The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLUA99-179 ' ' ' � � � \ / ' ` ' ( ' � LLI M ~ . - cn to MCC � ' ` ° � -~~- J�&�� _ rw ~ m --- � DIN/D.14 toB0{R'lO ` 081 � ' | i K� | | — • . . • . . . . . . • . ) , . • , . • , • . , •7 ,. • u., , ____________-\,... ----/ 6:...7..1 t 4 4 i Ale, 7., ,....., ..• ......00 • Ayari- . RO/R-10 1 . . . . ii i I r,...-'0.0 0•i 01.••od, A s ect6e1 Ali: R.Rmi i to 6c/cc s - Aff-1:34 AI ------ M - IN il • ... . 6 -,_=,_' _— II a • . . o RPN/R-14 ' Mr 4ky . I I I * to RO/R-10 • .. . . , \ . Fr' . . _ . NornAT G:04 op , 4 , 1 ...----------a-IK 1 / 1111111_111- . ,. . ' • • • 'Ivr REVISED NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) DATE: March 3,2000 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-99-179,ECF,R,CPA . APPLICATION NAME: LA PIANTA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/REZONE PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change 20 acres from Residential Planned Neighborhood/R-14 zoning to RO Residential Options/R-10 zoning. The proposal also includes an amendment to an existing development agreement for the number of vehicle trips per day to be generated from the site, the amount of impervious surface,the number of attached units and a cap on the amount of residential developmenklon the site. The application includes a request to change the Land Use Map from Multi-family Infitl (RM-I) zoning o Convenience Commercial (CC) zoning for .97 acres, and from Residential Options/R-10 zoning to Convenience Commercial for.53 acres. A proposed development agreement for the Convenience Commercial portion of the site would restrict the category of uses on the site. . PROJECT LOCATION: NE 3ro/4t and Monroe OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE(DNS): 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.110,the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS process to give notice that a DNS is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS 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). A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS., PERMIT APPLICATION.DATE: December 15,1999,Revised January 28,2000: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: January 31,2000 • Permits/Review Requested: Environmental(SEPA)Review,Comp.Plan Amendment,Rezone Other Permits which may be required: None Requested Studies: Traffic Analysis Location where application may be reviewed: Planning/Building/Public Works Division,Development Services Department, 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055 PUBLIC HEARING: A public hearing will be held before the Renton Planning Commission on the 7th floor of the new Renton City Hall located at 1055 Grady Way South. The date of this meeting is not yet determined.Parties of record will be informed of the date and time of the hearing when it is scheduled. • CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Analytical process Project consistency refers to whether a project is consistent with adopted and applicable development regulations,or in their absence,comprehensive plan policies. RCW 36.70B.110(2)(g)provides that the Notice of Application(NOA) include a statement of the preliminary determination of a project's consistency with the type of land use,level of development,infrastructure,and character of development if one has been made at the time of notice. At a minimum, every NOA shall include a determination of the project's consistency with the zoning,comprehensive plan and development regulations. Land Use: The project is consistent with the policy objectives of the Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element for Residential Options Land Use and implementing R- 10 zoning,and for the Convenience Commercial Land Use Designation and Convenience Commercial zoning. . Environmental Documents that •Evaluate the Proposed Project: Draft Environmental;Impact Statement for City of Renton Land Use Element Jan 1992,Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Land Use Element of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Feb.1993,Draft Comprehensive Plan ' Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Dec.1994,Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Feb.1995. • NOTICF OP PROPOSFf1 FNVIRONMFNTAI APPI ICATInN f Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Ms. Rebecca Lind, Project Manager, Development Services Division,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on March 17,2000. If you have questions about this proposal,or wish to be,made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, 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: MS.REBECCA LIND (425)430-6588 PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION • /11 > J II/1111= y 4 RO/R-10 to CC/CC • v `�_ -�R? w- AI GetGG{ AYGai r. ��►� ••':� R 1101 14 to CC/CC A(fe6j-g • RPN/R-14 . to RO/R-10 • e y� a • NOTICE OF PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL APPLICATION CITY OF RNTON E .rt Planning/Building/Public Works • "' �� 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 ItAA 0 6'9 0 e.E1017.714714 0 3 0 5 • g /L, y aril „ EffADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED 7158401 e.S. POSTAGE k rjr\IN/ State of Washington ;2631 NE 4th Street 'Renton, WA 98056 Ul�dOr TOFORWARD '' t aV�� ao 4ETllRN y� ^ a z� r- ! j t �,.,,_� !�U�l7 i'! �7 `^`-� '�'"` (!]!i!'l II1'!!11 llll:I�t!!!!�!!� [ 3 !lll:til iii 1 ti i!! I ! ! iI !, !. „ p CITY OF RENTON ----- ” OM- �� '- . Planning/Building/Public Works 4ea� `>0T,i, ,VAA ® � MR0 0 - 0 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 co r,.;,,,,,, A ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED 1�. .cc cie � h ;I:s7477 W.S. POSTAGE �* ; .> � • ,' THIS IS A BUSINESS BUILDING � � �, _.�),� MUST INCLUDE A t_,of« ti �3F L`King County NUMBER BER 7 !OR e 9d Er BE ND! 'LR '� ` 500 4th Avenue g ti E�g RECEIVE DELIVERY �_Wit. ,�' '�y: 1—�� ITla��d.�. @� : . Seattle, WA 98104 INSDEICpENT ,v�r 1 J _ ADDRESS " � RETURN TO SENDER d a W �' ' r_�n�. ,)_ , I. rrrrrr,r„r„rrr,,,,r,r„rr,,,rr„�r,r„rr,,,r,r,r,r,, , ,, , a (vx' (:1 U� .eP•NTo� . REVISED NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) DATE: March 3,2000 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-99-179,ECF,R,CPA APPLICATION NAME: LA PIANTA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/REZONE PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change 20 acres from Residential Planned Neighborhood/R-14 zoning to RO Residential Options/R-10 zoning. The proposal also includes an amendment to an existing development agreement for the number of vehicle trips per day to be generated from the site, the amount of impervious surface,the number of attached units and a cap on the amount of residential development on the site. The application includes a request to change the Land Use Map from Multi-family Infili (RM-I) zoning to Convenience Commercial (CC) zoning for .97 acres, and from Residential Options/R-10 zoning to Convenience Commercial for .53 acres. A proposed development agreement for the Convenience Commercial portion of the site would restrict the category of uses on the site. PROJECT LOCATION: NE 3ro/4th and Monroe OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE(DNS): 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 process to give notice that a.DNS is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS 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). A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: December 15,1999,Revised January 28,2000. NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: January 31,2000 • Permits/Review Requested: Environmental(SEPA)Review,Comp.Plan Amendment,Rezone Other Permits which may be required: None Requested Studies: Traffic Analysis Location where application may be reviewed: Planning/Building/Public Works Division,Development Services Department, 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055 PUBLIC HEARING: A public hearing will be held before the Renton Planning Commission on the 7th floor of the new Renton City Hall located at 1055 Grady Way South. The date of this meeting is not yet determined.Parties of record will be informed of the date and time of the hearing when it is scheduled. • CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Analytical process Project consistency refers to whether a project is consistent with adopted and applicable development regulations,or in their absence,comprehensive plan policies. RCW 36.70B.110(2)(g)provides that the Notice of Application(NOA) include a statement of the preliminary determination of a project's consistency with the type of land use,level of development,infrastructure,and character of development if one has been made at the time of notice. At a minimum, every NOA shall include a determination of the project's consistency with the zoning,comprehensive plan and development regulations. Land Use: The project is consistent with the policy objectives of the Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element for Residential Options Land Use and implementing R- 10 zoning,and for the Convenience Commercial Land Use Designation and Convenience Commercial zoning. Environmental Documents that - Evaluate the Proposed Project: Draft Environmental Impact Statement for City of Renton Land Use Element Jan 1992,Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Land Use Element of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Feb.1993,Draft Comprehensive Plan Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Dec.1994,Final Supplemental • Environmental Impact Statement Feb.1995. - • • NOTICE OF PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL APPLICATION f • Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Ms. Rebecca Lind, Project Manager, Development Services Division, 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,by 5:00 PM on March 17,2000. If you have questions about this proposal,or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, 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: MS.REBECCA LIND (425)430-6588 PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION k 04 "pa loot RO/R-10 to CC/CC • %,.. ir RMI/Riv GIss to CC/cc Affe6 cel • r : _ RPN/R-I4 . to RO/R-10 1 y, I /11111111111 • NOTICE OF PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL APPLICATION c: CITY OF RENTON :., '...: . ."^' 2 71 ems:" . ••LL Executive Offices o v r 4. ®��a ,: NAY 2500 1055 South Grady Way- Renton Washington 98055 W Q sr"";9 = ® 3 0 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED t o 7ETER B 8401 _U.9. POSTAGE Al enn , RAMAC INC \ 20919 SE 34TH STREET ti 4a7 2 � ISSAQUAH,WA 98029 lin k :4.ocjii0 .61, . ' RAMA919 980293010 1199 14 05/26/00 i FORWARD TIME EXP RTN TO SEND : RAMAG INC 9 4807 FOREST AVE SE MEIWER ISLAND WA 98040-4.306 RETURN TO SENDER i }�y �Q �.Q j t t ] ] f j t j ) j A U n(^'l+Egigtti X i i 1 1 f i i i i R i.1 1 ! 1 , l l f l I t 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 �•��Y�='� �!i{!ii:;�:�!!!f Ei ii:ij!j i!!ii:. 1 ! !1 I !II !ii I I1 I!i 1 ! I fY F I !!. • CITY OF RENTON , Renton City Council, Jesse.Tanner,Mayor - May 25, 2000 SUBJECT: 2000 Amendments to the Renton Comprehensive.Plan To Interested Parties: The Renton CityCouncil's Planning&Development Committee will meet to review the above-referenced item on the following dates: Thursday,June 1, 2000 . Thursday,June 8, 2000 Thursday,June 15, 2000 3:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM Agenda Agenda ' ' Agenda - o Merlin Map &Text o Talbot Road o Transportation Element o Sierra Heights o Downtown Urban o La Pianta Center/South Renton o Aegis/Briefing on, o Highlands Office Use in IL s Zone All meetings will be held: 7th Floor/Council Chambers City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton,Washington This is not a public hearing,but a working session of the Planning &Development Committee. As all Council Committee meetings are open to the public, you are welcome to attend. If you have questions regarding these meetings,please phone Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison, at.425-430-6501. Sincerely, - ltJ Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Chair Planning&.Development Committee Renton City Council 1055 South.Grady,Way- Renton,,Washington 98055 = (425)430-6501' • • . I1 ..�7 .r�T• '�- ds9'y eyfry7.ew�+rv..r✓-,.:4 .- -_ _ 0 © CITY OF RENTON , ;p t �.2' - .2..- GA Executive Offices �� 4 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 W MAY 2 5'0 0 s� E 0 3 Q 5 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED 58401 r °` " e, U.S. POSTAGE LP La Pianta PO Box 88050 Tukwila WA 98138-2050 PLEASE REMOVE FROM KS! MAILING LIST - THAN pf N AUHP 98138 iifiiiliiiiiiilliiilElilisiihlliiiiiiii►lliiiiiiiiiiiiiiilid 4-611 YY1, ,5--- y return to sender y fee due 50Q First Class Mail • Postage and Fees Paid USPS Permit No. G-10 Ei a CITY OF. RENTON ®a Executive Offices , == / �' . h; ,, j p i`a`�.r ;u, �, 1055 South Grady Way-Menton Washington 98055 G.; �'' ``' �, I`s ' ',i }I '' ti r' ,, .F F ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED ' r. A, , i�i IF",`'I t.s.;c.t„ a �{ 11 1, is W U tY dam' HOUSING AUTHORITY RENTON : W - 970 HARRINGI'ON AVENUE NE U) M RENTON,WA 98056 0 RENT970W 98056900a 1200 21 05/30/00 FORM 3547 0 W PHOBOXN2916THORITY RENTON a . ... RENTON WA 98056-0916 • a c AUifP. 98866. lhhiI,;LIL ,.I,I I! fl,hA i„Ifflf Ili ~' `''"� „ ( Nor zo A5 ADDRESSED c, UNABLE TO FORWARD o Wd e RETURN TO SENDER r. se, IIiIii1UJiIliiiililiiliIiliIiilitiiiiiiiiiilihi'il CITY OF RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING March 1, 2000 7:00 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 16, 2000 4. CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED 5. AGENDA REVIEW 6. AUDIENCE COMMENT 7. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: 8. STAFF REPORT: 9. POLICY/CODE STUDY SESSION: 2000 Comprehensive Plan Amendments 00-T-1, Transportation Element Revisions 00-M-1, Boeing North Renton 00-M-2, Sierra Heights Review 00-M-5, Residential Option (RO) to Employment Area-Industrial (EAI)with concurrent rezone from R-10 to IL and Development Agreement i Ea Pianta RM-I to CC and RPN/R-14 to RO/R-10 (NOTE: Insert these CPAs in your red three ring binder you received at the last meeting and bring to the meeting.) 10. COMMISSION DELIBERATION & RECOMMENDATION 11. ADJOURNMENT: 0 CITY OF RENTON -4.:-----,_ .- -5--,;—_------- ,,,,,_. ellratrat•jc. 1 .-6-,•", :A 7'-, :"--1W., 44zrabi,,,:."',., i. Economic Development, Neighborhoods -1 6 zbvir...-• v 0 NA •- gX 0' cro, and Strategic Planning i ;OM ovki * o ' FE 2 5°0 0 ; 04..4 a :: 0 3 0 5 * AL 1055 South Grady Way- Renton Washington 98055 co ...Ca Elt It P 0,4\--,....L..... ' 71135741.0E7 U.S.tl.S. POSTAGE ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED 4vaDI lot 1:3 kb cv. w gdfts- CI Atter -j'4 'tv4'47ff' . opted,..pm.., r litioival KING COUNTY 500 4TH AVENUE SEATTLE,WA 98104 , Av eo -...„.. .,...::• ...., ----.,.:. 4' . • 1."AS RDDREED c:,..-- ;3.0;53 a) IUNAUF... 10 FOR%'1ARD 'C:'--------,:j11 '1 i RETURN TO SENDEil • ••.1.• •..• •...4 ililliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiIiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii4iiiiiiiiiiiii V.A/"Thitf fa 4' . i 11 47 3"I -/ ' , ...•• - - • 0 © CITY OF RENTON �--"f -, Economic Development, Neighborhoods 4 ui © a and Strategic Planning IMAL x ! ,I� 1 a 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 W !EB 2 5 0 ® ,� 5 * ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED ti�-i: = n58401 U.S. POSTAGE 1: STATE OF WASHINGTON 2631 NE 4TH STREET RENTON,WA 98056 `, eo�r ''if ,R Wo 4c�.e:��—Try -y2 ._ �9 _�`�`'` I L r LLr� y `a" ' : ,c5, W d ..} tS - �i. IIi I I![I!I'!!1[It !I!I ii!If lt I9 Iili I!I 3 !!1!I[1!ILI --- CITY OF RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING March 1, 2000 7:00 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 16, 2000 4. CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED 5. AGENDA REVIEW 6. AUDIENCE COMMENT 7. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: 8. STAFF REPORT: 9. POLICY/CODE STUDY SESSION: 2000 Comprehensive Plan Amendments 00-T-1, Transportation Element Revisions 00-M-1, Boeing North Renton 00-M-2, Sierra Heights Review 00-M-5, Residential Option (RO) to Employment Area-Industrial (EAI) with concurrent rezone from R-10 to IL and Development Agreement 00-M-4, La Pianta RM-I to CC and RPN/R-14 to RO/R-10 (NOTE: Insert these CPAs in your red three ring binder you received at the last meeting and bring to the meeting.) 10. COMMISSION DELIBERATION & RECOMMENDATION 11. ADJOURNMENT: . . __—•-•,--, 4•-...,:„,.., L.'4,V.----''. .... 1 I 1 `.... - '.1.1) •-. ,• Mr, • . ,' ' " J : . N Eiconi, .,E,'-:-21.0...-v...,.11 -1 A ,;!.--;,,.--;!0 !-0., :6.rbi );"*E, , i M„.9 -n •-.' •." . ''El Hiks. "7:".e,'„".,;1:::,,,,,-,.: :'::".1 ,. ',-- 7 -'2,;; ,..c.sr. • , Merlino SR 900 Property li 'an.'4-"-- :-- l'5 , al .-.L.,r.:. 4, ' ' : 7 .,_.r..I7-'L.-Y.,-.>ci,„•!!. ....-,„ ,,• - . , ' •'A 0,,.. • ...7"--p 1...,,„,,,:...---;,_,. # i !E3 En Du EI " . ..1* ,\::, Comprehensive Plan Map 1 j,..,.. .\6: , • •".9 1.•'13;i•V '1.4.3" ,rete...d01 ' • ,.....,„.H,-, :•::.:;.4.. . •,,..9 1... 0,77..."'•;..1, ,LPP f, ' . . :,.E1 6 Amendment and Rezone r''i ' s ,LANGSTON A13: :V q.:1_5 ....'?! ?i= •• , --A V .••te 4 3 i. 3;4-,e,''';'17.\!% I 3').'.r. g,.. Ti-,...,7,,I 1 , ,. H. ,... •, . . Pi- .. 16 t 1 Z It :. i '7',..., •15 i 1,. '''''',.. ., EL TR ACIS 1...-- ---: " '- 'ce,Z....2(37 S % ,, : , iit, . L ..1..r 1 I .,.._ o i. r2_,..: d ., , ., J., • -4 -,,n, ...REN70%...,., 111.... .,..,,,,,,O'...7..47' ,.-.=,,. --!-,.., ..., ;E . I..,L w. , L,....\ '.!$•.., , , ;.,- ..: ..I.,„Id:.,,.., ., . . ,. .. .. . S .1.32ND ST : a„7"1 ---.s.'- .-: i• '' 02",a.:,.-6) ;b1. 1 •:2 6,2'1. • I t ) ,, • i...1.; ;IMI -- 1 411.1 '''. 1 ! '' 1 ...k..1- .., ,--•- 5 'AD' .1 -• -g 4 w a33.1 , . . 1 0- 'L' -..1 ti. • - • .1; • ' ''''S ••-•' ""'r" 'Ix C;131'V 4 `i, , 9, ‹,,,f..p. .,- : , ex-1.._ !,:1.1L7 _',.9:I 'ffii---N- '--T1tX---7tlii, ""„;:,74:7- 1 6,• I.;'1,---'.'1.-1.---1:11-f--.3V ,"------ __.. 6i• ' ;8" ! 'f;. r... 0 eipolit R 2 ‘';; :.,.... . 1 1 i 1 1 . ., .„-,-,---,. _„.___ 6 • .113-0 °i". '0„'4, , qp , : i — 2 . zo i •1/,` 10: 1 .F Etik:2....,-''''s-'-';-f;--:--.==;-•,,.,•_,;...._ P in* ,.1,2 4, 1 • 117Arrwc', . ,-,„ i 1 ,2 3 14: 3.C.J 3 7 II s.-, , .1.,:, 7 4.-,r,.4 lkin ",.0.-z,-,,„7,-;,-,.. ...-7 .. I 910 :g ! 2-5,0- . .. i,...„....__5"--AvE^ ii ..„... . ....."". VE ,---1 1- 1,±,1 4..-Pi cP.9.?' 4',1 g•".,4; 02';', NI• ' 0':'''''-':',C;-g' t' ,,.;: '' all 3,11 r: 1 I 'J r ,1 , , `. c ; ..(C01111iy) „. ,it] :Sc .. ''"6-l'---:-'''-'-'-',-2------ "''' e/x 6,. •• - '. ' ' ' ' .. ." . „_,,,A_Rs.ri.,....sr .-,,,;:, 9;QA,..•,..:,..,....,4„. 01.., .. -. . .0'-opr c„.-7.--,..------,:-.7,-,,,,,-.-i 'n d.,- .- '' •• -.• .'• •',.' , ,,,, ,i7:11 01 .4..&_ ri j.Ir: 6,.1qE1.A:•: i,,c...2; - ..,,5, ..; .un,••:;_v_ .'12,0 i. - 7,•-• .,..Ity/if ,,.A.-,...4"s /....,,,,,,...z. ..,!sr? .7471 .i..;--,-.7,....;;;;;..:.......... 1,4,ciiiii: . , 6'6'."1„,‘„ '-•_,... : .." 4'.n.--isw.e, ....,..[-.e, ,1 7 ,i ,i 1,'' ,;... 4bs t t;1 .; pl.t h-':.7.t.• ..s.,. -.l'A.P% 1', " ...d., ..,_,°.''4 E.41,17•s,;.';"44',. - ,..1 '""?rm.""'"°-;:;;--------- ' •- .! ; ' . ifii.'ic".'1- ' i 'i41-,', '! , • N, '',1 ' .1,j_.L.:(•0'i.- :, ..,-;I:_ it;., .4.ts17:.;--; e.,,I,':,....,',''„1.','.4'q‘111. ,4-.7-,. :."'.. 9,,,....r,,--774r,.._ ' 1-.: ...1.• , ..1,. . • •,, ' ib,:: :. 95:- -z,-'• •,, ---•t?-i`-,-..,!• ,Lt 4 ,rk-e-160 , ,,E,..„,,, -, : ..,L-z•t ;AA .f.".•, .s.- i"krti,-;:„.._ • ,p,,,, ..... , • - :-•,--------Ti -,;=•'•f-;.,•, P'''''- ,-,.,-.-,`4.,YG:s,o- ' il• fliF,:' ov••Li ...,...—:L3;',!L___ - . - • r.4 ,Pg -lissitio•i--• . L. ••,,, - - ,.,-...- sot 0-- -_, ,,,-,,. ,...,.-4-,.........- q ,......• c.„ ,.....q:6'..(3-----"--7.,- ',1!-E.,-m-P'30.'!' • 12 Acres . '' .4.1.14.1.-•''' :.i i Ci.:‘''' 717!'-'/.7,.. . o.,.p,,;-..1.43..0 f• -I (Proposed) -,__ ..„ - i - i - - I - - , ",,,, °. r••,,,-..,,,... .-s ' '4'••.7!:1 '! ... , -... 4 c:, - •."''.° . ../ . . ..f4?.' 4‘ . ' ' ' e "4-1. . •'(''.'6".....-^:P *.C3 , '.. '•:4-', 1 _I'' 6 1 qI t . 3 2 • s ' cr A(xlsting P co(Existing).4'••4 '••:,4.1(*-4... " '.d1, •--zp 1. • 9,.,.,s1,-"-;;:;';);C-?.-.--.:-4•.5.1.77.';-6'1.,,:?1•.,....0ia,"e-,d 0i'•,i.,-— ^- k•,'4',47.:::::.•.7.,,';;;'; ;„1,-:_l, it r'-•,'. trro , ;z--:----,.:i.:7 E '' --.-M"-- -- - --- """'.'''.,,...: 'C':.• ''':-,-....;c7:•'P////':/•/,..' 1---_,4-'::::VC:„:e,',;;7,..'' ;47 Q. ..,.,7•,.Q. . : &.'' pClikkaiii..........vC)./01 .. one) ! ____,...„..---------. - liC;(ExistIng) %EP‘0, '-• - - .41.- -'). '''s' b ''.'il i ...g '.,,„.7.,;-.'xyff,o':91.t.4 .. ...,,:. [ SUNPO ;• a .... El /...) ',-0-.-. '...: .. ..---- 4el:rli ..."4.-• ,,,,,. .-•lk-,,. ,1,,...„,,e.-.iNi';;""..;..-',-,:,_.,' \ - -.- s , ,,:e't Let3 4. Ct9 reZ:: 12). `C3 I,4:4-%-':e'le /.4••••'13`-'7.*:".•CZ -2q2.e,I4--m: —4..• ....1-y2G ken #' bt, se,IT. . ri, . --4;q_:--t.-s..!1,,,,.;,;,.4P 4,‘,..V.clip,,i-A-, ,„., 1P>4„4,4, .. : 4,,„ ,zi., :,iii., -'-. •.. i,.-',.1..%:,,..i "oi,!;:in.7r.i.k ,• . -\ -,- *? \t. ii".i". Rrc , ,..., --"0._. .f..___ .. ...,..,0„, • ..: oti.....".„7„;-...,;„.„-.:•..,,,zii.r...,:...'s.,-••,, cr.,.....,,, ,',-‹-j4E. .!,_41r. ,' ,F3i, .ps':•\ \!! _.... 4- ! r..-.., ///\, ,7„.„4,--. •.,,, ..2_0_,_„\ .... 4 -Alar. x r • .5.-.,•..4 ,., -,...„:„...•.....:„--. • , ... ,. -------.i.._ , ______.......0. ..,,,,,„ Ft. I, pl .•• --•....:: . 1 1 ,..::_. .- _ •- -• -':-. . -,-:-. - ,00410 .4„„„ ,t• MINIM , r -1. ,-T ,N ;1 '''- — - ,.. 5. ' 0011.1 •0011.. .. w•S,..1-ING TON TECHNICAL • '''''''''...-'''j." • .vi `.1 ti 01.... -," - -- P.M -- -. ' '-k 1 1 / "___„.,11111 0 o s , l';',. • . 1- .7-.- — .. ---'11 -.,...11.- ...,:.: r\ ' ! . A S H I N.'..q T 110„,y,.."1 1 I t.T E C H N:1/C A L II E N T E li...____. f I 1. I •-ioNsTER '0.-. 3c; „* \ CENTER )1 P.. 1 I ----- .. f 7..„.. i %>. / 1: • , 1 • \ , A\1 I M ' l7-11:11f•-- ' '.. ..\,... • ' r ( ::...4 : J i , ,,:,: .: / ,s.:..... _ . • �• " .-a ,,..,. CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator April 26, 2000 Ms. Ann Nichols La Pianta Limited Partnership PO Box 88028 Tukwila,WA 98138 SUBJECT: La Pianta Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Project No. LUA-99-179,CPA,R,ECF Dear Ms. Nichols: This letter is to inform you that the comment and appeal periods have ended for the Environmental Review Committee's (ERC) Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated for the above-referenced project. No appeals were filed on the ERC determination. This decision is final and application for the appropriately required permits may proceed. The applicant must comply with all ERC Mitigation Measures. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at(425)430-6588. For the Environmental Review Committee, /11,12W16 Rebecca Lind Principal Planner cc: Parties of Record FINAL 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMILMIEIEIIII a © CITY OF RENTON �„ ,x , ••LL Planning/Building/Public Works ;a aC 4 0. 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 0 APR 2 7'cr) 0® 0rcegm 5 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED tact �B�Qpi U.S. POSTAGE i ' 04 28 00 FCM PRESORTED SEA WA 981 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES %QZPC IAND CITY OF RENTON MAY 08 2000 12\,\1\ State of Washington RECEIVED ..2631 NE 4th Street Renton, WA 98056 OTD . LE a aUOc 1C -”tQt ., -- Agri E 6 61 ` Ini d G7 tETU} N ;.r :.DOER 64;118oditiilt,ssilitiii;liAlliiriiiiiitii,l►i,i„iiii„ii;i 311 yt4? „ ® CITY OF RENTON rp ' , . Ott Planning/Building/Public Works ;® � a� a 1,; P ca . APR 2 7'0 0 g a 3 0 ';. 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 .ppr ,•:, f; � �U M�'t'E R f ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED y i58d0 i u.s. P 0 S 1'A G E �,`� 0 1J P4OFENTRENTON .MAY 0 8 2000 Ramac, Inc. 20919 SE 34th Street RECEIVED- . Issaquah, WA 98029 RAMA919 980293008 1199 17 05/04/00 FORWARD TIME EXP RTN TO SEND d :RAMAC INC E .4607 FOREST AVE SE MRC.;EH I6LAND WA y8046—'4 O RETURN TO SENDER I P J!!! ! 1 #1!! JJ JJ JJ ) t 1 jj j1 r J) +1jj jj A u � + �.'+�'=+L'. illl3'lEi�11l33ili_i iilVIii__iii-1131--iiilililiiii11111ii131 1 CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator April 26,2000 Ms.Ann Nichols La Pianta Limited Partnership PO Box 88028 Tukwila, WA 98138 SUBJECT: La Pianta Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Project No. LUA-99-179,CPA,R,ECF Dear Ms. Nichols: This letter is to inform you that the comment and appeal periods have ended for the Environmental Review Committee's (ERC) Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated for the above-referenced project. No appeals were filed on the ERC determination. This decision is final and application for the appropriately required permits may proceed. The applicant must comply with all ERC Mitigation Measures. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at(425)430-6588. For the Environmental Review Committee, 4046 aw/ • Rebecca Lind Principal Planner cc: Parties of Record FINAL 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 •:1:-•••:,-,;•:,:" -r-....•-:al ill' -114414.1,10 I ... :-a ..."•••.,^ .•,`.•. ;:.:0*r7; :7 .... ,.- --":,.. irl.:-:'. ..,V ..,,....„.„... . ..r. ...:4,-"' :_,,,,•,-.1.r,:,U. i i If!1 ILE. Iii 1171251211 127 ::::::, .1,•,-,•ert•trikelp •••:•717111.n.-e•.,I .....,-„t•tc.,,,...,,, • .,..-,?„ .• _I,,__-_, .17,,,t; . 01„. • .-.,-,,t• .....or,,,, . 12, . . mort.slaw a.......;,.91 ap•vi r:. iiis. :.;::;-- ''..,-,,,,a1-4/..r-A,.1.t•'4-di-i-- 1; •,•-;.c,), .,,,i,..Z., . -_:-.. .r-e, : Iii:-.1 ''ir•A:': P',1 1;-... %C..% - I.8,I -1- .if:el-Priam,'1 VRIIng '. 111 dr. ...:.I• : 1•• IIPL..;?' 171 i i.!•, %-.- .I E., ??1•77.79.'r4 .11-1,.;,1`7..::;' Iti34 X."..5.-'it:.1 i',4? '4011„L--...; ..".... I i i -silt $ Ia i . 0:. `- . . i I Z... •-- .=..mom.L.". , • I lik L Ilf 0 (r-:;":" ,i'&:i•=7:j. • *'.3r.:-31.•31! " :91,111,111104 XI r'..%•'•11---A,\.'. N. 1.7• :, •••••••• -•,,--,•-•-•:., !„ if, 011' I •11:g 1 • Eli--71 -3. --;,• 3/,?•-•%'•', •1_., ---if.. .i-51:72 1 gWittlibk T.:, ,;.••c-_,:. ,.....„-t.. , ). , r,..,. ?)i-_-f 1 5,-;•-•---:\ 6 — ..?.:_-..: - - • I - ii i .....-•••••• . - kit 4F-•:,••:••• ,v- -e..c--y.,;,-•<,.1-.1, .7-ic --7&:-.7-A. ,••••:,i,.'>'\ '•'(' iz;: •. 1 i ---(i.,„„„.:•,...t.•• .. • iipi Nkt 3:1 r..D,,.--•:.,-- • .'• N wIte:-, _ .._. _ ;,;op- . j...:-.,a.-.-0447?• „,..„ N.3! -—. . t.,...-:; i poreatres ilz-Vj - iiiii ,.......„-.,, ,..-- 1 i • k: •-,.--4.A.:), ,_-*-7tp ..ti:; •:t-i-li-44,•%; I cox agi(3! re• . _.•...4,...,/• 1 I ..,,_,..m-.....•......!:. -1+, .--'••• ..--.,•••- ••4-> .4,1;" ..,,f,.A.1 Ar -Ar Stliilria,Dc•••4. '•ca.'",t .. P4 1 — - "A •-•., . .. I2 -- ...w-"v--il ••;,„&.;,,• m Nim i Ell )5' •,* - -mc_ •_;,----.. ;47 ... - . . .0,"<*i," '4' ..*. • ••• -,s,'. 1,3 .I, 04inti ...n. L3-....0 0 fr g 1 44.1 i ,- .. :..ii.:••611`.. :;1 * ay., , 11 li(pfc... ....1...,_..-.4.41, 1 i- . : --1,-. ID i 41:-.1.7•••=V II i frv. - " ''''-e...i. -.1-.. 41* '.. .... L..‘•611.- i Mae • • • - 1:1711wr. 1i.'Po ..1 -1-tign it . Lr_i..it-- — ' • .1 •- 4_„_____ .____.__.—.1KL-...44,--.41 091'..-•••74,1hr• ....."7 .,.-,.„. W- M. ,V.i ..I. :-'' '). 'tt. -.1114.11.1r74 "- -1? . • st-er. if - ,..A.T. • ,„_-• . M;11• ..4,. ......... ,,. [--- i 7.4i 1 vs, . -NEI . .•W X . m,...-:•.‘c...x. ( ..:',7 ..•.m... . Iasi 0. 0, I A • r 1 .fik?• .er• -• "".. f, „.. ./ Ilti . fit //// , // / $1 _5 ., / / // / H I • • 4 . X ...... ':!. Te Auo ..F1...:::"... ...... 41/////woo/minor o i ..... 4.- X , R10 _ • . ...• --- 4/ // —... itc • / //1//,..... .:1 • ! Clr I D I I 30r. .-.a.1111111111gt - %•,. , I / / ?/ / /.. Et / ':1/ 4 lig. ./..•'. a •oo ,,'•----.•-•( .' , •: i 6 .. ._ _1...7. ...-- ... ...-----•-•-• -.1.• • - ,.,.... _ ,,,Iligh, -@.43...._a- s==...-•----•-•---. .,o,._._.__:,,,,..1,-. A . . i.' / / .///.411:1.1' et 1..• *Iv 'f'ZIs..:v -v-.;--- •I WM GE•ROF . 11 • . • 6° .1:14 a : boas 11 I I i t ...• !C.:.4%....".K7-q R-8 :. ....•.-• , . ',..•//40/,h ii 171c1 Li, ov... i•r. 2,4_.. •,:i mgr. .3 ; . . „/A/ Ifil ,?:; • A 1.. ''.-..• '. C ..1 ---.j. 1 t•IkF ..-E. ••„.• .i : IT.C-;.V ,T4R 4 : • • . 4, ...•L., 41111••• ( . 1 i r_1;ii,..., ,_^..:1;_ • • . /0 • / • 11 • CI i: : .. I i ry•-:-3LE I : - ir( , r.200' E=ii 3••24:1;-• .t.;(4, 1 / NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL.IAAP . .1 . • 4 if Woo.i; Ian .... lIT..:::. ..'1 .• .1'1' . ... // / ' .' ......, =.....1.---......---.....----.,--•----.... ma, w.• , I 1 , i : • UPUP S3JECT PRCF1ERTY. 4. - s• k,t..\.._-.,-\_-),,...,...___ '.. v:e:I1 s.,:•:.. ,,,...-.-+,.s.,--" ........ ......„„ -7. • ,,",....,.-.,....... . - -- ,• . v /„„ r „, , , i ,, i , ."... ,t f • It N. .........15•Watt CA • .. .4' // i q. I // / i : ... . , RC t ' • /; • . . . i .. : . .-.,.. I % • — „„•• ..... . f • 1 v., I ,•''' ." ,,,,, ---......••••'$' 1 •:.- ...--•• .. ‘k ,..,... ..\ 1 ... •:. le •.;. it NNN 1 t , • k- RC I I I • I - • \I- i _ l •I'‘ , ••— RC I ,„ 11\ \ \ ....., I; •. V 4 ‘ I ,I 1..r . , \ t . • fel_ .--.• 1 r s•7:ca W 7• _.... ^I-.. -- - mil i.-.; 'IV- * lilt'47,' . .,,,t.4% -. „ 101 .• ,;t1,,,,,. .... ,,,4t., .14.... -.......z.i..0. - __....:,:tepi, ........- .... eakyi 6 ,f.: • • i , ., N. Ta- •' An-. ..„„.ty.00,0--iwzczois:t•• .. • . -•• .-.....••• 144 COR r _..__.____________ _.-0....:-. -N-0. :$.7.:i4.1,T'•72,:::ii,hijooki...,:iii- -,._,,-,A., — ,A "'"-Ns- 4.4- YJkj.:.• •-••,. '41 i I.,'"' WIII.....".10.... .ar Orefilla istr '..1`• '"1 ::rtira, 4,N.dm.i.,,,; ..-e.s.,... "'•••/*, .. ••• .... 44 •4.4. ',-;:;,:::::-::" A.,,,, D Plat 0011,...;::%2 z.. RCP \ ..4 ., 449%;•,,....q.ligi.. Firk likisal„.....yline,....40 ,..... ,!.*h. ., '',-, . .44.4'..;•:. •I -40 . ..01111W.10 ritt\ -"•-,r.-,..,...:,_____.el ..44 '-,kiii4).427%. 4NC-.)s'-,,,:::Th: _.4,,,..;..':..,c ..., .,...-.,-... , .-: s. IR .--- ell..\ \ 11,ehrimpie• Plirk 4•:...,..„...C7147...„14 4... , •14C..?4:41,...,..._:.; .;,..ilk,S-24),,,•.,..,e,,....›,7 N.,,,.\\. .,__ . _ -----_______: -. ... -inimill Nave. 4.1-:., -'-‘ ,4 „..4„•;10 • •~4.-rri,-,•,--„,r,.. 4 -• .____ • 0 -- - -.. ••• •-•-• -•••iir..,-,i qpi ff,4 ,1 4'.•..•,•;;;;;,§ -:!.. :- PP Nibiiil % \ I • . '--.. V.:...,., s‹: •.:....:::•::::c...,...,/f4 a. . •--... .a. 6.: ... ---:-• i w• . . . i Pood•MOW,i I 1 \ \\ \ ‘ \ \r ''' ... .LiTr.t. .• )4, l''',Trii( •.,,o,..N •...•.'4,.... 1 1 A. I 1 \ i AM,WPM at . .. . ..:111,1"."...1111.111.06:•:,''...:14.4.,".... ..t‘..,.N,NI.41•tigq.. .......1[....i,11.... -A '1 II - -.- %•.-/... .. oftgiiis."17' CITY OF RENTON „" �' Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator April 5, 2000 • Ms.Ann Nichols La Pianta Limited Partnership PO Box 88028 Tukwila,WA 98138 SUBJECT: La Pianta Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Project No. LUA-99-179,CPA,R,ECF Dear Ms. Nichols: This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) and is to advise you that they,have completed their review of the subject project. The ERC, on April 4, 2000, issued a threshold.... Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated with Mitigation Measures. See the enclosed Mitigation Measures document. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM April 24, 2000. 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 4-8-11 B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. The preceding information will assist you in planning for implementation of your project and enable you to exercise your appeal rights more fully, if you choose to do so. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, please call me at(425)430-6588. For the Environmental Review Committee, lakk) Rebecca Lind Principal Planner cc: Parties of Record • Enclosure dnsmletter 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 C�Thic saner rnnlains 50%recycled material.20%cost consumer CITY OF-RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) • MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): ' LUA-99-179,CPA,ECF • APPLICANT: La Pianta Limited Partnership (David Halinen) PROJECT NAME: La Pianta Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: This application requests a Land Use Map Amendment changing 20 acres of this property from Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN) to Residential Options (RO) with R-10 zoning, .92 acres from Residential Multi-family Urban to Convenience Commercial with CC zoning, and .53 acres from Residential Options with R-10 zoning to Convenience Commercial. This property was reviewed last year by the City as,part of the Comprehensive Plan review process and at that'time.a Land Use Map Amendment and rezone were approved from Residential ;:Single ,Family/ Manufactured Home Park to Residential Options/R-10. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: South of NE 3' ., East of Edmonds Ave. (extended) MITIGATION MEASURES: Development Agreement,limiting development as follows: 1. Residential development on the R-10 portion of the site be'limited to 436 dwelling units. 2. The maximum number of attached units on the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 78 organized in buildings of a maximum of 4 units, 3. Total impervious surface on the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 45.04 acres 4. Average daily.vehicular trips from the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 4,172 maximum for residential land uses. c: CITY OF RENTON u-. _ , . p 'vTON �� ' � �� . _ Planning/Building/Public Works i" "� 1055 South GradyWayRenton Washington 98055 �� U ` - g . • \ !r U MEYER h ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED 73 ap1 U.S. PCISYArr I ..,,,..01.0JAD . : M . Ramac, Inc. '\� kk°3(‘\ . ' 2091.9 SE 34th Street � — Issagcrah;V1 _ .� , � '„"„ - --- - --- -- - - - -- - - RAMA919 980a9300a 1199 14 04/17/00 - ! FORWARD ITITIME EX RTN TO SEND _ f 4607 FOREST AVE 5E meRc !R ISLAND WA 98O40-4306 • RETURN TO SENDER • 11 r i _ . ,..- - . 9etG :,R+. 12.�67&38:`•9 . • • l{:iE: s:�:��;ss: a�si�:i:sail.=.ss�ii=.a��et:�: 3le aa�i� and -] 0 CITY OF RENTON , ..a. sal Planning/Building/Public Works ,..,-,cia • 1,16,..• .. ----------, :-, 1 ii' 0 AI foriproicll : , 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 P c') 1.- APR Orin fP.4$4/1 2 P 3 0 D : V.0 0 0 4 tili - P'LE .ii1-"11:' ST... ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED 6T. a METER * , 1 .. 715801 U.S. POSTAGE ,tr __,..,..._ c,\N State of Washington . ,,,_,....2631 NE 4th Street J5,13.e n t o n, WA 98056 6/ 4a..... .{.•—.4...1.,--1,—.r..—.....— .—a. • / iSs-h-le . I q;—"--.--$-,-- - IS ADDRESSED C. (A - uNAnt: 10 F 0 R W AliD a' NV I RETURN TO SENDER i i.----,-- -4 111V r4 {......a CITY OF RENTON ti,l/ r Planning/Building/Public Works Department J e Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator April 5, 2000 • • Ms.Ann Nichols La Pianta Limited Partnership PO Box 88028 Tukwila,WA 98138 SUBJECT: La Pianta Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment • Project No. LUA-99-179,CPA,R,ECF Dear Ms. Nichols: This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) and is to advise you that they have completed their review of the subject project. The ERC, on April 4, 2000, issued.a threshold Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated with Mitigation Measures. See the enclosed Mitigation Measures document. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM April 24, 2000. 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 4-8-11 B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. The preceding information will assist you in planning for implementation of your project and enable you to exercise your appeal rights more fully, if you choose to do so. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, please call me at(425)430-6588. For the Environmental Review Committee, lrt V` Rebecca Lind Principal Planner cc: Parties of Record Enclosure dnsmlettar 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 al This oacer contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer ` f, CITY OF RENTON. DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-99-179,CPA,ECF • APPLICANT: La Pianta Limited Partnership (David Halinen) PROJECT NAME: La Pianta Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: This application requests a Land Use Map Amendment changing 20 acres of this property from Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN) to Residential Options (RO) with R-10 zoning, .92 acres from Residential Multi-family Urban to Convenience Commercial with CC zoning, and .53 acres from Residential Options with R-10 zoning to Convenience Commercial. This property was reviewed last year by the City as part of the Comprehensive Plan review process and at that time a Land Use Map Amendment and rezone were approved from Residential Single Family/ Manufactured Home Park to Residential Options/R-10. . LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: South of NE 3`d:, East of Edmonds Ave. (extended) • MITIGATION MEASURES: Development Agreement limiting development as follows: 1. Residential development on the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 436 dwelling units. 2. The maximum number of attached units on the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 78 organized in buildings of a maximum of 4 units, 3. Total impervious surface on the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 45.04 acres 4. Average daily vehicular trips from the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 4,172 maximum for residential land uses. • .. . • 6. p CITY OF RENTON • -�° T .y F . i, Planning/Building/Public Works a a. v 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 ga : ilAR on O ' a 0 3 0 3 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED lam. ', . f • 7158401 e.s. POSTAGE , ' ov ei- ‘0)u - Ramac, Inc. 20919 SE 34th Street Issaquah, WA.98O2A— 0 RAMA919 9902922039 1199 20 04/11/00 FORWARD TIME EXP RTN TO SEND 1 :RAMAC INC , liERC FOREST AVE SE _40-4 E•fERCEt�. ISLAND WA .96U4c)-43U1 `eat .. ] 1 .l !) 1 1 1iii tt 11 1 11 1 f 3�(:)'S Sli l-6 „ 1....i�tJansimitinliltll�t[�i[cc 1.41,1jduliilumf <:``";.,'(,' C 1* IR" + keP REVISED NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) DATE: March 3,2000 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-99-179,ECF,R,CPA APPLICATION NAME: LA PIANTA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/REZONE PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change 20 acres from Residential Planned Neighborhood/R-14 zoning to RO Residential Options/R-10 zoning. The proposal also includes an amendment to an existing development agreement for the number of vehicle trips per day to be generated from the site, the amount of impervious surface,the number of attached units and a cap on the amount of residential development on the site. The application includes a request to change the Land Use Map from Multi-family Infill (RM-I) zoning to Convenience Commercial (CC) zoning for .97 acres, and from Residential Options/R-10 zoning to Convenience Commercial for .53 acres. A proposed development agreement for the Convenience Commercial portion of the site would restrict the category of uses on the site. PROJECT LOCATION: NE 3rd/4th and Monroe OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE(DNS): 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 process to give notice that a DNS is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS 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). A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: December 15,1999,Revised January 28,2000 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: January 31,2000 • Permits/Review Requested: Environmental(SEPA)Review,Comp.Plan Amendment,Rezone Other Permits which may be required: None Requested Studies: Traffic Analysis Location where application may be reviewed:. Planning/Building/Public Works Division,Development Services Department, 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055 PUBLIC HEARING: A public hearing will be held before the Renton Planning Commission on the 7th floor of the new Renton City Hall located at 1055 Grady Way South. The date of this meeting is not yet determined.Parties of record will be informed of the date and time of the hearing when it is scheduled. • CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Analytical process Project consistency refers to whether a project is consistent with adopted and applicable development regulations,or in their absence,comprehensive plan policies. RCW 36.70B.110(2)(g)provides that the Notice of Application(NOA) include a statement of the preliminary determination of a project's consistency with the type of land use,level of development,infrastructure,and character of development if one has been made at the time of notice. At a minimum, every NOA shall include a determination of the project's consistency with the zoning,comprehensive plan and development regulations. Land Use:, The project is consistent with the policy objectives of the Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element for Residential Options Land Use and implementing R- 10 zoning,and for the Convenience Commercial Land Use Designation and Convenience Commercial zoning. - Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project Draft.Environmental Impact Statement for City of Renton Land Use Element Jan 1992,Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Land Use Element of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Feb.1993,Draft Comprehensive Plan Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Dec.1994,Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Feb.1995. • . NOTICF OF PROPOSFO ENVIRONMENTAL APPLICATION t •. • ' ' Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Ms. Rebecca Lind, Project Manager, Development Services Division,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on March 17, 2000. If you have questions about this proposal,or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail,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: MS.REBECCA LIND (425)430-6588 PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION 7 'IP 11 � 1" N ilk 00* RO/R-10 to CC/CC TA IT . .; RMURMI ma z .to CC/CC4111 ma l� GG1�'GG� cs #4, RPN/R-14 to RO/R-10 90, , NOTICE OF PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL APPLICATION „ o CITY OF RENTON . lz,, - �,►°�--. r. Planning/Building/Public Works_ _ ��A 1055 South Grad Way Renton Washington 98055 ® ” FEB 01°0 0 :4 8 5 Y Y - g =�-� �� a 0...� O ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED •L� 1,-00: mow. 858E E1 * sti� 7058401 U.S. POSTAGE * �`R /\\ c, r c e T t)11 Dik1 3 162305-9003-08-000 THIS IS Ft !,.. i.� , COUNTY KING DE IA hi` m� • �; �Wlr 500 4TH AVE ` � p� � DIVE c SEATTLE WA 98104-2337 flr° ' ' CO" [.....,........._.....,. ETURN TO SENDER 6' VI .. ,.f w __ a ��/fir::'. Iltittlttltllitl+lilttltltttlIJtiltittllttrltitltlttl,ltitliti (VY .O eti • NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) DATE: January 31,2000.. • LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-99-179,ECF,R,CPA APPLICATION NAME: LA PIANTA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/REZONE PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amendment to-the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change to RO Residential Options/R-10 zoning to Residential Planned Neighborhood/R-14 zoning for approximately 40 acres with a concurrent zoning amendments from R-14 to R-10. The proposal also includes an amendment to an existing development agreement for the number of vehicle trips per day to be generated from the site. The application includes a request to change the Land Use Map from Multi-family Infill(RM-I)zoning to Convenience Commercial(CC)zoning for.97 acres. PROJECT LOCATION: NE 3rd/4d'and Monroe 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.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 15,1999 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: January 31;2000 Permits/Review Requested: Environmental(SEPA)Review,Comp.Plan Amendment,Rezone Other Permits which may be required: None Requested Studies: Traffic Analysis Location where application may be reviewed: Planning/Building/Public Works Division,Development Services Department, 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055 PUBLIC HEARING: A public hearing will be held before the Renton Planning Commission on the 7th floor of the new Renton City Hall located at 1055 Grady Way South. The date of this meeting is not yet determined.Parties of record will be informed of the date and time of the hearing when it is scheduled. CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Analytical process Project consistency refers to whether a project is consistent with adopted and applicable development regulations,or in their absence,comprehensive plan policies. RCW 36.70B.110(2)(g)provides that the Notice of Application(NOA)include a statement of the preliminary determination of a project's consistency with the type of land use,level of development, infrastructure,and character of development if one has been made at the time of notice. At a minimum,every NOA shall include a determination of the project's consistency with the zoning,comprehensive plan and development regulations. Land Use: The project is consistent with the policy objectives of the Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element for Residential Options Land Use and implementing R-10 zoning. Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Draft Environmental Impact Statement for City of Renton Land Use Element Jan 1992,Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Land Use Element of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Feb.1993,Draft Comprehensive Plan Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Dec.-1994,Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Feb.1995. NOTICE OF PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL APPLICATION • ' • • Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Ms. Rebecca Lind, Project Manager, Development Services Division, 1055 South Grady Way;Renton,WA 98055,by 5:00 PM on February 15,.2000. If you have questions about this proposal,or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, 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: ' MS.REBECCA LIND (425)430-6588 ' . • • PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION • DA ti ;•f fit_:•:, .,.' ! )AI :v;,,,,� cTL_ :i�-Z ``:]r.;� III r•imnnarin'7•t�nn,q nr•�• ut4'�•� "�1:L*}11�I f�' f`� :':i r -r;":r+�'�{tea i I..d'n:•...:....ullr..: niu uti►;.•..l_ iy:.: G 1I E. ?�.rrr�b �r„�.r.r. II r� :�"� '..��r. �`". `1 �•�-• '� 1xR� t�bt �',: TAW X:" . 1( �,.i.:-JL��.'�.•IIJN' j��\�L �"I • •.T +!) '•S.' 1111 '�r 1, . • • t.. �t��1�:•;• , ��.•??r,;1^r•l�; ";,h1;(``-'' �� •x.ti. P. 1�=y ICI •t;��.daaat iiigto . . •I" !" ,lzzL ...,- _owl KtK'tr i' •� :t I.I 191j;;%N..rlfl��{ O lo' i r' ?r2 I �}��y�- TIi'rII�t AIT k'c_ ,.��L..• 1 -��,f ,_'� ^.1" - 1•^c ,�ti • r `'..e:,, ':t.?" ✓•r r'S)A7e.!Rn�lotV�Fe tr. 1'..'.,'�.. ., ✓A t]^l:.i I I .,.-.-:!=h.,- .A 0.....-' • ":,iplr,^ .1--t-,4";• •41:7; :-'1 It'lre.11124 Trikt:,-,116,1;;: ..: :•'•;"••.. 4:' 1 1 • :r.211 wc:*-- 4.-.sj• .• ...lr:*••-?; .: A 4,4,eniix....-N ..,-, 0 L....4 -L--- 4,4 A- . A..•••••-.,-.• _. .2.169`A9,+4tintl PIM '-3-'•:'Cl• •I ilY ...--- g 1 2I: •- ijc... * , R i �a. ♦ -:�i (F -` • . I , � u ' A r .q �i .. / Pi / / /% - •— I: ► • ■t / /! & — �Y T w lg+ ,� ter— �_ li J • •' .:4 .i / Mi • p i ICw:.11I1 t' / r-ate 0I ' a�:•I, Ir T`.•`�� / NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL YAP ---'___. -_ i; ..SIS.E PRPROPENTY i _' tom . /: a I . / i� zi, 4 r r • ,NLIP'n. 1 `N -•�, RC I to t1 I Iii . - ,�'V ,� Z i t / �,. .. �• . .11111E 11 �� •�� ..° p.F� ��• M 0131"1 101Tr..t �'r�. '. _ ... fiat,{{ 4-1 �► i ea q•` . 1 D ./6 !. .„, './.()T._ --.4. f +^id yir it • •� �-_ ems■ �•�'yr_' "• "'I"r,/r'�►: • • � �r�'* NOTICE OF PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL APPLICATION • • A m �a1 W + .,; r� C^:z c,• •6 s aee n;,•: ix =;a"r=n. s ir. _. 'GG :"aavu'u." i '__ATi 4•9f_' s ,4 � .•'� � f'� � � f��n�`"1 �nr.,�� .,ten.,, r� �• 4 �eti .r(:Pst -- aLi;J[]ry 1 • !1 r/� _" of T • '4_'1}v _ • I 1..rJ1 CIT JL:6 n.1rn1tiAuidii rl ,.ti ft.. 1� fi• < <. '%t'.1..{ ,, V ' K, LHr. •,�_ Q� ME srM Ili 1 reir;to/ `+,N* I-e 1 '' '• "'1 • LAIL'.._,A r.Bi40', ,%. .; •Ftt i • L 'ilaCHK Y.:'. .L';. .Z.ria . 7 0 l I c�a,:a 5.(L��,p�_ , q� �6,<<_ ,_* . 7 .�.; • I;I •Nii . I �Vk? q}!�a y I I • 4 �' R ' i --,'j?rr , 71,`' .Q- :e, ., *.1� :, I ,�' I I ji j •�'�!r•Q'. -a'Ir ;; 1it 4 �i. z _ 1 p �`��l'TN i f';� 5. { : _ lc I. J► �Qi Z.' �1� '; B' �' 1 1 ITM y i :. I 1.4M -i'M 1^;I�_.I O , '8L.1� �3 /1n *:i '- i7tt 7r._L.. --, •K Iz rS•!�'� Z:a ? j.; ,-:-r-,.___ i 1E4 ^� - t ��,•��;�� ..=1 l�titi.��110 ]4 r:r l��F r, 3 �. iI'y •. .. -4�._.d{'ii-'r/--�: �.� _ �, * i - rr.-- ) r r la • c�4.1 N.• =, r l Q .�'r,iis •• y � A x c� 1i�^•1!'' .. �.';r�t]4�t+j4 I i i`'=_ I—''"`� -l3•• • -f -� 6 ' r • !9 .�, q43 ,, p,e :-3; --� I � ' _,w R'1 .' j I� v L f i' Hilial - 132105' a • •• • :IL F1 ..4000401 i • -,'. r- ioru'. •'er `, = e _ _nr" LA_. +Ir— " ry ..El 1;4417 ,,,,, ‘ . njr. '11;1. --i.11:t:".1N'' --.- it'""/*; I I / i; P 4.f.....;-If ?,'• .r.,- f. 41.—so.•4 g. 61 k ate' 1/...,::.• R-10 . F� .... /// //.//.». .. :._.•_:•,._=I,.1IL..-.,1__'.•- - 3 -R 8.".:p m11. II iA6- t d / ;+f Wit= — _ - _ a• _ _ -)- t*C . s / /// IIr • • • `_.41[.,,..• FA t (f// . , // .:;,: /// Imo;• '- `-- •.i F'-14t••1 /41'• Illitt.S.DD maw I It. • / -' ; • = 1 . ..•s t;•r i'r c._= r__ NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP • • T` • • ,/i�� —:,.... .»., a --`�.C; ; SIJ CT PROP�iTY/ L-P,,,.: L� .,... . , „.._ •• , , : , . �, J I / .r .. : : I /�/ R`. \ R.8 61 // i . r�j��p4 I;I ' 31 2 SFr M 'r �,, d/ qi -1 " `'., it M .... ./ 'VIv a, 5cY '•-:"';' 'i R' '" D P. 0 I,- ,ce i ty 'y i 44'"1_4 ip. . c, y, -Y // iii ......s.,........79r; ,..., g....iiiiii...--- Olesi . \ \,,m,,,,,.,,,...;;;1---",,,,,,,..... cob...„ -‘444,:y4.,„,...,.,...7., ...i..,49,10,4'1,4,0- -•:,•.‹..?„'") ."";.\\\.- -4,A, i - ire • '1 ` 1 5 w,u nun.». k,,`r.►�\ / N T ,i•„ "1 .nr 1 11 1 I WA lot 6 ,;R' 4;�: �,C �(�,�.T '.,� �. \ 1 IQ76AOrw •II;: 44. .�✓yr:�' !r, $ \'yr*~ • )/( s • KG. •*- . KING COUNTY . ' ! '. ENTIRE MAP .k 1 tga.••,ic. •,,,,,2:;, c ,.:.-- CFRIFRER MAPENTOM N E I 7-23-5 ..: . DEPT.OF ASSESSMENTS .CITY OF RENTON.IN IIN:"IIIIIN--....,,,,...., .c...i... KING COUNTY DEPT.OF ASSESSMENTS .—,fil 4—e----7- t,........ ,.... ., p., . ,.. ....1 •....... ._.• , — ----- ' - . yomv• . • . -,- —...'", '..., '._::,.:_:.F.,74::„,,,74: —T.• ,-..----7 . -:i.- -N.' glar4, ".. ..,' Apr. • • I" ' ''. - ... // ....... •%, •• , ezr. '11' '''.? . rov.°°*:•.• •:;"• ,00, ..••••• ; --,.. • • .-. -‘.2.0....,!., • - ..•'•;..;.1 . cl, ... . _. ... /if... , ,..•••^*. :.i..1'...."- t,. ',..-.7' ort," . • ..--..:2..:;; - -. i.;,:a ,i • . ''''•. • /`.s)'• . „,... • ,•.14'-,„--APJAD 0 7 .'op. el.,,, _ -. ' / . . t \ ;11: ••••.. ......' . . , f I 1 .•-r- .-- '.. , 11 0 ....... ''... • .''•' O' , '% '\ ,e -...0";'°.:-.-'—` i. ,• ....,' -:-.-..- ..4,-- l• I • r ec, ......- . .1"0 . ............ -- -' , ea" . \ .:!...',, • : - ,16000°. ...• ..4\ !'t I • .„......."..."'" toOt i‘‘\\ IA i +•-• •—• •—• /1, iiii \ \ •-i • 1 ' i ° , ..., - •—"Ie.., . e ' . • ,,„€, ...-, ,- I .0 . . . . ay.. .. ' a ... . ..,.. . ... \ i . ........ i "1----- I ......,. i.•1.-4,-.4.. i • / .4. I...,, , , • ....v..69'' I . ,,,, / •aa- I ...„ s .\I ;1... . <0' .0 _r.6. I SUBJECT PROPERTY • ; / . _ I , I 011:111\1 \ I ....,- 1 .,,f/ „" I\0 1 • ,• I i ', ___„t• ••••-• __, .. . • ,.....-7-,:r. 0 ,• -0- /19 Ir 1 • 1...— — —.--$.:1:— .— —.——— —1 -." .1.. —,..............-4- ..i411... .\ ' / , • I I ... ....6?.. I ek. 1 ...6 .6 "'. '•-.' 1) .........--.•-• .....-...... ........‘. /— Z.L...;....;. — _. ......,... ...... •-..., -,— .. . • \ I . \ • I\ / 1/1 . ,l• ,..,,e„. ... . . -,...7_ Ili 1 0. ..I' ..r. .\ k ....e i 17\1 .., 4 '\ \ \ ...,...., k,..% i \\ . ik ,fi , 0 _., 1 \ .. . \ .." ' i k\\\\ ' ..0'..- 1 d 'r .., ..,: ..., I ., --- - - -' I .,. 4 ' 's----,,,- ‘ . 4W • , - -. -' . ,••• M11.2.a 400 , s .„......,...:,......4.. ,.,-- I .....- ,..7 --- „..,., . r L., ___. ,,4 trinl..0. 411.441MIVIllifarizt- . _............._ , -4.-6 If ,.,,,,.., . , -) ;• • ei"4 :41P'„iir'"'"ik-iiii.:::-' 4Vitijil - . .. . _.......„.. , LI --,. .-,-- 3-.: . '-1 :ginffilailik . .NIF\444§1.11M/111'1,. 11141111# -7- 4,77,,,/ ..: .. , . 0044 — .•, •., . 4 70# . .. - .. 414.• 7 • : g- ,''''', ...ov••-- ....7,a, ... la 1 4 I ' ''... • .f ‘ . I -:,:p.....*: ''''-;;-4*.... 741V-• se ...!V"...6.— ..-:, --.. IA 1.4 N. \' . •'...-',4;:i ,'.oii.A...i.c-!7:-A.E:Mc,SA.„1:,:jq '-g ' • 4::::;:::,''-fle:..:' ' • •, .,.;-., . ,-.---, ..,:,. I 1 ;a ... � 9,.,� . :;•, • :< v'; ,I .0.....,—.1.0 .,...._ _ _______.____...---1--___—_-..—.,--------_•-•—n • Il`t II ,) • a la" It 1tti fii„:•,./ Li 4 h IIl1I .is / § IIII \1 1 illii OW sj I -! „. /6_ ( , \ 4 h is: 1'' .,_, L,4, k b,—oi .. Ali • rti . KIllsok"( \ %-. V 1L ,;711:.)------ 1; ti cl y'&144 -- %.'- :.--- yam .a� Or --- .. 1 OW . 1 1• J !I1 I `'� 1 1 11 ,/ / 1 .\ V / a \ ,; Rw.....9 UMW lia eag i 11 VALLEY ¢ ift `�1 C11 WT FM iLL ig i 1 1,DATE aCE.eor MD COMP PLAN AMENDMENT/REZONE PLAN ha q`tsoris DOTE o MACE! % m DESIGNED LA P/ANTA °°°"" �� DRAWN I.L KETOAt! q41 APPROVED LA PIANTA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP Pre��ma 42O5144tAA».Ne Sutts]W c.¢ oSuea yenna e.c.7877(4 823-7 seam V CRAM ~DER P.OR BOX IMMOWA.OI su.wyrna pss)eeeaan(425)easnm Fat 2 PROJECT 4ANAGER 17RSS.t CASi/AL'!DV 99N8 l s 1. N. . Di il e. R ►ems.."' V �1 CDI ill1 a g u j1I .d Th1\01(7,1.1.---,-Th . 'i 0. -.,/ --77::::,--7-_-_-_--_--7 I. .I• \viir) F.. P 1=1 il.it65) / A /1,\,,„ . , \ 'Alp. \ 1 ,, i i ‘ . , - ,4 . \ • J ,. -- � (,: ______. s, c.‘,.! 040 �� .,.tom �_ —� . tir ,„......., 0 1 i trietkik...t 1 Wi // \\ 4.k:_4 77/0-)j .fi;1.. _ AIM[h *J ,I p T ilr„,_ ..7. (�� _ �Lik1SAti . --- ..; - -... / I 1 i ; 1 \ / I `'' 1 \ \ / 16 e 1 pi 1"ALLer g y 4k ). 7 • tU"" . . 8 ij, iuJ . I i8 j 1,DATE =E IOW COMP PLAN AMENDMENT/REZONE PLAN Rz, �z D DESIGNED I m^ r DRAWN ,J I¢wuc LA. P/ANTA °m' .ztriEl I APPROVED a v OOfA C 1 ne Em+ LA PIANTA JTED PARTNERSHIP ng^H Q, ( '„m,„;shI ,n"„30, • n PROJECT WWASER IUTRA WA9NWDV 371.7E • . • • • •. • . • . ---u. ti. • •,„.;'" ••. .4• ' ''' *:.3r4a4;...1.......: ' " N:491r•••• • . ,,..:. ki --, ..: ...'••.:h. : •.:,c.a' ll . . , Ili 4;le rAl°/:-47 v Liu-Elf:Lo.F.1'1-'1,' '_f: • u 1 '5,•• ,i er. 41•1_,,1?- , • •-•.:::.1,Av. 0:y-•:-•! •;.',1 .4731,-, r.-_- _-. -- ,•• vr.7:.:1_,__,- rtri7•4),F.,,,.-2.,.:"••1•1 1 1 •• tc;01i:1i:111u ••• torhiiiirli , •.- :1„ ,,4•.1• ,,;-?_-._! .7. .;, .f..-.me .73!....,,i ''a ).1....g 1 ;••:"..114 4• .. '•- . "•4"•:_1,., .s.' ..-:,:e ,,c .- • 1-•,i-.,•••• *:::4,..„Xi,li 1.1 I,r Eu........1',...•41.1111.*I.1,...LiuitirrNut.nu.L.:4. . ,ii....-..:.-.-. .s...-um. _ I 2: ; 1.1.6dp.qbaihdridp a-.,...