND AS lISlED IN tHE TABlE BElOW AS lIfll AS ANY OEC.ARATlON or CO'o£NANTS AND CRANTS (F EASEliENT RECORDED HEREON . LQLl!lOOlUl. LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 LOT 4 LOT 5 LOT 6 un7 una LOT 9 Il!!E....Dff. Rfl)UC[l) IIIPERVIOUS SURFACES BlIP REDIJCED IllPERVlOUS SURFACES BlIP REDUC!:D IIIPERVIOUS SURFACES BlIP REDUC!:D IUPER\o1OUS SURFACES BMP REDUCED III1'ER\o1OUS SURF ACES BlIP REDIJCED IllPER\lOUS SURFACES B1/P RmUCEIl 1lIP!lIIGOUS ~ACES _ REDUCED ~ S1MACES BIG' REDUC!:D IIG'ER\o1OUS SURFACES BlIP COUPUANCE I011H THIS STIPULATION UUIST BE MJOREsSrn IN THE "sINGlE FAMIlY RE9DEIITlAlIllllDlNG PERlliT DRAINAGE RE\o1EW" WHEN ANY APPUCA TlON IS UAIlI' fOR A BUI1DING PERIIIT fOR THE LOT. DRAlMAGE fROM IMPERVIous SURfACES REQ\JIBW£Jfii All 8UI.llHG 1J()'IRG'OOT5, fOOTING DRAINS AND DRAINS FRW All1llPERVlOUS SURFACES SlJCi AS PAnos AND IlRI\'EWAYS SHAll BE ~ClED TO !HE P£IlMANEIIT STORII DRAIN ounn AS SHOIIN ON tHE APPRO'o£D ~STRUCTl~ DRAI01NGS DR ADDRESSED IN THE 'SINGlE fAlGlY RESlOEIITlAl BUlUlING PERMIT IlRAINAGE RE\o1EW" ON FlU I01TH tHE OTY (F RDITON. !HIS PLAN SHAll BE SUBWlTlED \11TH tHE APP1JCATlON FOR ANY BUIlDING P£IlMIT. All CONNECTIONS TO tHE OOWNSTREAW ORAINAGE SYSlEU SHAll BE IN COUPUANCE IIITH OlY (F ~TON STANDARDS. All ~~S or THE DRAINS MUST BE OONSIRUClED AND AI'PRO'fm PRIOR TO tHE FINAl BUIlJlING INSPECD~ APPROVAL PRIVATE DRAINAGE EASEMENT; 1H( ORAINAGE FACRJDES LDCAlED WllHlN THE PRlVAlE EAS£WENTS SHOIIN ON 1H( PLAT SHAll BE OWNED. OPERATrD, AND MAINTAINED BY THE HOIIEOI01I[R'SASSOOA~~ CREAlED fDR THIS PLAT. tHE HOWEOM<IR'S ASSOaATl~ SHAll BE ESTAllJSHED IN AIXDRDANCE 11TH W~GT~ STAlE LAW. . !HE OTY (J' RENTON SHAll HA'o£ THE RIGfT TO ENIDI SAID EASElI£HTS TO R£PAIR ANY llEFIC1EIICES (F tHE DRAINAGE fAC1llTY IN !HE E'o£NT THE OI'/NER(S) IS/ARE NEGlIGENT IN 1H( MAINlENANCE or tHE IlRAINAGE fAC1UTIES. 1H(S[ R£PAIRS SHAlL BE AT THE O\INER'S COST. . . PRIVATE DRAlNA~ fAOUDES/bMPS:. tHE OI'INER(S) or PRlYAlE PROP£RTY .THIN THIS PLAT EIIaJIIIIER£D I01TH ilRNNAGE FAC1llDES REQUIR£D BY PLAT DESIQI, !XMNAI/T DR CONDIT'*. HEREBY CRANT AND ~ TO THE OTY (J' REKTON. A IlUNlCPAl CORPORATI(II. 1H( RIGHT cr ~ABlE ACC!:SS (INGI!ESS AND EGI!ESS) TO EJmR SAID PROPERTY fOR 1H( PURPOSE (J' OIIS£RVING THAT THE OIINER(S) ARE PROPERlY OPERATING NIIlIlAlNTAINING THE DRAINAGE FAC1UDES ~TAINED THEREIN. 1H( OlINER(S)S or SM> PRlVA lE PROPERTY SHAll RETAIN. UPHOlD, PIlOlECT 1H( STDRIIWA lIR IIANAC£MEIIT. D£W:[S, fEATURES. PATHWAys, UIIIT5, AND RESTRICT1CHS. KNOIIN AS flOW ~TRDl BEST IlANAGEllEIIT PRACTICES rBUPSJ, _ON THE DRAINAGE' STUDY NIIl PLANS ON fll£ WITH THE OTY (F RENTON. 1H( OI'INER(S)S (F SAID PRlVAlE PROPERTY ARE RESP!IISIBlE fOR OPERATING. IlAlNTAINING, NIIl REPAIRING 1H( STORIIWAlIR WANAGEJl[HT DE\1CES, fEATURES, PATHWAys, UIIITS, AND RESTR1C1lON5, KNOWN AS flOW ~TRDl BEST WANAC£MEIIT PRACDCES ('BlIPS") ~TAINED ON SAID PRlYAlE PROPERTY AND ARE, HEREBY REQUIRED TO OBTAIN ANY R£OUIREl) PERlliTS OR PERMISSION FROM THE OTY or ~TON PRIOR TO fll!ING, PIPING, CUTTING OR REUO\o1NG 'o£cr!A~ (EXCfPT FOR RruTlNE I.ANllSCAPE IIAINIDIANC!: SlJCi AS LA\I!j _NG) IN OPEN 'o£cr!ATrD IlRAINAG: fAC1llDES (SUCH AS RAIN GARDENS, ETC.) DR PERfORlllNG ANY AlnRATItlIS OR MOOIflCATItlIS TO THE DRAINAGE FACl1lIES AND/DR ~lED flOW PATHS ~TAINED \\\THIN THE PRlVAlE :::=~: n: =~ ~ ~ lANO NIIlIS BINDING ~ THE OYmER(S) (J' SAID PRlYAlE KENNETH R. ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. __ ond~_ 112Dbel341.t~Sli!tc-tfGld" D.SIiDll _1""10-"" "'(lSI)-E-M: ~-=-WfW&C:OrIII it '. I~ J~nnifer T. Henning From: Sent: Kenneth R. Anderson <ken@andersonsurveyors.com> Thursday, August 15, 2013 3:44 PM To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Jennifer, Jennifer T. Henning 'Bill Hughes' RE: Honey Creek View Estates Temp00602.PDF Yes, sheet 3 of 6, restriction note #3 has been added for final submittal. Attached, please find copy of the noted sheet for your review and approval. Again, feel free to contact me if necessary. Thank You, Kenneth R Anderson, PLS President Kenneth R. Anderson & Associates, Inc., PS 1720 South 341st Place, Suite C-4 , Federal Way, WA 98003 (253) 838-1199 Seattle (253) 838-8164 Fax (206) 730-9050 Cell Email: ken@andersonsurveyors.com -----Original Message----- From: Jennifer T. Henning [mailto:Jhenning@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 1:53 PM To: 'ken@andersonsurveyors.com' Cc: Bill Hughes Subject: RE: Honey Creek View Estates Hi Ken, So, the clarifying note regarding construction methods will be on the plat restrictions? . Jennifer -----Original Message---- From: Kenneth R. Anderson [mailto:ken@andersonsurveyors.com] Sent: Thursday, August IS, 2013 12:39 PM To: Jennifer T. Henning Cc: Bill Hughes Subject: Honey Creek View Estates Jennifer, 1 ------------ I am sending attached preliminary copy of Sheet 5 of 6 of the above referenced plat with notes added with regard to the buffer area 10' building set back line for your information and use. Please review for approval legend item 13 together with added requirement note added thereon. This added information will be included with final plat mylar submittal. If there are any questions or concerns, feel free to contact me. Thank You, Kenneth R Anderson, PLS President Kenneth R. Anderson & Associates, Inc., PS 1720 South 341st Place, Suite C-4 Federal Way, WA 98003 (253) 838-1199 Seattle (253) 838-8164 Fax (206) 730-9050 Cell Email: ken@andersonsurveyors.cdm 2 HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTATES A PORllON OF' 1HE S.W. 1/4. Of 1HE s.E. 1/4. SEC. 4. TWP. 23 lit. RNG. 5 Eo. W.M.. art OF' RENltlN. KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON RUIJ-r'IDFF£ tISIIIHD 81' SJH: EIiISJl .....,..,.. ........ QI.i1IAtm JUT CUiIO. """".- HONEY: CREEK PARK VOl... 59, PG. -57 9 S8B'09'J9"E 484.6a'(C} 484.62'(D} SCAlE IN FEET F" 20 10 0 20 SCAlE : ,. -20' ~~~~+=~~~~ I N g ~ '\ I I W· 40 i ~ z , UNPlATIED 4.1!"6SQ.FT. '"""""'" 9 j I ~ IWD' flU" ~ i0 . I~ I'" ~I I I ~~ eJ rill ~~ .. " I 2" I ~ ~ w 0 Il w 0: 2" 3 3,liSSQ.F1. 0Jl13""'" (e) (M) ·(KCAS) ® ~fUlaRO ~fI" ro.R _ t». LS. til. 29261 RIll> AS II>O!iiID I !o N82'2iiB"lr lI!l6lr ...,,; ----l------t 4.34' / S8T4Ii'Dn IfTJJEt I ...... I[SI!IIII_£AlIIIEJIT(PSI) . (lEE1IIlES,!HIT2CF')· I·~ ---------------r'~ I .... .. d~ . 8; -fl--------. II>! I ~ '!J ~ ~'ll -------fJ' G-----i ~ k. g/e . ------'--, . ---;:? . ' -- ® ® @ -~ 'iii I III r--@ SWIoU.-TCSJlI -_ ...... ~ Iii 11 (lEE1IIlE,!HIT2CFi) ---__ -, -""'_ I _.--c----. i .. muo:£AlIIIEJIT(lU) fWM) Il0l11 ~ 2-1!r S8n74B1:" <:::--==--->ow ! II @ (lEE IIIlE 1~ !HIT 2 CF 6) 1«1/ PIPE FU£D 1I1lH CD«:. 871·.30"(11) 871 ---.!!. I ~ wjlROl PIlI II Q'IIltJU£ IF lIE N E S .2Ii"(SI! 900) -__ __ I. __ @ 10' IIItIlM; S£T """ S.tl£f 1L\Il U NSE -~ --', (lEE --IIIIllN) \1SIlIDll/13/2006 (S,E_ REN T BL\ID -", f'OON)lIOIl1~2-1!r TON ISS Vi fRUjPIPEFllEDDlHIDIC. ( AQU AH • •• PillIlCEJIlERUN[ IF SR-9QO) RD.) _, 1lES.tl£fILW. 1()" BUIIDtNG SET BACK REOOIRFWFHT NOJ[- LEGeIO IIDI 13. RElAllNG TO BUFFER /.REA 10' BUIIlIHG ~ BAOI RECiU1REIiENT. COUlD BE RfIlUCE) TO ZERO ACCORDING YI11H REOUIREMDITS ~ FORTH IN BERGQU£ST GEOlECHNICAl ENGINEERING REPORT 1200J301-2, OlllED 8-14-201:1. LUAl3-000703 1..ND--1 ()--()4.4.4 " . \1SIllD 10/18/2006 KENNETH R. ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ---""""""'-mo ScaSt lad "-. ~ C-\ r.tsd IibJ, rA BILl ~ (25l) m-ue Fcc (25,1) m-mM £-tl;:t:i;!;I:bds +UII:III DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Rick, PLANNiNGIBUILDINGI PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM October 23,2007 Rick Moreno Jill Ding Honey Creek View Estates I have reviewed the submitted landscape plan and have the following comments: 1. The proposed 10-foot landscape buffer along Sunset Blvd, shall extend all the way to the sidewalk. The landscaping regulations state that a minimum 10-foot landscape strip shall be provided along arterials, provided that if there is . additional right-of-way in excess of 10 feet then that also shall be landscaped. 2. A minimum 5-foot wide landscape strip is required along the new internal road, the landscape plan shall be revised to include the 5-foot strip. . 3. A fencing and signage detail for the NGPE (Tract B) shall be submitted for review and approval. h:\ced\planning\current planning\zarchive\older projects 2001-2007\2005 projects\05-118.jili\cons~ction permit I.doc \ ~ .. Jennifer T. Hennins From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: .Hi Jennifer, kUhlfam4@comcast.net Thursday, August 15, 2013 8:26 PM Jennifer T. Henning bill@hugheshomes.com Re: 5' landscape strip Renton. pdf Please see the attached sketch. It's not cad, but I think you can see the idea. ;) Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Leanne Kuhlman 253-335-9669 cell From: "Leanne Kuhlman" <Ieanne.kuhlman@esmcivil.com> . To: kuhlfam4@comcast.net Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 8:15:13 AM Subject: FW: from: BiII'Hughes [mailto:bill@hugheshomes.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 8:09 PM To: Leanne Kuhlman Cc: 'Jennifer T. Henning' Subject: Hi Leanne, It was good to talk to you again this afternoon, I have attached a simple plat map showing where this 5 ft of landscape will be placed. If you can prepare a Typical 10 ft section drawing Using plants similar to what you called out in the landscape areas along Sunset Blvd (that really turned out looking great) (I will send you a picture or 2 of that area) remember each lot will have 2, 2" caliper trees so this area (5 Ft strip) does not need any trees just shrubs and ground cover. I know your computeris down at this time so I think Jennifer would accept a hand drawn drawing . For now, then follow that up with a more formal drawing when your computer is back on line. Please send me the typical 10 foot drawing as well as to Jennifer Henning just as soon as you can .. Thanks I do know this is very last minute THANKS whh Bill Hughes W H Hughes Co Inc 14401 Issaquah Hobart rd SE Issaquah WA 98027 Cell: 425-444·3367 Office: 425·392-4144 . Fax: 425·392-4391 www.hugheshtimes.com bill@hugheshomes.com \ 1 ';1 "I HABITAT TECHlNOLOGmeS I 'I -'I /1 -I :1 -I --I I -I I , -~I I 'I ,/1 ;1 ':1 I WETLAND AND DRAINAGE CORRIDOR EVALUATION AND DELINEATION REPORT PARCEL 0423059090 COTY Of RENTON, WASHINGTON prepared for Mr. Phil Kitzes FE PK Enterprises 23035 SO,lI.IItheast 263rd Street Maple Valley, Washungton 98038 prepared by IliABITAT TECHNOLOGIES P.O. Box 1088 PLllyaU~lUIp,Washington 98371-1088 253a 845-5119 September 23, 2005 wetlslIl1Ids, streams, fisheries, wildlife -moiigatioB1l andlpell'B1l'llittingsoh,lItions fI.O. Box 1088, fluyalHlUlp, Washil'olgton 983711 woiice 253-845-511119 fa~ 253-8411-1l942 lhlalbofi:altteclln@cuwestl:.Dllet II I TABLE Of CONTENTS I ·INTRODUCTION ............................................................................ ~ .•............ ~; .................. · ............... 1, STUDY PURPOSE ...................................................................................................................... 1 I PROJECT SITE DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................. 1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ................. ; .................................................................................. 2 . . I NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY .......................................................................................... 2 STATE OF WASHINGTON STREAM CATALOG ........................ : .............................................. 2 KING COUNTY INVENTORY MAPPING ........................................................................ ;: .......... 2 'SOILS MAPPiNG ..... : ............................................... ; ................. · ......... : ........................ : ................ 2 I WASHINGTON STATE NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM ...................................................... 2 CITY OF RENTON INVENTORY MAPPiNG ............................................................................... 3 ONS~TE ANAL ySIS .......... : .......................................... ; .. ; ................................................................ 3 I CRITERIA FOR WETLAND AND STREAM IDENTIFICATION : ................................................. 3 STUDY METHODS ..................... ; .......... : ..................................................................................... 4 I FIELD OBSERVATION ......................................................... , ...................................................... 4 Soils ..................................... : ................ : ................ , .................................................................. '4 Hydrology ........................................... , ................. : ................................................... : .............. 4 Vegetation ............................................................ ; .................. ~: ........... : ............ : ..................... -5 I WETLAND AND DRAINAGE CORRIDOR DETERMINATION ...... : ............................................... 6 WETLAND FUNCTION AND VALUE ASSESSMENT ............... : ....................................... : ........... 7 I ONSITE WETLAND VALUATION .... ; .......................... , ................ : .............................................. 8 WilDLIFE 'OBSERVATIONS ............................................................................................................ 9 I . MOVEMENT CORRIDORS ........................................................................................................ 10 STATE PRIORITY SPECiES ..................................................................................................... 10· FEDERALLY LISTED SPECiES ............................................................... ~, ................. : ............. 11 I . REGULATORY CONSIDERATION ............................................. :: ................................................. 111 U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS -SECTION 404 ............... ; ............................................... 11 ... STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGy ..................... : ...................... : ....... 12 rl ~ CITY OF RENTON TITLE 4 -DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ...................... ; ............................... 12 . Wetland Categories ..............................................................................• , ............................... 13 Nonregulated Wetlands ..................................... : ........................................................ .-.......... 14 I Wetland Buffers ................................................... : ........................... ~, ..................................... 14 Stream Classification System ........................ .-....................................................................... 14 Stream Buffers ... : .......... ~ ......................................... ~ .... .-......................................................... 15 :1 SELECTED DEVELOPMENT ACTION ..... , .................................................... : ................... ~ ............ 1I5 FiGURES ....................................................................................................................................... 16 I REFERENCE LIST .................... ; ............................ , .... ; .................................................................. 17 APPENDIX A -FIELD DATA FORMS ....................................................... ; ............... ; .................. 18. I' APPENDIX B -WETLAND RATING fORMS ............ ; ............... ; ................................................. 19 An ACHMENTS .......................................... : ................................................................................. 20 I 1 I, I I' I' I I I: I I. I: I I II' ( . I: 'I I I, I.: I STANDARD OF CARE This wetland and drainage corridor evaluation and delineation report has been completed by Habitat Technologies for use by PK Enterprises. Prior to extensive site . planning, this document should be'reviewed and the wetland'and drainage corridor· boundaries, wetland and drainage corridor classifications, wetland and drain~ge corridor ratings, and proposed protective buffers should be reviewed and verified by the City of Renton and potentially other resource and permitting agencies. Habitat Technologies has provided professional services that are hi accordance with the degree ofcare and skill generally accepted in the nature of the work accomplished. No other warranties • . are expressed or implied. Habitat Technologies is not responsible for design costs incurred before this document is approved by the appropriate resource and permitting _ . agencies. B'rYan W. Peck w.,.~tland BiOI09ist~ ~ , . -ill."~ ~0 . . Thomas D. Deming . Certified Professional Wetland Scientist ----~~~---.---~.~- II I I I I I I I I I I I ;1 !I I ',1 II ,I I !NlTRODUCTION This report details the culmination of activities and onsite evaluations undertaken to complete a wetland and drainage corridor evaluation as an element of the planning of the approximately 1.80-acre project site (parcel 0423059(90) located at 3524 Northeast Sunset Boulevard, City of Renton, Washington (part of Section 05, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M.) (Figure 1). Thft evaluation and delineation of onsite and adjacent wetlands and drainage corridors is a vital element in the planning and selection or a site development action. The goal of this approach is to ensure that planned site development does not result in adverse environmental impacts to wetland areas. STUDY PURPOSE This purpose of this document is to present the results of an onsite assessment and evaluation of wetlands and drainage corridors within and immediately adjacent to the project site following the methods and procedures defined in the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (1987 Manual), the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Wash Manual), and City of Renton Title 4~. · Development Regulations. Drainage corridors were also assessed and identified in · accordance with the criteria established by the City of Renton and the State of Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Forest Practice Rules (WAC 222-16-030). This study was designed to accommodate site planning'and potential regulatory actions. This report is suitable for'submittal to federal, state, and local · authorities for wetland boundary verification and permitting actions. '. PROJECT SITE DESCRIPTION · The project site was approximately 1.80 acres in size and composed of an existing parcel. The project site had undergone prior land use manipulations to include forest harvest, clearing, grading, fencing, development of an onsite single-family homesite, culvert installation, internal and external road'and utility corridor construction, and the · development of adjacent parcels. The project site was moderately to steeply sloped . generally to the northeast and exhibited a mixed forest plant community composed of ,mature Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesil)"Western hemlock (Tsuga heterophyl/a), Western red cedar (Thuja plicata), black cottonwood (Populus trlchocarpa), big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), and red alder (Alnus rubra). · A well-defined drainage corridor was identified within the northeastern' portion of the 'project site. A well-develop'ed public utility corridor was also located along the northern , edge of this drainage corridor. Two, small hillside seep areas were identified in the far ~astern portion of the project site within a moderately sloped area adjacent to the drainage corridor. 1 Kitzes 05113 I I I I I I'. I 'I I I I I ,I I. I' I .1 I I BACKGROIUNDINfORMATION' NAT~ONAl WETLAND INVENTORY The National Wetland .Inventory (NWI) mapping completed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife ' Service was reviewed as a part of this assessment. This mapping resource identified' a drainage corridor crossing through the northeastern portion of the project site (Figure 2). This drainage corridor was defined as riverine, upper perennial, unconsolidated bottom, permanently flooded (R3UBH). This mapping resource failed to identify any wetlands within or adjacent to the project site.' . STATE OIF WASHINGTON STREAM CATALOG . The State of Washington Department of Fisheries Stream Catalog was reviewed as a' part of this assessment. This mapping resource identified Honey Dew Creek within the northern portion of the project site (Figure 3). Honey Dew Creek was not identified to . . provide habitats for salmonid fish species within the area of the project site. Honey Dew 'Creek was further identified to generally f1Qw to the northwest and become an eventually tributary to May Creek. KING COUNTY ~NVIENTORY MAPPING The King County mapping was reviewed as a part of this assessment. This mapping · resource generally identified Honey Creek in the northern portion of the project site .(Figure 4). Honey Creek is located in the same area as.Honey Dew Creek noted within the WDFW mapping above. Honey Creek is defined by King County as a Class 2 · Stream without salmonids. King County noted that this stream exhibited perennial flow and does not provide habitats suitable for salmonid fish species. SO~LS MAIPIPBNG The soil mapping inventory completed by the Soils Conservation Service was reviewed 'a~ a part of this assessment. This mapping resource identified the ,soil throughout the' southern portion of the project site as Argents,'Aldervitood material (AmC). The '. Argents, Alderwood'-material is defined as moderately well drained'and is not listed as · ~hydric." This mapping resource also identified Alderwood gravelly sandy loam (AgD) in the northern portion of the project site. The Alderwood soil series is defined as moderately well drained, formed in glacial till, and is not listed as "hydric" (Figure 5). ·WASIHUNGTON STATE NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM The Washington State Natur;,31 Heritage Program was reviewed as a part of this . ~ssessment. This resource failed to identify any high quality, undisturbed wetland or a . 2 Kitzes 05113 .1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I: I I I' I I wetland that supports state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species within the Section/Township/Range of the project site .. . C~TV Of RENTON INVENTORY MAPPHNG The City of Renton mapping was reviewed as a part of this assessment. This mapping resource generally identified Honey Creek in the northern portion of the project site (Figur~ 6). Honey Creek is defined by the City of Renton as a Class 3 Stream. OINISITE ANALYSIS CROTERDA fOR WETLAND AND STREAM a[)IENTBFICAT~ON . Wetlands are transitional· areas between aquatic and upland habitats. In general terms, wetlands are lands where the extent and duration of saturation with watE;!r is the primary factor determining the nature of soil development and the types of plant and animi=ll communities living in the soil and on its surface (Cowardin, et aI., 1979). Wetlands are generally defined within land use regulations as "areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and thafunder . normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions" (1987.Manual). Wetlands exhibit three essential characteristics, all of which must be present for an area to meet the established criteria within the Wash. Manual and the 1987 Manual. These essential characteristics are: 11. HydlroplhJytfic Vegetation: A predominance of plants that are typically adapted for life in saturated soils. 2. lHIydric SOB~: A soil that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper horizons. 3. Wetland lHIydlrology: Permanent or periodic inundation, or soil·saturation to the surface, at least seasonally. A.stream is generaHy-defined as a location where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed. A defined channel or bed is typically an area which demonstrates clear evidence of the passage of water and includes, but not limited to, bedrock channels,' gravel beds, sand and silt beds, and defined channel swales. A stream need not contain water year-round. A stream typically does not include irrigation ditches, canals, storm or surface water run-off devices, or other artificial watercourses unless the . 00 constructed watercourse conveys a stream which naturally occurred prior to the construction of such watercourse. 0 3 Kitzes 05113 ,I I ,I I I I I I I . ~ I I I I I I I: I I I STUDY METIHIODS Habitat Technologies completed a series of site visits between April and May 2005. The objective of this evaluation was to define and delineate potential wetland and drainage areas that may be present within the project area. Boundaries between wetland and non-wetland areas were established by examining the transitional gradient betWeen wetland criteria along a number of east to west transects through' the site. IN addition, the ordinary high water mark was identified for the small stream in the northeastern portion of the project site. Onsite activities were completed in accordance with criteria and procedures established in the 1987 Manual, the Wash. Manual, City of Renton TitieA -Development Regulations, and the WDNR Forest Practice Rules. Delineation was performed using the routine methodology for areas smaller than five acres as detailed in the 1987 Manual. Field data sheets are provided in Appendix A and sample plot locations are noted in the Attachments. FIELD OBSERVATION .. The project site was accessed via Northeast Sunset Boulevard. The project site contained an existing single-family homesite and a mixed upland forest community. The project site had undergone prior land use manipulations to include forest harvest, . clearing, grading, fencing, development of an onsite single-family homesite, culvert installation, internal and external road and utility corridor construction, and the development of adjacent parcels. A well-defined drainage corridor was identified within the northeastern portion of the project site. A well-developed public utility corridor was also located along the northern edge of this drainage corridor. Souls As documented atsample plots the majority of the project site was dominated by soil that exhibited a gravelly sandy loam to rocky sandy loam texture and coloration typical of the Alderwood soil series. The majority ofthe onsite soil appeared to drain moderately well and did not exhibit prominent redoximorphic features . . Within the hillside Seep areas identified in the far eastern portion 0.1 the project site the soil exhibited a highly organic to gravelly, silty loam texture. The surface soil toa depth of 10 to 16 inches was black (1 OYR 2/1). The subsoil to a depth of 24 inches was gray (10YR 4/1) .. In addition, the subsoil exhibited prominent redoximorphic features (i.e. soil mottles) and oxidized root channels. The soil within these small hillside seep areas' exhibited field characteristics typical of hydric soil. Hydrology Onsite hydrology appeared to be the result of seasonal storm water runoff from onsite, adjacent properties, roadside ditches, and soil characteristics. The majority of the project site appeared to drain moderately well and did not exhibit field indicators associated with the movement of seasonal surface water runoff. 4 Kitzes 05113 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ,. , I I A well defined drainage corridor was identified crossing through the northeastern portion of the project site and to continue offsite to the northwest This drainage corridor was identified by WFDW, King County, and City of Renton mapping as Honey Creek (Honey Dew Creek). Honey Creek was noted as a tributary to May Creek. Both King County and the City of Renton have identified this creek as a Class 3 Stream. WDFW had also identified that the portion of the stream adjacent to the pr9ject site did not provide habitats for salmonid fish. Two hillside seeps were identified in the far eastern portion of the project site. These hillside seeps appeared to remain ponded/saturated through at least the earJyportion of the growing season. Surface water from these seeps entered Honey Creek. ' Vegetation The site exhibited a mixed forest plant community which had been altered by prior land use actions. Observed tree species included Douglas fir, Western red cedar, Western hemlock, big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), red alder (A/nus rubra), black Cottonwood, cherry (Prunus spp.), and cascara (Rhamnus purshiana). The understory was dominated by a wide variety of shrubs and herbs which included Himalayan . blackberry (Rubus procera), evergreen blackberry (Rubus laciniatus), Pacific blackberry (Rubus ursinus), rose (Rosa spp.), Indian plum (Oem/eriacerasiformis); vine maple. (Acer circinatum), hazelnut (Cory/us cornuta), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), Pacific red elderberry (Sambucus raCet1lOsa), blue elderberry (Sambucus nigra), red huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifo/ium)"snowberry (Symphoricarpus a/bus), Oregon grape (Berberis nervosa and Berberis aquifolium), salal (Gaultheria shallon), sword fern (Polystictwm munitum), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilium), nettle (Urtica dioica), bleeding heart (Dicentra formosa), geranium (GeraniLJm spp.), and false lily of the valley' (Maianthemum dilatatum). This plant community was identified as non-hydrophytic in character (i.e. typical of uplands).' , The plant communities within the hillside seeps in the far eastern portion of the project site exhibited a plant community of trees, shrubs, grasses, and herbs more commonly associated with seasonally damp to saturated soils. Observed species included sapling red alder, salmonberry, reed canarygrass (Pha/aris arundinacea), common lady fern (Athyrium filix-femina), slough sedge (Carex obnupta), water parsley (Oenanthe sarmentosa), speedwell (Veronica scutellata), and buttercup (Ranunculus repens). This 'pl~nt community was identified as hydrophytic in character (i.e. typical of wetlands). 5) Kitzes 05113 I I I I I I I I I I' I ~I I I I I I I I WETLAND AND DIRA~NAGE CORRIDOR DETERM~N1ATION Wetland determination was based,on sample plots which contained hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology in accordance with the 1987 Manual and the Wash. Manual. Based on these methods one (1) area within the project site was identified to exhibit all three of the established wetland criteria. One (1) 'area within the project site was identified to exhibit characteristics of a stream.' ' Wetland CUassification City of Renton Function and' City of Renion ' (USFWS) Category , Value Ratong Buffer Width AlB PSSE ,3 low ' 25 feet Wetland AlB: Wetland AlB was .initially flagged as two independent wetl~nds: However, onsite assessment determined that these two areas were actually a single wetland,area. Wetland AlB was located in the far eastern portion of the project site in a steeply sloped area adjacent to Honey Dew Creek. This wetland appeared to have, undergone prior forest harvest and clearing. This wetland was dominated by thickets of , s~rubs and herbs. Wetland hydrology appeared provided by the hillside seepage, from seasonal drainage upslope, and from soils ch~uacteristics.Wetland AlB appeared to remain saturated to the surface following seasonal storm events and to remain ' saturated to the surface into at least the early summer. . . . . Wetland AlB met the u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) criteria for classifications of palustrine, scrub-shrub, seasonally flooded/saturated (PSSE). This wetland was, further identified to meet the criteria for designation as City of Renton Category 3 Wetlands. This wetland achieved a total functions score of 23 points (each) utilizing the, Department of Ecology Wetland Rating Form for Western Washington (Appendix B). As ,such, this wetland would be defined as Category 4 Wetlands using the WDOE wetland rating system. Onsile Stream: The drainage corridor identified crossing through the northeastern portion of the project site had previously been identified by the WDFW as Honey Dew 'Creek. In addition, both King Couilty and the City of Renton referred to this drainage Corridor as Honey Creek. This drainage corridor was located within a well qefined channel and was mapped as a tributary to May Creek, a tributary to Lake Washington. ,Along the project site this stream exhibited a low flow channel width ranging from approximately two (2) feet to 'areas of approximately sevelJ (7) feet. The channel was ,dominated by riffle and shallow glide areas along with a very few, SCour pools associated with in stream debris and large boulders. Channel substrate ranged from scattered pockets of small' fines to sections of cobblellarge rock. Along much of the channel the banks were unstable and exhibited areas of active erosion and slides. A public utility corridor and associated maintenance roadway dominated by northern side of this drainage corridor. ' 6 Kitzes 05113 .,1, I ·1 I I I I .. I I I I I I·.· I I······ I I I I The City of Renton has documented Honey Creek as a Class 3 Stream within the project site. This stream appeared to exhibit perennial flow and has not been documented to provide habitats for salmonid fish. King County has also identified this section of Honey Creek as a Class 3 Stream. " WETLAND FUNCTION AND VALUE ASSESSMENT Wetlands are known to perform significant roles ·jnthe ecosystem, some of which are of immediate value to society. These roles vary greatly with the size, type, hydrology, . vegetation, and location of wetland areas. Although the ecological functions performed by these wetlands are complex, interrelated, and difficultto assess and quantify, methods have been developed for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Adamus et al. 1987: Reppert et al. 1979). The functions provided by wetlands include hydrologic support, shoreline protection, storm water and floodwater storage, waterquality, groundwater recharge, and provision of wildlife habitat. The HYDROLOGIC SUPPORT FUNCTBON is defined by the measure of hydrologic stability and environmental integrity that the wetland provides. This function is measured by the frequency of inundation and saturation by tidal actions, stream flow, runoff, and' precipitation. Wetlands permanently inundated or saturated, or intertidal wetlands are valued as high. Medium valued wetlands are seasonally flooded or are open water systems that remain saturated during most of the growing season. Wetlands that are intermittently flooded or hydrologically isolated are considered of low value . . ' The SHORELINE PROTECTION FUNCTION is defined by the measure of shielding froin wave action, erosion, or storm damage that a wetland provides. This function is measured by the location and width of the wetland along shoreline areas, types of vegetation present, and the extent of development along the shoreline. A high value is given to wetlands along a shoreline that have a width greater than 200 yards and dense woody vegetation. A medium value is given to a wetland with a width of 100 to 200 yards, sparse woody vegetation, and dense emergent vegetation. Wetlands less than 100 yards in width and emergent or lacking vegetation are considered of low value. The STORMWATER AND fLOODWATER STORAGE FUNCTION is defined by , the ability ota wetland to store water and. retard flow during periods of flood or storm discharge. Wetlands of larger size are generally considered to have greater ability to provide this function. In addition, wetlands nearer to urban or potentially develop-able areas are also considered,to provide greater flood protections than wetlands that are in undeveloped areas. 1 Kitzes 05113 .1. I I I I I I I I I: I I I 1 I I I I I' The WATER. QUALITY FUNCTION is defined by the physical, biological, and chemical processes which wetlands provide to' naturally purify water. This function removes organic and mineral particulates through natural filtration. In general, wetlands of greater size, more dense vegetation, and those that are close to point sources of pollution are considered to be of higher value. Wetlands that are sma!! «5 acres), lacking dense vegetation, and not close to point or non-point sources of pollution are considered of low value. The GROUNDWATER RECHARGE fUNCTION is defined by the interaction of. the underlying geology and soils, and the .surface topography. "This function provides for the movement of surface water into groundwater systems. Important to this function is wetland size, period of ,inundation, and depth of standing water within the wetland. High value is given to permanently inundated wetlands greater than 1 0 acres in size. Medium value is given to wetlands that are seasonally flooded and 5 to 1'0 acres is size. Wetlands less than 5 acres in size, isolated, and temporarily satur~ted are considered of low value. The NA lURAL BBOlOGICAl fUNCTION is defined by the complexity of physical habitats and biological species within the wetland area. The value given to a wetland depends upon its ability to provide habitat for nesting (spawning), , incubation, feeding, rearing, and cover of aquatic and terrestrial animal and fish species. In addition, the ability of a wetland to provide support for varying food chains is an important element in value assessment. Wetlands of high species , . diversity, three or-more habitat types, unique habitat features, large in size, and associated -with a permanent stream or tidal marsh is considered of high value. Wetlands with moderate species diversity, two habitat types, moderate in size, and associated with an intermittent stream or high salt marsh are considered of medium value. A low value is given to wetlands of low species diversity, small size, and isolated. These six functions are rated low, moderate, or high, based on the criteria outlined above. These criteria are guidelines compiled from Adamus (1987) and Reppert (1979) and professional judgment must be exercised in assessing thesecriteria~ Overall , values for a wetland are assigned, based on 'a synthesis of individual values. In ' , addition to intrinsic functions,extrinsic funCtions are also recognized. These extrinsic , functions provide social values that have indirect benefits to wetlands. , Education and , recreationa!' opportu-n-ities are most often mentioned as extrinsic functions. Associated v(:llues are often in the eye of the beholder and are thus difficult to 'evaluate. As such, these functions are not rated, but are nonetheless important when considering creation, restoration, or enhancement projects. ONSITE WETLAND VALUATION, Wetland AlB was evaluated following ~he functional value assessment process noted above and identified to exhibit an overall low functional value. 8 Kitzes 05113 ·1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I: I , < I I I , . I '" Water QlUlaUniy and Hydrologic SlUlpport (Iow)-This wetland appeared to have a combined area less than 3,000 square feet in size and had been modified by prior land use actions. This wetland appeared to retain less than 10% of the runoff which occurred within the local area and exhibited a vegetation density less than 60%. The primary water quality benefit provided by this wetland included the biofiltration of surface storm water from onsite and offsite areas. 6} Storm water Storage and GrolUlndwCiter Recharge (Iow)~ This wetland appeared to have a combined area less than 3,000 square feet in size and had been modified by prior land use actions. Because of the steep nature of the slope a limited amount of storm water from onsite and offsite appeared to be retained onsite, however, these wetlands were hydrologically connected to a drainage corridor. This wetland appeared to provide base flow support Honey Greek . ., Natural Biologocal FlUlnciioD"ll (Iow)-This wetland had been modified by prior land use actions and exhibited a limited range of plant diversity and vegetation complexity. This wetland was associated with a riparian corridor . along a stream that exhibited a moderate amount of unique habitat features. WILDLifE OBSER.VATIONS The onsite assessment of wildlife species presence was also completed as a part of the onsite assessment of wetland and drainage corridor characteristics. Onsite activities documented observations of individual species presence, the general location of the species sighting, and the life history activity being undertaken. For many of t,he smaller, less mobile species (Le. small mammals, amphibians) the project site may provide all of their life history requirements (nesting, cover, feeding, and reproduction) while for the more mobile species (Le. waterfowl, songbirds, medium sized mammals) the project site may be used for onlya few of the life history requirements. These more mobile species may depend more upon adjacent habitat for more critical habitat' needs such as nesting and cover from predators. It is unlikely based up'on the existing site conditions, coupled With adjacent land uses, that speCies which require large a(eas of undisturbed habitat would exist onsite. -'< • Onsite assessment was completed during April and May 2005. In addition, Habitat Technologies had completed prior site assessments within the surrounding area. Based on the plant communities, directly observations, and observations within adjacent parcels avian species that were observed -or that would be expected within the project site-included the.bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), tree swallow (Tachycineta bicolor), violet green swallow (Tachycineta thallassina), bam swallow (Hirundo rustica), brown creeper (Certhia familiaris)~ song sparrow (Melospiza melodia), American crow (CorVus brachynchos), American robin (Turdus migratorius),dark eyed junco (Juri~o 9 Kitzes 05113 I I I I I I II I I I I I I' I: I I I I I' hyemalis), Steller's jay (Cyanoeittastellert), starling (Stutnus vulgaris), black capped chickadee (Parus atrieapillus), Northern flicker (Colaptes auratus), hairy woodpecker (Pieoides villosus), pileated woodpecker (Dryoeopus pileatus), red tailed hawk (Buteo jamaieensis), great homed owl (Bubo virginianus), band-tailed pigeon (Columba ' faseiata), great blue heron (Ardea herodias), red'winged blackbird (Agelaius . phoenisues), marsh wren (Cistothorus palustirs), house sparrow (Passer domestieus), rock dove (Columbia livia), mourning dove (Zenaida maeroura), Western screech owl (Otus kennicottl), American goldfinch (Carduelis tristis), common snipe (Gallinago gallinago), killdeer (Charadrius vociferus), common mallard (Anas platyrhynehos), wood duck (Aix sponsa), and. Canadian goose (Branta canadensis). The majority of these . avian species would be expected, to feed throughout the drainage corridor and . surrounding area. Many of these species would also be expected to nest within the habitats provided by the project site. Mammal species observed (directly or indirectly) or expected within the project site would include black tailed deer (Odocoi/eus hemionus),' coyote (Canis latrans), raccoon (Procyon lotor), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), opossum (Didelphis virginianus), mountain beaver (Aplodontia rufa), eastern cottontail (Sylvi/agus f1oridanus), eastern ,gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), Townsend Chipmunk (Eutamias townsendt), Townsend mole (Scapanus townsendit), deer mouse (Peromyscus manieulatus), shrew (Sorex spp.), and bats (Myotis spp.). The project site would also provide habitats for Pacific treefrog (Hyla regilla), roughskin newt (Taricha granulosa), and common garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis). The drainage corridor within the northeastern portion of the project site (Honey Creek) has been noted by the WDFW as not providing direct habitats for salmonid species. No specific fish population assessment was completed as a part of this study. MOVEMENT CORRIDORS As identified by onsite wildlife trials, small, medium, and large mammals'appeared to be moving throughout the project site. The majority. of this movement was identified along . the riparian corridor assoCiated with Honey Creek. STATE PRIOR.ITY SPECOES .: A variety of species identified by the State of Washington as "Priority Species" were' ; observed onsite or pptentially may utilize the project site. The majority of these species are identified as "game species" and are regulated by the State of Washington through recreational hunting bag limits, harvest seasons, and harvest area restrictions. These species include mourning dove, band tailed pigeon, common mallard, wood duck, Canada goose, black tailed deer, and coyote. 10 Kitzes 05113 I I I I I I I I, I I I I I I I I I:' I I A few "State Candidate" or "State Monitored~' species were observed, or potentially could utilize the project site. State Candidate species are presently under review by the State of Washington Department of Fish' and Wildlife' (WDFW) for possible listing as endangered, threatened, or sensitive. A single State Candidate species -pileated , woodpecker -was noied feeding within the project site. However, no nesting 'areas were observed onsite for this species. ' " State Monitored species that are native to Washington but require habitat that has limited availability, are in,dicators of environmental quality, require further assessment, ' have unresolved taxonomy, may be competing with other species of concern, or have significant popular appeal. A single State Monitored species -great blue heron -may potentially utilize the project site for limited feeding. No nesting areas were obserVed onsite or within the adjacent vicinity for this $pecies. FEDERAllY lUSTED SPECIES No Federal Threatened endangered or threatened species, or critical habitats for such Ii,sted species, were observed within the project site. However, a single listed threatened species -bald eagle, Haliaeetus /eucocepha/us -has been identified along the shoreline Of Lake Washington located offsite to the west. As such, this species may occasional overfly the area of the project site. , ' , In addition, May Creek and Lake Washington downstream of the project site provide habitats for Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshaqytscha) -a federally listed threatened species. REGULATORY CONS~DERATION', The proposed alteration of lands defined by various federal, state, and local authority , 'rules and regulations as "wetlands" raises environmental concerns that are generally acjdressed ,in the development review process. These concerns center on the development's potential adverse impacts to the !)tructure, function, value, and size of these "wetland" areas. Such adverse'impacts may include: a reduction in wildlife habitats, reduced surface water quality, reduced water retention, a reduced ground '!IIater recharge rate, reduced'plant species diversity, and the reduction in the function and value of other associated wetland and non-wetland characteristics. , ' . !U.s. ARMY CORPS OF IENiGONEIERS -Section 404 Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) prohibits the discharge of dredged or fillmaterial into "Waters of the United States" without a permit from the Corps of Engineers (Corps). The Corps has jurisdiction over freshwater systems waterward froin the ordinary high water line of a water body or waterward from the upland boundary of 11 Kitzes 05113 .1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '. . the adjacent wetland. 'The definition of fill materials includes~the replacement of aquatic areas with dry land, grading which changes ·the surface contour of a wetland, and mechanized land clearing in wetlands. For the purposes of Section 404 permitting the Corps makes the final determination as to whether an area meets the wetland definition and would be subject to regulation under the Corps program. Applications to the Corps for permitting actions must follow the 1987 Manual wetland delineation format. Currently the Corps has two specific types of permits which apply to wetland fill proposals. These two types are a series of specific Nationwide Permits and the IndividuaB Permit. The Nationwide Permit process identifies specific categories of work that can be undertaken following a set of specific Conditions applicable to each NationWide Permit number. . . ' , The Corps requires an Individual Permit where a proposed activities within an identified jurisdictional wetland area can not be authorized under one of the Nationwide Permits~ Within the Individual Permit process the Corps undertakes a much more in- depth review of the proposed project and th~ proposed impacts. The Corps must evaluate whether the benefits derived from the project outweigh the foreseeable environmental impacts of the project's completion. All projects that proceed forward Using either one of the Nationwide Permits or the Individual Permit process must also comply with the provisions of the Endangered' Species Act. As defined by a recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions the Corps of Engineers does not typically regulated "isolated" ,wetlands pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Under this decision "isolated" wetlands do not exhibit a continuous surface water connection to other, downstream aquatic system. STATE Of WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT Of ECOLOGY Proposed action undertaken through either of the Corps of Engineers processes (Nationwide, Individual, or isolated) are 'also subject to the provisions of the Washington 'State Department of Ecology Water Quality Certification Process. Projects that may be exempt from Corps of Engineers Section 404 jurisdiction may still require review by the Wa .. shington State Department of Ecology to ensure consistency with State water quality . . , protection provisions~ , CITY OF RENTON nTlE 4 -Deve~opmentRegLII~ations The City of Renton regulates activities within and adjacent to wetlands and stream . cOrridors. As a part of this regulation the City of Renton has established criteria on . which to defined "categories." . '12 Kitzes 05113 . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I' I I I I I WeiDand Categories Category 1 Wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) The presence of species listed by Federal or State government as endangered or threatened, or the presence of essential habitat for those' species; and/or (b) Wetlands having forty percent (40%) to sixty percent (60%) permanent open water (in dispersed patches or otherwise) with two (2) or more vegetation classes; and/or (c) Wetlands equal to or greater than ten (10) acres in size and having three (3) or more vegetation classes, one of which is open water; and/or (d) The presence of plant associations of infrequent occurrence; or at the geographic limits of their occurrence; and/or Category 2 Wetl~Bnds are wetlands which meet.one or more of the following criteria: (a) Wetlands that are not Category 1 or 3 wetlands; and/or (b) Wetlands that have heron rookeries or osprey nests, but are not Category 1 wetlands; and/or (c) Wetlands of any size located at the headwaters of a watercourse, i.e., a wetland with a perennial or seasonal outflow channel, but with no defined influent channel, but are not Category 1 wetlands; and/or (d) Wetlands having minimum existing evidence of human-related physical alteratio~ such as diking, ditching or channelization; and/or Category 3 Wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: " (a) Wetlands that are severely disturbed. Severely disturbed wetlands are wetlands which meet the following criteria: (1) Are characterized by hydrologic isolation, human-related hydrologic alterations such as diking, ditching, channelization and/or outlet modification; and , (2) Have soils alterations such as the presence of fill, soil removal and/or compaction of soils; and (3) May have altered vegetation. (b) Wetlandsrthat are newly emerging. Newly emerging wetlands are: (1) Wetlandsoccuning on top offill materials; and (2) Characterized by emergent vegetation, low plant species richness and used minimally by wildlife. These wetlands 'are generally found in the areas such as the Green River Valley and Black River Drainage Basin. (c) All other wetlands not classified as Category 1 or 2 such as smaller, high quality wetlands. 113, Kitzes 05113 I I I I I I I I I I I I I' , ; I I: I I I I .. . '. Nc:mreglUllated Wetlands Category 3 wetlands less than two thousand two hundred (2,200) square feet in area are exempt from these regulations if such wetlands meet the criteria below: (a) The wetland formed on top of fill legally placed on a property; and (b) The wetland hydrology is solely provided by the compaction of the soil and fill material; and . (c) The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has determined that they will not take jurisdiction over the wetland. . Wet~arild Buffers The width of the required wetland buffer zone shall be determined according to the wetland category. The buffer zone required for all regulated wetlands is determined by the classification of the wetland. If standard buffer widths cannot be met,and buffer reductions per subsection.M6e ofthis'Section and buffer.averaging per subsection M6f of this Section cannot be accomplished, a variance to buffer requirements may be requested per subsection N of this Section, Alternates, Modifications and Variances, and RMC 4-9-2508, Variance Procedures. If the criteria in subsection M6d of this . Section are met, standard buffers may be increased: . Wetland Category. Standard Buffer Category 1 Wetland 100 feet Category 2 Wetland 50 feet Category 3 Wetland 25 feet . Stream Classifucation System The City of Renton has adopted the following classification system for the purposes of . regulating streams -and lakes in the City of Renton. Stream and lake buffer widths are • based on the following rating system: . C~ass 1: Class 1 waters are perennial salmonid-bearing waters which are classified by the City 'and State as Shorelines of the State . . Class 2: Class 2 waters are perennial or intermittent salmonid-bearing waters which . meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Mapped on Figure 04, Renton Water Class Map, as Class 2; and/or 114 Kitzes 05113 ·1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I (b) Historically and/or currently known to support salmonids, 'including resident trout, at any stage in the species lifecycle; and/or . (c) Is a water body (e.g., pond, lake) between one.half (0.5) acre and twenty (20) acres in size. Class 3: Class 3 waters are non-salmonid-bearing perennial waters during years of normal rainfall, and/or mapped on Figure Q4, Renton Water Class Map, as Clas~ 3. Class 4: Class 4 waters are non-salmonid-bearing intermittent waters during years of normal rainfall, and/or mapped on Figure Q4, Renton Water Class Map, as Class 4. Class 5: Class 5 waters are non-regulated non-salmonid-bearing waters which nieet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Flow within an artificially constructed channel where no naturally defined channel had previously existed; and/or (b) Are a surficially isolated water body less than one-half (0.5) acre (e.g., pond) not meeting the criteria for a wetland as defined in subsection M of this Section. Stream Buffers Stream Class Standard Buffer Class 2 100 feet Class 3 75 feet Class 4 35 feet SELECTED DEVELOPMENT ACTION The Selected Development Action for parcel 0423059090 project site focuses on the division of the existing parcel to allow for the creation of independent parcels suitable for the development of residential homesites consistent with the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan and local zoning. The Selected Development Action would not require an adverse impact to wetland or stream resources identified within the local area. As a part of the division of this parcel protective wetland and stream buffer areas shall be established consistent with the provisions of City of Renton Title 4. 15 Kitzes 05113 I .1 I . I I I I I I I' I I I I· I I I I I I' F~GUJRES i : , :' 16. Kitzes 05113 , , . ,.' ; I I I I I I I ,I I, I I I I HABITAT TECHNOLOGmES . Figure 1 Sste.V6cinity ; . I ,I I I ·1 I :1 I ~I I I I 1- .. -.:~.:. 'ro'_ , ·'~t . . ~, -: >-" .-\ .... :'.; ... HABITAT. -TECHNOLOGIES . ~.:. ....... ; .. "",. . , ..... , ::~ .. ~" . Figure 2 '.' ;., : ~ ;~. " . '~ NWD Resource Mapping. I I I I I I I I I I· I I I I ... :32 '.< :'\ .. HABITAT TECHNOlOOmES "~.-.-:~ _.' .. 33"'T24-0~'~5-0E : __ : .. ~..:. . ... :--... :,: . -: --""--. .;..' . {\~':'-~':-::-. .. : .... -\ --::-4l:· ." ·L· ... ·\~·::< ···\,;i~··· .. .<. \~~~:iI~_._._ . . ,r. : ,'\.:: .. ~('.: ":.:'r ,', -:';-::.-. legend FigU(l"93 f'I $eleC'.ed Stream o PlSS Townships :':.: PlSS Sections CITIES " Major Cities Cities . • Towns ./ RIVERS . (1 :24,000) DNR Trans 24k· ;V' Paved Road ,v Unpaved Road .! Road Surface ,. Unknown .,' Traa ",;/ Railtoad •• ' Road • Abandoned/Orp- han _ WATER BODIES mrJ (1:24,000) COUNTY WDRN Stream Mapping :-:--: ',.\ I I I I I· I I I I I I I I I· I I ~ Se~Pa_ls , -" Cmlnty BoundaJY StJee1S .~ tl~"l' . .../ ~ i' /'V'. ~ .r-"! ~ Paroels I. HABITAT TECHNOLOG~ES Legend SAO Sllaam Cass2~ C=2&m1crid Cla2la il~ LaKe~ and Lalga R!ivers Figure 4- /1\/ Sbeams m SAOW6tJand King County Mapping' I I I I I I I I ,I: I ':1 I I I I . \, " ... -< . i .. i:-~\ .. ", .. ... ,. o \ .. '··':'.: ... AeC ~~~~~ .. - HABITAT y'ECHNOLOGIES :figur.e 5 soo~ . Mapphi191 " . .t. •. 1 ! ' ", j -+i:~ " . ': "; ! : " I I I I I I I I I I I I I :r) :'~1~ " ~ .~ -:~ I ',. " ~t· ~ :,;. .... :-:-~ __ l .. .. ~~"'~" .:-." ~ " . : HABITAT TEC.HNOLOGIES See Ute detailed nt.:Ip on tile witn L OevelOIJ;.~l Servi~ DiviSion i: for '!he t«allon .of t)lped stre.;IITIS. B (i \. ClaSS2 t ____."'-. Class 3j1 Class 4 j' c:L=~~_____ _.---,---J, fogtUlrre 6 Cotty of Renton Stream Mappong .( , " I I I I -I I I I- I- I I I I I I I I I: I " REFERENCE LIST Adamus, P.R, E.J. Clairain Jr., RD. Smith, and RE. Young. 1987. Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET); Volume II: MethodolOgy, Operational Draft Technical Report Y-87, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Office of Biological SerVices, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, FWS/OBS-79/31. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation. 1989. Federal Manual for . Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S.D.A. Soil . Cpnservation Service, Washington, D.C. Cooperative technical publication.' 76pp. plus appendices. Hitchcock, C.L, A. Cronqoi,st. 1977. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press. Seattle, Washington. Reppert, RT., W. Sigleo, E. Stakhiv, L.. Messman, and C. Meyers. 1979. Wetland Values -Concepts and Methods for Wetland Evaluation. Research Report 79-R1, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources, Fort Belvoir, Virginia. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soils Conservation Service. Soils Survey of King County Area Washington, February 1979. Washington State Department of Fisheries, Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization; Volume 1., 1975. 17 . Kitzes 05113 I'I I I I I I I I . I I· I, I I I I' 'I I I I. 1- APPENDIX A -FIEllO !llAT A FORMS 18 Kitzes 05113 I I -I I I ' I I- I I I I I I I 1- SAMPLE PLOT SPB1 ------------~--- Project/site AppliCant/Owner: DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987_COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) -Parcel (0423059090) Date: 22 APR OS - Investigator: County: King ----------------------------------------------------------State: Washiri!tton Habitat I echnoiogies Have vegetation. soils, or hydrology been disturbed? Is the area a potential PiOblem area? YES NO YES NO Community 10: Tiarisect 10: VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Soecie'" <::tratum Indicator! nominant clant Soec;"s Stratum Indicator ~ v, I ~ I I~ I 1. Pseudotsuga menziesii I T FACU I ! 2. Alnus rubra I T FAC I 1 3. Coryius cornuta S FACU I 1 4. OemiE:)ria cerasiformis S t-ACU I 5. Hedera helix H FACU I 1 6. Polystichum munitum H FACU I 7. I I I I i 8. ! I I I i ! Percent of Dominant species that areOBL. FACW, or 17% FAC (except FAC-). include species noted (*) as shol,ving I morphologicalada~atlonstowetlands ~~ ____________ ~~ ______ ~ ______________________ ~ De~cribe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Southern portion of project site near homesite HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage --__ ,~erial Photograph Other -:'N~o~R~ecorded 'Data Available FIELD OBSERVATiONS: Depth of Surface Water: Depth to Free Water Pit: --Depth to Saturated Soil: None None Remarks: Onsite assessment-during spring 2005 " Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Inundated ----.;,_ Saturated in upper 12" , Water Marks Drift Lines Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Water-Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data Other (Expiain in Remarks) Soil appears to drain well following seasonal storm events Field indicatqrs of wetland hydrology NOT-present ,- I I I I I I Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam Taxonomy (Subgroup) Profile Description: Depth (inches) Horizon 0-2 2-18 Matrix Color. (Munsell MOist) 10YR 3/2 10YR 3/3 Mottie Colors (Munseil Moist) None None . SAMPLE PLOT SPB1 Drainage Class: Moderately well Field Observations Confinn Mapped Type YES N Mottle Texture, Conc(6tic Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. Gravelly loam Gravelly loam I Hydric Soil Indicators: I I I I I I I I I ; I I Histosol .. Concretions ---~-:--Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer -----Sulfidic Odor --___ . Organic Streaking Probab.ie Aquic Moisture Regime --·Usted on Local Hydric Soils List ---ReduCing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List -------Gieyad or Low Chroma Coiors ~__ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: Soil appears to drain moderately weil following seasonal storm events Prominent redoximorphic features NOT present F.ield indicators of hydric soil NOT present WETLAND DETERMINATION· Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soils Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Remarks: YES NO YES NO YES NO WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET is .this Sampling Point within a Wetland? Southern portnon of project site near homesite Area appears to drain mOderately well foUowing seasonal storm events. NO evidence of wetland hydrology patterrns NO I I I I I I I I' I I I I I :1 I I I I I I SAMPLE PLOT SPB2 ----------------- Project/Site Applicant/Owner: DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Parcel (0423059090) Date: 22.APR 05 County: King.. Investigator: --------------------------------~------------~~~-------Habitat Technologies State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO YES .NO Community ID: Transect ID: VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an tt) nominant plant Soecies ~tratum Indicator! nominant Plant Soecies Stratum Indicator ~ ~ ~ 1. . Acer macrophyllum I T FJ~CU i 2. Oemleria cerasiformis S I r:-ACU 3. f Rubus ursinus I S I FACU f I 4. Trillium ovatum H rACU 5. Pol'[stichum munitum H FACU 6. I I 7. I 8. f I I I Percent of Dominant species that are OSL, FACW, or 0% I FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing , morphologicalada~~ionstow~lands __________________ ~ ________________________________ ~ Describe Morphoiogical Adaptations: Remarks: Central portion of project site on slope HYDROLOGY· Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage ----f\erial Photograph --Other ~-::::-No Recorded Data Available FIELD OBSERVATiONS: Depth of Surface Water: Depth to Free Water Pit: None ---Depth to Saturated Soil: None Remarks: Onsite assessment during spring 2005 Wetland Hydrology !ndicators: Inundated Saturated in upper 12" Water Marks Drift Lines Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Water-Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data Other (Explain in Remarks) Soil appears to drain well following seasonal storm events Field indicators of wetland hydrology NOT present ------Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage ,4.erial Photograph ~---Other Inundated Saturated in. upper 12" Water Marks SAMPIL.E PLOT SIPB4 I I-------------------DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINA nON (1987 COE WETlANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) _P_a_r_c_e_1 <_0_4_2_3_05_9_0_9_0""} _________ Date: 22 APR 05 I' I I I Project/Site Applicant/Owner: Investigator: County: King ----------------------------------------------~----------lHIabitat Technologies State: Washington ------------~~~-------------------------- Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO YES NO Community ID: Transect ID: VEGETA nON (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) I I Dominant Plant Species 1. Alnus rubra 2. Acer circinatum 3. Athyri.um filix-femina 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator T FAC S FAC- H FAC -,. I Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC 67% (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing I morphological adaptations to wetlands __ De~cribe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: HiBBside seep in eastern project site I IHIYDROlOGY -I ~ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): _ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage _. Aerial Photograph I : --Other _ No Recorded Data Available I -Depth of SurfaCe Water: Surface FIELD OBSERVATIONS: 1_-Depth to Free Water Pit: Depth to Saturated Soil: Wetland Hydrology Indicators: x -Inundated x Saturated in upper 12" x Water Marks x Drift Lines x Sediment Deposits x Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " x Water-Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data Other (Explain in Remarks) -. 1 __ : Remarks: --OD'llsite assessment dlllring spring 2005 _S~o~iI~a~p~p~e~a~rn~to~d~r~a~in~p~o~o~ri&y~s~e~a~s~o_n~a~8~s~to~nn~-~e~v~e~n~b~· ______________________________ __ fiend indicatorn IOf wetDand hydrology present 1------"""--------- I I Map Unit Name: A1derwood gravelly sandy loam I Taxonomy (Subgroup) Profile Description: Depth (inches) Horizon !I Matrix Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist) , SAMPLE PLOT SPB4 Drainage Class: ' Moderately well Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type YES NO Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions, Rhizospheres, etc. ----------------------------------------------~---------------------------------- I. 0-20 10YR2I2 None Silty loam ---- I- I HydriC Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions ------I __ ' His~ic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor -- ...;.;.x ___ High Organic Content in Surface Layer Organic Streaking ---...;;x~_ Probable Aquic Moisture Regime --.-___ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions -x~-Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Listed on NationalHydric Soils List ----___ Other (Explain in Remarks) I _S~o~D~·B~a~p~pe~a~rn~to~d~r~aH~·n~p~o~o~ri,y~t~o~8Do~w~.~Hn~g~s~e~a~s~o_n~a~~~st~o~nn~_e_ve_n_b~ ______________________ _ Prominent redoximorphic features present II_F_i~e_od_,_in_d_i_c~at~o~~~O~f_h~y~d_r_ic __ s_o_Dl~p_~_e_s_e_n_t _______________ ----------~--------------- I I WETLAND DETIERMINATION HydrophYtlc Vegetation Present? Hydric Soils Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO YES NO YES NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? YES I: _1R~em=a;;;.rk~s;.;: ________________ ........ _________________________________________ _ WETLAND CRITERIA MET I_H~'~iI~~s~fid~e~s~e~e~p~u~n~e~a~s~t~e~rn~p~r~OLje~c~t_s_i~te~ _____________________________ _ Area appears to drain poorly following seasonal storm events. I Evidence of wetland hydrology patterns I, I. I I I SAMPLE PLOT SIP1B5 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERM8NATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) ------------~---- I Project/Site Palrrce~ (04230159090) Date: 22 APR 05 County: King ----------------------------~--------------~~~--------Investigator: Habitat Technologies State: Washington Applicant/Owner: . Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? . YES NO Community ID: Isthe area a potential Problem area? . YES NO Transect 10: VIEGfTATBON (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with. an *) I Dominant Plant Soecies .. Dominant Plant Soecies . Stratum Indicator Stratum Indicator 1. Acer macrophyllum T FACU 2. Acer circinatum S FAC- 3. Sambucus racemosa S FACU 4. Rubus spectabilis S FAC+ 5. Athyrium filix-femina H FAC 6. Polystichum munitum H FACU . ... 7. 8. I Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC 33% (except FAC-). Inc!ude species noted (*) as showing I.· morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: I Remarks~ Eastern pOrrinon of project site adjacent to hillside seep HYDROLOGY I .~ Recorded Data (Describe ~n Rema~ks): . Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage . ----Aerial Photograph Other ----No Recorded Data Available I I FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Depth of Surface Water: I Depth to Free Water Pit: Depth to Saturated Soil: None -----None ---- Wetland Hydrology Indicaton;: Inundated _ Saturated in upper 12" WaterMarks Drift Lines $edim~nt DepOSits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12" Water-Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data Other (Explain in Remarks) I· Remarks: Onsile assessment during spring 2005 Soi~ appea6'S to drain well following seasonal storm events . 1._F_i_e_Ud_i"_d_ic_a_t_o_lI"S_o_f_W_e_tB_a_fI'Il_d_h_Y_d_r_C_IO_g_· Y_N_O_T_p_~_e_s_e_n_t _______________ _ I I I I Map Unit Name: A1derwood gravelly sandy loam I' TaXonomy (Subgroup) Profile Description: I' Depth (inches) I " 0-4 4-18 ' I- Horizon I I Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol --Histic Epipedon --Sulfidic Odor -- !VIatrix Color , (Munsell MOist) 10YR 212 10YR4/3 .,;..-__ Probable Aquic Moisture Regime I Reducing Conditions ---" Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors -- Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist) None None --------- --"!'" --.;... --- SAMPLE PLOT SPB5 Drainage Class: ,Moderately well Field Observations Confirm Mapped Wpe YES NO Mottle' Texture, Concretions Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. Concretions Gravelly sandy loam " Gravelly sandy loam High Organic Content in Surface Layer Organic Streaking Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Listed on National Hydric Soils List Other (Explain in Remarks) I Remarks: SoiD appears to drain moderately weIR fo~lowing seasonal storm events Prominent redoximorphfic features NOT present I field indicatoll"S cf Hydric SOB~ NOT present .~~~~~~-------~--- , WETLAND" (()~TEIRMDNATION I Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hyqric Soils Present? I Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO YES NO YES NO I Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO I _E_a_s_t ..... e_r_lil..ILp_o_rt_i_o_n_o_f....lpL.;..r ..... o.&~e_c ..... t_s_i_te_a ...... dJ=...·a_c_e_n_t_to_h_D_lIs_i_d_9_s __ e_e..ILp _________ _ Area appears to drain moderately weU foUowing seasonal storm events. I_N_O_e_v_i_d_9_n_c_e_o_f_w_e_t_~a_n_d_h.lll.Y_d_Il"O_I_O_=9:.1\,Y....llp ..... a_tt_e_li"_tnl_s ______________ _ I I ' ... I I I I I SAMPLE PLOT SPBS --~~------~----DATA FORIIJi ROUTINE WETlAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAl:.) Parcel (0423059090) Date: 22 APR 05 Project/Site Applicant/Owner: County: King ------------------------~--------------------~----------Investigator: . lHIabomt TechnoDogoes Dominant Plant Soecies Stratum 1. Acer macrophyllum T 2. Rubus spectabilis S 3. Symphoriearpus albus S 4. Geum macrophyllum H 5. Athyrium filix-femina H 6. 7. 8. YES YES NO NO State: Washington Community 10: Transect ID: Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator FACU FAC+ - FACW- FAC I Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW; or FAC 75% (except FAQ-). Include species noted (*) as showing I.' morphological adaptations to wetlands Oescribe'Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Hmside seep in eastern project site I, I I I· I' HYDROLOGY _ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): 'Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage '--__ Aerial Photograph other ~~ No Recorded Data Available FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Depth of Surface Water: Surface Depth to Free Water Pit: Depth to Saturated Soil: Wetland Hydrology Indicators: x Inundated x Saturated in upper 1 ~n x Water Marks x Drift Lines x Sediment Deposits )( Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " x Water-Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data , Other (Explain In Remarks), I ; . Remarks: Onsile assessment during spring 2005 _S __ o_i6_a~p~pe __ a_rs~to __ d~r~a~in~p~o_o_ri~y_s~e~a~s~o_n_a~l~s~to~nm~~e~v~e_n_b ________________________________ __ I Fi~ld Indicators of wetland hydroUog)! present , ----....O-~---------------.;....-----~~-- I I Map Unit Name: A1derwood gravelly sandy loam Taxonomy (Subgroup) _ Profile DesCription: , ( SAMPlEPlOT SPB6 Drainage Class: Moderately well Field Observations ' Confirm Mapped Type YES NO I , Depth (inches) Matrix Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist) Mottle Texture, Concretions I 0-16. 16-20 1- Horizon , 10YR2I2 10YR 4/1 Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol --Histic Epipedon -- ~-Sulfidic Odor I, x Probable Aquic Moisture Regime ...;.;;..- Reducing Conditions ...---, x Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres,etc. None Silty loam None Gravelly sandy loam Concretions ---x High Organic Content in Surface Layer ---Organic Streaking ---Listed on Local Hydric Soils List ---___ Listed on National Hydric Soils List Other (Explain iri'Remarks) --- I Remarks: , Soil appears to drain poorly following seasonal storm events Prominent redoxfimonphic featllJllI'es present 1'_F;;..;i;.;:e~ldI;;;;..;.:in.;.;;d;;.;.ic.;;;.a;;;;,;t;;.;;;o;.;;.rs;;....;;;O;.;;.f.;;.;h;.£Y.;;;;d~ri;.;:C...;;S:;,,;;O;.;;.n;;..,lP!;;.;rr:;,,;;e;.;:s;.;:e~n;.;;.t ____________ ~ ________ _ WETLAND DIETERMUNATBONl I' HydrophyticVegetation Present? , Hydric Soils Present? I,' Wetland Hydrology Present? Remarks: YIES YES YIES NO NO NO I WETLAND CRITERIA MET Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? , I Hillside seep on eastern project site-' Area appears to drain poorly foUowong seasonalsiorm events. I Evidence of weiland hydrology patterns I I' I yes I -SAMPLE PLOT SI?T1 DATA fORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) --------~-------- I Project/Site Applicant/Owner: _P_a_r_c_s_I.l..(O_4 .... 2_3_05_9_0;....9_0.L' _________ Date: 22 APR 05 County: King --------------------------------------------~~----------I I I I I I I I I I I Investigator: Habitat Techno~ogies State: --Washington ~~~~~~~~~~------------------------ Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? -Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO YES NO Community ID: Transect ID: -VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an #) Dominant Plant Soecies Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Soecies Stratum Indicator 1. Pseudotsuga menziesii ' -T FACU - 2. Ainus rubra T FAC 3. . COlylus corn uta S FACU 4. Acer circinatum S FAC- 5. Rubus ursinus S FACU 6. Ribas sanguineum S UPl 7. Geranium robertianum H FACU+ 8. Percent of Dominant species that are OBl, FACW, or FAC 29% (except FAC-). Include speCies noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Northwestern portion of project site HYDROLOGY . -_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): --: Stream, lake, or Tide Gage __ Aerial Photograph Other ~ ....... No ReCorded Data Available FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Depth of Surface Water: Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Inundated' Saturated in upper 12" WaterMarks Drift Lines Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 .. Water-Stained leaves I Depth to Free Water Pit: ~_ : -Depth to saturated Soil: ! , ' None None local Soil Survey Data ----Other (Explain in Remarks) I I I Remarks: -Onsite assessment during-spring 2005 SoDlappears todirain well foHlowung seasonal storm events FieRd indicators of wetlland. hydrology NOT present I I Map Unit Name: A1derwood gravelly sandy loam I Taxonomy (Subgroup)' Profile Description : I Depth (inches) I 0-12 12':'18 1- HOrizon I) Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol I __ Histic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor -- Matrix Color (Munsell Moist) 10YR 3/2 10YR 3/3 _.,...-Probable Aquic Moisture Regime . __ Reducing Conditions __ Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors SAMPlEPLOT SPT1 Drainage Class: Moderately well Field Observations Confirm M~pped Type YES NO Mottle Colors (Munsell MOist) Mottle Texture, Concretions Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. None Gravelly loam None Gravelly loam Concretions ---High Organic Content in Surface Layer ---___ Organic Streaking Listed on Local HydriC Soils List ---_____ Listed on National HydriC Soils List ___ Other (Explain in Remarks) I · Remarks:. SOliD appears to drain moderately well following seasonal storm events Prominent redeximorplhic features NOT present I' fleUd indicators of hydric soil NOT present WETLAND IDIETERMINA THaN I I Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? HydriC SQils Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO YES NO YES NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO I :...;..~;.;.;.e~=aT;;..;.;;.;rk~;.;;..: '-N-D-C-R-IT~'E-R-j";""-A-N-O---T~M-E-T-' -~--------~ I~N~O~·~rt~h~w~e~s~te~r~n~p~O~ri~.~io~n~o~f~p~ro~~~·e~c~t~s~it~e __________________________________ __ Area appears todraitrn moderately wen foDiowing seasoll1lal storm events.-I NO evodelTllce of wetland hydrology patterns I, I I I SAMPLIE PLOT SIPT2. ------------------I I· . Project/Site Applicant/Owner: . I Investigator: DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION . (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Parcel (0423059090) --------------------------------------------lHIabitat T echnologoes Date: County: State: Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Community 10: YES NO Transect 10: 22 APR 05 King Washington I I VEGETATUON (Note those species obserVed to have morphologiCal adaptations to wetlands with an *) I Dominant Plant Soecies I· I I I Dominant Plant Soecies Stratum . Indicator 1. Acer macrophyllum T FACU 2. Alnus rubra T FAC 3. Corylus cornuta S FACU 4. Symphoricarpus albus S - 5. Hedera helix H FACU 6. 7. 8. Percent of Dominant species that are OBl, FACW, or FAC 25% (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Steep slope· area in northern project site I IHIYDROLOGY Stratum I . -Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): _~ Stream, lake; or Tide Gage __ Aerial Photograph Wetland Hydrology Indicators: I Other No Recorded Data Available Inundated Saturated in upper 12" Water Marks Drift Lines Sediment Deposits Indicator I FIELD OBSERVATIONS:, ---Drainage Patterns 'in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of $urface Water: I · Depth to Free Water Pit: None , Depth to Saturated Soil:, None -- Water-Stained leaves local Soil Survey Data Other (Explain in Remarks) I Remarks; Onsile· assessment during spring 2005 Soo~ appears to draBn weUI following seasonal stoma events . l_f_fi .... e_Bd_n_·n_d_ic_a .... to ..... rs_O_.f_w_e_t_~a_n_d_hY_d_r_O_IO_9_Y_N_O_T_p_~_e .... s_e_nt _________________ _ I, I I I I I Map Unit Name: A1derwood gravelly sandy loam Taxonomy (Subgroup) Profile Description: Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix Color (Munsell Moist)· . Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist) SAMPLE PLOT SPT2 Drainage Class: Moderately well Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type YES NO Mottle Texture, Concretions Abundance/Contrast . Rhizospheres, etc ... I 0-2 2-18 10YR 3/2 None Gravelly loam 10YR 3/3 None Gravelly loam 1- I I, I Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol --__ Histic.Epipedon . Sulfidic Odor --__ Probable Aquic Moisture Regime __ Reducing Conditions __ Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Concretions ---High Organic Content in Surface Layer ---, Organic Streaking ---Listed on Local Hydric Soils List ---Listed on National Hydric Soils List ---Other (Explain in Remarks) --- I · .. _R:..;e~m::.:.· a::::rk.:.:s~: _____________________________ ~ _______ _ Soil appeall"S to draill1 moderately we~1 following) seasonal storm events I I I I Prominent redoxfimorphic features NOT'present . fieDd indocaJ1I:ors of hydric sofi~ NOT present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydroph}ttjc Vegetation Present? Hydric Soils Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Remarks: YES NO YES NO ,YES NO WETLAND CRITERJA NOT MET Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO I· _S..;..t..;..,;e;,...;e;,.a;p;....·..;;,.sl;..;o;.s;p;...,;e;...a~r;....e;...,;a~ill1l_n_o_rt.;;.;.h;...,;e;..;.r_n...llp .... r...;o,.lZ.ie..;;.,c..;;.,t.;...s_D_te ________________ _ Area appears to drain modierately wel~ foUowRng seasonal stormevell1lis. I_N_O~e;....v_id.;.;.e.;;.;tnl;....c_e_o_ff_w...;;.e...;.tl_a_rn_d_h...lly'_d_r_o_lo...ll911:.11Y':.....L,.pa_H_· e_r_n_s __ · ______ ~----- I, I' .. I · . -~ . I I I' I I APPIEND~X B -WETLANlD IRAT~NJG.FORMS I I I il I I· I I I I· I I I I 19. Kitzes 05113 1- ,& . I, I··· I·' I' I I I I· I I I I· I I· I I I· I I ,. WETLAND RATING FORM -wEs'rJmN :W.ASB1NGTON Name of wetland (ifknown):·. IA. A. M -+~~--------~~------------------- .... , . Location:. SEC: 5 . TwNSHP.:23·RNGE:4 £..(attach ,map with outlliie ofwetJand to rimng' form)· . Person(s) Rating Wetland:' \Cg,y,r:...J . '. Affiliation: ~l""" 'rgJl.Date ofsite visit:2z..itPeo~ Category I = Score >=70 Category II = Score 51-69 Category ill = Score 30-50 Category N = Score < 30 Score for Water Quality Functions . "t} t-,.-....!!.L...,-...