•110114.•Vir-.: alai. .I. 13,101. illima,09••11.1•Asama•giiut.• a'' i}7.13%.111X-N •‘I'll'iT'Tr.-rAlg• .'-; • 67'-.-,_. '.:- Ad A'f' .-4hr.711.3 ,.--,1 .!-• . • tif.F : trl ! N•41....47P%.11i."4-11 '''-'):411 1 4-;. , ..„ .€•ii.'ir.:'... .-'-....b.741 1-11 '.81.1,fr.• P.1 I;To -vt.- - 1!A I -c •igiiK• •Alli•X vigkimiz al. ' Ae.-.,,,rli,grr,:;-.,. s.2k..lia':?.?,rr.1.7,9.4,'4.• ,c,;,.- ‘ ir-r '4")*•----r . I:1 14 lik1,1,ptiaL • •Ag,a. Li? . .:./:•it '', 1:1 ,.... ---•41•••cii., X ' mi. STII ".IC •,I, • ,s'W 111 L lif 0 /10 MI c..;14.i.."/ trIlt-'7, L-Z4lt i • 1 , '0;0; t?.;f:::::„.../y/*,---J, g5:1 Vr:411ZAtIrJ.it f.1E I L. W.INIMIlit.IF: 1. .?...i!,-...ia:Z-Zt X a • ..-11 If ,-----,, 1 • EP. 7,1*,-------,/ ' icr.7. ...=! -'• 971.1.• r.litala 711 r--7,,,,,,,•':,..V.j.‘•-211.,•••. "":„..,-.,. ci: iiiri ....... -...-‘ .3,7/.=,.,-.:., !„ . d .3E:,: . • I -5;F..:-.. 4 ..._,.._?..._,;„• - • 1 dk:1_,.:•• •-,-.''-'-',, 3/ $.4.t.'Z'6:•7 .•=4- 4.i-N1:7.7", ur-'7"" -1-___ ,_.--•- ,-;....->-.. I.7, r;,:- i•,,-,..:4 -_,-- -e,c-il,-•-•<.ti ,,.;;;,... :=It _ . ..,,i,..A . •ocet va T...b. ,.-:.,.‘,:5,:. .,. ...,..:43re:‘, 7... Fe. vr-iv; .." 1:- • . 4...-,, ••••!.--** I . • I I --(!,,..-,,,,.-11=-15i 0"°"--__., - - 11- -=1 ibit liareallgell ''''" ,E4 . '-.`iv,'••••.•• 0t.- ,4.. ,1,,,,,,,-,!..3 • „ ...,..- ''''.!,..." ,..• 445/4).• i ar ir, . .:!_-...1.. .. • 1 I - 41° I•h,'0.5 c.0' e ,..s.t.:, ••'-'40' 4-74• ...Ili IC 4,\,: SdailfaCW.,:.-1*, '•442.04# o' P4 1 1 "'"'''""" - '1 `11..-"44.,,..'"...•'t",.%",' 40.A. .4ce *i...p... . !1:14F Ir. .. . I .... gaM ."14t.:1 1• _..A4cErs 44.m. 23-:.',.. I Lai I --11 •-...-4:110....? 1.„1,„. ,00' dt' -1k1 ;§1 .. gig- .113,...-- :4-,-,::..944,4,amw.„,...:,,,,, ,_,_..::: g ., 1 kw 1..-'41:;1;10• ..'E.-I: 4:j" \-.,... isis i '. j tipmet ''''''-MX--`11""441 . L':---1 I i 1 I !, . -«d''.. ii-•••: i, • - irvn rt... ...„,,, ,,,..-:•: *.i-,-,--,•!!! : raft ,..,.•..• , • • • 1_, I.... 7 .r..tt.i,..a.:_“ _ / . ..S-11.4_,........_._."IP= _____II _m .m._ ,•k?r.i.. ,:,:s.b.l. . "'" ' .1-.:at • -• ' 09'."-001...4,11,.• • . •Nor ir' 40 . ,-AFII-Wril',-- • 111r1 '-- .. 001111 i i iiii.....: _ E:=1, 4t, ..., \ • ...... . I. ..:,,, ,/,00,00 LI: ill A F 1111F-:.7, - 1 I ' / ____J; / / g , (1,117. ''. S. t .1•11. W.& e St MN i & ! Rpm -..--- r.......... , //////' , ...„. ' / / // V .• gl . - ..... B H II . • %, . li• R-8 / // // 0 '''"------------ R-7- n':.51:77----"--=41 /-:::- I 1 u ... I.• A I "-- / / !//.....• . COI. I J 3 , • • ii16 I / ''' -.: • 1 ...---.'-'-'---.'-'''''' ---(..VA A _........_,. • Mit .., -•'.• a".!..-ligi r... -, _.- 4==:. _____- 1. 14:771 4 RAM, ,/ • 1•1:. / At.41111 l 1. e....--,1 ,.. . 4! :i I. vicar): Vs...,) , i,-4; :: P:1 •///itiVIII,. ik$ • F::; t.-. -. '(•,••arir •" ,--!e2;:.....N•11...,_WM R-8 -/ / / lyl.,.. il .• ';',. i;: '' :71°1', A SIK.• ."il. /- i. / /e/ it,ifil / .1,L, . . •=11; i,-,•-.,,,'. ...•urn . 1: • /0.> . '''' --...1 .•,t'4,7!••..,1 71- /0., u • =ill ; . •., %lat.:" l'....i._ . . • ' ii - i'•200'• ' . • 11/ NEIGmBORHOOD DETAL MAP -...t-4_"•,,- „;._L- - ---------v.,-.... A ..,.-..e / ?, . _AI'if -.• ..,-- - / / . . , • L-P L-P .4,--• -----_-_------:----------------4 suaEcr pRopery i c....._; .4 ..,,,,.; - ti •• *,::;,-:,,,..-..-1,-r,-----' .. // Aiti i: •••,4.--. ...... ''t t . ." I• .,• r_._-, • ----.t\s'I ,4 4'.1‘..•--...,.....,•-- '•.i"et. 1 I r :,/,.,/// ; :-.'.r. ..,.- '' '"" 17. i • . . I • // j i' / 1 .i !1. ! a •••I • ..: ___... „.?" i '' c.., •• - .....• 1'. '''''.'4. 4"" S . 2 - - - i • ,,. I ., • A : 1; „...... I 1 t .,•" , El I . 1 . • 'k RC 1 - • \1 • ,- 11.1:11'‘ ,.. 4t: ''''''':'•* , vv. I . • 1 % ., . ,_,-,'1---.'t e .q• "I4V r-', .'... .CgF1‘; .":::.:,.., ‘1;-- .11-".:Zill'iCnriErrsillilaillrraZrririrtittIP* ...•rm. mac GL,9hG 4-"•-f 111111),....7 .\.,. * SIT Cd'al-l.''rl! . ..:111111;11. 19 Mill.„...:.'-e-''-',..viT0'"1 H-'-' 1EZZ:44,-%:, ' 'INtorZ... .., '1'.,Pic..'.:11V...""7S7`.1:44-rilillii.11111111.:Fitmlill,71-:),.-7:11::..-tm:&•-:::.•;41Isi".."‘-'7: -.../ /".1 .: \iih\144 \... --•-•,•"'" papelflo PhD T7 4+4. •••%Irtir.,."0114„, .44,1174..rit , / ... ,, "44. '4J*TV.----:"....•••• JO ett t; gr....-,1 ille.'- Fic.p • ,'ter ,"4.7'474,-.„ "•••,.;...I:1ft).• .1,,- 'Iwilwit, -•.<7.'‘, . .... ..„,. .... .4,,,,.. -..• , ../. -. 4 .4 4-::::1,---1 - spwrs- ••;1 1\''=%--. \„1/ ' ' ‘,1444,,,,- •i-z , .----1'-'-'-' ,",- '.......:..:,-' /N... Na-.4--, --.. -1' • '''''-‘ Mii.:# 1 • !.••.* A -------- -"----,....2.. -0000111 \ ' ' '4". "- 4,,,, --,-, Aii-__„.::'; _-- I,, ,./1.11.0., ••,,,,..ri;ow agi...a; • ..,_,_ . •...,,s--. "Ill .h.i Q7....''t .,•, .1411,..--•.... '1464 __ Pi,:•...,.. -< *....::24.:.1/4•:%. ,/ ... 4.., • ...-;----- 1 , , . ...- 1.\,, ,,..... . • ?../.6....:, : .../..., , i PM,MM•M I 1 \ \ A \ \ . 1 .• '''' 4..i:*.*. ' ..1:,4,'04 • . \ \ 1 i '...... .... r.c.1 ..`,...',N,„,„,,,,.....:, /. ... "*..,•04... MIO • i Mill MUM.4 I Ir• \ 1. UAW!! =•._ ',',..$4/,,,,:. *.',. ...„....1--z....s.'04'^.....' ri?,:t,,r,,,,_,-.. 10.15Acess % . '''",•• ..t••• te ,..„--,. ilt-se.,i -4,..-,..i \,\ 'Is C.64 4g. NE I 7-23-5 -; KING COUNTY DEPT.OF ASSESSMENTS • CITY OF REPITCN CITY OF FLENTOA N W.v16--2.5t-5 ..t= KING COUNTY DEPT.OF ASSESSMENTS - ‘.`1... '-:7' "—.:, ..-! 1 '''' • -- , . -7.74.4:--tr,*„.• w '4.1r. ,wiA- ...•,... ' • -'2, ".:.,' VI • , ...,!:„ . -'''''T ---'. -,I. - 1 4•100-9°‘ IIl II ...I. ' • ,- /0.1°. -;-.4-'..';'4.,(Ite i:'Ill tr 4 ........ ...I / . /0 . ••••4'. .. ..-6, -r-..• . , — —f gi - 4,..0,3 \ 1 ....•••• ,, ....-.• -,1s---'')".",--'-::;'' , 1 ...---• • ,,I / ...,... -or^" -4' • '-0,--',...„--..^".:.....w.1. s. , 1 . I E e $ II .1.. II"' I 4..S:.e.;-' ...." / ....44.. Iil'e, ,,.%**: '''.. 6 ,..it \ • . GI. ,..1 S • , ...........;_... 10.„0„; i IA r -- .--• / I '—'1 di 1 \ I e it 1 I e i I ...''' ..... 4111111111111k '° 1 1 ...,• 6 0,1*i I ee. r I all ....011 ...L.' ......_...„-- ••= 1\ . i _ ___ __-,...7- - ,‘"! , 1"-,., ' ....,_:._ .14 . ....... \ i I , r- --• I•1 / 1 • . 4' I . , 1 i . , I -, .....at i 1 '''-*••' 17.9., 1 ;[....,... lio', I 'Po '• I ; \ ; 1 &SECT PROPIFITY 1 , 1 I , e 1 . ... \ , i ao• I ",/... -f...9•••• I ...., / 1 1 \ ‘ :::-..7.• ----/:__ .-_-,..,_ — - I 1 -- \ //i4 i ...- I \ \ /4 #0<- .' 8 1 1 l'i k \ (( ii ,......; i 1 ,1 I , IN 1 V .. .17 i " 7171. ,.. 1 1 \\ \ ............. , ............. ....4,:...., 4.... .,.,.\. ,. ....- ilL\I . , „.t.....,z A --f.„ 1 -'• .,,,,, .0 , i tA\\\\ _,..... --- . ,,,,.... .., ,.M .:. .... .- .. _..... .....4__t. --...r, ----_-=i_ i --. --- lr 74,rwiiw- 7 .MMIIM 0 - ,_.___,......,.. ..s F -tz.,•-,, lin , t kl.,.,_. _11)14, _: ;..,. .......e „ 4 4 4 4 4 4 414M1411111.71.4 Az, , --....... , ' .•- •:',40. -Wee tirjr) ,: 47... ,x 400, 0 4.,.. +.....:.Z."-.•-..4A.S.;*::--.-- 14 I ',0;1 oe'" \' .\ ..' 1 ' ,aq ' ...iv, \ ... k‘e. . 'a .;P'.. ' •-- .e. -..1-2--, - .- -.. .i.'N •: ,/ ..-..: I ) I 1- , 162305-9003-08-000 162305-9027-00 COUNTY KING LP LA PIANTA 500 4TH AVE ! I PO BOX 88050 SEATTLE WA 98104-2337 1 SEATTLE WA 98138-2050 162305-9035-00 1 162305-9046-07 SOUND ENERGY PUGET STATE OF WASHINGTON PO BOX 90868 0 BELLEVUE WA 98009-0868 I 162305-9062-06 162305-9117-01 T& E INVESTMENT INC RENTON HOUSING AUTHORITY 353 VUEMONT PL NE 970 HARRINGTON AVE NE RENTON WA 98056-3659 I RENTON WA 98056-3088 162305-9120-06 I > 162305-9133-01 ANNETTE B. & KEITH SR DEMPS COUNTY KING 2308 NE 24TH ST 500A K C ADMIN BLDG RENTON WA 98056-2251 SEATTLE WA 98104-1021 172305-9001-09 I 172305-9025-01 DEMOLITION & EXCAVATING ALLENNS ANMAR CO 6205 24TH ST NE 9125 10TH AVE S TACOMA WA 98422-3301 SEATTLE WA 98108-4612 172305-9039-05 172305-9085-08 CITY OF RENTON I MT OLIVET CEMETERY 200 MILL AVE S PO BOX 547 RENTON WA 98055-2132 I RENTON WA 98057-0547 172305-9170-04 I 172305-9180-02 PORTFOLIO L. P. ESSEX LAPINTA LTD PTNSP CO 777 S CALIFORNIA AVE PO BOX 88028 PALO ALTO CA 94304-1102 SEATTLE WA 98138-2028 11 2000-M-4a �i iL y�-1l Y Lenny Neafus Michael O'Halloran Terri L.Dumas 24th5 TaOComa NE ,WA 98422 4420 SE 4th Street Mt. Olivet Cemetery Co.,Inc. Renton,WA 98059 PO Box 547 100 Blaine Ave NE Renton,WA 98057 T&E Investment Inc. Ann Nichols Dick Gilroy 353 Vuemont PINE La Pianta Limited Partnership Northward Development Renton,WA 98056 PO Box 88028 ?' S. 1560 140`�'Ave NE Suite 100 Tukwila,WA 98138 ;,} �h Bellevue,Wa 98005-3256 LP La Pianta Craig Krueger s PO Box 88050 Dodds Engineering _� `Sound neE rgyElectric Puget Tukwila WA 98138-2050 4205-148`h Ave NE Suite 200 ?i -- PO Box 90868 Bellevue WA 98007 Bellevue,WA 98009 ANMARCO CO David L.Halinen r'' 9125 10th Ave. S. Halinen Law Offices,P.S. ,=: ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY Seattle,WA 98108 2115 N. 30th,Suite 102 =``=-_ PO BOX 512485 Tacoma,WA 98403 gt. LOS ANGELES, CA 90051 EVERETT WILCOCK KING COUNTY MT OLIVET CEMETERY 11830 164TH AVENUE SE 500 K.C. ADMIN.BLDG.#A PO BOX 547 RENTON WA 98059 SEATTLE,WA 98104 RENTON,WA 98057 KEITH&ANNETTE DEMPS SR. RENTON THIRD AVE PROP LLC RAMAC INC 2308 NE 24TH STREET PO BOX 814 20919 SE 34TH STREET RENTON,WA 98056 ZILLAH,WA 98953 ISSAQUAH,WA 98029 SEUNG SIK&EUNSIL PAIK PHYLLIS LARUE PORTFOLIO LP ESSEX 2439 SE MAPLE VALLEY HIGHWAY 2505 MAPLE VALLEY HIGHWAY 777 S CALIFORNIA AVENUE RENTON,WA 98055 RENTON,WA 98058 PALO ALTO, CA 94304 DELORES PATTERSON HOUSING AUTHORITY RENTON MELANIE JORDAN HECLA C/O T&E INVESTMENTS 970 HARRINGTON AVENUE NE 405 FIR LAND 1401 LINCOLN AVE.NE RENTON,WA 98056 ARLINGTON,WA 98223 RENTON WA 98056 Ess` kyortf LP 777 S. iforma Avenue Palo'Alto, C 04-1102 T&E Investment Inc. Ann Nichols Dick Gilroy 353 Vuemont P1 NE La Pianta Limited Partnership Northward Development Renton,WA 98056 PO Box 88028 1560 140th Ave NE Suite 100 Tukwila,WA 98138 Bellevue,Wa 98005-3256 • Joe Jainga Puget Sound Engergy PO Box 90868 Bellevue,WA 98009 ANMARCO CO David L.Halinen ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY 9125 101 Ave.S. Halinen Law Offices,P.S. PO BOX 512485 Seattle,WA 98108 2115 N.30th,Suite 102 LOS ANGELES,CA 90051 Tacoma,WA 98403 KING COUNTY KIN L O PITY MT OLIVET CEMETERY 500 4TH AVENUE - ' 00 K.0 MIN.BLDG.#A PO BOX 547 SEATTLE,WA 98104 G.f SEA v LE, '\A 98104 • RENTON,WA 98057 KEITH&ANNETTE DEMPS SR. RENTON THIRD AVE PROP LLC RAMAC INC 2308 NE 24TH STREET PO BOX 814 20919 SE 34TH STREET RENTON,WA 98056 ZILLAH,WA 98953 ISSAQUAH,WA 98029 SEUNG SIK&EUNSIL PAIK PHYLLIS LARUE PORTFOLIO LP ESSEX 2439 SE MAPLE VALLEY HIGHWAY 2505 MAPLE VALLEY HIGHWAY 777 S CALIFORNIA AVENUE RENTON,WA 98055 RENTON,WA 98058 PALO ALTO,CA 94304 STA OF ASHINGTON HOUSING AUTHORITY RENTON MELANIE JORDAN HECLA 2631 N H STREET 970 HARRINGTON AVENUE NE 405 FIR LAND RENT , 98056 RENTON,WA 98056 ARLINGTON,WA 98223 DELORES PATTERSON N`4 EVERETT WILCOCK Lenny Neafus C/O T&E INVESTMENTS NY" 11830 164TH AVENUE SE 6205 24th NE 1401 LINCOLN AVE.NE RENTON WA 98059 Tacoma,WA 98422 RENTON WA 98056 October 9,2000 Renton City Council Minutes — Page 360 Utility:Utility 421 &401 Utility Systems Division requested approval to adjust the 2001 appropriations Funds,2001 Adjusted , to the Utility 421 and 401 funds and requested approval to modify the City Appropriations budget and CIP document to reflect the adjusted appropriations. Based on historical CIP completion rates, increased permitting difficulty,Endangered Species Act requirements,and increased staff time dedicated to customer service,the adjusted appropriations will more accurately reflect anticipated 2001 expenditures. Refer to Utilities Committee. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY CLAWSON,COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. OLD BUSINESS Finance Committee Chair presented a report recommending approval of Claim Finance Committee Vouchers 186025 - 186446, and one wire transfer totaling $2,160,512.88; and Finance: Vouchers approval of Payroll Vouchers 27985 -28229 and 527 direct deposits totaling $1,017,991.50. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. ORDINANCES AND The following resolution was presented for reading and adoption: RESOLUTIONS Resolution#3470 A resolution was read designating the South County Journal as the official City Clerk: South County newspaper for publication of legal notices for the City of Renton, and Journal, Official City rescinding Resolution No.2612. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY Newspaper CORMAN, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. The following ordinances were presented for second and final reading: Ordinance#4864 An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of 1.45 acres with Rezone:Merlino CPA#2000- access from Edmonds Ave. NE from Residential Multi-Family-Infill(RM-I) M-4 on Edmonds Ave NE and Residential-10 Dwelling Units Per Acre(R-10)to Convenience from RM-I &R-10 to CC Commercial(CC) for the Merlino CPA Rezone#2000-M-4,La Pianta/Liberty (1.45 acres) `1 Ridge. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, '�� I COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#4865 An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of 20 acres with Rezone:Merlino CPA#2000- access to Edmonds Ave.NE from Residential-14 Dwelling Units Per Acre(R- M-4 on Edmonds Ave NE 14)to Residential-10 Dwelling Units Per Acre(R-10) for the Merlino CPA from R-14 to R-10 (20 acres) Rezone#2000-M-4,La Pianta/Liberty Ridge. MOVED BY KEOLKER- WHEELER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#4866 An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of 8.47 acres with Rezone: Merlino CPA#2000- access from Empire Way S./SR-900 from Commercial Office(CO) to M-6 on Empire Way S/SR-900 Residential Multi-Family-Infill(RM-I) for the Merlino CPA Rezone#2000-M- from CO to RM-I 6. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance#4867 An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of approximately 7.5 Rezone: Aegis CPA#2000-M- acres located south of NE 3rd St. between Edmonds and Monroe Avenues NE 5 on NE 3rd St from R-10 to from Residential-10 Dwelling Units Per Acre(R-10) to Light Industrial (IL) for IL the Aegis CPA Rezone#2000-M-5. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. October 9,2000 Renton City Council Minutes Page 361 Ordinance#4868 • An ordinance was read changing the prezoning classification of 17.54 acres Rezone: Merlino CPA#2000- with access from Empire Way S./SR-900 within the City of Renton's Potential M-6 on Empire.Way S/SR-900 Annexation Area from Commercial Arterial (CA)to Residential Multi-Family- from CA to RM-I Infill(RM-I)for the Merlino CPA Prezone#2000-M-6. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Councilmember Keolker-Wheeler reported that King County has asked the Boundary Review Board to invoke jurisdiction on the matter regarding the Merlino RM-I zoned properties,and requested that Council be informed when the hearings will be held. NEW BUSINESS Councilmember Keolker-Wheeler requested that an informational presentation Metro:Ballot Measure re: 2% be scheduled at a Council meeting regarding the Metro Transit Initiative that Sales Tax will appear on the ballot in the November election which proposes a 2%sales tax to sustain and expand Metro Transit service. She recommended that presenters representing both sides of the issue be invited to participate. Metro: Bus Traffic on N 33rd Councilman Clawson expressed concern regarding the bus traffic on N. 33rd St. St in Kennydale, saying that the buses exceed the posted speed limit of 25 mph. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PERSSON,REFER THE MATTER REGARDING REVISING THE SPEED LIMIT TO 15 MPH FOR METRO BUSES ON N. 33RD ST.TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE. CARRIED. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 8:35 p.m. MARIL J. TERSEN, CMC,City Clerk Recorder: Michele Neumann October 9,2000 ---- October 2,2000 --- Renton City Council Minutes --Page 351--=-- - CAG: 00-138,Liberty Park City Clerk reported bid opening on 9/27/2000 for CAG-00-138,Liberty Park Skate Park/Highlands Annex Skate Park/Highlands Annex Improvements; four bids;project estimate Improvements,Wyser $331,200; and submitted staff recommendation to award the contract to the low Construction bidder,Wyser Construction,Inc.,in the amount of$320,217.39 (includes base bid and alternates one and two). Council concur. Court Case:Jeffrey Craig Court Case filed by James Lambka, 127 Park Ave.N., Suite 300,Renton, Elton,CRT-00-010 98055, on behalf of plaintiff Jeffrey Craig Elton,who seeks compensation for medical expenses and economic loss due to injuries sustained on 11/12/97 when former Public Works Department employee James E.Bluhm,allegedly failing to stop when coming out of a parking lot,collided into plaintiff's vehicle. Refer to City Attorney and Insurance Services. Plat: Duvall Ave NE,Deed of Development Services Division recommended acceptance of a deed of Dedication for Road Widening dedication for additional right wy_for widening Duvall Ave.NE for public -- (SHP-00-042) road use as part of the Duvall Court Short Plat(SHP-00-042). Council concur. Technical Services: Renton Technical Services Division recommended acceptance of a quit claim deed School District Quit Claim from Renton School District 403 over the south 30 feet of property used for Deed(800 Union Ave NE) Honey Dew Elementary School at 800 Union Ave.NE. Council concur. CAG: 00-136, Sale of Boeing Wastewater Utility Division reported bid opening on 9/21/2000 for CAG-00- 'Lift Station,Boeing 136, Sale of Boeing Lift Station; one bid; sale price estimate$39,204.60; and submitted staff recommendation to sell the Boeing Lift Station to the high bidder,The Boeing Company,in the amount of$39,204.60. Council concur. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. ORDINANCES AND The following ordinances were presented for first reading and referred to the RESOLUTIONS Council meeting of 10/09/2000 for second and final reading: Rezone: La Pianta CPA An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of 1.45 acres with #2000-M-4 on Edmonds Ave access from Edmonds Ave.NE from Residential Multi-Family-Infill(RM-I) NE from RM-I&R-10 to CC and Residential-10 Dwelling Units Per Acre(R-10)to Convenience n q o`er.\ ' \ Commercial(CC)for the La Pianta/Liberty Ridge CPA Rezone#2000-M-4. I� l MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 10/09/2000. CARRIED. Rezone:Merlin CPA#2000- An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of 20 acres with M-4 on Edmonds Ave NE access to Edmonds Ave.NE from Residential-14 Dwelling Units Per Acre(R- from R-14 to R-10 14)to Residential-10 Dwelling Units Per Acre(R-10)for the Merlino CPA Rezone#2000-M-4. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 10/09/2000. CARRIED. Rezone:Merlin CPA#2000- An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of 8.47 acres with M-6 on Empire Way S/SR-900 access from Empire Way S./SR-900 from Commercial Office(CO)to from CO to RM-I Residential Multi-Family-Infill(RM-I)for the Merlino CPA Rezone#2000-M- 6. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL ,READING ON 10/09/2000. CARRIED. October 2,2000 Renton City Council Minutes - - Page 352- -- Rezone:Aegis CPA#2000-M- 'An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of approximately 7.5 5 on NE 3rd St from R-10 to acres located south of NE 3rd St.between Edmonds and Monroe Avenues NE IL from Residential-10 Dwelling Units Per Acre to Light Industrial(IL)for the Aegis CPA Rezone#2000-M-5. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON,COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 10/09/2000. CARRIED. Rezone:Merlino CPA#2000- An ordinance was read changing the prezoning classification of 17.54 acres M-6 on Empire Way S/SR-900 with access from Empire Way S./SR-900 within the City of Renton's Potential from CA to RM-I Annexation Area from Commercial Arterial.(CA)to Residential Multi-Family- Infill(RM-I)for the Merlino CPA Prezone#2000-M-6. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PARKER,COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 10/09/2000. CARRIED. Comprehensive Plan: 2000 Councilmember Keolker-Wheeler requested that Council be given copies of the Amendments,Development development agreements which were adopted as part of the 2000 Agreements Comprehensive Plan Amendments. NEW BUSINESS Council President Corman announced that with the resignation of Councilman Council: Council President Schlitzer,the Council must elect a new Council President Pro-Tem. MOVED Pro-Tern BY PARKER, SECONDED BY PERSSON,COUNCIL NOMINATE COUNCILMAN CLAWSON FOR THE POSITION OF PRESIDENT PRO- TEM. CARRIED. City Clerk: Renton Councilmember Keolker-Wheeler reported that she has received inquiries from Government Access Channel citizens living within the City's Potential Annexation Area(PAA) asking that 21 they be able to receive Renton's government access channel instead of the City of Seattle and King County's channels. She asked if there is any way to influence the cable company to allow these citizens access to Renton's cable channel. City Clerk/Cable Manager Marilyn Petersen explained that the City has put out a lot of effort towards this end. According to franchise agreements with AT&T Cable Services,the cable signals are carried within the boundaries of each jurisdiction. Describing her efforts to negotiate with King County and AT&T Cable Services,Ms.Petersen pointed out that even if the City were able to successfully negotiate the matter,the cost would be prohibitive. Council President Corman suggested that King County be contacted and requested to cablecast video tapes of Renton City Council Meetings on its government access channel. EDNSP:Neighborhood Responding to Councilmember Keolker-Wheeler's inquiry,Mayor Tanner Program,Information Request reported that the Administration will provide documentation regarding the by Inez Petersen City's Neighborhood Program to Inez Petersen. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN,COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 8:15 p.m. / MARIL J. TERSEN,CMC, City Clerk Recorder: Michele Neumann October 2,2000 O C T - 3 2000 ECONOMit 1 NEIGr�k;R�O; i�< r O AND STRA`EGIC FL.ANN. sit CD ANT CITY OF RENTON CITY CLERK DIVISION MEMORANDUM DATE: October 2, 2000 TO: Rebecca Lind ,I FROM: Suzann Lombard, X6521 SUBJECT: First Amendment to Development Agreement—LaPianta RO &R-10 rezone The attached original document has been fully executed and is being returned to you. Please transmit the original to the contractor and retain a copy for your file. An original of the attached document has been sent for recording with King County; the other originals are being returned to you. Please forward copies to parties of interest, and retain a copy for your file. A copy of the recorded document will be sent to you upon receipt from the County. Thank you. Enclosures: (2) FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PARTIES This FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this "First Amendment") is made and entered into this 15th day of September, 2000, by and between the CITY OF RENTON ("City"), a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, on the one hand, and LA PIANTA LLC, a Washington limited liability company, and LIBERTY RIDGE L.L.C., a Washington limited liability company, the owners of the parcels of property within the area covered by this First Amendment (collectively, the "Owners") on the other hand. RECITALS WHEREAS, on March 31, 1999, LA PIANTA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Washington limited partnership (the then-owner of the following described property) made application to the City of Renton for Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map amendments and Zoning Map amendments of the property that is legally described as follows (the"Property"): PARCELS 1, 2, 3, 4, 9 AND 10 CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE REVISION FILE NO. LUA-95-200-LLA, RECORDED IN BOOK 108 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 276, 276 A AND 276 B, UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9604239004, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; BEING A PORTION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF SAID PARCEL 1 LYING WEST OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 16. WHEREAS, in response to that application, the City and La Pianta Limited Partnership ultimately entered into a Development Agreement dated November 18, 1999 and recorded under King County Recording No. 19991213000395 (the "Original Development Agreement") which, upon the terms and conditions set forth therein (including various "Site-Specific Restrictions"), FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 1 established that (1) a portion of the Property (legally described and referred to therein as the "RO Area" and encompassing approximately 74.05 acres) would have a Residential Options (RO) Land Use Map Designation and R-10 zoning, and (2) the remainder of the Property (legally described therein and referred to therein as the"RPN Area" and encompassing 20 acres) would have a Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN) Land Use Map designation and corresponding R-14 zoning; and WHEREAS, on December 13, 1999, La Pianta Limited Partnership made application to the City to (1) amend the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation of the RPN Area to Residential Options (RO) and amend the zoning classification of the RPN Area to R-10, (2) amend the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation of a small portion of the RO Area near its northwest corner as well as a small area lying to the west and northwest thereof to Convenience Commercial (CC) and amend the zoning classification of that same property to Convenience Commercial (CC)', and (3) amend the Site-Specific Restrictions set forth in the Original Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, the City has assigned City File No. LUA 99-179, ECF,R,CPA (00M4) to that application; and WHEREAS, on April 14, 2000, a new lot line adjustment, City of Renton Boundary Line Adjustment No. LUA-00-020-LLA, was recorded under King County Recording No. 2000041900001; and WHEREAS, the new lot line adjustment encompasses both (1) the Property and (2) Parcels 6 and 7 of City of Renton Lot Line Revision File No. LUA-95-200 LLA, recorded in Book 108 of Surveys page 276, 276A and 276B, under Recording No. 9604239004, Records of King County, Washington; and WHEREAS, during April 2000, La Pianta LLC succeeded to La Pianta Limited Partnership's interest in both (1)the Property, and (2) above-mentioned Parcels 6 and 7 of City of Renton Lot Line Revision No. LUA-95-200-LLA; and WHEREAS, on or about May 1, 2000, La Pianta LLC conveyed to Liberty Ridge L.L.C. Lots 1, 3, 4, 7 and 8 of City of Renton Boundary Line Adjustment No. LUA-00-020-LLA; and WHEREAS, the Owners are willing to have the requested comprehensive plan amendment and zoning amendment of the RPN Area granted subject to the original Site- Specific Restrictions being amended to be as set forth in Section 3, below and to apply to the entire portion of the Property that will hereafter be Land Use Mapped RO and zoned R-10, which portion of the Property is legally described as follows (the"Amended RO Area"): ' The CC area is the subject of a new and separate development agreement between the City and Liberty Ridge L.L.C., the current owner of that property. FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 2 Lots 2, 7 and 8 of City of Renton Boundary Line Adjustment No. LUA-00-020- LLA and those portions of Lots 1, 4, 5 and 6 of City of Renton Boundary Line Adjustment No. LUA-00-020-LLA lying north of Parcels 6 and 7 of City of Renton Lot Line Revision No. LUA-95-200-LLA, recorded in Book 108 of Surveys page 276, 276A and 276B, under Recording No. 9604239004, Records of King County, Washington. WHEREAS, on May 3, 2000, the Planning Commission held a public hearing concerning the proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendments and Zoning Map Amendments and the amendments to the Original Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Planning and Development Committee report on August 7, 2000; WHEREAS, the City Council has taken into account the public comment presented at the Planning Commission public hearing; and WHEREAS, this First Amendment has been reviewed and approved by the City Council of the City of Renton, Washington; and WHEREAS, this First Amendment appears to be in the best interests of the citizens of the City of Renton, Washington; WHEREAS, for convenience of the parties the Original Development Agreement as amended by this First Amendment is hereinafter referred to as the "Amended Development Agreement"; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereby amend the Original Development Agreement as follows: SECTION 1. SUBJECT PROPERTY The entire text of Section 2 of the Original Development Agreement is hereby replaced with the following text: A. Illustrative Map: The Amended RO Area is graphically represented in the drawing attached hereto as Exhibit A. B. King County Property Identification Numbers: The following list indicates the King County Property Identification Numbers that relate to the Amended RO Area: 162305- 9006-05, 162305-9061-07, 162305-9010-09, 162305-9027-00, 162305-9131-03, 162305-9009-02, and 162305-9007-04. FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 3 SECTION 2. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP DESIGNATIONS AND ZONING SUBJECT TO AMENDED SITE SPECIFIC RESTRICTIONS The entire text of Section 3 of the Original Development Agreement is hereby terminated and replaced with the following text: A. Site-Specific Restrictions. The parties hereby agree that the following amended site- specific conditions (the "Amended Site-Specific Restrictions") shall apply to the Amended RO Area in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Designation described in Subsection C, below: (1) The overall number of residential units of any type will not exceed 436 units; (2) The overall number of flats/attached or townhouse units will be limited to 78 units and the number of units in any building to 4 units; (3) Permitted residential development will be limited so that the number and type of residential units will not be expected to generate more than 4,172 average daily trips as calculated under the 1997 Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Manual (subsequent updates to the ITE Manual may not be used to increase unit count); and (4) Permitted residential development in the Amended RO Area will be limited so that the total impervious surface coverage due to development will not exceed a total of 45.04 acres. B. Comprehensive Plan Map Designations: The parties agree that, subject to the Amended Site-Specific Restrictions listed in Subsection A, above, the Amended RO Area shall have a Residential Options (RO)Land Use Map designation. C. Zoning: The parties further agree that, subject to the Amended Site-Specific Restrictions listed in Subsection A, above, the Amended RO Area shall have an R-10 zoning classification. FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 4 • SECTION 3. EFFECT OF AMENDED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT The entire text of Section 4 of the Original Development Agreement is hereby terminated and replaced by the following text: Unless amended or terminated, the Amended Development Agreement shall be enforceable during its term by a party to this First Amendment; provided, however, only the City may enforce the Amended Site-Specific Restrictions. Development of the Amended RO Area shall not be subject to a new zoning ordinance or an amendment to a zoning ordinance or to a development regulation or standard adopted by the City after the effective date of this First Amendment, unless (a) otherwise provided in the Amended Development Agreement as hereby amended or (b) agreed to by the owner(s) of any of the portion(s) of the Amended RO Area to which such new zoning ordinance or an amendment to a zoning ordinance or a development regulation or standard shall apply or (c) in the case of a new or amended development regulation the regulation is one that the City was required to adopt or amend because of requirements of state or federal law. Any development permit or approval issued by the City for the Amended RO Area during the term of the Amended Development Agreement must be consistent with the Amended Development Agreement. The Amended Development Agreement shall only apply to the Amended RO Area; all portion(s) of the Property lying outside of the Amended RO Area are hereby released from the Original Development Agreement and the Amended Development Agreement. SECTION 4. RECORDING Pursuant to RCW 36.70B.190, this First Amendment shall be recorded with the real property records of King County. During the term of the Amended Development Agreement, the Amended Development Agreement shall be binding on the parties and their successors. SECTION 5. TERM The entire text of Section 7 (Term) of the Original Development Agreement is hereby terminated and replaced by the following text: This Amended Development Agreement shall run with the Amended RO Area until amended or rescinded by the City Council in accordance with Section 8 (Amendment), below. With respect to any portion(s) of the Amended RO Area that are not developed, the parties to this Amended Development Agreement agree to evaluate the Amended Development Agreement periodically, but not less than every ten (10) years from the date of the First Amendment. Where FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 5 appropriate, periodic review of the Amended Development Agreement shall generally coincide with the City's evaluation of its entire Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 6. FUTURE AMENDMENT OF THE AMENDED AGREEMENT The entire text of Section 8 (Amendment) of the Original Development Agreement is hereby terminated and replaced by the following: The provisions of the Amended Development Agreement, before the expiration of ten (10) years from the date of execution of this Agreement by all of the parties, may only be amended with the mutual written consent of the parties; provided, however, that the owner(s) of portion(s) of the Amended RO Area shall be entitled to amend the Amended Development Agreement from time-to-time (with the consent of the City) as it relates to their particular portion(s) of the Amended RO Area. After ten (10) years, the City may change the zoning and development regulations pertinent to the Property as part of its normal process of alteration to its Comprehensive Plan, Zoning and Development Regulations. Except as herein amended the Original Development Agreement remains unchanged. DATED this 15th day of September, 2000. CITY OF RENTON 4 : :, , -,,,,...„, r �C: �F Jesse;, anner, Mayor\ � * SAL( E *4- Attest: ....� � ' Marilyn . P t rsen, City Clerk ��ii� T 7ED S ss rrmnii1111i1fi4Ka Approved as to Form: 67• 19CLAAJ.-^0 aff,42a--r./.2-u-- Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 6 LA PIANTA LLC, a Washington limited liability company By: METRO LAND DEVELOPMENT, INC, a Washington Corporation, Manager By: M.A. Segale, Pr 'dent Date 7—„r/—Qo LIBERTY RIDGE L.L.C., a Washington limited liability company By: idol L Donald J. 1NVino, Manager Date 9 - / 9 - 0o STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that on the v2-� day 2000 JESSE TANNER appeared before me and acknowledged that he signed t e instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the Mayor of the City of Renton, the Washington municipal corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said City for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute such instrument, and that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate seal of said City. Dated: Selp. "--,1•Le...J02c,r 0-0 0 a %..... e(print) =AV �' �Sign ure . o ' U � Loi /k' e � 0rea(L'vv �r-- �j, 4yi''12 Ti r�`? b _ My ppointment Expires FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 7 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING Sr ) .J On this / ay of September, 2000, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared M. A. SEGALE, to me known to be the person who signed as President of Metro Land Development, Inc., Manager of LA PIANTA LLC, the limited liability company that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation and of said limited liability company for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument on behalf of the corporation and that the corporation was authorized to execute said instrument on behalf of the limited liability company. IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year first above written. Dated: 'AI DO .PN A. ►'N��III 't•,•.PO... s J,....,,0N 4.°•.el, Ali Name int) j �� o �`°Yr ' }' : i �— a «.t w� of / �• P40 6 F�� e° . . atur: � �' • / //r•9,),• ..-I Y 1, 200.. A Title le �`� �= My Appo' t ent Expires STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that DONALD J. MERLINO is the person who appeared before me and acknowledged that he signed the instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as manager of LIBERTY RIDGE L.L.C., a Washington limited liability company,to be the free and voluntary act of such limited liability company for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: 9- h9-00 gd f/ rn .l- 60AyfP��/S • Nam nt) vrpdIg ture , ILL-Lin Title '-/-c99-6 / My Appointment Expires D:\CF\2418\001\Development Agreement\Residential\FIRST-AM.F1.wpd FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 8 i ZJ 4 • 8 17 16 • Aro : Am mik IA VIMINIIINII 0 STRW I I N� NTS 1 // 1 9, • ,, 7, 4 . . 'AMENDED RO AREA' O (HATCHED) ti ✓ I pr / 1 rt e ;..../ , .. .4_, . .5 • Y . ,• Y • ‘... -., A • 17. 16 � %/ A 1 / , 1 e / ♦ / ♦ . �� LOTS /10 NORTH YOF LINERENTON PARCELSLLA 6NO.AND 7, LUA-95-200-LLA, REC/J 9604239004 O O O xi . D • O ID p D • m I 1 N N ! 4 pad- AMENDED RO AREA g S d EXHIBIT "A" 4 R Gr....vi is 1X LIBERTY RIDGE amEgg; ' o ✓ N z CITY OF RENTON WASHINGTON I8/18/00 022BLA.DWG i •• 77 CITN )F RENTON ..LL :€ Planning/Building/Public Works Department - f it Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator April 26, 2000 Ms.Ann Nichols La Pianta Limited Partnership PO Box 88028 Tukwila, WA 98138 SUBJECT: La Pianta Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Project No. LUA-99-179,CPA,R,ECF Dear Ms. Nichols: This letter is to inform you that the comment and appeal periods have ended for the Environmental Review Committee's (ERC) Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated for the above-referenced project. No appeals were filed on the ERC determination. This decision is final and application for the appropriately required permits may proceed. The applicant must comply with all ERC Mitigation Measures. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at(425)430-6588. For the Environmental Review Committee, keeek,t6 Rebecca Lind Principal Planner cc: Parties of Record • RNA] 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, Washington 98055 . • • -4 ,:' >, . : CITY •of RENTON mu. Planning/Building/Public Works Department - • Jesse Tanner,Mayor - - Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator April 5,2000 •. • _ Washington State • . Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section . PO Box 47703 . . Olympia,WA 98504-7703 . ' - Subject: Environmental Determinations . . • Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental.Determination for.the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC)on April 4, 2000: DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED - LA PIANTA REZONE &COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT LUA-99-179,CPA,R,ECF . This application requests a Land Use Map Amendment changing 20 acres of this property from • .Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN)to Residential Options (RO)with R-10 zoning, .92 - acres from Residential Multi-family Urban to Convenience Commercial with CC zoning, and .53 . • acres from Residential Options with R-10 zoning to Convenience Commercial. This property was • • reviewed last year by the City as part of the Comprehensive Plan review process and at that time a Land Use Map Amendment and rezone were approved from Residential Single Family/ Manufactured Home Park to Residential Options/R-10. Location: South of NE 3ro , East of Edmonds Ave. (extended). • Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM April 24,2000. 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 4-8-11 B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. If you have questions, please call me at(425)430-6588. For the Environmental Review Committee, PAI-4eAlletb 4 • Rebecca Lind Principal Planner • cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division 'Larry Fisher, Department of Fisheries . David F. Dietzman, Department of Natural Resources . Don Hurter, Department of Transportation Duwamish Tribal Office • . . • Rod Malcom, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe(Ordinance) . . US Army Corp."of Engineers - • •Tep cylte . . • . 1055•South Grady Way-Renton, •Washington 98055 - ' ' CITY RENTON • Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator • • April 5, 2000 • Ms.Ann Nichols La Pianta Limited Partnership PO Box 88028 Tukwila,WA 98138 SUBJECT: La Pianta Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Project No. LUA-99-179,CPA,R,ECF Dear Ms. Nichols: This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) and is to advise you that they have completed their review of the subject project. The ERC, on April 4, 2000; issued a threshold Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated with Mitigation Measures. See the enclosed Mitigation Measures document. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM April 24, 2000. 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 4-8-11B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. The preceding information will assist you in planning for implementation of your project and enable you to exercise your appeal rights more fully, if you choose to do so. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, please call me at(425)430-6588. For the Environmental Review Committee, ((b(� Rebecca Lind Principal Planner cc: Parties of Record • • Enclosure r nsmlettar 1055 South� � Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 65 This oaoer contains 50%recycled material.20%roost consumer CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-99-179,CPA,ECF • APPLICANT: La Pianta Limited Partnership (David Halinen) PROJECT NAME: La Pianta Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: This application requests a Land Use Map Amendment changing 20 acres of this property from Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN) to Residential Options (RO) with R-10 zoning, .92 acres from Residential Multi-family Urban to Convenience Commercial with CC zoning, and .53 acres from Residential Options with R-10 zoning to Convenience Commercial. This property was reviewed last year by the City as part of the Comprehensive Plan review process and at that time a-Land Use Map Amendment and rezone were approved from Residential SingleFamily/ Manufactured Home Park to Residential Options/R-10. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: South of NE 3`d , East of Edmonds Ave. (extended) MITIGATION MEASURES: Development Agreement limiting development as follows: 1. Residential development on the R-10 portion of the site be'limited to 436 dwelling units. 2. The maximum number of attached units on the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 78 organized in buildings of a maximum of 4 units, 3. Total impervious surface on the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 45.04 acres 4. Average daily vehicular trips from,the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 4,172 maximum for residential land uses. • CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-99-179,CPA,ECF APPLICANT: La Pianta Limited Partnership (David Halinen) PROJECT NAME: La Pianta Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: This application requests a Land Use Map Amendment changing 20 acres of this property from Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN) to Residential Options (RO) with R-10 zoning, .92 acres from Residential Multi-family Urban to Convenience Commercial with CC zoning, and .53 acres from Residential Options with R-10 zoning to Convenience Commercial. This property was reviewed last year by the City as part of the Comprehensive Plan review process and at that time a Land Use Map Amendment and rezone were approved from Residential Single Family/Manufactured Home Park to Residential Options/R-10. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: South of NE 3rd , East of Edmonds Ave. (extended) LEAD AGENCY: 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 43.21 C.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 April 24, 2000. 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 4-8-11 B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)- 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: April 7,2000 DATE OF DECISION: April 4, 2000 SIGNATURES: /914 W,l gKZ,/(4 I y�OO Greggrma ,Administrator DATE epartm nt of Planning/Building/Public Works v,76 Id( Jim'Shepherd, A min trafor DATE Community Services 44,1/ „. " !/.:f 4/e0 Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief DATE Renton Fire Department dnsmsig CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-99-179,CPA,ECF APPLICANT: La Pianta Limited Partnership (David Halinen) PROJECT NAME: La Pianta Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: This application requests a Land Use Map Amendment changing 20 acres of this property from Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN) to Residential Options (RO) with R-10 zoning, .92 acres from Residential Multi-family Urban to Convenience Commercial with CC zoning, and .53 acres from Residential Options with R-10 zoning to Convenience Commercial. This property was reviewed last year by the City as part of the Comprehensive Plan review process and at that time a Land Use Map Amendment and rezone were approved from Residential Single Family/ Manufactured Home Park to Residential Options/R-10. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: South of NE 3rd , East of Edmonds Ave. (extended) MITIGATION MEASURES: Development Agreement limiting development as follows: 1. Residential development on the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 436 dwelling units. 2. The maximum number of attached units on the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 78 organized in buildings of a maximum of 4 units, 3. Total impervious surface on the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 45.04 acres 4. Average daily vehicular trips from the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 4,172 maximum for residential land uses. r 'i.. AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Charlotte Ann Kassens first duly sworn on oath states that he/she is the Legal Clerk of the SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL 600 S. Washington Avenue, Kent, Washington 98032 a daily newspaper published seven (7)times a week. Said newspaper is a legal NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL . newspaper of general publication and is now and has been for more than six months DETERMINATION prior to the date of publication, referred to, printed and published in the English language ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE • continually as a daily newspaper in Kent, King County, Washington. The South County The E viiro�en al-i-Review Committee . Journal has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the (ERC)has issued a Determination of Non- f State of Washington for King County. - Signific8 ce-Mitigated for the following pro- • ject under the authority of the Renton The notice in the exact form attached,was published in the South County Municipal Code. - , Journal (and not in supplemental form)which was regularly distributed to the subscribers LA PIANTA REZONE LUA-99-179,CPA,ECF during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a Environmental review for proposed rezone and comprehensive plan amendment. LA PIANT REZONE Location: South of NE 3rd, east of Edmonds Ave.(extended). Appeals of the environmental determina- as published on: 4/7/00 . tion must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM April 24,2000. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of$37.38, $75.00 application fee with: Hearing charged to Acct. No. 8051067. f Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South g Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Legal Number 7405 Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11B. . Additional in)ormation regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton '1 - City Clerk's Office,(425)-430-6510. Published in_theSouth County_Journal -I i April 7,2000.7405 _____ • egal Cler , ty J nal Subscribed and sworn before me on this lay of , 2000 coltou vurfao a • " ,~r 11:17M- A •EAR.�• Notary Public of the State of Washington residing in Renton • o N: PUCL1� o. � King County, Washington ssser4ilO p @6YA ib N%%%%%%� NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON,WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has issued a Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated for the following project under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code. LA PIANTA REZONE LUA-99-179,CPA,ECF Environmental review for proposed rezone and comprehensive plan amendment. Location: South of NE 3rd, east of Edmonds Ave. (extended). Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM April 24, 2000. 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 4-8-11 B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. Publication Date: April 7, 2000 Account No. 51067 dnsmpub.dot H. NOTIIH ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION LA PIANTA REZONE 8 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT LUA-99-179,CPA,R,ECF This application requests a Land Use Map Amendment changing 20 acres of this property from Residential Planned Neighborhood(RPN)to Residential Options(RO)with R-10 zoning,.92 acres from Residential Multi-family Urban to Convenience Commercial with CC zoning,end.53 saes from ! ' Residential Options with R40 zoning to Convenience Commercial.This property was reviewed last year by the City as pad of the Comprehensive Plan review process and at that lime a Land Use Map Amendment end rezone were approved from Residential Single Family!Manufactured Home Park to Residential OptionslR-10.Location:South of NE 3ie,East of Edmonds Ave.(extended). 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 filed In writing on or baton 5:00 PM April 24,2000.Appeals must be filed In writing together with the required S75.00 application fee with:Hearing Examiner,City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 95055.Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 44.11B.Additional Information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office,(425)430.6510. ,91 V� z I 617 • 11 4‘7: ' NIP � ______ , a il 44% 4 A W „..a.'' . ^` .' RA0110 v--��\\j,, R Cc1CC �/ ((SAae�AYGai rocatc Fr;:::■ u ii ii WI r \ 1 I gyp% NDIIHT • I I O//yi I i '.'T'N.----- L I FOR FURTHER INFORMATION,PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON,DEVELOPMENT SEDO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE S WITN HTOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION IPlease Include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file Identification. I CERTIFICATION I, I si. Y{..e D,/34 N Li-) , hereby certify that 3 copies of the above document were posted by me in 3 _conspicuous places on or nearby the described property on . A •py; I ' r �U • Signed: OJ2_.....6 ATTEST: Subcribed-an wo before me,a Nortary Public, in and f r,the State of Washington residing ' a\ on the / 3 day of A,c,C Z. d • MARILYN KAMCHEFF NOTARY PUBLIC _-G0.,y_.." ��i-�� STATE OF WASHINGTON COMMISSION EXPIRES YN KAMCHEFF JUKE 29,2003 MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES:6-29-03 Iv w - STAFF City of Renton REPORT Department of Economic Development, Neighborhoods, Strategic Planning ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE A. BACKGROUND ERC MEETING DATE April 4, 2000 Project Name La Pianta Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Applicant La Pianta Limited Partnership,David Halinen File Number LUA-099-179,CPA,ECF Project Manager Rebecca Lind This application requests a Land Use Map Amendment changing 20 acres of this property from Project Description Residential Planned Neighborhood(RPN)to Residential Options(RO)with R-10 zoning, .92 acres from Residential Multi-family Urban to Convenience Commercial with CC zoning, and .53 acres from Residential Options with R-10 zoning to Convenience Commercial. This property was reviewed last year by the City as part of the Comprehensive Plan review process and at that time a Land Use Map Amendment and rezone were approved from Residential Single Family/Manufactured Home Park to Residential Options/R-10 The existing development agreement that was approved in 1999 is proposed to be amended to limit development in the following ways. a. Development to be restricted to a maximum of 460 units(no change) b. The total impervious surface coverage to be 45 acres as shown in the May 26, 1999 memo from Dodds Engineers (no change) c. Total traffic generation from all land uses to be no greater than 4,402 average daily trips as calculated under the 1997 Institute of Transportation Engineers ITE Manual as shown in the memo from David I Hamlin and Associates received dated February 1,2000. (Increase of 331 daily trips) d. Uses in the Convenience Commercial designation restricted to not allow the category "Transportation Services and Manufactured Home Sales" Project Location South of NE 3rd,East of Edmonds Ave. (extended) Exist. Bldg.Area gsf NA Proposed New Bldg.Area gsf NA Site Area 96 acres Total Building Area gsf NA RECOMMENDATION Staff Recommend that the Environmental Review Committee issue a Determination Non Significance Mitigated April 4, 2000.. B. RECOMMENDATION Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal,the information submitted by the applicant in the revised application,environmental checklist and attached traffic analysis,and on the analysis in the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan February 1993. staff recommends that the Responsible Officials make the following Environmental Determination: City of Renton ED/N/SP Department Envir ''ntal Review Committee Staff Report a LA PIANTA LUA-99-179, CPA,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF APRIL 4,2000 Page2 of 3 DETERMINATION OF DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED. Issue DNS with 14 day Appeal Period. XX Issue DNS-M with 14 day Appeal Period. Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period followed by a 14 day Appeal Period. C. MITIGATION MEASURES Development Agreement limiting development as follows: 1. Residential development on the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 436 dwelling units, 2. The maximum number of attached units on the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 78 organized in buildings of a maximum of 4 units, 3. Total impervious surface on the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 45.04 acres 4. Average daily vehicular trips from the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 4,172 maximum for residential land uses. D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS In compliance with RCW 43.21 C.240,the following project environmental review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. Has the applicant adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to occur in conjunction with the proposed development? 1. Earth Impacts: None at this time. Application is for Comprehensive Plan Designation change and rezone. Site specific review would need to occur at the time a development application is submitted. Mitigation Measures:None 2. Traffic/Transportation Impacts:The theoretical density on the site is calculated at 369 single family units and 18 multi-family units based on the standard city methodology utilizing vacancy,market,sensitive area and public facility discounts.The applicant submitted a preliminary site plan showing how 460 single-family units could be accommodated on the site.The vehicular trip generation with 460 conventional single family units would be 4,402 trips.The preliminary site plan was predicated on vacation of an existing power line easement,which was subsequently denied by Puget Sound Energy. In further correspondence with the City,the applicant(David Halinen via telephone conversation with Gregg Zimmerman,PBPW Administrator)4/3/00)indicated that they would reduce the number of units on the site and still have a viable project with 436 units.With this scenario,traffic generation would reach 4,172 daily trips based on a trip factor of 9.55 trips per unit. This reduction in units is likely to occur because the applicant's request to Puget Sound Energy was denied making less land available for development within the property. A theoretical maximum density of 462 units could be realized with the entire site in RO land use without the development agreement. Up to 50%of these units could be attached units.With a bonus for 100%detached units, 600 units could be realized. The increased trip generation with the maximum development scenario of 600 single-family units would be would be approximately 5,742 trips.The proposed development agreement as amended would be a mitigating factor in reducing the potential impact created by the maximum density on the site. The site was included in a Land Use Study Area Vehicle Trip Generation Report as part of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan in February 1993. Three alternative land uses were analyzed: Office, Single Family R/4 Mix,and Single Family/Education Institution Center for the McMahon Property Study Area(Attachment 3). This study area totals approximately 250 acres including the Mt. Olivet Cemetary,King County shops, office buildings and transfer station and approximately 194 vacant acres. The vacant land was included in the land inventory used in the capacity analysis for the City's 1993 Land Use Element. The potential impacts of traffic for M-4ERC City of Renton ED/N/SP Department Envir. ntal Review Committee Staff Report • LA PIANTA LUA-99-179,CPA,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OFAPRIL 4,2000 Page3 of 3 1150 single family and multi-family units(assuming a 50/50 split in unit types)were analyzed in the FEIS. The proposed Comp Plan/Rezone application represents approximately 96 acres of the study area. Assuming that the capacity analyzed was uniformly distributed within the undeveloped portions of the study area,the subject site would account for 49%of the capacity reviewed in the FEIS, or 564 units. The level of development proposed in the proposed CPA/rezone(with the development agreement)was already accounted for in a review of mixed(50%single family and 50%multifamily)unit types. With the proposed development agreement,the traffic generated by the subject property will not exceed the levels studied in the FEIS for this property. 3. Water The application materials include a storm drainage report prepared for this site,specifically for the Cedar Crest development,a 402 unit manufactured home park with a vested site plan approval on this site. This report included a detailed analysis of drainage and aquifer related issues. This level of analysis exceeds the submittal requirements for non project actions. However the applicants state that the storm drainage analysis already prepared for the Cedar Crest project will be used for a future development proposal on this site,and will be modified as needed to address any future project. Consequently the storm drainage analysis is included as part of this project application. All storm water generated on site is proposed to be infiltrated. Since infiltration of storm water is restricted within APA Zone 1 all of the infiltration facilities for this project are sited within APA Zone 2. Storm drainage will be collected in a tightline conveyance system and directed to the existing water quality/detention/infiltration facility. The storm water will enter a wet pond that will provide water quality enhancement prior to the storm water entering the infiltration pond. The infiltration pond will provide live storage detention to allow the 2, 10 and 100 year/24 hour storm events to be released entirely through infiltration.A downstream analysis is also included in the submittal,which addresses an emergency overflow pipe system to convey storm water that would be discharged in the event of a failure. This pipe discharges into a pond located adjacent to N.E.3rd Street and east of Blaine Ave.NE adjacent to Mount Olivet Cemetery. Storm water from this site enters into a system of pipe running along N.E 31"d and eventually discharge into a system near I-405. The downstream flow path was analyzed by Triad Associates in October 1998, and was reported as operating correctly. Documentation of this analysis is provided in the appendices to the Storm Drainage report for Cedar Crest. In addition,the applicant analyzed potential impervious surface for a conceptual development project. This analysis is presented in the memo from Dodds Engineers dated May 26, 1999. On the basis of this analysis,the applicant is proposing to limit the amount of impervious surface for future development on the site to the same level that was approved for the Cedar Crest Manufactured Home site plan. A cap of 45.04 acres of impervious surface is proposed. 4. Public Facilities Pedestrian Facilities Pedestrian access will be provided to the site along the sidewalk developed as part of the extension of Edmonds Ave. Internal pedestrian circulation would be required of a future development project in compliance with Renton Municipal Code Title IV Section 4-6-060 Street Standards. 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. x Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File. __ Copies of all Review Comments are attached to this report. Environmental Determination Appeal Process Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM April 24,2000. 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 4-8-11 B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. • M-4ERC Apr-03-00 03:43P Law Offices 253 272 98l6 t'.Ue HALINEN LAW OFFICES, P.S. A Professional Service Corporation David L Halincn,P.E. Bellevue Place I Bank of America Bldg. (425)454-8272 daridhalinenla lalinenlaw,com 10500 NE 81h,Suite 1900 Fax(425)646-3467 Bellevue,Washington 98004 April 3, 2000 VIA FAX (AT 425-430-73001 City of Renton Department of Economic Development and Neighborhood Strategic Planning 1055 S. Grady Way, Sixth Floor Renton, Washington 98055 Attn: Rebecca Lind, Principal Planner RE: La Pianta Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments and Rezone (2000) City of Renton File No. LUA 99-179, ECF,R,CPA (00M4 and 00M5) The Applicant's Request That(1)in Relation to the Proposed CC Portion of the Site the Question of Whether Right-in,Right-out Turns Be Permitted from and to NE 3'd Street Be Deferred until the Site Plan Review Process So That it Can Be Considered in Conj unction with a Specific Development Proposal, (2)in Relation to the Proposed CC Portion of the Site Certain Additional Use Categories Be Permitted, (3) Draft Mitigating Measures 2,3 and 4 be Amended to Relate Only to the R-10 Portion of the Site, and (4) Draft Mitigating Measure 5 Be Eliminated Because it Is Redundant Dear Rebecca: As a follow-up to our phone conference earlier this afternoon,I have obtained a copy of your Staff Report to the ERC concerning the La Pianta Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments and Rezone(2000). I make the following comments and requests on behalf of the Applicant. Request That Right-in, Right-out Turns to and From NE 3'd/NE4th Not be Prohibited Your proposed Mitigation Measure 1 would limit access to Edmonds Avenue NE, thus, prohibiting any vehicular access to and from NE 3`d/NE4th Street. The Applicant requests that Mitigating Measure l be revised to instead prohibit left turns to and from NE 3`d/NE4th Street. Let me explain why. First,note that in Section 2 of the Applicant's Project Narrative for the above-referenced CPA and Rezone Requests,the Applicant specifically proposes that,in regard to the proposed CC portion of the site, "vehicular access to and from NE3rd/NE4th Street be limited to right-in, right-out turns only". This limitation, which would prohibit left turns into the CC portion of the site from NE3rd/NE4th Street and left turns onto NE3rd/NE4th Street from that portion of the site, is understandable and acceptable to the Applicant because of the proximity to the Edmond's Avenue intersection and the need for such turns to cross two lanes of traffic. Apr-03-00 03:43P Law Offices 253 272 9876 P_ 03 City of Renton Department of Economic Development and Neighborhood Strategic Planning Attn: Rebecca Lind, Principal Planner April 3, 2000 Paget However, it is far less clear that there is any technical justification for prohibiting right-in, right-out turns from and to NE3rd/NE4th Street. No traffic lanes have to be crossed for such turns. Further, that question is better analyzed in conjunction with a specific project proposal for the CC portion of the site when the details of a proposed driveway location, project traffic volumes and the like are known. Bear in mind that prohibiting right-in, right-out turns from and to NE3rd/NE4th Street may substantially impair development of the proposed CC portion of the site. Because of site grades,the north portion of the site may need to be developed with access from and to NE3rd/NE4th Street and the south portion may need to be developed with access from and to Edmonds Avenue. Imposing a blanket prohibition on right-in, right-out turns from and to NE3rd/NE4th Street may foreclose reasonable development of the north portion of the site without any serious technical analysis of the issue. Request That Certain Additional Categories of CC Uses Not Be Foreclosed Your proposed Mitigation Measure 1 would limit the Uses of the proposed CC.site to the following CC uses specified in Title IV, Section 4-2-0701: Residential, Retail Sales, Office/Meeting Space, Services, and Commercial Accessory Uses. The Applicant's proposal was that all CC uses be permitted except for the uses under the CC zone's "Transportation Services and Manufactured Home Sales" category of uses. The Applicant proposed that limitation to make clear that this property would not be put to a use that could contaminate the aquifer. For that same reason, the Applicant would be willing to have as prohibited uses any of the uses under the CC zone's "Agricultural, Resource Production and Animal Keeping" and "Manufacturing and Industrial" categories. However,there doesn't appear to be any SEPA-based reason as to why any of the other categories of CC uses (i.e., the "Cultural, Entertainment and Recreational" category, the "Public Facilities" category, the "Educational Services" category or the "Miscellaneous Uses and Modifications to Development Standards" category) should be prohibited on the proposed CC portion of the site. Accordingly,I suggest that Mitigation Measure 1 be revised to read as follows(with proposed new text illustrated by underlining and text proposed to be deleted illustrated by strike-through): 1. Uses on the Convenience Commercial sites be limited to the following categories specified in Title IV, Section 4-2-0701: Residential, Cultural, Entertainment and Recreational, Retail Sales, Office/Meeting Space, Services, and—Commercial Accessory Uses,Public Facilities,Educational Services,and Miscellaneous Uses and Modifications to Development Standards and that left-in, left-out vehicular access to Apr••-O3-00 03:44P Law Offices 253 272 98/b F'- U'+ • City of Renton Department of Economic Development and Neighborhood Strategic Planning Attn: Rebecca Lind, Principal Planner April 3, 2000 Page 3 and from NE3rd/NE4th be prohibited in relation to the proposed CC portion of the sit . Request That Draft Mitigating Measures 3 and 4 be Amended to Relate Only to the R-10 Portion of the Site Note that the current Development Agreement relates only to the portion of the property lying east of Edmonds Avenue. That being the case, the current Development Agreement's limitations concerning maximum number of residential units, maximum number of attached units, and maximum impervious surface area relate only to the portion of the property lying east of Edmonds Avenue. With the R-14 to R-10 portion of the rezone requests, all of the subject property lying east of Edmonds Avenue will be zoned R-10. Accordingly, the Applicant requests that your proposed. Mitigating Measures 2, 3 and 4 be amended to read as follows: 2. Residential Development on the R-10 portion of the site shall be limited to 460 dwelling units. 3. The maximum number ofattached units on the R-10 portion of the site shall be limited to 78 organized in buildings of a maximum of 4 units. 4. Total impervious surface on the R-10 portion of the site shall be limited to 45.04 acres. Request That Draft Mitigating Measure 5 Be Eliminated Because it Is Redundant The Applicant hereby requests that your proposed Mitigating Measure 5 be eliminated because it is redundant. The redundancy occurs because, 4,402 average daily vehicle trips are generated by 460 single family residences (which under proposed Mitigating Measure 2 is the maximum number of residences). With Mitigating Measure 2, no reason exists for proposed Mitigating Measure 5. To avoid confusion, Mitigating Measure 5 should be eliminated. . Please advise the ERC of these requests. Phone me if you have any questions. Sincerely, HALINEN LAW OFFICES, P.S. (aA):e:e David L. Ha'nen Apr-03-00 03_44P Law Offices 253 272 Jb/b • City of Renton Department of Economic Development and Neighborhood Strategic Planning Attn: Rebecca Lind, Principal Planner April 3, 2000 Page 4 cc: La Pianta Limited Partnership Attn: Ann Nichols Donald J. Merlino Gregg Zimmerman, P.E., Administrator, City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works(via fax at 425-430-7241) Jana Hanson, Director, City of Renton Development Services Division (via fax at 425-430-7300) ov.nmaoawro 7 r t MT OLIVET CEMETERY AND FUNERAL HOMES March 16, 2000 QITY O„F9R5r:1; Mr. Pete Rosen ' Planning, Building and Public Works MAR 1 6 2000 City of Renton 3555 NE 2nd BUILDING DIVISION Renton, WA 98056 �-- �_.z. m- �a' Dear Mr. Rosen: We understand that the City of Renton may be rezoning some property for which we have an easement running through for the storage, collection and extraction of irrigation water. We trust that any proposed rezone will not affect our ability to collect, store and extract water that is presently on or comes onto this property. My office spoke with you this afternoon regarding an upcoming hearing on the rezoning and was informed that without a project name or LUA number you would be unable to provide us with any information. After a careful search of the area, we were unable to locate a posting on the property in question. Therefore, enclosed is a map indicating the approximate area we understand to be affected by the rezone and we are requesting you provide additional information so that we may respond in a timely fashion. Also, please notify us of the hearing date if it has already been established Sincerely, MT.OLIVET CEMETERY CO.,INC. Tern L. Dumas for James L. Colt JLC/tld enc. Funeral Home, Mausoleum, Crematory and Gardens Box 547 • 100 Blaine Ave. N.E., Renton, WA 98057 • 425-255-0323 Received: 3/16/00 3:56PM; 604 665 7210 -> AMERICAN#MEMIIRIAL; Page 2 16/03 '00 THU 15:45 FAX 604 687 .0 COAST PLAZA SUITE HOTE] Z 002 MRR-16-00 03 ;.39 PM RMERICRN MEMORIRL, r Itll �` 425 255 7691 P. 02 le . \\ ... al =i 0 ii • ♦ :M •■■■w "W 1 g i 1 \ I 3 :we' PN''' '' • \ • 7111S1 - .. Ile, I i i 1 ,,, ' .. 0 •; a \1111111Ittilliti Pil Alb 1... 1 II: 1 NNIN'N'll'%%6•NN Arigi •' . ram.�r— L1 v. 11•••••••••:mr-min.••••ai:�iw r ••�j�� )g II i li \NO, 4I i , lit Ji • : ImIMMIONMEP• . \' I • v 41:1 .. V.• 1 1 \ I 4,,,t, .. . .4 . x. iii - 'I ' i ii9 , - • . • .. t 1 �� •t��-i_. 1w �- • ,e0201trili•L' s o 3 cs I la CS CI • • MAR 1 6 2000 BUILDING DIVISION Received: 3/16/00 3:56PM; 604 685 7210 -> AMERICAN#MEM^RTAL; Page 3 16/00 '00 THU 15:46 FAX 604 68; 0 COAST PLAZA SUITE HOTEI Ll 000 MAR-16-00 03 :40 PM PMERICgN MEMORIRL 425 255 7691 1?li \ . 7.);,:. . '• . .‘k.ii,•., . co,\1,1,4 \. it. : \ 4 s , L . `J J , -•.,..1.,.' • 1 \ 11'\ — 7 , }1` \-, . `i`• \ c•M , • • ... _k\' 1, - A -- ',\ \c4. / ; c • . - . 4, '+. F! • ..... •;fit' • r 's ' k ,, - \ a \ 6 V- \\"'Z'— '11.°' 11; , r ., q t;, , ! • ...PI./ F o 'r. i ,r m /.e ` N ' • k \ - \lk - ...„1:3er. \ . ‘4 \ 16 6*. I--1. p. 641• r I w Q ' I is � F --So . - . 'I �'• ,'' \ �1� ! - II ' \ .i , 0 , ` , . , ` , I ,' 10‘)°''' ..1 \ r , . 1.. ,...:,..;1 0 R aTyo• R roti, . • 1 •�• e I �rt111111111:111° z :' MAR 1 6 2000 � ts •�—. 6 '\ BUILDING DIVISION �""w,� 1 G� ��, `\1/4_,\,...- mo4.o ': 1 I i J iI ry ' �• 1 ,. I ,I PUGET SOUND ENERGY February 17,2000 Ms. Rebecca Lind Project Manager Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RECEIVED Re: LUA-99-179-, ECF, R, CPA FEB 2 2 2000 NE 3`d/NE 4`h and Monroe ECONOMIC DEVELOPME\' NEIGHBORHOODS AND STRATEGIC PLP y,, Dear Ms Lind: I have reviewed the City's determination of non-significance concerning NE 3`d/NE 4th and Monroe development. The developer has contacted PSE concerning relocation of the existing transmission lines within the development and has been referred to our transmission manager. PSE has an existing 55Kv transmission line (Shuffleton) which is currently de-energized and a set of transmission lines (Talbot-Lakeside)which is energized. PSE intends to build a transmission line in the future to replace the Shuffleton line ,the Talbot-Lakeside line is an active circuit. The developer has been told the Shuffleton line can be relocated at his expense. In addition, he would be responsible for relocation costs of the Talbot-Lakeside line. Any future correspondence may be directed to Mr. Steve Botts ,PSE real estate department, P.O. Box 98068, Bellevue, WA 98009-9869 or myself. If you have any questions feel free to Steve at 425-4462-2255 or myself at 206-224-2120. • Sincerely, j.e Ja a Municipal Land Planner P.O. Box 90868,Bellevue,WA 98009 Puget Sound Energy, Inc. • P.O.BOX 90868 • Bellevue,WA 98009-0868 AMENDMENT 00-M-4, LUA-99-179- LA PIANTA DESCRIPTION: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change the Land Use Designation from Residential Planned Neighborhood to Residential Options for approximately 40 acres with a concurrent zoning amendments from R-14 to R-10 to facilitate development of a 100% detached residential project. The proposal includes an amendment to an existing development agreement for the number of vehicle trips per day to be generated from the site and the amount of impervious surface allowed in the combined residential and commercial portions of the proposal. The application also includes a request to change the Land Use Map from Multi- family Infill (RM-I) zoning to Convenience Commercial (CC) zoning for .92 acres and .53 abutting acres from Residential Options/R-10 to Convenience Commercial. The property is located on the south side of NE 3an/4Tx sr on six contiguous vacant parcels. The property also includes a Residential Rural designated portion, at the top of the slope above Maple Valley Highway, which is not included in the application and would remain unchanged. This portion of the site has Resource Conservation zoning. See Attachment A for maps of the zoning proposal. The property owner is a member of the partnership submitting this application. ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. Is a lower density(all Residential Options/R-10) designation appropriate for this site? 2. Should the development agreement be amended to allow an increase in the average daily trips to accommodate more single family detached development? 3. Should the development agreement be amended to require all detached units or to continue to allow limited attached units? 4. Should development of the site include a commercial component? 5. Should increases in the amount of impervious surface be allowed to accommodate the commercial development? RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: 1. The Convenience Commercial Designation along SE 3rd St. is supported with the stipulation that the uses be limited to the following categories specified in Title Iv Section 4-2-070I, Convenience Commercial: Residential, Retail Sales, Office/ Meeting Space, Services, and Commercial Accessory Uses, and that access be limited to Edmonds Ave. NE. 2. The proposed amendment changing 20 acres of Residential Planned Neighborhood (R-14) to Residential Options (R-10) is supported with the condition that the existing development agreement be amended by the City, and stipulate the following: a. Development to be restricted to a maximum of 460 units, M-4lssue\ Page 1 March 1,2000 b. The overall number of flats/attached or townhouse units to be limited to 78 units and the number of units in any building to 4 units, c. The total impervious surface coverage to be 45 acres as shown in the May 26, 1999 memo from Dodds Engineers (Attachment B), d. Total traffic generation from all land uses to be no greater than 4,402 average daily trips as calculated under the 1997 Institute of Transportation Engineers ITE Manual as shown in the memo from David I Hamlin and Associates dated February 1, 2000 (Attachment C), ANALYSIS: Background The site is bordered by N. E. 3rd Street on the north; vacant land, King County shops and transfer station on the east; Maple Valley Highway on the south; vacant land and Mount Olivet Cemetery on the west. The site was originally vested with a 402 unit Senior Manufactured Home Park (Cedar Crest) site plan approval that expired in December 1999. This project was approved at a density of 5.65 dwelling units per acre which was calculated on approximately 71 net acres out of 133 acres gross and included the RC zoned portion of the site. Prior use of the site was for an on site gravel mining operation. The site was recently filled, and retention ponds created in preparation for development of the mobile home park. Access to site is via the extension of Edmonds Ave. N.E. which was developed as part of the phase I approval for the mobile home park. The site is located in both zones 1 and 2 of the Aquifer Protection Area. The property also lies adjacent to the Mt. Olivet Landfill and was used to monitor the landfill site through the City's Mt. Olivet Landfill groundwater sampling program. Two power line easements bisect the site. One runs north/south near the western portion of the site. The other runs diagonally from the southwest corner through the center of the site in a northeasterly direction. Topography at the site consists of steep cut slopes along the north, east and west margins of the mine area. The cut slopes at the margins range from 50%to 75%. This property was reviewed in the 1999 Comprehensive Plan review cycle and a Land Use Map Amendment and rezone were approved subject to a development agreement limiting the extent of development on the site. The development agreement stipulated as follows • Development to be restricted to a maximum of 460 units • The overall number of flats to be limited to 78 units and the number of flats in any building to be limited to 6. • The total impervious surface coverage to be 45 acres as shown in the May 26, 1999 memo from Dodds Engineers. • Total traffic generation from all land used to be not greater than 4,071 average daily trips as calculated under the 1997 Institute of Transportation Engineers ITE Manual as shown in the memo from David I Hamlin and Associates M-4lssue\ Page 2 March 1,2000 • The portion of the property proposed for Residential Planned Neighborhood Designation which is located in Zone 1 of the Aquifer Protection Area shall be limited to 10 dwelling unit per net acre. Project Proposal and Summary of Proposed Changes to the Development Agreement Attachment D • Eliminate the unit mix cap and attached unit cap. • Increase the allowed daily trips by 331 trips by allowing a cap of 4,402 for the R-10 portion of the site, with unlimited trips from the Convenience Commercial portion of the site. • Increase the amount of impervious surface allowed on the Convenience Commercial portion of the site The applicant is proposing an all detached product at this time. The project proponent no longer desires the Residential Planned Neighborhood (R-14) zoning because this zone requires a minimum density of 8 dwelling units per acre which can not be achieved with a 100% detached project. The re-designation to Residential Options/R-10 zoning eliminates this problem since R-10 zoning allows a minimum density of 7 dwelling units be acre, which is feasible with the proposed project concept. However, the proposed amendments to the development agreement do not specify that the project is limited to detached units. The Residential Options/R-10 zoning allows detached and attached housing in a 50/50 mix with attached clusters of up to 4 units in size (LU-41 LU- 54). See Attachment E for a summary of policies. A plat or condominium development would be required. Density could be up to 10 dwelling units per acre or 13 dwelling units per acre if all detached units were developed(Policy LU-51). To give the property owner the maximum flexibility, staff suggests that the unit mix condition in the existing development agreement be retained. This provision should be amended so that the number of attached units would still be capped at 78 flats, townhouses or attached units, however the building size should be reduced to a maximum of 4 units per structure. While the present applicant does not propose any attached units at this time, retaining this stipulation would give the City control over the unit mix should the project concept change or should the property be sold. The existing development agreement also limits the total number of vehicular trips generated by the site for all land uses to 4,071 trips. This is the number of trips that were originally estimated for single family use of the site based on 413 lots for detached housing. The current proposal includes a request to amend the development agreement to allow 4,402 trips for the residential uses—an increase of 331 trips. The original development agreement includes a stipulation limiting the amount of impervious surface on the site to 45.04 acres for all land uses. This level of impervious surface was approved for the site under the original vested site plan. The applicant submitted documentation in 1999 demonstrating that despite the additional units proposed, the impervious surface would actually decrease under the RO/RPN proposal with the development agreement. According to the analysis by Dodds Engineers, May 26, 1999, the project concept could be achieved with a net reduction of 9.14 acres of impervious surface due M-4lssue\ Page 3 March 1,2000 to the smaller building footprints associated with two story detached and attached construction compared with a single story manufactured home. The applicant is still relying on the Dodds Engineers memo of May 26, 1999 with this revised proposal and notes that with 93.52 acres in R-10 zoning, only 48.2 percent of the R-10 portion of the site could be covered with impervious surfaces. The applicant requests that the development agreement be modified to allow additional impervious surface for the proposed commercial portion of the site. The amount of impervious surface is not specified, but the zone allows up to 65% impervious coverage. If a total of 63,162 sq. feet is re-designated to Convenience Commercial, an additional 41,055 sq. ft of impervious surface could theoretically be allowed on the site. The 1999 application materials included a storm drainage report prepared for this site, specifically for the Cedar Crest manufactured home park development. This report includes a detailed analysis of drainage and aquifer related issues The storm drainage analysis already prepared for the Cedar Crest project is still proposed. Consequently the storm drainage analysis is included as part of this project application. All storm water generated on site will be infiltrated. Since infiltration of storm water is restricted within APA Zone 1 all of the infiltration facilities for this project are sited within APA Zone 2. Storm drainage will be collected in a tightline conveyance system and directed to the existing water quality/detention/infiltration facility. The storm water will enter a wet pond that will provide water quality enhancement prior to the storm water entering the infiltration pond. The infiltration pond will provide live storage detention to allow the 2, 10 and 100 year/24 hour storm events to be released entirely through infiltration. A downstream analysis is also included in the submittal which addresses an emergency overflow pipe system to convey storm water that would be discharged in the event of a failure. This pipe discharges into a pond located adjacent to N.E. 3rd Street and east of Blaine Ave. NE adjacent to Mount Olivet Cemetery. Storm water from this site enters into a system of pipe running along N.E 3rd and eventually discharge into a system near I-405. The downstream flow path was analyzed by Triad Associates in October 1998, and was reported as operating correctly. Documentation of this analysis is provided in the appendices to the Storm Drainage report for Cedar Crest Commercial Component A small area at the northwest corner of the site, abutting NE 3rd is zoned Residential Multi- family according to City records. This parcel is .92 acres and would have a capacity of approximately 18 dwelling units per acre if the area were developable. The proposal includes a commercial component for this portion of the property plus addition .53 acres of abutting Residential Options land. The requested Convenience Commercial designation allows small- scale commercial uses up to 5,000 sq. feet such as convenience retail,restaurants, and gas stations. Offices up to 3,000-sq. ft. are allowed. Due to aquifer issues, gas station would not be permitted on this site. The applicant proposes a development agreement excluding the uses in the "Transportation Services and Manufactured Home Sales" category of the CC zone. This restriction would apply to car washes, gasoline service stations and small vehicle service and repair. Staff suggests expanding the restriction to include agricultural resource production and animal keeping, cultural, entertainment and recreation, and manufacturing and industrial uses. This action would still allow a wide range of uses including the following: residential uses at 5 du/acre,retail sales including eating drinking establishments, flower,plant and flora supplies, mini-marts and newsstands, office/meeting spaces, and services including barber, beauty shops, cemetery, laundromats and video rental and sales. M-4lssue\ Page 4 March 1,2000 The proposal also stipulates that turning movements off of NE3rd/4th be limited to right turns in and out of the commercial development. Staff suggests that limiting the access to the commercial uses to Edmonds Ave. NE is preferable to reduce additional turning movements of NE 3rd and 4th CAPACITY ANALYSIS: Residential C component R-10 Entire Site 462 units (50% attached) 600 with bonus (100% detached) Project Concept 460 units 100% detached) BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE The property involved in the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and concurrent re- zone includes regulated steep slopes and the aquifer recharge area Zones 1 and 2. The provisions of Renton's adopted Sensitive Areas Ordinance, which addressed both regulated steep slopes and aquifer issues, would regulate the future development of the property. The Sensitive Areas Ordinance is currently being revised based on best available science methodologies. REVIEW CRITERIA This request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan by providing additional residential capacity and supporting the development of additional detached housing in the City. This request complies with Section 4-9-020G a. of Title IV, Renton Municipal Code, findings the Comprehensive Plan review process. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: Purpose of Land Use Districts Additional building size allowances and density distinguish the Residential Option Designation from the Residential Planned Neighborhood. In other respects the policy direction guiding the RPN and RO designations is similar, and many of the general residential policies apply to both designations. (Objective LU K) The intent of both designations is to create new residential communities incorporating elements of both attached and detached housing,but at a scale and with building types which allow a single family character to be retained. (LU 41,LU-42, LU-43, LU-44, LU-45, LU-46) Mapping Criteria Residential Options policies require compliance with mapping criteria before a parcel can be designated. Policy LU-50. Residential neighborhoods may be considered for the Residential Options Designation if they meet three of the following criteria: a. The area already has a mix of small-scale multi-family units or had long-standing duplex or low density multi-family zoning; M-4lssue\ Page 5 March 1,2000 b. Development patterns are established. c. Vacant lots exist or parcels have redevelopment potential. d. Few new roads or major utility upgrades will be needed with future development. e. The site is located adjacent to a Center designation. The site meets criteria "c," "d" and "e" of policy LU-50. The parcel is vacant, access is already established via Edmond Ave. SE and the parcel is adjacent to the Institution Center. The site also meets all of the mapping criteria for the RPN designation. NE 3ra/4th is a major arterial, the parcel is adjacent to the Institution Center, parcel size is 92 acres, and the site is buffered from single family residential areas. City Goals for Mix of Housing Types The Land Use Element regional growth policies include the goal of maintaining a balance of 50-50 single family and multi-family development in the residential areas outside the Urban Center(LU-4). Changing the land use designation of this parcel could potentially impact the citywide housing mix. If the parcel is re-designated, up to half of those units could become attached unit types. The staff proposal to retain the limit of 78 attached units would mitigate the impact of this change in the worst case. It the project concept of a 100% detached project moves forward the goal of 50-50 single family/multi-family would not be altered. ZONING CONCURRENCY: • Concurrent rezoning to R- 10 is requested. No zoning code amendments are required DECISION CRITERIA FOR CHANGE OF ZONE CLASSIFICATION The proposed amendment meets the review criteria in 4-9-020.G (see section on Review Criteria) The property is potentially classified for the proposed zone being requested pursuant to the policies set for the Comprehensive Plan in that the Residential Options Land Use designation requires concurrent re-zoning to R-10. The following circumstances also apply. i. Although the subject reclassification was considered at the time of the last area land use analysis and area zoning it was not denied at that time. The R-10 alternative was recommended for approval by staff in its initial analysis in 1999. The applicant requested a combination of the R-10 and R-14 zoning and due to the limited terms of the development agreement the City supported the request. Either the r-10 alternative or the combined R-10 /R-14 alternative could have been approved in 1999. CONCLUSION: This proposed amendment would allow development of quality housing at an equivalent density to the original Comprehensive Plan Amendment and development agreement M-4Issue\ Page 6 March 1,2000 approved in 1999. It could allow development of more detached unit types and fee simple homeownership opportunities. If the project concept is altered, the worst case could allow 78 attached units in buildings of up to 4 units. If this scenario were to occur, the traffic generation would be less than with an all detached project. Since townhouses uses have a lower rate of traffic generation. In the worst case, with 100% single family development, traffic generation would increase by 331 trips per day plus the traffic generated by the proposed commercial land use. M-4lssue\ Page 7 March 1,2000 • CARCO THEATRE MAILING LIST COUNTY/CITY NUMBER PERCENTAGE KING COUNTY South King County Renton (outside of City limits) 218 22.5% Renton (inside of City limits) 197. 20.3% Kent 129 13.3% Auburn 37 3.8% Maple Valley 32 3.3% Enumclaw 20 2.1% Federal Way 19 2.0% Des Moines 10 1.0% Other 19 2.0% Sub-Total South King County 681 70.1% East King County Bellevue 49 5.0% Issaquah 18 1.9% Kirkland 12 1.2% Redmond 11 1.1% Mercer Island 10 1.0% Other 13 1.3% Sub-Total East King County 113 11.6% North King County 6 0.6% Seattle South Seattle 113 11.6% Central Seattle 7 0.7% North Seattle 11 1.1% Total Seattle 131 13.5% Total King County 931 95.9% PIERCE COUNTY 27 2.8% SNOHOMISH COUNTY 7 0.7% OTHER WASHINGTON/OREGON 6 0.6% TOTAL 971 100.0% March 30,2000 ATTACHMENT A-1 R_g -` i . 4\-- ' ,. _I r • �I R.R . 1 0 .. . I . 4 to 4 _ .j fr 1 R_g N.- 00 . ..v/ 4 • . . / (,- ,,) R- 14 Figure 1 : Study Area La Pianta 0 300 600 01Y � Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning :: :;;::;:;:::: QO, U.Nagel a ii Proposed RM-I/RM-I to CC/CC 1:3600 U. gel 8NTO 20 December 1999 1 I ,a �� ) ATTACHMENT A-2 �� t ( pl y %'`��,1��r ..�\__ -. P\'�'-_---77-� �.�,�/ /�. ^ .`_ �_.. �- ___•---�_ J `m� / ) W 77 _j‘V-,•1.---- — -Wie-,;--7-if\,, ,,7" \/ _ ri ik„ r----r_-___,. 11 /il - ,i((, 'u ,---�'ti�); .',N\) -� Al,r _ \ll { • - iI ` j ,'t\i/(.1,11'(1,.(fi ,,,,..,,p4-iy ,, f0trAIWO.:\ /} " \-C------Th\> -------mq l'k ''';.---- - �) ?1)\10111..11. /%�-, (i try , �� o r�=-' . -r t' F{j;',A,,. ) \1-1 \�\\\',,� \�-,-/ir(.: I/ ''/- '1 1 •10 r' ..-" _'\ !�"JL+ lln 1. t .�• l l.I' /� .,i 1/,1,ip; :_-!� ,• ` r-;'.lip\ y9-/f)1//9:'' j /1A)TitilrliL4'.-'-''- x-:-.'.-2(1."- '-''' '.--- \ (' hr �'"� ,;,./„.;-_-,;___..,-. .-.... -,-:-.:-: -, , `!��tt I /,•I I,f i;,/L/JI /',1..`'1, r(', t'l ,< \ ' •- t \ 1 ,,t' ..%:-.'ice --_sue` ':, fill lti tfi l� ,; - ,t 1.:r:--..'-\-e 1_ 1 l \ . `n it,ti p" \...- .-fir _,,, ;-,d �`',t .G" - r'f %1;;,''J fl �I) ;l',ilFi j�,.-%` i �, ;/ i`J,_' --=\`�„ '(5` ��® _ --•,1; .-_- "i�i -:% I:,;'f'ry- ',: I t,-K-,.----P•';5i-,'-i.4-,.-r/,-,ii,. --,-.,\AA'- ':5I--'L',',-M;.'-,---.-7-.,'''''7'.2',.'.'.\1‘,N.,,,..'..,..,+-,.--,t,';'\N':---:t N-j-,,'',.-;''\..,,fr_V',t.•..\',-'Jii-„-s'- ,i.,;„,...5'1,V,:.1 I'.l,L'•;,.;t: f,/i :f1:) / rtr i r ^l�s. ,J,'.�\^ ' -{ti ,,' L� J it♦ ® ! rr's-e- ,r fl'),,,,:/t 1, t J ;_ \, ll (t!/t�' �,-�� \\ ®F �'!;f� _ 1,'�Ihi . :, .� Jl/f ! �'!r(/ t >' S' 1{ .N,. •/11)I' f �I ;,` t��' \�R' 0 '`i" -- '.,,,,,i:,,7. >/�l j%i lit Pit\,tj/i l• 4/ ` .'!/",!j)41`_I ,.-;`r/r^"" ��Ad .x l'S ; -~, /! , :i'! t \ \\ v!=- -- .> -‘ f- K \ rE \1,_ ® "_t '.t\ `\ .—+"--�""1 r i,�'. 1i j =>y to/ ..ram'-' +r N\ 1 .,-v ' -._= .'\ �,l\ �/�y/,, ,n s“--1'.'.1 1( ( _..; `^ 1 t ram. • 10 " 0;.., l�4_-i_'.;..-" '�_ ,� •'^-�--r`�,-xN __ r� ''.lr itlrfr •,-, '.\- ''1' �' l;I��l i;,( f. ® `...,111I' ,1 t%�/ ✓.-% ksi'w+ t/ , _ _? rJl - ,JJ//� }fly, /"-V"--1-4.-----r---77::" , --;‘--...\--2-)...7„.\-1,_ 7, +\,l~---_--_- . (` ' ' , • ,` �I1.. ��d�4 fr ,� -jf , iu , : } i "l \' 1 ` „_1...f" sk,, a �� , fvr° � }' �. �`(• t: a �II • tii-r*J- i ,. ,.,...,, ...,... . . �1 ,t/:f lr;t .� f`�: - � ._. ""S'1,..xmu�,.. ,✓�- :I'i' -r.-i / Jr- :- i ifl `- ,t✓i r�i ' ry „,1 ,-1 �. I'c. •��' �r('', ,,,.. �t��: `�`\, f r-J,,y ill .7. I I i\r . '" ( n,\---- -1 \ f. ,------(.4- il 'N,--- Ili, • ..;\ AI,- f• "', t L ,r 1 0 � 1 j .,.-,-/1. / I, ‘-';''''1,',. '...' " , : ,..k:-,,,,.,. „,,, .,.. , • - ---. ( - r _;;;;;" f"). 1 c' I'• '\. I --",', ',',.1.‘\''''‘ `1.,' "-• ,;--,. ;i,:. I , 1, ,,.,_,_,....1,11r'1,;••••.k. . ,• •-,,;,,,,,„„:I••••-..., . -, i/i 2..:• _ /- \ \i L',,,..,��, 1`, i i `\,.1 \ r t- ,�/ LLIic. �i J,I:(I(_- / i •'\, \' , ;\ \,;\,` ;i' '1. ... .:::.. ,-- ;1,) ,.-. ,,,,, i V/r,-,i-r-l‘z\%.,\ ,, „.„,„7,,.., •,,,,,,,,,.:-.....,,,„2,0..,.., \,,,,,,,,,,,...,::„,,,,„ .,„,.,,,,,,,....,,,..„,, 1 i l �"d�,+,.'� \�` .... 75\r .."S lid \ ;\' i • Figure 2: Study Area La Pianta . 5 Meter contour-intervals Gtil O� Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning •• . IDN i �/� Proposed RM-I/RM-I to CC/CC FN,ro 20 December 1999 � x . �$ ' .- � ATTACHMENT A- n `"i'" -a,tr,;,fg1 _. .4* F4 r" W,..:11.••• ' , • ',-.4*. '.. 4- - -4-io-'4',741111 ''''''.....alir 'Il - re'*•4;:r--A`r^"'a 4.-. \ -:-*_....-) -;„ ',At "ri",--"sr‘.1-,:$7ruit.T13-tt, • ISA �.� ... .. 4 e � �, • >`�Asr t •�`Y' �'a•,., ,x;. a1' .''�♦ r} 4`L t\f w• .IN / ,�} 1 t ."z zy,e• • ,h•. W - ra l� r `' "' t \\+ 4' 5,, - • • r �.r rJY,/ •' f• tJ j' • !' fi+''`a''•• "a •.' ,- 4J .i• .44 •:� - ' 1-`L: ♦ .r^�~.. e..�- • , '� r'. c d'+ i. ''fir'Y v ;,,d f "'* y ti r, s \., "i't ptiy� * i 1-7 F• ! 5� , .. f''. S',•..4-a„•::", ,, t t Y • j : ;.ri �r ,Y}' mac,r' ` ' '' :. ' M .I t . ' r isr .rpd +'"'i, 3 'r'�t ft`�'t' j rc�� t , � ,gyp ii ,,•'�,r .S 4 ` • 4' . � uT 11 :6S. I. '�Cz:`3,';.N�. M ,j tr 744`I �.ytt' Jp t '/ f t`t „t 'Or ;/. • �,. .s, �v r, ��' 1 r}.. 4.:1• z x ''' • ''.♦ . ,S',. ..'" 'c ' . is '¢' '4� , • 1a ,, y..tJ� ;I:...,, - ,,,l $v+K y t,• . 5i Y A':JY G�3 r,,9\ >ti•r -2 ,k, ♦ 't - -}3jf t')fN` 5>& -''•`L `1.\.'\�'1� }, • � ' Y A. k `ik � ;, .�nr,"�d-J'-_'' t.Jl }.4 +. .c r ter; •�..1 '' �' 3 ,' 1 A - '.f'/' e,r'•, r v. '"W 4,,,-, '� `t 3a `,�,l.rl' N dc'2�1''�+yj,. VI x t j x '''.'..4- > r 5+ a, s a �h l iV- fix. �� '.`' ''' r•" . • ' vu "r A♦•. •...; , + n ,'" . r,Y•_. ds - t�`' •• .' z' r S`1 s 1 r + ,a x .,` ,-.....00'— . �`. ' "..�ati;.l Y 1 "'. ''t%'r -'r y, •`s.r . � }�jJ � tr+ f r R� ,t •a : { f _ 2/j. v ,g'�,` rE..ts-tr° ^bq 3 a '_ ! .ji »°x If.' > !r o i;�S ; ,,sr 4E.,r .s a i.,• ryq'� ' -r•r+ -, , : ♦,Y L�•.;:s y- `✓' ,,;�., X` Fj f i• -0. + r"'"'" a'yr ,,,„l.,E ..•�,,,4 r r{.• # 4�`•n >• r. I "+'«..i1 ✓4 • Y'. 1 t 'as•' `Z` .. k x'!•- ,kk ",! Noy♦''`S.3*",'`.' • t ' 'i}• f^, r + t r x i.r ! S 'f { , ' 1r,\,y -.,K +„ A�. t er.r +':lcN ' • , r t ';5rf`-4 y sx+.+ r! \ w t has g 1''r . v ` y a - t"'""'"•s a r rr `` \,`. '..-').-,...,--,4 �. .La� ?^^ + ! G-%{'� r r Y- x'"�xY• r ,ark ^. � N •t,. f a .r.i, v.,4 7! ', '� ; } ,..4.r. - -4. 47, ,.. ,......),,,,,,,,...,,„..„,„„, ..., . „.„,...,....., ,,,,,, , ,... .„.., _.4.._. ,...:, ..„ . t -4• ..„.„ r., ,, . .. ,. 'c !. •7 ,,. -' 5', yt' ae , , '{. +'.�rZ" '" +�,, , ,,,,,, '`� v_gyp}.. aT `y ...... .... ,. -' ,..-. -tt ._ 4 `Nr' s i,.•>1.. .4>S 7 .'r•, ..„ y^` 9`.'..#f y '""" e ,'.. �•5r ..;,'�y �e.,x.,.k' t «,•'rµ ,w ! .ry~ ,�4:: ,., r x, / Y F :`ref.� x Stl }� ,+ �it.�r 4 rY....'V+r.�."'rh+t}r+k, `�'\, r^ 1 � ` t,,..« 7'•'�d'"z..R'' ''} 4�� `'`�'. A •�i> x.- • i 3'.` vCy'R`f ''µ s.., i� • ♦ ; • '''' «.�'� . , ,.fit f' t ,°:C» •, ,5 '•,,.r „ , • ^ " .7//i s r ...} r ,S„4 b r \7_•• ; - ♦}y,..3,,.` a .,rs a 5 x.`' '•, ,. ,. ,. • kr I.. y Kir\} A. ti 41%-_ ,, ti .wit -• -'s'+ 'r fit,;`,' ',, k `! ,/ ,.t ti y' a' / . re f, Vit, 4 +,a t1 r\ • ='r fy.+4.`` «:> `t,. y ` �„ y r" dS• ). .. T{ ,jy , •'. ,1 a 1y 5;�\<HZ r r..•`:t' -5„'•k. .r 1g,'. .t y4 it Y.a, r x ♦-♦,�,., .,' ,� _, \ ' +} •i .,} F S t« -... 4" ,• +..y -• �"3 { ,1 #k�'e.\• 7 7��• �`� �•- ''.*-?4,, . t'3'i ' } 4 11 f t e it�"•A 1.r x.•�*`� „S x • t '\ why ' •ttw,. k ,L °�"'4'S MI l f i y x - .« 4'r'4 k 4,40 r, .. l r r. ,,'L d} x lr ' 4 '! E.'.Y +'„-vim.., ti .t', I� '� ( q "`+ti'',1i. .t k S' r 3, *3:41 V.I.".• s*" ' 1`." '''. . : a- a ,,,,,,.. ,R,..,,,..,4414, • 5 a c ,1 �., r t . r n , F i, Y ,.i l`2 f • } r ` 4' 7,t,X'J�t w, ;��/�S p�.y� e• N.Y rY ,y�, s • • /a r a , , R. 'C of t t t y 4° # k \c w < . / f i I f, '}:..r JJ� w:. '� \•, �. 1/2 . a - •_ '• ' ,r / .. . I �t E 3 r r .1 '• of 'F' L \ '".... ,. ' , y i , �� „ s ` z 1.. .�1 {.:+.,sta r•• I ;or i( l� �•+`> �k •ia.3.... �.. . y :`�' sit'� � .' „.-i.e: "}*his'. '{%\ `" . i' h I '°Ta F ,.-41;\. - 94 ' tii I !* A 'r"' s'r ' j41 1. I„� r1' .mt + ; Y...r :7? !„>.t- 7,4 T I .. '3I ,fdl` *J. > •" ,•a � Wit`` a•a :.t " S \. • a ?,. '. '4, y,. ;.f '1a a x i ,o.y', ,..,r3 $'""•N.♦ If , 3"34 'a s " y! 5L .[ p.d "bs it .A 'y H rs. 9f `t { 1 " 'i. ! P t �{� 4'a. Y ;-,} :'+ if � S ! ,^`4,+Y .•' 2"6,*..a'} r+; 33 Y 71, ':, y v. S r ., ,,,. Mypq.. , --- q '1 _ C1'h \ "',. ri, a .si: •i,�-w.'3 t""_;*I r• ,•+..: 4~ 'f k',•-• l '}'Iy r, !T.,, ..♦ .i /„-0: r "t i• c'f 'f - "': l Y ` �' y • i,' r -0 ,e. r.,,Ni...,..,?...,.......... '...,• s.....Y} .. .�i, .. •"'. l t, �f � ' �, '�„' r..s- •a ,� .,.• •'iT'04 "t"' " 3 Figure 3: Study Area La Pianta o 300 600 Gars O� Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning ' Proposed RM-I/Rm-I to CC/CC + • + m,N,sp �� p 1.3600 ,� U.Nagel • �N'TO 20 December in, J _ ATTACHMENT A-4 cA ilh' , , CA RM-I . . I z a) •• Q IN R-10 �, . R_10 0 .R . -I o i . . r---- . ■ I • 1 4 i fra i . IL(P) R-g / A, • R• -8 R-• 10 . / RC RC lir • 6 ;-1; I I I I I I I I IR. 114 COR `• s 41ip�jmil '. :�li , ..._ liar .4, aii, _ Figure 1 : Study Area Cedar Crest Homes ° 0.......................10n GtiTY O Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning • --�— Overall Site 1:6000 ♦®+ EUDN e ��NTO 21 December 1999 r .� Proposed RPN/R-14 to RO/R-10 . • ATTACHMENT A-5 i;' � ..•�`�tj � t «t s�^1'.n �1 t,:.y , .r,.,a. . "':'�, •''' -t1...,_ ,'..t .x»' .443.4, I .. a•t 1? -, J,_ •, c. ,fir• '} ' ,' ' ' ) '};�ri {r jy� :? w ,. 171 � .,a t ��_ys--';t„r .� � �' ( �r«. e� r>mr��, t i t! A"'-'� r�i" '� '•lug r4' id �/J ,5.///' ;{, 't1'� •° fit- Ir..-f� • .., �{ r "1�; � v.t t wi..•tea. ...t� �'i� �.4 ._ti�,`1"riF..�, „��x i t 1 ! `+Y r •,yam ,'J-+x�� t i�al`�' 't�••i.''H' .� '''f.�8 - "'J.JY k y t , 1 ti ... � l 1 r,4 4tt -7 �tt� r� r t -,t,, :s a., ; rt.•j S';r �. t,e t.Jy.S k' S o., Y tE 41 �. °h.Y� vw� �� r y.? ' ;' s ,,�i'3tD i•_'C: T /-?`r • r , u a Y n 5 L '} ; }f« a 1 S 1. ,. wit,. 1 '. S` t w W ? :'� •}.F ''fa F d' `a :: \� •..,44, .I.` ..tc. .r+^� 4' ✓ t� _t,rt it t''?t'�^ ' 'J'.a V r+ � >�,' t ' � �.� `�v'f �. x .i',,, � y� ��.«.'}r+ �)rj'ar-,�'{ t�0.5 c� -•.r r,. ` r �s 1 ty r£ j, 1 g r� . e r ' V gtty 1 /x V 1 v,./4:.:. ,ft r/.9.. ,�' J �% n"i,.• CS �J.1 < 'n +{ + s_. kJ, ... a 'i :. �. ; r1Ni a';. t ' r I 3,, nip' } y r a�-.. rJrt" c 'S ++ ., 1 ,," c ', h l! ♦�r «r7«�+`{ 1• � �T t <� �� t I.I k � •"t. � �Yr.,�. 4 ...� t i -G}., S�1 'kJ "7� C.:' `y rl�5k��^+�]- w'.} +. �,� .��. M1 k� �tti 4��R.}y�'N b ��•�`,if Akf ' t vf"''' `5+n # W IFS Y,,yS.^, f�ir� .'7 Tr'!` 'V # a +.. ,at' 4 it. � . Y...a a Zs '; ` �^ h ,"+•4, •r t .» L-,r r^ ..i tr K '• :; i1 � i t« ' t.j'' 4 ; m... ti '4.s t _ 4.Ott �i 7 -3` I 4 r t ' 'S -.nw.,..• sx xi i-_ .'t — y, pp�..�^L +r+t. '�4 . �R�,�t� L•..',v tt". .�' �hsx{.- -�`S•u1• �w � �� J y 1.,� r A�y�'�: i ��}' ,, �c?r }w•—4:'' '� -t"'�'•5'`' ,_y 4,i�'f::::-_,A.J.�- F t l�., '��,x -; ,e,l. Ld "^«i t�J.y'�t t cl c yT `r •,.. 44.) f a'r tea-. t ''" e 'Y'�r _ �'�t�-l'4i �` s c ' Kt 4qa. � t p,, "`t4 M r A4.7 V. � �a_,,:i.:,.,..1.;,,i!.7..1". .,,m, a 3 'r°r`'.t ^`"'� '."1 a'. � +.z•:r m,..{ ,Nz „� ..a c h,r rr4 ,_5. i Cii �i .tC N4 �,wt $ .Yau.`y" ]+ .,d•� 71 t Ri _j �� iir 1 a.tit+ 't.�+a' �•'' 1- t r. '&. A.. _ `G.1, t`. "+ • { ti" ! .A' ' at � ` f{ �,/�aft ,t„t'it�aa i 1 •� �+, •r�'�, .<�: Wit) ,-i•+"�}�/ F r 1�i c >�:-faw: i• ,c;r+.� t4 114, t 6." SJ' r •t. K ,,A K ','., Y 3' C ' / F • `•-'M r'1��5N.I a 1.1 "� .1 ',� s t:','fi. - 7 •1 i rr " V ct'4-.*0 t..�� . ''.P.:�t' :}t. •i .1Z' : '� F :+l;}}} ` t'� s .,.'! 5,," � crt 1%/- V tik-' a��"'y r1J y• >�..i 'T ',v F ' n t ,- p f '• i . " .• Vj' .• i.t y� e' r .'d. t" a• ''tt.`., dr •.• SC.:: V } t ,� :'i.• 'X1�' ,i o a } Y °`� i r rt�. ,, /'dam }`�JY[►r: c� •a �t t r fi ;,' =ram-¢*> ..d .s.,. ` Ir A 'J Ii t t, r. '+4. 6 , .! .Y- ram, / ' i_�•a tt` a*,'(« ,^¢� ,a .S ' ' �y"tM .r,}S .ri • t�u. I �1`i.-7-:. ..i k � is j!. ,A, 'K+ .d� ,,r.�`y '��y,.. ,•.y •• ��'n`.. +--r, .�,�•% �'.r' � J t �i. :'.1, e ` *r Ir,, . ..,:r. ;, ;..- t `. ' !..)C , ,;L�'C 1t ?::? '`jv � � .r. "'1 r N ?5 i � .47c .j { } h, '" 1..1 / r r� � ',� Yam. , ..J., i I 'r`�, ?:.'� t`✓�ft ,. i"�W�".r�y Ya ,t.rr n h tri � ral, +.:•. • �• ¢ `G / i i Vt rFi t:, �'. �< y e A••4F} ' ; t, r pr.".t ,. S a s •: ;;I, 4Ft •l S� !y1t. . 1: �+�a �,�! '.V ,t• 'I.t �y'X 1 .t .•� � flip,/�.7'<c+�}r� �a�' ",i�".s,.t1/:�• '1�4•t r � 'S _� �+..'�, x'Y��t{}� klYf�' Dti, .0 a .. .. , ': t;,r, vi.,•s � ,V +1; `ik%-"t. Sr•4.}"r �. f'Z•.rism. 'raj'+. r ".rc . .,• }.tj� ,t :#i M , • i �, , rt "...-it.". 1A t �e �q�i�a. '. •• t� � r 47 S � h�•1 �•.,,'-•'Zr.�y aP 3'"�;t y i'.y.`1'� i•ylf ,��y t,9� `�� ? 1. I: r }} .-;- Cli. t t• •� "/ 3, .'�•,�' i€3Yt,'� 1\ , y,.j• `�,,-�,�..+a a+,ya w r S, }� V} 4� .,t 4.i 1 y�„ Y�� `•` .S t .11 ? 4.' 1 " `� 4�_ ti ��kr,�}L 4. Jq��'' �f "N•f++ ` - „,- ,'y,..P >`n "' '.a: ..'t.0+''', • t s .t , , t,� a C? 4 q -z yr„ .� -x ,`.. ' S t.t i tit_a' ,. I. ,t �', k 4. "$r-, 1, i't'„�.tj� f. t '''41 Mc. '. `t M:)�S,yt1,t':':t:.*,.{T s• 1i .t3 k' �.%% . , v r.C "►"'i Yk.Sy `C`.4.Sir t` s ,w v`y Sr•�,4.. i' 1 , t+"i,.• � '" .„, , ,�,•+r.� 'S^%k••:*}+• :r rj ., itiv;� _i- 3,� rill �.S•r..K;`fw, 3' '�� ,. _r 'if S,v'a 'r'# .,re.�7`"a +�is ,, `'#� Jy r }y.),. ,-,-,,,,,pc..!:: t ly•��S /�i•,Y' r' r e't+g' r, ' E � 4 3$.1' , ,} K t '.•i le% J A " ) tom, 5 'C+• rr'ct•i; •,.'.+,,� '•Yi - s, , Fk., £ �Va .. :a {', F at i.0 i } ."` k .. ,}`z" 6,i . ,s t'` =t. #t f3" - ;+• Y,t s s e;, 4.)'} .7,Y ". �r y..eC. 'e .l' c+ f,•t t a �?> t Y'y,' j"•..s,! s ?,: r C. i "`F` 5 }k fir•, 4.f t s%: 1,, T }«.� �` i)i' : wX ',.t iT. x "' !V4•# rd.a 4a,,` 4 �4% e�''. �7`c.1 Rj 4 Y 'i. £ �' -1 t._ s , j`. ,;...w .;Y r'4 f y •S r .Y:. . 4-- +r y> s t ..�- 5. r av .ti e s: �^ � ..�,S t t t �k- #.,tS, I kA' R '"} a� t ,�t ��+`tr,•+` � � � • y i �, ,�, a. k. ', i2 _ : u . :,.. cr, •t : � � +•,t £1• �'" ...1.i t. ��,. Z ''. r4 ... utji�ti � i r,' i �;* ' 1 c \ 4 „•,. 1 ' V. • ..74�,. �,"YF • $ �� :�, 4'`t ° t.'.S r f p. r•. t a Y t 1. "- h f, c d • ,r 't' • i_ �'4 t . �s t .. e,_ L` �,}r a, .fc+ .t S w r ti, t �ti. i.I . r 4\ :.} , i .,\ •^n b • r t,J r '4, ' ,.� t� }E f`y .n rr ' )' � at 1 s t* nq ?,,,*'., fig. ✓ .•,.i 6wrs E, w K '-,. �i „a »:-; r nep`;� ,,: • 0T V t V ''��,,..;i s•K a r.r. r ??. ° ' 3 '1 ' r t7 E ,.' 1 ��' .,r its V }r`;r.14 ,' , ' k; ' .; Vr t 1. 21 n;� i 14.:s?f ilk" .� ' 4 ,.^ r� �. tt;Si: •js 'r fi�, ; 'W}t • 'V" r " �t �i}S J ` .•.y ♦ r y . y r S'�x;h,i 1 . p �, : �Ya r.2 3;' '"'S"'y aTC'tf '4i'+•`r' } '.f • r t i}''-.C /.. ,S - t r,',, y,�y"c L t i 1... S S tir •t f 7 w x ' ,x P ,,'r::: , • v." `% ,4} Y' ,rz.,a. ;Nel -.44(42 aJ a , . te.• f, :-AT z •s s* ' , .•+.r•• J• t .� ,e i Y f� X. V t ,r w � t , . t. fr r, r i« ;,H''0 a''e'', r 1 .r �•::�'` +� 4"r�ia i y •' .* r ti }�� .y i o' r'`a•v %�1 Y,t'TF� ' ' J K w h e� ,.r �, , • <y •ti• r il,t *,K .�-r t 1ji r+ y�a.Vf .v i i'SI,•5 " )Y' V}d�' V w. 41 t t if` at '. } ^ w•V F/ r 'd'' to ..: kr an - tb 1 'w ,. .;• • `tri. > -'� r-.a, 7'i•, ti. .'.'• 3'` t r { i i• ' �„ :',,,,,IC. . b'A' ...^: .} � t {„ r./tt{yr B' �t'j'}h�� 't'�;�'' ,iy�'iru r��r,+li t', LA r 1(F'V t'�7.. a � ! r»f�„ 4,�• n. :^'" 1 r t'i�v-:• i � {� . t. Sft t t c t 41 .rs �� R %—` c e d.e: J ,}AV r +. t Y s. .A .k:t s �' . �, °' t 'Y. •,� „ t!•r-...w. i, Fe ... ---- ••r-{ 1\•v 4 tl .'• .J f'H' C �'f K 'aC�F .7S YY Y §174. «' ` 'O1Yr.•. •:`� Sr e• �' x s,,, wr fh a t e'��r ,.;`� i'a 'i y'k,�±3r,Y, V"f .n YYYT .-,m /'^"n ^nCM, i.:^ 'gyp K"ry® S!®�S {®� ® �p,j�yy.►.... .., leilliff �` .. :. � `•i f. x`F"i , •:y'- S-:`` ti# i.wx i•i�1> `w'vB- .c. � '�I ViiIiojaa �1�, r.E-� �Jt� i. 1 .1. C '.`'+�. t, i,1 s •'''40� .C.J �j,'fliJ1 a,.4,v H� tr, �^, 1 j • i�'ti•1,;',',�5a }Y :r 1.r" .iv, r4 :-.."TL j� 'vr}:#: 't Rz..'ll�p'.41s, + ti ®'�• '..ai�`, Jf '``C~ .�•.r« t Figure 2: Study Area Cedar Crest Homes 0 soo i000 Gti�Y o� ---- Overall Site �::.:.:.:.:.:.:.;:.:. Neighborhoods&Strategic Planning .0. ��/sP 1:6000 U.Nagel �.NTO 21 December 1999 • r ./, Proposed RPN/R-14 to RO/R-10 • i ATTACHMENT A-6 ' =r" • ill �69 r �� w194 - . Vim] I�� Q;� ; �� °g c. c 01,1. ...i 1 o 4'P lif,t_._?' I. 'CS f , r(i ~� ~ II\LI:0- 1\,/P. I I r� ' 0-II ii.,,'' '. ,/ (0 . ',,tiL E 'Ai ,,,,,.„, r ,/ // V. co t\ O \\1�f: iv eoldw j , I / , II . . . ' i if -a\ ) ,,..., c,),-1 (,,,,s* A ._.„-..„......„. __.L.„_____): A.. ii, iii.,klivir„ -,,,,w,_„-: ,,.....:, . il Aworsi) -' , 3111.1100- r.,_41,- .,,,,A „,,,,--.4- .1 L , ),JAI, I •r �t.� io iS gg/ [0 ktr.4 Z.-------- ..f.';;',• •V' . 1 11 IR ti ; k ‘ „-,„ s 411. ri f \,00 - I ; ;."-11 \ / I`' I 1 \ / I M \ \ / ` \IsIsr 'ei11 8lvo«er i a 3 mar Ulf - i, 1 N 8 i 1 w. .E uws MR o 2 DATE =MEEK 1099 COMP PLAN AMENDMENT/REZONE PLAN O v m DE51DRAMM ONED J1 LA P/ANTA °°°°' '�' �� AI11OAfL APPROVED LA PIANTA j%TED PARTNERSHIP eaaso S o,°:, o ( 841"'A„.. a1 r D 2 sonfoot pa oar v, • n PROJECT MANAGER Mu VASAVOTOV NIJO • , , _ . ...___ .... _...._.__ . • • • . • . . . ATTACHMENT A-7 - • • . .,-.,. .1... a . •'-Irrig/""?`z cm 11.31-e--91 i . ',..,'-c _..., ....,...q; . - ,:---,..„--q,',1s;,1r.-..-*,:.-Ay3. V4: ;•\7 •,.'