-l .. Score for Hydrologic Functions z.. Score for Habitat Furictions J 5 TOTALsco!l'e full" flllilmmou z.. 3 . Category bmsed Ollll SPECIAL CBARAC1'ERISTICS ofwedamld 1_' n~ DOeS 1I!l~tt AppHy ~. . . [1] . WetJaDdRating Fonn.-westem washington 1 .. August 2004 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -'. ',-.. -: ..... .. . ;;. . '. . . . DOes the wetland being rated meet uy ofth~ criteria below? . If you miswer YES to any of the questions below you Will need to protect the wetland according to the'regUlations regarding the special ~cs found in the wetland. SPI. Hasthewetlandbeen documented as a hahitatforany Federally listed. Threatened or Endangered plant 07 {lFIima1 species. (TIE species)? For the purposes of this rating system, itdocumented" means the wet1and is on the ·ate state or federal database. SP2. Has the weiland been documentf!d. as habitat for any State listed Threatened or EniJangeredp/ant or animal species? . .. .. . For the pUrposes of this rating,system, "documented" means the wetland is on the , ro riate state database. SP3. Does the -wetland contain individuolS of Priority species listed by the WDFW for the·state? SP4. Does the wetland have a local significqnce in ~tion to its functions? For example, the wetland has been identified in,the Shoreline,~ Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having special signifiCance. ' To complete the next part of the data sheet YOU will need to determine the . llydrogeomorphic ClaSs of the wet1tInd being rated The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below; See p. 24 for more detailed instructions . on classifYing wetlands. . ..... -,- Wetland ~ Form -Western Wasfringtnn 2 August 2004 I -1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I :' '. : ;=~ .. :. CBassmcation'ofv egetated Wetlands for Western WashingtoJm. WetlbrumdNmmme: . II ~/.. .Date: ZZ-~p.f!. 1'5 . 1.~e ~ev~ls in the wetland usually controlled by tideS (Le. except during floods)? " '-@_ -~ YES -the wetland claSs is T~ FriJmge '. ' ' If yes, is the salinity of the water dwing periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES -Freshwatel!" T"Jdm.I! Fringe NO -'SatltwaJter rJda! Fringe (Esturilme) lfyour wetland can be. classiikd as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe 'U.'le the forms for Riv~ wetkmds. If it isSaltwater TuJoJ Fringe it is rated tis an ~ wetland. Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first apd second editions of the rating system are called Satt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were c;ttegorized sepm-ately in the earlier editions, and this Separation is' beiitg kept in this revision. To.JDaintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine>1-wetland is kept. - Please note, however. that the characteristics that define Category I and II 'estuarine wetla!lds have' chmiged (see p. ). ' tI.--+r1'Ri'UH'~)"", within the wetland flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) ofwater to it. NO -go to 3 I' YES -The wetland class is.FDam ' ---=-------' '. --.....J;t:yE:mrwetland can be classified as a "Flats" wetland. 1isethe form for DepJreSSioona1 :wetlands. 3. Does the wetIandmmeet 00tIa of the following criteria?· _The vegetated part of the wetland i~ on the shores of a body of open water (withoUt any vegetation o~ the surface) where atJ~ 20 acres (8 ha) ~ permanently inundated ' . (ponded or flooded);, ." . -~=~-:.' 30% of the ,open water area is deeper ,than 6.6 ft (2 m)? . '~ ,YES.-The wetland class is ~ (LaclllStrine li'rimtge) 4: m.~aBII of the following criteria? .:.J..LI~-~' tJalld is on a slope (slope can be very gradual), e water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and:usually , , ' ~~-seeps. It may flow subsuitace, as sheetflow, or in a swaIe without ~ct _~_ e w~ater lle~ves the wetland 1ri1tIInOllll1t beimlg immppllllDIlded? " , NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these' type of wetlands except occasio1iolly in very small and aha/.' 'Ssions or behind hwnmoclrs( depressions are usuOJly <3ft . :;:'-~ lind ~ than 1 foot ~~j~ NO -go'to 5, -The'wetlimd class is SlIope 5. Is the wetland in a ere it gets inuD.d8ted by overbank flooding from . th8t stream or river? The-fioodhlg should occur at least once every two years, on theaveragC, to answer ''yes.'' The wetland can co7(lain depressions that are filled with water when the rivei-is not flooding.' . NO -go to 6 YES ~ The wetland class is RiveriDae, Wetland Rating Fonn -western Washington 3 August 2004 I I I I ,I I I I, I I I' I I I' I· I ·1 I I ':~-; .. 6. Is the wetland in a topographic depression in which 'water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of the' year. This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior of t~' . wetland .,.. 'NO -go to 7 . YES -The wetlaild class Is DepresiJi@Jmal! 7. Is the wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no Stream or river running through it and providing water. The wetland seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet NO -go to 8 YEs ~ The we~and claSs isDeprasi@u ' 8. Your wetland seems to be difficUlt to classify. For example, seeps at the base ofa slope may. grade into· a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depreSsional wetland has a zone of . flooding along its sides. Sometimes we find characteristics of severaIdifferent hydrogeomorphic , classes within 'one wetland boundarY. Use the following table to identitY the appropriate class to ' use for the rating syStem.if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland. Nom: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column.represen.ts 10% or more of the' tOtal area of the wetland 'being rated. If the area of the second, class is less than 10% classity , . the wetland usm'g the firSt class.' ' , :;;alt Water Tidal Friilge and any other class ,of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special If you are unable still to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have ,more than 2HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classifY the wetland as Depresmi«D_ for ' the rating. " " Wetland Rating Fonn -western Washington 4 August 2004 ,- I I I .' I I I I I I·' I I I I I I I I I I ;-:i;.'. H 1-.1 Vegetation structure (fI~p. 72) Check the types of vegetation classes preseirt (as defined by ClJWardin) if the closs covers more than 10% of the area of the wetland or ~ acre. ' , A uatic bed . ' , t~~ ..... " Shrub (areas where .sluvbs have >30% cover) __ Forested (areas where/trees have >30% cover) , __ Forested areas have 3 outof5 strata(canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous. , moss/ground~ver). ' ' ' Add the number of vegetation types that quaJify. Ii you have:' , 4 types or more 3 types :. ~ ( H 12. Hydroperiods (seep. 73) , Check the types of water regirile~· (hydroperlods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or ~acre to count. (see text for 2m of hydro perl ods). . , anently flooded or inundated 4 or more types, present , ""'rnt' .. ~easonally flooded or inundated ' 3, types present :"'~::r.:-=:=:::;""'--I Accasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present, point =' 1 ~~YflOwing stream or river in. or adjacent~, the wetland __ Seasonally flowing stream in. or adjacent to, the wetland __ ~ewetlmul-2poimlm _' _FresltJwtJJter tidtd wetliJuJuJ = 2 po.iJlllts H 13. Richness of Plant Species (:Je2p. 75) , , , 'Count-the riumber'ofplant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 if. (different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold) , You do not hav~.!Q nome the species., ' Do not include Eurasian Milfoil; reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife. Canadian. 'Thistle - If you counted: List species below if you want to: ' Wetland Rating Form -western Washington 13 , > 19 species, 5 .;. 19 species < 5 species points =2 9 August 2004 ' o I I I I I I I I I I, I I I I I I I I, I: , . .' ,}< H lA Interspersion of habitats (seep. 76) , . ,',' Decide from the diagrams, below whether interspersion between types of vegetation, (<iescribed'in H 1.1), or vegetation types and Unvegetaied areas (can include op~, water or mudflats) is high; medium. low, or none. . . , , Moderate =' 2 points / " [riparian braided channels] High = 3 pointS NOTE: If you have four or more vegetation types or 1hree vegetation types , and 0 water the ratin is aIwa s ''hi ". ' H 1.5. Special Habitat Features: (seep. 77) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland The r.zumber of checks is , the number of points you put into the next column. '_. _Large, downed,woody debris within the wetland (>4in. diameter ~d 6 ft long). Standing snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the wetland . Underc~t banks are presen,t for at least 6.6 ft (2m) andlor ~verhanging vegetation "c' extends at least 33 ft (1m) over a stream for at least 33 ft (IOni) __ Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for ' , denning (>30degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present . At leaSt ~ acre of-thin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present - ~ that are permanently or seasonally inundated {structuresfor egg-laying by _' _~_ Inv!!:::::;:~ts cover les~than'25% oftbe wetland area in each stlatum of plants " .,.---.' Ii 1. TOTAL Score... potential for providingbabitat ' Add, the scores in the column above WetJaod.Rating Form -western Washington , 14 August 2004 ----- I I I I I I I II I I I I II II I I I I I" ... . . H 2~ Does the wetland have the opportmmity to provide habi'dat fOJr :mwny spteeies? .-H 2.1 Buffers. (see p..SD)·,. . . . Choose the description that best represents condjtjon ()fbuffer of wetland. The highest . . scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition oj-"undisturbed ,. '. -. 100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or opeQ. water >95% of circumfeTence. No developed areas within undisturbed part of buffer. . (reJativdy UldistunrlJed also m_. mo-gna:ing) . . P@fuma = 5 -100 m (330 ft) of i'eIativelyundisturbed vegetated areas. rockY areas, Or open water > 500/0 -circumference.' 'Pofimlts = " -50 m (17Oft) ofreIativ~ly imdisturbed vegetated areas, rocky·areas,. or open water >9;;% circumference. f . Pom.a = 4 -100 m (330ft) of relatively un4istufbed· vegetated areas, rocky areas, or opeD. water > 25% circumference; -. Points = 3 -50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas. or open water , for> 50% circumference. . . Pofimlts == 3 Ifb1lllfi'er does mot meet amy of tile c~ above -No paved areas (except paved trails) 'or buildings Within 25 m (80ft) O~f ;sd ~ 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. ~~ts = ...L-) -No paved areas or buildings within 50m ofwetIaDd for >50% circumfi ,.- Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Pofumt5== 2 -Heavy grazing in buffer. Pomm = 1. -Vegetated buffers are <2m wide (6.6ft) for more than 95% of the circ~erence (e.g. tilled fields, paving, b8satt bedrock extend to edge of wetland POOnts == (L -Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. . Pofumts = 1 H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2~ 1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or up1aild) that is at least 150 ft: wide, has at least 30% cOver of shrubs. forest or' native undisturbed prairie, that co~ects to estuaries, other . . wetiands or undisturbed uplands tIuit are at least 250 acres in size? (dams in riparian corridors, heavily used graVel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the . corridor).' . YES = .. pomts (go to H 2.3). . NO = go ~o H 2.2.2 H 2.2.2 Is the wet1aBd-part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50ft .wide, has atJeast 300/0. cover of shrubs or furest, and connects to estuaries., other wetlands or uildisturbed uplands . that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lab--fniJmge wetland, ,if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? . YES = 2 p$Iilmllm (go toH 2.3) NO = H 2.2.3 H 2.23 Is· the wetland: within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR . within 3 mi of a large field or pasture (>4O'acres) OR within 1 mi of ~ 1_ '6-" ~ 2~ acres? L YES = IpIIDnt· NO =@BBOBmuts '-. Wetland Rating Form -western Washington 15 .t\Ugust 2004 1 1.-. - I I I. I· I I I· I I I· I I I I I· I I I :. "::;.', H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW.(see p. 82) -=. which the following priority habitats are within 330~ (lOOm) of the wetland? . (ae ut for a more detailed description ·of these priority habitats) . .~: The area adjacent to aqWWc systems with flowing water that contains .. elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each ·other. _lUpeE Stavn&1: Pure or mixed stanps of aspen greater than 0.8 ha (2 acres). _CW1S:Greater than 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occmring below 5000 ft~ . ~ OId~wth fol!'eSts: (Old-growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi~layered canopy with· occasional small openings; with at . least 20 treesJha (8 trees/acre» 81 em (32 in) dbh or > 200·years of age •. _MmtmUI"e forests: Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 em (21 in) dbh; crown . cover may be less that IOOOAi; crown cover may be less that 100%; decay~ .. decadence, nwnbe~ of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally . less than that found in old-growth; 80 -200 years old west of the Cascade cresi . _Pralines: Relatively undisturbed areas (as indicated by dominance of native plants) where grasses and/or forbs fOrm the natural climax plant community. ~TallDS: Homogeneus areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 -2.0 m (0.5- 6.5 ft), composed ofbasaIt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. __ Gnves: A naturally occurring caVity, recess, void, or system ofintercomiected . . . passages . ~ _ Oak: WoodIandsSIaods Qfpure oak or o3kJconifi:r associations . ere ·canopy coverage of the oak component of the stand is.25% .. rbu Natinral Opellll Space: A priority· species resides within or is adjacent to the open space and uses it for breeding and/or regular feeding; and/or the open space functions as a corridor connecting other priority habitats, especially those that· would otherwise be isolated; and/or the open space is· an isolated remnant of natural . habitat larger than 4 ha (10 acres) and is s~unded by W'ban development. __ EmtWlul'ylEstmlan'y-like:. Deepwater tidal haJ>itats and adjacent tidal wetlands, usually semi-enclosed by land but with open, partly obstructed or sporadic access t9 the . open ocean, and in which ocean water is at least occasionally diluted by freshwater nmoff from the land. The salinity may be periodically increased above that of the . open ocean by evaporation. Along some low-energy·coastlines there is appreciable. dilution of sea ~ri Estuarine habitat extends upstream and lan.d~to where ocean-derived saltS measure less than 0.5ppt. during the period of average annual low flow.lncludes.both estuaries and lagoons. . M.auriJm~ SBnoretiDnes: Shorelines include the intertidal and subtidal zones --of beaches,' and may also include the backshore and adjacent components of the terrestrial landscape (e.g., cliffs, snags, mature ~ dunes, meadows) tbat are important to shoreline associated .fish and wildlife and that contribute·to shoreline function (e;g., sandlrock/log .recruitment, nutrient contribution, erosion control) .. Ifwetland has 1 pnonty bahl = ~t;\ . . Ifwetland·has 3 Oil'. J!III~1l'e ~~.~~-" ~ ... Ifwetland has 1 priority bahitat~1iiOlffi? ·No habitats = 0 points :::> Wetland Rating Form -western Washington: 16 . August 2004 I I .. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ·1 I I .;~ .'. '/ .:':;~'. H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits) (seep. 84) There are at least 3 other wetlands within Y2 mile; arid the connections between them are reJativelyun~ed bi~t graziUg between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with . some boating. but connections should NOT be bisect eel by paved.roads, fill, fiel~ or other development. points ='5 The wetland is-Lake-:friDge on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake- . fringe wetlands within Y2 mile .' . points = 5 There are at least 3 other wetlands.within Y2 mile, BUT the connections e. are disturbed '. . points = 3 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake witllD. ~sturbance and ~ere are 3 other - . fringe wetland within ~ mile points ;; 3 There is at least 1 wetland within 12 mile. pOints = 2 There: are no wetlands·within % mile. poipts = 0 H 2~' TOTAL Score.-opportunity for providing habitat· . Add the scores iri the column above Tot:d Score for Habitat FWidiolOO -add the points for H I. H 2 and record the result on , p. 1 . -:--~-.. Wetland Rating Fonn-western Washington 17 August 2004 9 IS I- I I. I- I- I- I I- I I I 1-· I I I I I I I -. - j )!;, >. - . -p.' Name ofwetiand (iflmown): ---- -B- , ~,~~------~---------------------- Location: SEC: S . TwNSHP;23 RNGE:4 £..(attach map with o~ ofw.dto r3dng'form} - Person(s) Rating Wetland: :O14.;~ -_ -Affiliation: J4.sii"A-'r 'rgJI,Date {)f site visit: ZZit!'eos.,- Category 1'= Score >=70 category II == Score 51-69 _ Category m = Score 30-50 ~orv IV = Sco~ < 30 sUMMARy OF RATING SCm-e for, Water Quality Functions -Score for Hydrologic Functions Score for Habitat functions TOT.ALscore foll'-fwmetiou Category bme'd. ow SPECIAL CHARAc:rERISTICS o(wetlamld 1_' -II~ DOeS Dot Apply: V-- --, b z.3 FinlaI Category <-tile "fiigIo-~ mum aIJeve) IT] .. WetJadd Rating Fonn -western wastrington 1 ' _ -August 2004 , , I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I· I I. I . Does the wethmd being rated met ay of the criteria below? . Ifyau answer YES to any of the questions beloW you will nee,f·to protect the wetland .. according to the'regwatipns .regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. SPl. Has~.wetlandbeen documented as ahahitatfor lU7:Y FederQJ/y listed. Threatened or Endangeret:!plant or {11Jimal·speciesJTIE species)? For the purposes of this rating ~ "documentedn means the wetland is on the L~ state or federal database. SP2. Has ihe wetland been docwnentiid as habitat for any State listed 1iIreatened or Endangered plant or animal species? . . . For the pUrposes of1bis ratingsyst6n, ndocumentedn ttleaDS the wetland is on die . . ate state dirtabase. SP3. Does the wet/ond contain individtuzlS of Priority species listed by the WDFW . for the-state? . SP4. Does the wetfond havlf a loClli significance in addition to its fimctions? For example; the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline.~ Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance; or in a local management plan as having special significance. ··v ··V V ,/ To complete the next part of the data sheet YOU will need to determine the . Qydrogeomorphic Class of/he wetlaiid being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways.. 'ThiS simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below; See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. . -:;;.-.-- . " '-,. Wetland ~ Form -Western Wasbirigtnn 2 August 2004 .R I I I I I I I I I I I· I I I I I I I I -~ : . .. : ,:~.<. . \ 1.~e w~eveIs in the wetland usually controlled by tideS (i.e. except during floods)? . ~_-g~ . . YES-the wetland class is T~ FriDge . ... . If yes, is the salinity of the water dming periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (p3rts per thousand)? YES -:Freshwater TI4W Fringe NO -Saltwater TIdal FriJmge (EmBarimle) \ • •• • r 1f your wetland can he. classified as a Freshwater Tidal Frtnie use the forms for lliveri1Be wetlands. If it is-Saltwater TuiaJ Fringe it is rated as an ~ wetland. Wetlands that. were called estwirine in the first iI1ld· second editions of the rating system are called Scilt WaterTidal Fringe in the HydrogeomorphicClassification. Estuarine wetlands were c;Uegorized separately in the earlier editions, and this Separation is· being kept in this revision. To.maintain consi$tenCY between editiollS; th~ term "Estuarinc""wetland is kept. . Please note, however, that the cbaracteristics that define Category I and II estuarine . wetlands have changed (see p. ).. .. . 2 •. Is within the wetland flat and precipitation is only source (>900)(,) ofwaterto it. N~~· YES -The wetI3nd class is FJats . . . .. ----J;£:..y4:fl:1r-wetland can be classified as a "Flats" wetland, lise ·the form for DepressicDUi ·w~. 3-0 Does the wetland Beet 00dD. of the following criteria?· _·_The vegetated part of the wetland i~ on the shores of a body of open water (withoUt any vegetation o~ the. surfuce) where at.le8$t 20 ~ (8 ha) ~ pennmiently inundated (ponded or flooded); .. . . --=--=---:A:-'-t;;;"· .;,... 30% of the. open water area is deeper.than 6.6 ft (2 m)? NO -go to 4 . 'YES -The wetland class is Lake-1irimIge (LaemstriDe FrimIge) ':Be~fii&;etbBm meetmIJI of the following criteria? .. d is on a slope (slope can he very gradual), _. _ e water flows througbtbe weiland in one direction (uDidirectional) and:usually . . . ~~Seeps. It may flow subsurface, as meettlow, or in~ swale ~o~ ~ct .. _~_ e w~ater llec=aves the wetlandwitlhloQlnt IDeiJmg immptBlimmded1 . . . NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these· type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shall. . . 'SsWns or behind hzunmocks( depressions are US'UtiJJy <3ft . . -;£----fmd Jess than 1 foot . NO -go·to ~. -'f}le. wetland class is SlIope So Is the wetland in a . ere it gets inuitdated by overbank flooding from. that stream or river? The-floodiDg shoUld occur· at least once every two yeais; on theaveraF, to answer "yeS. ~ The wetland can contizin ~io1lS that ai'e ftOed with wdlitr when the river is· • not flooding. .. . . , NO -go to. 6 'ilES ,..:. The wetland class is RiveriIme· Wetfand Rating Fmm -western washington 3 August 2004 I I I. I I I I I I I' I I I I I I I I 6~ Is the w~Jand in a topographic depression in which water pon~ Of is saturated to flit:: surface, at some time of the year. This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior of tk ' . wetland. " . Nq -go to 7 , YES -The wetIand class is Del111resmo~ 7~ Is the wetland located iIi 'a very flat' area with n~ obvious depression and no Stream or river running through it and providing water. The wetland seems to be maintained by high' . , groundwater. in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. NO -'go to 8 YES -:-The w~and class is'Dep!reSSiou! 8. Your wetland seems to be difficri1t to classifY. For exampI~ seeps at the base of-a slope may. . grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depreSsional wetland has a zone of . flooding along its sides. 'Sometimes we find chaIacteristics of several different hydrogeomorphic claSses within one wetland boundarY. Use the following table :to identify the appropriate class to . use for the. rating sySti;mifyou have ~everal HGM c1assespresentwithin your wetland. NOTE: - Use this table only if the claSs that is recommended in the second colUlllIi represents 10% or more ofthe'trital area of the wetland "being rated. If the area of the second, class is less than 10% classify , the wetland usm'g the firSt cl3ss. ' . Salt Water Tidal Friilge and any othercI~ ,of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with speci~ characteristics If you are unable still to determine which of tile above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HOM classes within a wetlandboundaIy, classi:fY the wetlaild as Depllressionnal for the rating. " ' Wetland RatiugForm -western Washiogton 4 August 2004 ,- I I I I I I I I I·' I I I I· I I I I I I .. \ H 1.1 Vegetation structUre (seep. 72) Check the types of l1l!getation c/osses present (as defined by Cowardin) if the class covers more than 10% of the area of the wedandor ~ acre. . . ~19uatic bed . .' . --0D1~plants ." . '. ~~ (areas where shrubs have >30% cover) __ Forested (areas where.;trees have >30% cover) . __ Forested areas have 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, mosslground~ver) . . Add the nWnher of vegetation types·that qualijjt. If you have: . 4 types or more 3 types 2 types 1 H 1.2. Hydroperiods (seep. 73) . . Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wed and The wale.,. regiMe has to cover more than 10% of the wetkmd or ~ acre to·COunl.. for ~ of hydro periods) .' ~-- _ . ently flooded or immdated 4 or mOre types present . ~in"'C! ~easonally flOoded or inundated ..' _3 types present ~o::==;:;;-~I =t2§ccasionally flooded or inundated· 2 wes present.. point =. 1 ~onIy .. J2:Permanently flowing ~ or river in, or adjacent~, the wethmd __ Seasonally :flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland _~e -wetIJmod = 1 poi!iiI~. Fre:J1rMIJJter tidJJJJ wet!JJoDul = 2 mm.m -PO. H 13. Richness ofPIant Species (seep. 75) . . . Count the number' of plant speCies hi the wetland that cover at least 10 If. (dijforent patches of the same species can be combined to meet' the size thre.sbold) . You do not havf{,-/Q name the species. . _ Do not incJude Eurasian Milfoil; reed canarygross. pwple loosestrife. Canadian -Thistle .' . If you counted: List species below lfY01.4lf1ant to: Wetfand Rating Form -westa'n Washington 13 . > 19 species '. S ... 19 species .<5 species AllgDst 2004 - ( B I I I' I I I I I, I I I I I I I I I I I . :~/ H lA Interspersion 'ofbabitats (seep. 76) , _ Decide from the diagramsbelow whether interspersion between types,ofvegetatiOll, (described'in H 1. I). or vegetation typeS and Unvegetaied 'areas (can include op~ water or mudflats) is high; meciium; low. or none. . -. Moderate = 2 points / ' [riparian braided channels] . High , = 3 pointS' , NOTE: Ifyou'have four or more vegetation types or three vegetation types and 0' water the ratin is aIwa: s"hi ". ' H 1.5. Special Habitat,Features: (aeejJo 77) '. Check the habitat fetitures that tire present in the wetland The' '!ID"ber of checks is the number of points you put into the nert column.., ' __ ' Large, downed.,woody debris within the wetland (>4in. diameter ~d 6 ft long). __ ·Standin~ snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the ,:wetland . _' _Undercut bSnks are pres~ for at least 6.6 ft (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation ',' extends at least 33 ft (1m) over a stream for at least 33 ft OOm) __ Stable steep banks offine material that might be used by beaver or muskratfor , denning (> 30degree slope) OR signs of :recent beav.er activity are present _' _At leaSt ~ acre of1hin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present . ~. that are pennanently or seasonally inundated. (sthictures for egg-laying by hibians) . . _'_ InVaSive plants cover less·~ 25% of the wetland area in each sti-atuin of plants -. .' H 1. TOTAL Score.. potential for providing habitat Add.the scores in the column above Wetland Radng Form -western Washington . 14 1 'b I I I I, I I I - I I I I I I I I" I I I' I " ; . : :~ .~~ .::' H 2.1 Buffers. (see p.lJIJ) "" , . , Choose ihe description that best reptese1its condition of buffer of wetland The highest . scoring criterion that applies to the wedand is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed ,. , " . . . -, 100m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas. or open water >95% of circunrfiience. No developed areas within ·undisturbed part of buffer. (~eiy mmdisimiDed also lIIlleus.~ .' Poimrtls = 5 -100 m (330 ft) of reIativelyundisturbed vegetated ai-eas, rockY areas, or open water > 50% cirCumference. ' . 'Pomm = 4 -50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed. vegetated areas, rocky' areas.. or open water >95% circumference. j , . Pam. = 4 -100 m (33()ft)'ofrelatively un~vegetated areas, rocky areas, or opeD. water > 25% circmn,rerence;·. PoDmim =3 ' -, 50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water 'for> 50% circu.mference. . . Poimts = 3 Hb11lffer does mot meet uy of the eriterim above ,-No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings ~ 25 m (80ft) O~~gd ~ 95% circumference. Light.to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK.· ~~ = ~~ -No paved areas or buildings within 50m ofwet1andfor >50% circurin ..- Light to moderate grazin.& or lawns are OK. Pcmmm· == 2 -Heavy grazing in buffer. Poimm = 1 -Vegetated buffers are <2m wide (6.6ft) fot niore than 95% of the circUinference , (e.g. tilled fiefds, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland PODDlts == o~· -Bllff'C-does'not meet any ofthecrlteria abOve. . Pofumts = 1 H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (see po 81) H 2.2~1 Is the wetland part of a re1atively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 it wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that co~ects to estuaries, other . , wetlands or Undisturbed uplands tIultare at least 250 acres in siZe? (dams in riparitin corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roods. are ,considered brea/r:1 in the . corridor).' , " YES = 4 polinm. (go to H 2.3) . NO = go to H 2.2.2 H 2.22 Is the wetlaiid-part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian' or upland) tbat is at least 50ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries" other, wetlands or uiJdisturbed uplands . that ~ at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake-friImge wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? ,YES = 1 pmfulrrdm(go IoH 2.3) H 2.2.3 Is· the wetland: 'NO = H2.2 .. 3 within 5 mi (Skm) of a brackish or saltwater estuary OR . within 3 mi of a.large field or pasture (>4O'a.cres) OR within 1 mi ofl!ll""'\r _ ...... 2~ acres? . r-YES 1 P®limti~. '. , ........ .. .. ' Wetland Rating Form -Westrm Washington , 15 NO @ August 2004 I I I. I I. I .. I I I· I I I I I I , I I I I I I , , , . \<.:. H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other mority habitats listed by WDFW (see po 112) . Which' e following priority habitats are Within 330ft (100m) of the wetland? (ae for a more detailed description·of these priority habitats) ---.L~ jtip2lma· um: The area adjacent to ~c systems with flowing water that contains .. elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosyStems which mlitually in:tIuence each other. _..AspeJm StaImds: Pure or mixed stan,ds of aspen greatei than 0.8 ha (2 acres). _C!iftS:·Great.ertban 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft~ , · __ ~wth forests: (Old~wth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, fonning a multi~layered canopywith'occasionaJ small openings; with at least 20 treeSIha (8 trees/acre) >-81 em (32 in) dbh or> ioo·years ofage. _~re foresa: Stands with average diameters exceeding 53cm (21 in) dbh; crown . '. cover may be less that 100%; crown 'cover may be less that 1000.10; decay~ decadence, num~ of snagS, and quantity ofIarge . downed material is generally less than that found in oId-growth; 80 -200 years old west of the Cascade crest. _Prairies: RelatiVely undisturbed areas (as indicated by dominance of native plants) where grasses andlor forbs form the natural climax plant community. __ Talu: Homogeneus areas of rack rubble ranging in average size 0.15 -2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and inine tailings. May be associated. with cliffs. __ Caves: A naturally occurring caVity, recess, void, or system of mtercomiected . passages . . ~. white Oak: WoodlandsS~ds ofpme oak: or oak/conifer associations . ere'canopy cov~ of the oak component of the sQlnd is 25%.' riJmn NatmJ.r.al Opemi Space: A priority· species resides within or is adjacent to the . open space and uses it for breeding litidIorregu1ai feeding; and/or the open space functions as a canidor connecting other priority habitats, especially those that •. would otherwiSe be isolated; and/or the open space is an isolated renlruint of natural . habitat larger than 4 ha (10 acres) and is SlBTOlDlded by urban development. __ EmamrylEstmlaryoolib:. peepwater tidal habitats and adjacent tidal wetlands, usually semi-enclosed by land but with open, partly obstructed or.sporadic access to the open ocean, and in which ocean water is at least occasionally diluted by freshwater runoff from the land. '!'he salinity may be periodically increased above that of the' . open ocean by evaporation. Along some low-energy coastlines there is appreciable' dilution of sea ~. EstUariIie: habitat'extends upstream and landwarc:i.to where . ocean,..derived saltS measure less than 0.5ppt. during the period of average annual' low f1ow~lncludesboth estuaries and lagoons.' . __ Mamiin~e Sllnfll)Ireiimles: Shorelines include the intertidal and subtidal zones . of beaches, and may also include the back.shore and adjacent components of the' terrestrial landscape (e.g., cliffs, snags, mature ~ dunes, meadows) tbat are imporf:ant to shoreline associated fish and wildlife. and that contribute to shoreline functiOn (e.g., sandirocklIog .recruitment, nutrientcontnoution, erosion control). Ifwetiand·hasJol!"1IlIlon pn~'~=~:4~ .', Ifwetland has 1 priority bah· =_~ . Ifwetland has 1 ·0' habitat = lID' . No habitats = 0 ints 3 Wetland Rating Form -western WuJriugl<lB-16 I· I I I I I I I' I I I· .' I I I I. I H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the one description'of the landscape around the wetland that best fits) (seep. 84) There.are at least 3 other wetJands witiJ.4t Yz mile. arid th~ connections between them are relatively . undisturbed (light grazing betWeen wetlands OK. as is lake shore with someboatin& but connections should NOT be bisected by paved.roads. fill,. fields, . or other development. . . . points = 5 The wetland is--Lake-fringe on a Ialre with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake- fringe wetlands within ~ mile' . points = 5 . There ~ at least 3 other wc$tldswithin Yz mile, BUT the COnnectio,ns ~. ~ ~.~ , are disturbed '. . .. po~~ ~ The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake witln msturbance and there are 3 other' --:-=- fringe wetIaDd within Y.: mile points == 3 There is at least 1 wetland within Yz mile. pOints = 2 There are no wetIan~·witbJn ~mile. po4tts = 0 :3 11 2~ TOTAL Score.-opportunity for providing habitat· . Add the scores iri the colzimn above Totai Soon ror Habitat Fmidiou -add the points for HI, H 2 and record the result on , p.l . Wet1andRadng Palm. -western Washington· 17 August 2004' I I I I I I I II I I I I I I' I I I I- I IA lTACHMENITS 20 Kitzes 05113 .j Honey Creek View Estates lPrelirilinary lPlat Conditions ofDeveiopment (Summary) . LUA05-118 Project Condition Source of When Compliance Party Responsible Notes Condition is Required Hearing Prior to final plat Applicant The landscape plan shall Examiner Plat recording be revised to show that 2-Condition inch caliper trees shall be provided within the interior of the plat as opposed to the 1 %-inch - caliper trees proposed. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted prior to final plat approval. Pay Transportation ERC Prior to final plat Applicant $5,742.00 Mitigation Fee recording Pay Fire Mitigation Fees ERC Prior to final plat Applicant $9,760.00 recording Pay Parks Mitigation ERC Prior to final plat Applicant $4,246.08 Fees a reduced Parks recording Mitigation Fee may be charged in exchange for a trail easement within Tract B. Hearing Prior to final plat Applicant A trail easement within Examiner Plat recording Tract B shall be dedicated Condition to the City of Renton Parks Department for the Honey Creek Trail. The easement shall be required to be dedicated prior to or concurrently with the recording of the final plat. Haul hours are limited Code During Construction Applicant! from 8:30 am to 3:30 pm Contractor/Builder Monday through Friday Within 30 days of Code During Project Applicant! completion of grading Construction Contractor/Builder work the applicant shall hydroseed or plant appropriate vegetation. Construction hours are Code During Project Applicant! from 7:00 am to 8:00 pm Construction Contractor/Builder Monday through Friday and 9:00 am to 8:00 pm on Saturday and no work is allowed on Sundays. . , . , Honey Creek View Estates-Preliminary Plat Condntions of Development (Summary) LUA05-118 The earthwork activities to be conducted onsite shall only be permitted to occur during the dry months of the year. The applicant to comply with the recommendations found in the preliminary geotechnical site evaluation prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services dated July 22, 2005 and the follow up geotechnical evaluation dated February 12, 2006 A homeowner's association or' maintenance agreement shall be created concurrently with the recording of the final plat in order to establish maintenance responsibilities for shared roadway, storm water and utility improvements. A draft of the document(s) shall be submitted to the City of Renton Development Services Division for review and approval by the City Attorney and Property Services section prior to the recording of the final plat. The project shall be _ required to comply with the Department of Ecology's (DOE) Manual for erosion control measures. ERC Mitigation Measure ERC Hearing Examiner Plat Condition ERC Mitigation Measure During Construction During Construction Prior to final plat recording During Construction ApplicanVcontractor /builder ApplicanV Contractor/Builder Applicant ApplicanVContracto r/Builder Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat Conditions of Development (Summary) LUAOS-118 The applicant shall be ERC During project ApplicanVcontractor required to comply with construction Ibuilder the recommendations found in the Wetland Study report prepared by Habitat Technologies dated September 23, 2005 and the Supplemental Stream Study and Mitigation Plan prepared by Ecological Land Services, Inc. dated December 9, 2005. A Native Growth Hearing Prior to final plat Applicant Protection Easement Examiner Plat recording shall be recorded over Condition Tract 8 prior to the recording of the final plat map. The proposed sensitive Hearing Prior to final plat Applicant Examiner Plat recording area tract (Tract 8) shall Condition be delineated with a split rail fence and identified with signage as approved by the Development Services Division Project Manager. A fencing and signage detail shall be submitted to the Development Services Division project manager at the time of Utility Construction Perm it for review and approval and that such fencing and signage shall be installed prior to the recording of the final plat. The applicant shall be Hearing Prior to final plat Applicant required to place "No Examiner Plat recording Parking" signage along Condition the hammerhead prior to final plat approval. : ' Honey Oreek View Estates Preliminary Plat Conditions of Development (Summary) LUA05-118 The detention system for ERC At Utility Construction Applicant! this project shall be Permit Application Contractor required to comply with the requirements found in the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention (conservation flow control -Level 2) and water quality improvements. Hearing Utility Construction Applicant! The applicant shall submit Examiner Plat Permit Application Contractor a landscape plan for the Condition storm water detention tract (Tract A). Proposed landscaping shall either be drought tolerant or irrigated. The landscape plan shall be submitted at the time of Utility Construction Permit application to the Development Services Division project manager for review and approval. The landscaping shall be installed prior to recording of the final plat. Hearing Prior to final plat Applicant A note shall be recorded Examiner Plat approval on the face of the final Condition plat stating that no more· than 1 single family dwelling unit is permitted on each lot. A demolition permit shall Hearing Prior to final plat Applicant be obtained and all Examiner Plat approval inspections completed on Condition the demolition of the existing residence prior to final plat approval. .' .. '" ,li' ., , ~ t. Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat Conditions of Development (Summary) LUA05-11S . The stormwater detention Hearing During Applicant! tract (Tract B) shall be Examiner Plat Construction/Prior to Contractor fenced, landscaped, and Condition final plat approval irrigated (unless drought tolerant plants are used). A 6-foot chain link fence with black vinyl covering shall be installed around the perimeter of Tract B. Tract B shall be landscaped with plant materials that will provide a year-round dense screen within three (3) years from the time of planting. The applicant is to submit a landscape plan for the review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager prior to .. recording of the plat. f/jN:II1~'Yr 1'\ Of: f?St,..0lotvll. ,,~C ~ G ~ 2 12005" ~rc~/PIA Su.pplemental Stream Study ~IJ aImd. Stream Buffer Mitigation Plan for Honey Creek View Estates 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard ~ City of Renton, King County, Washington Prepared for: Preferred Engineering, LLC P.O. Box 25422 Federal Way, Washington 98023-2422 206-501-5708 Prepared by: Ecological Land Services, Inc. 1157 -3rd Avenue, Suite 220 Longview, Washington 98632 360-578-1371 December 9,2005 ELS Project Number 1299.03 SIGNATURE PAGE The information and data in this report were compiled and prepared under the supervision and direction of the undersigned. ./ ~~ Lynn Simpson ~ Environmental Scientist Supplemental Stream Study and Buffer Mitigation Plan Honey Creek View Estates Ecological Land Services, Inc. December 8, 2005 -2- · .. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 5 DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING AREA ..................•................................................................................................... 5 EXISTING SITE DESCRIPTION .................................•....•.............................................................................................. 5 PROPOSED SITE DESCRIPTION ......... ; .......................................................................................................................... 5 HONEY CREEK AND FUNCTIONAL VALUES OF STREAM BUFFER ................................ 6 EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................................................................................................... 6 Topography .........................................................................................................................................•................. 6 Soils ................... -.................. ,~ .. : ..............................................................................•............................................. 6 Vegetation ............................................................................................................................................................. 6 Wildlife .................................................................................................................................................................. 6 Honey Creek Habitat ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Functional Analysis of Stream Buffer .................................................................................................................. 7 SITE-DESIGN ALTERNATIVES AND RATIONALE FOR CHOICES ..................................... 8 A VOIDANCE ............................................................................................................................................................... 8 MINIMIZATION ........................................................................................................................................................... 8- IMPACT EVALUATION ........................................ ;; .. : ................................................................. 9 PROPOSED IMPACTS .................................................................................................................................................... 9 COMPENSATION AND RESTORATION ............................................................. , ............................................................ 9 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS TO W ATERSHED .................................................................................................................... 9 FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED STREAM BUFFER ........................................... 10 RESPONSIBLE PARTIES ........................................................................................................... 10 GOAL, OBJECTIVES, AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ................................................ 10 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE .................................................................................................. 11 SITE PREPARATION SPECIFICATIONS ................................................................................. 11 PLANT MATERIALS .................................................................................................................. 11 REVEGETATION SPECIFICATIONS ....................................................................................... 12 PLANTING ................................................................................................................................................................ 12 MATIING ................................................................................................................... , ............................................. 12 MAINTENANCE ......................................................................................................................... 12 AS-BUILT REPORT .................................................................................................................... 13 CONTINGENCY PLAN .............................................................................................................. 13 Supplemental Stream Study and Buffer Mitigation Plan Honey Creek View Estates - 3 - Ecological Land Services, Inc. December 8, 2005 MONITORING PLAN ................................................................................................................. 13 PHOTOGRAPHS •.......................................................•...............................•..............................................................•. 14 MONITORING REpORT CONTENTS ........................................................................................•................................... 14 SITE PROTECTION .................................................................................................................... 14 COST ESTIMATE ........................................................................................................................ 14 COMPLIANCE WITH RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE. ............................................................ 14 PROFICIENCY ............................................................................................................................ 15 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 16 Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Vicinity Map 2002 Aerial Photograph Site Map Cross Section Supplemental Stream Study and Buffer Mitigation Plan Honey Creek View Estates Ecological Land Services, Inc. December 8, 2005 -4- ·' SUPPLEMENTAL STREAM STUDY INTRODUCTION Ecological Land Services, Inc. (ELS) was contracted by Preferred Engineering, LLC (PELLC) to prepare a Supplemental Stream Study and Stream Mitigation Plan for the I.S-acre site at 3524 NE Sunset Blvd. in Renton, Washington. The site consists of one parcel (0423053030) located inthe southeast 'l1 of Section 4,Township 23 North, Range 5 East W.M., in King County~ Washington (see Figure I). . DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING AREA The adjacent lots to the northeast, east, and southeast of the subject property are vacant, wooded areas, and there are single-family homes along the north side ofNE Sunset Blvd, Two lots south of the subject property each have single-family homes. Scattered single-family homes are located on lots to the northwest accessed by NE 17th Place. Across NE Sunset Blvd. to the south is a single-family residential area with a high density of homes (see Figure 2). EX:U:STJlNG SITE DESCRIPTION . . The subject property is on the north side of NE Sunset Blvd and has one, single-family home located in the southwestern comer of the property. Honey Creek, a perennial stream, flows across the eastern portion of the property from east to northwest. Most of the property is moderately or steeply sloped, generally to the northeast toward Honey Creek. The site is mostly forested with a mixture of conifers and deciduous trees, and there are blackberries throughout the site; A 10-foot wide gravel road and public-utility corridor is located along the north bank of Honey Creek, which is a perennial stream that falls within a Classification 3 stream according to the RMC (see Figure 3). It requires a 75-foot-wide steam buffer as measured from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) (RMC 4-3-050). A previous report by Habitat Technologies (2005) entitled Wetland and Drainage Corridor Evaluation and Delineation Report identifies two, small, slope wetlands in the far southeast comer of the site near the stream. PROPOSED SITE DESCRIPTION Proposed site development includes creating nine single-family residential lots in the western portion of the site and extending an access road to the northwest portion of the property (see Figures 3 and 4). In order to more fully utilize those portions of the property favorable for construction, the applicant proposes to temporarily impact the stream buffer to install underground utilities and install a permanent stormwater-outfall structure near the stream while maintaining ecological functions of the buffer' as required by development regulations in the Renton Municipal Code (RMC) Stormwater facilities are allowed within critical-area buffers according to RMC 4-3-050(C)(6). Supplemental Stream Study and Buffer Mitigation Plan Honey Creek View Estates ~ 5 - Ecological Land Services, Inc. December 8, 2005 .' Proposed development within the 75-foot-wide stream buffer will include an underground stormwater-detention vault, an underground stormwater-discharge pipe, and a permanent outfall structure (see Figures 3 and 4). For these reasons, the applicant proposes to temporarily impact the stream buffer and install a pennanent outfall structure near Honey Creek. The total buffer impact will be 615 square feet). HONEY CREEK AND FUNCTIONAL VALUES OF STREAM BUFFER EXISTING CONDITIONS Topography In general, the site slopes from southwest to northeast toward Honey Creek. The upper portions of the property are approximately 80 feet above the lowest portio~ of the property at Honey Creek. Slopes greater than 40 percent are located in the portion of the stream buffer proposed for temporary impacts from outlet pipe installation. SoRls Soils are mapped by the Soil Conservation Service as Argents, Alderwood material in the southern portion of the site and as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam in the northern portion. of the site. Habitat Technologies (2005) stated that sample plots were similar to descriptions of the Alderwood soil series and that the majority of onsite soils appeared to drain moderately well. Textures observed onsite included gravelly sandy loam, gravelly loam, and silt loam. Vegetation Stream buffer vegetation on the subject site consists of a mixture of conifer and deciduous trees with a high percentage of canopy cover. Tree species include red alder (Alnus rubra), big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera), cherry (Prunus species) Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), western red cedar (Thuja plicata), and western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla). The understory contains a variety of shrubs and herbs: Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armenicus), evergreen blackberry (Rubus laciniatus), trailing blackberry (Rubus ursinus), rose (Rosa spp), Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis), vine maple (Acer circinatum), cascara (Rhamnus purshiana), hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), Pacific red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa), blue elderberry (Sambucus nigra), red huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium), snowberry (Symphoricarpus alb us) Oregon grape (Polystichum munitum), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), stinging nettle (Urtica dioica), Pacific bleeding heait (Dicentra formosa), geranium (Geranium spp.), and false lily-of-the- valley (Maianthemum dilatatum). Wildlife A wildlife assessment was completed by Habitat Technologies (2005) during April and May 2005 and reported in the wetland delineation report. The following topics were discussed: wildlife observations, wildlife movement corridors, state priority species, and federally-listed species. Supplemental Stream Study and Buffer Mitigation Plan Honey Creek View Estates -6- Ecological Land Services, Inc. December 8, 2005 .' To summarize, the project site may provide all of the life-history requirements (nesting, cover, feeding, and reproduction) for many of the smaller, less-mobile species of mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. More mobile species, such as waterfowl, songbirds, and medium-sized mammals, may depend upon adjacent habitat for critical habitat needs (nesting and cover from predators). It is unlikely that species which require large areas of undisturbed habitat would exist onsite based on the existing site conditions and adjacent land uses. Onsite wildlife trails indicated. that small, medium, and large mammals appeared to be moving throughout the stream and buffer area. Bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) are the only. federally-listed species that may occasionally occur on, or fly over,the project site. Downstream from the project site, chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha, listed as threatened) occur in May Creek and Lake Washington. Honey Creek Habitat Honey Creek was described in the wetland delineation report by Habitat Technologies as follows: Along the project site, this stream exhibited a low-flow channel width ranging from approximately two (2)feet to areas of approximately seven (7) feet. The channel was dominated by riffle and shallow glide areas along with a very few scour pools associated with instream debris and large boulders. Channel substrate ranged from scattered pockets of small fines to sections of cobble/large rock. Along much of the channel, the banks were unstable and exhibited areas of active erosion and slides. A public-utility corridor and associated maintenance roadway (dominates the) northern side of this drainage corridor. Functional Ana~ysos of Stream Buffer Stream buffer functions can include water-quality improvement from contaminants, nutrients, and sediments; providing food to the stream ecosystem; moderating the buffer microclimate; moderating stream temperature by providing shade; moderating human disturbances that affect the stream as a result of development; providing large woody debris to the stream and buffer for wildlife habitat and stream complexity; and providing streain-bank stability (A.C. Kindig & Co. 2003). The buffer is fully vegetated for the entire 75-foot buffer width near the project site, providing good water-quality functions, food for the stream ecosystem, some moderation of buffer microclimate, shade for stream-temperature moderation, and a visual screen from human disturbances. Habitat Technologies (2005) does not state the amount of large woody debris or standing snags in the area; however, the site has many trees for woody-debris recruitment. Habitat Technologies states that there were several areas of active streambank erosion along Honey Creek., so the combination of soil types, slope, and vegetation may not be performing bank-stability functions. Some bank erosion is expected in natural systems as part of the process of channel migration; however, the report did not state if the likely cause of erosion was stream buffer deficiencies or human disturbance. Supplemental Stream Study and Buffer Mitigation Plan Honey Creek View Estates -7- Ecological Land Services, Inc. December 8, 2005 SITE-DESIGN ALTERNATIVES AND RATIONALE FOR CHOICES One alternative for site layout would be to place the stormwater facility near the northern property line in Lot 6 and create a lot in the general location of Tract A. Temporary impacts to the outer edge of the buffer would be eliminated; however, that configuration would put a home closer to the edge of the 40 percent slope, and the building envelope would be small. In addition, the lot setback requirements would not be met if this alternative was implemented. However, placing homes farther away from the steep slope further protects the home, creates a larger, flatter home site, and maximizes stream and buffer protection from potential impacts due to residentiaI uses. Potential impacts to water quality can come from sediment from earth- disturbing activities, fertilizer and pesticide use, as well as from pet waste. Stormwater-detention ponds are an alternative to a vault for detention purposes; however, vaults may be placed underground to eliminate hazards involved with water bodies. Ponds attract children; require fencing; take up more room, which could reduce the number of lots by two; and are difficult to design. and construct on a slope. In addition, stagnant waters increase the potential fD.r harboring mosquitoes that carry West Nile Virus. AVOIDANCE The project has been designed to avoid impacts to the stream and most of the stream buffer; however, a stormwater detention vault, an underground stormwater pipeline, and an outfall structure will be located within the stream buffer. Only the outfall structure will remain' permanent; the utilities will be located underground and native plants will be replanted in all of the disturbed buffer areas with the exception of the outfall and a small area over the vault, which cannot be replanted for maintenance reasons. These impacts could not be avoided, because site topography requires the stormwater facility to be constructed at a lower elevation than the proposed development, and the pipeline through the buffer is necessary to convey stormwater to Honey Creek. The vault location is necessary to allow access to Lot 8 and to meet setback requirements. Currently, runoff from the proposed construction area of the site flows toward the creek. MINIMIZATION Design of the stormwater system was intended to minimize impacts to Honey Creek and its buffer. The only permanent above-ground structure proposed is the outfall to Honey Creek that is necessary to prevent streambank erosion. Impacts to the stream buffer will be minimized by using stormwater best-management practices during design and construction of the stormwater facility according to stormwater manuals by King County (King County 2005) and the Department of Ecology (Ecology 2005). Additionally, the following stream-buffer restrictions and maintenance standards will be followed (RMC 4-3-050(L)(6)): preservation of native vegetation will be preserved to the extent Supplemental Stream Study and Buffer Mitigation Plan Honey Creek View Estat~s - 8 - Ecological Land Services, Inc. December 8, 2005 possible, disturbed areas will be revegetated with native species, undesirable plant species will be controlled, and there will be no impervious surfaces within the buffer area. IMPACT EVALUATION PROPOSED IMPACTS Temporary construction impacts to the stream buffer include clearing, trenching, and grading activities during installation of the following stormwater structures: ., Stormwater detention vault f) Outlet pipeline from stormwater vault to Honey Creek Penilanent stream-buffer impacts include the following structures and activities: • Outfall structure (design and construction techniques will be ill accordance with stormwater BMPs in 2005 King County and Department of Ecology stormwater manuals) . ., Removal of up to 5 native trees (with varying breast-height diameters of8-12 inches) will be required for pipeline construction in the buffer. No new trees will be planted in this corridor so roots will not affect the pipeline. COMPENSATION AND RESTORATION Proposed compensation for impacts to the stream buffer include vegetating cleared areas with native shrubs and herbaceous plants, and enhancing the buffer with 4 to 5 pieces of large woody debris to improve wildlife habitat. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS TO WATERSHED No cumulative impacts to the watershed are expected as a result of this project. Potential temporary impacts to water quality from sedimentation and erosion will be prevented by implementing BMPs as required by the King County and Department of Ecology stormwater BMPs as previously described. Areas of cleared vegetation will be mulched and planted with native shrubs and herbaceous plants. Supplemental Stream Study and Buffer Mitigation Plan Honey Creek View Estates -9- Ecological Land Services, Inc. December 8, 2005 ,.' STREAM BUFFER MITGATION PLAN FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED STREAM BUFFER A functional analysis of existing stream-buffer conditions is discussed above in the supplemental stream study. The proposed project is not expected to permanently impact functions of the stream buffer, because the only permanent, above-ground structure proposed for the project is the outfall near Honey Creek. Four to five trees will be removed to install the underground outlet pipeline to the creek, which is not expected to change any of the seven stream-buffer functions addressed above. There will be numerous trees remaining in the buffer, and trees removed for pipeline installation will be placed horizontally in the buffer to provide large woody debris for wildlife habitat enhancement. The outfall structure has been designed according to King County and Department of Ecology stormwater standards (see Figures 3 and 4). Potential temporary impacts to the buffer and stream will be avoided by implementing construction BMPs and planting native shrubs in the outlet pipeline corridor. A three-year monitoring period will report deviations from the mitigation plan and a contingency plan will be implemented if problems arise. RESPONsmLE PARTIES The applicant or other assigned parties will be responsible for implementing the mitigation requirements as described in this plan. GOAL, OBJECTIVES, AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS The goal of this mitigation plan is to protect Honey Creek and its buffer during the site- construction period and to restore buffer areas cleared of native vegetation. To accomplish this goal, the following objectives and performance standards have been developed to give the mitigation plan the best opportunity for success. Objective 1. Install native plants on 5-foot centers above outfall pipeline shown in Figure 3 (approximately 360 square feet). Performance Standard 1 a. The survival of planted species will be at least 90' percent in Years 1 and 2, and 80 percent in Year 3. Objective 2. Implement required stormwater BMPs . Performance Standard 2a. All onsite construction will be performed according to stormwater BMPs required by the City of Renton. This includes the design, construction, and maintenance requirements of the outfall structure near Honey Creek. Objective 3. Place a minimum 4 pieces of large woody debris in buffer. Performance Standard 3a. Place 4 or 5 pieces of large woody debris from pipeline clearing into the stream buffer area behind existing trees to prevent logs from rolling downhill. This Supplemental Stream Study and Buffer Mitigation Plan Honey Creek View Estates -10- Ecological Land Services, Inc. December 8, 2005 performance standard will be considered complete when the as-built report is submitted to the City of Renton showing locations of the installed large woody debris. Objective 4. Provide long-term, legally-binding protection for buffor. Performance Standard 4a. A conservation covenant will be established for the stream buffer area of the site. This performance standard will be completed when the City of Renton records the conservation covenant and a copy is provided in the Year 1 monitoring report. CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE Construction will take place in the summer months between mid June and late August 2006 to minimize runoff potential within the buffer. In addition, salmon runs downstream of the project site will not begin until September. Mulching, temporary erosion and sediment control practices, silt fencing, and NGPE fencing will be installed prior. to September 1, 2006. Planting will be done from November 2006 to March 2007 when plants are dormant and soil moisture is high. SITE PREP AHA TION SPECIFICATIONS The following tasks will be performed prior to construction to avoid stream-buffer impacts. t) Stake or flag the stream buffer and clearing limits. . fj) Perform stormwater BMPs as required to protect stream and buffer from water- quality impacts. PLANT MATERIALS Plant materials will conform to the following criteria: o Container stock will be kept moist until installation. o Containerized plants will be a minimum of I8-inches tall. o Container stock will have a well-developed root system and will not be excessively root bound. \!) The planter will be responsible for inspecting container stock prior to and during planting; the planter will cull unacceptable plant materials. . Supplemental Stream Study and Buffer Mitigation Plan Honey Creek View Estates -11 - Ecological Land Services, Inc. December 8, 2005 ·, REVEGETATION SPECIFICATIONS The following table summarizes plant numbers, species, type of stock, and spacing requirements. Only native plant species will be installed, ornamental varieties are not acceptable. Table 1. Vegetation Specifications Wetland Buffer Enhancement (approximately 360 square/eel) Quantity Common Name Scientific Name Type of Stock Spacing (feet) 10 Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis '. Container 5 10 Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus Container 5 10 SwordFem Polvstichum munitum Container 3 10 LadyFern Athyrium felix-femina Container 3 40 Total PLANT][NG Plants will be installed at the specified spacing shown in Table 1. Shrub and herbaceous species will be planted in groups of3, 4, or 5 using 5-foot spacing for shrubs and 3-foot spacing for ferns that mimics natural plant colonies to improve survivability. The following planting procedures will be used: o Container plants will be purchased from a native plant nursery. e Dig 24-inch-wide planting hole that is 6-inches deeper than the root system and scarify sides of hole to 4-inches. Ii) Remove the plant from the container and loosen roots with hand or score vertically on sides and bottom with knife. II) Set plant upright and plumb in hole so the crown is 1-to 2-inches above the finish grade. Q Replace loose soil around plant and firmly compact the soil around the plant to eliminate . air spaces. Do not use frozen soil for backfilling. MATTING Weed mat~ will be placed around the base of planted species to reduce competition from existing vegetation. Mats will be 3-feet square and are made of plastic. Mats will be secured using six- inch staples on each comer and in the center of the mat. MAINTENANCE The mitigation area will be maintained regularly during the three-year monitoring period to assess plant survival, control invasive species, and provide adequate nutrients. Invasive species will be controlled by hand during the late fall and early spring. Plants will be irrigated with a temporary above-ground irrigation system or hand watered approximately every two weeks Supplemental Stream Study and Buffer Mitigation Plan Honey Creek View Estates -12 - Ecological Land Services, Inc. December 8, 2005 ·. ". during the dry season (July I-October 15). The maintenance will specifically involve the following activities: Ii) Hand-weed unwanted vegetation around all newly-installed plants and on a routine basis throughout the monitoring period. e Irrigate plants as necessary during the dry season, approximately July 1 through October 15. We recommend that watering occur at least every two weeks during the dry season. Water will be provided by a temporary above-ground irrigation system or by hand watering. e Replace dead or failed plants, as described for the original installation, to meet the annual performance standards of 90 percent survival in Years 1 and 2 and 80 percent survival in Year 3 . . Minor corrective actions will be undertaken as a part of routine maintenance to ensure the success of the planted species. Possible corrective actions include: ., Replacing failed plants with different species ., Implementing anti-herbivory measures ., Controlling invasive, non..:riative species AS-BUlL T REPORT An as-built report will be submitted to the City of Renton within three months of planting. The report will include a description of the project, number, and species of plants installed, and photographs of the planted areas. CONTINGENCY PLAN If mitigation areas are failing or the performance criteria are not met, steps will be taken to correct the situation in a timely manner. The following steps will be implemented when an area is identified as failing or potentially failing: o Identify the cause(s) of the failure or potential failure . ., Identify the extent of the failure or potential failure. I) Implement corrective actions such as irrigating, fertilizing, and replanting. Gil Document the activities and include this data in the annual monitoring and maintenance reports. e In the event that a routine corrective action will not correct the problem, immediately consult with the appropriate agencies. • Evaluate recommendations from the City of Woodland and implement recommendations in a timely manner. MONITORING PLAN Planted areas will be monitored annually during the growing season (generally April through June) for a three-year period following plant installation. Monitoring reports will be submitted Supplemental Stream Study and Buffer Mitigation Plan Honey Creek View Estates -13 - Ecological Land Services, Inc. December 8, 2005 ·' to the City of Renton by December 31 of each year. The monitoring goal is to determine if the previously-stated performance standards are being met. . PHOTOGRAPHS Photographs will be taken from photo-points that will be established for the as-built report. Photograph locations will be shown on the site map and will be included in each monitoring report. MONITORING REpORT CONTENTS Monitoring reports will, at minimum, contain the following items: e Location map (including photo-point locations) and as-built drawing . ., Historic description of project, includiJ;lg dates of plant installation, current year of monitoring, and restatement of mitigation goals, objectives, and performance standards. • Documentation of plant surVival and overall development of the plant communities . ., Assessment of non-native, invasive plant species and recommendations for management. e Assessment of other buffer conditions, e.g. surrounding land use, use by humans, and use by wild and domestic animals, presence of wetland buffer signs. o Observations of wildlife including, amphibians, invertebrates, reptiles, birds, and mammals. .. e Photographs from permanent photo points . ., Summary of maintenance and contingency measures proposed for the next season and completed for the past season. SITE PROTECTION The applicant will establish and record a permanent and irrevocable deed restriction before final plat approval on the non-developed areas of the property. The legal owner of the property, or homeowners association by assignment, will be responsible for following its requirements. COST ESTIMATE Total costs to implement the mitigation plan include direct costs and labor for mitigation installation, as-built reporting, three years of monitoring and reporting, three years of maintenance, and coordination between the applicant, mitigation contractor(s), and the City of Renton. The estimated cost for this project is $11,000, which does not include the costs of installing stormwater BMPs. COMPLIANCE WITH RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE The supplemental stream study and stream buffer mitigation plan were written in accordance with requirements listed in RMC 4-8-120(D)(J9). City code allows "stormwater management facilities in critical area buffers, including stormwater dispersion outfall systems designed to minimize impacts to the buffer and critical area where the site topography requires their location Supplemental Stream Study and Buffer Mitigation Plan Honey Creek View Estates -14- Ecological Land Services, Inc. December 8, 2005 within the buffer to allow hydraulic function, provided the standard buffer zone area associated with the critical area classification is retained pursuant to subsection L or M6c (of RMe 4-3-050) and is sited to reduce impacts between th,e critical area and surrounding activities." This project meets RMC requirements, because site topography requires the stormwater system to be located downslope of the development. Stormwater systems are required to be gravity controlled; pumps are not allowed in stormwater systems. The facility is sited to reduce impacts between the critical area and site activities by placing the stormwater facility between the buffer and residential areas, which pose a greater potential for impacting the stream buffer. In addition, Honey Creek is a Classification 3 stream, requiring a 75-foot buffer width (RMe 4-3- 05 0 (L) (5)(a)(i)). This buffer width will be retained. PROFICIENCY The applicant will p~ovide appropriate levels of oversight during project construction, planting, maintenance, monitoring, and reporting phases of this project to ensure that results meet the .above-stated performance standards and deadlines. This project was designed by Ecological Land Services, Inc. (ELS), in cooperation with the applicant and project engineer. ELS has over 12 years experience in the design, installation, planting, maintenance, and monitoring of wetland mitigation projects throughout Washington. Likelihood of success of this project is excellent if the provisions in this plan are followed by a contractor experienced in implementing construction stormwater BMPs and installing native plants. In addition, it is important to hire a qualified person or company to monitor the site, prepare monitoring reports according to this plan, and has proven experience to prepare specific contingency plans. Mitigation site maintenance also needs to be implemented in a timely manner until native vegetation is re-established in the disturbed areas. This project will be a success if the above-mentioned tasks are implemented according to this plan. . Supplemental Stream Study and Buffer Mitigation Plan Honey Creek View Estates -15 - Ecological Land Services, Inc. December 8, 2005 " REFERENCES A.C. Kindig & Co. 2003.· Best Available Science Literature Review and Stream Buffer Recommendations. Bellevue, Washington. Prepared for the City of Renton. February 27. City of Renton. 2005. Renton Municipal Code. Web site accessed November 28,2005: http://search.mrsc.org/nxtlgateway .dIVmtnmc/renton04/renton04.html Cedarock Consultants, Inc. 2003. City of Renton Best Available Science Literature Review and Stream Buffer Recommendations. Prepared for the City of Renton, Washington. February 27. http://rentonnet.org/intemetapps/files/ednsp/caostrea.pdf. King County. 2005. King County Stormwater Design Manual. Seattle, Washington. Habitat Technologies. 2005. Wetland and Drainage Corridor Evaluation and Di!lineation Report. Puyallup, Washington. Prepared for Phil Kitzes, PK Enterprises. September 23. Washington Department of Ecology. 2005. Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. Washington State Department of Ecology Publications #05-10-029 through 05- 10.;.033. Olympia, Washington.' . Supplemental Stream Study and Buffer Mitigation Plan Honey Creek View Estates -16- Ecological Land Services, Inc. December 8, 2005 WASHINGTON CJ 47° 30' 27" N Latitude 122° 10' 18n W Longitude LOCATION MAP R5E NOTE: PROJECT VICINITY MAP , I r Iii a U~GS topographic quadrangle map reproduced using MAPTECH. Inc. software Terrain Navigator. ~~:~CERINC. 1157,3rd Ave .• Suite 220 Longview. WA 98632 (360) 578-1371 Fax: (360) 414-9305 Dec 09, 2005 -3.30pM DATE 12::08:05 OWN. .I.II APPR. PROJ. # 1299.03 Figure 1 VICINITY MAP Honey Creek View Preferred Engineering,llC. City of Renton, King County, Washington Section 4 Townshio 23N Rance 5E W.M. SI\Klng-I,/A\Renton\1299-Lee\1299.03-Honey Creek Vlew\1299.03-Flgures\1299.03-sl"I-ss-nwl-l107-05.clwg o 100 200 J ' ... 1 SCALE IN FEET 1157 3rd Avenue Suite 220 Longview, WA 98632 (360) 578-1371 Fax: (360)414-9305 Dec 09, 2005 -3129pM DATE OWN. APPR. NOTE: Aerial photo & Parcel Map provided online by King County at web address http://www5.metrokc.gov, 2002 12::llB:a5 .I.II Figure 2 .AERIAl PHOTOGRAPH Honey Creek View Preferred Engineering, llC. PROJ. # 1299.03 City of Renton, King County, Washington Section 4 Township 23N Ranoe 5E W.M. S'\Klng-WA\Renton\1299-Lee\1299.03-Honey Creek Vlew\1299.03-Figures\1299.03-sM-ss-nwi-l107-G5.dwg a " --~: <:;{L.2:2. E$' (~ J::: ::: -=r-::' . . "-v __ . -- legend: Property Boundary ..-Buffer Impact Area 1+ +1 Wetland (615 sq. ft) -------Wetland Buffer ~ Existing Contour ~ ... -Honey Creek .",..,.--OHWM-Ordinary Stream Buffer ""-----High Water Mark AI---iA' Cross Section Location ---- Dec 09. 2005 -3:35pm S:iKing-WA \Renton\ 1299-lee\ 1299 .03-Honey Creek View\ 1299.03-Rgures\ 1299.03-sm-els _ 2-120805.dwg \ \ -- I \ ./ '1 I _ NOTE: Plants are not to sd;ale and location are approximate as shown. Actual planting locations will be determined'in the field;. with consideration to the abbve listed spacing and density to . I produce the most natural ap,pearance possible. NOTE: Base map provided /bY City of Renton. 0 I 40 80 I i ! ! SCA~E IN FEET I 1 t:~ -§,~ .5: -• oJ:: W ~II)IO roO) ~~3: 0> 0)0> _t: a.. 5·5: :;.~ C")<c~Q;§~:::2:O)O)oZ :::Iw ~.5:UC") .2>1-() g> 0> N " U. ->-w .5: .9-en 0) ~ oJ:: t: '0 II) 00) -t: ~ UJ ~ 0 <..> Z en W 0 ~ w tI) 0 Z ~ It::::t:~ 0)..90 ~ z ~ 0 'Q}5j1-a:o::..f ci Il. Il. ~ ot: :;.g ._ 0 uO) CJ) i -; 0 0:: Il. N M co ~.IO 0 ( ~~ 5:~ CDO::-~U Nu.. CD .... == ..... ::1M en .... :cb CD ..... ~~ -0 0 ... co M (') ..... ~ ... 10 ;/I. '-" Dec 09. 2005· 3:35pm A _____ 75'-Stream1luffer-'l-~------ProposeirCleanngDmiC __ __ 375,--.--.-.. ------------.... ----.. j' \. . I rock rip rap I sand layer gravel layer existing grade level spreader plate. bolted to anchor post 2' (min) embedded into existing ground t. . Am --1'---'~--'--'------------'--I 375 ~ 365 _ r ___ -,-______ ~;,:==-+--'--------------------__----~--~--"---------.. ( ~--.. -------.~ -----·--·-·----1365 u. 355 ___ . ________ . ______ .,...-___ . __ '1 ________ ._._--______ . ___ ._ . _______ ;==., ~ '. .. .. I . Honey Creek Z . . Stormwater Detention 1-------= ~~-.---.. --.----.--... -.-.. -... -----.--... -------.'-... -.. --.-.-.------.---.... ----.-. ·-_···f··-------··-----~----I··--·--1355 wi .. V It - . 1 .-="'=:.==-..' ;i 345 _ .. _____ . ______ . __________ ... __ L ___ ....: ___ . _____ h_. __ ~~ ___ . _____ ... ___ ... ....J _________ : __________ . __ ~ ~~-------:---. _. ______ . __ \Ordinary High Water Mark o . . . . ===~~ . ---.--.--.-.---.----\---.--.. -.---1-.--•.. -----.--.-·-'--1--~----1-·--·1345 C/) ~ g 335 -.. ~ .. -.. -.---... ----... ,,-.-.: ..... -.. -.----~-,,-.. --.... ----.-.--... -. ---. .. .. ---.--.-. '--'-'---.. ----.-... --.-------... _h' -..... -----••• ---~ ~.~--~------... --_\-.-- -~~. ffi 325 ... ----"'---... ---. --.. ---.. --~--"':' .-.. ,--.-----..... --... -' -..... -.... -.. -.-...... --._ .. -.... --.~ " .-.-.. --.----.-'--'---.-,,---... ----.--.. -.-.--...... --.,,----.--------.. -------.. ~-~~-~ > ==0l'Pb ---~ .. ---. 325 315 1----.-.-. .,..- O' 10 20 HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET NOTE: Vertical Scale as shown NOTE: Stormwater drawing typical provided by City of Renton. o 10 20 I ! I HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET 30 40 50 60 ECOLOGICAL LAND SERVICES, INC. ~ l@-==~=-- 1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220 Longview, WA 98632 (360) 578-1371 Fax: (360) 414-9305 70 80 90 DATE 12-08-05 DWN. MPM APPR. REVIS. 1299.03 ·II~~C>I 1/ ~315 100 I . 110 120' I' Figure 4 . I PROFILE VIEW A-A' .. \ Honey Creek View Preferred Engineering. LLC. City of R~nton. King County, Washington Section 4,!Township 23N, Range 5E, W.M. S:lKing-WAiRentonI1299-LeeI1299.03-Honey Creek View\1299.0~i9ures\1299.03-sm-e'.s..2-120805.dw9 I,; DECLARATIONS OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR THE HONEY CREEK VIEW HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION THIS DECLARATION is made on the date hereinafter set forth by PK ENTERPRISES. AND/OR ASSIGNS, (Declarant), the owner of certain land situated in the State of Washington, City of Renton, King County, known as Honey Creek View, which is more particularly described in Exhibit A. In order to ensure preservation of the gracious residential environment at Honey Creek View, Declarant agrees and covenants, that all land and improvements now existing or hereafter constructed thereon will be held, sold, conveyed subject to, and burdened by the following covenants, conditions, restrictions, reservations, limitations, liens and easement, all of which are for the purpose of enhancing and protecting the value, desirability and attractiveness of such lands for the benefit of all such lands and the owners thereof and their heirs, successors, grantees and assigns .. All provisions of this Declaration shall be binding upon all parties having or acquiring any right, title or interest in such lands or any portion thereof and shall insure to the benefit of each owner thereof and to the benefit of Honey Creek View Homeowners Association and shall otherwise in all respects be regarded as covenants nmning with the land. Contents ARTICLE I ARTICLE II ARTICLE III ARTICLE IV ARTICLE V ARTICLE VI ARTICLE VII ARTICLE VIII ARTICLE IX ARTICLE X ARTICLE XI ARTICLE XII ARTICLE XIII DEFINITIONS PRE-EXISTING RESTRICTIONS DEVELOPMENT PERIOD· EASEMENTS, OPEN SPACES & TRACTS ASSESSMENTS MAINTENANCE OF LOTS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION MANAGEMENT BY BOARD LAND USE RESTRICTIONS BUILDING RESTRICTIONS UTILITIES ARClllTECTURAL CONTROL GENERAL PROVISION 2 3 3 4 5 7 9 9 12 l3 14 14 17 (- " r. ARTICLE I DEFlNITIONS 2 For purposes of the Declaration and the Articles of Incorporation and the Bylaws of the Honey Creek View Homeowner's Association, certain words and phrases shall have particular meaning as follows: Section 1. "Association" shall mean and refer to the Honey Creek View Homeowners' Association, its successors and assigns. Section 2. "Board" shall mean and refer to the Board of Directors of the Association, as provided for in Article IX. For the purposes of exercising the powers and duties' assigned in this Declaration to the Board. this term shall also mean the "Temporary Board" or "Declarant" as provided in Article IV unless the language or context indicates otherwise. Section 3. "Properties" shall mean and refer to the real property described with particularly in Exhibit A. Section 4. "Lot" shall mean and refer to any plot of land shown upon any recorded subdivision map of the Properties. This term shall not include tracts designated on the face of the Plat. Section 5. "Declarant" shall mean and refer to PK Enterprises, its successors and assigns. Successors and assigns shall not include other· developers who acquire one or more undeveloped lot from the Declarant for the purpose of development. Section 6. "Architectural Control Committee" shall mean and refer to the duly appointed or elected committee of the Board of Directors as outlined in Article xrn of this Declaration, hereinafter referred to as the "Committee". Section 7. "Development Period" shall mean and refer to that period of time defined in Article In of this declaration. Section 8. "Plat" shall mean and refer to the plat of Lots 1-11, inclusive Honey Creek View as recorded in Volume of Plats, Pages , Records of King County, State of Washington, under Recording No. ______ _ Section 9. "Residence" shall mean and refer to any buildings occupying any lot. Section 10: "Owner" shall mean and refer to the record owner, whether one or more persons or entities, of a fee interest in any Lot, including the Declarant, but excluding mortgagees or other persons or entities only holding security interest in " 3 properties within the Plat. Purchasers or assignees under recorded real estate contracts shall be deemed Owners as against their respective sellers or assignors. Section 11. "Building setbacks" are areas designated on the face of the plat adjacent to sensitive areas, such as property lines or utilities. ARTICLEll PRE-EXISTING RESTRICTIONS The Properties shall continue to be subject to preVious covenants, conditions, encumbrances and restrictions, to the extent that such restrictions are valid. ARTICLEll DEVELOPMENT PERIOD; MANAGEMENT RIGHTS OF DECLARANT DURING DEVELOPMENT ' Section 1. Management by Declarant. "Development period" shall mean that period of time from the date of recording this Declaration until (1) a date five years from the date of recording this Declaration or (2) the thirtieth day after Declarant has transferred title to the purchasers of the lots representing 99 percent of the total voting power of all Lot owners as then constituted or (3) the date on which Declarant elects to permanently relinquish all of Declarant's authority under this Article by written notice to all Owners, whichever date first occurs. During the Develop Period, the Board of Directors of the Association shall be appointed by ,the Declarant. Section 2. Notices to Owners. Before the termination of the DeVelopment Period, the Declarant will give written notice of the termination of the Development Period to the owner of each Lot. Said notice shall specify the date when the' Development Period will terminate and shall further notify the Owners of the date, place and time when a meeting of the Association will be held. The notice shall specify that the purpose of the Association meeting is to elect new Officers and Directors of the Association, notwithstanding and provision of the Articles or Bylaws of the Association to the contrary, for the purpose of this meeting, the presence, either in person or by proxy, of the Owners of five lots shall constitute a quorum. The Board of Directors and officers of the Association may be elected by majority vote of said quorum. If a quorum is not present, the Development period shall nevertheless terminate on that date specified in said notice and it shall thereafter be the responsibility of the ,Lot Owners to provide for the operation of the Association. Section 3. Temporary Board. Declarant may in its sole discretion, and at such times as the Declarant deems appropriate, appoint three persons who may be Owners, or representatives of corporate entities or other entities which are Owners, as a Temporary Board. During the Development Period, members of the Board of Directors need not be the Owners. The Temporary Board shall have full authority and all rights, 4 responsibilities, privileges and duties to manage the properties under this Declaration and shall be subject to all provisions of this Declaration, the Articles and the Bylaws. Section 4. Appointment of Manager. Declarant may appoint a managing agent, which shall have the power and authority to exercise all powers necessary to carry out the provisions of this Declaration, including but not limited to contracting for required services, obtaining property and liability insurance, and collecting and expending all assessments and Association funds. Any such management agent or the Declarant shall have the exclusive right to contract for all goods and services, payment for which is to be made from any monies collected from assessments. Section 5. Acceptance of Management Authority. The purpose of this· management arrangement is to ensure that the properties will be adequately managed during the initial stages of development. Acceptance of an interest in a lot evidences acceptance of this management agreement. ARTICLE IV EASEMENTS, OPEN SPACES AND PRIVATE TRACTS Section 1. Drainage TractJEasement Restrictions. A drainage tract with easements is indicated on the face of the Plat. S1ructures, fills, and obstructions, including, but not limited to decks, patios and buildings, overhangs, and trees shall not be permitted within drainage tract. The easements give the City of Renton the right to enter . upon the said easements, and the area immediately adjacent to said easements, in order to effectuate the purposes of the easement, or to construct a hard surface road among the easements. Section 2. Utility Easements. Various utility easements are designed on the face of the Plat for the purpose of providing Lots within the Plat with electric, telephone, gas, cable television service and water. These easements give the easement-holders the right to enter upon these Lots at all times to effectuate the purposes of the easements. Not utility lines shall be. placed on any Lot unless underground or in a conduit attached to a building. Structures may only be placed on easements with the permission of the Architectural Control Committee and the entity to which the easement was granted. No planting material, fill, or other substances may be placed on the utility easement which will interfere with such utility service. Section 3. Structures Prohibited in Rights-of-Way. All rights-of-way within the . Plat have been dedicated to the City of Renton. No structures may be placed in rights-of- way within the Plat. Section 4 .. Maintenance of Detention and Water Quality System. The Home Owners Association shall maintain the detention and water quality system and emergency access roads until such time that those improvements are deeded or sold to a 5 governmental agency, which will assume maintenance and. responsibility of such improvements. ARTICLE V ASSESSMENTS Section 1. Creation of Lien and Personal Obligation. Each Owner of any Lot by acceptance of a deed therefore, whether or not it shall be expressed in such deed, is deemed to covenant and agree to pay the Association (1) annual assessments or charges and (2) special assessments. Annual and special assessments shall be established and . collected in accord with the following provisions. The annual and special assessments, together with interest, cost and reasonable attorney's fees, shall be a charge on the land and shall be a continuing lien upon the property against which such assessment is made. Each assessment, together with the interest, costs and reasonable attorneys' fees incurred to collect such assessments, shall· be the personal obligation of the individual who is the Owner of the Lot at the time that the assessment fell due. Section 2. Purpose of Assessments. The assessments imposed by the Association shall be used (l) to promote recreation, health, safety and welfare of the residents of the properties, (2) for the cost of maintaining the recreational area within the Plat, (3) for legal fees or damage incurred in any action in which the Association or a member of the Board of Architectural Control Committee, acting in behalf of the Homeowners' Association is named as a party, (4) for legal fees incurred by the Homeowners' Association, (5) for any other reasonable expenses incurred by the Homeowners' Association. (6) for maintenance of the common storm facility. Section 3. Annual Assessment. The initial annual assessment shall be $ per Lot payable in annual installments; six percent of the assessment shall be allocated and . paid to the Declarant for Plat management services provided by the Declarant to the Association or by a Professional management firm. Such allocated funds to the Declarant shall cease when the Development Period expires and the Association assumes collection costs, bookkeeping and other management responsibilities which are described with particularity in the Bylaws of the Association. The annUal assessment may be increased during the Development Period to reflect increased (1) maintenance costs, (2) repair costs, (3) Association and plat management costs, (4) legal costs. All increases in the annual assessment during the Development Period must directly reflect increase in the above-recited costs. During the Development Period, it shall not be necessary to amend this Declaration to raise the annual assessments. During the Development Period, the Declarant shall give members of the Association notice of any increase in the annual assessment thirty days before the date that the assessment becomes effective. (a) After the Development Period expires, any increase in the annual assessment which exceeds 10 percent requires the vote of the members of the Association. 6 (b) After the Development Period expires, any increases in the annual assessment which exceeds 10% requires the approval of 51 % of the members of the Association. (c) After the Development Period expires, the Board of Directors shall fix the quarterly assessment in accord with the above-recited standards . . Section 4. Special Assessments for Capital Improvements. If needed, an addition to the annual assessments authorized above, the Association may levy, in any assessment year, a special assessment, applicable to that year only, for the purpose of defraying, in whole or in part, the cost of any construction, reconstruction, repair or replacement of a capital improvement within the Plat including fixtUres and personal property relating thereto, provided that any such assessment shall have the assent of 51 percent of the members of the Association who are voting on person or by proxy at a meeting held duly called for this purpose. Any capital improvements, which exceed $15,000.00, must be approved by 51 percent of the Owners. Section 5. Special Assessments for Legal Fees and Damages. In addition to the special assessment authorized in Section 4, the Declarant or the Association may levy any assessment year a special assessment for the purpose of defraying, in whole or in part, (1) legal fees and costs incurred in any action in which the· Association is a party, (2) legal fees and costs incurred in any action in which a member of either the Board or the Architectural Control· Committee is named as a party as a result of a decision made or action performed while acting in behalf of the Homeowners' Association, or (3) any other reasonable expenses incurred by the Homeowners' Association. lbis assessment shall require the constant of 51 percent of the Association who are voting in person or by proxy at a meeting duly called for this purpose. Section 6. Notice and Quorum for Any Action Authorized Under Section 4 and 5. Written notice of any meeting called for the purpose of taking any action authorized under Sections 4 and 5 of this Article shall be sent to all members not less than 30 days and nor more than 60 days in advance of the meeting. At the first meeting called, the presence of 51 percent of the members of the Association of or proxies entitled to cast 51 perc~t of the members of the Association shall constitute a quorum. If the required quorum is not present, another meeting may be called to subject to the .same notice requirement; the required quorum at the subsequent meeting shall be one-half of the required quorum at the preceding meeting. Section 7. Uniform Rate of Assessment Both annual and special assessments must be fixed at a uniform rate for all Lots. Section 8. Date of Commencement of Annual Assessment. Due Dates. The annual assessments described in this· Article shall commence on . The first annual assessment shall be adjusted according to the number of months remaining in the calendar year. Written notice of the Quarterly assessment shall be sent to every Owner 7 subject to such assessments. The Board of Directors shall establish the due date. The Association shall, upon demand and for reasonable charge, furnish a certificate signed by an officer of the Association setting forth whether the assessment on a specific Lot has been paid. A properly executed certificate of the Association as to the status of assessments on a Lot is binding upon the Association as the date of its issuance. Section 9. Effect of Non-Payment of AsSessments: Remedies of the Association. Any assessment not paid within 30 days of the due date shall bear interest at the rate of 12 percent per annum. Each owner hereby expressly vests in the Association or its agents the right and power to bring all actions against such Owners personally for the collection of such assessments as debts and to enforce lien rights of the Association by all methods available for the enforcement of such liens, including foreclosure by an action brought in the name of the Association in like manner as a mortgage of real property. Such Owner hereby expressly grants the Association the power of sale in connection with such liens. The liens provided for in this section shall be in favor of the Association and sliall be for the benefit of the Association. The Association shall have the power to bid in an interest and foreclosure sale and to acquire, hold, lease, mortgage and convey the same. The Owner is responsible for the payment of all attorneys' fees incurred in collecting past due assessments or enforcing the terms of assessment liens. No Owner may waive or otherwise escape liability for the assessments provided herein this Agreement. The Association shall have the right to suspend the voting rights of an Owner for and period during which any assessment which the Lot remains unpaid and for a period not to exceed 60 days for any infraction of the terms of either this Declaration, the Articles or the Bylaws of the Association. Section 10. Subordination of the Lien to Mortgage. The lien for assessments, provided for in this Article, shall be subordinated to the lien of any first mortgage. Sale or transfer of any Lot shall not affect the assessment lien. However, the sale or transfer of any Lot pursuant to a mortgage foreclosure, or any proceeding in lieu thereof, shall extinguish the lien created pursuant to this Article as to payments which become due prior to such sale or transfer. No sale of transfer, however, shall relieve such Lot from liability for any assessments thereafter ~oming due or from the lien thereof. Section 11.· Exempt Property. All property dedicated to and accepted by local public authority shall be exempt from assessments provided by this Article. ARTICLE VI MAINTENANCE OF LOTS Section 1. Exterior Maintenance by Owner. Owner shall maintain each Lot and Residence in a nea~ clean and attractive condition at all times. . 8 (a). Street Trees. The street trees planted within and / or abutting individual Lots shall be owned and maintained by the Owners of said Lots·and the trees planted within and / or abutting the private and public tracts within he Plat shall be owned and maintained by the Honey Creek View Homeowners Association. (b). Refuse. All lots shall be kept free of debris. All refuse shall be kept in sanitary containers screened from view of and Lot in the Plat; the containers shall be regularly, emptied and the contents disposed of off the Properties, No grass cuttings, leaves, limbs, branches, and other debris from vegetation shall be dumped or allowed to acCumulate on any part of the Properties, except that a regularly tended compost heap shall be permitted if the compost heap is concealed from view of any of the properties. (c). Storage of Vehicles. Owners may not store goods or equipment or permanently parked vehicles (e.g. boats, cars, trucks, campers, and recreational vehicles) in open view of any Lot, or allow others to do so. When vehicles or goods are permanately parked or stored on Lots for a period over 24 hours, other than in the circumstances described below in subsection (e) of this section, the vehicles and goods shall be adequately screened from the view of adjacent right of ways and Lots. The screening of such vehicles of goods must have the approval of the Architectural Control Committee. Cd). Improperly Parked. Vehicles. Upon 48 hours notice to Owners of an improperly parked vehicle, the Board has the authority to have towed, at the Owners expense, any vehicles that are parked in violation of this section. Ce). Temporary Parking by Owners. This section does not prevent Owners from parking automobiles and trucks on driveways when the Owners are out of town. (0. Temporary Parking by Guests. This section does not prevent guests. from parking automobiles, trucks or recreational vehicles in driveways for a period of four days: However, if the guests either (1) plan to park their vehicles in driveways or (2) stay in their recreational· vehicles for a period in excess of four days, the Owners must obtain permission from the Board . . (g). Dilapidated. Unsightly Vehicles. Neither Owners nor their guestS are allowed to park dilapidated, dysfunctional or unsightly vehicles in driveways. Section 2. Easement for Enforcement Purposes. Owners hereby irrevocably grant to the Association permission for purposes of going upon the Lots of Owners for the purpose of removing vehicles of other similar objects which are parked or stored in violation of the terms of this Declaration. Section 3. Lot Maintenance by the Association. In the event that an.owner shall fail to maintain the exterior of his premises and the improvements situated thereon in a manner consistent with maintenance standards of the Honey Creek View community, 9 the Board shall, upon receipt of written complaint of any Owner, and subsequent investigation which verifies that complaint, have the right through its agents and employees to enter upon the offending Owner's Lot and.repair, maintain and restore the Lot and the exterior of the improvements on that Lot if the Owner shall fail to respond in a manner satisfactory to the Board within 45 days after mailing of adequate notice by certified mail to the last known address of the Owner. The cost of such repair, maintenance or restoration shall be assessed against the Lot, and the Board shall have the right to cause to be recorded a notice of lien for labor and materials furnished. which lien may be enforced in the manner provided by the law. In the event that the estimated cost of such repair should exceed one-half or one assessed value of the Lot any improvements of that Lot, the Board shall be required to have the assent of 51 percent of the members before undertaking such repairs. Section 4. Construction Exemption. This Article does not apply to the construction activities, storage of construction materials, construction debris, or the use and parking of construction vehicles by the Declarant or its contractors during the Development period. ARTICLE VII HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION Section 1. Nonprofit Organization. The Association is a nonprofit corporation underthe laws of the State of Washington. Section 2.Membership~ Every Owner of any Lot shall become a member of the Association. Membership shall be appurtenant to the Lot and may not be separated from ownership of any Lot shall not be assigned or conveyed in any way except upon the transfer of title to said Lot and then only to the transferee of title to the Lot. All Owners shall have the rights and duties specified in this Declaration, the Article and the Bylaws of the Association. Section 3. Voting rights. Owners, including the Declarant, shall be entitled to one vote for each Lot owned. When more than one person or entity owns an interest in any Lot, the vote for that Lot shall be exercised· as the Owners decide to exercise that vote, but in no event shall more than one vote be cast with respect to any Lot nor shall any vote be divided. The voting rights of any Owner may be suspended as provided for in this Declaration, the Article and the Bylaws of the Association. Section 4. Meetings. Meetings shall be ·conducted in accordance with the Bylaws of the Honey Creek View Homeowners' Association and RCW 64.38 . . ARTICLE VIII MANAGEMENT BY BOARD Section 1. Expiration of the Development Period. Upon expiration of the Declarant's management authority under Article ill, all administrative power and 10 authority shall vest in a Board of three directors who must be owners. The Association. by amendment of the Covenants, may increase the number of directors. All Board positions shall be open for election at the first annual meeting after tennination of the Development Period. At the first meeting of either the temporary or permanent Board of Directors, . the new Board shall adopt BylaWS. The Declarant will make copies of the Bylaws available to Lot Owners upon request. Section 2. Terms. The tenns of the ~oard are defined in the Bylaws. Section 3. Powers of the Board. All powers of the Board must be exercised in accord with the Bylaws. The Board, for the benefit of all the Properties and the Lot Owners, shall enforce the provisions of this Declaration and the Bylaws. In addition to the duties and powers imposed by the Bylaws and. any resolution of the Association that may be hereafter adopted, the Board shall have the power and be responsible· for the following, in way of explanation but not limited to: (a). Insurance. Obtain policies of general liability insurance. (b). Legal and Accounting Services. Obtain legal and accounting services if necessary to the administration of the Association affairs, administration of the Recreational Area within the Plat, or enforcement of this Declaration. (c). Street Lighting.· Pay all costs of operating and maintaining street lighting. (d). Maintenance of Lots. If necessary, maintain any Lot if such maintenance is reasonably necessary in the judgment of the Board to preserve the appearance and value of the Properties or Lot. The Board may authorize such maintenance activities if the Owner or Owners of the Lot have failed or refuse to perfonn maintenance within a reasonable time after written notice of the necessity of such maintenance has been delivered by the Board to the Owner or Owners of such Lot, provided that the Board shall levy a special assessment against the Owner or Owners of such Lot for the cost of such maintenance. (e). Discharge of Liens. The Board may also pay any amount necessary to discharge any lien or encumbrance. levied against the entire Properties or any part thereof which is claimed or may, in the opinion of the Board, constitute a lien against the Properties or agairist the Recreational Area within the Plat rather than merely against the interest therein of particular Owners. Where one or more Owners are responsible for the existence of such liens, they shall be jointly and severally liable for the cost of discharging it and any costs or expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees and the costs of title search incurred by the Board by reason of such lien or liens.· Such fees and costs shall be assessed against the Owner or Owners and the Lot responsible to the extent of their responsibility. 11 CO. Security. Pay all costs deemed appropriate by the Board to ensure adequate security for the Lots constituting the residential community created on the Properties. (g). Right to Contract. Have the exclusive right to contract fOf all goods and services, maintenance, and capital improvements provided, however, that such right of contract shall be subject to Association approval. @' Right of Entry. Enter any Lot when reasonably necessary, in the event of emergencies or in connection with any maintenance, landscaping or construction for which the Board is responsible. Except in cases of emergencies, the Board, its agents or employees shall attempt to give notice to the Owner or occupant of any Lot 24 hours prior to such entry. Such entry must be made with as little inconvenience to the Owner as practicable, and any damage caused thereby shall-be repaired by the Board if the entry was due to an emergency (unless the emergency was caused by the Owner of the Lot entered, in which case the cost shall be specially assessed to the Lot) If the repairs or maintenance activity were necessitated by the Owner of the Lot entered, in which case the cost shall be specially assessed to that Lot If the emergency of the need for maintenance or repair was caused by another Owner of another Lot, the cost thereof shall be specially assessed against the Owner of the other Lot. (i). Promulgation of Rules. Adopt and publish rules and regulation governing the members and their guests and establish penalties for any infraction thereof. G). Declaration of Vacancies. Declare the office of a member· of the Board to be vacant in the event that a member of the Board is absent from three consecutive regular meetings of the Board. (k). Employment of Manager. Employ a manager, and independent contractor, or such other employees as the Board deems necessary and describe the duties of such employees. m. Payment for Goods and Services. Pay for all goods and services required for the proper functioning of the Recreational Area within the Plat and the Association. (m). Impose Assessments. Impose annual and special assessments. (n). Bank Account. Open a bank account on behalf of the Association and designate the signatories required. (0). Legal Actions. Commerce legal actions for the enforcement of these covenants or any other legal action that the Board of Directors deems necessary for the protection of the Plat. The Board also has the authority to defend against legal actions initiated against the ASsociation. 12 (p). Exercise of Powers. Duties and Authorities. Exercise for the Association all powers, duties and authority vested in or delegated to the Association and not reserved to the membership by other provisi9ns of the Bylaws, Articles of Incorporation, or this Declaration. The Board shall have all powers and authority permitted to it under this Declaration and the Bylaws. However, nothing herein contained shall be construed to give the Board authority to conduct a business for profit on behalf of allOwners or any of them. ARTICLE IX LAND USE RESTRICTIONS Section 1. Residential Restrictions. All lots within the Properties shall be used solely for private single-family residential purposes. Each residence must have a private enclosed car shelter for not less than two cars. No single-family structure shall be altered to provide residence for than one family. No Lot in Honey Creek View shall be further divided. Section 2. Property Use Restrictions. No Lot shall be used in a fashion that unreasonably interferes with the other Owners' right to use and enjoy their respective Lots. The Board, the Committee designated by it, or the Declarant during the Development Period, shall determine whether any given use of a Lot unreasonably interferes with those rights; such determinations sh3ll be conclusive. Section 3. Prohibition Of ' Nuisances and Untidy Conditions. No noxious or offensive activity or condition shall be conducted on any Lot, nor shall anything be done or maintained on the Properties which may be or become an activity or condition which unreasonably interferes with the right of the other Owiters to use and enjoy any part of the Properties. No untidy or unsightly condition shall. be maintained on any property. Untidy conditions shall include, but are not limited to, publicly visible. storage of wood, boats, trailers recreational vehicles and disabled vehicles of any kind. Section 4. Fences. Walls & Shrubs. Fences, wall or shrubs are permitted to delineate the lot lines of each Lot, subject to (1) The approval of the Architectural Control Committee and (2) determination whether such fences, walls or shrubs would interfere with utility easements. reflected on the face of the Plat· and other easements elsewhere recorded. No barbed wire or corrugated fiberglass fences shall be erected on any Lot. All fences, including chain link fences, open and solid, are to meet the standards set by the Committee and must be approved by the Committee prior to conStruction or installation. No fences shall be constructed in the front yard or front setbacks. Fences or rails shall be erected and maintained at the top of any area where they create a vertical or. nearly vertical retaining wall or slope over three feet (3 '). Section 5. Temporary Structures. No structure of a temporary character or trailer, recreational vehicle, basement, tent, shack, garage, barn, or other outbuildings shall be used on any Lot at any time as a residence, either temporarily or pennanately. No 13 vehicles parked in public right-of-way may be used temporarily or permanately for residential purposes except as provided in Article VI. Section 6. Mjning. No oil drilling, oil development operations, oil refilling, quarrying, or mining operation of any kind shall be permitted on or in any Lot, nor shall oil wells, tanks, tunnels, mineraI excavation or shafts be permitted on or in any Lot. No derricks or other structure designed for use in boring for oil or natural gas shall be erected, maintained or permitted upon any Lot. Oil storage for residential heating purposes is permissible of the storage tank is buried. Section 7. Signs. No signs, billboards, or other advertising structure or device shall be displayed to the public view on any Lot except one sign: not to exceed five square feet in area may be placed on a Lot to ofIerthe property for sale or rent. Signs also may be used by a builder to advertise the property during the construction and sale period. Political yard signs of a temporary nature will be allowed on Lots during campaign: periods. Within five days of the occurrence of the election, such signs must be removed from Lots. The Board may cause any sign placed on Properties in violation of this provision to be removed and destroyed. Section 8. Animals. No animals other than dogs, cats, caged birds, tanked fish, and other conventional small household pets may be kept on Lots. Dogs shall not be allowed to run at large. The Owner· or other person accompanying the animal shall remove anima] waste deposited on lawns, sidewalks. trails and right-of-way. All animaJ pens and enclosures must be approved by the Committee prior to construCtion and shall be kept clean and odor free at all times. If the investigation of the Board indicates that anima1s are kept in violation of this section, the Board will give the Owner 10 days' written notice of the violation. The Owner must remedy such violations within 10 days. Failure to comply with the written notice will result in a fine of $25 per day. The Association shall be entitled to attorneys' fees for any action taken to collect such fines in accord with the provisions of Article XIII, Section 4. ARTICLE X BUILDING RESTRICTIONS Section 1. Building Materials. Homeowners who do not have PK Enterprises and/or Assigns, or the contractor (TBD) designated to construct homes for it shall be obliged to use materials of a quality equivalent to those materials which PK Enterprises and/or Assigns Contractor has utilized for the construction of homes in the Plat. If inferior materials are utilized, the Committee will require that such materials be replaced. The (1) grade of materials and (2) price of materials shall be relevant considerations in determining whether the materials equivalent quality. Section 2. Permits. No construction or exterior addition or change or alteration of any structure may be started on any portion of the. Properties without the Owner first obtaining a building permit and other necessary permits from the proper local government authority and written approval of such permits from the Board, Architectural 14 Control Committee or the Declarant. The Committee must approve the plans for all construction or alternation proposals (see article XII). Section 3~· Codes. All construction must conform to the requirements of the State of Washington, Uniform Bodes (building, mechanical, plumbing) and the City of Renton codes and requirements, in force at the commencement of the construction, including the latest revisions thereof. Section 4. Time of Completion. The exterior of any structure, including painting or other suitable finish and initial landscaping, . shall be completed within eight months of the beginning of construction so as to present a finished appearance when viewed from any angle. The construction area shall be kept reasonably clean during the construction period . . Section 5. Entry for Inspection. Any· agent, officer or member of the Board, Committee, or the Declarant may, at any reasonable predetermined hour upon 24 hours notice during the construction or exterior remodeling, enter and Inspect the structure to determine if there has been compliance with provisions of this Declaration. The above- recited individuals shall not be deemed guilty of trespass for such entry or inspection. There is created as easement over, upon and across the residential Lots for the purpose of making and carrying out such inspections. Section 6. Contractor. No home may be constructed on any Lot other than by a contractor licensed as general contractor under the statues of the State of Washington without the prior approval of the Committee. ARTICLE XI UTILITIES Section 1. Antennas. No radio or television antennas, transmitters or parabolic reflectors (satellite dish antennae) shall be permitted unless approved by the Committee. ARTICLEXll ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL Section 1. Architectural Control Committee. (Committee"). Upon termination of the Development Period, the Board shall 3ppoint a Committee. The Committee shall consist of not less than three and not more than five members. It is not a requirement that members of the Committee be (1) Owners or (2) members of the Association: During the Development Period, the Declarant may elect to exercise and perform the functions of the Committee. If the Declarant elects not to perform this function, or at any tUne elects to no longer perform this function, the Declarant or the· Board shall appoint the Committee to function as herein provided. After termination of the Development Period, the functions of the Committee shall be performed by the Board 15 until such time as the Board shall appoint and designate the Committee. The Committee shall be appointed within a month of the election of the Board following the termination of the Development Period. Section 2. . Jurisdiction and Pmpose. TJle Committee or the Declarant shall review proposed plans and specifications for Residences, accessory structures (e.g., garden sheds, tools sheds, doll houses, tree houses, gazebos, and playground equipment), fences, walls, appurtenant recreational facilities (e.g., hot tubs, spas, bath houses, animal pens, or enclosures), or other exterior structures to be placed" upon the Properties. No exterior addition or structural alteration may be made until plans and specifications showing the nature, kind, shape, height, materials, and location of the structure or alteration have been submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Committee. The Committee also shall review proposals to change the exterior design and location of the proposed structure, alteration, or color change harmonize with the (1) surrounding structures, (2) surrounding natural and built environment, and (3) aesthetic character of other homes in the Plat. Section 3. Membership. The Committee shall be designed by the Board. An election to fill either a newly created position on the· Committee or a vacancy on the Committee requires the vote of the majority of the entire Board. However, the Board is not obligated to fill a vacancy on the Committee unless the membership of the Committee numbers less than three persons. Section 4. Designation of a Rg>resentative. The Committee may unanimously designate one or more of its members or a third party to act on behalf of the Committee or a Committee member with respect to both ministerial' matters or discretionary judgments. Section 5. Donation of Time. No member of the Committee shall be entitled to any compensation for services performed on behalf of the Committee. Committee members or representatives shall have no financial liability resulting from Committee actions. Section 6. Address of the Committee. The address of the Committee shall be the registered office address of the Association. Section 7. Voting. Committee decisions shall be determined by a majority vote by the members of the Committee. Section 8. Submission of Plans. All plans and specifications required to be submitted to the Committee shall be submitted by mail to the address of the Committee in duplicate. The written submission shall contain the . name and address of the Owner submitting the plans and specifications, identify of the Lot involved, and the following information about the proposed structure: (a) The location of the structure upon the Lot; 16 (b) The elevation of the structure with reference to the existing and finished Lot grade; ( c) The general design; (d) The interiorlayout; (e) The exterior finish materials and color, including roof materials; (t) The landscape plan; (g) Other information which may require in order to determine whether the structure conforms to the standards articulated in the Declaration and the standards employed by the -Committee in evaluating development proposals. Section 9. Plan Check Fee. All individuals submitting plans to the Committee shall be obliged to pay a reasonable plan· check fee to cover the administrative costs of reviewing such development proposals. It will be necessary to pay the plan check fee upon submitting plans and specifications for Residences. A fee of $25 will be charged for the review of other structures. Section 10. Evaluating Development Proposals. The Committee shall have the authority to establish aesthetic standards for evaluating development proposals. In addition to such standards, in evaluating development proposals, the Committee shall determine whether the external design, color, building materials, appearance, height configuration, and landscaping of the proposed structure harmonize with (1 ) the various features of the natural built environment, (2) the aesthetic character of the other homes in Honey Creek View, and (3) any other factors which affect the desirability or suitability of a proposed structure or alteration. The Committee will not approve temporary or non- permanent structures. Committee determinations may be amended by a majority vote of Committee members. Section 11. Exclusions. The Committee is not required to review plans and specifications for homes constructed by PK Enterprises and/or Assigns or PK Enterprises and/or Assigns Contractor. Section 12. Approval Procedures. Within 30 days after the receipt of plans and specifications, the Committee shall approve or disapprove the proposal structure. The Committee may decline to approve plans and specifications which, in its opinion, do not conform to restrictions articulated in this Declaration or its aesthetic standards. The Committee shall indicate its approval or disapproval on one of the copies of the plans and specifications provided by the applicant and shall return the plans and specifications to the address shown on the plans and specifications. 