• ' 1: '''..4 . ''''' '. ': tv, . cr. - - •„61:.,.-.'1,-,„, .i -.*-1..1.4-4.. .'....,••.'t .... ....f 7411,1 rin- ;-.-. . V."::.-..-.3 - 3 ' if,;,::m!!1F-lu •Iii "'"V*0411 1 ' :.-4.'...i.N.:i..,... "//:t• •-•_.;;17! ._24Z, '4'1- nit.::' C a ..;---.'041 ' ,, Ch. '`. -..„1..\ 'Z''..-".•‘• .S`. .."--,,in ,__!..yr - • 7-1.1'-_,-- *--c,r;,./ci.:i _ - -,-...ic.-.—.-•••=mas. .. I ..:1 h.,...,. •.....4 . ..;_C7,,.'A .1111... ,_.. .• •• .,j.:.... Zir., i lr‘ftP171,1k1111\3‘Irt".1'4;g ,.:t R (0'if•-•,- •-7:.' '‘:. ,INPI • .r.71-11 :.• . ' ti!:"--: ."-• LI'1.11W'V s i.'n..iiitiuulut L.4.t.o.„1. I i I.1 .%MK-;ettbil"•;:u-JLIZIL, ilIiiki• • \.....:•..:...:41/7"&i,i..ii -- ,...,• --;•ce.,.„. .- .. :7•• ,•,--ei ,:‘ --.0-,.• . a •xt-. • I. Amoy- Arm. vggImpz 411-1 •4:`, e-•_, ...I, ';ft 1 -1.Irliq':: I.r,i`TrS' IV i 411V *,I,;c' in VU--- i:i 11,1111-r,:/•71. 0 711;11 , . trP Irli.,_....rig Lg.;... •,:k-i,L,,,,. •'r• Jk J I 0.1 -.I.A • . Aty. .11 1 -,: I i 3 :, ir, 'i 4 : • !,_lir::: ,,-;,,,-, ,„-Arz ,...-:4... . 7,:ne I. ll NW ?.:,-4>isir, r.,:r....:„.:i 94:10r1.1::-.74 i •--,•..4,.. X -„,,,,• 34 •••/'• •-7'. . ,-. , •• ' ,k...).1::11.-f;•-'-",•=-,le:1r" le- cr--1/.,3i 1 -. jilt. ,mall 33 r'.,v.,,..;......A.\...),%., .a : 7e.,--.....) !i' ''' ....,s..-•'''' • • • :7.... .i•:---- •-• At 46-71 ,,-4 •-•`i 7 - 72 i -- -7'"'"'"' r-zi"...'- .L."'? ,s ,,,• " ' " *---- 4.:,.......:3;4",e_....5-..i#4.,<,,,,,,,. W. .7-1IC i gliglair N.. iii 'n, 14-AL:-`..s.; ..1".;03:,:> N -..-:)' f+C•tir. " I I " • "ill,i,71 ' Pr- — --;•ti,-,•=-,--%•,,ii.. ..,.,.:drit.,;) •,‘1.4.v.- , , ,-.'..,. ,11,-.•?..0-4s, ,,,,,,, uir ;kilo, r:Vi, -,•!•10i,-,'-' ••••.—*--- -4---- I I • P,'XE ,41.•_1.0.,,,,,,..N.'. • ,4r.i .'...•1:- fr,•' '- ',25„_. 1 rw .113 . ire A,43o6 e,444 .42"!,( 1 1 A "-A..:4 4' ''. P4 I ,..,,,•• .. .. .... ...,., •.,..... ,_.,.. . ,, 7' ,,•:;... 4,140 . pp .,.0,. • , ,.....:-.40:.i.b ..,y_ ,,,,,,,,,-• !Eg1414- 0. 4Mrt.t ;Tx :3,:.7-43._. aim/ .,„..;., arl I "•.ii?k,-" 04'''-7 -:-. .-,t ,..0.?• , i RR .„<, iiiirpor,.. 16 .7_-1,. tp. ,._ . r irsrit..... )...!'; 'iy• ,...-.11.1....447x `s.,,,,... Kh.. .L.,,,O 1 imam Ogrit, !...1..,;_,. --4,44ilf ...„...."'=1°"" li I Ilt tililaTi:u,1 • , „ , • • .. ..L .„. _ ...,..„.„_,..... _.... i . ,4__._____ F A .-.. airi•-a*.T.t, • •-•7 .- • .... . ,..). 11,0 lelail.F0,4- -:,, --,. • .aIIP Sr.. ,,.61?"*-•.- SI--r•40P - .,-.041,-• --- / UMW/ i 1 F e• FI° .4t or, X - _e.GA zra.- ii • / _ : ..de. • , L..„... ,„,,,,.„• , . , . / . 1^...• ! '."" RPM e 0 is • el, $ RPM & • -.0 / H , fl T. , . ,Mill••161.1•0!CO - ov, ' / / ,//.....• I CQ•F I 0 I I •t . ; • ci. - 1..7 •I _...6._„--- a Ma .., to:0 // V . •4---- - .., yer_, Ityp Ilar- • . a i ...a....mm r....a. - -44+,6, •- — • , ,„4,t4i,, -1717.e. . I, \ • .i.:.le.:..c,'N-..11,!._ •Wq R-8 .-.-:--- /...`/1/4/4 , ,-1„ 11 171 I 1 ,• r..... 1;• ,- y/ ii U 9 ...— -1-'1=111 ‘• • / /./ •;;;;;;.-••• (\\-t -, ,/,.. am4..usga• astSaa a • 1------..,: ,TZD' I= I • 4 / 14 • • W--r1-; PI i 2—j ' ''''' - '11.1; i 1 • 3.1:1;;, ' .,•rk: I :.-----------.-_- -,:ri:- All -1-•20/7 • : . • NEIGFUIORHOOD DETAL MAP • = 1 ,... , L-P . ••• , / : LP .„ ":=-:-----------------:'------------.---z----'—---- I/ S3JECT PFIOPERTY i • .... .4 . ..,„,_ . 1. I, ;40,-:-It.,-;-.=_-..-•+,-,.----r- .2,- it, . --:-.4--:--t: - ____.4(1' • ,. // ....,.. '.\:•••,..„......:-....-ii. .,.......,,,A1211Acres 1 1./ •/ ; "....1 '....---- \--) \ I // .... • t' • i // // / t• .. 'Ai' : ti• .... RC ',.•, . , • I '.: ',/------.4, :40° -- ' '''4 . ,II , • „ • • • .. .... ) • R-8 i ,".••• ....,- ....--' I • : • ':,. .. .. 1 , a ,:\ , ,....,...„..,...:-......„ „....:,::. • ,of • '... 1 11 . • N 1 14 ,,. tA:1\.\ • s'',,,,,,,,, RC I - - 1 1 . . , - 11.1,_\-`1 ,,„ --- ..-4> .4,. I • 1 70 ...0"---IN € v . 6.0.1.02 ; ‘.3.-- ...„_-_....it•h•-2:::::,-; 6.6.--..N.6.N.:;.-.r.:am„.:1:41.1.,,z,-,.1:„:„....,:-.,,_zif.4„, .#4,_ —— .-. "tY16 f-f ..744, ' ''' !Iir "4".;•i- , „ . - ,0-• `-\.. , —...-• •,., •• , -.-- •••`*„:•;,rre• .,4„. 5.6,‘ -\ ..4 • Af-,---ti-_,-„,„-,,„,...„...„,,A.--„000,,,„---,...._ - N.,.,. 4)4,4;...,;'.7' .Iiiiii.9'77:7-... --,,...:4",--= --xr ) ' -. *,-.„, '7. COR . I \---..._-__,--, -__:--:--_,;%.:,'..-i•direir***a41/14, 4,,>•• ' i2V..*• Alltget%ibrit. .4,..i4, ..-4.fi'. x' 7 1.' 4/P Liu.?..-- -,,--•••• '411 elot '" "kw.'" 00' • l'q'' 44/_•,/,. 'ti-!lir'''. ei, ?°*tb• '.. ..-.z. ' z '' -, e• .4** 4:::::::: 1 D IV:tte,;(Y'':.......... \.6' ' N:744.,,,'-'-,72"*44Ce.4-11. :',s;:4> ..,-.._,.'•• ,‘,/....,-.. • .....-.,, ,,,,, , ....• 1 .--. Lill 1.:.V. \ \I\.....,.::''''''''''''''''''' "-.,741i/P.. .41411'.: •...: ''',33r%'t. .. .N..,,,..— .,44,-;,i,..... :.:-.-iiiiii4 „.44;:s' e.01,1 • ‘ •44';‘,',erri,•-;•,.. i . ____ ..........---- waiNEE.,....„„ii; .- . 4.,•;---,-. "4,4-i(49......:1 !:;,..--••••L.I.,;.,,„a-1,::-:,........,-,?4-4 .- u'Illftofer: • 1 \ 1 \ -•-;'„'' .•..t• -- `1"--i .-- : • '''..... -.1,,,,,,:14,- ''..''')>%,, ._ . a , -- . ,-44..., mil 1.410.1.mt. A % '..,''', 're ••C.4.....r ! asaos •...,,,\ i 6.6.ua 6 ,..,... •-if;Or'.,- '-' •,•• •.,.. .4, •-- , sr .14,.. „,, . . \ , \\ 10711aus • '44 ..t...N• 'hi.' - ...›• 44,;-_,, ,,..,.. NA. 0 4 1•A ..:.* i , \ , 1 .,. . i . •` ''' ' '• •• . . . , , . . • • t ' DODDS ENGI • �".. • OF RENTON = = MAY 271999 MEMO BUILDING DIVISION Date: May 26, 1999 • DEI Project No. 99015 To: David Halinen From: Craig Krueger Re: La Pianta Comp Plan Amendment/Rezone •. Impervious Surface Calculations Attached you will find the detention calculations prepared by another consultant for Basins 1 and 2 for the approved Cedar Crest development (402 manufactured homes). • 'For the purposes of this analysis, we have assumed that many of the impervious surface • calculations will be cgrhsistent for the proposed mixed use plan since the road pattern, road width, water quality ponds, etc. will remain very similar to the Cedar Crest layout. The areas that will change are 1) the "impervious areas on lots" and 2) the RV Storage Area, which is being deleted from the development. Below you will find a comparison of the "impervious area on lots" for the two basins which compares the assumptions made for Cedar Crest against the mixed use proposal with townhouses, carriage flats, and single family homes. You will note that, while the mixed use proposal calls for an increase in the number of units, the size of the footprints for the townhouses, carriage flats and alley homes are much smaller than the 2876 square feet assumed for the manufactured homes. Basin #1 Comparison of impervious area on lots. Approved plan 2876 sf x 209 lots= 13.80 ac. Proposed Concept Village A 101 TH x 1700 sf/TH= 3.94 ac. Village B 82 TH x 1700 sf/TH= 4.96 ac. 78 carriage flats x 980sf/DU 1400 if of 20' wide alley= 0.64 ac. Total = 9.54 ac. Planning•Engineering•Surveying 4205-148th Avenue NE Suite 200 Bellevue,Washington 98007 • • Te142S,8$5447 f 42S.B85L�Q6 . ,�, . 99015L#l.doc • 5/27/99 Mr.Dave Haline -T-Pg: 2 - _ • Additional reduction in impervious area ; • RV storage area deleted= 1.94 ac rTh Basin #2 Comparison of impervious are on lots Approved plan 2876 sf x 2001ots= 13.20 ac. Proposed concept Village C 46 SFD @ 2876/DU= 3.10 ac. Village D 76 trad. @ 2000/DU= 6.63 ac. 76 alley @ 1800/DU Alleys @ 12001f x 20'wide= 0.55 Total= - 10.28 ac. Total impervious area for approved plan 45.04 ac. Total impervious area for proposed plan 35.90 ac. Net reduction 9.14 ac. Net %reduction ±20% DETENTION CAI ' ATIONS -_ - - JL Basin#1, as shown on the Pipe Tributary Area Exhibit in the Appendix, includes the on-site developed .� areas-of-'Phases°1 and 2 of the project as well as the full width of Edmonds Avenue from N E.3ie Street to 4 l • the Plat of La Colina. The specific areas,which were included in the facility sizing calculations, have been summarized in the table below. The table shows the areas calculated for each of the different land covers in the developed condition for the areas tributary to Pond A, the Basin #1 conveyance system, and the Emergency Overflow Pipe. SUMMARY OF AREAS USED IN CALCULATIONS --Location - - - - Impervious Pervious Pond A Basin#1 Overflow Area Area Sizing Convey- Pipe - (acres) (acres) ance Sizing CN=98 CN=68 System . Sizinat Interior Roads&Sidewalk 7.32 1 X X I X Impervious Area on Lots(2.876 s.fJlot'209 lots) 13.80 X X X Edmonds Avenue(On-Site) 1.54 X X. X Edmonds Avenue(Off-site) 0.26 X X X R.V.Storage Area 1.94 1.45 X X X Community Center 0.67 0.41 X X X Detention/Infiltration Pond A (incl.surrounding area) 3.68 X X Water Quality Pond A 0.44 X _X Detention/Infiltration Pond B(Incl.in Basin#2 area) • 0.61 X Basin#1 Pervious Areas(Lots,landscaping,etc.) 18.65 X X X Bypass Area(Slope in N.E.corner of site) 4.30 X Bypass Area(Depression area in N.W.corner of site) 1.47 Off-site Tributary Area(Area along east property line) 3.01 X Basin#2 Areas(Includes Pond C and off-site trib.areas) 19.07 21.24 X Acreage Totals 50.16 I ,4157 97.78_ Total Impervious 1 25.97 22.92 C45.04 X Total Pervious 24.19 I 18 5 52.74 Existing Conditions Tributary Area: 50.16 Ac.(area tributary to Pond A)-0.26 Ac.(Edmonds Ave.off-site) +0.6IAc.(Pond B)+4.30 Ac.(N.E.slope bypass area)=54.81 Ac. The totals for this column represent the areas used in the hydrograph flow calculations. For the R.V.Storage and Community Center areas(Impervious: 1.94+0.67=2.61,Pervious: 1.45+0.41 = 1.86),which are also marked with an"X" in this column,the flows were calculated using the Rational Method. The detention calculations were performed using Engenious Systems Inc.'s hydrology program Water Works. Hydrographs were developed using S.B.U.H. methodology with a King County Type I-A (User 1) 24-hour rainfall distribution. Separate S.C.S. curve numbers were used for the impervious and pervious portions of the site. Using the onsite existing condition hydrographs, the allowable release rates were determined for the site in accordance with City of Renton standards. Developed condition hydrographs were then generated for the bypass areas in order to verify that the developed bypass flows did not exceed the pre-developed peak runoff rates for each of the 2, 10,and 100-year,24-hour storm events. STORM DRAINAGE REPORT FOR CEDAR CREST-Page 7 Phases 1 & 2 • ---..-:...-2,-. -- _____.-7.- - - --vim i.%:.:a3c..z-. .:------m.... Zr -....r,. DETENTION kLCULATIONS - . _ - Basin #2, as shown on the Pipe Tributary Area Exhibit in the Appendix, includes the on-site developed • , areas of Phases 3 and 4 of the project..as-well as the approximately 4-acre future park area in the southwest - -� corner of the site. The specific areas, which were included in the facility sizing calculations, have been f. summarized in the table below. The table shows the areas calculated for each of the different land covers in the developed condition for the areas tributary to Pond C, the Basin #2 conveyance system, and the Emergency Overflow Pipe. SUMMARY OF AREAS USED IN CALCULATIONS Location Impervious Pervious Pond C Basin#2 Overflow Area Area Sizing Convey- Pipe (acres) (acres) ance Sizing CN=98 CN=68 System Sizings Interior Roads&Sidewalk 5.35 I I X X X Impervious Area on Lots(2,876 s.f./lot*200 lots) 13.20 I X X X • Basin#2 Pervious Areas(Lots,landscaping,etc.) I 13.88 I X X X Detention/Infiltration Pond C(Incl.surrounding area) 1.85 X X Water Quality Pond C 0.52 X X Detention/Infiltration Pond B I 0.61 - I X X Pervious Future Park Area(S.W.corner of basin) 3.95 X X X Off-site Bypass Area(Along northern basin boundary) 0.95 X Basin#1 Areas(Intl.bypass and off-site tributary areas) 25.97 31.50 . X Acreage Totals g 39.36 32^43,. ._ 97.78 Total Impervious 19.07 . 1855 65.04j— • Total Pervious 20.29 13.88 52.74 Existing Conditions Tributary Area: 39.36 Ac.(area tributary to Pond C) - 0.61 Ac.(detention/infiltration Pond B) 38.75 Ac. I The totals for this column represent the areas used in the hydrograph flow calculations. For the Future Park area,which is also marked with an"X"in this column,the flows were calculated using the Rational Method. The detention calculations were performed using Engenious Systems Inc.'s hydrology program Water Works. Hydrographs were developed using S.B.U.H. methodology with a King County Type I-A(User 1) 24-hour rainfall distribution. Separate S.C.S. curve numbers were used for the impervious and pervious portions of the site. Using the onsite existing condition hydrographs, the allowable release rates were determined for the site in accordance with City of Renton standards. Developed condition hydrographs were then generated for the bypass areas in order to verify that the developed bypass flows did not exceed the pre-developed peak runoff rates for each of the 2, 10, and 100-year, 24-hour storm events. This analysis can be found in the Cedar Crest—Phases I & II—Storm Drainage Report. STORM DRAINAGE REPORT FOR CEDAR CREST—Page 7 Phases 3 &4 • ATTACHMENT C TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM CEDAR CREST REZONE RENTON, WASHINGTON • Revised February 1, 2000 DAVID I. HAMLIN AND ASSOCIATES 1319 DEXTER AVENUE NORTH, SUITE 270 SEAlTLE, WASHINGTON 98109 (206) 285-9035 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM February 1, 2000 TO: Dave Halinen, Halinen Law Offices FROM: Geri Reinart, P.E., David I. Hamlin & Associates SUBJECT: Proposed Rezone of the Cedar Crest Site (Southeast Quadrant of the Intersection of NE 3'd/4t Street and Edmonds Avenue) (Revised) BACKGROUND/PROJECT DESCRIPTION The purpose of this memorandum is to briefly summarize the trip generation/assignment and the potential traffic impacts associated with the proposed rezone of the Cedar Crest site. The property was the subject of a previous traffic impact analysis for a senior manufactured housing development back in 1994. The proposed rezone would allow the potential development of up.to 460 single-family lots on the site. The change in zoning and eventual site development would result in traffic impacts beyond those summarized in the 1994 development proposal. It is my understanding that further traffic analysis associated with the development of this site would occur as part of the subdivision process. The information contained herein is intended to summarize, for use in the rezone's SEPA checklist, the potential impacts associated with development under the proposed rezone, including the trip generation/assignment and a level of service analysis of critical intersections impacted by development of up to 460 lots. The subject property is located south of NE 3'd/4t Street and east of Edmonds Avenue. Edmonds Avenue was recently extended south from NE 3`d/4`11 Street as part of the development of the La Colina subdivision. The Edmonds Avenue extension would serve as the sole public access to the subject property. (An emergency vehicle access road connecting to La Colina and its roadway connection to Cedar Crest will provide a secondary emergency access.) The property is currently undeveloped, and was previously used as a gravel mine. ROADWAY SYSTEM Adjacent roadways in the vicinity of the site include the following: 1 • NE 3'd/41h Street is an east-west arterial consisting of two lanes in each direction plus left-turn storage. Curbs, gutters, and street lights have been installed on both sides of the street, with sidewalk on the north side. In the vicinity of the site, NE 3'1/4'h Street is characterized by a sloping vertical curve that also includes some horizontal curvature. Traffic signals have been installed along NE 3'd/4`h Street at major intersections including Sunset Blvd., Bronson Way, Edmonds Avenue, Jefferson Avenue, and Monroe Avenue. The posted speed limit is 35 mph and the adjacent land uses are a mix of commercial, residential, and educational uses. • Edmonds Avenue is a two lane north-south street that has recently been extended south from NE 3'd/4'h Street as part of the site access for the adjacent La Colina subdivision. Edmonds Avenue, north of NE 3rd/4'h Street, is striped for two lanes, curb and gutter have been installed on both sides of the street, and sidewalk exists on the west side of the street. The adjacent land use is multi-family residential between NE 3rd Street and NE-46 Street, transitioning to single-family residential further to the north. TRIP GENERATION/ASSIGNMENT The ITE Trip Generation Manual (published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, 6th Edition, 1997) has been used to estimate the number of trips that can be expected to be generated by a development of this type. ITE Land Use Code 210, Single Family Detached Housing, was chosen as the appropriate trip rate for use in this assessment. Table 1 shows the trip generation for the proposed rezone using the average trip rates. 2 • TABLE 1 ESTIMATED TRIP GENERATION CEDAR CREST REZONE (460 LOTS) TIME PERIOD TRIP RATE TOTAL TRIPS Daily 9.57 4402 AM Peak Hour In 86 Out 259 Total .75 345 PM Peak Hour In 298 Out 167 Total 1.01 465 The trip generation values shown in Table 1 indicate that the proposed development of the Cedar Crest site with 460 single-family homes could generate more traffic than the amount generated under the previous development scenario, although specific trip generation based on the ultimate site development plan may result in slightly lower trip generation. The estimated trip distribution/assignment for the rezone has been shown on Figures 1, 2, and 3. Figure 1 shows the estimated trip distribution for the site by percent and daily volume. This distribution is based on data used in the previous development proposal for the subject property, which was based on information provided by the City of Renton (i.e., traffic counts and land use data). It is expected that the majority of the site traffic would be distributed to and from the west where access to the regional transportation facilities is available and the majority of employment and activity centers are located. As a result of this, the project will have its greatest off-site impact on the intersection of NE 3'd/4h Street and Sunset Boulevard (326 PM peak hour trips), after its initial impact at the intersection of NE 3rd/41 Street and Edmonds Avenue. Somewhat lesser impacts at the intersections of NE 4th Street and Monroe Avenue (116 PM peak hour trips) and Edmonds Avenue and Sunset Boulevard (23 PM peak hour trips) will occur. 3 • TRAFFIC VOLUMES AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts for the year 1999 were acquired from the City of Renton for use in this study. Counts were available for the intersections of NE 3'd/4t1 Street and Edmonds Avenue, NE 3'd Street and Sunset Blvd., NE 4th Street and Monroe Avenue, and Sunset Avenue and Edmonds Avenue. These counts are summarized on Figures 4 and 4A. The 19 98 daily traffic volumes along arterials in the vicinity are also shown on Figure 4. Figures 5 and 6 show the projected future daily and PM peak hour traffic volumes with and without the development. The year 2004 has been used as the expected year when the project site could be built out. The volumes on Figure 5 have been estimated using a 2% annual background traffic.growth rate, plus the trips associated with the La Colina subdivision added into these volumes. The volumes on Figure 6 include the PM peak hour site development trips. Figures 5A and 6A show the AM peak hour traffic volumes for these future-conditions. LEVEL OF SERVICE The following intersections in the area were analyzed with respect to level of service for the proposed rezone. NE 31d/4t Street and Edmonds Avenue NE 3't Street and Sunset Boulevard NE 4th Street and Monroe Avenue Edmonds Avenue and Sunset Boulevard "Level of service" is a common term used in the Traffic Engineering profession that is defined as a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic stream, and its perception by motorists and/or passengers. These conditions are usually described in terms of such factors as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience, and safety. Six levels of service are designated, ranging from "A" to "F", with level of service "A" representing the best operating conditions and level of service "F" the worst. The actual capacity of an intersection is generally considered to be at the lower end of level of service "E" and most agencies strive to maintain a roadway network that will not drop below this level of operation, except perhaps during unusual periods such as holiday shopping, sporting events, etc. Calculations for the level of service analyses were conducted using the McTrans Highway Capacity Software version 2.if based on the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual. AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts provided by the City of Renton were used in the 4 • analysis of the existing conditions. The future conditions were estimated using a 2% annual background traffic growth factor, plus adding-in the trips associated with the adjacent La Colina subdivision, which is currently under development. All of the intersections analyzed are controlled by traffic signals. The lane configuration and signal operation at the intersection of NE 314/4t Street and Edmonds Avenue were modified slightly for the analysis of the future conditions to reflect changes associated with the La Colina development. . The following table shows levels of service for the existing and future conditions. The expected build-out of the project is 2004. TABLE 1 PEAK HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICE LEVEL OF SERVICE (DELAY) PEAK 2004 W/OUT 2004 WITH LOCATION HOUR EXISTING PROTECT PROJECT NE 3"/4h Street and AM EB _B ( 6 sec.) B ( 6 sec.) B (9 sec.) Edmonds Avenue WB — B (7 sec.) B ( 7 sec.) B (11 sec.) NB — C (20 sec.) C (24 sec.) D (33 sec.) SB — C (21 sec.) C (21 sec.) C (19 sec.) OVERALL — B ( 7 sec.) B ( 9 sec.) B (14 sec.) PM EB — B (7sec.) B (10sec.) B (12sec.) WB — B ( 6sec.) B ( 7sec.) B (9sec.) NB — C (20 sec.) C (19 sec.) D (26 sec.) SB — C (20 sec.) C (19 sec.) C (19 sec.) OVERALL — B ( 7 sec.) B ( 9 sec.) B (13 sec.) NE 3'd Street and AM EB -D (29 sec.) D (30 sec.) D (31 sec.) Sunset Blvd. WB — C (24 sec.) D (29 sec.) D (39 sec.) NB — C (16 sec.) C (17 sec.) C (17 sec.) SB — C (25 sec.) D (26 sec.) D (27 sec.) OVERALL — C (22 sec.) C (25 sec.) D (28 sec.) PM EB — D (30 sec.) D (36 sec.) D (37 sec.) WB — D (34 sec.) D (34 sec.) D (40 sec.) NB — B (15 sec.) C (19 sec.) C (20 sec.) SB — D (30 sec.) D (28 sec.) D (33 sec.) OVERALL — D (28 sec.) D (29 sec.) D (33 sec.) 5 TABLE 1 (con't.) PEAK HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICE LEVEL OF SERVICE (DELAY) PEAK 2005 W/OUT 2005 WITH . LOCATION HOUR EXISTING PROJECT PROJECT NE 4th Street and AM EB - B (15 sec.) C (17 sec.) C (18 sec.) Monroe Avenue WB - D (39 sec.) E (48 sec.) E (52 sec.) NB - D (27 sec.) D (29 sec.) D (29 sec.) SB -D (25 sec.) D (28 sec.). D (28 sec.) OVERALL - D (31 sec.) D (36 sec.) D (38 sec.) PM _ EB - B (14 sec.) C (15 sec.) C (16 sec.) WB - C (19 sec.) C (20 sec.) C (22 sec.) NB - C (25 sec.) D (25 sec.) D (25 sec.) SB - C (24 sec.) C (24 sec.) C (25 sec.) OVERALL - C (18 sec.) C (19 sec.) C (19 sec.) Sunset Blvd. and AM EB - B ( 9 sec.) B ( 9 sec.) B (9 sec.) Edmonds Avenue WB - B (13 sec.) B (14 sec.) B (14 sec.) NB - B (14 sec.) B (14 sec.) B (14 sec.) SB -B (14 sec.) B (14 sec.) B (14 sec.) OVERALL - B (12 sec.) B (12 sec.) B (12 sec.) PM EB = B (11 sec.) B (12 sec.) B (12 sec.) WB - B (15 sec.) C (15 sec.) C (15 sec.) NB - C (16 sec.) C (16 sec.) C (16 sec.) SB - C (16 sec.) C (16 sec.) C (16 sec.) OVERALL - B (13 sec.) B (13 sec.) C (13 sec.) Where: LOS Delay A < 5 seconds B > 5 & < 15 seconds C >15 & < 25 seconds D >25 & < 40 seconds E >40 & < 60 seconds F >60 seconds The results of the capacity analyses for the existing and future conditions indicate that all of the intersections are currently operating at an overall level of service "D" or better, and will continue to do so in the future, with or without development impacts 6 • associated with the development of 460 single-family homes on the subject property. There will be some increased delay at these intersections as volumes increase over the next four to five years, and some intersection movements may drop below level of service "D"; however, the overall intersection level of service would not be expected to drop below the "D" range. IMPACTS A 460-lot development of the Cedar Crest site could potentially generate just over 4400 trips per day, 345 of which would occur during the AM peak hour and 465 during the PM peak hour. The majority of these trips are expected to travel on NE 3'd/4th Street, primarily to and from the west where the majority of the employment and activity centers are located. All of the site trips will initially travel through the intersection of NE 3rd/4`h Street and Edmonds Avenue before dispersing to the east, west or north. This intersection is currently being modified to serve the La.Colina subdivision, which is currently under development. The intersection modifications at NE 3'1/4th Street and Edmonds Avenue should adequately handle the additional traffic associated with the rezone and development of the Cedar Crest site. Beyond the intersection of NE 3'1/4th Street and Edmonds Avenue, the intersection of NE 3"' Street and Sunset Blvd. would be the impacted the most by the development of the site. This intersection has essentially been upgraded to its ultimate configuration and is able to handle a considerable volume of traffic. Development activity under the proposed rezone would constitute an increase in PM peak hour traffic volumes through this intersection by about 7.5%. The capacity analyses completed for this summary indicate that the intersection would be able to absorb this additional volume (plus annual increases of 2%) and still operate at level of service "D". Lesser site development impacts are expected on Edmonds Avenue and NE 3n/4th Street to the east of Edmonds Avenue. Both of these intersections are expected to operate at level of service "D" or better. Based on this initial assessment of the proposed rezone for the Cedar Crest site, and its potential development activity, no off-site mitigation measures should be needed. 7 NORTH 0" TNq? NE 12TH ST NE 10TH ST W !I •' 2 � ¢O C/)1 0 o w (20%) / NE•4TH ST 880 c3R 5 1 ..� (2 ) 4—� �—► (5%a (20%) (10%) 22 i S 2ND ST (70 S 3RD ST 41) PROJECT SITE ESTIMATED DAILY TRIP DISTRIBUTION DAVID I. HAMLIN &ASSOCIATES FIGURE 1 • CEDAR CREST REZONE PAGE F-1 • , . _... , A • NORTH (..... 13 ' \ ►4 .Jo ei c� NE 12TH ST 1! . 013 4 4IP J NE 10TH ST 1 Li 4 26 52 `� Z r/ W 13 IP }13 1,, 26 ¢ > + Z 9 (.-- 522 17 z 4� ow 4 La 1 ¢ 29 6 • o ce oo 9 51�7 26 i/ w 78V( / t 0 E 4TH ST 0 5 ' N4.'5 f 65 --t 1 4 */ 40 22 18 52 9 26 181 60 j13 S2NDST 22 4 S 3RD 5T /r/ 18 52 65 PROJECT SITE It 181 4 65 4p4F(. 60 r y�Y 2 ESTIMATED AM PEAK HOUR TRIP ASSIGNMENT DAVID I. HAMLIN &ASSOCIATES ' FIGURE 2 CEDAR CREST REZONE PAGE • F-2 i • . , ._ A NORTH 8 Th15 .te 15 8 �i NE 12TH ST J 7 • •IIII! 4 NE 10TH ST I 34 1 z }17 w h8 115 gw 17z3 60 oN r 15 w > 29 z o a 30 17 9 o ec z 33 60 w ) w z 5 33 6, i ��'S�V�42 „NE 4Tr ST 0 44 74 59 34 30 17 8 15 � 1i09 Jg S 2ND ST 74 S 3RD ST f 15 42 PROJECT SITE 59 34 117 18 15 42 4p44,1, 09 74 y�r ESTIMATED PM PEAK HOUR TRIP ASSIGNMENT DAVID I. HAMLIN Sc ASSOCIATES . FIGURE 3 CEDAR CREST REZONE PAGE F-3 ® 159 � f/ NORTH 4800045:00 PM 79+39 11 41 710 747 (---1543 08.�►89 123 • + 1 1346 114 973 26 209 250 870 28 47 24+21 1042 469 // /gg 402 579 73 48(70 25:00 PM 364 61+472 935 ..f) 0; 67 NE 12TH 5T A w 21700 „4111 �� • . NE 10TH ST w 2400 i- 1 z w w w c > z w Q N > o w cc 0 re z j l 0 0 9100 Z 35400 w 900 M z .. '� E 426 ST N�,��V 2600 19700 4 32700 23500 28300 S 2ND ST S 3RD ST PROJECT SITE gaCF fr 4444., y7.1r 30 28 �.--"----2 8 33 0 801i.810 238 1174 1138 1 125��—93 68 1 20 3 8�9 pp /391/5 / g 144 643 746 18 24:115 PM 1056 998 19 35 14 64-58 0p // /g 141 3�30 64:30 PM EXISTING DAILY & PM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES DAVID I. HAMLIN &ASSOCIATES FIGURE 4 • CEDAR CREST REZONE PAGE F-4 . • ___., . ® 73 61�.-3 07/15/99 15 NORTH 885 7: 0- 00 AM 9 824 844 155.÷70 102 50 660 551 490 5 158 438 1435 6+9 11 27 6 407 188 687 895 102Y Q8d03- 0�9g / 0 AM 61 243-vy 452 1382 y • 4.7 ci N 7 if ,, E12THST NE 10TH ST 1 W W W Q > z N a W z 0 O CC Z ) z z Li z 0 E 4TH ST N..%-.5Ca • 41/ lIP . Ve• S 2ND ST S 3RD ST PROJECT SITE 4p4F `41<<4,), yh'Y 56 56O 12 10 0 1198 1214 620 609�1 4 (----"--.-180 . 26 85 0 258 22 1 0 116 1309 1 08f 09�gg 99 AM 673 390 26 56 ::,....,41-.- 39 v 7:00-8:00 AM 106 7:00-8:00 PM EXISTING AM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES DAVID I. HAMLIN & ASSOCIATES FIGURE 4A CEDAR CREST REZONE PAGE F-4A . . . A 175 8743 12 NORTH 1722 1 19��►117 136 45 784i.825 �. 55 1486 1267 1074 29 231 286 995 31 57 29 -23 1 170 537 444 654 V ---- 83 402 67 550 1061 0y 1 V NE12THST 24510 �yJ '1;, ,,' . NE 10TH ST 1 ' 2770 I w w Li Z Q Q ; o Li Q 0 0: Z ) o 0 10320 z 1644:150" w 1085 '� E 4TH ST N�5R� 5735 133 .� I 22185 pli, if 37810 26815 32220 S 2ND ST • S 3RD ST PROJECT SITE '9AZ4- y4Y (C37 ---...-.1\-.-2 9 5 36 884 917 268 143�--/\---103 75 136 125E 24 4 70 44�23 162 22 728 842 71 1178 1001 21 39 15 704-64 155 2004 ESTIMATED DAILY & PM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES (WITHOUT PROJECT) DAVID I. HAMLIN &ASSOCIATES FIGURE 5 • CEDAR CREST REZONE (PAGE F-5 ---- , i A 80 67+:3NORTH 17 983 17183 129 55 10 910 933 729 • 609 541 6 174 500 1641 76 13 34�t�7 455 . 214--759 1012 V 117 67 26507 1534 i�o �y c7 HE12THST 1 ,, 2�"/' I, NE 10TH ST W Z W W a > z O W Q z o z ir /� o w 0Z o Z z 1.•4= 0E 4TH STN4� • S 2ND ST • S3RDST • PROJECT SITE 4A4F yy'Y (-----64 ...-t-1 13 1 13r23- 1347 200 11 147✓\-►29 94 704 - 672 11 \< 564_21 289 24 129 1452 81 • 764 447 62 29 28 45 43 117 2 2004 ESTIMATED AM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES (WITHOUT PROJECT) DAVID I. HAMLIN &ASSOCIATES ' FIGURE 5A . PACE CEDAR CREST REZONE F-5A • , ._ ,. .. _ _ .. _ _ _ .,..... , _ --) S 175 87 43 NORTH (, 782 \ 12 ±17 7 89 136 45 784 825 I 1486 128 1074 29 231 319 1112 31 72 37.+23 1230 597 Y 444 7O4 91 402 67+639 1150 0� c. NE12THST 24730 it o ItNE 10TH ST 2990 La Laa > z en a > O laQ • z o �� o oz 10540 o 41030 w 1305 m igh E 4TH ST N1:0 " 6615 22405j� [27915 . 40890 33320 S 2ND ST S3RDST PROJECT SITE • �ACF Lq< C�, ti 52 30 f..-1\--2 9 36 20 884i.991 283 158 103 75 1571 1256 12 98 279 1665 170 22 787. 901 2VV33'''8 1220 .- 1035 39 21 15 70 ± 64 155 2004 ESTIMATED DAILY & PM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES (WITH PROJECT) DAVID I. HAMLIN &ASSOCIATES . FIGURE 6 CEDAR CREST REZONE PAGE F-6 _ _ _ . _ ,__._,. Ar6--7-- 80 3......77 NORTH 10910 933 (c00 +100181 55 613 541 174 729 551... .1822 76 6 17 474-7 472 231 759 1090 67 268+533 1560 -10 I y00 I NE 12TH ST A y.. ►/ NE 10TH ST I1PPP .... 1 ` Li z W W Lai > Z 0) i Q > W Z 0 z / O Z o o o Z Li M o J 0 c 0 E 4TH ST 4.sR V' • S 2ND ST / S 3RD ST PROJECT SITE 'IA(F 1,A<<4 hi.yY 1...--- 68 -.1\---1 13 11 5 1323-, 1369 204 151..--7\-a-29 94 764 672 33 17 81 237-4.-86 302 24 131 1470 340 829 499 29 62 8 45 43 • 117 2004 ESTIMATED AM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES (WITH PROJECT) DAVID I. HAMLIN &ASSOCIATES FIGURE 6A • PAGE CEDAR CREST REZONE • F-6A n —7 ATTACHMENT D. IING CITY OF RENTON DEG 15 1999 Projecharrative • - RECEIVED ' • -.. Justification-for the-La Pianta:'Compreh.ensive Plan - Amendment and Rezone • - • - Project Name: - La Pianta Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone __..._-__-_P_roject Location: South side of NE 3r/NE 4`h Street and primarily east of Edmonds Avenue (partially west.of_Edmonds Avenue), Renton, WA Current Use: Vacant Land (mined out gravel pit) Current Zoning: R-10, R-14 and Residential Multi-Family Infill (RM-I) Proposed Zoning: R-14, R-10 and CC Proposed Use: Single-Family Residential Development and a small convenience commercial use. Proposed by: La Pianta Limited Partnership, a Washington limited partnershop ("La Pianta") 1. Explanation .bf the Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments and Rezoning of the Subject Property That Were-Made During-the City's 1999 Planning and Rezone Cycle As part of the City's 1999 comprehensive planning amendment and rezone cycle, the following twenty (20) acres of the site (the "RPN Area") were given a Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN) Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation and corresponding R-14 zoning: • THAT PORTION OF PARCELS 2, 4, AND 9 CITY OF RENTON, LOT LINE REVISION, FILE NO. LUA-95-200-LLA, RECORDED IN BOOK 108 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 276, 276 A AND 276 B, UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9604239004, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; BEING A PORTION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 16; THENCE, SOUTH 01°04'02" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE THEREOF, 601.36 FEET; THENCE, SOUTH 88°55'58" EAST, PERPENDICULAR TO SAID WEST LINE THEREOF, 378.15 FEET, TO THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT CO. EASEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 2571770, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AND THE TRUE POINT OF Page 1 of 11 Pro j-Nar-v3.F 1 12/14/99 . • BEGINNING; THENCE, NORTH 34°05'53" EAST,ALONG SAID -,NORTHWESTERLY LINE;'.1416.63 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE, " ,THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS.SOUTH 50°15'19" WEST; THENCE ' • _ ...•. - "ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEF.:T;.HAVING A RADIUS OF 197.38 FEET, • THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°09'26",.AN ARC DISTANCE OF • 55.66 FEET;: THENCE, NORTH.55°54'08" WEST;'958.13 FEET,.TO.A ... • I POINT OF_CURVE;THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ON SAID CURVE TO • THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 399.32 FEET, THROUGH A ; .. - CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27° 17' 11", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 190.17 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 83°11'18" WEST, 18.88 FEET, TO A POINT ON A CURVE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 82°55'25" EAST, 'THENCE ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2470.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02°37'08", AN ARC -DISTANCE OF 112.90 FEET TO THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHTCO. EASEMENT-.AS DESCRIBED.IN AN ...INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 2513101, ' • _RECORDS dF KING COUNTY,-WASHINGTON; THENCE, SOUTH.. .. • ' - 26°46'02" EAST, ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN THEREOF,-163.94 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN, SOUTH 06°20'40" EAST, 1566.43 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Also as part of the City's 1999 comprehensive planning amendment and rezone process, the following 74.05 acres of the site (the "RO Area") were given a Residential Options (RO) Land Use Map designation and corresponding R-10 zoning: PARCELS 1, 2, 3, 4, 9 AND 10 CITY OF RENTON, LOT LINE REVISION, FILE NO. LUA-95=200-LLA, RECORDED IN BOOK 108 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 276, 276 A AND 276 B, UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9604239004, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; BEING A PORTION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF SAID PARCEL 1 LYING WEST OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 16; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCELS 2, 4, AND 9 CITY OF RENTON, LOT LINE REVISION, FILE NO. LUA-95-200-LLA, RECORDED IN BOOK 108 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 276, 276 A AND 276 B, UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9604239004, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; BEING A PORTION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 Page 2 of 11 Proj-Nar-v3.F1 12/14/99 • • • EAST,W.M. IN-KING COUNTY WASHINGTON,-DESCRIBED AS • - FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF .:.: • SAID SECTION 16; THENCE,. SOUTH.01°04'02":WEST, ALONG THE :T ... -'WEST LINE THEREOF, 601 36 FEET;-.THENCE., SOUTH 88°55'58 _ .--• ; • EAST, PERPENDICULAR TO SAID WEST LINE THEREOF, 378.15 _ • '-FEET, TO THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE.OF .PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT CO. EASEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN AN INSTRUMENT •• RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 2571770, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AND THE TRUE POINT OF - BEGINNING; THENCE, NORTH 34°05'53" EAST, ALONG SAID • NORTHWESTERLY LINE, 1416.63 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE, - THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH.50°15'19" WEST; THENCE .. - • ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 197.38 FEET, • THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°09'26", AN ARC DISTANCE OF • - 55.66 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 55°54'08" WEST, 958.13 FEET TO A .:- • • • -... POINT OF CURVE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ON SAID CURVE TO .... .. • • = THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 399.32 FEET, THROUGH,A = • • CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27° 17' 11", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 190.17 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 83°11'18" WEST, 18.88 FEET, TO A POINT ON A CURVE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 82°55'25" EAST, THENCE ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2470.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02°37'08", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 112.90 FEET TO THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT CO. EASEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 2513101, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE, SOUTH 26°46'02" EAST, ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN THEREOF, 163.94 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN, SOUTH 06°20'40" EAST, 1566.43 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. The RPN Area and the RO Area were made subject to a November 18, 1999 Development Agreement between the City of Renton and La Pianta Limited Partnership. Under that agreement, development of the RO Area and the RPN Area was made subject to the following special restrictions (the "Existing Development Agreement's Special Restrictions"): (1) Permitted residential development in the RO Area and RPN Area would be limited so that the number and type of residential units would not be expected to generate more than 3,952 average daily Page 3 of 11 Proj-Nar-v3.6 12/14/99 • trips as calculated under the 1997 Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Manual; (2) Permitted residential development in the RO Area and RPN Area - *would be limited so that the total impervious surface coverage due to development would not be allowed to exceed a total of 45.04 -- acres; • - (3) The overall number of residential units of any type could not exceed 460 units; (4) The overall number of flats (which would only be constructed in the RPN Area) could not exceed 78 units and the number of flats in any such building could not exceed 6 units; and • • (5) • The residential density of the portion of the RPN Area lying within - 'Aquifer Protection Zone 1 shall be limited to 10 dwelling units per,- acre. In addition, as part of the City's 1999 comprehensive planning amendment and rezone process the applicant requested that the Comprehensive.Plan Map designation and zoning of an approximately 0.92-acre portion of the site (the portion of Parcel 1 of City of Renton Lot Line Revision File No. LUA-95-200-LLA lying west of the west line of Section 16, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M.) be changed from Residential Multi-Family Infill to Convenience Commercial (CC). On August 12, 1999, at the • request of City Staff, the applicant requested that the City Council defer into the year 2000 Comprehensive Plan updating cycle the CC portion of the application so that both City Staff and the applicant could have more time to develop mutually acceptable conditions to and/or refinements of the proposal, such as (1) some minor modifications to the geometry of the proposed CC zone site to make it fully abut Edmonds Avenue and thereby create a better access situation (permitting a workable limitation of access to and from NE3rd/NE4th Street to right-in, right-out only) and (2) limitations as to particular CC uses. The Council did so. The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee (ERC) issued as a SEPA threshold determination for the applicant's 1999 planning cycle requests a mitigated determination of non-significance with the following mitigating conditions (the "1999 SEPA Mitigating Conditions"): 1. A Development Agreement be approved by the City and recorded as a restrictive covenant running with the title of the property. The Page 4 of.11 Proj-Nar-v3.17 1 12/14/99 • • Development Agreement shall stipulate as follows: • Development tote restricted to.a maximum of 460 units. . • The overall number of flats to be limited to 78 units and the number of flats in any:building:to be limited to 6. • The total impervious surface coverage to.be 45 acres as shown in the May 26, -1999 memo from Dodds Engineers. • • Total traffic generation from all land uses to be not greater • than 4,071 average daily trips as calculated under the 1997 Institute of Transportation Engineers ITE Manual as shown in the memo from David I. Hamlin and Associates. 2. ' The portion of the property proposed for Residential Planned Neighborhood Designation which is-located in Zone 1 of the Aquifer . -. _. Protection Area shall.be limited to 10 dwelling units per net acre. • . 2. The Applicant's Year 2000 Requested Changes to the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps La Pianta hereby requests the following changes to the subject property's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designations and Zoning classifications: (a) An amendment of the RPN Area's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation from Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN) to Residential Options (RO); (b) An amendment of the RPN Area's Zoning Classification from R-14 to R-10; (c) An amendment of the Comprehensive Plan Map designation and zoning for an approximately 1.45-acre portion of the site at the site's northwest corner (i.e., the 0.92-acre portion of the site that is currently zoned Residential Multi-Family Infill and approximately 0.53 abutting acres of the current RO Area) to Convenience Commercial (CC) along with an amended Development Agreement to provide in relation to the CC portion of the site that (i) the CC zone's "Transportation Services and Manufactured Home Sales" category of Page 5 of 11 Proj-Nar-v3.F1 12/14/99 • uses be prohibited and (ii) vehicular access to and from NE3rd/NE4th Street be limited to right-in, right-out turns only; and (d) The 1999 SEPA Mitigating Conditions be replaced with the . following limiting conditions of the proposed application: (i) . • • There be a maximum of 450 single-family residential units . on the R-10.portion of the site; and (ii) The total impervious surface coverage of the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 45 acres as shown in the May 26, 1999 memo from Dodds Engineers; and (e) The existing Development Agreement be replaced with an amended Development Agreement that substitutes the following two conditions of the proposed application (with corresponding amendments to the factual recitals of the Development Agreement to be made as well) for the Existing .. Development Agreement's Special Restrictions: (i) There be a maximum of 450 single-family residential units on the R-10 portion of the site; and (ii) The total impervious surface coverage of the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 45 acres as shown in the May 26, 1999 memo from Dodds Engineers. La Pianta contemplates ultimate development of(a) the proposed R-10 portion of the site with a community of single family homes and (b) the proposed CC portion of the site with convenience commercial uses other than the uses listed in the CC zone's "Transportation Services and Manufactured Home Sales" category. (The uses in that category are "car washes", "gasoline service stations", and "vehicle service and repair, small".) 3. Size and Location of Site The subject property is located on the south side of NE 3rd/NE 4th Streets, east of. Mt. Olivet Cemetery, west of the King County Shops and north of the Maple Valley Highway in Renton. The subject property consists of contiguous parcels of land owned by La Pianta totaling about 95 acres in size. The south edge of these parcels has an irregular shape that follows the top of slope above the Maple Valley Highway. Page 6 of 11 Proj-N ar-v3.F 1 12/14/99 4. Current Use of Site and Any Existing Improvements - - - The site is currently vacant after having been previously used as a gravel mine. - • • • Improvements for the southerly extension of Edmonds Avenue into the property have recently been constructed. Significant grading of portions of the site has occurred in relation to both (a) part of a previously-approved manufactured housing project (Cedar - Crest)that was planned for the site and (b) the City's sewer interceptor line that - crosses the property. There are currently no structures on the site. 5. Special Site Features • Special site features include the site's location, size and topography.. The • location is a prominent one in the Renton Highlands and would be attractive to potential homeowners with its easy access to downtown Renton and the nearby commercial uses along NE 4th Street. • - The site's relatively large size would allow for the development of a quality single-family residential neighborhood and a small convenience commercial facility • with'parks and open space. The topography would allow this new neighborhood to be built below NE 3`d/NE 4th Streets with little visual impact. Further, the site's topography and southward orientation provide opportunities for substantial southerly views. 6. Location of Existing Structures This site is currently vacant with no existing structures. 7. Special responses to the following Decision Criteria: 1. The CPA/Rezone bears a substantial relation to the public health, safety or welfare. The requested Comprehensive Plan Amendments and rezone, if granted, would allow for the provision of single-family residential development and a convenience commercial area, both of which would address needs of area residents and would increase the City's tax base. 2. The CPA/Rezone addresses changing circumstances or the needs of the City as a Whole. Page 7 of 11 Pro j-N ar-v3.P 1 12/14/9 9 • The City of Renton as a whole is experiencing an increase in demand for both residential real estate and commercial space as a result of a strong local economy. This proposal will allow for needed single-family residential development, which is in strong demand in the local housing market and would provide close-to-the • - - City housing opportunities for employees of local businesses. The proposed small convenience commercial portion of the site will be available to serve future residential development on the R-10 portion of the site as well as the adjacent. La Colina residential subdivision. • 3. The CPA/Rezone is compatible with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan or other policies or goals of the City -:The requested CPA and rezone is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan as it "furthers the go.als and policies of the plan to increase the variety of housing and channel growth into the City's urban area. Please refer to the following section addressing the policies. This location is ideal for a residential community in view • of its easy access to downtown Renton and the NE 3rd/NE 4th Street corridor. 4. The CPA/Rezone is compatible with and not materially detrimental to adjacent Land uses and surrounding neighborhoods. See answer to 4 (Current Use of Site and Any Existing Improvements), above. Once the subject property is developed, the adjacent landowners and residents will no longer have to look at the mined-out gravel pit in its current state and the neighborhood will be improved, both aesthetically and economically, as a result of the proposed project. Development contemplated by the proposed amendments will be very compatible with all the surrounding uses including the proposed residential subdivision of La Colina to the west. 5. The CPA/Rezone will not result in development which will adversely impact community facilities, including but not limited to utilities, transportation, parks or schools Under the existing Development Agreement, up to 460 residential units can be constructed on the current RPN and RO Areas of the site. Under the current proposal (which would amend the Development Agreement), the maximum number of residential units (all single-family) would be limited to 450, which corresponds to an anticipated 4,307 average daily trips under the 1997 Institute Page 8 of 11 Proj-Nar-v3.F 1 12/14/99 • • of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Manual. That would be just 355 trips more (or • •8.98 percent more) more than the-maximum 3,952 average daily trips specified - •• as Special Restriction (1) in the Existing Development Agreement's Special.• .. • Restrictions for the current RPN and.RO.Areas of the site. The 0.92-acre - portion of the site that currently has an RM-I Comprehensive Plan land use designation and zoning would allow for development under the RM-I zone (at the rate of 20 dwellings per acre, equivalent to about 18 multi-family units). The - proposed CC portion of the site would to a significant extent serve the subject property as well as the adjacent La Colina subdivision and is not anticipated to create offsite traffic significantly greater than would be generated by 18 multi • - family units on the current RM-I-zoned part of the proposed CC portion of the site.. No significant impacts La Pianta's proposal calls for a slight increase in density, yet, with the variety of housing types contemplated, including conventional single-family detached homes, attached townhouse homes and flats, the impacts on utilities, transportation;-parks, or schools will be very similar - to the impacts,bf R-8 development. No adverse impacts on such community facilities are expected. 6. The subject property is suitable for-development in general conformance with zoning standards under the proposed zoning classification. With the site's previous grading and the installation of storm drainage facilities, the existing RPN Area of the site as well as the existing RO Area of the site are very well-suited to development under the proposed R-10 zoning classification. The R-10 classification allows for the single-family residential homes that the applicant envisions for the proposed R-10 portion of the site. The proposed small convenience commercial area will require filling and grading as part of site development. Consistent with Comprehensive Plan Objective LU-FF, the small-scale commercial use of the proposed CC area will serve both the proposed R-10 portion of the subject property and the nearby La Colina subdivision. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment of the RPN Area to Residential Options (RO) is consistent with the City's goals and policies, as noted in the following Land Use Policies set forth in the City's Comprehensive Plan: Page 9of11 Proj-Nar-v3.r 1 12/14/99 • General Residential Policies: (-)• LU-11 Consistent with subsection a of this policy, the proposal would provide for development of a new residential neighborhood on vacant, environmentally suitable land on one of the plateaus surrounding downtown Renton. - Residential-Types LU-15 Consistent with this policy, the ultimate single-family residential development that will follow the proposal on this site will be part of a city- wide mix of housing types that includes large lot and small lot single family development, and residential mixed use development. LU-16.1 Consistent with this policy, ultimate development following the approval of this propiosal is anticipated to include single-family residential lots of various sizes on the subject property (with likely lots widths on the order of 40 feet, 45 feet, 50 feet and 60 feet to accommodate various sizes of single-family housing). Residential Options and Residential Planned Neighborhood General • Policies LU-41 Consistent with this policy, the proposal will provide opportunity for small-lot single family detached homes that meet the R-10 density standards. • LU-42 Consistent with this policy, the proposal will provide opportunity for a range of lot sizes. LU-43 Consistent with this policy, the applicant envisions a central place at or near the entry to serve as a focal point to the contemplated new residential neighborhood on this site. LU-45 The site is conducive to a flexible grid street system as contemplated by this policy, generally of the type that the City has previously approved for the earlier "Cedar Crest" manufactured housing project proposal at this site. Page 10 of 11 Proj-Nar-v3.F 1 12/14/99 • Residential Options Policies LU-50 Consistent with this policy, the proposed map.amendment of the existing 20-acre RPN Area to Residential Options meets the criteria for the Residential Option Designation through the following: (a) the RPN Area is surrounded by the existing abutting RO Area, which is currently zoned R- 10, (b) the subject parcels are currently vacant, and (d) few new roads or major utility upgrades will be required for development of the site since a City sanitary sewer interceptor has recently been constructed through the site and a southerly extension of Edmonds Avenue NE has recently been installed. LU-51 and LU-51 Consistent with these policies, the envisioned single- family residential development on the proposed R-10 portion of the site would fall within a range of 7 to 10 homes per acre. . Page 11 of 11 Proj-Nar-v3.F 1 12/14/99 ATTACHMENT E ADDITIONAL _ •neighborhoods. De --4ment standards shouTd _ • ..COMPREHENSIVE.PLAN POLICIES reflect single family neighborhood characteristics such as ground related orientation,coordinated • Regional Growth Policies - structural design,and private yards. Policy LU-4. Future residential growth should Policy LU-56. Non-residential structures,should achieve'a maximum°50%multi-family housing in be clustered and connected;within the.,overall development through the organization of roads, : " parts of the City located outside of the Urban blocks,yards,other central features and amenity Center. - tY features to create a neighborhood. RPN and Residential Options Policy LU-58. Density in the Residential Planned PolicyLU-41. Provision of small lot single'family Neighborhood designation should be in the range detached unit types,townhouses and multi-family of 8 to 18 dwelling units per net acre. structures compatible with a single family character should be encouraged provided that Policy LU-59.A minimum of 50%of a project in . density standards can be met. the RPN designation should consist of the following primary residential types: traditional detached,zero lot line detached,or townhouses Policy LU-42. A range and variety of lot sizes . . • should be encouraged. with yards which are designed to reflect a single family character. Policy LU-46. Condominium ownership may Policy LU-60. Townhouse building clusters occur in any unit type. I which qualify as a primary residential type should be limited in size so that the mass and scale within Policy LU-47. Townhouse development should the cluster retains a single family character. Limits provide either condominium or fee simple on the number of units which may be attached in homeownership opportunities. one cluster should be established in the Policy LU-48. Buildings should front the street development regulations. rather than be organized around interior courtyards Policy LU-61. Longer townhouse building or parking areas. clusters,and other multi-family building clusters, considered secondary residential types, should be Policy LU-49. Non-residential structures may limited in size so that the mass and scale of the have dimensions larger than residential structures cluster retains a small scale multi-family character but should be compatible in design and dimensions rather than a garden apartment development style. with surrounding residential development. Limits on the number of units which may be attached in one cluster should be established in the Policy LU-51. The net development densities development regulations. should be 10 dwelling units per acre. If 100%of the dwelling units are detached, a density bonus Policy LU-62. The mass and scale of secondary may be allowed to a maximum of 13 dwelling residential types pursuant to policy LU-61 should units per acre. not preclude their location adjacent to primary residential types. Policy LU-52. Minimum net development densities should be 7 dwelling units per acre. Policy LU-63.Projects in a Residential Planned Neighborhood designation should have no more Policy LU-53. Detached single family housing, than 50%of the units designed as secondary townhouses, and small scale multi-family units residential types, i.e.longer townhouse building should be allowed in Residential Options. clusters, and other multi-family buildings. Policy LU-54. A maximum of 50%of units Policy LU-63.1 Development standards should allowed within an individual RO development may reflect single family neighborhood characteristics consist of attached units which includes and access to public amenities and services. townhouses,and small scale multi-family units. Policy LU-55.Development in Residential Policy LU-63.2 Development standards should Options should be compatible with existing reflect the following criteria. development patterns and be sensitive to unique a. heights,width and length of structures features and differences among established• should be designed to resemble single family housing,with __�rilar setbacks from the street as single family; • b. parking should be encouraged in the rear or side yards or under thestructure; c. structures should be located on lots or arranged in a manner to appear like a platted development to ensure adequate light and air,and views if any,are preserved between lots or structures; d. buildings should be massed in a manner that promotes a pedestrian scale with a small neighborhood feeling; e. each dwelling unit should have an identifiable entrance and front on streets rather than courtyards and parking lots. f. fences may be constructed if they contribute to an open spacious feeling between units and structures;and g. streetscapes should include green,open space for each unit. Existing Multi-family Districts Objective LU-L: Encourage the development of infill parcels in existing multi-family districts with compatible projects. Policy LU-64. Development density should generally be in the range of 10-20 dwelling units per acre. Policy LU-65. New development in Residential Multi-family Infill designations should be compatible in size,scale,bulk,use,and design with other existing multi-family developments. Policy LU-67. Siting and design of new structures should be sensitive to site constraints and adjacent uses. Provision of adequate buffers or setbacks or scaling down building heights may be required to transition from Residential Multi-family Infill designations to adjacent lower density uses. Policy LU-69. Residential Multi-family Infill designations should not be expanded. Land within he districts should be used efficiently to meet multi-family housing needs. • Policy H-11. Favor single family land use designations for large vacant parcels outside of Centers and in predominantly residential areas to increase the single family capacity within the city. • H:IDEPTS\EconomicDevelopment\STRATPLN\PLANNING\AMENDS11999\M-3 POL.DOC • Oti �A REVISED NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON- comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Ms.Rebecca Lind,Project Manager,Development Services Division,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,by 5:00 PM on March 17,2000. II you have questions SIGNIFICANCE(DNS) about this proposal,or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by malt,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. DATE: March 3,2000 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA•99-179,ECF,R,CPA APPLICATION NAME: LA MANTA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/REZONE • CONTACT PERSON: MS.REBECCA UND (425)430-658B PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change 20 acres from Residential Planned Neighborhood/R-14 zoning to RO Residential Options/R-10 zoning. The proposal also includes an PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION amendment to an existing development agreement for the number of vehicle trips per day to be generated from the site. the amount of impervious surface,the number of attached units and a cap on the amount of residential development on the site. The application Includes a request to change the Land Use Map from Multi-family Infill(RM-q zoning to Convenience Commercial(CC)zoning for.97 acres,end from Residential Options/R40 zoning to Convenience I Commercial for.53 acres. A proposed development agreement for the Convenience Commercial portion of the site • would restrict the category of uses on the site. - PROJECT LOCATION: NE 3i0/4tl1 and Monroe OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE(DNS):As the Lead Agency,the City of Renton has I 7 ihiI✓ = U( �� ?��/ determined that significant environmental Impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project.Therefore.as /Ir/--�--'\ I r/_. permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110,the City of Renton Is using the Optional ONS'pmcess to give notice that a DNS is likely to be Issued.Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS are Integrated Into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Nan-Significance Mitigated4 c / (DNS).A 14-day appeal period will follow the Issuance of the DNS. • it'd PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: December 15,1999,Revised January 28,2000 ' w \�R♦i NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: January 31,2000 • ROm-10 Permits/Review Requested: Environmental(SEPA)Review.Comp.Plan Amendment.Rezone I ,_ ,/ta CC/CC o ' A A({cct'�Awai ' Other Permits which may be required: None �� ' ••:0, MUM! — ` ...,�'• Ia CC/CC A[C �-G� Requested Studies: Traffic Analysis I Ill EN Location where application may , �r •• ~ii - be reviewed: Planning/Building/Public Works Division,Development Services Department, • s—t Li IC (� 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055 J ` 1 \ - �i�.� RPWR-14 PUBLIC HEARING: A public hearing will be held before the Renton Planning Commission on the 7th to ROm-to floor of the new Renton City Hall located at 1055 Grady Way South.The date of this meeting Is not yet determined.Parties of record will be informed of the date .\ L • and lime of the hearing when it is scheduled. , CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: ' Analytical process Project consistency refers to whether a project is consistent with adopted and applicable development regulations,or in fop, NQFM their absence,comprehensive plan policies.RCW 36.7013.110(2)(g)provides that the Notice of Application(NOA) N include a statement of the preliminary determination of a project's consistency with the type of land use,level of //P development,Infrastructure,and character of development if one has been made at the time of notice.At a minimum, 1'� every NOA shall include a determination of the project's consistency with the zoning,comprehensive plan and o' development regulations. Land Use: The project is consistent with the policy objectives of the Renton Comprehensive --------,..to, I r I I r I I r Plan Land Use Element for Residential Options Land Use and Implementing R- 10 zoning,and for the Convenience Commercial Land Use Designation and Convenience Commercial zoning. Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Draft Environmental Impact Statement for City of Renton Land Use Element Jan 1992.Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Land Use Element of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Feb.1093,Draft Comprehensive Plan Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Dec.1994.Final Supplemental Environmental Impart Statement Feb.1995. I NOTICE OF PROPOSED ENw0.0NMENTALAPPLICATION 1 . 1 ' NOTICE OF PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL APPLICATION CERTIFICATION • I, A 1 -e_e. a(n. u , hereby certify that 3 copies of the above document were posted by me in 3 conspicuous places on or nearby the described property on .s -, ,‘ ,I ►iAct-C,t/N 3, 2 oc)o Signed: ___CI, �4 ___C ____________ ATTEST: Subcribed and sworn before me, a Nortary Public,in and for the State of Washington residing in* k -,,,, , on the I&,-Ir. day of /2 )c)t-c_PA. 260 0 ...„..1_72.) dt_Av... 4, NOTARY MARILYN KA6NOHEFF PUBIJO r STATE WASTON MARILYN KAMCHEFF 1 COMMISSIONSATOFHINGEXPIRES ? MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES:6-29-03 JUKE 2��2003 -� ,a.,,„-..,,.....-,t, - r �•' ' .REVISED NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON- 313 SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) ` o .-, DATE: March 3,2000 it'd 'V6^ n ` LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-99-179,ECF,R,CPA S l Ems"' APPLICATION NAME: LA PIANTA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/REZONE Ont e a ./ PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change 20 acres from 3 I�(6-° Residential Planned Neighborhood/R-14 zoning to RO Residential Options/R-10 zoning. The proposal also includes an S S amendment to an existing development agreement for the number of vehicle trips per day to be generated from the site, the amount of impervious surface,the number of attached units and a cap on the amount of residential development on the site. The application includes a request to change the Land Use Map from Multi-family Infill (RM-I) zoning to Convenience Commercial (CC) zoning for .97 acres, and from Residential Options/R-10 zoning to Convenience Commercial for .53 acres. A proposed development agreement for the Convenience Commercial portion of the site would restrict the category of uses on the site. . PROJECT LOCATION: NE 3fd/4th and Monroe OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE(DNS): 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.110,the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS process to give notice that a DNS is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS 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). A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: December 15,,1999,Revised January 28,2000 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: January 31,2000 • Permits/Review Requested: Environmental(SEPA)Review,Comp.Plan Amendment,Rezone Other Permits which may be required: None Requested Studies: Traffic Analysis Location where application may be reviewed: Planning/Building/Public Works Division,Development Services Department, 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055 PUBLIC HEARING: A public hearing will be held before the Renton Planning Commission on the 7th floor of the new Renton City Hall located at 1055 Grady Way.South. The date of this meeting is not yet determined.Parties of record will be informed of the date and time of the hearing when it is scheduled. • CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Analytical process Project consistency refers to whether a project is consistent with adopted and applicable development regulations,or in their absence,comprehensive plan policies. RCW 36.705.110(2)(g)provides that the Notice of Application(NOA) include a statement of the preliminary determination of a project's consistency with the type of land use,level of development,infrastructure,and character of development if one has been made at the time of notice. At a minimum, every NOA shall include a determination of the project's consistency with the zoning,comprehensive plan and development regulations. Land Use: The project is consistent with the policy objectives of the Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element for Residential Options Land Use and implementing R- 10 zoning,and for the Convenience Commercial Land Use Designation and Convenience Commercial zoning. Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Draft Environmental Impact Statement for City of Renton Land Use Element Jan 1992,Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Land Use Element of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Feb.1993,Draft Comprehensive Plan Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Dec.1994,Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Feb.1995. NOTICE OF PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL APPLICATION Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Ms. Rebecca Lind, Project Manager, Development Services Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on March 17, 2000. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, 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: MS.REBECCA LIND (425)430-6588 PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION 7#- 1 k 11- j 11 . I 0 111% . RO/R-10 to CC/CC a _J _ , �A A 16 oei avG� n►� • ''� RMI/RMI 1;® to CC/CC Aff-ecl,464 • RPN/R-14 to RO/R-I0 y,, \ - NOTICE OF PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL APPLICATION / JAN 2 0 2000 ECCNO'AIC DEVELOPMENT, NEIGHBORHOODS, ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND STRATEGIC PLANNING_ INTRODUCTION Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C 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 ACTIONS (per D)• For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in the checklist to the word "project", "applicant", and "property or l7EL`CJPI ld... a read as "proposal," "proposer", PLANNING proposal, proposer , and "affected geographic area," respectively. CITY OF RENTON MAR 0 3 2000 Page 1 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 RECEIVED A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: La Pianta Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone (a non project action) 2. Name of applicant: La Pianta Limited Partnership, a Washington limited partnership 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: Contact Person: Attn:Ann Nichols David L. Halinen c%Segale Business Park Halinen Law Offices, P.S. P.O. Box 88050 10500 N.E.8th Street, Suite 1900 Tukwila, WA 98138 Bellevue, WA 98004 (206) 575-2000 (425) 454-8272 4. Date checklist prepared: January 27, 2000 5. Agency requesting checklist: . City of Renton Department of Economic Development and Neighborhood&Strategic Planning 6. Proposed timing or schedule(including phasing, if applicable): The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone (and the corresponding proposed amendment to the existing December 8, 1999 Development Agreement between the City of Renton and La Pianta Limited Partnership, a copy of which is attached hereto as Attachment 1--the "Existing Development Agreement') are anticipated to be processed by the City by June 2000. Single-family residential development of the proposed R-10 portion of the site is anticipated to start in 2001 following City approval of(a) the CPA and rezone application (and the corresponding proposed amendment to the Existing Development Agreement) and(b) preliminary plat application(s) for single-family residential development of the La Pianta property. Convenience Commercial development of the proposed CC portion of the site is anticipated to start in 2002 following (a) City approval of the CPA and rezone application (the Existing Development Agreement with the proposed amendment thereto will not apply to the proposed CC-zoned portion of the site) and (b) site plan approval and/or construction plan approval(s). 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. Page 2 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 Single-family residential development of the La Pianta property consistent with the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone (and with the proposed Amendment to the Existing Development Agreement) is contemplated in future years but is not part of this proposed non project action. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. The City of Renton issued a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Element (dated January 16, 1992) and a two-volume Final Environmental Impact Statement for the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan's Land'Use Element (dated February 1, 1993). Volume 2 of that FEIS includes special "McMahon Property" studies involving analyses of that property under three different Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map scenarios: (1) Office, (2) "Single Family/4 Mix" [according to Renton Department of Economic Development and Neighborhood & Strategic Planning's Rebecca Lind, Single Family/4 Mix was a precursor to what is currently the Residential Options (RO) Land Use Map designation], and (3) Single Family/Education-Institution Center. (The subject property is a portion of the McMahon Property special study area.) Attached hereto as Attachment 2 is a set of copies of the Land Use Study Areas Vehicle Trip Generation Report (including "Appendix A—Study• Area Land Use and Estimated Trip Generation" thereto). The applicant's consultant submitted an Environmental Checklist on May 27, 1999 for earlier Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Rezoning (subject to a then proposed Development Agreement) concerning the subject property. The ultimately-approved Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Rezone culminated in the Existing Development Agreement. (See the Existing Development Agreement, Attachment 1,for details.) 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. City Council approval of(a) the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone and (b) the corresponding proposed amendment to the Existing Development Agreement. 11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) Background Page 3 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 • As part of the City's 1999 comprehensive planning amendment and rezone cycle, the following twenty (20) acres of the site (the "RPN Area") were given a Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN) Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation and corresponding R- 14 zoning: • THAT PORTION OF PARCELS 2, 4, AND 9 CITY OF RENTON, LOT LINE REVISION, FILE NO. LUA-95-200-LLA, RECORDED IN BOOK 108 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 276, 276 A AND 276 B, UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9604239004, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; BEING A PORTION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 16; THENCE, SOUTH 01°04'02" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE THEREOF, 601.36 FEET; THENCE, SOUTH 88°55'58" EAST, PERPENDICULAR TO SAID WEST LINE THEREOF, 378.15 FEET, TO THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT CO. EASEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 2571770, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE, NORTH 34°05'53"EAST, ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE, 1416.63 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 50°15'19" WEST; THENCE ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 197.38 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°09'26",' AN ARC DISTANCE OF 55.66 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 55°54'08" WEST, 958.13 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 399.32 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27° 17' 11", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 190.17 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 83°11'18" WEST, 18.88 FEET, TO A POINT ON A CURVE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 82°55'25"EAST, THENCE ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2470.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02°37'08", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 112.90 FEET TO THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT CO. EASEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 2513101, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE, SOUTH 26°46'02" EAST, ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN THEREOF, 163.94 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN, SOUTH 06°20'40"EAST, 1566.43 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Also as part of the City's 1999 comprehensive planning amendment and rezone process, the following 74.05 acres of the site (the "RO Area") were given a Residential Options (RO) Land Use Map designation and corresponding R-10 zoning: PARCELS 1, 2, 3, 4, 9 AND 10 CITY OF RENTON, LOT LINE REVISION, FILE NO. LUA-95- 200-LLA, RECORDED IN BOOK 108 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 276, 276 A AND 276 B, UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9604239004, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; BEING A PORTION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF SAID PARCEL 1 LYING WEST OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 16; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCELS 2, 4, AND 9 CITY OF RENTON, LOT LINE REVISION, FILE NO. LUA-95-200-LLA, RECORDED IN BOOK 108 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 276, 276 A AND 276 B, Page 4 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9604239004, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; BEING A PORTION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. IN KING COUNTY WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 16; THENCE, SOUTH 01°04'02" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE THEREOF, 601.36 FEET; THENCE, SOUTH 88°55'58" EAST, PERPENDICULAR TO SAID WEST LINE THEREOF, 378.15 FEET, TO THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT CO. EASEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 2571770, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE, NORTH 34°05'53" EAST, ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE, 1416.63 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 50°15'19" WEST; THENCE ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 197.38 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°09'26", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 55.66 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 55°54'08" WEST, 958.13 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 399.32 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL' ANGLE OF 27° 17' 11", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 190.17 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 83°11'18" WEST, 18.88 FEET, TO A POINT ON A CURVE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 82°55'25"EAST, THENCE ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2470.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02°37'08", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 112.90 FEET TO THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT CO. EASEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 2513101, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE, SOUTH 26°46'02" EAST, ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN THEREOF, 163.94 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN, SOUTH 06°20'40" EAST, 1566.43 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. The RPN Area and the RO Area were made subject to the Existing Development Agreement. Under that agreement, development of the RO Area and the RPN Area was made subject to the following special. restrictions (the "Existing Development Agreement's Special Restrictions"): (1) Permitted residential development in the RO Area and RPN Area would be limited so that the number and type of residential units would not be expected to generate more than 3,952 average daily trips as calculated under the 1997 Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Manual; (2) Permitted residential development in the RO Area and RPN Area would be limited so that the total impervious surface coverage due to development would not be allowed to exceed a total of 45.04 acres; (3) The overall number of residential units of any type could not exceed 460 units; (4) The overall number of flats (which would only be constructed in the RPN Area) could not exceed 78 units and the number of flats in any such building could not exceed 6 units; and (5) The residential density of the portion of the RPN Area lying within Aquifer Protection Zone 1 shall be limited to 10 dwelling units per acre. Page 5 • Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 In addition, as part of the City's 1999 comprehensive planning amendment and rezone process, the applicant requested that the Comprehensive Plan Map designation and zoning of an approximately 0.92-acre portion of the site (the portion of Parcel 1 of City of Renton Lot Line Revision File No. LUA-95-200-LLA lying west of the west line of Section 16, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M.) be changed from Residential Multi-Family Infill to Convenience Commercial (CC). On August 12, 1999, at the request of City Staff, the applicant requested that the City Council defer into the year 2000 Comprehensive Plan updating cycle the CC portion of the application so that both City Staff and the applicant could have more time to develop mutually acceptable conditions to and/or refinements of the proposal, such as (1) some minor modifications to the geometry of the proposed CC zone site to make it fully abut Edmonds Avenue and thereby create a better access situation (permitting a workable limitation of access to and from NE3rd/NE4th Street to right-in, right-out only) and (2) limitations as to particular CC uses. The Council did so. The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee (ERC) issued as a SEPA threshold determination for the Applicant's 1999 planning cycle requests a mitigated determination of non-significance with the following mitigating conditions (the "1999 SEPA Mitigating Conditions"): • 1. A Development Agreement be approved by the City and recorded as a restrictive covenant running with the title of the property. The Development Agreement shall stipulate as follows: • Development to be restricted to a maximum of 460 units. • The overall number of,flats to be limited to 78 units and the number of,flats in any building to be limited to 6. • The total impervious surface coverage to be 45 acres as shown in the May 26, 1999 memo from Dodds Engineers. • Total traffic generation from all land uses to be not greater than 4,071 average daily trips as calculated under the 1997 Institute of Transportation Engineers ITE Manual as shown in the memo from David I. Hamlin and Associates. 2. The portion• of the property proposed for Residential Planned Neighborhood Designation which is located in Zone 1 of the Aquifer Protection Area shall be limited to 10 dwelling units per net acre. Current Proposal The Applicant now requests that the following changes be made to the subject property's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designations and Zoning classifications: (a) An amendment of the RPN Area's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation from Residential Planned Neighborhood(RPN) to Residential Options (RO); Page 6 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 . 1 (b) An amendment of the RPNArea's Zoning Classification from R-14 to R-10; (c) An amendment of the Comprehensive Plan Map designation and zoning for an approximately 1.45-acre portion of the site at the site's northwest corner (i.e., the 0.92- acre portion of the site that is currently zoned Residential Multi-Family Infill and approximately 0.53 abutting acres of the current RO Area) to Convenience Commercial (CC) along with an amended Development Agreement to provide in relation to the CC portion of the site that (i) the CC zone's "Transportation Services and Manufactured Home Sales" category of uses be prohibited and (ii) vehicular access to and from NE3rd/NE4th Street be limited to right-in, right-out turns only; and (d) The 1999 SEPA Mitigating Conditions be replaced with the following limiting conditions of the proposed application: (i) There be a maximum of 4601 single-family residential units on the R-10 portion of the site; and (ii) The total impervious surface coverage of the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 45 acres as shown in the May 26, 1999 memo from Dodds Engineers; and (e) The Existing Development Agreement be replaced with an amended Development Agreement that substitutes the following two conditions of the proposed application (with corresponding amendments to the factual recitals of the Development Agreement to be made as well)for the Existing Development Agreement's Special Restrictions: (i) There be a maximum of 460 single-family residential units on the R-10 portion of the site; and (ii) The total impervious surface coverage of the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 45 acres as shown in the May 26, 1999 memo from Dodds Engineers. The Applicant contemplates ultimate development of (a) the proposed R-10 portion of the site with a community of up to 460 single-family homes and (b) the proposed CC portion of the site with convenience commercial 'uses other than the uses listed in the CC zone's "Transportation Services and Manufactured Home Sales" category. (The uses in that category are "car washes", "gasoline service stations", and "vehicle service and repair, small".) When the current Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone application was submitted to the City on December 15, 1999, in the Project Narrative the Applicant proposed that there be "a maximum of 450 single-family residential units on the overall proposed R-10 portion of the site". On January 28, 2000, by means of a letter to the City from attorney David L. Halinen on behalf of the Applicant, that proposal was amended to be "a maximum of 460 single-family residential units on the overall proposed R-10 portion of the site". (It should be borne in mind that, in order for about 20 of those lots to be feasible, a relinquishment of a Puget Sound Energy transmission line easement crossing the site would have to be secured. An initial request to Puget Sound Energy for such a relinquishment was rejected during January, 2000.) Page 7 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The site is located north of Maple Valley Highway, south of NE 3rd/NE 46 Street, east of Mt. Olivet cemetery and the La Colina residential subdivision, and west of the King County shops in the City.of Renton. 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan map as environmentally sensitive? Yes, the subject property lies partially in Aquifer Protection Area Zone 1 and partially in Aquifer Protection Zone 2. The RC-zoned area south of the site is designated Greenbelt. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous other The portion of the site where most of the future development on the site is expected is gently sloping, while the perimeter of the site contains steeper slopes. b. What is the steepest slope on the site(approximate percent slope)? The steepest slope is f 67%. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Sand and gravel, no agricultural soils. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. Note that the stability of the southern slope is addressed in three detailed geotechnical reports prepared in regard to the site by GeoEngineers dated March 7, 1994, October 24, 1994, and April 6, 1995 in conjunction with the previously-approved . "Cedar Crest Manufactured Home Park", copies of which are included in the February 11, 1999'"Storm Drainage Report" binder for Cedar Crest Phases I, II, III and IV prepared by Triad Associates (and which were submitted to the City along with the May Page 8 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 27, 1999 Environmental Checklist for the Applicant's 1999 planning cycle requests). Note further that, on page 7 of the October 24, 1994 GeoEngineers report, the report indicates that "[i]nfiltrated ground water in this area would. . .flow to the northwest. . ." (underlining added for emphasis) and that "[t]his is also supported by the lack of evidence of significant ground water seepage occurring on [the portion of the bluff being analyzed in the report]". e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. None proposed at this time. Application is for CPA and rezone (and corresponding amendments to the Existing Development Agreement) only. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. A stormwater retention/recharge system has already been designed for the site, approved by the City of Renton and constructed on the site in relation to the previously- proposed Cedar Crest Manufactured Home Park. Modifications may or may not have to be made to that system in order to accommodate ultimate development subsequent to City Council approval of the requested CPA and rezone requests. While some erosion may take place during such ultimate development, because of(a) the nature of the site's topography and (b) the erosion control measures that the City will require, significant quantities of sediment-laden water are not anticipated to leave the site. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? In view of the proposed limitation of total impervious surface coverage on the proposed 93.52-acre R-10 portion of the site to 45.04 acres, not more than 48.2 percent of the R- 10 portion of the site could be covered with impervious surfaces. Under the "Development Standards for Commercial Zoning Designations" in the City's Development Regulations (see the table in RMC 4-2-120A), the maximum lot coverage for buildings on the approximately 1.45-acre proposed CC-zoned portion of the overall site would be 65% (unless parking is provided within a building or parking garage) and with additional impervious surfaces (such as parking areas, driveways, and sidewalks) allowed but with landscaping(i.e., area(s) of pervious surface) also required. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: N/A (They will be developed in the future in regard to a project-specific proposal and will be reviewed by the City then.) 2. Air Page 9 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 • 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 if known. Unknown at this time. Application is for CPA and rezone only. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None proposed at this time. 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate,state what stream or river it flows into. Storm water retention and silt control structures and other man-made facilities. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes,please describe and attach available plans. Not applicable. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Not applicable. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions?. Give general description,purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Not applicable. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. Page 10 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground: • 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. N/A 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage: industrial, containing the following chemicals....; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. N/A c. Water Runoff(including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. A stormwater retention/recharge system has already been designed for the site, approved by the City of Renton and constructed in relation to the Cedar Crest Manufactured Home Park A January 11, 1988 hydrogeologic- geotechnical study by Golder Associates plus portions of the above- referenced geotechnical reports by GeoEngineers bear upon that system as well as does a "Level I Drainage Study and Preliminary Storm Drainage Calculations" by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated October 12, 1994 (as revised November 4, 1994), all of which are included in the February 11, 1999 "Storm Drainage Report" binder for Cedar Crest Phases I, II, III and IV prepared by Triad Associates and submitted to the City with the Applicant's May 27, 1999 Environmental Checklist for the Applicant's 1999 planning cycle requests. Modifications may or may not have to be made to that system in order to accommodate ultimate development subsequent to City Council approval of the requested CPA and rezone requests. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. N/A Page 11 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc; 1/28/00 • d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: None proposed at this time. Storm ponds have already been installed—see above. 4. Plants a. Check or underline types of vegetation found on the site: X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other: X evergreen tree: fir,_cedar,pine, other: X shrubs X grass pasture wet soil plants: cattail,buttercup,bullrush, skunk cabbage,other water plants: water lily, eelgrass,milfoil, other: other types of vegetation: b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Trees and shrubs have been removed as part of the clearing and grading of the site associated with the previously approved manufactured housing project and previously conducted gravel mining of the site. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: N/A (Note: The sloped areas along the perimeter of the site affected by grading have been hydroseeded.). 5. Animals a. 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, songbirds, other: crows and miscellaneous small birds mammals: deer,bear, elk,beaver, other: squirrels, chipmunks, raccoons fish: bass, salmon,trout, herring, shellfish, other: None b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Page 12 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc; 1/28/00 Unknown. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: N/A 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing,etc. Unknown at this time. Application is for CPA and rezone only. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal: List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: None. Application is for CPA and rezone only. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so,describe. No. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)? Page 13 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 None. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Unknown at this time. Application is for CPA and rezone only. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: N/A 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is vacant, having been recently graded for the previously-approved (and no longer proposed) Cedar Crest manufactured housing project. The current use of the adjacent properties is as follows: Cemetery, King County Transfer station and shops, manufactured home park and multi- family residential. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. None. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so,what? • None. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The current zoning is RMH—Residential Manufactured Homes. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? "RS"—Residential Single family. g. If applicable,what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Page 14 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Yes, the proposed project is partially in Aquifer Protection Area Zone 1 and partially in Aquifer Protection Area Zone 2. (The RC-zoned portion south of the site is designated Greenbelt.) i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Unknown at this time. Application is for CPA and rezone only. However, in view of the proposed maximum number of single-family homes on the proposed R-10 portion of the site being 460 homes and assuming an average of 2.5 persons per home, the estimated total number of persons that would reside on the proposed R-10 portion of the site would be 1,150. • j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts,if any: Not applicable. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans,if any: Consummation of the proposed amendments to the Existing Development Agreement between the City and the Applicant. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Up to a maximum of 460 single-family residential units would be constructed. The units are anticipated to be a mix of high and middle-income housing. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,middle, or low-income housing. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts,if any: Not applicable. Page 15 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Unknown at this time. Application is for CPA and rezone only. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? The view of the mined-out gravel pit would be enhanced by development of the site. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: No aesthetic impacts are anticipated. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur. Unknown at this time. Application is for CPA and rezone only. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? N/A. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts,if any: N/A. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Liberty Park, Cedar River Park, Windsor Hill Park and the Maplewood golf course are all are located within 1 mile of the project. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. Page 16 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreational opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any? Several onsite parks and open spaces are contemplated. City of Renton parks impact fees would also be paid. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation 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. No. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Not applicable. 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. Primary access to the site would be provided by the recently-constructed southward extension of Edmonds Avenue NE from NE 3rd/NE 4th Street. A major connection to Edmonds from the proposed R-10 portion of the site is anticipated approximately 400 feet south of NE 3rd/NE 4th Street. About 2000 feet further south, another roadway connection (this one to the La Colina subdivision, which is also served by Edmonds Avenue) from the proposed R-10 portion of the site is anticipated at the recently- constructed stub street along La Colina's east boundary (i.e., SE 3rd Street). A traffic signal has recently been installed at the intersection of NE 3'9NE 4th Street and Edmonds Avenue NE in anticipation of the development of the subject property. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes, there is public transit service on NE 3rd/NE 4th Street. The nearest bus stop is about 100 feet from the intersection of NE 3rd/NE 4th Street and Edmonds Avenue NE. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Page 17 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 The number of parking spaces that a completed development of the site would have is unknown at this time. No parking spaces would be eliminated. (Application is for CPA and rezone only.) d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Unknown at this time. Application is for CPA and rezone only. (Internal streets will be required for development of the site, most or all of which will be public streets.) 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? If known,indicate when peak volumes would occur. Attachment 3, which is a January 27, 2000 Technical Memorandum from the transportation planning and engineering firm of David I. Hamlin and Associates, sets forth (1) an anticipated trip generation and trip route assignment in connection with full build-out of 460 homes (the proposed maximum number of homes) on the proposed 93.52-acre R-10 portion of the subject property and (2) a Level of Service (LOS) analysis of four street intersections in the area as suggested by Staff of the City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works (i.e., NE 3rd/4th and Edmonds Avenue, NE 3rd and Sunset Boulevard, NE 4th and Monroe Avenue, and Edmonds Avenue and Sunset Boulevard). Page 4 of the Technical Memorandum indicates that 460 single-family homes would be expected to generate a total of 4,402 average daily trips, with 345 of those trips expected during the AM peak hour and 465 of those trips expected during the PM peak hour. Page 6 of the Technical Memorandum states that: "The results of the capacity analyses for the existing and future conditions indicate that all of[those four] intersections are currently operating at an overall level of service "D" or better, and will continue to do so in the future, with or without development impacts associated with the development of 460 single-family homes on the subject property. There will be some increased delay at these intersections as volumes increase over the next four to five years, and some intersection movements may drop below level of service "D"; however, the overall intersection level of service would not be expected to drop below the "D"range ffor any of those four intersections]." Note that the extent and type of development on the proposed 1.45-acre CC portion of the site is unknown at this time and,for that reason, traffic analysis for that portion of the site has not been included in that Technical Memorandum. However, it is Page 18 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 anticipated that, apart from trips associated with future development of the R-10 portion of the subject property and associated with La Colina, the number of trips generated by development of the proposed CC portion of the site will be relatively modest. Analysis of traffic expected to be generated by the CC portion of the property will be conducted at the time that a specific development proposal for that portion of the property is submitted to the City of Renton. Note also that; in Attachment 2 [the copy of the Land Use Study Areas Vehicle Trip Generation Report's Appendix A (from Volume 2 of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Element, dated February 1, 1993)1 extensive trip generation was anticipated from the subject property as part of the McMahon Property special study area. The least intensive of the three different Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map scenarios considered for that special study area was "Single Family/4 Mix" [which, according to Renton's Rebecca Lind, was a precursor to what is currently-the Residential Options (RO) Land Use Map designation, the designation that the Applicant now seeks for the 20 acres of the site currently designated Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN)]. With the proposed maximum of 460 single-family homes on the proposed R-10 portion of the site, the traffic generated by development of the subject property will certainly not exceed the levels anticipated for the subject property by that FEIS. (It will probably be less) g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: City of Renton traffic impact fees would be paid in conjunction with actual development of the subject property. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection,police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Application is for CPA and rezone only. Ultimate development of the site pursuant to approval of the request wold result in an increased need for public services. This has already been contemplated in the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements for the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Element(circa 1992 and 1993). b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. See the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements for the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Element(circa 1992 and 1993). 16. Utilities a. Underline utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. Page 19 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 All utilities are available to the site through a proper extension of services. Extension of services will be the developers'responsibility at the time of ultimate development. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Electricity will be provided by Puget Sound Energy Natural Gas will be provided by Puget Sound Energy Water Service will be provided by the City of Renton Sanitary Sewer will be provided by the City of Renton Telephone Service will be provided by US West C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: W,,Ijel Date Submitted: January 28,2000 atherine Russell, Triad ssociates - • Page 20 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (Do not use this sheet for project actions). Non-project actions are those that do not include a specific project. A non-project action may be a rezone, annexation, or amendments to ordinances. 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. Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent of the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal that would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms.' 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? .The proposed Comprehensive Plan designations and zoning are very similar in intensity of use to the existing Comprehensive Plan designations and will not significantly increase any discharge to water, emissions to air or production of noise. Uses permitted under the proposed categories will not produce, store or release toxic or hazardous substances. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: None proposed since Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Rezone will ultimately result in similar uses to those previously studied and approved by the City for the subject property. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? The site has already been mined and graded and storm drainage/water quality facilities have already been installed. The proposed CPA and rezone will not further affect plants, animals or fish. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: When development of the site ultimately occurs pursuant to the proposed zoning, erosion control and water quality/stormwater detention/retention facilities will be required per City codes. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Future development of the site pursuant to the proposed zoning will have approximately the same impact on energy and natural resources as allowed under the current Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning category. Page 21 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 • i 1 ' Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: None required beyond normal City codes. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated(or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers,threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands,floodplains, or prime farmlands? There are no such environmentally sensitive areas on the site at this time. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: None required or proposed. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? The proposed Comprehensive Plan designations and proposed zones are very similar to the existing ones. No significant affect upon land and shoreline use is anticipated. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: The site-specific development restrictions that the proponent has proposed(see above). 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? The proposal will be very similar in scale to that envisioned by the City in adopting the current Comprehensive Plan and Zoning designations. There will be no significant increase in demand for these services. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: The site-specific development restrictions that the proponent has proposed(see above). 