17 . Section 13. Compliance with Codes. In all cases, ultimate responsibility for satisfying all local building codes and requirements rests with the Owner. and contractor employed by the Owner. The Committee has no responsibility for ensuring that plans and specifications which it reviews comply with local building codes and reqUirements. The Committee shall be held harmless in the event that a structure which it authorizes fails to comply with relevant building and zoning requirements for any defect in any plans or specifications which are· approved by the Committee nor shall any member of the Committee or any person acting on behalf of the Committee be held responsible for any defect in a structure which was built pursuant to plans and specifications approved by the Committee. Section 14. Variation. The Committee shall have the authority to approve plans and specifications which do not conform to these restrictions in order to (l) overcome practical difficulties or (2) prevent undue hardship from being imposed on an Owner as a result of applying these restrictions. However, such variations may only be approved in . the event that the variation will not (l) detrimentally impact on the overall appearance of the development, (2) impair the attractive development of the subdivision or (3) adversely affect the character of nearby Lots. Granting such variations shall only be granted if the Committee determines that the variation would further the purposes and intent of these restrictions. Variations shall only be granted in extraordinary circumstances. Section 15. Enforcement. In any judicial action to enforce a determination of the Committee, the losing party shall pay the prevailing party's attorneys' fees, eXpert witness fees, and other costs incurred in connection with such legal action or appeal. (See Article XV, Section 4.) ARTICLE XIII GENERAL PROVISION Section 1. Covenants Running with the Land. These covenants are to run with the land and be binding on all parties and persons claiming Under them for a period of 30 years from the date these covenants are recorded, after which time the covenants shall be automatically extended for successive period of 10 years unless an instrument signed by a majority of the individuals then owning Lots has been recorded which reflects their intent to amend the covenants in whole or in part. Section 2. Amendment. This Declaration and the Bylaws may be amended during the initial 30-year period if 51 percent of the members vote to amend particular provisions of either instrument. This Declaration may be amended during the Development Period by any instrument signed by both the Declarant and the Owners of 51 percent of the Lots, including those owned by the Declarant. The provisions expressly referring to the Declarant may not be amended without the Declarant's approval. All amendments must be filed with the office of the King County Records Department or its successor agency. These covenants may not be amended to llinit or eliminate the 18 responsibility for maintaining the cOmmon storm water facility without the prior approval of the city of Renton. Section 3. Enforcement. The Association. the Board, or any Owner shall have the right to enforce, by any legal proceeding, all restrictions, conditions, covenants, reservations, liens and charges now or hereafter imposed by the provisions of this Declaration. Section 4. Attorneys' Fees. In the event that it is necessary to seek the services of an attorney in order to enforce any (l) provision of this Declaration or (2) lien created pursuant to the authority of this Declaration. the individual against whom enforcement is sought shall be obliged to pay any attorneys' fees incurred. If the Owner fails to pay such fees within 60 days, such fees shall become a lien against the Owner's Lot. In any legal action commenced in order to enforce the provisions of this Declaration. the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all reasonable attorneys' fees· and expert witness fees incurred in order to enforce the provisions of this Declaration. The prevailing party sball.also be entitled to recover all costs; Section 5. Successors and· Assigns. The covenants, restrictions and conditions articulated in this Declaration shall run with the land and shall accordingly be binding on all successors and assigns. Section 6. Sever ability. The invalidity of anyone or more phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs or sections hereof shall not affect the remaining portions of this Declaration of any part thereof. In the event that one or more of the phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs or sections contained herein should be invalid, this Declaration shall be constructed as if the invalid phrase, clause, paragraph or section had. not been inserted. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned, being the Declarant herein, has hereunto set his hand and seal this day of ___ --'--_-' ___ ~ PK Enterprises Declarant By: _________________ __ Its President STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) )ss, ) 19 On this day of " before me, the undersigned, a notary public in and for the State of Washington, personally appeared PK Enterprises, President ofPK Enterprises, a Washington Corporation, the corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument, acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he is authorized to execute the said instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation. WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first written above. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at:, ____________ _ My commission expires:, ______ --- EXlllBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION - To be inserted METES AND BOUNDS LEGAL DESCRIPTION To be inserted 20 C~TY OF RENTON IDETERM~NAT~ON Of NON-SIGN~f~CANCE-MITIGATED M~T~GATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA05-118, PP, CAR, V-H, ECF APPLICANT: Phil Kitzes, PK Enterprises PROJECT NAME: Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to subdivide an existing 78,512 square foot (1.8 acre) parcel located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling unit per acre zoning designation into 9 lots, a . stormwater detention tract (Tract A), and a native growth protection tract (Tract B). An existing residence is proposed to be removed. The lots would be proposed for the future construction of detached single family residences. The lots range in area from 3,000 square feet to 4,333 square feet Access to the lots would be provided via a new 42-foot wide road (Road A) proposed to be dedicated as right-of-way. The proposed Road A terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A class 3 stream (Honey Creek) flows across the eastern portion of the subject site; in addition Protected Slopes and a category 3 Wetland are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. "" " LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LEAD AGENCY: MITIGATION MEASURES: 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard The City of Renton . Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section 1." The earthwork activities to be conducted onsite shall only be permitted to occur during the dry months of the year. 2. ". The applicant to comply with the recommendations found in the preliminary geotechnical siteev~luation prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services dated July 22, 2005 and the follow up geotechnical evaluation dated February 12, 2006. "3. The applicant shall be required to provide a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) designed pursuant to the Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements outlined in Volume II of the Stormwater Management Manual and provide staff with a Construction Mitigation Plan prior to issuance of Construction Permits. This condition shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division. 4. The applicant shall be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Wetland Study report prepared by Habitat Technologies dated September 23, 2005 and the Supplemental Stream Study and Mitigation Plan prepared by Ecological Land Services, Inc. dated December 9,2005. 5. "The detention system for this" project shall be" required to comply with the requirements found" in the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention (conservation flow control-Level 2) and water quality " improvements. " " 6. The applicant shall pay a Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per each new single family lot prior to the recording of the final plat " 7. The applicant shall pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee in the amount of $75 per net new average daily trip prior to the recording of the final plat. 8. Staff recommends that the applicant pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on $488.00 per new single family lot prior to the recording of the final plat. " ERe Mitigation Measures Page 1 of 1 PUBLIC HEARING City of Renton Department of Planning / Building / Public Worl<s PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER A. SUMMARY AND PURPOSE OF REQUEST: Public Hearing Date: Project Name: Applicant/Contact: . File Number: Project Description: Project Location: May 9,2006 Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat Phil Kitzes, PK Enterprises, 23035 SE 263rd Street, Maple Valley, WA 98038 .LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR,V-H Project Manager: Jill K. Ding, Associate Planner The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval and Variance approval for the subdivision of a 78,512 square foot (1.8 acre) site located within the Residential-10 (R-10) dwelling units per acre zone into 9 lots and two tracts. The proposed lots would be developed with single family residences. An existing single family residence will be removed. The lot sizes would range from approximately 3,000 sq. ft. to 4,333 sq. ft. Access to the proposed lots would be provided via a new road (Road A) off of NE Sunset Boulevard and terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A stormwater detention tract (Tract A) and a sensitive area tract (Tract B) are located on the eastern portion of the subject site. - 3524 NE Sunset Boulevard City of Renton PIBIPW Department HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTA TES PRELIMINARY PIA T PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: May 9, 2006 B. HEARING EXHIBITS: Preliminary Report to the HearlngExaminer LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H Page 20f14 Exhibit 1: Project file ("yellow filen ) containing the application, reports, staff comments, and other material pertinent to the review of the project. Exhibit 2: Geotechnical Engineer's Site Plan sheet A2 showing cross sections (dated May 2, 2005) Exhibit 3: Preliminary Plat Plan (dated 9/22/2005) Exhibit 4: Preliminary Storm, Sewer, and Water Plan (dated 9/22/2005) Exhibit 5: Preliminary Grading Plan (dated 3/312006) Exhibit 6: Conceptual Landscape Plan (dated 9/22/2005) Exhibit 8: Boundary(fopographic Survey (dated 9/22/2005) Exhibit 9: Zoning Map sheet D5 East 1/2 (dated 12/28/2004) Exhibit 10: ERC Mitigation Measures Exhibit 11: Critical Area Exemption letter (dated 3/3012006) C. GENERAL INFORMA nON: 1. Owners of Record: James & Minoo .costello, 22814 77th Avenue SE, Woodinville, WA 98072 Charles & Mahwash Price 16102 NE 175th Street, Woodinville, WA 98072 Ali & Farideh Mastan 13910 SE 42nd Place, Bellevue, WA 98006 2. Zoning Designation: Residential-10 (R-10) Dwelling Units per Acre 3. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Residential Medium Density (RMD) Designation: 4. Existing Site Use: Single-family residence to be removed 5. Neighborhood Characteristics: North: Single family residential; R-8 zoning East: Single family residential; R-10 zoning South: Single family residential; R-8 zoning West: Single family residential; R-10 zoning 6. Access: NE Sunset Boulevard 7. Site Area: 1.8 acres 8. Project Data: Area Comments Existing Building Area: New Building Area: N/A N/A N/A Existing residence to be removed N/A Total Building Area: N/A Hexrpt 05-118 City of Renton PIBIPW Department HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTA TES PRELIMINARY PLA T Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-11B, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: May 9, 2006 D. HIS TORICAUBA CKGROUND: Action Annexation Comprehensive Plan Zoning Land Use File No. NIA NIA N/A Ordinance No. 1631 5099 5100 E. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RfENTON MUNICIPAL CODE: 1. Chapter 2 Land Use Districts Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts Section 4-2-070: Zoning Use Table Section 4-2-110: Residential Development Standards 2. Chapter 3 Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts Section 4-3-050: Critical Areas Regulations 3; Chapter 4 Property Development Standards Section 4-4-030: Development Guidelines and Regulations Section 4-4-060: Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations Section 4-4-080: Parking, Loading and Driveway Regulations Section 4-4-130: Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations 4. Chapter 6 Streets and Utility Standards Section 4-6-060: Street Standards 5. Chapter 7 Subdivision Regulations Page 30'14 Date 8/13/1957 11/01/2004 1110112004 Section 4-7-050: General Outline of Subdivision, Short Plat and Lot Line Adjustment Procedures Section 4-7-080: Detailed Procedures for Subdivision . Section 4-7-120: Compatibility with Existing Land Use and Plan-General Requirements and Minimum Standards Section 4-7-150: Streets -General Requirements and Minimum Standards Section 4-7-160: Residential Blocks -General Requirements and Minimum Standards Section 4-7~170: Residential Lots -General Requirements and Minimum Standards 6. .. Chapter 9 Procedures and Review Criteria 7. Chapter 11 Definitions F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 1. Land Use Element: Residential Medium Density objectives and policies. 2. Community Design Element. 3. Environmental Element. G. DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval and Variance approval for a 9-lot subdivision of an 18.13- acre site located within the Residential -10 (R-10) dwelling units per acre zone. The applicant proposes the eventual development of single-family detached units. An existing residence will be removed. The proposed lot sizes range from approximately 3,000 sq. ft. to 4,333 sq. ft. Two tracts are proposed to be created as a result of the proposed subdivision. Tract Ais proposed as a stormwater detention tract and would be approximately 5,587 square feet in area and Tract B is proposed as a sensitive area tract and would be approximately 34,389 square feet in area. The following sensitive areas have been identified on the subject site: moderate landslide hazard areas, erosion hazard areas, a class 3 stream, a category 3 wetland, sensitive slopes, and protected slopes. A class 3 stream requires a 75-foot buffer, however when the stream buffer falls within a protected slope area, the stream buffer shall extend to the boundary of the protected slope. The category 3 wetland requires a 25 foot Hexrpt 05-118 City of Renton P/BIPW Department HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTA TES PRELIMINARY PLAT PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: May 9, 2006 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H Page 4 of 14 'buffer. A class 4 stream was identified on the property to the northeast of the subject site. A class 4 stream requires a 35-foot buffer, it does not appear that the buffer extends onto the subject site however impacts to the stream buffer may occur through the installation of a sewer main through the property located to the north. The Environmental Review Committee (ERG) imposed the following setback requirements from the protected slope as recommended by the applicant's geotechnical report prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services: Cross Section of Area (see page Minimum Buffer ' Minimum Building Setback A2IExhibit 2, attached) A-A' 15 feet from top of steep slope 10 feet from buffer line B-B' 15 feet from top of steep slope 10 feet from buffer line B-B' with vault 5 feet from top of steep slope 5 feet from buffer line North Property Line 10 feet from crest of slope 1 0 feet from buffer line The protected slope area, stream, and wetland would be protected within the proposed sensitive area tract (Tract . B). The applicant has requested a Critical Area Exemption letter to locate a stormwater outlet pipe within the required stream buffer. The requested Exemption has been granted. In addition a variance has been requested to locate the stormwater outlet pipe on a protected slope. Staffs recommendation for the requested variance is contained within the body of this report. The subject site slopes from south the northeast to west and has an average slope of approximately 19.7% .. The ,site is currently forested with a mix of deciduous and evergreen trees, shrubs, and emergent vegetation. As proposed approximately 60% of the existing vegetation will be removed during the construction of the proposed plCit improvements. Preliminary earthwork quantities are estimate(j at approximately 7,000 cubic yards. Access to the proposed lots would be provided through a new 42-footwide internal access road (Road A) that will 'access off of NE Sunset Boulevard on the southern portion of the subject site. The proposed access road will , terminate in a hammerhead turn around. The new right-Of-way would include 32 feet of pavement, with curb gutter and sidewalks on both sides of the street. A modification has been granted reducing the right-of-way width at the terminus of the hammerhead to 20 feet. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.21C, 1971 as amended), on March 14, 2Q06, the Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M) for the Honey Creek View Est~tes Preliminary Plat. The DNS-M included 8 mitigation measures. A 14- day appeal period commenced on March 20, 2006 and ended on April 3, 2006. No appeals of the threshold determination were filed.· ' , ' 3. COMPLIANCE WITH ERC MITIGATION MEASURES Based on an analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, the Environmental Review Committee (ERG) issued the following mitigation measures with the Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated: 1. The earthwork activities to be conducted onsite shall only be permitted to occur during the dry months of the year. 2. The applicant to comply with the recommendations found in the preliminary geotechnical site evaluation prepared by Bergqui~t Engineering Services dat~d July 22, 2005 and the follow up geotechnical ev.aluation dated February 12, 2006. 3. The applicant shall be required to provide a Temporary Erosion and 'Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) designed pursuant to the Department of Ecology's Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements outlined in , Volume II of the Stormwater Management Manual and provide staff with a Construction Mitigation Plan prior to issuance of Construction Permits. This condition shall be subject to .the review, and approval of the Development Services Division. " " Hexrpt 05-118 City of Renton PIBIPW Department HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTA TES PRELIMINARY PiA T Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: May 9, 2006 Page 50f14 4. The applicant shall be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Wetland Study report prepared by Habitat Technologies dated September 23, 2005 and the Supplemental Stream Study and Mitigation Plan prepared by Ecological Land Services, Inc. dated December 9, 2005. 5. The detention system for this project shall be required to comply with the requirements found in the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention (conservation flow control-Level 2) and water quality improvements. 6. The applicant shall pay a Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per each new single family lot prior to the recording of the final plat 7. The applicant shall pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee in the amount of $75 per net new average daily trip prior to the recording of the final plat 8. Staff recommends that the applicant pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on $488.00 per new single family lot prior to the recording of the final plat 4. STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS Representatives from various City departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and address site plan issues from 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 the report. 5. CONSISTENCY WITH PRELIMINARY PLAT CRITERIA: Approval of a plat is based upon several factors. The following preliminary plat criteria have been established to assist decision makers in the review of the subdivision: A. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan Designation. The subject site is designated Residential Medium Density (RMD) on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The RMD designation is intended to create the opportunity for neighborhoods that offer a variety of lot sizes, housing, and ownership options. Residential Medium Density neighborhoods should include a variety of unit types designed to incorporate features from both single~family and multi-family developments, support cost-efficient housing, facilitate infill development, encourage use oftransit service, and promote the efficient use of urban services and infrastructure. The proposed plat is consistent with the following Residential Medium Density policies and objectives: Land Use Element Policy LU-161. Support residential development incorporating a hierarchy of streets. Street networks should connect through the development to existing streets, avoid "cul-de-sac" or dead end streets, and be arranged in a grid street pattern (or a flexible grid street system if there are environmental constraints). The proposed access to the new lots would be a new 42-foot wide right-of-way (Road A), which . terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. A through street connecting to the north the NE 17th Place is . not required due to the topography of the subject property. In addition if a through street were required the propertY owner to the north would be precluded from subdividing due to the requirement for providing the remaining road connection between NE17th Place and Road A . . . Policy LU-162. Development densities in the Residential Medium Density deSignation area should range from seven (7) to eighteen (1 B) dwelling units per net acre, as specified by implementing zoning. The proposed plat would result in a net density of 9.57, which is within the density range permitted. Policy LU-164. When a minimum denSity is applicable, the minimum development density in the Residential Medium Density deSignation should be four (4) dwelling units per net acre. The proposed plat would exceed the minimum density of 4 dwelling units per acre required. Hexrpt 05-118 ~ City of Renton PIBIPW Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTA TES PRELIMINARY PLAT PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: May 9, 2006 Page 60t 14 Policy LU-165. Provision of small lot, single-family detached unit types, townhouses, and multi-family structures compatible with a single-family character should be allowed and encouraged in the Residential Medium Density designation, provided that density standards can be met (see also the Housing Element for housing types). The proposed development would result in the creation of small single-family lots and would comply with the density requirements. . Objective LU-I/: Residential Medium Density development should be urban in form and fit into existing residential neighborhoods if developed as infill projects. . The proposed development is urban infill as the proposed lots are small and the front yards are oriented towards the proposed street. In addition the proposed single-family lots would be compatible with the existing development in the surrounding neighborhood. Policy LU-171. Buildings should front the street rather than be organized around interior courtyards or parking areas. All of the proposed lots would have front yards facing the proposed street (Road A) .. Policy LV-174. Single-family detached building types in the Residential Medium Density designation should have a maximum lot coverage by the primary structure of fifty (50) percent. The R-1 0 zoning regulations permit a maximum building lot coverage for detached single-family structures of 70%. No single family residences will be permitted which would exceed the 70% maximum permitted under the R-10 zoning regulations. Community Design Element Objective CD-C: Promote re-investment in and upgrade of existing neighborhoods through redevfHopment of small, underutilized parcels, modification and alteration of older housing stOCk, and il1Jpr:ovements to streets and sidewalks to increase property values. The proposed subdivision would upgrade the existing neighborhood through the replacement of the existing residence with 9 new single family residences and landscaping improvements. The proposed new homes would update the existing neighborhood and increase the surroundi~gproperty values. Policy CD-12. Infill development, defined as n!'Jw short plats of nine or fewer lots, should be encouraged in order to add variety, updated housing stock, and new vitality to neighborhoods. The proposed plat would create 9 lots for the construction of 9 new single family residences, updating the housing stock in the existing neighborhood. Environmental Element Objective EN-C: Protect and enhance the City's rivers, major and minor creeks and intermittent stream courses. The proposed subdivision would protect the stream flowing across the north eastern portion of the property and it's associated buffer. Policy EN-70. Land uses on steep slopes should be designed to prevent property damage and environmental degradation, and to enhance greenbelt and wildlife habitat values by preserving and en- hancing existing vegetation to the maxiriwm extent possible. The protected slope areas on the subject site would be protected within a sensitive area tract. No residential structures are proposed on the protected slope or within the recommended protected slope buffer area as specified in the applicant's geotechnical report. A stormwater outfall pipe is proposed on Hexrpt 05-118 City of Renton PIBIPW Department HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTA TES PRELIMINARY PtA T PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: May 9, 2006 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H Page 70f14 the protected slope through a sensitive area variance. See further discussion below in the Variance Section. Policy EN-71. Allow land alteration only for approved development proposals or approved mitigation efforts that will not create unnecessary erosion, undermine the support of nearby land, or unnecessarily scar the landscape. The applicant has proposed to alter the protected slope area for the installation of a stormwater outlet pipe on the slope and has requested a variance from the City's sensitive area requirements for the installation of the pipe. See further discussion below under the Variance Section. B. Compliance with the Underlying Zoning Designation. The 1.8-acre site is deSignated Residential -10 Dwelling Units per Acre (R-10) on the City of Renton Zoning Map. The proposed development would allow for the future construction of up to 10 new single-family residential units. Density -The allowed maximum density in the R-10 zone is 10.0 dwelling units per net acre (dulac) and the minimum density permitted is 4.0 dwelling units per net acre (dulac). Net density is calculated after public rights-of-way, private access easements, and critical areas are deducted from the gross acreage of the site. After the deduction of 7,524 square feet of proposed Road A and 29,947 square feet for the sensitive areas on site from the gross lot area, the proposal for 9 lots would result in a net density of 9.57 dwelling units per acre (78,512 gross sq. ,ft. -7,524 sq. ft. -29,947 sq. ft. = 41,041 sq. ft. or 0.94 ac, 9· units I 0.94 acres = 9.57 dulac). The proposed plat appears to comply with density requirements for the R-10 zoning desjgnation. Lot Dimensions and Size -The minimum lot size required is 3,000 sq ft. The minimum lot width required is 30 ft for interior lots and 40 feet for comer lots, and a minimum lot depth of 55 feet is required. Proposed lot widths range ·from 36 to 60 feet and lot depths range from 66 feet to 100 feet. The proposed plat would create 9 lots with the following lot sizes: Lot Number Lot Size (square feet) Access 1 3,437 Road A 2 3,793 Road A 3 4,333 Road A 4 3,208 Road A 5 3,194 Road A 6 3,708 Road A 7 3,000 Road A 8 3,358 Road A 9 3,419 Road A As proposed, all lots appear to be in compliance with the required lot width, depth and size standards as prescribed in the R-8 zone. In addition, the proposal includes 2 tracts one is for stormwater detention, one is for sensitive areas. The proposed stormwater diction tract (Tract A) is 5,587 square feet in area and the proposed sensitive area tract (Tract B) is 34,389 square feet in area. Setbacks -In the R-10 zone, the minimum front yard setback is 10 feet for the primary structure and 20 feet for an attached garage, the side yard along a street setback is 10 feet for the primary structure and 20 feet for attached garages, which, access from the side yard, the side yard setback is 5 feet, and the rear yard setback is 15 feet, however if the new lot abuts an existing lot zoned R-8 then a 25-foot setback is required. Proposed Lots 3-6 would have rear yards abutting an R-8 zoned property; therefore these lots shall be required to provide 25-foot rear yard setbacks.' All other proposed lots would have a 15-foot rear yard setback. The proposed lots appear to contain adequate area to provide for the construction of single family residences after the consideration of the setback requirements. Compliance with these setback standards will be verified prior to the issuance of individual building permits. Hexrpt 05-118 City of Renton PIBIPW Department HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTA TES PRELIMINARY PLA T PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: May 9, 2006 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H Page 80f14 Building Standards -The R-10 zone permits one residential structure per lot a residential structure may be permitted with up to 4 residential units. However, the proposed subdivision limits the number of · dwellil1g units permissible on the subject site to 9 units. Therefore, the proposed lots will be limited to 1 single family dwelling unit per lot Staff recommends as a condition of approval that a note be recorded on the face of the final plat stating that no more than 1 single family dwelling unit is permitted on each lot. An existing residence is proposed to be removed. from the subject site. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of plat approval that.a demolition permit be obtained and all inspections completed on the demolition of the existing residence prior to final plat approval. Accessory structures are permitted at a maximum number of two per lot at 720 sq ft each,or one per lot at 1,OOOsq ft in size. Accessory structures are permitted only when associated with a primary structure located on the same parcel. Building height in the R-10 zone is limited to two stories and 30 feet for primary structures and 15 feet for detached accessory structures. Maximum building coverage is 70% and the maximum impervious surface area permitted is 75%. The proposal's compliance with these building standards would be verified prior to the. issuance of individual building permits. Parking -Each detached dwelling unit is required to provide two off-street parking stalls per unit. The proposed building pads appear to be adequately sized for the provision of the required parking. Landscaping -A. conceptual landscape plan has been provided that proposes a 10-foot landscaped strip · along the properties NE Sunset Blvd frontage, and a 5-foot landscape strip within Lot 2 and 7 along the · frontage of proposed Road A In addition 11 Serviceberry trees are proposed 'within the front yards of the proposed lots .. The proposed landscaped strips would be vegetated with Newport Dwarf Escallonia, · Dwarf Mugo Pine, and Fountain Grass. The applicant will be required to submit a detailed landscaping plan to the Development Services Division for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit.. . C. Compliance with Subdivision Regulations Lot Arrangement: Side lot lines ,are to be at right angles to street lines, and each lot must have access to a public street or road. Access may be' by private access easement per the requirements of the Street Improvement Ordinance. As proposed, the lots appear to comply with arrangement and access requirements of the Subdivision Regulations. Lots: The size, shape and orientation of lots shall meet the minimum area and width requirements of the applicable. zoning classifiCation and shall be appropriate for the type of development and use contemplated. Each of the proposed lots is rectangular in shape, oriented to provide front yards faCing a street, and satisfies the minimum lot area and dimension requirements of the R-10 zone. When . considering the required setbacks, as well as access points f()r each lot, the proposed lots appear to have · sufficienlbuilding' area for the development of detached single family homes. ' Property Corners at Intersections: All lot corners at intersections of dedicated public rights-of-way, except · alleys, shall have minimum radius of 15 feet. Access and Street Improvements: Access to the site is proposed via a new internal access road off of NE Sunset Blvd, which terminates in a hammerhead turnaround. Full street improvements (including paving, sidewalks, curb and gutter, storm drains, landscaping, street lighting and signage) will be required along the frontage of NE' Sunset Blvd and new Road A. A modification was granted February 16th, 2006 to allow for a reduced right-of-way width at the northern terminus 'of Road A down to 'a minimum width of 20 feet In order to ensure efficient emergency access to the development is not obstructed, staff recommends as a condition of preliminary plat approval the applicant be required to place "No Parking" signage alo,ng the hammerhead prior to final plat approval. In addition, staff recommends a condition of · approval requiring the establishment of a homeowner's association or maintenance agreement for the development, which would be responsible for any common' improvements and/or tracts within the plat prior to final plat approval. Hexrpt 05-118 City of Renton PIBIPW Department HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTATES PRELIMINARY PtA T · PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: May 9, 2006 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-11 B, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H Page 90f14 To 'mitigate impacts to the local street system, the City's Environmental Review Committee imposed mitigation on the project in the form of the requirement for payment of a Traffic Mitigation Fee. The Traffic Mitigation Fee is based on $75 per net new average daily trip attributed to the proposed subdivision. The proposed 8 new residential lots would be expected to generate approximately 76.56 new average weekday trips (8 new homes. x 9.57 trips per home = 76.56). The fee for the proposed plat is estimated to be $5,472 (76.56 total trips x $75.00:::: $5,472) and is payable prior to the recording ofthe· plat Topography and Vegetation: The topography of the subject site slopes from south to north and has an average slope of approximately 19.7%. Moderate Landslide Hazard Areas, Erosion Hazard Areas, and Sensitive Slope areas are located on the majority of the subject site. Protected Slope Areas (slopes greater than 40%) a class 3 stream and a category 3 wetland are located within proposed Tract B. Two preliminary site evaluation reports (Reports 2 and 3) prepared by Bergquist Engineering Services dated July 22, 2005 and February 12, 2006 were submitted. The soils underlying the development area consist of Beausite gravelly sandy loam (BeC). Based on the existing site topography, the applicant's project engineer estimates that approximately 5,000 cubic yards of fill and 2,000 cubic yards of cuts (which will be used as fill elsewhere on the site) will be required to achieve proposed elevations. The subsurface conditions of the subject site were evaluated by excavating four test pits. The report states that the test pits were excavated to a maximum depth of 13.5 feet. A surficial layer of topsoil and sod was identified within the first 6 inches of soil at all of the test pit locations. Underlying the topsoil, brown to reddish brown, loose, SAND-SILT (SM) some gravel, occasional cobble was encountered to a depth ranging from 2.5 feet to 4 feet below the surface. Underlying the loose SAND-SILT soil in Test Pits 1-3, gay-brown to gray, dense to very dense GRAVEL-SAND occasional cobble to SAND occasional cobble (GP-SP) was encountered to the,termination depth of Test Pits 1 and 2 and to a depth of 10.5 feet in Test Pit 3. From a depth of 10;5 feet and extending to a depth of 13.5 feet (the termination depth), gray, very hard GRAVEL-SAND-SILT (GM), occasional cobble (glacial till) was encountered .. In Test Pit 4, gray; very hard GRAVEL-SAND-SIL T (Grill), occasional cobble (glacial till) was encountered underlying the reddish brown, loose SAND-SILT (SM) at a depth of about 3.75 feet to 6 feet, the termination depth. No ground water was encountered in any of the test pits. Due to the soils located on site, the geotechnical engineer recommended that earthwork activities be limited to occurring during only the dry months of the year. Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (TESCP) and the use of Best Management practices wOl,Jld serve to mitigate potential erosion and off-site sedimentation impacts. The project application includes a Construction Mitigation Plan, which is subject to final approval prior to the issuance of construction permits for the project. In addition, the project will be subject to the 2001 DOE manual regarding erosion control, as conditioned by the ERC. Staff from the City's Plan Review Section has reviewed the submitted geotechnical information. Due to the existence of steep slopes in the site and the soils classification (potential erosion) shown on the Preliminary Site Evaluation dated February 12, 2006 staffadvises that prior to any construction a complete Geotech Report be provided. The Geotechnical Engineering Services -Preliminary Site Evaluation dated July 22, 2005 and dated February 12, 2006 do not provide sufficient information regarding earthwork, site clearing, excavation, soils materials and erosion. The City's critical area regulations require that critical areas (including protected slopes, wetlands, and Class 2-4 streams) be protected under a Native Growth Protection Easement (NGPE). Therefore, Tract B shall have a NGPE recorded over it. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that a Native Growth Protection Easement shall be recorded over Tract B prior to the recording of the final plat map. In addition, staff further recommends as a condition of approval that Tract B be delineated with a split rail fence and identified with signage as approved by the Development Services Division Project Manager. A fenCing and signage detail. shall be submitted to the Development Services Division project manager at the time of Utility ConstruCtion Permit for review and approval and that such fencing and signage shall be installed prior to the recordil1g of the final plat. The subject site is primarily vegetated with second growth alder, Douglas fir, and maple trees. The ground cover includes predominantly blackberry, fern, and ivy. The information submitted by the applicant indicates that the majority of the vegetation located on the western portion of the site would, be Hexrpt 05-118 City of Renton PIBIPW Department HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTA TES PREUMINARY PLAT PUBUC HEARiNG DA TE: May 9, 2006 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H Page 10 of 14 removed for the construction of the proposed short plat improvements, driveways, and building pads. RMC 4-4-070 indicates that existing trees and other vegetation shall be used to augment new plantings for landscaping where practical, and RMC 4-7-130 requires that a reasonable effort should be made to preserve existing trees. A Determination was made by the Director of Development Services that the retention or replacement of 25% of the existing trees would achieve these requirements. As Significant grading is required on the subject site for the construction of Road A and the 'proposed building pads, the' retention of existing trees outside of the sensitive area tract (Tract B) is not possible. A landscape plan was submitted with the project application proposing the replace the 103 existing trees with 11 AB Serviceberry trees, which would result in the replacement of 11 % of the existing trees. Staff has reviewed the proposed landscape plan and due to the small size ofthe proposed lots, it appears thatthe proposed replacement of 11 % of the trees is the maximum number of trees than can be replaced on the subject site. The proposed replacement trees would be 1 Y:z inch caliper trees, the City's determination specifies that the replacement trees shall be a minimum of 2-inch caliper trees. Therefore, the proposed tree replacement plan is approved subject to the condition that the caliper of the replacement trees be increased to 2 inches. As previously noted, a Category 3 wetland is located on the eastern portion of the subject property. A Category 3 wetland requires a 25-foot buffer. No impacts are proposed to the wetland or its buffer. A Class 3 stream runs through the northeastern portion of the subject property. A Class 3 stream requires a 75-foot buffer; however as the stream. buffer is located within a Protected Slope, the buffer extends to the top of the slope. A storm. drainage outlet pipe is proposed to be located within the proposed stream buffer. Storm drainage facilities are permitted within stream buffers per RMC 4-3-050C and a letter of exemption for the location of the storm drainage outlet pipe within the stream buffer has been granted. A mitigation plan was submitted with the project application and proposes to replace .. the vegetation removed for the storm drainage outlet pipe with vegetation that will not impact the pipe. No other impacts. are proposed to the stream or its buffer. Relationship to Existing Uses: Single family residential homes surround the subject site. The proposed detached single family residences would be compatible with the surrounding development D. Availability and Impact on Public Services (Timeliness). Police and Fire: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicate that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development, subject to the applicant's provision of Code required improvements and fees. Therefore, the City's Environmental Review Committee is requiring the applicant to pay a Fire Mitigation Fee based on $488.00 per new single-family home. the fee is estimated at $1,952.00 (8 new lots x $488.00 = $1,952.00) and is payable prior to the recording of the plat. Recreation: The proposal does not provide on-site recreation areas for future residents of the proposed plat. There are no existing recreational facilities in the immediate vicinity of the subject property and it is anticipated that the proposed development would generate future demand on existing City Parks 'and recreational facilities and programs. Therefore, the City's Environmental Review Committee is requiring the applicant to pay a Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per new single-family home. The fee is estimated at $4,246.08 (8 new lots x $530.76 = $4,246.08) and is also payable prior to the recording of the plat. The City of Renton Trail Plan identifies a potential link to the existing Honey Creek Trail on the eastern portion of the subject property within Tract B. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval the dedication of a trail easement within Tract B for the Honey Creek 'Trail. The Parks Department has indicated that a portion of the Parks Mitigation Fee may be waived with the dedication of the easement. . Schools: The site is located within the boundaries of the Renton School District No. 403. According to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the City of Renton Land Use Element (January 16, 1992), the City of Renton has a student generation factor of 0.44 students per single-family residential dwelling. Based on the student generation factor, the proposed plat would potentially result in 4 additional students (0.44 x 8 = 3.5). The schools would include: Sierra Heights Elementary School, McKnight Middle School, and. Sierra Heights High School. The school district has indicated that they would be able to handle to additional students coming from the proposed development. Hexrpt 05-118 City of Renton PIBIPW Department HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTA TES PRELIMINARY PLA T PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: May 9, 2006 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H Page 11 of 14 Storm Drainage/Surface Water: A preliminary storm drainage report prepared by Preferred Engineering, LLC, dated September 22, 2005 was submitted with the project application. The existing surface water runoff sheet flows to the north into Honey Creek. The proposed onsite vehicular flows and other impervious runoff would be treated within a two cell detention and water quality vault. The proposed vault would be located within the north central portion of the site within Tract A and would diScharge into Honey Creek. The City's Environmental Review Committee imposed a mitigation measure on the project requiring that the storm drainage system comply with a higher standard for flow control. The project is required to comply with the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention (conservation flow· control -Level 2) and water quality improvements. The proposed vault is required to have a separate building permit. The applicant shall submit separate structural plans for review and approval under a separate building permit for the proposed vault. A special inspection from the building department is required during the construction of the vault. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that the stormwater detention tract (Tract A) be landscaped, and irrigated (unless drought tolerant plants are used) appropriately. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan for the review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager prior to recording of the plat. A Surface Water System Development Charge, based on the current rate (If $759.00 per new single- family lot, would be required prior to the issuance of construction permits for the plat. Water and Sanitary Sewer Utilities: The proposed development is within the City of Renton's water and sewer service area. The project is located within the 565-pressure zone. There is an existing 12-inch water main in NE Sunset Blvd that can deliver a flow rate of 4,500 gallons per minute (gpm). The static water pressure is about 70 psi at street elevation (see City water civil drawing no. W-0315). The proposed project is located within the Aquifer Protection Zone 2. Water main improvements within the new development will be required to provide the required fire flow demand and for domestic water service for this project. The improvements will include but not be limited tothe following: iii A water main extension (8-inch minimum diameter) within the new street. The maximum available flow rate from this water main extension will be 1,250 gpm (unless looped system is in place). o Fire hydrants, domestic and landscape water meters. All new construction must have a fire hydrant capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 gpm and must be located within 300 feet of the structures. Existing hydrants will require a quick disconnect Storz fitting, if not already in place. The Water System Development Charge (SDC) would be triggered at the single-family rate of $1,956 per new single-family per building lot. This fee is payable at the time the utility construction permit is issued. A sewer main extension along the new street will be required. All sewer mains outside Right-of-Way require a 15-foot utility easement with drivable access throughout the easement. Existing septic systems shall be abandoned in accordance with King County Health prior to recording of the plat. Sewer main shall be extended to provide separate side sewers stubs to all lots. This parcel is subject to the Honey Creek 8611 Special Assessment District (SAD). The fee is $250.00/lot. Fees are collected at the time the utility construction permit is issued. This parcel is also subject to the Honey Creek frontage 8612 Special Assessment District (SAD). The fee is $74.38 per ft of frontage along Honey Creek. The Sanitary Sewer System Development Charges (SDC) is $1,017 per lot. This fee is payable at the time the utility construction permit is issued. The proposed plat layout indicates that sewer would be provided to the subject site via a sewer easement granted from the property owner to the north. If a sewer easement is not granted for use by the subject site, an alternate sanitary sewer location must be provided. An alternate sewer location may require additional land use approvals prior to the installation of the sewer main. Hexrpt 05-118 City of Renton PIBIPW Department HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTA TES PRELIMINARY PLA T PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: May 9, 2006 5. CONSISTENCY WITH VARIANCE CRITERIA:- Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR; V-H Page 120f14 The Hearing Examiner shall have authority to grant a variance upon making a determination, in writing, that the conditions specified below have been found to exist Section 4-9-250B.10 lists 10 criteria that the Hearing Examiner is asked to consider, along with all other relevant information, in making a decision on a Variance application. These include the following: . 1. Public. policies have been evaluated and it has been determined by the Department Administrator that the public's health, safety, and welfare is best served; The proposed variance is requested to permit the location of a stormwater discharge. pipe on a Protected Slope. The granting of the variance would permit the development of the property in a manner that would provide for better protection of the slope than if the variance were denied. The denial of the variance would require the applicant to discharge the surface water at the top ofthe slope, which would then flow down the slope and into Honey Cre~k. If the surface water were discharged at the top of the slope, the stormwater could cause erosion on the slope and compromise the integrity of the slope. Therefore the granting of the variance would be in the best interest of the public. -. 2. Each facility must conform to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and with any adopted public programs and policies; The proposed stormwater detention facility is part of a residential subdivision proposal, see discussion above for compliance with the Comprehensive Land Use policies. -3. Each facility must serve established, identified public needs; The proposed stormwater discharge pipe is anticipated to serve the surface water runoff needs of the residents of the subdivision and prevent and excess of surface water runoff from leaving the project site arid damaging other properties downstream. 4. No practical alternative exists to meet the needs; There is not practical .alternative to placing the stormwater outlet pipe on the slope, the alternative would involve discharging the stormwater at the top of the slope, which could cause erosion on the slope and compromise the stability of the slope. . 5. The proposed action takes affirmative and appropriate measures to minimize and compensate for unavoidable impacts; A stream buffer mitigation plan was submitted with the project materials to mitigate for the impacts of removing vegetation from the Protected Slope, which also functions as the stream buffer for' Honey Creek. The impacted area is proposed to be restored and replanted with vegetation that would have roots that would not impact the integrity of the stormwater outlet pipe. -' 6. The proposed activity results in no net loss of regulated wetland or streamllake area, value, or function in the drainage basin where the wetland, stream or lake is located; The proposed pipe would not impact any wetlands or streams. The proposed stormwater outlet pipe would comply with the requirements found in the 2005 King Couhty Stormwater Management Manual as required by the City's Environmental Review Committee. 7. The proposed activities will not jeopardize the continued eXisten~eof endangered, threatened or sensitive species as listed by the Federal government or the State; The proposed pipe would not jeopardize any endangered, threatened or sensitive species. 8. That· the proposed activities will not cause significant degradation of groundwater or surface water quality; The installation of the proposed stormwater outlet pipe will be required to comply with the requirements found in the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual to ensure that no surface or ground water quality would be degraded. Hexrpt 05-118 City of Renton PIBIPW Department HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTA TES PRELIMINARY PIA T PUBLIC HEARING DATE: May 9, 2006 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H Page 13 of 14 9. The approval as detennined by the Hearing Examiner is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose; and . The proposed location of the stormwater outlet pipe within the protected slope area is the minimum variance that will accommodate the purpose of discharging stormwater from the stormwater detention system constructed for the proposed plat into Honey Creek. . 10. The proposed variance is based on consideration of the best available .science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific infonnation, the steps in RMC 4- 9-250F are followed. The location of the proposed pipe was based on the analysis done by the applicant's engineer that the location on the protected slope was the preferred location. The mitigation plan prepared by Ecological Land Services, Inc. dated December 9, 2005 to mitigate for the impacts to the stream buffer was prepared in accordance with best available sCience. H. RECOMMENDA nON: Staff recommends APPROVAL of th~ Honey Creek View Estates Preliminary Plat and Variance, Project File No. LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, V-H subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated that was issued by the Environmental Review Committee on March 14,2006. 2. A note shall·be recorded on the face of the final plat stating that no more than 1 single family dwelling unit is permitted on each lot. 3. A demolition permit shall be obtained and all inspections completed on the demolition of the existing residence prior to final plat approval. 4. The applicant shall be required to place UNo Parking" signage along the hammerhead prior to final plat approval. 5. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement shall be created concurrently with the recording of the final plat in order to establish maintenance responsibilities for shared roadway, stormwater and utility improvements. A draft of the document(s) shall be submitted to the City of Renton Development Services Division for review and approval by the City Attomey and Property Services section prior to the recording of the final plat. 6. A Native Growth Protection Easement shall be recorded overTract B prior to the recording of the final plat map. 7. The proposed sensitive area tract (Tract B) shall be delineated with a split rail fence and identified with signage as approved by the Development Services Division Project Manager. A fencing and signage detail shall be submitted to the Development Services Division project manager at the time of Utility Construction Permit for review and approval and that such fencing and signage shall be installed prior to the recording of the final plat. 8. The landscape pl~n shall be revised to show that 2-inch caliper trees shall be proVided within the interior of the plat as opposed to the 1 Yz-inch caliper trees proposed. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted prior to final plat approval. 9. A trail easement within Tract B shall be dedicated to the City of Renton Parks Department for the Honey Creek Trail. The easement shall be required to be dedicated prior to or concurrently with the recording of the final plat. 10. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan for the storm water detention tract (Tract A). Proposed landscaping shall either be drought tolerant or irrigated. The landscape plan shall be submitted at the. Hexrpt 05-118 City of Renton PIBIPW Department HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLA T PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: May 9, 2006 Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-05-118, ECF, PP, CAR, V-H Page 14 of 14 time of Utility Construction Permit application to the Development Services Division project manager . for review and approval. The landscaping shall be installed prior to recording of the final plat. EXPIRATION PERIODS: Preliminary Plats (PP): Five (5) years from final approval (Signature) date. Hexrpt 05-118 -.' . . - .. 1 _ I···· . .. " , '. , ' _ "' •• v'. -'. . .? . . . ~ . /' ,-' , , . ..... ~.; " .. ' . . --, . " ). , "-L 1" ..... ~" CITY OF RENTON ADDENDUM A U13000503 HONEY CREEK VIEW ESTATES PROJECT PERSONNEL AND NUMBERS Dan Thompson, City Inspector Corey Thomas, Fire Department City Shops (Water) FRANCHISE UTILITIES: 206-999-1828 425-430-7024 425-430-7400 1. The franchise utilities require copies of the approved construction drawings before designing their facilities. Provide a copy of the approved composite drawing to each utility for inclusion with their permit application. 2. Each franchise utility must apply for a separate permit prior to construction in existing or future right-of-way. A blueline drawing showing the location of all utilities, city and franchise, in· redlines shall be submitted to the sixth floor counter for City review two weeks before installation. 3. All franchise utilities shall be separated a minimum of five feet (5') horizontally and twelve inches ' (12") vertically from City utilities. 4. All franchis.e utilities within the City of Renton right of way must be inspected by the City of Renton . franchise inspector. Call the inspection line at 425-430-7203 24-hours prior to job start for coordination . . 5. The composite drawing shall be. asbuilt showing all franchise utility locations and c::rossings. The revised composite drawing shall be submitted with the asbuilt drawings after construction is complete. GENERAL: 1 .. CALL 425-430-7203 FOR INSPECTION (24 HR NOTICE) BEFORE YOU START WORK. NOTiFY FIRE, POLICE AND METRO OF CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE. CALL 911 FROM A LOCAL LAND LINE ONLY. FIRE DISPATCH FROM CELL PHONE: 253-852-2121 . 2. Contractors' shall use only sets· of drawings stamped and signed by the City of Renton for constructing utility and transportation improvements. Keep a set of approved drawings on-site at all times. 3. Work hours for hauling in right-of-way are weekdays, 8:30 AM to 3:30 PM, Saturday by approval only and no Sundays. Construction hours: 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM. Any changes to work hours shall have prior approval from the City of Renton. 4. Contractor must call for City inspection before 3:00 p.m. on the previous day. Overtime takes' special authorization and scheduling in advance. 5. Streets shall be kept clean at all times. Truck 'washing and other measures as approved are required for the duration of the project. Provide whatever measures necessary for cleanup and dust control during jo.b and at night. . , 1 6. Traffic control plan to be in accordance with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and as . A approved by the City of Renton Transportation Division. Submit plans at least one week in advance of start of work . . Haul routes must be submitted and approved to the Transportation Division a minimum of one week in advance of start of construction. Haul legal loads and observe all traffic laws. All truck maneuvering and materials storage to be on-site only .. Right of way to remain unobstructed when possible. No stockpiles are allowed in the right of way. 7. All utilities must be inspected prior to backfill. 8. The contractor, as well as the engineer, shall keep as-built drawings. All changes shall be shown on asbuilts. Asbuilts shall be per CitY specifications. All bends on waterlines shall be surveyed prior to backfill with horizontal and vertical control for all bends established. Sewer lines may be surveyed after backfill at manhole access. As-built drawings must have a P.E. or L.P.S. stamp. Final plat recording or Final occupancy will not be issued until receipt and approval by the City of project utility and transportation improvement as-built drawings. 9. Field changes: If minor, submit a shop drawing or schematic through the inspector or by FAX- 425-430-7300. If major, the project engineer should submit drawings and complete justification, information and calculations as applicable to the project manager. The City will answer by memo or schedule a meeting within two days. The field inspector can not give approval in the field for major construction changes. 10. Street Restoration is required to conform to the City of Renton Trench Restoration and Street Overlay Standards. A copy has been provided. All street repairs shall be complete and in place within 14 days, or as directed by the Public Works Inspector. FIRE PREVENTION:. 1. Maintain access to site at all times. Access must be able to support emergency equipment in all types of weather. Hydrants are required to be in place prior to any combustible installation above the foundations. .' 2. All new hydrants shall be Cory type hydrants to be painted Safety Yellow. Iowa and Renselear ' are manufacturers of Cory type. An alternate fire hydrant, Clow Medallion or Mueller Super Centurion has been approved for use. Any hydrant installed shall be equipped with 5-inch diameter Storz "quick connect" style fittings. 3. New hydrants are to be covered with burlap, or heavy plastic and wrapped until operational. 4. The Public Works inspector must inspect all concrete blocking prior to backfill. 5. Water main leads that exceed 50 feet in length shall be minimum 8-inch diameter pipes . .. 6. Call 911 from a local land line phone if the watermain needs to be shut off (emerg~ncy only). All other water mains or for valves shut down, call the Renton Water Department at 425-430-7400. 7. Fuel: any temporary on-site fuel supplies shall have a separate permit from Fire Prevention. 8. A permit from the Fire Department is required for all underground mains serving fire· sprinkler systems. All systems must be installed by a Washington State certified fire sprinkler contractor. 2 l~ 9. Notify central dispatch 24 hours prior to work in the existing right-of-way. (Local Land Line: 911) or Fire Dispatch (cell phone -253-852-2121) 10. Any Hazardous Materials permit (including removal of underground fuel tanks) or Hot Works Certification may be applied for through. Fire Prevention, sixth floor of Renton City Hall. CITY UTILITIES WATER: 1. Pipe materials, valves and fittings shall be as indicated on the approved plans and standard notes. In the case of construction in proposed neW roadways, the proposed road prism shall be constructed to sub-grade prior to any utility installation. 2. The City of Renton shall installall connections to existing· mains. The contractor shall construct the new water main to a point approximately ten feet short of the existing main. All necessary excavation, shoring, and materials are supplied by the contractor and shall be on-site prior to scheduling~ Allowing at least seven working days advance notice, schedule the connection , through the construction inspector. 3. Temporary and permanent thrust blocks shall be formed. Concrete for thrust blocks shall be delivered to the job. No on-site mixes are allowed. Stahdard mix design shall be 3,000 psi. All blocking must be inspected before backfilling .. 4. Procedure for cleaning and construction testing of new water lines: a. Pipe cleaning shall be by poly pigging through vertical crosses installed at the ends of the water lines to serve as pig launches and sediment traps. . b. All water lines shall be pressure tested to minimum of 200 psi or 150 over operating pressure (static) for 2 hours. Services may be tested separately by visual inspection of the corp stop under static pressure. c. Chlorinate for 24 hours, using liquid chlorine and chlorine pump assembly. The inspector shall schedule chlorination. Seven working days advance notice is required~ d. Water used for flushing water lines shall be drained into sanitary sewer only. e. The construction inspector will collect purity tests at blow-ofts. Water purity tests are taken to the testing laboratory by the city inspector. Test results are ·available in 5-Tdays. 5. Crushed rock 5/8 minus backfill to grade is required in City right-of-way. Recycled 1 %" concrete may be used in lieu of crushed rock backfill. Pit run type material may be considered for use in backfill by the construction inspector. Compaction testing may be required. 6. Where conflict exists, the water main shall go under oth~r utilities, however, it is preferred that no water mains shall have more than 6 feet of cover. All water mains up to 10-inch and under shall have a minimum of three· feet of cover. Water mains 12-inch and larger shall have a minimum of four feet of cover 7. Final acceptance shall be·afh~r fined walk through inspection, adjustment of all structures, and approval of asbuilts, bill of sale, cost data inventory and if applicable, easements. -"... 8. Any. water meter less 2-:inches. or less shall be installed by City of Renton crews. Separate" permits are required and may be obtained at the Sixth floor counter of Renton City Hall. 3 , Coordination of location and installation shall be through. the Public Works Inspector. An J additional separate permit for any irrigation installation is required through the Building Permit center for inspection of the appropriate cross connection control. Review and inspection shall follow the standard process as noted on the face of the plumbing permit. 9. If a hydrant meter is needed for the project, the contractor may apply at the sixth floor counter of Renton City Hall. Clear billing information shall be provided by the contractor and any inspections, pickup, maintenance, water bills and return shall be the sole responsibility of the contractor. SANITARY SEWER: 1. All pipes and materials shall be per approved plan and standard notes. However, any sewer pipe with less than four feet or greater than fifteen feet of cover shall be Ductile Iron, Class 50 or C900 pipe. 2. All manholes shall have all interior surfaces. including channeling. coated/sealed with a high solids urethane coating: Wasser MC~Conseal or approved equal. Coating shall be white. 3. Pipe bedding for PVC pipe shall be pea gravel or 5/8" minus crushed rock as approved by the , inspector 6" above and below the pipe. 4. Backfill shall be compacted to at least 95% of maximum density, within the right of way. 5. Contractor will be responsible for Tv ing of the sanitary line. TV after channeling is complete. Air .tests on main and side sewers shall be per City speCification. Number 6 wire shall be wrapped around the stub and extended-to the top with a 2 x 4 marker stenciled in white. 6. Contractor shall asbuilt the invert elevation of side sewer stubs. If cleanouts are installed, the top . and flowline shall be asbuilt and noted on the record drawings. 7. Metro forms for the proposed buildings are provided for your use. Please fill them out and return them with the request for side sewer permits for each building. STORM IEROSION CONTROL: 1. Approved temporary erosion control measures are to be installed as first order of business and maintained at all times per the approved drawings. 2. Weekly erosion control reports outliriing the status and condition of the erosion control plan with any recommendations of change or revision to maintenance schedules or installation shall be submitted by the project Engineer of record to the plan review project manager at the City. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities is required prior to final approval. 3. All pipes and materials shall be per approved plan. All roadway excavation and backfill for· construction of the road prism shall be accomplished prior to installation of the drainage facilities to avoid damage or disturbance of the new infrastructure .. 4. Contractor must notify engineer of any vertical conflict prior to proceeding with construction. Please submit a shop drawing for review. 5. Bedding material shall be per Standard Specifications 9-03.12(3) or as approved by the inspector. 6. Backfill shall be compacted to at least 95% of maximum density. 4 Il .. 7. Catch basins shall be grouted smoothly. 8. System shall be flushed and cleaned. City may request that the line be lamped. 9. Smooth interior wall corrugated polyethylene storm water pipe, where permitted, shall use watertight couplings. It shall also be bedded in pea gravel to the springline. T~NSPORTATION: 1. Uniform traffic manual shall be foilowed for street closures and ro'uting for traffic. An approved traffic control plan shall be in place prior to working in the City right of way. 2. Paving -The minimum· compaction shall be 95% of maximum relative density on subgrade and rock surfaces. 3. Contractor shall not leave open trenches overnight. Backfill, plate or fence all trenches. The proposed method of cover or protection shall be submitted for approval to the inspector. Shoring plates and cold mix to be on site at all times. The~inspector may require cold mix for sidewalks and driveways·for safety. 4. Watch for pedestrian traffic. Provide "sidewalk closed" signing as needed. CONDITIONS TO ISSUANCE OF A CONSTRUCTION PERMIT: 1. Submit Traffic Control Plan and Haul Routes for approval at least 5 days prior to construction. 2. Provide copy of utility contractor's license number. 3. Provide copy of utility contractor's business license number with the City of Renton. H:/Division.s/Develop.ser/Plan.rev/PreconlPrecon notes rev.4/19102 5 City of Renton piB/Pw Department '1' <.< ,.( ., ,Preliminary Report to t~e H~~ring Exa;'iner , LUA-05-118, E!'Ci=, PP, CAR; V-H HONEY GREEK VIEWESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT PU~LlC HEARING DA TE: May 9, 2006 , , Pafl..e 70(14 , the protected slope through a sensitive area variance. See further discussion below in tDe; Variance . . Section.,~:: ' .' ' .. " ". . -. . , 'Policy EN-~1.' AI/ow land aiteration only for apprbved development proposals or approved mitigation < efforts that. will not create unnecessary erosion; unrJermine thi3 support of nearby land, orunnecessan7y : ' , scartbe landscape. '. . The applicant has proposed to alter the protected slope area for the installation of a stormwate~ outlet :' , '. ,eipe on the slope and has requested a variance from the City's sensitive area requirements for the' ' installation of the pipe. See further discussion below under the Variance ~ection. ' . B. Complicince with the Und~rlying Zoning Designati'on. the 1.8-acre site' is designated' Residential -10 Dwelting Units per Acre (R-10) on the City of Renton Zoning Map. The'prapdse(fdE~velopmentwould allow for the future construction of up to 1 o new single-family residential units. , ' Density -The allowed maximum density in the R~10 zorie fS"ftttrdiNelling units per net acre (dulac) and, the minimum density permitted is 4.0 dwelling units p~rhet acre (dulac). Net density is calculated after , ., public rights:cif-way, private access easements, ang critical are,asare deducted from the gross acreage of' ,tHe· sffe>"c-Afier.the·deduction of 1,524 sqw~.r~ feet·of proposed Road A' and 29,947 square feet for the' . sensitive areas' on site from the gross lot area, the proposal for 9 lots would result in a net density of 9.57 dwelling units per acre (78)512 gross sq. ft. -7,524 sq. ft.-29,947 sq. ft. =41,041 sq. ft. or 0,94 ac,9 units,! 0.94 acres = 9,57 dulac). The proposed plat appears to comply with density requirements for the B::19 zorling designation. ,.,. Lot Dimensions and Si~e ~ TheminimLim lot size required is 3,000 sq ft. The minimum lot width required is 30 ft for interior lots and. 40 feet for corner lots, and a'minimum lot depth of 55 feet is required. Proposed lot widths range from 36 to 60 feet and lot depths range' from 66 feet to 100 feet. The proposed _ plat would create 9 lots with the following lot sizes: ' Lot Number 'Lot Size (square feet) 1 2 3 4 5 ,6 7 8 9 3,437 3,793 4,333, 3,208 3,194 ,3;708· .3,000 3,358 3,419 Access , Road A Road A Road A Road A Road A Road A Road A "Road A Road A As propolled, all lots appear to be'''in compliance with the required lot width, depth and size standards as prescrioed in the R-8 zone. In addition, the proposal includes 2 tracts one 'is for stormwater d~tention, . one is for s.ensitive areas. The proposed storm~ater diction tract (Tract A) is 5,587 square feet in area , and the pr9Po~ed sensitive area tract (Tract B) is 34,489.square feet in area. ' Setbacks -In the R-10zone, the minimum front yard !:)etback i~ ·1 o feet for the primary structure and 20 feE;lt for an atta,~d .gfirage, the side yard along 8 street setbac;k is 10 feet for the primary structure and 20 feet for attached garages, which access from the side yard, the side yard setback is5.feet, and the' rear yard setback is 15 feet, however, if the. new;lot abuts an existing ,lot zoned R-8 then a 25-foot setbac,k , is required.:-Proposed Lots 3-6 would ha(,~ rearyardsabUUing, an R~8 zoned property; therefore these , Iqts. shaSb..'feq~ired to provide 25~foot rear yard setbacks. All other proposed lots would 'have a,15~foot rear yard setback. The proposed lots appear to contain adequate area to provide for the construction of single family residences after the consideration' of the setback requirements. Compliance with'these ,setback standards will be verified prior to the issuance of individual building permits. ' . Hexrpt05-118.doc l.~ Tatie Officer. Robert B. Jackson Phone: Fax: TItle Officer: Don Peters Phone: Fax: Northwest DMsooll'll Carl Woods Phone: Ul'Ilderwfl'lter: Fax: Your Reference: MASTAN-PRICE-COSTELLO To: D~V~l.O crr':;t1fNt PtA . A~Atio!lj'J'iVG 1000 Second Avenue, SUite 1620DEC 2 1 ? Seattle, Washington 98104 to ~005 206-770-8700. 877-S30-1S05iIECIEIVED 206-770-8860 E-mail: rjackson@stewartcom 206-770-8801 206-770-8858 E-mail: dpeters@stewart.com 206-770-8801 206-770-8809 E-mail: cwoods@stewart.com 206-223-4211 . Order Number: 205115003 SUPPLEMENTAL NO.1 There has been no cihlange to tine property covered by olUlr prelimonary commitment dated JIUIDy 8, 2005; at 8:00 a.m.; except as noted below: None DATED: SEPTEMBER 16, 2005 BY: Don Peters Page 1 Order Number: 205115003 'v Title Officer: 41 Reference: 41 41 41 41 MASTAN-PRICE-COSTELLO 18000 International Boulevard South, Suite 510 . SeaT~c, Washington 98188 206-770-8700 • 888-896-1443 41 Order Number: 205115003 SCIHEDIULEA 1. Effective Date: July 8, 2005 at 8:00 a.m. 2. Policy Or Policies To Be Issued: ( X ) ALTA OWNER'S POLICY, (10117/92) ( X ) STANDARD ( ) EXTENDED Proposed Insured: TO BE DETERMINED ( X ) ALTA EXTENDED LOAN POLICY, (10/17/92) SIMULTANEOUS ISSUE RATE Proposed Insured: NO LENDER Amount: TO BE DETERMINED Premium: T2IX: Total: $ 0.00 Amount: TO BE DETERMINED Premium: Tax: Total: $ 0.00 3. The estate lOr interest On the land described ell' referred to in this Commitment and covell'ed herein is: FEE SIMPLE ESTATE 4. Totle to said estate lOll' 6nterest in said land is at the effective date hereof vested in: . CHARLES E. PRICE AND MAHVASH G. PRICE, HUSBAND AND WIFE AND JAMES MICHAEL COSTELLO AND MINOO COSTELLO, HUSBAND AND WIFE AND ALI A. MAST AN AND FARIDEH MASTAN, HUSBAND AND WIFE . . 5. The land rrefeDTed to in this commitment is described un Exhibit "A". Order Number: 205115003 SCHEDULE B -SECTIOINI 11 THE FOLLOWING ARE THE REQUIREMENTS TO BE COMPLIED WITH: ITEM (A) PAYMENT TO OR FOR THE ACCOUNT OF THE GRANTORS OR MORTGAGORS OF THE FULL CONSIDERATION FOR THE ESTATE OR INTEREST TO BE INSURED. ITEM (B) PROPER INSTRUMENT(S) CREATING THE ESTATE OR INTEREST TO BE INSURED MUST BE EXECUTED AND DULY FILED FOR RECORD NOTE: EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1997, AND PURSUANT TO AMENDMENT OF WASHINGTON STATE STATUTES RELATING TO STANDARDIZATION OF RECORDED DOCUMENTS, THE FOLLOWING FORMAT AND CONTENT . REQUIREMENTS MUST BE MET. FAILURE TO COMPLY MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF THE DOCUMENT BY THE RECORDER FORMAT: MARGINS TO BE 3" ON TOP OF FIRST PAGE, 1" ON SIDES AND BOTTOM, 1" ON TOP, SIDES AND BOTTOM OF EACH SUCCEEDING PAGE. FONT SIZE OF 8 POINTS OR LARGER AND PAPER SIZE OF NO MORE THAN 8 %" BY 14". NO ATTACHMENTS ON PAGES SUCH AS STAPLED OR TAPED NOTARY SEALS. PRESSURE SEALS MUST BE SMUDGED . . INFORMATION WHICH MUST APPEAR ON THE FIRST PAGE: Page 2 TITLE OR TITLES OF DOCUMENT. IF ASSIGNMENT OR RECONVEYANCE REFERENCE TO AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER OR SUBJECT DEED OF TRUST. NAMES OF GRANTOR(S) AND GRANTEE(S) WITH REFERENCE TO ADDITIONAL NAMES ON FOLLOWING PAGE(S), IF ANY. ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION (LOT, BLOCK, PLAT NAME OR SECTION, . TOWNSHIP, RANGE AND QUARTER QUARTER SECTION FOR UNPLATTED). ASSESSOR'S TAX PARCEL NUMBER(S) RETURN ADDRESS WHICH MAY APPEAR IN THE UPPER LEFT HAND 3" TOP MARGIN Order Number: 205115003 SCHEDULE B -SECTION! 2 . GENlERAl EXCEPTIONS THE POLICY OR POLICIES TO BE ISSUED WILL CONTAIN EXCEPTIONS TO THE FOLLOWING UNLESS THE SAME ARE DISPOSED OF TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE COMPANY. A TAXES OR ASSESSMENTS WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN AS EXISTING. LIENS BY THE RECORDS OF ANY TAXING AUTHORITY THAT LEVIES TAXES OR ASSESSMENTS ON REAL PROPERTY OR BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS. B. ANY FACTS, RIGHTS, INTEREST, OR CLAIMS WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS BUT WHICH COULD BE ASCERTAINED BY AN INSPECTION OF SAID LAND OR BY MAKING INQUIRY OF PERSONS IN POSSESSION THEREOF. C. EASEMENTS, CLAIMS OF EASEMENT OR ENCUMBRANCES WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS. D. DISCREPANCIES, CONFLICTS IN BOUNDARY LINES, SHORTAGE IN AREA, . ENCROACHMENTS, OR ANY OTHER FACTS WHICH A CORRECT SURVEY WOULD DISCLOSE, AND WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN BYPUBLIC RECORDS. . E. (A) UNPATENTED MINING CLAIMS, (B) RESERVATIONS OR EXCEPTIONS IN PATENTS OR IN ACTS AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE THEREOF; (C) WATER RIGHTS, CLAIMS OR TITLE TO WATER; WHETHER OR NOT THE MATTERS EXCEPTED UNDER (A), (B) OR (C) ARE SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS, (D) INDIAN TRIBAL CODES OR REGULATIONS, INDIAN TREATY OR ABORIGINAL RIGHTS, INCLUDING EASEMENTS OR EQUITABLE SERVITUDES. F. ANY LIEN, OR RIGHT TO A LIEN, FOR SERVICES, LABOR OR MATERIAL THERETOFORE OR HEREAFTER FURNISHED, IMPOSED BY LAW AND NOT SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS.· . G. ANY SERVICE, INSTALLATION, CONNECTION, MAINTENANCE, CONSTRUCTION, TAP OR REIMBURSEMENT CHARGES/COSTS FOR SEWER, WATER, GARBAGE OR ELECTRICITY. H. DEFECTS, LIENS, ENCUMBRANCES, ADVERSE CLAIMS OR OTHER MATTERS, IF ANY, CREATED, FIRST APPEARING IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OR ATTACHING SUBSEQUENT TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF BUT PRIOR TO THE DATE THE PROPOSED INSURED ACQUIRES.oF RECORD· FOR VALUE THE ESTATE OR INTEREST OR MORTGAGES THEREON COVERED BY THIS COMMITMENT. END OF GENERAl EXCEPTIONS Page 3 Order Number: 205115003 6. DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTOR: CHARLES E. PRICE AND MAHVASH G. PRICE, HUSBAND AND WIFE AND JAMES MICHAEL COSTELLO AND MINOO COSTELLO, HUSBAND AND WIFE AND ALI A MASTANAND FARIDEH TRUSTEE: BENEFICIARY: AMOUNT: DATED: RECORDED: RECORDING NO.: MASTAN, HUSBAND AND WIFE WASHINGTON ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, INC. HOME SAVINGS OF AMERICA. F.A., A CORPORATION $67,400.00 FEBRUARY 21,1990 FEBRUARY 26, 1990 9002261642 7. JUDGMENT. IN FAVOR OF: AGAINST: AMOUNT: FILED: JUDGMENT NO.: CAUSE NO.: CREDITOR'S ATTORNEY: STATE OF WASHINGTON CHARLES PRICE $4,770.00, TOGETHER WITH INTEREST, COSTS AND ATTORNEYS FEES, IF ANY FEBRUARY 10,1997 97-9-03463-4 96-5-01147-0 LLOYD CORGAN THE LIEN OF THE MATTER SHOWN IN PARAGRAPH 7 HEREIN DEPENDS UPON THE IDENTITY OF THE DEBTORITAXPAYER WITH THE NAME CHARLES E. PRICE. THE ENCLOSED AFFIDAVIT SHOULD BE COMPLETED AND RETURNED TO THIS OFFICE TO HELP DETERMINE THE IDENTITY OF SAID PARTY. 8. EXAMINATION OF THE RECORDS DISCLOSES NUMEROUS MATTERS PENDING AGAINST PERSONS WITH NAMES SIMILAR TO JAMES MICHAEL COSTELLO. THE ENCLOSED IDENTITY AFFIDAVIT SHOULD BE COMPLETED AND RETURNED TO THIS COMPANY FOR CONSIDERATION 10 DAYS PRIOR TO CLOSING. 