7. Identify, if possible,whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The proposal is not anticipated to conflict with local, state or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. - Page 22 Revised SEPA Checklist for DA Amend and Rezone.doc;1/28/00 Attachment 1 WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: Office of the City Clerk Renton City Hall 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PARTIES l7 'Y This agreement is made and entered into this 1-8th day of�, 1999, by and between the CITY OF RENTON ("City"), a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, and LA PIANTA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Washington limited partnership, the owner of the parcels of property within the area covered by this development agreement ("Owner"). RECITALS WHEREAS, the Owner made application to the City of Renton on March 31, 1999 for Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map amendments and Zoning Map amendments of the Owner's property that is legally described as follows (the"Property"): PARCELS 1, 2, 3, 4, 9 AND 10 CITY OF RENTON,LOT LINE REVISION, FILE NO. LUA-95-200-LLA, RECORDED IN BOOK 108 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 276, 276 A AND 276 B, UNDER RECORDING NUMBER.9604239004, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; BEING A PORTION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. IN THE CITY OF RENTON, • KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF SAID PARCEL 1 LYING WEST OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 16. WHEREAS, the City has assigned City File Nos. LUA 99-054 and 99-M-3 to the Owner's requests; and WHEREAS, the owner seeks to have the following-described portion of the Property(the "RO Area", which is approximately 74.05 acres in size) given a Residential Options (RO) Land Use Map designation and R-10 zoning: PARCELS 1, 2, 3, 4, 9 AND 10 CITY OF RENTON, LOT LINE REVISION, FILE NO. LUA-95-200-LLA, RECORDED IN BOOK 108 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 276, BIElfLopA CrTy Oerr ENTOING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 1 BAR O 3 2000 • RECEIVE® 276 A AND 276 B, UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9604239004, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; BEING A PORTION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH,RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF SAID PARCEL 1 LYING WEST OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 16; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCELS 2, 4, AND 9 CITY OF RENTON, LOT LINE REVISION, FILE NO. LUA-95-200-LLA, RECORDED IN BOOK 108 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 276, 276 A AND 276 B, UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9604239004, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; BEING A PORTION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. IN KING COUNTY WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 16; THENCE, SOUTH 01°04'02" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE THEREOF, 601.36 FEET; THENCE, SOUTH 88°55'58" EAST, PERPENDICULAR TO SAID WEST LINE THEREOF, 378.15 FEET, TO THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT CO. EASEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 2571770,RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE, NORTH 34°05'53" EAST, ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE, 1416.63 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 50°15'19" WEST; THENCE ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 197.38 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°09'26", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 55.66 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 55°54'08" WEST, 958.13 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 399.32 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27° 17' 11", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 190.17 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 83°11'18"WEST, 18.88 FEET, TO A POINT ON A CURVE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 82°55'25"EAST, THENCE ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2470.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02°37'08", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 112.90 FEET TO THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT CO. EASEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 2513101, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE, SOUTH 26°46'02" EAST, ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN THEREOF, 163.94 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN, SOUTH 06°20'40"EAST, 1566.43 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. WHEREAS,the owner seeks to have the remainder of the Property (the"RPN Area", which DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 2 is 20 acres of the site)(the minimum size permitted under Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-57) given a Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN) Land Use Map designation and corresponding R-14 zoning: THAT PORTION OF PARCELS 2, 4, AND 9 CITY OF RENTON, LOT LINE REVISION, FILE NO. LUA-95-200-LLA, RECORDED IN BOOK 108 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 276, 276 A AND 276 B, UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9604239004, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; BEING A PORTION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 16; THENCE, SOUTH 01°04'02" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE THEREOF, 601.36 FEET; THENCE, SOUTH 88°55'58" EAST, PERPENDICULAR TO SAID WEST LINE THEREOF, 378.15 FEET, TO THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT CO. EASEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 2571770, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE, NORTH 34°05'53" EAST, ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE, 1416.63 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 50°15'19" WEST; THENCE ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 197.38 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°09'26", AN ARC DISTANCE • OF 55.66 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 55°54'08" WEST, 958.13 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT,HAVING A RADIUS OF 399.32 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27° 17' 11", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 190.17 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 83°11'18"WEST, 18.88 FEET, TO A POINT ON A CURVE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 82°55'25"EAST, THENCE ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2470.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02°37'08", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 112.90 FEET TO THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT CO. EASEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 2513101, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE, SOUTH 26°46'02" EAST, ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN THEREOF, 163.94 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN, SOUTH 06°20'40" EAST, 1566.43 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. • WHEREAS, the major emphasis of the Owner's proposal is to provide an opportunity for a residential development with a mix of urban residential forms while maintaining a development intensity that it is roughly comparable to conventional, detached single-family development; and DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 3 WHEREAS,to ensure that this emphasis will be achieved, the Owner has had three different analyses performed to provide baseline conditions for development restrictions to be embodied in a Development Agreement between the City and the Owner and recorded to run with the land; and WHEREAS, as the first of the three analyses, Dodds Engineers, Inc. has (a) evaluated the number of conventional, detached single-family lots that could reasonably be achieved under the . Property's current Residential Single Family Land Use Map designation and R-8 zoning and (b) determined that 413 such lots could reasonably be achieved; WHEREAS, as the second of the analyses, the traffic analysis consulting firm David I. Hamlin & Associates has calculated the anticipated number of average daily trips that would be generated by 413 conventional, detached single-family residential lots as calculated under the 1997 Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)Manual and has determined that 3,952 average daily trips would be anticipated for that many lots; WHEREAS, as to the third of the analyses, Dodds Engineers, Inc. has (a) reviewed the detailed stormwater detention calculations for the "Cedar Crest Manufactured Home Park" (a development proposal that was previously-approved for the Property and still vested) to determine the amount of impervious surface that was anticipated for the Property under that development proposal and (b) determined from its review of those calculations that a total of 45.04 acres of impervious surface were anticipated for Cedar Crest; WHEREAS, staff members of the City's Department of Economic Development and Neighborhood Strategic Planning and of the City's Department of Planning/Building/Public Works have reviewed the three above-referenced analyses and concur with their conclusions; WHEREAS, in view of those three analyses, the Owner is willing to have the requested comprehensive plan designations and zoning be granted subject to a Development Agreement that would embody the following site-specific restrictions (the"Site-Specific Restrictions"): (1) Permitted residential development in the RO Area and RPN Area would be limited so that the number and type of residential units would not be expected to generate more than 3,952 average daily trips as calculated under the 1997 Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)Manual; (2) Permitted residential development in the RO Area and RPN Area would be limited so that the total impervious surface coverage due to development would not be allowed to exceed a total of 45.04 acres; • (3) The overall number of residential units of any type could not exceed 460 units; (4) The overall number of flats (which would only be constructed in the RPN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 4 Area)could not exceed 78 units and the number of flats in any such building could not exceed 6 units; and (5) The residential density of the portion of the RPN Area lying within Aquifer Protection Zone 1 shall be limited to 10 dwelling units per acre. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing about the proposed Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments and Zoning Map Amendments and the associated development agreement on July 14, 1999; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Planning and Development Committee report on September 27, 1999; WHEREAS,this development agreement has been presented at a public hearing before the City Council held on the 11th day of October, 1999; and WHEREAS, the City Council has taken into account the public comment presented at that• public hearing; and WHEREAS, this development agreement has been reviewed and approved by the City Council of the City of Renton, Washington; and WHEREAS, this development agreement appears to be in the best interests of the citizens of the City of Renton, Washington; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties do agree as follows: SECTION 1. AUTHORITY Pursuant to RCW 36.70B.170(1), the City and persons with ownership or control of real property are authorized to enter into a development agreement setting forth development standards and any other provisions that shall apply to, govern, and vest the development, use, and mitigation of the development of the real property for the duration of such development agreement. SECTION 2. SUBJECT PROPERTIES A= Illustrative Map: The Property and the RO Area and RPN Area that comprise it are graphically represented in the drawing attached as Exhibit A. B. King County Property Identification Numbers: The following list indicates the King County Property Identification Numbers applicable at the time of this development agreement: 172305-9171-03, 162305-9007-04, 162305-9009-02, 162305-9010-09, 162305- 9006-05 and 162305-9061-10. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 5 SECTION 3. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATIONS AND ZONING: A. Comprehensive Plan Map Designations: The parties agree that, subject to the Site- Specific Restrictions listed on page 4, above, (1) the RO Area shall have a Residential Options (RO) Land Use Map designation and (2) the RPN Area shall have a Residential Planned Neighborhood(RPN)Land Use Map designation. B. Zoning: The parties further agree that, subject to the Site-Specific Restrictions listed on page 4, above, (1) the RO Area shall have an R-10 zoning classification and (2) the RPN Area shall have an R-14 zoning classification. SECTION 4. EFFECT OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Unless amended or terminated, this Development Agreement is enforceable during its term by a party to this Development Agreement; provided, however, only the City may enforce the Site- Specific Restrictions. Development of the Property shall not be subject to a new zoning ordinance or an amendment to a zoning ordinance or development standard adopted by the City after the effective date of this Development Agreement, unless (a) otherwise provided in this Development Agreement or(b) agreed to by the owner(s) of any of the portion(s) of the Property to which such new zoning ordinance or an amendment to a zoning ordinance or development standard shall apply. Any development permit or approval issued by the City for the Property after execution of this Development Agreement must be consistent with this Development Agreement. SECTION 5. AUTHORITY RESERVED Pursuant to RCW'36.70B.170(4) the City reserves its authority to impose new or different regulations to the extent required by a serious threat to public health and safety. SECTION 6. RECORDING Pursuant to RCW 36.70B.190, this development agreement shall be recorded with the real property records of King County. During the term of the development agreement, the agreement is binding on the parties and their successors. SECTION 7. TERM This development agreement runs in perpetuity with the Properties, unless amended or rescinded by the City Council in accordance with the procedures of Section 8, below. With respect to any portion(s)of the Property that are not developed, the parties to this development agreement agree to evaluate the agreement periodically, but not less than every ten (10) years. Where appropriate, periodic review of the development agreement shall generally coincide with the City's evaluation of its entire Comprehensive Plan every ten years, pursuant to RMC Title 4 in effect at the time of this agreement, or as thereafter amended. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 6 SECTION 8. AMENDMENT The provisions of this agreement may only be amended with the mutual consent of the parties;provided, however, that the owner(s)of portion(s)of the Property shall be entitled to amend the development agreement from time-to-time (with the consent of the City) as it relates to their portion(s)of the Property. No additions or alterations of the terms of this agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and formally approved and executed by the duly authorized agents of the City and of the owner(s)of the portion(s) of the Property to which such amendment(s) relate. The City shall consider proposed amendments to the development agreement after a public hearing by the designated hearing body, and any amendments shall be adopted by ordinance or resolution of the City Council, and thereafter recorded. DATED this 1-8Th day of November, 1999. CITY OF RENTON �p1 .`s'�-- B = c0.,". Jess Tanner, Mayor Attest: _ Marilyn . Pe sen, City Clerk Approved as to Form: . oe,„„.444(?7/1424-. Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney LA PIANTA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Washington limited partnership By: METRO LAND DEVELOPMENT, INC., a Washington corporation, its General • Partner By: �z�: f .p/47 1 r i en Dr ate f M.A. Segale, es d t DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 7 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that on the day of-November, 1999 JESSE TANNER appeared before me and acknowledged that he signed the instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the Mayor of the City of Renton, the Washington municipal corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said City for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute such instrument, and that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate seal of said City. Dated: (a—$—99 q(DAUtAk,tUati74/1 Signature e 'A n , Titl� J�x My Appointment Expires STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that M.A. SEGALE is the person who appeared before me and acknowledged that he signed the instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as president of METRO LAND DEVELOPMENT, INC., a Washington corporation, in its capacity as the general partner of LA PIANTA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Washington limited partnership, to be the free and voluntary act of such limited partnership for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: /'7, / -97 A. Py .11>t + ' t Sign e _ • kkOTARy `cri: //, •4-7'%417/1-- A •• «. N • Title 6(1"-4-1_ i T4: P(l�BL Z. o M • .�' / e� ,'g�A s. '"1 Y �, 2°°� ';.'r My Appointme t E pires tttt��F: , t1. ��A�_A -t F12009\040\dev-agrmt\Agmt.F6 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT--Page 8 i • EXHIBIT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 99—M-3 RStoROandRPN • 1 w NE -5`6 5� ) 0 c . o , ii • v• 1 -II RO RPN RO /1/ooi, , RC (no change) • Ti, . 37=Fl4trirlqt1 l I l EttQ • 3 „7\77 Land use designation boundary 0 500 1,000 C Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning 0 Dennlaon 1:6 0 0 0 5 October 1099 Attachment 2 LAND USE STUDY AREAS VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION REPORT Introduction The Renton City Council has requested City staff to study alternative land uses for three areas in Renton: the . North Renton area including the adjacent Airport Way area, the McMahon Property area in East Renton and the Talbot Road area in Southeast Renton. The following is the traffic analysis element of the study. This report provides information on the estimated vehicle trips generated by each alternative land use proposed for each of the three study areas, compares the vehicle trips generated by each land use alternative and presents the findings resulting from the comparison. Study Areas and Land Use Alternatives The following information on the study areas and land use alternatives was provided by the Long Range Planning Section of the City of Renton. North Renton/Airport Way Study Area: The North Renton area, as shown on Figure 1, is bounded by Logan Avenue North, North 6th Street, Garden Avenue North, North 4th Street, North 3rd Place, Bronson Way and the Cedar River. The three land use alternatives identified for this area are presented in Table 1. Land Use Alternative 1, the Planning Commission proposal, has a nearly even split between single family (441 units) and multi-family use (444 units) and a majority of financial, insurance, real estate services (office) mixed with some retail, education, manufacturing and warehouse uses. Jobs and building square footage under this proposal total 2836 and 995,000 respectively. Land Use Alternative 2, the neighborhood proposal, represents existing land use and assumes no change in land use in future years. Land Use Alternative 2 has a nearly even split between single family (441 units) and multi-family (415 units) use and a majority of financial, insurance, real estate services (office) use mixed with some retail, education, manufacturing and warehouse uses. Jobs and building square footage under this proposal total 2199 and 707,000 respectively. The main difference between Land Use Alternative 1 and 2 is the amount of retail, education, manufacturing and warehouse use (311,000 square feet in Alternate 1 and 117,000 square feet in Alternate 2). Land Use Alternative 3, representing requests, proposes a predominance of multi-family (923 units), financial, insurance, real estate services (office) and retail uses. Total jobs and building square footage is 3,324 and 1,112,000 respectively. The Airport Way area, also shown on Figure 1, is bounded by Airport Way, Logan Avenue South, South Tobin Street and Lake Avenue South. The three land use alternatives identified for this study area are presented in Table 1. Land Use Alternative 1, existing use, assumes the existing single and multi-family uses and the existing financial, insurance, real estate services(office), and retail and manufacturing uses wll not change in future years. Land Use Alternative 2,. the Planning Commission proposal, assumes a more intense mix of financial, insurance,real estate services (office) and retail and manufacturing uses with some multi-family use (26 Units) only. Jobs and building square footage in Land Use Alternative 2 total 505 and 208,000 respectively, compared to 190 jobs and building square footage of 86,000 in Land Use Alternative 1. Land Use Alternative 3, the commercial/single family proposal, assumes a predominance of single family units (39) and one-half the jobs (252) and building square footage (104,000) for financial, insurance, real estate services (office) and retail and manufacturing uses than proposed in Land Use Alternative 2. McMahon Property Study Area: This area, as shown on Figure 2, is located east of Blaine Avenue NE and s between NE 3rd/4th Street and the top of the bluff above Maple Valley Highway. The three land use alternatives • identified for this study area are presented in Table 1. Land Use Alternative 1 pw s a predominance of financial, insurance, real estate services (office) with some manufacturing and a lesser amo �.�L�fJ.ra Ta�al jobs and square footage for the mixed office, retail, manufacturing uses are 7028 and 2,425,000Rl lvlel'r'. MAR 0 3 2000 RECEIVE® 4.' Land Use Study Area • Page 2 • Vehicle Trip Generation Report December 16, 1992 Residential use is not proposed in this alternative. Land Use Alternative 2 is a 50-50 mix of single family and multi-family dwellings. Land Use Alternative 3 has approximately 90% of the area as education use with the remainder as retail, financial, insurance, real estate services (office) and single family residential uses. Total jobs and square footage for the education, retail and office uses are 4279 and 2,278,000, respectively. Also included in Table 1 are estimated jobs and building square footage for existing land uses in this study area. Talbot Road Study Area: This area, as shown on Figure 3, is located north of South 192nd Street and between • SR 167 and the top of the hill east of Talbot Road. The two land use alternatives identified for this study area are presented in Table I. Land Use Alternative 1 is totally multi-family use while Land Use Alternative 2 is a 50-50 mix of single family and multi-family units. Also included in Table 1 is the estimated dwelling units for the existing residential use in this study area. Trip Generation Estimates of dwelline units,jobs and building square footage for the land use alternatives in the three study areas were provided by the Long Range Planning Section of the City of Renton. Trip generation rates for each land use are based on information in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trio Generation manual (fifth edition, 1991). The trip rate per square foot of building floor area was used because the Trip Generation manual did not provide information on trip rate per employee for several of the land uses. Detailed listings of land use data and estimated trip generated by each land use alternative in the three study areas are provided in Appendix A. Table 2 summarizes the trip generation estimates of daily and PM peak hour trips for each land use alternative in the study areas. These estimates represent average daily and PM peak hour trips and indicate future traffic demands on the street system after "build-out" of each land use alternative. Also included in Table 2 are the estimated daily and PM peak hour trip generation for the existing land uses in each study area. Trip Generation by Land Use Alternative-Summary of Findines North Renton Study Area: • Land Use Alternative 2 (Neighborhood Proposal) is estimated to generate the least daily and PM peak hour trips (14,780 and 1660 respectively) of the three land use alternatives. (It should be noted that the Neighborhood Proposal is representative of existing conditions.) Land Use Alternative 1 (Planning Commission Proposal) is estimated to generate 18,440 daily and 2130 PM peak hour trips. Land Use Alternative 3 (Requests) is estimated to generate the most daily and PM peak hour trips (25,050 and 2930, respectively). Airport Way Study Area: • • Land Use Alternative 1 (representing,existing conditions) is estimated to generate the least daily and PM peak hour trips (2200 and 270, respectively) of the three land use alternatives. Land Use Alternative 3 (Planning Commission proposal) is estimated to generate 3010 daily trips and 380 PM peak hour trips. Land Use Alternative 2 (Commercial/Single Family) is estimated to generate the most daily and PM peak hour trips (5130 and 650, respectively). McMahon Property Study Area: ( • Land Use Alternative 2 (SF/4 mix) is estimated to generate the least daily and PM peak hour trips (8510 and 840, respectively) of the three land use alternatives. Land Use Alternative 1'(office) is estimated to generate 24,020 daily trips and 3110 PM peak hour trips. Land Use Alternative 3 (Education - Institution) is ( a C. CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING & PUBLIC WORKS •..N\-- .-L K_I WISHING TON. /r. - --:----- ..—::— -:. '. 7 ..............-N---Fil'-----"Li-"? ._\ .c? \! % • • • Ct A , i.. n., . _R .. { Tf s. •\ jI1 A S " ' ' • 3I 5 . a I • >�L.L.,____::: ST_ x 7 -. '3\ . - K :7t-3-1-1 1 ‘ b\71 x . xi t t....1-!: 'cl - t---- ..Mi;• ?i:0 :•igi. •gg:•g: AIRPORT WAY STUDY AREA ;sue({i ?'•% ;:: ;:, { LANDG` I USE ALTERNATIVES PLANNING COMMISSION PROPOSAL(CA ZONE) '� •>.6 r"f no;.;:ii.: IT 7 3. COmMERCIAUSINGL£FAMILY. • '` :-.. :j ; H •kS [ 1,[..sI N�1L /ri :.k: „ :,:::..:::. D,:zs_ii :„. : -•.i:•:-•::•::-•::•:7..-•:7 ••i1". •:,••••f•.:.:,:-•i.- E1:, � .... • .1 :4: .: •ct" "a" i,,,,,::::::• k?.:: ,,:::::::, c,..,,,,:„:,.x, ...._ • si -2 il It.L...;;;; ;. .1i1;;;102PCV1 . 1..lf.:.'".; .St INI:.).:. :.:.••:.';,1:''''s". :5. ..% 1.7.''';1;;;;41 . ‘-- ‘ 4*.1.0.0::',f. ...,.,,,„..,.,..mm. . i n . i ,.._ :::_ad ___, . . .10.1. .,„ Li .... . .g.z.::,,,:.: ,...:..,i 24" 4W4k...:1!:-. 1 J IT us x 5.i 4 Ci7 III JTkL .^ —� 'VP1314 NORTH RENTON STUDY AREA. .1 ---. .1- 1- a LAND USE ALTERNATIVES 1. PLANNING COMMISSION PROPOSAL 2. NEIGHBORHOOD PROPOSAL a� }-c 3. REQUEST'S } •A.-4 % ms r--4 11 Y I! T2 '!I:i77--._== !1 L ,%.. ..........3 FIGURE 1 , C CITY OF •RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING & PUBLIC WORKS I 5 \ \1.2"'Lti. I,I-` 0 iLej I)^ I y T£ III '�,11 . \\ 4144.=k!, ;I r, 11,_s_L-a. • wf,1 rw in ` S 1 ,_;_:._.il, 4.L.2 A.. N.<:/-11 § h.. .. w II en. II 5.7 91 It— • . ill • -- .• sc.5.,-..t ST, LQ-.P -1,, .c-I----- • . ..„., i. s! . . i,..., c____,,[-r : i .,,,Ar--A ,i i • 11 ,...„.„ • Cz21[!icc: /-P-_ Lie'' ?"<' '-ii--1--------Ti \ LI • . lei s C NE'I:4. i 13 --T . ...................1 . 7I,I_D,... [g-- (v.f.,..1s.z.\iC.__.../._...o..„.\,.,...7,c:..t..,,..:.....:::,.....za..r_.:,:3..::;....:.z.:„..,.:s.:.:z.:,.:...:::?.:...:..'.:...:.../z:....z.::.:..z..:r..::.„:.*..::..:.:...z4:.:.::.4::::...:::..:::z..:.:0....::..„.:::.:*:..,:.:......:...,........::2..:..,.....0.....:......:../?.:z...z.z:..:...:#..m..::::...::..:.:.:,.:..:4..:...::.:„,,,...:..::,::,..„.......:.......0..:...::".k.,.....::...::..,z:..z..:.§,...:„4..:.:•:::;.:,::„:..:.1:...:..:.x„,.:.:....,..„..::...:.„..„.z:.,...6..::1„.;...::.„.§„:,1.:„?.:„:::.,.:.:....0..:..::.,*..:.:z..:..:,:..4„„.m:..1....:.:......:„..4:.:.1„...:...:....„:::./:1.2:.:?.§..•:....::.z.:..:..:,:..::.:.„.::..:.::.0,..:.m.„*....*:..2::..,.:.1.?:„g.:::.4„:6?.1„.?.§.../.:.....:,..z....,..:.N..:.....,.z:...i:....,62:.z.1.:„.:..,...„:.i.„.::,..z:„i0.z...,.:...:.:...?:.:./.,.•.:..„..,.,4..,7:....:.,...:.::.:,:.:.,„.::.::,.:?:.1:...:•:.„..:.,.::..„::...z:.:.:*.:?:....,:...::.:::0:....:..:.:....,:.:.z.0..:::::...,..„m1..,.:.,...?m::.:7e.„,„...1,....,,...0.,:.„.:..,.....:...:...?,::..;....:?...:„...;§:.:.1....::....:z.:.:...0.,.:g..:...:.::?.:.:....•:,::..1/4./:.:.::.,.::1z..i:.::.,„::...,:.:.:z..:.::.:.:.„4z.;..:.:..:....:w„....::4..:„;.:..:.,.:.:....Q.:.:..,.:.:?/,v...1,..:.....:.:..:.z.z.,:.,:.§.:..,:.v„:...„::.,,.::..::.:::.1:.::..,.:*.:..:...::..,::•....:i::...,:.:z:.:..:.„:•:.i..•..:,....::..:...1./.,:..x:...:..:..,:z,:.....:.:.:..:..:x:;./.:..,..::,„..u...::.,0..,../...::....:.....1.,.„..„...;:•..:......:,.....:::„.:.0..§,::?.:,1/4c.,..:..:.:..,z.:..?...:izz:4.„..,.. •;ter::::: r o - I'Cr> �r }��`%�snj'}��7�Y `�;^� ��'��r�5�} ? r ; t �s� {::r¢V�rr!:7Y4 • f :1,2...11..:.:....,........4::....:....i:..., C.. � 1 U - l ,.,c.,5,._ :_c.. 1 -t .......•.::.„.„.§:..z.m..„: • •. . .t.e... • •• E • • McMAHON PROPERTY STUDY AREA • • • LAND USE ALTERNATIVES •• 1. OFFICE . OL;•"1, '` • 2. SINGLE FAMILY/4 MIX 3. SINGLE FAMILY/EDUCATION-INSTITUTION CENTER 0.01:N • ; • • —: f • .?i,(2/-••.2%• N C\i/ At:*s\.1, - - ----•• • Itis • ( RGURE.r . CITY OF RENTON 1 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING & PUBLIC WORKS } — -1 zitili ---- -... IL)L_JI., I _ \ l'il WI / sr b . _ n. � sr 1 I S I �f� .. I \ I;n I . I . zi i 31 s te r, `� .r+ ii J g text 5 r J .4., :rtti, .. , �'. a. i ,z li , [a' '''..1 . -c I,. 0 ) 1 g w :7-1 .. _Fr Mil` — r -c b! be Si .:k. \c -c -c c g a -4. gl 3 SI L ,i S 172-A S -.-, _3set 21 • i 'a • :111111 — • .' V tl.t s bf b1 Ilig I ' I �a I a / ,r Q - i i . . Ti aLBOT ROAD STUDY AREA i . LAND USE AL I ERNA I i GS dtULTI F,'utiIILY 2. 51NCLE FA,IIILY/4�IIY i k .9 • r c J FC- I I ,� I bi _n I2. .� 1_____ s g�oe, n^^ I Hi I_ I r J I I _ : _ • I r ._I _. . 1 . '1.1 1[_ .____1DRI .) • .` FIGURE 3 • • TABLE 1 STUDY AREA LAND USE ALTERNATIVES NORTH RENTON/AIRPORT WAY STUDY AREA LAND USE ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 ALTERNATIVE 3 EXISTING PLANNING COMLMISSION PROPOSAL NEIGHBORHOOD PROPOSAL REQUESTS • NORTH RENTON AREA Single Famiiy 42 Units Oil Units 441 Units 441 Units Multi-Family 444 Units 415 Units 923 Units CIS Units Total 835 856 965 856 Retail 240 Jobs 108,000 Sq.Ft. 128 Jobs 58.000 Sq.Ft. 709 Jobs 319.000 Sq.Ft. 128 Jobs 58.000 Sq. Education 76 Jobs 46.000 Sq.Ft. 40 Jobs 24,000 Sq.Ft. 0 0 40 Jobs 24.000 Sq. Manufacturing 201 lobs 111.000 Sq.Ft. 63 Jobs 35,000 Sq.Ft. 26 Jobs 16,000 Sq.Ft. 63 Jobs 35,000 Sq. Financial.Insurance,Real ESIatC SCNICCs(FIRES) 2231 Jobs 684.000 Sq.Ft. 1968 Jobs 590,000 Sq.Ft. 2589 Jobs 777.000 Sq.Ft. 1968 Jobs 590.000 Sq. Warehouse 24 Jobs 46.000 Sq.Ft. 0 0 0 0 0 Total 2336 995.000 2199 707.000 3324 1.112.000 2199 707,000 ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 ALTERNATIVE 3 EXISTING EX1STLNG USE PLANNING CO\LQIISSION PROPOSAL COMMERCIAL/SINGLE FAMILY (CA ZONE) AIRPORT WAY AREA • 0 Units 39 Units 18 Units Single Family I8 Units 3 Units 19 Units Multi-Family 19 Units 266 Units 1 Total 37 26 52 37 Retail 70 Jobs 32.000 Sq.Ft. 202 Jobs 91,000 Sq.Ft. 101 Jobs 45,000 Sq.Ft. 70 Jobs 32.000 Sq. Manufacturing 70 lobs 39.000 Sq.Ft. 101 Jobs 56.000 Sq.Ft. 50 Jobs 28,000 Sq.Ft. 70 Jobs 39.000 Sq. Financial.Insurance.Rest 50 Jobs 15.000 Sq. Eclat.Services(FIRES) 50 Jobs 15.000 Sq.Ft. 702 Jobs 61.000 Sq.Ft. 101 Jobs 31.000 Sq.Ft. Total 190 86,000 505 208.000 252 104,000 190 86.000 11.1c IAHON PROPERTY STUDY AREA LAND USE ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 ALTERNATIVE 3 EXISTING OFFICE SINGLE FAMILY/4 MIX SINGLE FAMILY/EDUCATION• INSTITUTION CE.NTEi Single Family 0 575 Units q 575 Units 45 Units 00 Multi-Family 45 Total 0 1150 Retail 351 Jobs 158.000 Sq.Ft. 0 0 214-Jobs 96,000 Sq.Ft. 0 0 Education 0 0 0 0 3209 Jobs 1.925.000 Sq.Ft. 0 0 Manufacturing 1054 lobs 508.000 Sq.Ft. 0 0 0 0 10 Jobs 6,000 Sq. Financial.Insurance.Real 257,000 Sq.Ft. 0 0 856 lobs 195 Jobs 59.000 Sq. 5623 lobs 1.687.000 Sq.Ft. Ewal.Services(FIRES) 4279 2.278,000 205 65.000 Total 702s 2.425.000 0 0 • TALBOT ROAD STUDY AREA LAND USE ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 EXISTING MULTI FAMILY SINGLE FAMILY/4 MIX Units Singlc Family 0 305 to 450 Units 25 0 Multi Family 940 to 1210 Units 305 In 450 Units Total 940 to 1210 610 to 900 25 Source: City of Renton Long Range Planning Section RLM]1A:TI*Evf.Mtjb , • • , TABLE 2 LAND USE STUDY AREAS SUMMARY OF VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION • PROPOSED LAND USE EXISTING LAND USE STUDY AREA ESTIMATED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED • ' DAILY TRIPS PM PEAK DAILY TRIPS PM PEAK •HOUR TRIPS HOUR TRIPS North Renton • ,Land Use Alternative 1 18,440 2130 14,780 1660 (Planning Commission Proposal) Land Use.Alternative 2 * 14,780 1660 --- --- (Neighborhood Proposal) Land Use Alternative 3 25,050 2930 14,780 1660 (Requests) Airport NVav Land Use Alternative 1 2200 270 --- --- (Existing Use) Land Use Alternative 2 5130 • 650 2200 270 (Planning Commission Proposal) Land.Use Alternative 3 3010 380 2200 270 (Commercial/Single Family) , *Represents existing land use 4% McMahon Property Land Use Alternative 1 24,020 3,110 950 130 • (Office) * * Land Use Alternative 2 8,510 840 950 130 (Single Family/4 Mix) Land Use Alternative 3 32,070 2,950 950 130 (Single Family/Education Institution) ** Includes retail and manufacturing as supporting uses. Talbot Road Land Use Alternative 1 5300 to 6500 480 to 590 300 30 (Multi Family) • Land Use Alternative 2 4870 to 6800 470 to 630 300 30 (Single Family /4 Mix) • RL\I-]/c.w/A:T'Jb - Land Use Study Area • Page 3 Vehicle Trip Generation Report December 16, 1992 estimated to generate 32,070 daily trips and 2950 PM peak hour trips. •Land Use Alternative 3 generates 160 less PM peak hour trips than Land Use Alternative 1. This minor difference in PM peak hour trips is attributable to differences in peaking characteristics between office and education uses. • • All three land use alternatives generate significantly more trips than the existing land uses. For Land Use; Alternatives 1 and 3, the combination of location, topography, existing traffic level of service, aquifer and adjacent single family neighbors make for an exceptionally challenging situation to addressing transportation • needs. The trip generation indicates SOV needs equivalent to a 50% increase in capacity on Sunset Blvd. at N. 3rd and Maple Valley Highway intersections. Both of these intersections are currently operating at level of service F. Capacity improvements would require costly grade separations on Sunset Blvd. and Maple Valley Highway, I-405 revisions and extensive R/W acquisition. In addition, such improvements would be • located in Zone 1 of the aquifer and would set up travel patterns that could have very negative impacts on residential neighborhoods, particularly in the Highlands. Therefore, the magnitude of new office development proposed in Land Use Alternative 1 must be.located west of I-405 near regional transit centers. The institutional zoning proposed in Land Use Alternative 3 has some potential, but it would need to be greatly scaled down in terms of trip generation. • Each of the three land use alternatives could generate transit ridership; however, the densities proposed under Land Use Alternatives 1 and 3 should be located along future regional transit service connections. Talbot Road Study Area: . • Land Use Alternative 1 (Multi-family)is estimated to generate from 5300 to 6500 daily trips and 480 to 590 PM peak hour trips. Land Use Alternative 2(Single Family/Multi-Family Mix) is estimated to generate 4870 • to 6800 daily trips and 470 to 630 PM peak hour trips. At the low end of the range of estimated daily and PM peak hour trips, Land Use Alternative 2 generates less daily and PM peak hour trips than Alternative 2. At the high end of the range of estimated daily and PM peak hour trips, Land Use Alternative 1 generates less daily and PM peak hour trips. This reversal in trip generation is attributable to assumptions that multi-family use has a greater potential to generate transit ridership than single family use. Therefore, as the number of multi-family units increase, transit ridership increases and fewer vehicle trips are generated. • Both land use alternatives could generate transit ridership. For the reason stated above, Land Use Alternative 1 has higher transit ridership potential. R L.N.3/ww•/A:LUSTUDY'i • • APPENDIX A Study Area Land Use and Estimated Trip Generation TABLE A-1 NORTH RENTON/AIRPORT WAY STUDY AREA Summary of Land Use and Estimated Trip Generation DAILY DAILY PM PEAK PM PEAK LAND USE UNITS QUANTITY • TRIPS TRIPS HOUR TRIPS HOUR PER UNIT PER UNIT TRIPS Airport Way Alternativel - Existing Use . Single Family d.u. 18 11.8 212 1.28 23 • Multi Family d.u. 19 10.7 203 0.82 16 Retail 1000 gsf 32 40.67 1300 4.93 158 Manufacturing 1000 gsf 39 3.55 138 0.75 29 Office(FIRES *) 1000 gsf 15 . 23.1 347 3.16 47 Warehouse 1000 gsf 0 Total: 2200 273 'Airport Way Alternative 2 - Planning Commission Proposal Single Family d.u. 0 --- --- --- --- Multi Family d.u. 26 10.11 263 0.77 26 Retail 1000 gsf 91 40.67 3.700 4.93 449 Manufacturing 1000 gsf 56 3.64 203 . 0.75 42 Office(FIRES *) 1000 gsf 61 15.84 966 2.12 129 Warehouse 1000 gsf 0 --- Total: 5132 646 Airport Way Alternative 3 - Commercial /Single Family Single Family d.u. 39 11 429 1.18 46 Multi Family d.u. 13 5 150 0.86 11 Retail 1000 gsf 45 40.67 1830 4.93 223 Manufacturing 1000 gsf 28 3.41 96 0.75 20 Office(FIRES *) 1000 gsf 31 19 509 2.57 80 Warehouse 1000 gsf 0 Total: 3014 380 * FIRES = Financial, Insurance, Real Estate Services d.u. = dwelling units _ gsf = gross square footage of floor area Source: Daily and PM peak hour trip rates per unit based on information in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)Trio Generation manual (5th edition, 1991) KLM.3'.+lA:TA35b • TABLE A-1 NORTH RENTON/AIRPORT WAY STUDY AREA Summary of Land Use and Estimated Trip Generation I DAILY DAILY PM PEAK PM PEAK LAND USE UNITS QUANTITY TRIPS TRIPS HOUR TRIPS HOUR 1 PER UNIT PER UNIT TRIPS North Renton Alternative 1 - Planning Commission Proposal - Single Family d.u. 441 9.18 4,048 0.94 412 . I Multi Family d.u. 445 6.09 2.710 0.55 250 Retail 1000 gsf 108 40.67 4,390 4.93 532 Education 1000 gsf 46 11.2 515 0.28 13 1 Manufacturing 1000 gsf 111 3.77 418 0.75 83 Office(FIRES *) 1000 gsf 684 8.77 6,000 1.12 766 Warehouse 1000 gsf 46 7.76 357 1.67 78 ITotal: 18,438 2,134 North Renton Alternative 2 - Neighborhood Proposal Single Family d.u. 441 9.18 4,048 0.94 415 I Multi Family d.u. 415 6.16 2,556 0.56 232 Retail 1000 gsf 58 40.67 2,359 4.93 286 Education 1000 gsf 24 13.46 323 0.28 7 1 Manufacturing 1000 gsf 35 3.51 123 0.75 26 Office(FIRES *) 1000 gsf 590 9.10 5,369 1.17. 690 Warehouse 1000 gsf 0 --- --- --- Total: 14,778 1,656 North Renton Alternative 3 - Requests Single Family d.u. 42 11 462 1.20 50 1 Multi Family d.u. 923 5.34 4,929 0.48 443 Retail 1000 gsf 319 40.67 12,974 4.93 1573 Education 1000 gsf 0 --- --- ---- --- I Manufacturing 1000 gsf 16 3.85 61 0.75 12 Office(FIRES *) 1000 gsf 777 8.53 6,628 1.09 847 Warehouse 1000 gsf 0 --- --- ---- - Total: 25,054 2,925 I North Renton - Existing Land Use 1 Single Family d.u. 441 9.18 4,048 0.94 415 Multi Family d.u. 415 6.16 2,556 0.56 232 Retail 1000 gsf 58 40.67 2,359 . 4.93 286 Education 1000 gsf 24 13.46 323 0.28 7 • 1 Manufacturing 1000 gsf 35 3.51 123 0.75 26 1 Office(FIRES *) 1000 gsf 590 9.10 5,369 1.17 690 - Warehouse 1000 gsf 0 --- --- - I Total: 14,778 1,656 1 * FIRES = Financial, Insurance, Real Estate Services d.u. = dwelling units I gsf = gross square footage of floor area Source: Daily and PM peak hour trip rates per unit based on information in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)Trip Generation manual (5th edition, 1991) , ` KLMM.3I -./A:TAIiib , a • • , TABLE A-2 McMAHON PROPERTY Summary of Land Use and Estimated Trip Generation ' DAILY DAILY PM PEAK PM PEAK • LAND USE TYPE UNITS QUANTITY TRIPS TRIPS HOUR TRIPS HOUR PER UNIT PER UNIT TRIPS - Alternative 1 - Office • Single Family d.u. 0 --- --- --- --- Multi Family d.u. 0 --- --- --- --- Retail 1000 gsf 158 40.67 6,425 4.93 780 Education 1000 gsf 0 --- --- --- --- Manufacturing 1000 gsf 580 3.85 2,235 0.75 435 Office(FIRES *) 1000 gsf 1687 9.11 15,370 1.12 1890 Warehouse 1000 gsf 0 --- ---- --- Total: 24,020 3105 • Alternative 2 - Single Family/4 Mix Single Family d.u. 575 9 5,175 0.91 525 Multi Family d.u. 575 5.82 3,345 0.54 310 Retail 1000 gsf 0 --- --- --- --- Education 1000 gsf 0 --- --- --- --- Manufacturing 1000 gsf 0 --- --- --- --- Office(FIRES *) 1000 gsf 0 --- --- --- --- Warehouse 1000 gsf 0 --- --- -- - Total: 8,510 835 Alternative 3 - Single Family/Education-Institution Center Single Family d.u. 45 11 495 1.17 53 Multi Family d.u. 0 --- --- --- --- Retail 1000 gsf 96 40.67 3,905 4.93 473 Education 1000 gsf 1925 12.87 24,775 1.06 2040 Manufacturing 1000 gsf 0 --- --- --- --- Office(FIRES *) 1000 gsf 257 11.24 2,890 1.47 379 Warehouse 1000 gsf 0 : --- ---- --- - Total: 32,065 2,945 Existing Land Use Manufacturing. 1000 gsf 6 3.33 20 0.75 5 Office(FIRES*) 1000 gsf 59 15.84 930 2.12 125 950 130 FIRES = Financial, Insurance, Real Estate Services d.u. = dwelling units esf = gross square footaee of floor area KL%43l..k/A TA'.jb • ti TABLE A-3 TALBOT ROAD STUDY AREA Summary of Land Use and Estimated Trip Generation DAILY DAILY PM PEAK PM PEAK LAND USE TYPE UNITS QUANTITY TRIPS TRIPS HOUR TRIPS HOUR PER UNIT PER UNIT TRIPS • Alternative 1 -Multi Family Multi Family d.u. 940 5.62 5300 0.51 480 or Multi Family d.u. 1210 5.37 6500 0.49 590 Alternative 2 - Single Family/4 Mix Single Family d.u. 305 9.45 2,880 0.97 296 Multi Family d.u. 305 6.51 1.985 0.58 177 Total: 4,865 -473 or Single Family d.u. 450 9.11 4100 0.87 390 Multi Family d.u. 450 6 2700 0.54 240 Total: 6800 630. Existing Land Use Single Family d.u. 25 12 300 1.2 30 Multi Family d.u. 0 -- Total: 300 30 HLM.3I x•IA:TA2/jb d TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM CEDAR CREST REZONE RENTON, WASHINGTON January 2000 DAVID I. HAMLIN AND ASSOCIATES 1319 DEXTER AVENUE NORTH, SUITE 270 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98109 (206) 285-9035 oF�FI c/1)-op�A lit to irk%O TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM January 27, 2000 TO: Dave Halinen, Halinen Law Offices FROM: Geri Reinart, P.E., David I. Hamlin & Associates SUBJECT: Proposed Rezone of the Cedar Crest Site (Southeast Quadrant of the Intersection of NE 3'd/4t Street and Edmonds Avenue BACKGROUND/PROJECT DESCRIPTION The purpose of this memorandum is to briefly summarize the trip generation/assignment and the potential traffic impacts associated with the proposed rezone of the Cedar Crest site. The property was the subject of a previous traffic impact analysis for a senior manufactured housing development back in 1994. The proposed rezone would allow the potential development of up to 460 single-family lots on the site. The change in zoning and eventual site development would result in traffic impacts beyond those summarized in the 1994 development proposal. It is my understanding that further traffic analysis associated with the development of this site would occur as part of the subdivision process. The information contained herein is intended to summarize, for use in the rezone's SEPA checklist, the potential impacts associated with development under the proposed rezone, including the trip generation/assignment and a level of service analysis of critical intersections impacted by development of up to 460 lots. The subject property is located south of NE 31d/4th Street and east of Edmonds Avenue. Edmonds Avenue was recently extended south from NE 3'd/4th Street as part of the development of the La Colina subdivision. The Edmonds Avenue extension would serve as the sole public access to the subject property. (An emergency vehicle access road connecting to La Colina and its roadway connection to Cedar Crest will provide a secondary emergency access.) The property is currently undeveloped, and was previously used as a gravel mine. ROADWAY SYSTEM Adjacent roadways in the vicinity of the site include the following: 1 • NE 3rd/4`h Street is an east-west arterial consisting of two lanes in each direction plus left-turn storage. Curbs, gutters, and street lights have been installed on both sides of the street, with sidewalk on the north side. In the vicinity of the site, NE 3'a/4'h Street is characterized by a sloping vertical curve that also includes some horizontal curvature. Traffic signals have been installed along NE 3'd/41 Street at major intersections including Sunset Blvd., Bronson Way, Edmonds Avenue, Jefferson Avenue, and Monroe Avenue. The posted speed limit is 35 mph and the adjacent land uses are a mix of commercial, residential, and educational uses. • Edmonds Avenue is a two lane north-south street that has recently been extended south from NE 3'd/4`h Street as part of the site access for the adjacent La Colina subdivision. Edmonds Avenue, north of NE 3r'/41 Street, is striped for two lanes, curb and gutter have been installed on both sides of the street, and sidewalk exists on the west side of the street. The adjacent land use is multi-family residential between NE 3'd Street and NE 4th Street, transitioning to single-family residential further to the north. TRIP GENERATION/ASSIGNMENT The 1'1'h Trip Generation Manual(published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, 6th Edition, 1997) has been used to estimate the number of trips that can be expected to be generated by a development of this type. ITE Land Use Code 210, Single Family Detached Housing, was chosen as the appropriate trip rate for use in this assessment. Table 1 shows the trip generation for the proposed rezone using the average trip rates. 2 TABLE 1 ESTIMATED TRIP GENERATION CEDAR CREST REZONE • (460 LOTS) TIME PERIOD TRIP RATE TOTAL TRIPS Daily 9.57 4402 AM Peak Hour In 86 Out 259 Total .75 345 PM Peak Hour In 298 Out 167 Total 1.01 465 The trip generation values shown in Table 1 indicate that the proposed development of the Cedar Crest site with 460 single-family homes could generate more traffic than the amount generated under the previous development scenario, although specific trip generation based on the ultimate site development plan may result in slightly lower trip generation. The estimated trip distribution/assignment for the rezone has been shown on Figures 1, 2, and 3. Figure 1 shows the estimated trip distribution for the site by percent and daily volume. This distribution is based on data used in the previous development proposal for the subject property, which was based on information provided by the City of Renton (i.e., traffic counts and land use data). It is expected that the majority of the site traffic would be distributed to and from the west where access to the regional transportation facilities is available and the majority of employment and activity centers are located. As a result of this, the project will have its greatest off-site impact on the intersection of NE 3'1/4th Street and Sunset Boulevard (326 PM peak hour trips), after its initial impact at the intersection of NE 3`d/461 Street and Edmonds Avenue. Somewhat lesser impacts at the intersections of NE 4th Street and Monroe Avenue (116 PM peak hour trips) and Edmonds Avenue and Sunset Boulevard (23 PM peak hour trips) will occur. 3 LEVEL OF SERVICE The following intersections in the area were analyzed with respect to level of service for the proposed rezone. NE 3'd/4t Street and Edmonds Avenue NE 3rd Street and Sunset Boulevard NE 4th Street and Monroe Avenue Edmonds Avenue and Sunset Boulevard "Level of service" is a common term used in the Traffic Engineering profession that is defined as a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic stream, and its perception by motorists and/or passengers. These conditions are usually described in terms of such factors as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience, and safety. Six levels of service are designated, ranging from "A" to "F", with level of service "A" representing the best operating conditions and level of service "F" the worst. The actual capacity of an intersection is generally considered to be at the lower end of level of service "E" and most agencies strive to maintain a roadway network that will not drop below this level of operation, except perhaps during unusual periods such as holiday shopping, sporting events, etc. Calculations for the level of service analyses were conducted using the McTrans Highway Capacity Software version 2.1f based on the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual. AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts provided by the City of Renton were used in the analysis of the existing conditions. The future conditions were estimated using a 2% annual background traffic growth factor, plus adding-in the trips associated with the adjacent La Colina subdivision, which is currently under development. All of the intersections analyzed are controlled by traffic signals. The lane configuration and signal operation at the intersection of NE 3n1/4t Street and Edmonds Avenue were modified slightly for the analysis of the future conditions to reflect changes associated with the La Colina development. The following table shows levels of service for the existing and future conditions. The expected build-out of the project is 2004. . I 4 TABLE 1 PEAK HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICE LEVEL OF SERVICE (DELAY) PEAK 2004 W/OUT 2004 WITH LOCATION HOUR EXISTING PROJECT PROJECT NE 3'd/4t Street and AM EB - B ( 6 sec.) B ( 6 sec.) B (9 sec.) Edmonds Avenue WB - B (7 sec.) B ( 7 sec.) B (11 sec.) NB - C (20 sec.) C (24 sec.) D (33 sec.) SB - C (21 sec.) C (21 sec.) C (19 sec.) OVERALL - B ( 7 sec.) B ( 9 sec.) B (14 sec.) PM EB - B (7 sec.) B (10 sec.) B (12 sec.) WB - B ( 6 sec.) B ( 7 sec.) B ( 9 sec.) NB - C (20 sec.) C (19 sec.) D (26 sec.) SB - C (20 sec.) C (19 sec.) C (19 sec.) OVERALL -B (7 sec.) B ( 9 sec.) B (13 sec.) NE 3rd Street and AM EB - D (29 sec.) D (30 sec.) D (31 sec.) Sunset Blvd. WB - C (24 sec.) D (29 sec.) D (39 sec.) NB - C (16 sec.) C (17 sec.) C (17 sec.) SB - C (25 sec.) D (26 sec.) D (27 sec.) OVERALL - C (22 sec.) C (25 sec.) D (28 sec.) PM EB - D (30 sec.) D (36 sec.) D (37 sec.) WB - D (34 sec.) D (34 sec.) D (40 sec.) NB - B (15 sec.) C (19 sec.) C (20 sec.) SB - D (30 sec.) D (28 sec.) D (33 sec.) OVERALL - D (28 sec.) D (29 sec.) D (33 sec.) NE 4th Street and AM EB - B (15 sec.) C (17 sec.) C (18 sec.) Monroe Avenue WB -D (39 sec.) E (48 sec.) E (52 sec.) NB - D (27 sec.) D (29 sec.) D (29 sec.) SB -D (25 sec.) D (27 sec.) D (27 sec.) OVERALL - D (31 sec.) D (36 sec.) D (38 sec.) PM EB - B (14 sec.) C (15 sec.) C (16 sec.) WB - C (19 sec.) C (20 sec.) C (22 sec.) NB - C (25 sec.) D (25 sec.) D (25 sec.) SB - C (24 sec.) C (24 sec.) C (25 sec.) OVERALL - C (18 sec.) C (19 sec.) C (19 sec.) 5 TABLE 1 (con't.) PEAK HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICE LEVEL OF SERVICE (DELAY) PEAK 2005 W/OUT 2005 WITH LOCATION HOUR EXISTING PROJECT PROJECT Sunset Blvd. and AM EB - B ( 9 sec.) B (9 sec.) B ( 9 sec.) Edmonds Avenue WB - B (13 sec.) B (14 sec.) B (14 sec.) NB -B (14 sec.) B (14 sec.) B (14 sec.) SB - B (14 sec.) B (14 sec.) B (14 sec.) OVERALL - B (12 sec.) B (12 sec.) B (12 sec.) PM EB - B (11 sec.) B (12 sec.) B (12 sec.) WB - B (15 sec.) C (15 sec.) C (15 sec.) NB - C (16 sec.) C (16 sec.) C (16 sec.) SB - C (16 sec.) C (16 sec.) C (16 sec.) OVERALL - B (13 sec.) B (13 sec.) C (13 sec.) Where: LOS Delay A < 5 seconds B > 5 & < 15 seconds C >15 & < 25 seconds D >25 & < 40 seconds E >40 &< 60 seconds F >60 seconds The results of the capacity analyses for the,existing and future conditions indicate that all of the intersections are currently operating at an overall level of service "D" or better, and will continue to do so in the future, with or without development impacts associated with the development of 460 single-family homes on the subject property. There will be some increased delay at these intersections as volumes increase over the next four to five years, and some intersection movements may drop below level of service "D"; however, the overall intersection level of service would not be expected to drop below the "D" range. IMPACTS A 460-lot development of the Cedar Crest site could potentially generate just over 4400 trips per day, 345 of which would occur during the AM peak hour and 465 during the 6 PM peak hour. The majority of these trips are expected to travel on NE 314/4th Street, primarily to and from the west where the majority of the employment and activity centers are located. All of the site trips will initially travel through the intersection of NE 3"'/4th Street and Edmonds Avenue before dispersing to the east, west or north. This intersection is currently being modified to serve the La Colina subdivision, which is currently under development. The intersection modifications at NE 314/4th Street and Edmonds Avenue should adequately handle the additional traffic associated with the rezone and development of the Cedar Crest site. Beyond the intersection of NE 311/4th Street and Edmonds Avenue, the intersection of NE 3n1 Street and Sunset Blvd. would be the impacted the most by the development of the site. This intersection has essentially been upgraded to its ultimate configuration and is able to handle a considerable volume of traffic. Development activity under the proposed rezone would constitute an increase in PM peak hour traffic volumes through this intersection by about 7.5%. The capacity analyses completed for this summary indicate that the intersection would be able to absorb this additional volume (plus annual increases of 2%) and still operate at level of service "D". Lesser site development impacts are expected on Edmonds Avenue and NE 3"1/4th Street to the east of Edmonds Avenue. Both of these intersections are expected to operate at level of service "D" or better. Based on this initial assessment of the proposed rezone for the Cedar Crest site, and its potential development activity, no off-site mitigation measures should be needed. 7 - • NORTH • 2TZbi / NE 12TH ST lb ipp NE 10TH ST r g (20%) \ . aw r 2. > P5%,5 z N ¢ 11 Q i10%) o w re z o z o z w 0 (2088%) la V,� NE 4TH ST ,.. ' 101, (25%) 4 1 (20%) (10%) Apr 7.4 S 2ND ST (37 S 3RD ST ' 51, 1 PROJECT SITE 4444, qA�F ESTIMATED DAILY TRIP DISTRIBUTION DAVID I. HAMLIN & FIGURE 1ASSOCIATES CEDAR CREST REZONE PAGE .. . , . . .. A NORTH . • 13 Th 4 .4o my b NE 12TH ST ;` 13 4 `V�J 1� `` NE 10TH ST • w �26 52V. z W 13 w S 13 W 26 z 9 ¢ 4 Lcl 52, _7 17 z 4 I o Q 9 26 o JI Z zz 9 51 17 26 // w 7 51 1 S "NE 4TH ST �� r---► NE�� /65 �—� - 1 4 �� 22 18 52 9 26 181 60 J13 S 2ND ST 22 S3RDST //��1 4 65 PROJECT SITE 18 2 C13 '9A 1 4 65 CF 44,,,,...: C 60 2 y�'Y . I I 1 I ESTIMATED AM PEAK HOUR TRIP ASSIGNMENT DAVID I. HAMLIN &ASSOCIATES FIGURE 2 CEDAR CREST REZONE PAGE F-2 1 .. , _ .. , . . , A . . NORTH C 15 a - mi 47 0 NE 12TH ST `� �a � �yJ 1 , NE 1 OTH ST 34 ', z w j17 �� ail-8 8 I8 w 17 w z 15 w 29 �—_ i 3z66... 60 zo 15 a ¢ 9 30 17 z 1 2 3 60� i/ w � ± g 33 61 -RV oNE 4TH ST "`� • i 4 ,42 44 ill . 74 59 34 30 17 .8,0,15 ,, 1'09 J8 S2NDST �4 S3RDST 1559 3 42 . PROJECT SITE 59 34 117 18 15 42 4'6( Q r .