9. ACCORDING TO THE APPLICATION FOR TITLE INSURANCE, TITLE IS TO VEST IN PERSONS NOT YET REVEALED AND WHEN SO VESTED WILL THEN BE SUBJECT TO MATTERS DISCLOSED BY A SEARCH OF THE RECORDS AGAINST THEIR NAMES. 10. MATTERS REGARDING EXTENDED MORTGAGEES COVERAGE HAVE NOT BEEN CLEARED. UPON NOTIFICATION OF A BONA FIDE PURCHASER. THESE MATTERS WILL BE DETERMINED BY AN INSPECTION OF SAID PREMISES. END OF SCHEDULE B PageS Order Number: 205115003 NOTES: NOTE A: SO THAT WE MAY COMIPL Y WDTH AlL lENDER REQUUREMEINTS ANID ENDORSEMENTS, PlEASE ENCLOSE A COMPlETE COpy Of mE lENDER'S INSTRUCTIONS WITH THE RECORDING PACKAGE. . IN ORDER TO ASSURE TIMELY RECORDING ALL RECORDING PACKAGES SHOULD BE SENT TO: STEWART TITLE 18000 INTERNATIONAL BLVD., ,SUITE 510 SEATAC, WASHINGTON 98188 - ATTN: RECORDER NOTE B: THE DESCRIPTION CAN BE ABBREVIATED AS SUGGESTED BELOW IF NECESSARY TO MEET STANDARDIZATION REQUIREMENTS. THE FULL TEXT OF THE DESCRIPTION MUST APPEAR IN THE DOCUMENT(S) TO BE INSURED. NE % SW.% SE %, 4-23-5E NOTE C: THE SITUS ADDRESS OF THE PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED IS: 3524 NORTHEAST SUNSET BOULEVARD RENTON, WASHINGTON 98056 NOTE D: A RECORD OF SURVEY RECORDED JUNE 2, 1992 UNDER RECORDING NO. 9206029001. CHAIINJ OF Tm.E NOTE: THE FOLLOWING DEED(S) AFFECTING SAID LAND WAS (WERE) RECORDED WITHIN 24 MONTHS OF THE DATE OF THIS COMMITMENT: NONE THE ABOVE. INFORMATION IS PROVIDED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY AND NO LIABILITY SHALL ARISE THEREFROM. BGS/CJ Page 6 Order Number: 205115003 Copies to: STEWART TITLE/SEATAC 18000 INTERNATIONAL BOULEVARD SOUTH, #510 SEATAC, WA 98188 ATTENTION: NICOLE- DAVIS REAL ESTATE GROUP 1201 MONSTER ROAD SOUTHWEST, SUITE 320 RENTON, WA 98055 ATTENTION: DANA Page 7 Order Number: 205115003 Order Number: 205115003 IEXIHI~BBT "A" THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION 373 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHERLY MARGIN OF STATE HIGHWAY NO.2 (SUNSET HIGHWAY); THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SUNSET HIGHWAY 300 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTHERLY PARALLEL WITH SAID EAST LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION A DISTANCE OF 145 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY 300 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID EAST LINE WHICH IS 145 FEET NORTH OF THE NORTHERLY MARGIN OF SAID SUNSET HIGHWAY; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION, BEING THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 484.62 FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS 170 FEET EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH, PARALLEL TO SAID WEST LINE TO THE NORTHERLY MARGIN OF SUNSET HIGHWAY; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID SUNSET HIGHWAY TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONDEMEND IN KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NO. 742207 FOR SUNSET HIGHWAY. stewart ~titIe 'I \ \ 1 1 " I .I l ORDER NO:. 205115003 , \ \ 1\ \ • \ \ N This sketch is provided without charge for infomiation. It is not intended to show all matters related to the property including, but not limited to area, dimensions, encroachments or locations ofbotmdaries. It's not a part of, nor does it modifY, the commitment or policy to which it is attached. The company assumes NO LIABILITY for any matter related to this sketch. Reference should be made to an accurate survey for fin1her information. COMMIITMENT FOR TITlE INSURANCE BSSUED BY ,stewart L-:title guaranty company STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, A Texas Corporation, herein called the Company, for a valuable consideration, hereby commits to i~ue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefore; all subject to the proviSions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Stewart Title Guaranty Company has caused its corporate name and seal to be hereunto affIXed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown on Schedule A. Authorized Signatory STEWART TITLE Company SEATAC, WASHINGTON City, State CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS 1. The tenn mortgage, when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. . If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage . thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall· disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, enCUmbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but suCh amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. 3. UabiJity of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed . Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the fonn of policy or policies committed for any only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the· insuring provisions, the· Conditions and Stipulations, and the Exclusions from Coverage of the fonn of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed Insured may have or may bring against the Company arising out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the status of the mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be based on and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment. . ·A11 notices required to be given the Company and any statement in writing required to be furnished the Company shall be addressed to It at P.O. Box 2029, Houston. Texas 77252. Stewalll'lt Title Guarnnty Company, Stewart Title BnsurGll'\lce Company, Stewart TotBe "Dnsurance Company of Oregon. NatlcnaB land Title Dnsurance Company, Mansas TriBe Insurance ComlPany, Charier landTItDe Insurance Company. Privacy Policy Notoce PURPOSE OF THIS NonCE Title V of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) generally prohibits any financial institution, directly or through its affiliates, from sharing nonpublic personal information about you with a nonaffiliated"third party unless the institution provides you with a notice of its privacy policies and practices, such as the type of information that it collects about you and the categories of persons or entities to whom it may be disclosed. In compliance with the GLBA, We are providing you with this" document, which notifies you of the privacy policies and practices of Stewart Tlltie Guaranty Company, Stewart TItle Dnsurance Company, Stewart ntDe Insurance Company of Oregon, NaltfionaB landl litRe 8nsurance Company, Arkansas TatRe Insurance C~mpany, Charter landl TotBeUnsurance Company. We may collect nonpublic personal information about you from the following sources: e Information we receive from you, such" as on applications or other forms. Cl Information abOut your transactions we secure from our files, or from our affiliates or others. • Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency. • Information that we receive from others involved In your transaction, such as the real estate agent or lender. Unless it is specifically stated otherwise In an amended Privacy Policy Notice, no additional nonpublic personal information will be collected about you. We may disclose any of the above information that we collect about our customers .or former customers to our affiliates or to nonaffiliated third parties as permitted by law. """ We also may disclose this information about our Customers or former customers to the follOwing types of nonaffiliated companies that perform marketing services on our behalf or with whom we have joint marketing agreements: o Financial service providers such as companies engaged in banking, consumer finance, securities and insurance. " o Non-financial companies such as envelope stuffers and other fulfillment service providers. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY NONPUBlIC PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE "THAT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY PERMITTED BY LAW. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products or services to you. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. Page 4 SCHEDULE B D SECTBOIN 2 CONTINUED SPECDAL EXCEPTIONS 1. EASEMENT DISCLOSED BY ASSESSOR'S MAP FOR TRANSMISSION LINE WHICH AFFECTS THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED. 2. TERMS, COVENANTS, CONDITIONS ANDIOR PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN AN EASEMENT SERVING SAID PREMISES, AS CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT: RECORDED: FEBRUARY 14, 1975 RECORDING NO.: 7502140608 3. EASEMENT, INCLUDING TERMS AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED THEREIN: RECORDED: AUGUST 2, 1984 RECORDING NO.: 8408020497 IN FAVOROF: CITY OF RENTON; A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION FOR: UTILITIES AFFECTS: REFER TO SAID INSTRUMENT FOR THE EXACT LOCATION. 4. LIEN OF THE REAL ESTATE EXCISE SALES TAX AND SURCHARGE UPON ANY SALE OF SAID PREMISES, IF UNPAID. AS OF THE DATE HEREIN, THE EXCISE TAX RATE FOR CITY OF RENTON IS 1.78%. 5. GENERAL TAXES. THE FIRST HALF BECOMES DELINQUENT AFTER APRIL 30TH• THE SECOND HALF BECOMES DELINQUENT AFTER OCTOBER 31 ST• YEAR: 2005 AMOUNT BILLED: $1.490.02 AMOUNT PAID: $ 745.01 AMOUNT DUE: $ 745.01, PLUS INTEREST AND PENALTY, LEVY CODE: TAX ACCOUNT NO.: ASSESSED VALUATION: LAND: IMPROVEMENTS: IF DELINQUENT 2100 042305-9090-06 $88,000.00 $37,000.00 NOTE: KING COUNTY TREASURER, 500 4TH AVENUE, 6TH FLOOR ADMIN. BLDG., SEATTLE, WA 98104 (206) 296-7300 WEB ADDRESS: http://webapp.metrokc.gov/KCTaxinfol. Order Number: 205115003 i f .r '''~;.;~ Pellc1@gmail.com " '-', .' City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton, W A 98055 Honey Creek View Plat Level 1 Drainage Analysis Prepared for: PK ENTERPRISES 23035 SE 263rd Street Maple VmnIey, WA 98038 Septellllllberr 22, 2005 D ENGINEERING, LLC Box 25422 Way, WA 98093-2422 (206) 501-5708 I. II. III. IV. v. Table @f Contents Introduction Soils Infonnation Review of Resources Field Iilspection and Downstream Analysis Table 1 -Downstream Analysis Table Maps, Exhibits, and Figures (pics) Page 4 7 8 11 13 VI. Preliminary Pond Sizing and ExistinglFuture Runoff Pot. 22 VII. Summary 30 35 CERTDfBCATE OF ENGINEERS: The technical material and data contained in this report were prepared under the supervision and direction of the undersigned whose seal as Professional Engineer is affixed bebw. Richard J. Blair, P.E. Preferred Engineering, LLC EXPIRES 11/11/06 I I. IlIIltrodUlictiollll The proposed Honey Creek View Plat is a 9 lot residential short plat located at 3524 NE Sunset Blvd in the City of Renton, Washington. The property tax identification-:mmber is #042305-3050 and the parcel number is 0423059090. A vicinity map is provided below in Figure 1. The project's closest major intersection along Sunset Boulevard is Union A venue and the project is located west of Union Avenue. See vicinity maps #1 to determine the driving directions and local cross streets. The project site is on the north side of Sunset Blvd NE and contains Honey Creek on the eastern side that will remain a tract with a Native Growth Easement on it. The existing 2.78 acre property is zoned RIO with a minimum lot size of 3,000 sq-ftrequired for the RIO designation. The maximum marketable number oflots is 9 lots due to providing a sensitive tract for Honey Creek and providing a new roadway design per City standards to access the lots. FigUlllre 1: Vicinity Map witJlnParrceK Lines --~---, ..... -~ -.... i"'-'::7~',.;...f~"::"":'-.. ---~-''i1'~ : Sa ~~~ ~ FigUlre 2: Larger Vicimlity Map for Highway Access to Site (NTS) The project site was originally surveyed by Touma Surveyors in 1989 and recently re-surveyed by Infonned Land Surveyors to revise the topography, OHWM habitat flags by Habitat Technologies, locate utilities, and locate 6- inch diameter or greater trees as required by the City of Renton. The datum used is per the NA VD 88 datum as used by the City of Renton. May Creek Basin Imfoll'mstion: The proposed discharge location for the project site is into Honey Creek at approximately 1 mile upstream of the confluence of Honey Creek into the May Creek. The May Creek Basin encompasses a 14 square mile drainage basin, which empties into Lake Washington. It is located between the Cedar River, Coal Creek, and Issaquah Creek drainage basins. The basin lies primarily within unincorporated King County; the western and southwestern portions of the basin (approximately 10% of the total area) are in the City of Renton. The Honey Creek sulrbasin is located on a flat, upland area known as the East Renton Plateau. Honey Creek is the lii'gest of the plateau tributaries and drains several major commercial areas along Sunset Boulevard NE, in addition to several fully developed neighborhoods. The hydrologic conditions of Honey Creek are very similar to other streams that drain the plateau further to the east. The Honey Creek area includes high density single family homes and commercial development and future drainage from this area will not significantly increase due to it's already high amount of development existing in the area. Increased floods still may occur due to increases in the flow-rates. The most significant problem within this basin is the channel construction near the Metro sanitary sewerline and trail. H. Soils Information The topography, existing landuse,and cover of the site consists of an existing small 800 square foot "teardown" home with boarded windows, a small entrance and~~Y.it driveway, and existing tree canopy for most of the 2.78 acre site. Most of the trees consist of deciduous trees with some alder and cedar found on-site (see tree survey map provided with the preliminary site plan). The site is shaped in an "L" shape along the northern boundary of Sunset Boulevard NE and contains slopes ranging from 10% to 40% for most of the project site. The soils on site are classified within the Alderwood Series per the US Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. This soil association is moderately well drained, undulating to hilly soils that have dense, very slowly permeable glacial till at a depth of 20 to 40 inches; on uplands and terrances. (See Figure 3 and Figure 4: For General and Area Specific Soil Survey Maps). From the soil survey maps the soil classification . is primarily AgC and AgD or Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6% to 15% slopes and Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15% to 30% slopes, which is consistent with the site slope observations and soil types. Runoff off from this soil type is medium and the erosion hazard is moderate to severe dependent on slopes, landuse, and vegetative cover. Figlllre 3: Genera! Soil Classification Map Site Location Figure 4: US Dept. of Agriculture SCS Map Site Location HI. Review of Resolllrrces (See Appendix forr Matp PriImttOllllts) King County Critical Drainage Area Maps: The proposed site improvements is not part of any critical drainage areas. Floodplain / Floodway (FEMA)Maps: The project site is not contained within a floodplain or floodway area upon . review of the City of Renton Flood Hazard Areas Map. Erosion Hazard Area: The project site is part of the Erosion Hazard Area upon review of the City of Renton Erosion Hazard Areas Map. Greenbelt Sensitive Areas: A portion of the site is part of the Greenbelt Sensitive Areas upon review of the City of Renton Greenbelt Sensitive Areas Map. The proposed project will maintain this area per the Preliminary Plat Site Plan provided. Aquifer Protection Zone: The project site is part of the aquifer protection zone, therefore no infiltration facilities are allowed for discharge per the City of Renton Aquifer Protection Zone Map. Seismic Hazard Area: The project site is not part of the seismic hazard area per the City of Renton Seismic Hazard Area Map, Slide Sensitive Area: Per the City of Renton Slide Sensitive Area Map, the project site is classified as having a "moderate" potential for slide. Wetland Inventory Maps: There exists no inventory wetlands on the project site per the King County Wetland Inventory Map. US Department of Agriculture, King County Soils Survey: The soils on site are classified as Alderwood. /0 if: 'I IV. Fiend Inspection, DowlIIlstreamm Analysis, & Downstn-eamm Analysis Map: General Site Conditions: A site inspection was conducted on May 20, 2005. The weather during this period was overcast and 55 degrees with a slight .<::.;:'11 5mph wind. The previous days' precipitation consisted of a slight accumulation and soils were found to be moderately dry. In additio~ heavy downpours were observed two days prior to the site visit. During this site inspection the following was observed about the existing downstream and upstream conveyance system (see Figure 5 contained within this section for the y.. mile downstream flow path map): General Field Observations: 1. On the frontage road (Sunset Blvd.), approximately 750 LF of centerline to curb existing vehicular sheet flow runoff was observed to drain into a gutter and catch basin located adjacent to the project site's frontage to the south. (see attached pictures provided in Section V.) This flow drains to the east along Sunset Blvd before draining to the north to Honey Creek and to the northwest. 2. Contributing flows from the parcels to the east do not supply any significant runoff to the proposed project site. They are mostly of existing single family homes with plentiful tree cover within their parcels. The existing runoff from these three existing residential lots will continue to drain into the unmodified sensitive area tract that will remain forested in the proposed site plan. 3. There exists no contributing flows from the western parcel located adjacent to the proposed project lot. 1/ ,r ,J No. 0 1 2 Flow Direction Northwest Northwest Northwest , ---. -,,-t,./t!.-.!.: :-~{~~: ___ ._: .: c!.---=7""'r~~~_~ ...... :. -:J':[=-~\~:~=-~i o;.::;;;';~~::~~~~~~3:g--~~=~~::?:::-~·:~:;~J Figure 5: % Mile Downstream AnaBysis Map Dowlmstream Analysis 'fable 1 Description Distance (feet) Surface Sheet flow from existing treed 0 canopy to Honey Creek Flow along Honey Creek with rounded 1320 gravel base Confluence with May Creek 5400 downstream Condition Good Good Good '0. i. •... t! Total Distance (feet) 0 1320 5400 Downstream problems within a ~ mile of the discharge location shows woody debris located within the stream OHWM limits. Further inspection downstream of the Y4 mile section shows that flooding or high water levels within Honey Creek has occurred due to the sewer interceptor main and the access road located parallel to Honey Creek. 12- V.Maps fll"om Review of Resoull"ces SecttiOIlD & Miscell]allDoous Utilities Fngwures The following maps were described within Section III of this Level 1 Downstream <~alysis Report and are provided within this section. In addition, potential other utility maps are provided for the reader to determine future utility conflicts and crossing information. Some of the figures provided within this section are enlargements from the Review of Resources Maps provided in Section III. FigulI"e 6: City of Renton Sanitary Sewell" Map IS City of Renton Storm -Surrfsce Wster 11 Figure 9: City of Renton Water Zone Map (Located in the 565 Pressure Zone) IS PROJECT SITE Figure 10: City of Renton Zoning Map (Located within theJR-tO Residential Zone) CITY OF REf'ITON ZONING MAP RESIDEffTlAL t~ (RC) Resource Conservation o (R-1) Resldenllla11 duiac _ (R-4) Residenlia14 duiac o (R~) Residential 8 dutac o (RMH) Residential Manufactured Homes o (R-10) Residential 10 dulac lEI (R-14) Rest.1ent!al14 dulac _ (R~F) Res8clenlllal MtAlQ.FamMy m (RM-T) ResEdenlial M~amily Tradlional _ (R~U) Residential Multi-Farrily Urban Center - --City Umts Adopted November 1. 2004 Effective November 10, 2004 MIXED USE CENTERS _ (CV) Cenler Wage _ (UC-NJ1) Urban Center-Ibtt! 1 o (UC-H2) Urban Center-I'bth 2 /;",>J (CO) Cenler OownlOWf1 R"::;:n (COR) CommercialfOffice!Residenlial COMMERCIAL m:1~~j (CA) Commercial Arteria! 1m (CO) Commercial Office Kd,$~~ (CNI) CommercIaB NeIghborhood INDUSTRIAL D (lLllnduslrial-Light 1~;10f;ii~1 (1M) Bndustrial-Medfum 1:""%::'1 (IH) industria! • Heavy Figure 11: City ofJRenton Zoning Legend -? ;;; -a 8 c:~ j., (~ at-~ t"t t\E itl f,l, j .!? a' -r.: ~. f; i{ ~ Be :;,,~;; '" ~ .g fi ~ ...s:; .~ ~g Figure 12: City of Renton Capita! Improvement Projects 17 / I '{ Figure 13: City of Renton Erosion Hazard Areas IS . Exiting parcel driveway Figure 15: Existing House onsite Figure 15: Existing Gll'avel Rosd CUlrvilmg Around Behind House " if • Figure 17: View of Slope Behind Hoose Figure 19: Closest & Best View of Honey Creek with OHWM Stake Visible Figure 20: View of rocks aROling base of Honey Creek 2./ VJI.Prelimmiunau!'y Pound Sizirmg and Existimtg/Proposed Rmlloff Poteuntial AIlUIlHySUs Enclosed is a preliminary hydrological analysis from the existing site hydrology with the detention and water quality modeled runoff simulating the existing hydrc!ngy using the King County hydrological model, KCRTS. This detention calculation utilizes the Level II King County Flow Control Criteria with 100% pre-existing forested conditions for the existing site hydrology to comply with the 2005 Manual. Detention runoff was matched with ~ of the 2 year to the 50 year full durational analysis methodology, but since the ~ of the 2 year simulated peak runoff from the existing hydrology was too small to runoffwith the minimum discharge diameter allowable within KCRTS, then the minimum lower diameter discharge from the first orifice was used. Since the smallest diameter KCRTS was used in the first orifice results in a proposed runoff larger than ~ of the existing 2 year simulated runoff from forested conditions, then the proposed lower event curve will be greater than the existing ~ of the 2 year probable runoff. Existing Conditions: There exist no upstream drainage basins associated with the project site due to existing Sunset Blvd tightlined conveyance. Land from the east and west of the site all drain separately from the proposed building site area. The project's existing site condition is on forested canopy with slopes averaging 15% to 17% for most of the build-able area. The surface water from the site drains northward off the project site to Honey Creek. The existing site conditions consist mostly of grass and forest runoff from a single family home. The following table is a summary of the existing flows using the KCRTS program, a continuous model simulation program developed by King CoUnty, Washington. The onsite basin flow is shown as one drainage basin. The downstream discharge drains eventually into Honey Creek and eventually to May Creek approximately 6500 feet downstream of the discharge point into Honey Creek. :us J!! ne E . tin S·t CIIn 11: • ti arac ens cs Description Imperviollls Pernous 2SyrFIow lOOyrFlow Area, acres Area, acres Frequency, Frequency, cfs cfs Basin 0.00 1.02 0.064 0.083 Note: I. The existing basin area is comprised of mostly forested conditions (existing firs and deciduous types, see pictures in end of this report). 2. The build-able area is approximately 1.0 acre. I. r:. Existing Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:pre-ex2.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Analysis------- Flow Rate Rank Ti~eof Peak - -Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) 0.064 0.018 0.048 0.002 0.028 0.050 0.042 0.083 Computed 2 2/09/01 18:00 7 1/06/02 4:00 4 2/28/03 3:00 8 3/24/04 20:00 6 1/05/05 8:00 3 1/18/06 20:00 5 11/24/06 4:00 1 1/09/08 9:00 Peaks Proposed Conditions: (CFS) Period 0.083 1 100.00 0.064 2 25.00 0.050 3 10.00 0.048 4 5.00 0.042 5 3.00 0.028 6 2.00 0.018 7 1.30 0.002 8 1.10 0.076 50.00 0.990 0.960 0.900 0.800 0.667 0.500 0.231 0.091 0.980 The proposed development will provide 9 additional residential houses with a 42 feet wide right of way provided for a city road, including 5-foot sidewalks on both sides of the street. Approximately 0.80 acres of the site will maintain the steep slope sensitive area foliage to reduce and minimize impacts from the development. This 0.80 acres is not included within the detention facility sizing due to not changing it's pre-development site characteristics. The following table is a summary of the drainage components for the downstream analysis and their runoff capabilities. P de d·n ropose 0l1li BODS Description Impervious Pervious 2Syr 100yr Area, acres Area, (grass) Exceedence JExcee«iellllce acres Flow, cis Flow, cfs Basin 0.53 0.49 0.209 0.356 Proposed Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:dev2.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Analysis------- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak -Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) <.~.;.,. (CFS) Period 0.173 5 2/09/01 2:00 0.356 1 100.00 0.990 0.136 8 1/05/02 16:00 0.209 2 25.00 0.960 0.209 2 2/27/03 7:00 0.206 3 10.00 0.900 0.142 7 8/26/04 2:00 0.183 4 5.00 0.800 0.172 6 10/28/04 16:00 0.173 5 3.00 0.667 0.183 4 1/18/06 16:00 0.172 6 2.00 0.500 0.206 3 10/26/06 0:00 0.142 7 1.30 0.231 0.356 1 1/09/08 6:00 0.136 8 1.10 0.091 Computed Peaks 0.307 50.00 0.980 RetentionIDetention Facility Retention/Detention Facility Type of Facility: Facility Leh-gth: Facility Width: Facility Area: Effective Storage Depth: Stage 0 Elevation: Storage Volume: Riser Head: Riser Diameter: Number of orifices: Orifice it 1 2 Height (ft) 0.00 13.00 Detention Vault 40.00 ft 20.00 ft 800. sq. ft 16.00 ft 100.00 ft 12800. cu. ft 15.00 ft 12.00 inches 2 Diameter (in) 0.50 1.40 Full Head Discharge (CFS) 0.026 0.075 Top Notch Weir: None Outflow Rating Curve: None Pipe Diameter (in) 4.0 Stage Elevation Storage Discharge Percolation (ft) (ft) (cu. ft) (ac-ft) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 . 100.00 800 . 0.018 0.000 0.00 0.01 100.01 808. 0.019 0.001 0.00 0.02 100.02 816. 0.019 0.001 0.00 0.03 100.03 824. 0.019 0.001 0.00 0.04 100.04 832. 0.019 0.001 0.00 0.05 100.05 840. 0.019 0.001 0.00 0.30 100.30 1040. 0.024 0.004 0.00 0.56 100.56 1248. 0.029 0.005 0.00 0.81 100.81 1448. 0.033 0.006 0.00 1.06 101.06 1648. 0.038 0.007 0.00 1.32 101.32 1856·. 0.043 0.008 0.00 1.57 101. 57 2056. 0.047 0.009 0.00 1. 83 101.83 2264. 0.052 0.009 0.00 2.08 102.08 2464. 0.057 0.010 0.00 .2.34 102.34 2672. 0.061 0.010 0.00 2.59 102.59 2872. 0.066 0.011 0.00 2.84 102.84 3072. 0.071 0.011 0.00 3.10 103.10 3280. 0.075 0.012 0.00 3.35 103.35 3480. 0.080 0.012 0.00 3.61 103.61 3688. 0.085 0.013 0.00 3.86 103.86 3888. 0.089 0.013 0.00 4.11 104.11 4088. 0.094 0.014 0.00 4.37 . 104.37 4296. 0.099 0.014 0.00 4.62 104.62 4496. 0.103 0.015 0.00 4.88 104.88 4704. 0.108 0.015 0.00 5.13 105.13 4904. 0.113 0.015 0.00 5.39 105.39 5112. 0.117 0.016 0.00 5.64 105.64 5312. 0.122 0.016 0.00 5.89 105.89 5512. 0.127 0.016 0.00 6.15 106.15 5720. 0.131 0.017 0.00 6.40 106.40 5920. 0.136 0.017 0.00 6.66 106.66 6128. 0.141 0.017 0.00 6.91 106.91 6328. 0.145 0.018 0.00 7.17 107.17 6536. 0.150 0.018 0.00 7.42 107.42 6736. 0.155 0.018 0.00 7.67 107.67 6936. 0.159 0.019 0.00 7.93 107.9;,3." 7144. 0.164 0.019 0.00 8.18 108.18 7344. 0.169 0.019 0.00 8.44 108.44 7552. 0.173 0.020 0.00 8.69 108.69 7752. 0.178 0.020 0.00 8.95 108.95 7960. 0.183 0.020 0.00 9.20 109.20 8160. 0.187 0.021 0.00 9 .. 45 109.45 8360. 0.192 0.021 0.00 9.71 109.71 8568. 0.197 0.021 0.00 9.96 109.96 8768. 0.201 0.021 0.00 10.22 110.22 8976. 0.206 0.022 0.00 10.47 110.47 9176. 0.211 0.022 0.00 10.72 110.72 9376. 0.215 0.022 0.00 10.98 110.98 9584. 0.220 0.022 0.00 11.23 111.23 9784. 0.225 0.023 0.00 11.49 111.49 9992. 0.229 0.023 0.00 11. 74 111.74 10192. 0.234 0.023 0.00 12.00 112.00 10400. 0.239 0.023 0.00 12.25 112.25 10600. 0.243 0.024 0.00 12.50 112.50 10800. 0.248 0.024 0.00 12.76 112.76 11008. 0.253 0.024 0.00 13.00 113.00 11200. 0.257 0.024 0.00 13.01 113.01 11208. 0.257 0.025 0.00 13.03 113.03 11224. 0.258 0.026 0.00 13.04 113.04 11232. 0.258 0.028 0.00 13.06 113.06 11248. 0.258 0.031 0.00 13.07 113.07 11256. 0.258 0.035 0.00 13.09 113.09 11272. 0.259 0.039 0.00 13.10 113 .10 11280. 0.259 0.042 0.00 13.12 113.12 11296. 0.259 0.043 0.00 13.37 113.37 11496. 0.264 0.057 0.00 13.63 113.63 11704. 0.269 0.067 0.00 13.88 113.88 11904. 0.273 0.075 0.00 14.13 114.13 12104. 0.278 0.082 0.00 14 .39 114.39 12312. 0.283 0.088 0.00 14.64 114.64 12512. 0.287 0.094 0.00 14.90 114.90 12720. 0.292 0.099 0.00 15.00 115.00 12800. 0.294 0.101 0.00 15.10 115.10 12880. 0.296 0.411 0.00 . 15.20 115.20 12960. 0.298 0.976 0.00 15.30 115.30 13040. 0.299 1.710 0.00 15.40 115.40 13120. 0.301 2.500 0.00 15.50 115.50 13200. 0.303 2.790 0.00 15.60 115.60 13280. 0.305 3.040 0.00 15.70 115.70 13360. 0.307 3.280 0.00 15.80 115.80 13440. 0.309 3.500 0.00 15.90 115.90 13520. 0.310 3.710 0.00 16.00 116.00 13600. 0.312 3.900 0.00 16.10 116.10 13680. 0.314 4.090 0.00 16.20 116.20 13760. 0.316 4.270 0.00 16.30 116.30 13840. 0.318 4.440 0.00 16.40 116.40 13920. 0.320 4.600 0.00 16.50 116.50 14000. 0.321 4.760 0.00 16.60 116.60 14080. 0.323 4.910 0.00 16.70 116.70 14160. 0.325 5.060 0.00 16.80 116.80 14240. 0.327 5.210 0.00 Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Storage Target f,::, Calc Stage Elev (Cu-Ft) (Ac-Ft) 1 0.36 0.08 0.08 14.06 114.06 12046. 0.277 2 0.17 ******* 0.06 13.52 113.52 11614. 0.267 3 0.17 ******* 0.02 11.22 111.22 9780. 0.225 4 0.21 ******* 0.02 11. 49 111.49 9990. 0.229 5 0.18 ******* 0.02 9.52 109.52 8414 . 0.193 6 0.11 ******* 0.02 7.15 107.15 6523. 0.150 7 0.14 ******* 0.02 5.78 ·105.78 5425. 0.125 8 0.14 ******* 0.01 3.57 103.57 3652. 0.084 ---------------------------------_. Route Time Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File:dev2.tsf Outflow Time Series File:rdout Inflow/Outflow Analysis Peak Inflow Discharge: 0.356 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Peak Outflow Discharge: 0.080 CFS at 11: 00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Peak Reservoir Stage: 14.06 Ft Peak Reservoir Elev: 114.06 Ft Peak Reservoir Storage: 12046; Cu-Ft 0.277 Ac-Ft Flow Duration from Time Series File:rdout.tsf Cutoff Count Frequency CDF Exceedence Probability -CFS % % % 0.001 33770 55.072 55.072 44.928 0.449E+00 0.003 7682 12·.528 67.599 32.401 0.324E+00 0.004 3751 6.117 73.717 26.283 0.263E+00 0.006 4800 7.828 81. 544 18.456 0.185E+00 0.008 3045 4.966 86.510 13.490 0.135E+00 0.010 2737 4.463 90.974 9.026 0.903E-Ol 0.011 2012 3.281 94.255 5.745 0.575E-Ol 0.013 1231 2.008 96.262 3.738 0.374E-Ol 0.015 460 0.750 97.012 2.988 0.299E-Ol 0.017 701 1.143 98.156 1. 844 0.184E-Ol 0.018 553 0.902 99.057 0.943 0.943E-02 0.020 155 0.253 99.310 0.690 0.690E-02 0.022 210 0.342 99.653 0.347 0.347E-02 0.023 154 0.251 99.904 0.096 0.962E-03 0.025 33 0.054 99.958 0.042 0.424E~03 0.027 4 0.007 99.964 0.036 0.359E-03 0.029 1 0.002 99.966 0.034 0.342E~03 0.030 3 0.005 99.971 0.029 0.294E-03 0.032 1 0.002 99.972 0.028 0.277E-03 0.034 0 0.000 99.972 0.028 0.277E-03 0.036 0 0.000 99.972 0.028 0.277E:-03 0.037 0 0.000 99.972 0.028 0.277E-03 0.039 1 0.002 99.974 0.026 0.261E-03 0.041 0 0.000 99.974 0.026 0.261E-03 0.043 2 0.003 99.977 0.023 0.228E-03 0.'044 1 0.002 99.979 0.021 0.212E-03 0.046 0 0.000 99.979 0.021 0.212E-03 0.048 3 0.005 99.984 0.016 0.163E-03 0.050 0 0.000 99.984 0.016 0.163E-03 0.051 0 0.000 99.984 0.016 0.163E-03 0.053 2 0::..,003 99.987 0.013 0.130E-03 0.055 0 0.000 99.987 0.013 0.130E-03 0.056 2 0.003 99.990 0.010 0.978E-04 0.058 1 0.002 99.992 0.008 0.815E-04 0.060 3 0.005 99.997 0.003 0.326E-04 0.062 0 o.oob 99.997 0.003 0.326E-04 Bottom Dimension (inside) = 25 ft x 40ft Total Detention Stage = 18.5 ft (max, including storage & l' freeboard) Total Detention Volume 12,800 CF (required) Total Detention Volume = 15,450 CF (provided, including l' storage depth) Total WQ Storage = 3,050 CF (required) WQ Bottom Area = 25 ft x 40 ft x 3.5 ft (1st cell, 30% = 10.5' x 25') KCRTS Input/Output Fnles (rtn9Iot.exc and rtn9Iot.out) KCRTS Command CREATE a new Time Series Production of Runoff Time Series Project Location: Sea-Tac Computing Series: dev2.tsf Regional Scale Factor: 1.00 Data Type : Reduced Creating Hourly Time Series File Loading Time Series File:C:\KC _ SWDM\K.C _DATA \STTG60R.rnf Till Grass 0.49 acres Loading Time Series File:C:\KC _ SWDM\K.C_ DATA \sTEI60Rrnf Impervious 0.53 acres Total Area: 1.02 acres Peak: Discharge: 0.355 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Storing Time Series File:dev2.tsf Time Series Computed KCRTS Command Enter the Analysis TOOLS Modul~ Analysis Tools Command Compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies Loading StagelDischarge curve:dev2.tsf : .'!:" Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:dev2.tsf Project Location: Sea-Tac Frequencies & Peaks saved to File:dev2.out Analysis Tools Command Compute Flow DURATION and Exceedence Loading Time Series File:pre-ex2.tsf : Computing Flow Durations Durations & Exceedence Probabilities to File:target.dur Analysis Tools Command Compute Flow DURATION and Exceedence Loading StagelDischarge curve:pre-ex2.tsf : Computing Flow Durations Durations & Exceedence Probabilities to File:target.dur Analysis Tools Command Compute Flow DURATION and Exceedence Loading Time Series File:pre-ex2.tsf : Computing Interval Locatjons Loading Stage/Discharge curve:pre-ex2.tsf Computing Interval Locations Computing Flow Durations Durations & Exceedence Probabilities to File:prelim2.dur Analysis Tools Command RETURN to Previous Menu KCRTS Command Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module Analysis Tools Command- COMPARE Flow Durations CANCELLED Analysis Tools Command Plot Probability EXCEEDENCE Curves Loading Flow Dirration File:target.dur : Loading Flow Duration File:prelim2.dur End Graphics Command Analysis Tools Command Plot Probability EXCEEDENCE Curves Analysis Tools Command Plot Probability EXCEEDENCE Curves Loading Flow Duration File:target.dur : Loading Flow Duration File:prelim2.dur End Graphics Command Analysis Tools Command RETURN to Previous Menu KCRTS Command Size a RetentionIDetention FACILITY Edit Facility Loading Time Series File:dev2.tsf Time Series Found in Memory:dev2.tsf Saving RetentionIDetention Facility File:vault2.rdf Starting Documentation File:G:\PE-SSE-JOBS\2005\100- Renton\Calculations\vault2. Time Series Found in Memory:dev2.tsf Edit Complete 31 • I ," ;. SWlmmmlUlll!"f The onsite vehicular flows and other impervious runoff will be treated within the project boundaries with a two cell detention and water quality vault (see Figure 21 on the following page). The detention system will be located in the natural low Sr~t of the build-able site, that does not have any wetland plants in the area (northeast portion of the site before discharge). Per City of Renton requirements, a geo-technical analysis is included within the preliminary plat submittal with 5-feet structure setback requirements for the detention / water quality structure from the top of the steep slope line. The detention facility will be maintained privately, but built to City of Renton standards. This modified Levell downstream analysis (preliminary TIR) has been provided to initiate the preliminary plat approval for the above referenced project. . • ~,1 !. Core Requirements Summary: Core Requirement # 1 through #5 requirements were met through this report by the following: Core Requ;riment #1: Discharge at the Natural Location: Discharge from the existing project site is directly into Honey Creek. All existing runoff surface flows through the existing canopied cover on the project site and discharges iti a north to northeasterly direction. The proposed drainage will collect runoff from all pervious, impervious, and vehicular impervious areas, discharge the runoff into a water quality vault, then detain the runoff to match the Level II requirements for the City of Renton on the May Creek Basin, and discharge into an energy dissipation structure prior to release into the Honey Creek OHWM boundary line. Core Requirement #2: OffsiteAnalysis: The offsite analysis was provided within this downstream analysis Level 1 report. The quarter mile downstream drainage walk was conducted for this project's discharge location and was described within this report. Likelihood of creating a new problem from the proposed discharge after construction will be minimized through use of the 2005 Level II King County Stonnwater Manual. Core Requirement #3: Flow Control: An onsite detention and water quality facility will be designed and proposed . to comply with the City of Renton's May Creek Basin flow control requirements. The Level 2 Flow Control will be followed. Core Requirement #4: Conveyance System: A tightlined conveyance system is proposed for this project that will collect runoff from the project site, treat and detain the runoff, release into a tightlined conveyance system down the steep slope, discharge into a rockery designed to dissipate the energy created through the steep slope, and discharge to the OHWM boundary line of Honey Creek. Core Requirement #5: Erosion and Sediment Control Erosion and sediment control will be proposed through the TESC Plans to be developed for the final engineering approval of this project site. These plans will utilize BMPs as established through the King County Manual including, but not limited to, silt fences, interceptor ditches, tesc ponds/traps, mulching, hay bales within ditches, sediment baskets within existing CBs, and etc. v. f T wetpool width (Z ee(( FIGURE6.4.2.A WETVAULT Manholes or access doors required. See King County Road Standards for specifications for manholes and ladders. trame, grate and locking cover marked "drain~ (typ.) 1--------wetpool length ---~--..;.....j PLAN VIEW OUTLET Open pipe tor wetvault only. See detention vault for combined water quality! detention vault outlet 25"10 to 35"10 of wetpool volume NTS wetpool depth 8' max. 2' min. l' for WQ vaults 2' for combined W.O. , and detention vaults size to meet conveyance requirements (Ch.1) NOTE: capacity of outlet pipe designed to peak flow for conveyance ~~====::d==~~======~,.....,.,~~I<:I;j gravity drain (if grade allows) place as low as grade allows but must 3' min. average sediment storage l' min. (first cell) 7' min. 5"10 (min.) slope trowel finish 1998 Surface Water Design Manual §&~ill~!illEiG~M be 6" min. above the base elevation of vault walls or above sediment storage area bottom slope 0.5-2% towards outlet end of second cell (recommended) access doors or removable panel ~rl--"":"'':'':':'::.!:...--------::::=~:f!-average l' sediment storage SECTION B-B NTS (first cell) 'I" , 911198 II. 0,';' .. King County Department of Development and. Environmental Services TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (T~R) WORKSHEET Project Owner PI{ kr?!upct>t':.G J LtC. ~ ..., Address -,' . :z. 3035 Sf; 2.(p?/.,:1 sf: ; JlI~ tJaII~ Phone UJfp -2.27-7f95 P~ct Engineer " l:Ltrkt-:t ['?lAte, F~ii > 9'03B~ Company B-c;.£...,.-.ee/ £'!JIJ LLe AddresslPhone Jlba, 5 2.. ;\~~~~~lr~~~p.~~~i~~li,J·.~~];ij~,::;~.'t:;:,';\~:jl. Subdivjson (Short Subdivision::> 9 leI-. Grading Commercial Other _________ _ . Community C,ly ,¥ Rw/rm Dra~nAage Basin /"'l..... ('" ~p;j River Stream ~ CcuL Critical Stream' Reach Depressions/Swales ;;Bart2.' paOJECTLOCATION AND , t!~~$~:<~R!etl;~~o;. . ".., Project Name lion?, .. Uuv: pIAl Township _2~3-,N-,--__ _ Range 5£"' ...........•. Section __ .-9..L..... ___ --'- ." . ..,. ~jf?~rtf~f:'~9~f:tE~;ftEVIEw$/AND.;;PE~rrS, " , .' DFWHPA COE404 DOE Dam Safety FEMA Floodplain COE Wetlands .......... ' .. - Shoreline Management (R~keryJ ~ctural Vaults ;; Other Floodplain _______ ----' ___ _ Wetlands ,'1"0 t'l.(.M./ st~e/"'~ ,£ Seeps/Springs High Groundwater Table Groundwater Recharge Lake ___________ __ Other ________________ _ Steep Slopes >-,Ito~ (ttpprtJ'I. 33t<~5F) ';~ ... ' ."':-:Pa~El ;;~p(~$'~,f :i>: ". .,'.' Soil Type Slopes Erosion Potential Aoc.. -41J1'£,,*D AfJ b G,% ~ rs-% si,lA' Ie 4';1... Additional Sheets Attached REFERENCE Ch. 4 -Downstream Analysis Additional Sheets Attached , ':. ",,~" -" .,,'".,. '.': ":":". i'··" ,_ , ~·~~~~;i~t§~~mrr~gl~~~~~'il(:)/;;/::t~:~~~, . MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION Sedimentation Facilities Stabilized Construction Entrance Perimeter Runoff Control Clearing and Graing Restrictions Cover Practices Construction Sequence Other ,. LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS AFTER CONSTRUCTION Stabilize Exposed Surface Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities Flag Umits of SAO and open space preselVation areas Other Part 10 ' SURFACE WATER SYSTEM Grass Lined Channel Tank Infiltration Method of Analysis &/?15 , <:pipe System~ Open Channel Dry Pond cvaiJ[) Depression Compensation/Mitigati on of Eliminated Site Storage c::: E"erg~ Dissapator => Aow Dispersal ~~yvetland Waiver Stream Regional Wet Pond Facility Related Site Limitations Reference Facility j~~~1;i1\~\~tFlU()tl!J RAL:~~¥~$J?;:,-,,·:t ',; f: Cast in Place Vault Retaining Wall C!!,?ckery > 4' Hl9D , @tructural on Steep §!Qli/-7~.s , Other Detention ,-, •• '¥ '. ,...~. ,,_. '.' • ,y. ;::gartt1~~LEAsEMENTSttRACT,S·.~ ;. ., , ,,:,. .... "'" """,':',">':",';" :,',:-".?,,::;:':',::, ": ~age Easeme9 Access Easement C !'-Jaflve Growth Protection EasemeOD Tract Other I or a civil engineer under my supervision my supervision have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attachments. To the best of my knowledge the information provided here is accurate. , SignedlDate