„,,c_._ -9 7' y„,Y I I I i I I i i I ESTIMATED PM PEAK HOUR TRIP ASSIGNMENT DAVID I. HAMLIN &ASSOCIATES FIGURE 3 CEDAR CREST REZONE PAGE F-3 i I PUGET - j SOUND ENERGY February 17, 2000 Ms. Rebecca Lind Project Manager Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Ways Renton, WA 98055 RECEIVED • - • Re: LUA-99-179-, ECF, R, CPA FEB 2 2 2000 NE 3`d/NE 4th and Monroe ECONOMIC DEVELOPMEvT NEIGHBORHOODS AND STRATEGIC PLA.JN: Dear Ms Lind: I have reviewed the City's determination of non-significance concerning NE 3rd/NE 4th and Monroe development. The developer has contacted PSE concerning relocation of the existing transmission lines within the development and has been referred to our transmission manager. PSE has an existing 55Kv transmission line (Shuffleton) which is currently de-energized and a set of transmission lines (Talbot-Lakeside)which is energized. PSE intends to build a transmission line in the future to replace the Shuffleton line ,the Talbot-Lakeside line is an active circuit. The developer has been told the Shuffleton line can be relocated at his expense. In addition,he would be responsible for relocation costs of the Talbot-Lakeside line. Any future correspondence may be directed to Mr. Steve Botts ,PSE real estate department , P.O. Box 98068,Bellevue, WA 98009-9869 or myself. If you have any questions feel free to Steve Botts at 425-4462-2255 or myself at 206-224-2120. Sincerely, eJai a V Municipal Land Planner P.O. Box 90868,Bellevue,WA 98009 Puget Sound Energy, Inc. • P.O.BOX 90868 • Bellevue,WA 98009-0868 HALINEN LAW OFFICES,P.S. A Professional Service Corporation David L.Halinen,P.E. Bellevue Place/Seafirst Building (425)454-8272 10500 NE 8th,Suite 1900 Fax(425)646-3467 Bellevue,Washington 98004 February 16, 2000 VIA FAX (AT 425-430-7300) AND HAND-DELIVERY City of Renton Department of Economic Development and Neighborhood Strategic Planning 1055 S. Grady Way, Sixth Floor Renton, Washington 98055 Attn: Rebecca Lind, Senior Planner RE: La Pianta Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Rezone City of Renton File No. LUA 99-179, ECF,R,CPA(00M4 and 00M5) Submittal of Rezone Legal Descriptions Dear Rebecca: Bob Mac Onie of the Renton Property Services Division advised me a few days ago that the above-referenced file does not contain a submittal of the legal descriptions of the proposed rezones. I checked my file and found that,while the Project Narrative(a)contains the legal description of the property that is currently designated RPN(and zoned R-14)and(b)indicates that that property is the property that we are seeking an RO designation and R-10 zoning of, no legal description was submitted for the proposed CC area at the overall site's northwest corner. As a follow-up to my discussion with Mr. Mac Onie, I have had Triad Associates prepare a legal description of the proposed CC area and have set forth on the accompanying sheets both that description and the legal description of the property that is currently designated BLEN 14). ITY OF RENTON Please phone me if you have any questions. MAR 0 3 2000 Sincerely, RECEIVED HALINEN LAW OFFICES, P.S. (Dec., David L. Hal en Enclosure cc: La Pianta Limited Partnership Attn: Ann Nichols (with copy of enclosure) Donald J. Merlino (with copy of enclosure) Robert Mac Onie, P.L.S., Mapping Supervisor, City of Renton Property Services Division (via fax at 425-430-7241, with copy of enclosure) DM2009MOW ND.L I PI.vpd La Pianta Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone (2000) LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY PROPOSED TO BE REZONED FROM R-14 TO R-10 THAT PORTION OF PARCELS 2,4, AND 9 CITY OF RENTON,LOT LINE REVISION,FILE NO.LUA-95-200-LLA,RECORDED IN BOOK 108 OF SURVEYS,PAGE 276,276 A AND 276 B, UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9604239004,. RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; BEING A PORTION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST,W.M. IN THE CITY OF RENTON,KING COUNTY,WASHINGTON,DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 16; THENCE, SOUTH 01°04'02" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE THEREOF, 601.36FEET; THENCE,SOUTH88°55'58"EAST,PERPENDICULARTO SAID WEST LINE THEREOF, 378.15 FEET, TO THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT CO. EASEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 2571770, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE, NORTH 34°05'53" EAST, ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE, 1416.63 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 50°15'19" WEST; THENCE ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 197.38 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°09'26", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 55.66 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 55°54'08" WEST, 958.13 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 399.32 FEET,THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27° 17' 11",AN ARC DISTANCE OF 190.17 FEET; THENCE,NORTH 83°11'18"WEST, 18.88 FEET, TO A POINT ON A CURVE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 82°55'25" EAST, THENCE ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2470.00 FEET,THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02°37'08",AN ARC DISTANCE OF 112.90 FEET TO THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT CO. EASEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 2513101, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY,WASHINGTON;THENCE, SOUTH 26°46'02" EAST, ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN THEREOF, 163.94 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN, SOUTH 06°20'40" EAST, 1566.43 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. LEGAL DESCRIPTION—Page 1 \ February 16, 2000 • LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY PROPOSED TO BE REZONED FROM RM-I AND R-10 TO CC THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 1,CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO.LUA-95- 200-LLA AS RECORDED IN BOOK 108 OF SURVEYS AT PAGES 276, 276A AND 276B UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9604239004, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON;SAID LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT BEING APORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 16 AND THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 17, ALL IN TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE SOUTH 26°46'02" EAST ALONG THE BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1 A DISTANCE OF 365.41 TO AN ANGLE POINT IN SAID BOUNDARY LINE; THENCE SOUTH 89°33'52" EAST ALONG THE BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1 A DISTANCE OF 17.73 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN SAID BOUNDARY LINE; THENCE SOUTH 8 9°07'10"EAST 60.97 FEET TO THE WESTERLY MARGIN OF EDMONDS AVENUE AS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON BY INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 20000119000765, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE NORTH 08°08'26" EAST ALONG SAID MARGIN 46.24 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID MARGIN ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 370.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 26°43'05" AND ARC LENGTH OF 172.54 FEET; THENCE NORTH 18°34'39" WEST ALONG SAID MARGIN 179.84 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE SOUTH 71°30'26"WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 186.60 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. LEGAL DESCRIPTION—Page 2 . February 16, 2000 HALINEN LAW OFFICES,P.S. A Professional Service Corporation David L.Halinen,P.E. Bellevue Place/Seafirst Building (425)454-8272 10500 NE 8th,Suite 1900 Fax(425)646-3467 Bellevue,Washington 98004 JAN 2 8 2000 BUILDING DIVISION January 28, 2000 HAND-DELIVERED City of Renton Department of Economic Development and Neighborhood Strategic Planning 1055 S. Grady Way, Sixth Floor Renton, Washington 98055 Attn: Rebecca Lind, Senior Planner RE: La Pianta Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Rezone City of Renton File No. LUA 99-179, ECF,R,CPA(00M4 and 00M5) (1)Notice of Applicant La Pianta's Modification of the Proposal to Limit the Number of Single-Family Residences on the Proposed R-10 Portion of the Site and(2)Submittal of Environmental Checklist Dear Rebecca: As you know,on December 15, 1999 I submitted the new La Pianta Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Rezone application referenced above. In the Project Narrative portion of that application,the Applicant(La Pianta Limited Partnership)proposed that there be"a maximum of 450 single-family residential units on the overall proposed R-10 portion of the site", with the existing Development Agreement between the Applicant and the City to be amended accordingly. On behalf of the Applicant, I now hereby amend the December 15, 1999 request to"a maximum of 460 single- family residential units on the overall proposed R-10 portion of the site".' In addition, I herewith enclose an original and 11 copies of a completed environmental checklist for the above-referenced application. 'Bear in mind that, in order for about 20 of those lots to be feasible,a relinquishment of a Puget Sound Energy transmission line easement crossing the east edge of the site would have to be secured. An initial request to Puget Sound Energy for such a relinquishment was rejected during January, 2000,but the matter is to be pursued further. City of Renton Department of Economic Development and Neighborhood Strategic Planning Attn: Rebecca Lind, Senior Planner January 28, 2000 Page 2 Thank you for all of your assistance concerning this matter. Please phone me if you have any questions. Sincerely, HALINEN LAW OFFICES, P.S. r- David L. Halin Enclosures cc: La Pianta Limited Partnership Attn: Mario Segale and Ann Nichols (with copy of enclosure) Donald J. Merlino (with copy of enclosure) Gary M. Merlino (with copy of enclosure) Kathy Russell, Triad Associates (with copy of enclosure) D:\CF\2009\090\LIND.LT6.F1.wpd —ris • City of F >n Department of Planning/Building/Publi irks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW S EET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: \--DcA COMMENTS DUE: FEBRUARY 15, 2000 APPLICATION NO: LUA-99-179,ECF,R,CPA DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 31,2000 • APPLICANT: LaPianta Limited Partnership PROJECT MANAGER: Rebecca Lind [� PROJECT TITLE: LaPianta CPA/Rezone WORK ORDER NO: 78636 LOCATION: NE 3rd/4th and Monroe SITE AREA: 40 acres and .97 acre l BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change to RO Residential Options/R-10 zoning to Residential Planned Neighborhood/R-14 zoning for approximately 40 acres. The proposal also includes an amendment to an existing development agreement for the number of vehicle trips per day to be generated from the site. The application includes a request to change the Land Use Map from Multi-family Infill (RM-I)zoning to Convenience Commercial (CC)zoning for .97 acres. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet &jO /201 apta,. B. POLICY-RELATED 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. Lf. A 2-t '��-f':2�� 2-2��'l� Signature of Director or Autbbrized Representative Date Routing Rev.10/93 ° City ofR?_, n Department of Planning/Building/Public ,:rks • ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: G- s _ COMMENTS DUE: FEBRUARY 15, 2000 APPLICATION NO: LUA-99-179,ECF,R,CPA DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 31,2000 ' APPLICANT: LaPianta Limited Partnership PROJECT MANAGER: Rebecca Lind PROJECT TITLE: LaPianta CPA/Rezone WORK ORDER NO: 78636 LOCATION: NE 3rd/4th and Monroe SITE AREA: 40 acres and.97 acre BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change to RO Residential Options/R-10 zoning to Residential Planned Neighborhood/R-14 zoning for approximately 40 acres. The proposal also includes an amendment to an existing development agreement for the number of vehicle trips per day to be generated from the site. The application includes a request to change the Land Use Map from Multi-family Infill (RM-I)zoning to Convenience Commercial (CC)zoning for .97 acres. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More. Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet • . 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS I V° Co C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS J j0, Cti✓,11^‘BA ' 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 Directo r Authorized Representative Date Routing Rev.10/93 o4Op Cal;470ift PiA p . �NTo/VN�MG CITY OF RENTON R B 11 ?000 PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS �cOlf MEMORANDUM Fo DATE: February 11,2000 TO: Rebecca Lind FROM: Sonja J. Fesser) SUBJECT: LaPianta CPA/Rezone 0 0- 11 61 Legal Description Review Bob Mac Onie and I have reviewed the above referenced submittal and have the following comments: The legal description attached to the Master Application does not specifically describe the property that is to be rezoned from RPN(R-14)to RO(R-10). Additionally,the property to be rezoned from ;. RM-1 and RO to CC is not specifically described. In fact,the Master Application legal description includes properties that are already zoned RO and should,therefore,be excluded from the legal description submittal. The map exhibits also do not definitively show those parcels that are to be rezoned as noted in the previous paragraph. A portion of the property noted as RO is already zoned RO. Said portion already zoned RO should be separate from that portion that is to be rezoned to RO. The title report submitted includes property owners and properties not involved in this CPA/Rezone application. S:\USR\SFESSER\LAPNTARZ.DOC e ° City.of Ri.- .'n Department of Planning/Building/Public ks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: I CLV,_._g COMMENTS DUE: FEBRUARY 15, 2000 APPLICATION NO: LUA-99-179,ECF,R,CPA DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 31,2000 • APPLICANT: LaPianta Limited Partnership PROJECT MANAGER: Rebecca Lind PROJECT TITLE: LaPianta CPA/Rezone WORK ORDER NO: 78636 LOCATION: N 3`d/41h and Monroe SITE AREA: 4 acres and .97 acre I BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change to RO Residential Options/R-10 zoning to Residential Planned Neighborhood/R-14 zoning for approximately 40 acres. The proposal also includes an amendment to an existing development agreement for the number of vehicle trips per day to be generated from the site. The application includes a request to change the Land Use Map from Multi-family Infill (RM-I)zoning to Convenience Commercial (CC)zoning for .97 acres. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation _ Environmental Health • Public Services - • Energy/ Historic./Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet if B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS a-7a ik) &) 16124 V___a 2 I(--5/17L(30 7/7 ga---. A(///0---(dfl -tOZr)a°, i/2/2 /_,ec7,=f,e c,/ 2 Al"r---1--/ ,/2,e_ rak. ', 00a-(71--- �G�/C C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS n/t . ,1/0 ( 1,0C( (/71---/-6 1.gidd 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 wher additional information i eded to properly assess this proposal..7V(,,1"---- /}3 Id?)ignature of Director or A hor ed Representative Date Routing Rev.10/93 ° City of F n Department of Planning/Building/Public rks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT I'A.lnSp0 rjV\ COMMENTS DUE: FEBRUARY 15r �rRrrrtke APPLICATION NO: LUA-99-179,ECF,R,CPA DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 31,2000 • APPLICANT: LaPianta Limited Partnership PROJECT MANAGER: Rebecca Lind FEBel 1 2000 PROJECT TITLE: LaPianta CPA/Rezone WORK ORDER NO: 78636 LOCATION: NE 3rd/4th and Monroe CAV,SI®N SITE AREA: 40 acres and .97 acre I BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change to RO Residential Options/R-10 zoning to Residential Planned Neighborhood/R-14 zoning for approximately 40 acres. The proposal also includes an amendment to.an existing development agreement for the number of vehicle trips per day to be generated from the site.. The application includes a request to change the Land Use Map from Multi-family Infill (RM-I)zoning to Convenience Commercial (CC)zoning for.97 acres. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code)COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS 106 coVOW 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. ) z / /00 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Routing Rev.10/93 o r City of F�i_.__.,,in Department of Planning/Building/Public .,rks . ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: e'I(, jam COMMENTS DUE: FEBRUARY 15, 2000 APPLICATION NO: LUA-99-179,ECF,R,CPA DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 310 �REOt,p • APPLICANT: LaPianta Limited Partnership PROJECT MANAGER: Rebecca Lind rip—, PROJECT TITLE: LaPianta CPA/Rezone WORK ORDER NO: 78636 FEB rt 11 2000 LOCATION: NE 3rd/4th and Monroe BLfLLJHU'L1Vr6nk.)r4 SITE AREA: 40 acres and .97 acre BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change to RO Residential Options/R-10 zoning to Residential Planned Neighborhood/R-14 zoning for approximately 40 acres. The proposal also includes an amendment to an existing development agreement for the number of vehicle trips per day to be generated from the site. The application includes a request to change the Land Use Map from Multi-family Infill (RM-I)zoning to Convenience Commercial (CC)zoning for .97 acres. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use . Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS MD C-0 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. \-)e,d-al,g17 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Routing Rev.10/93 • City of F: "m Department of Planning/Building/Publir --Irks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET • REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: i.\` CV,S4V -h(rVV COMMENTS DUE: FEBRUARY 15, 2000 APPLICATION NO: LUA-99-179,ECF,R,CPA DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 31,20EKTY OF RENTO • ' APPLICANT: LaPianta Limited Partnership PROJECT MANAGER: Rebecca Lind PROJECT TITLE: LaPianta CPA/Rezone WORK ORDER NO: 78636 FEB 0 a 20Qp LOCATION: NE 3rd/4th and Monroev'6ION SITE AREA: 40 acres and .97 acre BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change to RO Residential Options/R-10 zoning to Residential Planned Neighborhood/R-14 zoning for approximately 40 acres. The proposal also includes an amendment to an existing development agreement for the number of vehicle trips per day to be generated from the site. The application includes.a request to change the Land Use Map from Multi-family Infill (RM-I)zoning to Convenience Commercial (CC)zoning for.97 acres. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code)COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use . Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS kk/116 C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS Mwl✓ 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 whr dditional information is neede, to roperly assess this proposal. Or 4 /7/40. Sig ature of Dire or Auth Representative Date Routing Rev.10/93 ° City ofh_ _:�n Department of Planning/Building/Publi- rrks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: ReU( -ui COMMENTS DUE: FEBRUARY 15, 2000 APPLICATION NO: LUA-99-179,ECF,R,CPA DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 31,2000 AEN1TARr • APPLICANT: LaPianta Limited Partnership PROJECT MANAGER: Rebecca Lind tarp PROJECT TITLE: LaPianta CPA/Rezone WORK ORDER NO: 78636 ZQ®u LOCATION: NE 3rd/4th and MonroeIvi6`v' SITE AREA: 40 acres and .97 acre BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change to RO Residential Options/R-10 zoning to Residential Planned Neighborhood/R-14 zoning for approximately 40 acres. The proposal also includes an amendment to an existing development agreement for the number of vehicle trips per day to be generated from the site. The application includes a request to change the Land Use Map from Multi-family Infill (RM-I)zoning to Convenience Commercial (CC)zoning for.97 acres. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code)COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline.Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ HistoridCultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS - NO CowlWt 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 n iilss needed to properly assess this proposal. _ Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Routing Rev.10/93 ° City of I )n Department of Planning/Building/Publi jrks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 1 ti(e.-1r?retpL V`-{bT \ COMMENTS DUE: FEBRUARY 15, 2000 APPLICATION NO: LUA-99-179,ECF,R,CPA DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 31,2000 • • APPLICANT: LaPianta Limited Partnership PROJECT MANAGER: Rebecca Lit d,— p4,1 wo ".„,.... PROJECT TITLE: LaPianta CPA/Rezone WORK ORDER NO: 78636 LOCATION: NE 3rd/4th and Monroe F E 0 0 1 2000 SITE AREA: 40 acres and .97 acre I BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A CLAY OF rXK T '1 1 P . �1P. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change to RO Residential Options/R-10 zoning to Residential Planned Neighborhood/R-14 zoning for approximately 40 acres. The proposal also includes an amendment to an existing development agreement for the number of vehicle trips per day to be generated from the site. The application includes a request to change the Land Use Map from Multi-family Infill (RM-I)zoning to Convenience Commercial (CC)zoning for .97 acres. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code)COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation _ Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet lie"— )w.pa t AtzI• B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS /04 C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS/0I ' 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 i,tj/mation is needed to properly assess this proposal. ,� _ ø7o� 'Sig ture of Director or Auth 1 ized Representative Date toy i�9 Rev.10/93 ' • • --•••' • ' • • • • • ••f••••,,il•V:k:t0 .4 ; • ••••• 1.t: l'il.:3•46:AMIValP:OPA;$?,.rni.i.....x4'%it..f,INVAI.:4•:•:•••zz::3;,i3.i.::•,*:":::•):; .. • '•3f:%j. 14-"4'-•1"IiViV•4 :"..4f•-':M*2•Vi&isi4:1:i'"P"l'ii*'•:iiI:g*stMqZ*Iiigg:f,:NR:eSn..*:f;i5AX•4:s..i”.•:.*F:Y"W•••••:"• •"1:Y.'."*.e: rie%.00.5)70P".rigign"ttgiVOtIV•MinAgqi ::;%414iWAIPOVill1Wes'05.!`:%0q9)4i•;K:#.f CiSgAr Pe gm eN111,,,SERVIOB . 41111$14•00.54,40,4gtvOgkIk06..,-,,Npi0..0,$.p:I4N?wo.o)ppge:3:114i.p.rips.j441110filliztmtp.40.4vAigo..00W.M.roloimi:: 00.04k0iiimbpogAeloi ;0,1g.itattltootriNrst8:1 atlp.gsraRROUNE):INag3tlyiwgi.ralp,o,fm.w . ,,,t',VkfEetmli.wriMi3V.:: • ' • • • • •PROJECT NAME: La Pianta Comprehensive. Plan Amendments and Rezone OA• 9 9 - 1-79 EL fr c-r-rt APPLICATION NO: • L • The following is'a list of property owners within 300 feet of the subject site. The Development • Services Division will notify these individuals of the proposed development. NAME ADDRESS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL • NUMBER • • • • • • • • • •FR S ATTACHED. • •' • • • • • • • • • • DEVELOPMENT PLANNING • •• • CITY OF RENTON DEC 1.5 1999 RECE1VEE) • • • • • • • • •• • .• (Attach additional sheets, if necessary) • • . . • - • • • • • • (Continued) • • NAME ADDRESS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL ' NUMBER ' • • • • • • • • • • Applicant Certification • I, David L. Halinen • , hereby certify•that the above list(s) of adjacent property (Print Name) • • owners'and their addresses were obtained from: • ilIiiiiii,' ) ❑ City of Renton Technical Services Records �� ,, l . Title Company Records �.�`:"�t�La�' ,,,,,, ,�'••o ❑ King County Assessors Records ..,p�0. 0,.ssiori' -.�� Signedge,Trit-s_77::(k. �./ Date 12�/S'/97 : �_ ® � (App scant) • :, = PUB L{C • ATTESTED: Subscribed and sworn before me, a Notary Public, in and for the Sf3ae,p�o' rat tsM?igton, residing at -1� ri i//i /�/ on the /3 t:day of L j� , 19W. Signed.___. 56 . (Notary Public) i ,.....•.... --.. - - .", gym 1 • {•:i.;•rR;S;i`22:•:t::;:::::s:iit2'.22:::>;::22:;•t}.:.}•,}...:.:;..}:.:::::.,.;..t::::•::.::...;..:t•.:::•.:v•:::,.}':•:v......:..:...:........• ....... }.:.:;{.. .,: :.t.is".,r, .J.. ..2.: ♦.i:: .:3<: ,:<; :� .E any i'>` ::JC t Use••}:;:.»:},;:: ::««...,,'>.::: ..;., ::2>7' gi:r ;:2�:i{ t�i:i .:....r. .........,..,..:::�:...t..:... .. .....:::}•::..,:::•.}•:.,........ •. .. :. r}...}▪.. ;•.};.n•:•...:.}+,:{•:^}:+.2t2222;i2i2}';; :;>S2:::i•:;,••};.•:•.::.:•., Yi•.;•:i•\::;'.,,••:.a.;•::.:�••; ;..—"2i{2::i%'"-•—i2:}:•. }: v •:.::::: "'•::—•' •. •}.}:.}:•;:;?:.'S..::e:....... : .........{::.}:••;}}!{•;.•"{::::...,, rrr.... •ti{•ti• +v:{.:::z+•*.:•::,......:.,....n,::•:•::w::: .. ....`.y .. .... . ,. ., ..'•}N::•77v:.:}};Y:•: :.::.,.:::........,x::•;{ryi::r.{•y:.{{r•::::}::::..;nn:i'✓•;:{{:.�::.�:::{::�!'• y:•:J:::v:x... r.r.n.•......•:.: •:•v: 30.,,....:}•:.}•.,.•...,::{ , t,,:T:•:•:O}!}}!:{•}iSS:�:....'ti;;{•.; ......:•.;{•}.�t.... .:::;{tir24}L:i2;•;{{.:{3;•}:{{.... '.5•::•':• 7 . v t....... t ..... ..... ............ .n::';:•.v.v:•'•?v Jy •:::...v,•.... •.a.,7<.{{}.•}:;:}:•....a: �•`••' ..< ...$:5::.:::1:'f.:?::.::. ..:.. ..........:.....}.,..:, .. .x•:'::::r. }•7}�•::::v.::::.::+.p.�::�:+w::.:v::::::i:2::v;.:.•;.r{.}:{:{::S•}: '.:: k'. ., ::2 ". � if:;:;here•5y.:cert >:th.ct'.:notices':to:sdi a.........:.: :,.: ;� }>: :':. :. s <> •••::.:i•}>:,. .:•iii:•:2;{:;:}., .:.......:.;:.. ::..,.:::.:�.t:..�::.:!..�.�::..:J: :}Y ::ti::>{•:>::?::;i.>;:2.:;{ii.:{::iii<::;::22>2}::;2::::,:2{:::::2{:;:r{.>::>}: .} ,. . ., . if e„:: c ae :: 1 •:..:<.. .... .....( ::}•i::2i2::{:2i:isi:>22::?:;:::{?::i?•.'•;f:;;::Si:i;:.'•::::: i.i:.:::22:i%}::;•::::•::::.,•.+•:..:�:..... .:.::..., .; :.:;.•�. ...:: � v •:W;rv..t..: i:;?:}.:ii}+is::.is}{{{ti{•i:!L::ti::§i::: 2}i:gi:W;; �y Y 'i:•3:;;:.,;:?iy;ii}:;:pr.:v 2:{}i}}:;2:;:Q.{,v, ,..r.r. 4r led.. :>: >�:"GB:><::>>;��><: :.:::::}Y:•7:•>::.Y7'.,,.} ,•:. •v::.,v: �xv„••. ....vnx•• nt..�:.:a.: •. :•:,}i}:,}:,: :::*:.:.-2Sv}:{:i2ivii:.i;:�!;:;•: i:J':n , >222i:vi; . v v. :.:•x;.:. ..:}:•.:}•Si:+'r{{{{ •}ti:{:,{ 2:Y:%2}}•.y:•.v„d}i2:•}}'.::•.}::•Yi ... • -• ...w:; .}. ••• .: ;..�v:K•\`Sw:.v .�::.:{::+,..tv::. .. ........,. :. I:..•::;:}•.};.};•}:':^:'•i} .:.::fin:..: :t!t:•:....:::...:. ...... .. .. 7ry { . : .... • ........ .::::::::::.::.:.:.:.:;•:C::::•:.•.:+.t•..•:::�;.::{.r:}ip 2'v::`:•:::. ..•..... :...,....,,...i.'::::::•.... :.a•.vY:`}}}i}•.}.�..,;:.Y i;{:::}{?::::..{.. .,..:?•: .:;isi::2::2>.:::�::•.,CC•:.;.}.}:.}}:.S•:i}:. ..:•.....::..,,....:•:..:•.�.�••. v•.:.... . .... • }:::: •::}...:..t..:......:•:fin!•.{!::•}:•:;.}:.:.....:•::•........ .,.{.. ::.:.::::::.:::::•:::•.,.::.ti. i2>}?:}}•}•. a.}: •7}}J;.;..+{•.:,:•.v•.:t•.v••..:.•:.....,. .....{ ....... .r ... ...... .........,..:•....:... :222:::7:222ti%:::�}}i3} ;•:;;.;::�:?•:.! ,,;.?:.!?{.iii:;,>i:%:?;i .i n ni2.::i22: i'Y'f•'v•i:;::•?:+.:2}:;::?;h;}7ti{::•i:4::'C!;i'it}:?:ti2+'{: �..:'•:+}}•;{}:{,tits% � 22�............ r ..•... ▪ .:...............:J:. •••r•!J:•}: ?srt• 22{ ;E:2 tii12:•2S2'' .yji2ij•...iSrr: ' •.v.t..nw:•:....,}}:):}:•}:':w, r. v..... .:r. •:�:v:•:}.'•.�:r+a..}•`:,::}:}J:^}:...:..:::.,...:•;}!.yrr ^ .:1.....:... .;.,i..... .........+.t.. "ti:Y••}r<;.}::},..;.;.:;..;..::::::. ::,....:..▪ .......+....,...:•:::.........;;•;+:. J .x2t•.io.. J.•:l+iii2i•:i2>s:. .....:.......r.• •{•.};.a.•:}:.}•;.};:}:}::n•:is it:•. i :2 AtT� r iii} <: ::ra 7;. iSuosC.rtb f-t v,{2i225Y: :••:t{i {.., I.1•I. �Vt.;;. .,.. :.....,.•.+,vn}t,.•'•S;i•.?•}'22ii:ti•:ti??:;i•i 22i•:v •.,, S r:2 n RJ Sk.: iC �:tti` 2 •:tide :?.o ::};:}.. r:+:::x.. ...r.t;...,•nv,+•:.,:•n•t,;•:;•..•, ...r:.......v••n.....:.,..:::w:•....... :..... .. ...... n..nv::.}• {:.�v::}:•..... w::.:: r ,...,........ .n...i..n....... .,. .. ..r..r... ... .....• v.2:,..::.:.;.... . ..... ..:..;{.Y\{:.v.:•.{t.......t::::v.y.... •........ .n...:...,.n..,....tt...ta, ,{.:... ... .. .. •...,..v.. n... ... ......... 7. .......t.......}..:............... rn.... .nr..r.} ,n•:::•.ti,{:•.:::: •{...:v^`, .... ♦..n..n..f.•, ... ..r.......... { .,a. ...�,+i.. ... .. .. .. :Y•Y••Y:v: ... r .. .....,.. •::2ry' ;ti`}':' .! ..{....t.i.n r..: .r.r... ...,...,....,..,2 ...i:,? :.. ..t•:::.;•; •.,,•:;,y>?{•:•2ti:,,:?i•.�.22i. '..v,:•.Y},•:::::n•.v::.v?::'",.:''"::...v:,T...... .. r,.... a.,..+,. n..,:•::.v•.:•.{•.2+..t,•.,.. ,... :: ..:.J.v.. . t.....,... .....:... .. ....:......... .. .:.ni:.:..;. .. ..... 3.......}. ,.....:...,•.:i•r.,2.,a,i:•.•:...•:........ {•,}'•.::Jta . ,t ::•:t;•;. ...........:. .,.. , ... :•n,v,;•..: ...:... n.. .. .. {v.......:.:..i..5:..:n.....:......S..r.... .r:.. • ;2 \:}}:• .i? 2::222 .•,....,t. ... ..,a• ... ....7•:J. 'A ... .....:a... t•. •.:{t;:.�.....:.. •..:.:Y t..v+}..:•r:. :. •2 .. .{., Sit:{,. }::y4:: • `•''''f",., c MARILYN KAMCHEFF REV 7r94 MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES:6-29-03 supwootAadiaingl OiNgioim0.40:*0;MiMMOWNANOMME MMOWONIANCM#004MOWNCE 1 162305-9003-08-000 KING COUNTY 3407 NE 2ND ST RENTON 98056 500 4TH AVE SEATTLE WA 98104 2 162305-9003-08-001 KING COUNTY 3407 NE 2ND ST RENTON 98056 500 4TH AVE SEATTLE WA 98104 3 162305-9003-08-002 KING COUNTY 3407 NE 2ND ST RENTON 98056 500 4TH AVE _SEATTLE WA 98104 4 162305-9003-08-003 KING COUNTY 3407 NE 2ND ST RENTON 98056 500 4TH AVE SEATTLE WA 98104 5 162305-9003-08-004 KING COUNTY 3407 NE 2ND ST RENTON 98056 500 4TH AVE SEATTLE WA 98104 6 162305-9027-00 LA PIANTA LP 3006 NE 5TH PL RENTON 98056 PO BOX 88050 SEATTLE WA 98138 7 162305-9035-00 PUGET SOUND ENERGY/ELEC/HW PO BOX 90868 BELLEVUE WA 98009 8 162305-9046-07 STATE OF WASHINGTON 2631 NE 4TH ST RENTON 98056 0 9 162305-9062-06 T&E INVESTMENT INC NE 4TH ST 353 VUEMONT PL NE RENTON WA 98056 •10 162305-9072-04 LA PIANTA LP 2810 SE MAPLE VALLEY H PO BOX 88050 SEATTLE WA 98138 • . 11 162305-9117-01 RENTON HOUSING AUTHORITY 2811 NE 4TH ST RENTON 98056 970 HARRINGTON AVE NE RENTON WA 98056 12 162305-9120-06 1111 DEMPS ANNETTE B&KEITH SR EDMONDS AVE N 2308 NE 24TH ST RENTON WA 98056 13 162305-9131-03 LA PIANTA LP PO BOX 88050 SEATTLE WA 98138 14 162305-9133-01 KING COUNTY 500A K C ADMIN BLDG SEATTLE WA 98104 15 172305-9001-09 ALLENNS DEMOLITION&EXCAVATING MT OLIVE WAY NE 6205 24TH ST NE TACOMA WA 98422 16 172305-9004-06 ALLENNS DEMOLITION&EXC 6205 24TH ST NE TACOMA WA 98422 17 172305-9025-01 ANMAR CO 2150 SE MAPLE VALLEY H RENTON 98055 9125 10TH AVE S SEATTLE WA 98108 10 172305-9039-05 CITY OF RENTON/HW NE 116TH ST 200 MILL AVE S RENTON WA 98055 19 172305-9085-08 MT OLIVET CEMETERY - PO BOX 547 RENTON WA 98057 • 20 172305-9085-99 MT OLIVET CEMETARY PO BOX 547 RENTON WA 98057. 21 172305-9109-00 ANMAR CO 500 SE MAPLE VALLEY HW 9125 10TH AVE S SEATTLE WA 98108 22 172305-9170-04 ESSEX PORTFOLIO L P 2307 NE 4TH ST RENTON 98056 777 S CALIFORNIA AVE PALO ALTO CA 94304 23 172305-9180-02 LAPINTA LTD PTNSP CO PO BOX 88028 SEATTLE WA 98138 I • • @ 1996 Win2Data 2000 Page: 1 of 1 • 1) Situs: 3407 NE 2ND ST, RENTON WA 98056-4183 C050 Lot Area: 4,399,560 APN: 162305-9003-08-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/07/1988 10/07/1988 Bldg/Liv Area: 25,871 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $390,300 Zoning: T Use: UTILITIES Doc#: 8810070204 Cnty Use: 622 Owners: KING COUNTY Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-G2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1963 Mail: 500 4TH AVE; SEATTLE WA 98104-2337 C036 Phone: 2) Situs: 3407 NE 2ND ST, RENTON WA 98056-4183 C050 Lot Area: 4,399,560 APN: 162305-9003-08-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/07/1988 10/07/1988 Bldg/Liv Area: 9,948 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $390,300 Zoning: T Use: UTILITIES Doc#: 8810070204 Cnty Use: 622 Owners: KING COUNTY Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-G2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1983 Mail: 500 4TH AVE; SEATTLE WA 98104-2337 C036 Phone: 3) Situs: 3407 NE 2ND ST,RENTON WA 98056-4183 C050 Lot Area: 4,399,560 APN: 162305-9003-08-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/07/1988 10/07/1988 Bldg/Liv Area: 8,631 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $390,300 Zoning: T Use: UTILITIES Doc#: 8810070204 Cnty Use: 622 Owners: KING COUNTY Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-G2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1967 Mail: 500 4TH AVE;SEATTLE WA 98104-2337 C036 Phone: 4) Situs: 3407 NE 2ND ST,RENTON WA 98056-4183 C050 Lot Area: 4,399,560 APN: 162305-9003-08-003 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/07/1988 10/07/1988 Bldg/Liv Area: 3,200 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $390,300 Zoning: T Use: UTILITIES Doc#: 8810070204 Cnty Use: 622 Owners: KING COUNTY Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-G2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1964 Mail: 500 4TH AVE; SEATTLE WA 98104-2337 C036 Phone: 5) Situs: 3407 NE 2ND ST, RENTON WA 98056-4183 C050 Lot Area: 4,399,560 APN: 162305-9003-08-004 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/07/1988 10/07/1988 Bldg/Liv Area: 4,092 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $390,300 Zoning: T Use: UTILITIES Doc#: 8810070204 Cnty Use: 622 Owners: KING COUNTY Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-G2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1963 Mail: 500 4TH AVE; SEATTLE WA 98104-2337 C036 Phone: 6) Situs: 3006 NE 5TH PL,RENTON WA 98056-3728 C064 Lot Area: 465,872 APN: 162305-9027-00 Rec/Sale Dt: 02/29/1996 02/28/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $609,864 Zoning: RC Use: MULTI FAMILY ACREAGE Doc#: 9602291883 Cnty Use: 914 Owners: LA PIANTA LP Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-F3 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: PO BOX 88050; SEATTLE WA 98138-2050 B013 Phone: 7) Situs: , WA Lot Area: 147,233 APN: 162305-9035-00 Rec/Sale Dt: 04/23/1984 04/23/1984 Bldg/Liv.Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $84,950 Zoning: RC Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 8404230038 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: PUGET SOUND ENERGY/ELEC/HW Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-F3 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: PO BOX 90868; BELLEVUE WA 98009-0868 B900 Phone: ©1996 Win2Data 2000 Page: 1 of 4 ' 400 IND 8) Situs: 2631 NE 4TH ST, RENTON WA 98056-4019 C051 Lot Area: 446,050 APN: 162305-9046-07 Rec/Sale Dt: Bldg/Liv Area: 1,980 County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: MF1 Use: WAREHOUSE Doc#: Cnty Use: 501 Owners: STATE OF WASHINGTON Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-F2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1959 Mail: 0; Phone: 9) Situs: NE 4TH ST, WA Lot Area: 304,920 APN: 162305-9062-06 Rec/Sale Dt: 12/16/1981 12/16/1981 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $300,000 Zoning: MR Use: INDUSTRIAL ACREAGE Doc#: 8112160697 Cnty Use: 933 Owners: T&E INVESTMENT INC Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-F2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 353 VUEMONT PL NE; RENTON WA 98056-3659 C051 Phone: 10) Situs: 2810 SE MAPLE VALLEY HWY, WA - Lot Area: 199,406 APN: 162305-9072-04 Rec/Sale Dt: 02/29/1996 02/28/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $609,864 Zoning: R-8 Use: MULTI FAMILY ACREAGE Doc#: 9602291883 Cnty Use: 912 Owners: LA PIANTA LP Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-F3 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: PO BOX 88050; SEATTLE WA 98138-2050 B013 Phone: 11) Situs: 2811 NE 4TH ST,RENTON WA 98056-4082 C051 Lot Area: 90,013 APN: 162305-9117-01 Rec/Sale Dt: 11/12/1982 11/12/1982 Bldg/Liv Area: 31,692 County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: MF1 Use: MULTI FAMILY 10 UNITS PLUS Doc#: 8211120723 Cnty Use: 112 Owners: RENTON HOUSING AUTHORITY Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-F2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1983 Mail: 970 HARRINGTON AVE NE; RENTON WA 98056-3088 C063 Phone: 12) Situs: EDMONDS AVE N, WA Lot Area: 38,224 APN: 162305-9120-06 Rec/Sale Dt: 03/04/1998 02/25/1998 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $165,000 Zoning: MF1 Use: MULTI FAMILY LOT ' Doc#: 9803040609 Cnty Use: 911 Owners: DEMPS ANNETTE B&KEITH SR Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-F2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 2308 NE 24TH ST; RENTON WA 98056-2251 C053 Phone: 13) Situs: , WA Lot Area: 874,685 APN: 162305-9131-03 Rec/Sale Dt: 02/29/1996 02/28/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $609,864 Zoning: RC Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9602291883 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: LA PIANTA LP Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-F3 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: PO BOX 88050; SEATTLE WA 98138-2050 B013 Phone: 14) Situs: , WA Lot Area: 435,600 APN: 162305-9133-01 Rec/Sale Dt: Bldg/Liv Area: 12,460 County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: P1 Use: UTILITIES Doc#: Cnty Use: 622 Owners: KING COUNTY Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-F2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1966 Mail: 500A K C ADMIN BLDG;SEATTLE WA 98104-1021 CR08 Phone: ©1996 Win2Data 2000 Page:2 of 4 • 15) ' Situs: MT OLIVE WAY NE, WE4 Lot Area: 36,585 APN: 172305-9001-09 Rec/Sale Dt: Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: RMH Use: MULTI FAMILY LOT Doc#: Cnty Use: 911 Owners: ALLENNS DEMOLITION& Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-E2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 6205 24TH ST NE;TACOMA WA 98422-3301 C033 Phone: 16) Situs: , WA Lot Area: 345,431 APN: 172305-9004-06 Rec/Sale Dt: 02/03/1998 12/18/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $26,000 Zoning: R-8 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9802030308 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: ALLENNS DEMOLITION&EXC Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-E2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 6205 24TH ST NE; TACOMA WA 98422-3301 C033 Phone: 17) Situs: 2150 SE MAPLE VALLEY HWY, RENTON WA 98055 C087 Lot Area: 1,176,120 APN: 172305-9025-01 Rec/Sale Dt: Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: S-1 Use: COMMERCIAL ACREAGE Doc#: Cnty Use: 925 Owners: ANMAR CO Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-E2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 9125 10TH AVE S; SEATTLE WA 98108-4612 C002 Phone: 18) Situs: NE 116TH ST, WA Lot Area: 16,712 APN: 172305-9039-05 Rec/Sale Dt: 01/19/1982 01/19/1982 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $25,000 Zoning: R1 Use: EASEMENT Doc#: 8201190021 Cnty Use: 953 Owners: CITY OF RENTON/HW Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-E2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 200 MILL AVE S; RENTON WA 98055-2132 C087 Phone: 19) Situs: , WA Lot Area: 200,376 APN: 172305-9085-08 Rec/Sale Dt: Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: R-8 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: Cnty Use: 901 Owners: MT OLIVET CEMETERY Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-E2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: PO BOX 547; RENTON WA 98057-0547 B005 Phone: 20) Situs: , WA Lot Area: 200,376 APN: 172305-9085-99 Rec/Sale Dt: Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: R-8 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: Cnty Use: 901 Owners: MT OLIVET CEMETARY Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-E2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: PO BOX 547; RENTON WA 98057-0547 B005 Phone: 21) Situs: 500 SE MAPLE VALLEY HWY, WA Lot Area: 304,920 APN: 172305-9109-00 Rec/Sale Dt: Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: G1 Use: COMMERCIAL ACREAGE Doc#: Cnty Use: 923 Owners: ANMAR CO Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-E2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 9125 10TH AVE S; SEATTLE WA 98108-4612 C002 Phone: ©1996 Win2Data 2000 Page: 3 of 4 %II 22) • . Situs: 3 2 07 NE 4TH ST,RENTO WA 980564083 C051 Lot Area: 366,167 APN 172305-9170-04 Rec/Sale Dt: 12/30/1996 12/30/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: 200,178 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $12,800,000 Zoning: R-4 Use: MULTI FAMILY 10 UNITS PLUS Doc#: 9612301800 Cnty Use: 115 Owners: ESSEX PORTFOLIO L P Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-E2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1986 Mail: 777 S CALIFORNIA AVE; PALO ALTO CA 94304-1102 C098 Phone: 23) Situs: , WA Lot Area: 15,557 APN: 172305-9180-02 Rec/Sale Dt: 09/09/1999 08/31/1999 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $6,000 Zoning: RMH Use: MULTI FAMILY LOT Doc#: 9909090821 Cnty Use: 911 Owners: LAPINTA LTD PTNSP CO Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 656-E2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: PO BOX 88028; SEATTLE WA 98138-2028 B013 Phone: ©1996 Win2Data 2000 Page:4 of 4 OticcY O� Comments on the above application must be suhm(tled in writing to Ms.Rebecca Lind,ProjeU Manager,Development ♦ Services Division,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,by 5:00 s. a February 15,2000. If you have questions It about this proposal,or wish to be made a party of record end receive additional notification by ma0,contact the Project ' .'NT° Manager•Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project . NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE(DNS) • CONTACT PERSON: MS.REBECCA LIND (425)430-6588 I PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION DATE: January 31,2000 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-99-179,ECF,R,CPA APPLICATION NAME: LA PIANTA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/REZONE ;� .{ ,. 'atirlii^ K`:.: •.. r • :..:5�a u :1 ,,ti ?. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ,tt2 _ ?':,;r` `` .%':L7c, -• Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change lo RO '.,.0 .,. Residential Options/R-f0 zoning to Residential Planned Nef hborhoodlR- zoning approximately C concurrent zoning amendments horn R-14 to R•f o.The proposal also Includes anamendment to naezlist a developmenta i��*�s �1 ,'; v—^'K' T' ��" "' '`.5;. );I so.- •':..' "'""""""` ItiZ ::" ��•�. [i' 1",T: ,..F!S° t�}.L..'1J ;� ICI.i;)�?tO�cet�Rir3F��ivP agreement for the number of trips per day to be horn the site. The application Includes are est to rI,I `�- 'U$K ii 7:';.::•'�,� 'T 1 1�11•••r•rbti • N. change the Land Use Map from vehiclefamily thrill(RM-I)zoning to generated her tense Commercial(CC)zoning for.97 acres. r r��1 yG„4s•,� [ - .LI<KC 't .t ,_ q -j r .�F�r a al TJ T,r.SF 'fir., f.:' L•:.- r PROJECT LOCATION: m u ,.^,�,. f'��i�.:; ..r'I'� 3[lfltUt��- As' �.t� '� %�'�, �' �� Xtt ..,..• I J �-r.:z �. NE 3/4 and Monroe cr,,',`.7,t1 Stg iri441 d .V.i.` {r1 ••— (1 . - .. OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE,MITIGATED(DNS,M):As the Lead Agency,the Cityof ' ,�iJ. a / �r �_� �ASIVity p`fi W o- ,i Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposedprojectTherefore, ^4:.y,�``' � /1 R�4ppY N.4s. i'-..•Q' �i0 jl ill p r��_ as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110,the Myer Renton Is using the Optional DNS(M)process to w notice that a .P 1:'i •Rd��'•• r7ti •-7�' r 0015-1- DNS-M is likely to be Issued.Comment periods for the project end the proposed DNS-M are integrated into a single ^� '?h.• - '', :v' - �t 11�-'��t,��°`- a, ill J'f°-s'm comment period.There will be no comment period following the Issuance of the Threshold integrated Determinationi of Non- Ma Significance Mitigated(DNS-M).A 14-day appeal period will follow the Issuance of the DNS-M. "' \ !0'�"'I" -Eli I u •1' PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: 3�l }� r December 15,1999 I . 0 ` L - / i v by NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: January31,200D • r_ • � RO f j/ 1 • e Permits/Review Requested: �•� � 14t0 F• i/i,-�- ' d • �_ Environmental(SEPA)Review,Comp.Plan Amendment,Rezone / / _ Other Permits which may be required: None � e� Requested Studies: u / / "_ Traffic Analysis R��A /••,�'i "-_, - / , / Location where application may Ij -. / //.':? 1' be reviewed: ��- ..-�_ r�► /��/i/°(3 0 ~9It (1 Planning/Building/Public Works Division,Development Services Department, �^•'��'a' f.�- tJ1 . 1• 1055 South Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 'I 'ec, wPUBLIC HEARING: CTC "� �y -- C1 t (�.. A public hearing will be held before the Renton Planning Commission on the 7Ih r O i�Boor of the new Renton City Hall located at 1055 Grady Way South.The date of '`. t I' I'.n 1 This meeting is not yet determined.Parties of record will be Informed of the date • r-, • 4 � � and time of the hearing when it Is scheduled. •C""////'+ -t /f 1 L.p to CONSISTENCYprocess OVERVIEW: v - T I ' Analytical process •-- .x.. /, v Project consistency refers to whether a project is consistent with adopted and applicable development regulations,or in �\`--" j j �' • r their absence,comprehensive plan policies.RCW 36.708.110(2)(g)provides that the Notice of e statement of the preliminary determination of a project's consistency with the type of land use,avail oftdevion e developNOA)ment, 1I I. /// infrastructure.and character of development if one has been made at the time of notice.At a minimum,every NOA shall I / r Include a determination of the project's consistency with the zoning,comprehensive plan and development regulations. ? / r 1 1 fit` I •1. Land Use: ' R.a ` . e -- - ;) The project is consistent with the policy objectives of the Renton Comprehensive 1 Ir ' t 1 Plan Land Use Element for Residential Options Land Use and implementing R-10 e zoning. , \1 \`\ rj� �.\ 'IC l 11 I Environmental Documents that • „1 1 t st to _ �' I Evaluate the Proposed Project: Draft Environmental Impact Statement for City of Renton Land Use Element Jan _ T • `• • _ _ 1 1992,Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Land Use Element of the City If(R r ; �N.'� "' R.a 1 _ • C�'�►��.^ - �•'•yl•1'� of Renton Comprehensive Plan Feb.1993,Drall Comprehensive Plan CO'-' \y-� hr,- a:;�S i3 1\ 7,LI:4 :- - - r ,•` Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Dec.Comprehensive live Supplemental ti it•6. � I�/� •/✓4>.'+=!/�5T*,� ti'vi`e>> �/, ,Environmental Impact Statement Feb.Statement ��.: 01, a'41^T, tt`A'''•k �? i NOTICE OF PROPOSED III I -... ,'1` f''` I•�. •0---'4,r ENVIRONMENTAL APPUG4TION NOTICE OF PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL APPLICATION CERTIFICATIO• idie L/� L/ , hereby certif y that 3 copies of the above document were posted by me in conspicuous places on or nearby the described property on . �1,,) I Z . , Signed: eta, LA,vi ATTEST: Subcribed and sworn before me, a Nortaw Public,in and for the State of Washington residing in` ,,,\ , on the /0-171' day of ) z' • ,. MARILYN KAMCHEFF ( - t NOTARY PUBLIC �,c U 1 i STATE OF WASHINGTON `i COMMISSION EXPIRES a JUNE 29,2003 k. MARILYN I<AMCHEFF ...„� ; MY APPOINTi1AENT EXPIRES:6-29-03 • • D+ .ep . ./vrco NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) DATE: January 31,2000 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-99-179,ECF,R,CPA APPLICATION NAME: LA PIANTA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/REZONE xa; PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to change to RO Residential Options/R-10 zoning to Residential Planned Neighborhood/R-14 zoning for approximately 40 acres with a • concurrent zoning amendments from R-14 to R-10. The proposal also includes an amendment to an existing development agreement for the number of vehicle trips per day to be generated from the site. The application includes a request to change the Land Use Map from Multi-family Infill(RM-I)zoning to Convenience Commercial(CC)zoning for.97 acres. Sf 1/ V PROJECT LOCATION: NE 3rd/4th and Monroe 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 15,1999 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: January 31,2000 Permits/Review Requested: Environmental(SEPA)Review,Comp.Plan Amendment,Rezone Other Permits which may be required: None Requested Studies: Traffic Analysis Location where application may be reviewed: Planning/Building/Public Works Division,Development Services Department, 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055 • PUBLIC HEARING: A public hearing will be held before the Renton Planning Commission on the 7th floor of the new Renton City Hall located at 1055 Grady Way South. The date of this meeting is not yet determined.Parties of record will be informed of the date and time of the hearing when it is scheduled. CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Analytical process Project consistency refers to whether a project is consistent with adopted and applicable development regulations,or in their absence,comprehensive plan policies. RCW 36.70B.110(2)(g)provides that the Notice of Application(NOA)include a statement of the preliminary determination of a project's consistency with the type of land use,level of development, infrastructure,and character of development if one has been made at the time of notice. At a minimum,every NOA shall include a determination of the project's consistency with the zoning,comprehensive plan and development regulations. Land Use: The project is consistent with the policy objectives of the Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element for Residential Options Land Use and implementing R-10 zoning. Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Draft Environmental Impact Statement for City of Renton Land Use Element Jan 1992,Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Land Use Element of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Feb.1993,Draft Comprehensive Plan Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Dec.1994,Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Feb.1995. • NOTICE OF PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL APPLICATION • • • • r �_ Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Ms. Rebecca Lind, Project Manager, Development Services Division, 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,by 5:00 PM on February 15,2000. If you have questions about this proposal,or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, 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: MS.REBECCA LIND (425)430-6588 PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE.IDENTIFICATION • • -;-yis_'' nti:'•j1 "` 'fir r5I •-•, I/' \- �: .v:•' v ..--• w `-:.•7 Iil ri.,nnnc:1;LA.,•mi7r . nn^•G7LC .Er K i �� KV•' • fir :*ram 4-::�n'tii'aCm .n'..1...:.:,:uWu:!., ii... uinuil ,i.. rrttn...,LL +tr�Il Y•r /(.,.. :J .a •• ; ',T', I '-}LKId !!t>� TqP' .,�ce •.°� ;. 3 �, .. i;a;.,, 7 a: I.I •iaw� IRE Ruwnla dr. T ��• 1 '�i j_: �� •1.11T y t�=' kg. • `L• �ti., 1`y �• I:I 't :-� •� to i .r •! y �-�l -��x1 �KFS•:11.-:: ..'•-' �- Z I.I »4,�N..I•1L_L, D Iv . u,. • e '1•,?s.t QAr.1 7 t i !•• 1�:Q` '.Ca ' ...... _ L_II_ry .; �o �-+0 ve .e..0 0.100....:,t • .---II •�V'� XI a"\.;7.',coy:,....: ' nr�: • I I �._._I ijl.✓' p.. *▪ *1....,.9. ----..44-4-i• ..:- -4-<Nk.i j-6711(4r Milinax•2-• •-.t.-4 i .0 P-I 1 'Wan ...,...... %ociv.--i ',,,Z,'3,• \' - VA 11111 '5 4; -0E-.-•••••.'47 ..e. • . r iri.3:-. • ▪ � 1 4s � teU�iiikli � : i = r 1 1.id'► - �� f y 1= - 7� -'m - H � • moot L� I1) + "-- " -Lr M IR •C- - 'W. ♦ ill•V.,. - iirj.rA11101 u 1.1 1 A F . I.' I [2:1 *— ii, ‘: D /' : Er.. / / I— , i / / }a A moo• ! tiff te .° „, • S i • ...2r. ,,,,,.,,... . . �/ / .1/ 7/./011: .c--ai••' i. fill . [II roll: .. ,:c,;!.-.:" c a ../47/ kti?._.$ n.SI ••Eril : / I E eatueeowaao caw L 'ri 4 17 Imo`-/• :'' SIAECT PROP6iTY/ e . L� • L� VIC--,_!_,.1.7..,.. i . /71 A!iii ... / ';) • i // 1��\��\ ��, RC I Iz 1 l I n..AC • I l aAw7 1 r,)' }� q .ey q��•.' / 0 ►A s, ROB \�.a / ->_ ti�! +..o **Je'? ti. �/ . , ... . , 7 ----.1. . '4.`:,,.4-1 1 .1.:4:.-411-..1'1.:4:::.1. ,.;-.7/44:4,1).•117:4:.77.z.f.tt---;"'4,14.17. . NOTICE OF PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL APPLICATION •',";;;_%- , -: ';••• • ,0 • • _ ' - ' CITY FRENTON : . - aal • • , Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse.Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator _ • . , . " • . , . , January 31, 2000 • • , • • • • Ms.Ann Nichols La Pianta Limited Partnership PO Box 88028 Tukwila,WA 98138 • SUBJECT: La Pianta CPA/Rezone • Project No. LUA-99-179,ECF,R,CPA Dear Ms. Nichols: The Development Planning Section of the City of Renton has determined that the subject applicatiOn is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on February 22, 2000. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. Please contact me, at(425)430-6588, if you have any questions. Sincerely, rot,„„p Rebecca Lind • Project Manageraccoptanco • - - - • . , • ;: 1 0.55..SOuth:Grady Way 7 Renton;Washington,98055 AGAR, i1LiC�'f1i.�.i 'ter'• i_""t'.1 N.';<:;"i�::"r.:iii;<::F;��iF E-isiY :'.'::iai.:iii•'.:as:i ::i::::: 4ci ° :,_ .Y.. 1 MASTER"'APPL El uu ;i:::i:ti i i::i:'i it i ii:...::i::::.•::�:::::.:::::s;;:>::::.:'.>:>'t::.::>.:::.:::::::::�:::::::::.::.:...:...:::. •. .:.:. PRO : :: >:> ;:.>:.;::>:<:;::>:<:>«::.>:;:>::;;:;�P:ROJ�CT€1NP:O.R /�TIO ; ::::: >::�'•:: :: • TY::.OWN.ER .S ..................................... : , ``•"`'"o e t`a n``one legal oWno` .' . ... ...... ........................................... hoterized<Mastor.`Appl .._ .._. � PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: NAME: La Pianta Limited Partnership La Pianta Comprehensive Plan Amendments • and Rezone PROPERTY/PROJECT ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION: ADDRESS: P.O. Box 88028 Southeast and Southwest quadrants of . • NE 3rd/NE 4th and Edmonds Avenue CITY: Tukwila ZIP: 98138 KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): 162305-9006-05 172305-9171-03 162305-9007-04 162305-9009-02 162305-9061-07 162305-9010-09 TELEPHONE NUMBER: (206) 575-2000 EXISTING LAND USE(S): VACANT .... .. ...: > >:APPLICANT:(�. dtki:er>tl:an.:...:.....:......):::.:.:::.;•::.:;.;>;.;..; ...................... . PROPOSED LAND USES: NAME: Same as owner Single-family residential and convenience commercial • COMPANY(if applicable): EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: RaSidat.tal Plamzd Neigl 37zcd (RPN) .•Rakidenbial Crtitns. (RO) lhxithtial Infill (RM-I) ADDRESS: PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable): Residential Options (RO) and Convenience Commercial (CC) CITY: ZIP: EXISTING ZONING: Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) TELEPHONE NUMBER: • Residential Multi-Family Infill (RM-I) PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): Residential-10 DU/AC (R-10) and Convenience . Commercial C C SITE AREA (SQ.FT. OR ACREAGE): NAME: Ann Nichols 95 acres +/- COMPANY (if applicable): PROJECT VALUE: N/A La Pianta Limited Partnership ADDRESS: P.O. Box 88028 IS THE SITE LOCATED IN THE AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA? The City's maps show that the site is CITY: Tukwila ZIP: 98138 ppparp'tii��annlly77in APA Zone 1 and partially in IS-1TiESfFCPOCATED IN ANY OTHER TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA? • TELEPHONE NUMBER: (206) 575-2000 Not to applicant's knowledge. ::•:•;:.::LEGAL.;DES.CRI.F: f)N:I:i..ReROPERTY:•:. /ltt0.•gt;:s a::...:•;:;:•;::•;:.....:......::......... ................. . e . r sh.e.et:::>If::>r►eces ar.: ; ::;:::....,....••••:.::::::::::>:::; >:>>:: PARCELS 1 THROUGH 4, 9 AND 10 OF CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE • REVISION FILE. NUMBER LUA-95-200-LLA, AS. RECORDED IN BOOK 10.8 OF SURVEYS AT PAGES 276, 276A AND 276B, UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NUMBER 9604239004 . .E.. F..AP1�1 ... ....................... .... ................................ :<:::>::::>:::::::>:::>:»:::<:::::::::::: >::::: ::::>:::<::::::::::: :::::::>:::>:::: ::::::>:::<::>::::::::::::>:::::.:.'I''. i' 0 IC . .IO.N..gcFEES .................. .. . II..: ::......>Check.a .. I i a c .,;:::.;:�.>::.;;:<.»:>:;:.>:.:::.:;:.;; at t at..a I :.-..-.0 >::: f. :;; ::: •>::>:::><::<<::::<:<>;::;;:<;�>::>::>::: >:«:::;>::>: ::.:• � :.>:; . .:.:..:.......:::..::.:: .p.p.:I:..:..::..:..:n.:::..Y :e...:..t::....:.:::... . ... ...... .�t. ..sta..f.�w►Il.�.d:ete.r.:.m....lti:�:::�se ................:..,...::::::.::::::::::. ANNEXATION $ SUBDIVISION: x COMP. PLAN AMENDMENT $.500,' x REZONE $4 000." _ LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT $ _ SPECIAL PERMIT $ _ SHORT PLAT $ _TEMPORARY PERMIT $ _TENTATIVE PLAT $ • _ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $ — PRELIMINARY PLAT $ _ SITE PLAN APPROVAL $ — FINAL PLAT $ _GRADE & FILL PERMIT $ • (NO. CU. YDS: ) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: $ _VARIANCE $ (FROM SECTION: ) _ PRELIMINARY _WAIVER $ FINAL _WETLAND PERMIT $ — ROUTINE VEGETATION MOBILE HOME PARKS: — $ MANAGEMENT PERMIT S _ BINDING SITE PLAN $ • SHORELINE REVIEWS: _ SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT $ _ CONDITIONAL USE $ _ VARIANCE $ • _ EXEMPTION $No Charge x ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW $ 880 REVISION $ • I, (Print Name) M.A. Segale ,declare that I am (please check one)_the owner of the property involved in this application, X the authorized representative to act for the property owner(please attach proof of authorization), and that the foregoing statements and answers heroin contained and the information herewith submitted aro in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. LA PIANTA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a • Washington Limited Partnership ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public, in and By: Metro Land Development, Inc., a for the State of iii.A 60,/ onthedayof esiding at (uc�,�ct Washington corpor ion, its Coral Pair r• Qece'4 s r 19 i By: �!� :57. (/ M.A. Segale, President GLt �pz,4a;it,_„„ (Signature ootary ublic) bi�'co t "'f •::•:�� ,...,. ....., .... ....t.. .......... . t .. to f ......... ....... . . ::>::::::>::>: I :.:.:.;•:?i:i : :::...y�.::::::.�:•:::::•:::::::.:::::: =.,...... ... ... . ... : :.2'...:...b.::: Sp: CAp:S: ::;CAp..:U::.•:.CF': ::::.CU.:A:. . •.: ; ;;...•:•.:: `:<:TAHR::» :.:.. m......:.f'. .. ...::�P::PP A..,;..,.:SNP:,L..A;::>S.H PL=H•>:;>S R`:;:::: r.:..:S E:::: >T.;::>::::;:..- ;:.;;:::.. :>:::; :<::s»iNTOT. L .. :::::::::::::::.�::::.: ::::: :: :.:::.,................:::::.::........�`�.:..::. .......:.:::.�:.::TO.TAL.P.O.STAGE�. :. V .... ::.:..:...:::::•,:•.:::::::::::: : .:.............. . .:.::.::... .......................... . . ...... MASTERAP.DOC REVISED 8/97 it �� DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON DEC 151999 Project Narrative RECEIVED Justification for the La Pianta Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone Project Name: La Pianta Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone Project Location: South side of NE 3rd/NE 4th Street and primarily east of Edmonds Avenue (partially west of Edmonds Avenue), Renton, WA Current Use: Vacant Land (mined out gravel pit) Current Zoning: R-10, R-14 and Residential Multi-Family Infill (RM-I) Proposed Zoning: R-14, R-10 and CC Proposed Use: Single-Family Residential Development and a small convenience commercial use. Proposed by: La Pianta Limited Partnership, a Washington limited partnershop ("La Pianta") 1. Explanation of the Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments and Rezoning of the Subject Property That Were Made During the City's 1999 Planning and Rezone Cycle As part of the City's 1999 comprehensive planning amendment and rezone cycle, the following twenty (20) acres of the site (the "RPN Area") were given a Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN) Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation and corresponding R-14 zoning: THAT PORTION OF PARCELS 2, 4, AND 9 CITY OF RENTON, LOT LINE REVISION, FILE NO. LUA-95-200-LLA, RECORDED IN BOOK 108 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 276, 276 A AND 276 B, UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9604239004, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; BEING A PORTION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS.FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 16; THENCE, SOUTH 01°04'02" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE THEREOF, 601.36 FEET; THENCE, SOUTH 88°55'58" EAST, PERPENDICULAR TO SAID WEST LINE THEREOF, 378.15 FEET, TO THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT CO. EASEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 2571770, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AND THE TRUE POINT OF Page 1 of 11 Pro j-Nar-v3.F 112/14/99 ti BEGINNING; THENCE, NORTH 34°05'53" EAST, ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE, 1416.63 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 50°15'19" WEST; THENCE ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 197.38 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°09'26", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 55.66 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 55°54'08" WEST, 958.13 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 399.32 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27° 17' 11", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 190.17 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 83°11'18" WEST, 18.88 FEET, TO A POINT ON A CURVE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 82°55'25" EAST, THENCE ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2470.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02°37'08", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 112.90 FEET TO THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT CO. EASEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 2513101, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE, SOUTH 26°46'02" EAST, ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN THEREOF, 163.94 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN, SOUTH 06°20'40" EAST, 1566.43 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Also as part of the City's 1999 comprehensive planning amendment and rezone process, the following 74.05 acres of the site (the "RO Area") were given a Residential Options (RO) Land Use Map designation and corresponding R-10 zoning: PARCELS 1, 2, 3, 4, 9 AND 10 CITY OF RENTON, LOT LINE REVISION, FILE NO. LUA-95-200-LLA, RECORDED IN BOOK 108 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 276, 276 A AND 276 B, UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9604239004, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; BEING A PORTION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF SAID PARCEL 1 LYING WEST OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 16; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCELS 2, 4, AND 9 CITY OF RENTON, LOT LINE REVISION, FILE NO. LUA-95-200-LLA, RECORDED IN BOOK 108 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 276, 276 A AND 276 B, UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9604239004, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; BEING A PORTION OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 Page 2 of 11 Proj-Nar-v3.F1 12/14/99 li EAST, W.M. IN KING COUNTY WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS . . FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 16; THENCE, SOUTH 01°04'02" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE THEREOF, 601.36 FEET; THENCE, SOUTH 88°55'58" EAST, PERPENDICULAR TO SAID WEST LINE THEREOF, 378.15 FEET, TO THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT CO. EASEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN AN INSTRUMENT' RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 2571770, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE, NORTH 34°05'53" EAST, ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE, 1416.63 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 50°15'19" WEST; THENCE ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 197.38 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°09'26", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 55.66 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 55°54'08" WEST, 958.13 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 399.32 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27° 17' 11", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 190.17 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 83°11'18" WEST, 18.88 FEET, TO A POINT ON A CURVE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 82°55'25" EAST, THENCE ON SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2470.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02°37'08", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 112.90 FEET TO THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT CO. EASEMENT AS DESCRIBED IN AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 2513101, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE, SOUTH 26°46'02" EAST, ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN THEREOF, 163.94 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN, SOUTH 06°20'40" EAST, 1566.43 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. The RPN Area and the RO Area were made subject to a November 18, 1999 Development Agreement between the City of Renton and La Pianta Limited Partnership. Under that agreement, development of the RO Area and the RPN Area was made subject to the following special restrictions (the "Existing Development Agreement's Special Restrictions"): (1) Permitted residential development in the RO Area and RPN Area would be limited so that the number and type of residential units would not be expected to generate more than 3,952 average daily Page 3 of 11 Proj-Nar-v3.F 1 12/14/99 trips as calculated under the 1997 Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Manual; (2) Permitted residential development in the RO Area and RPN Area would be limited so that the total impervious surface coverage due to development would not be allowed to exceed a total of 45.04 acres; (3) The overall number of residential units of any type could not exceed 460 units; (4) The overall number of flats (which would only be constructed in the RPN Area) could not exceed 78 units and the number of flats in any such building could not exceed 6 units; and (5) The residential density of the portion of the RPN Area lying within Aquifer Protection Zone 1 shall be limited to 10 dwelling units per acre. In addition, as part of the City's 1999 comprehensive planning amendment and rezone process the applicant requested that the Comprehensive Plan Map designation and zoning of an approximately 0.92-acre portion of the site (the portion of Parcel 1 of City of Renton Lot Line Revision File No. LUA-95-200-LLA lying west of the west line of Section 16, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M.) be changed from Residential Multi-Family Infill to Convenience Commercial (CC). On August 12, 1999, at the • request of City Staff, the applicant requested that the City Council defer into the year 2000 Comprehensive Plan updating cycle the CC portion of the application so that both City Staff and the applicant could have more time to develop mutually acceptable conditions to and/or refinements of the proposal, such as (1) some minor modifications to the geometry of the proposed CC zone site to make it fully abut Edmonds Avenue and thereby create a better access situation (permitting a workable limitation of access to and from NE3rd/NE4th Street to right-in, right-out only) and (2) limitations as to particular CC uses. The Council did so. The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee (ERC) issued as a SEPA threshold determination for.the applicant's 1999 planning cycle requests a mitigated determination of non-significance with the following mitigating conditions (the "1999 SEPA Mitigating Conditions"): 1. A Development Agreement be approved by the City and recorded as a restrictive covenant running with the title of the property. The Page 4 of 11 Proj-Nar-v3.F 1 12/14/99 . l Development Agreement shall stipulate as follows: • Development to be restricted to a maximum of 460 units. • The overall number of flats to be limited to 78 units and the number of flats in any building to be limited to 6. • The total impervious surface coverage to be 45 acres as shown in the May 26, 1999 memo from Dodds Engineers. • Total traffic generation from all land uses to be not greater than 4,071 average daily trips as calculated under the 1997 Institute of Transportation Engineers ITE Manual as shown in the memo from David I. Hamlin and Associates. 2. The portion of the property proposed for Residential Planned Neighborhood Designation which is located in Zone 1 of the Aquifer Protection Area shall be limited to 10 dwelling units per net acre. 2. The Applicant's Year 2000 Requested Changes to the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps La Pianta hereby requests the following changes to the subject property's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designations and Zoning classifications: (a) An amendment of the RPN Area's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation from Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN) to Residential Options (RO); (b) An amendment of the RPN Area's Zoning Classification from R-14 to R-10; (c) An amendment of the Comprehensive Plan Map designation and zoning for an approximately 1.45-acre portion of the site at the site's northwest corner (i.e., the 0.92-acre portion of the site that is currently zoned Residential Multi-Family Infill and approximately 0.53 abutting acres of the current RO Area) to Convenience Commercial (CC) along with an amended Development Agreement to provide in relation to the CC portion of the site that (i) the CC zone's "Transportation Services and Manufactured Home Sales" category of Page 5 of 11 Proj-Nar-v3.F1 12/14/99 uses be prohibited and (ii) vehicular access to and from NE3rd/NE4th Street be limited to right-in, right-out turns only; and (d) The 1999 SEPA Mitigating Conditions be replaced with the following limiting conditions of the proposed application: (i) There be a maximum of 450 single-family residential units on the R-10 portion of the site; and (ii) The total impervious surface coverage of the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 45 acres as shown in the May 26, 1999 memo from Dodds Engineers; and (e) The existing Development Agreement be replaced with an amended Development Agreement that substitutes the following two conditions of the proposed application (with corresponding amendments to the factual recitals of the Development Agreement to be made as well) for the Existing Development Agreement's Special Restrictions: (i) There be a maximum-of 450 single-family residential units on the R-10 portion of the site; and (ii) The total impervious surface coverage of the R-10 portion of the site be limited to 45 acres as shown in the May 26, 1999 memo from Dodds Engineers. La Pianta contemplates ultimate development of (a) the proposed R-10 portion of the site with a community of single family homes and (b) the proposed CC portion of the site with convenience commercial uses other than the uses listed in the CC zone's "Transportation Services and Manufactured Home Sales" category. (The uses in that category are "car washes", "gasoline service stations", and "vehicle service and repair, small".) 3. Size and Location of Site The subject property is located on the south side of NE 3rd/NE 4th Streets, east of Mt. Olivet Cemetery, west of the King County Shops and north of the Maple Valley Highway in Renton. The subject property consists of contiguous parcels of land owned by La Pianta totaling about 95 acres in size. The south edge of these parcels has an irregular shape that follows the top of slope above the Maple Valley Highway. Page 6 of 11 Proj-Nar-v3.P 1 12/14/99 4. Current Use of Site and Any Existing Improvements The site is currently vacant after having been previously used as a gravel mine. Improvements for the southerly extension of Edmonds Avenue into the property have recently been constructed. Significant grading of portions of the site has occurred in relation to both (a) part of a previously-approved manufactured housing project (Cedar Crest) that was planned for the site and (b) the City's sewer interceptor line that crosses the property. There are currently no structures on the site. 5. Special Site Features Special site features include the site's'location, size and topography. The location is a prominent one in the Renton Highlands and would be attractive to potential homeowners with its easy access to downtown Renton and the nearby commercial uses along NE 4th Street. The site's relatively large size would allow for the development of a quality single-family residential neighborhood and a small convenience commercial facility with parks and open space. The topography would allow this new neighborhood to be built below NE 3rd/NE 4th Streets with little visual impact. Further, the site's topography and southward orientation provide opportunities for substantial southerly views. 6. Location of Existing Structures This site is currently vacant with no existing structures. 7. Special responses to the following Decision Criteria: 1. The CPA/Rezone bears a substantial relation to the public health, safety or welfare. The requested Comprehensive Plan Amendments and rezone, if granted, would allow for the provision of single-family residential development and a convenience commercial area, both of which would address needs of area residents and would increase the City's tax base. 2. The CPA/Rezone addresses changing circumstances or the needs of the City as a Whole. Page 7 of 11 Proj-Nar-v3.F 1 12/14/99 The City of Renton as a whole is experiencing an increase in demand for both residential real estate and commercial space as a result of a strong local economy. This proposal will allow for needed single-family residential development, which is in strong demand in the local housing market and would provide close-to-the- City housing opportunities for employees of local businesses. The proposed small convenience commercial portion of the site will be available to serve future residential development on the R-10 portion of the site as well as the adjacent La Colina residential subdivision. 3. The CPA/Rezone is compatible with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan or other policies or goals of the City The requested CPA and rezone is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan as it furthers the goals and policies of the plan to increase the variety of housing and channel growth into the City's urban area. Please refer to the following section addressing the policies. This location is ideal for a residential community in view of its easy access to downtown Renton and the NE 3rd/NE 4th Street corridor. 4. The CPA/Rezone is compatible with and not materially detrimental to adjacent Land uses and surrounding neighborhoods. See answer to 4 (Current Use of Site and Any Existing Improvements), above. Once the.subject property is developed, the adjacent landowners and residents will no longer have to look at the mined-out gravel pit in its current state and the neighborhood will be improved, both aesthetically and economically, as a result of the proposed project. Development contemplated by the proposed amendments will be very compatible with all the surrounding uses including the proposed residential subdivision of La Colina to the west. 5. The CPA/Rezone will not result in development which will adversely impact community facilities, including but not limited to utilities, transportation, parks or schools Under the existing Development Agreement, up to 460 residential units can be constructed on the current RPN and RO Areas of the site. Under the current proposal (which would amend the Development Agreement), the maximum number of residential units (all single-family) would be limited to 450, which corresponds to an anticipated 4,307 average daily trips under the 1997 Institute Page 8 of 11 Proj-Nar-v3.17 1 12/14/99 of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Manual. That would be just 355 trips more (or 8.98 percent more) more than the maximum 3,952 average daily trips specified as Special Restriction (1) in the Existing Development Agreement's Special Restrictions for the current RPN and RO Areas of the site. The 0.92-acre portion of the site that currently has an RM-I Comprehensive Plan land use designation and zoning would allow for development under the RM-I zone (at the rate of 20 dwellings per acre, equivalent to about 18 multi-family units). The proposed CC portion of the site would to a significant extent serve the subject property as well as the adjacent La Colina subdivision and is not anticipated to create offsite traffic significantly greater than would be generated by 18 multi- family units on the current RM-l-zoned part of the proposed CC portion of the site. No significant impacts La Pianta's proposal calls for a slight increase in density, yet, with the variety of housing types contemplated, including conventional single-family detached homes, attached townhouse homes and flats, the impacts on utilities, transportation, parks, or schools will be very similar to the impacts of R-8 development. No adverse impacts on such community facilities are expected. 6. The subject property is suitable for development in general conformance with zoning standards under the proposed zoning classification. With the site's previous grading and the installation of storm drainage facilities, the existing RPN Area of the site as well as the existing RO Area of the site are very well-suited to development under the proposed R-10 zoning classification. The R-10 classification allows for the single-family residential homes that the applicant envisions for the proposed R-10 portion of the site. The proposed small convenience commercial area will require filling and grading as part of site development. Consistent with Comprehensive Plan Objective LU-FF, the small-scale commercial use of the proposed CC area will serve both the proposed R-10 portion of the subject property and the nearby La Colina subdivision. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment of the RPN Area to Residential Options (RO) is consistent with the City's goals and policies, as noted in the following Land Use Policies set forth in the City's Comprehensive Plan: Page 9of11 Proj-Nar-v3.F 1 12/14/99 General Residential Policies: LU-11 Consistent with subsection a of this policy, the proposal would provide for development of a new residential neighborhood on vacant, environmentally suitable land on one of the plateaus surrounding downtown Renton. Residential-Types LU-15 Consistent with this policy, the ultimate single-family residential development that will follow the proposal on this site will be part of a city- wide mix of housing types that includes large lot and small lot single family development, and residential mixed use development. LU-16.1 Consistent with this policy, ultimate development following the approval of this proposal is anticipated to include single-family residential lots of various sizes on the subject property (with likely lots widths on the order of 40 feet, 45 feet, 50 feet and 60 feet to accommodate various sizes of single-family housing). Residential Options and Residential Planned Neighborhood General Policies LU-41 Consistent with this policy, the proposal will provide opportunity for small-lot single family detached homes that meet the R-10 density standards. LU-42 Consistent with this policy, the proposal will provide opportunity for a range of lot sizes. LU-43 Consistent with this policy, the applicant envisions a central place at or near the entry to serve as a focal point to the contemplated new residential neighborhood on this site. LU-45 The site is conducive to a flexible grid street system as contemplated by this policy, generally of the type that the City has previously approved for the earlier "Cedar Crest" manufactured housing project proposal at this site. Page 10 of 11 Proj-Nar-v3.F 1 12/14/99 Residential Options Policies LU-50 Consistent with this policy, the proposed map amendment of the existing 20-acre RPN Area to Residential Options meets the criteria for the Residential Option Designation through the following: (a) the RPN Area is surrounded by the existing abutting RO Area, which is currently zoned R- 10, (b) the subject parcels are currently vacant, and (d) few new roads or major utility upgrades will be required for development of the site since a City sanitary sewer interceptor has recently been constructed through the site and a southerly extension of Edmonds Avenue NE has recently been installed. LU-51 and LU-51 Consistent with these policies, the envisioned single- family residential development on the proposed R-10 portion of the site would fall within a range of 7 to 10 homes per acre. Page 11 of 11 Proj-Naz-v3.F 1 12/14/99 9r r ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST INTRODUCTION Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C 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 ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in the checklist to the word "project", "applicant", and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer", and "affected geographic area," respectively. CITY OF RENTON RECEIVED MAY 2 71999 BUILDING DIVISION ENV-CHECKLIST-2.Fl.doc;05/27/99; Page: 1 A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project,if applicable: La Pianta Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Rezone (a non project action) 2. Name of applicant: La Pianta Limited Partnership 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: Contact Person: Attn:Ann Nichols Craig J. Krueger c/o Segale Business Park C/O Dodds Engineers, Inc. (DEI) P 0 Box 88050 4205- 148th Ave. N.E., Suite 200 Tukwila, WA 98138 Bellevue, WA 98007 (206) 575-2000 (425) 885-7877 4. Date checklist prepared: May 27, 1999 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Rezone are anticipated to be processed by the City by Fall 1999. Development is anticipated to start in the Spring of 2000 dependant on the approval of the CPA and rezone application as well as subsequent site plan and preliminary plat applications. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. Development of the subject property consistent with the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Rezone is contemplated in future years but is not part of this proposed non project action. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. The City of Renton issued a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Element (dated January 16, 1992) and a two-volume Final Environmental Impact Statement for the City of Renton Comprehensive.Plan's Land Use Element (dated February 1, 1993). Note that Volume 2 of that FEIS includes special "McMahon Property" studies involving analyses of that property under three different Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map scenarios: (1) Office, (2) "Single Family/4 Mix" (according to Renton's Rebecca Lind, Single ENV-CHECKLIST-2.F1.doc;05/27/99; Page:2 Family/4 Mix was a precursor to what is currently the Residential Options (RO) Land Use Map -designation), and (3) Single Family/Education-Institution Center. (The subject property is a portion of the McMahon Property special study area.) • Attached hereto is a set of copies of the Land Use Study Areas Vehicle Trip Generation Report (including "Appendix A—Study Area Land Use and Estimated Trip Generation"thereto). 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. City Council approval of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Rezone. 11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The originally-submitted application (March 31, 1999) requested that (a) approximately 42.6 acres of the site be given a Residential Options (RO) Land Use Map designation and corresponding R-10 zoning and (b) approximately 53.6 acres of the site be given a Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN) Land Use Map designation and corresponding R-14 zoning. In contrast, the amended application (May 27, 1999) requests that, subject to particular site-specific development restrictions to be set forth in a Development.Agreement between the City and the property owner and recorded to run with the land, (a) approximately 74.2 acres of the site be given a Residential Options (RO) Land Use Map designation and corresponding R-10 zoning (those 74.2 acres are currently designated Residential Single Family and zoned Residential Manufactured Home (RMH)), (b) 20 acres of the site (the minimum size permitted under Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-57) be given a Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN) Land Use Map designation and corresponding R-14 zoning (those 20 acres are also currently designated Residential Single Family and zoned RMH), and (c) the northwesterly-most 0.92-acre portion of the site (which is currently designated and zoned Residential Multi-Family Infill (RM-I)) be designated and zoned Convenience Commercial (CC). The locations of the requested Land Use Map designations and zoning classifications are set forth on the accompanying amended Property Map. The site-specific development restrictions that the proponent has proposed (the "Proposed Site- Specific Restrictions") are the following: (1) Permitted residential development in the proposed R-10 and R-14 portions of the site and permitted convenience commercial development in the proposed CC portion of the site would be limited so that the number and type of residential units in combination with the building square footage of convenience commercial development would not be expected to generate more than 4,071 average daily trips as calculated under the 1997 Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)Manual; (2) Permitted residential development in the proposed R-10 and R-14 portions of the site and permitted convenience commercial development in the proposed CC . portion of the site would be limited so that the total impervious surface coverage ENV-CHECKLIST-2.F1.doc;05/27/99; Page:3 due to the combined residential and convenience commercial development would not be expected to exceed a total of 45.04 acres; (3) The overall number of residential units of any type could not exceed 490 units; and (4) The overall number of flats (which would only be constructed in the R-14-zoned portion of the site) could not exceed 78 units and the number of flats in any such building could not exceed 6 units. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The site is located north of Maple Valley Highway, south of NE 3rd/NE 4`h Street, east of Mt. Olivet cemetery and west of the King County shops in the City of Renton. A property map is attached hereto and incorporated by reference. 13. Does the proposal lie with an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan map as environmentally sensitive? Yes, the proposed project is partially in Aquifer Protection Area Zone 1 and partially in Aquifer Protection Zone 2. The RC-zoned area south of the site is designated Greenbelt. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous other The portion of the site where most of the future development on the site is expected is gently sloping, while the perimeter of the site contains steeper slopes. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The steepest slope is±67%. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Sand and gravel, no agricultural soils. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. Note that the stability of the southern slope is addressed in three detailed geotechnical reports prepared in regard to the site by GeoEngineers dated March 7, 1994, October 24, 1994, ENV-CHECKLIST-2.F1.doc;05/27/99; Page:4 ' ' and April 6, 1995 in conjunction with the previously-approved (and still vested) "Cedar Crest Manufactured Home Park", copies of which are included in the accompanying February 11, 1999 "Storm Drainage Report"binder for Cedar Crest Phases I, II, III and IV prepared by Triad Associates. Note further that, on page 7 of the October 24, 1994 GeoEngineers report, the report indicates that "[i]nfiltrated ground water in this area would. . .flow to the northwest . . . " and that "[t]his is also supported by the lack of evidence of significant ground water seepage occurring on [the portion of the bluff being analyzed in the report]". e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. None proposed at this time. Application is for CPA and rezone only. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. A stormwater retention/recharge system has already been designed for the site, approved by the City of Renton and constructed in relation to the Cedar Crest Manufactured Home Park. Modifications may or may not have to be made to that system in order to accommodate ultimate development subsequent to City Council approval of the requested CPA and rezone requests. While some erosion may take place during such ultimate development, because of(a) the nature of the site's topography. and (b) the erosion control measures that the City will require, substantial quantities of sediment-laden water are not anticipated to leave the site. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example,asphalt or buildings)? In view of Proposed Site-Specific Restrictions 2's limitation of total impervious surface coverage of the approximately 95.1-acre site to 45.04 acres, not more than 47.3 percent of the site would be covered with impervious surfaces. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: N/A (They will be developed in the future in regard to a project-specific proposal.) 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 if known. Unknown at this time., Application is for CPA and rezone only. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air,if any: None proposed at this time. 3. Water ENV-CHECKLIST-2.F1.doc;05/27/99; Page: 5 - a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Storm water retention and silt control structures and other man-made facilities only. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes,please describe and attach available plans. Not applicable. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Not applicable. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Not applicable. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. 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. No. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. N/A 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage: industrial, containing the following chemicals....; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. N/A c. Water Runoff(including storm water): ENV-CHECKLIST-2.F1.doc;05/27/99; Page: 6 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. A stormwater retention/recharge system has already been designed for the site, approved by the City of Renton and constructed in relation to the Cedar Crest Manufactured Home Park. A January 11, 1988 hydrogeologic-geotechnical study by Golder Associates plus portions of the above-referenced geotechnical reports by GeoEngineers bear upon that system as well as does a "Level I Drainage Study and Preliminary Storm Drainage Calculations" by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. dated October 12, 1994 (as revised November 4, 1994), all of which are included in the accompanying February 11, 1999 "Storm Drainage Report" binder for Cedar Crest Phases I, II, III and IV prepared by Triad Associates. Modifications may or may not have to be made to that system in order to accommodate ultimate development subsequent to City Council approval of the requested CPA and rezone requests. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. N/A d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: None proposed at this time. Storm ponds have already been installed—see above. 4. Plants a. Check or underline types of vegetation found on the site: X deciduous tree: alder,maple, aspen, other: X evergreen tree: f r,cedar,pine, other: X shrubs grass pasture wet soil plants: cattail,buttercup,bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass,milfoil, other: other types of vegetation: b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Trees and shrubs have been removed as part of the clearing and grading of the site associated with the previously approved manufactured housing project and previously conducted gravel mining of the site. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: N/A (Note: The sloped areas along the perimeter of the site affected by grading have been hydroseeded.). 5. Animals ENV-CHECKLIST-2.F 1.doc;05/27/99; Page:7 a. 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, songbirds, other: crows and miscellaneous small birds mammals: deer,bear, elk,beaver, other: squirrels, chipmunks, raccoons fish: bass, salmon,trout,herring, shellfish, other: None b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Unknown. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: N/A 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Unknown at this time. Application is for CPA and rezone only. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c: What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal: List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: None. Application is for CPA and rezone only. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None ENV-CHECKLIST-2.F1.doc;05/27/99; Page: 8 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? None. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Unknown at this time. Application is for CPA and rezone only. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: N/A 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is vacant, having been recently graded for the Cedar Crest manufactured housing project. The current use of the adjacent properties is as follows; Cemetery, King County Transfer station and shops, manufactured home park and multi family residential. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. ENV-CHECKLIST-2.F1.doc;05/27/99; Page:9 c. Describe any structures on the site. None. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so,what? None. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The current zoning is RMH—Residential Manufactured Homes. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? "RS"—Residential Single family. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Yes, the proposed project is partially in Aquifer Protection Area Zone 1 and partially in Aquifer Protection Area Zone 2. (The RC-zoned portion south of the site is designated Greenbelt.) i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Unknown at this time. Application is for CPA and rezone only. However, in view of Proposed Site-Specific Restriction 3, the overall number of residential units of any type on the site could not exceed 490 units and a 0.92-acre convenience commercial development could be constructed. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Consummation of a Development Agreement between the City and the property owner to embody the Proposed Site-Specific Restrictions. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Approximately 460 residential units would probably be constructed, with a maximum possible of 490 units. (The accompanying sheet entitled "La Pianta's Planned Residential Development ENV-CHECKLIST-2.F 1.doc;05/27/99; Page: 10 rl , Distribution as of 5/27/99"provides a breakdown of the 460 units that the proponent is currently contemplating in four villages. The locations of the villages are generally depicted on the accompanying Property Map.) The units would be a mix of high and middle-income housing. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not applicable. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Unknown at this time. Application is for CPA and rezone only. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None required at this time. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur. Unknown at this time. Application is for CPA and rezone only. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? N/A. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: N/A. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? ENV-CHECKLIST-2.Fl.doc;05/27/99; Page: 11 . • Liberty Park, Cedar River Park, Windsor Hill Park and the Maplewood golf course are all are located within 1 mile of the project. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreational opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any? Several onsite parks are contemplated. (See the accompanying Property Pap.) City of Renton parks impact fees would also be paid. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation 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. No. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Not applicable. 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. Primary access to the site would be provided by the southward extension of Edmonds Avenue NE from NE 3'd/NE 4rh Street, which extension has recently been constructed. There is an existing traffic signal at the intersection of NE 3'd/NE 4`h Street and Edmonds Avenue NE. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes, there is public transit service on NE 3'd/NE 4th Street. The nearest bus stop is 100 feet from the intersection of NE 3'd/NE 4`h Street and Edmonds Avenue NE. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The number of parking spaces that a completed development of the site would have is unknown at this time. No parking spaces would be eliminated. (Application is for CPA and rezone only.) ENV-CHECKLIST-2.F1.doc;05/27/99; Page: 12 d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Unknown at this time. Application is for CPA and rezone only. (Internal streets will be required for development of the site, most or all of which will be public streets.) 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? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. In view of Proposed Site-Specific Restriction 1, permitted residential development in the proposed R-10 and R-14 portions of the site and permitted convenience commercial development in the proposed CC portion of the site would be limited so that the number and type of residential units in combination with the building square footage of convenience commercial development would not be expected to generate more than 4,071 average daily trips as calculated under the 1997 Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Manual. That is the number of trips that would be equivalent to development of 413 conventional, detached single- family residential lots (in the portion of the site currently designated RS) and 18 multi family units (in the portion of the site currently designated RM-I)—see the accompanying Trip Generation Table prepared by the traffic analysis consulting firm David I. Hamlin & Associates and the accompanying May 27, 1999 letter from attorney David L. Halinen (especially pages 4 and 5). Note in the attached copy of the Land Use Study Areas Vehicle Trip Generation Report's Appendix A (from Volume 2 of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Element, dated February 1, 1993) that extensive trip generation was anticipated from the subject property as part of the McMahon Property special study area. The least intensive of the three different Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map scenarios considered for that special study area was "Single Family/4 Mix" (which, according to Renton's Rebecca Lind, was a precursor to what is currently the Residential Options (RO) Land Use Map designation). With Proposed Site-Specific Restriction 1, the traffic generated by the subject property will certainly not exceed the levels anticipated by that FEIS for the subject property. (It will probably be less.) g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: In conjunction with development applications for the site, a traffic analysis will be prepared to examine the operation of the NE 3rd/4`l`-Edmonds Avenue intersection in regard to the trip generation estimated for the ultimate development of the site that is actually proposed in order to see if any further intersection improvements are warranted. Also, City of Renton traffic impact fees would be paid in conjunction with actual development of the subject property.Unknown at this time. Application is for CPA and rezone only. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection,police protection,health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. ENV-CHECKLIST-2.F1.doc;05/27/99; Page: 13 Application is for CPA and rezone only. Ultimate development of the site pursuant to approval of the request wold result in an increased need for public services. This has already been contemplated in the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements for the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Element(circa 1992 and 1993). b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. See the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements for the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Element (circa 1992 and 1993). 16. Utilities a. Underline utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. All utilities are available to the site through a proper extension of services. Extension of services will be the developers'responsibility at the time of ultimate development. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Electricity will be provided by Puget Sound Energy Natural Gas will be provided by Puget Sound Energy Water Service will be provided by the City of Renton Sanitary Sewer will be provided by the City of Renton Telephone Service will be provided by US West C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. i /Signature: � Date Submitted: May 27, 1999 Craig eger D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (Do not use this sheet for project actions). Non-project actions are those that do not include a specific project. A non-project action may be a rezone, annexation, or amendments to ordinances. 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. ENV-CHECKLIST-2.F1.doc;05/27/99; Page: 14 • r 7 Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent of the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal that would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? The proposed Comprehensive Plan designations and zoning are very similar in intensity of use to the existing Comprehensive Plan designations and will not significantly increase any discharge to water, emissions to air or production of noise. Uses permitted under the proposed categories will not produce, store or release toxic or hazardous substances. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: None proposed since Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Rezone will ultimately result in similar uses to those previously studied and approved by the City for the subject property. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? The site has already been mined and graded and storm drainage/water quality facilities have already been installed. The proposed CPA and rezone will not further affect plants, animals or fish. Proposed measures to protector conserve plants, animals,fish, or marine life are: When development of the site ultimately occurs pursuant to the proposed zoning, erosion control, water quality and detention facilities will be required per City codes. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Future development of the site pursuant to the proposed zoning will have approximately the same impact on energy and natural resources as allowed under the current Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning category. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: None required beyond normal City codes. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks,wilderness,wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites,wetlands,floodplains, or prime farmlands? There are no such environmentally sensitive areas on the site at this time. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: None required or proposed. ENV-CHECKLIST-2.F1.doc;05/27/99; Page: 15 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? The proposed Comprehensive Plan designations and proposed zones are very similar to the existing ones. No significant affect upon land and shoreline use is anticipated. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: The site-specific development restrictions that the proponent has proposed(see above). 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? The proposal will be very similar in scale to that envisioned by the City in adopting the current Comprehensive Plan and Zoning designations. There will be no significant increase in demand for these services. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: The site-specific development restrictions that the proponent has proposed(see above). 7. Identify, if possible,whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The proposal will not conflict with local, state or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. ENV-CHECKLIST-2.F 1.doc;05/27/99; Page: 16 LAND USE STUDY AREAS VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION REPORT Introduction The Renton City Council has requested City staff to study alternative land uses for three areas in Renton: the . North Renton area including the adjacent Airport Way area, the McMahon Property area in East Renton and the Talbot Road area in Southeast Renton. The following is the traffic analysis element of the study. This report provides information on the estimated vehicle trips generated by each alternative land use proposed for each of the three study areas, compares the vehicle trips generated by each land use alternative and presents the findings resulting from the comparison. Study Areas and Land Use Alternatives The following information on the study areas and land use alternatives was provided by the Long Range Planning Section of the City of Renton. North Renton/Airport Way Study Area: The North Renton area, as shown on Figure 1, is bounded by Logan Avenue North, North 6th Street, Garden Avenue North, North 4th Street, North 3rd Place, Bronson Way and the Cedar River. The three land use alternatives identified for this area are presented in Table 1. Land Use Alternative 1, the Planning Commission proposal, has a nearly even split between single family (441 units) and multi-family use (444 units) and a majority of financial, insurance, real estate services.(office) mixed with some retail, education, manufacturing and warehouse uses. Jobs and building square footage under this proposal total 2836 and 995,000 respectively. Land Use AIternative 2, the neighborhood proposal, represents existing land use and assumes no change in land use in future years. Land Use Alternative 2 has a nearly even split between single family (441 units) and multi-family (415 units) use and a majority of financial, insurance, real estate services (office) use mixed with some retail, education, manufacturing and warehouse uses. Jobs and building square footage under this proposal total 2199 and 707,000 respectively. The. main difference between Land Use Alternative 1 and 2 is the amount of retail, education, manufacturing and warehouse use (311,000 square feet in Alternate 1 and 117,000 square feet in Alternate 2). Land Use Alternative 3, representing requests, proposes a predominance of multi-family (923 units), financial, insurance, real estate services (office) and retail uses. Total jobs and building square footage is 3,324 and 1,112,000 respectively. The Airport Way area, also shown on Figure I, is bounded by Airport Way, Logan Avenue South, South Tobin Street and Lake Avenue South. The three land use alternatives identified for this study area are presented in Table 1. Land Use Alternative 1, existing use, assumes the existing single and multi-family uses and the existing financial, insurance, real estate services (office), and retail and manufacturing uses wll not change in future years. Land Use Alternative 2, the Planning Commission proposal, assumes a more intense mix of financial, insurance,real estate services (office) and retail and manufacturing uses with some multi-family use (26 Units) only. Jobs and building square footage in Land Use Alternative 2 total 505 and 208,000 respectively, compared to 190 jobs and building square footage of 86,000 in Land Use Alternative 1. Land Use Alternative 3, the commercial/single family proposal, assumes a predominance of single family units (39) and one-half the jobs (252) and building square footage (104,000) for financial, insurance, real estate services (office) and retail and manufacturing uses than proposed in Land Use Alternative 2. McMahon Property Study Area: This area, as shown on Figure 2, is located east of Blaine Avenue NE and between NE 3rd/4th Street and the top of the bluff above Maple Valley Highway. The three land use alternatives identified for this study area are presented in Table 1. Land Use Alternative 1 proposes a predominance of financial, insurance, real estate services(office) with some manufacturing and a lesser amount of retail use. Total jobs and square footage for the mixed office, retail, manufacturing uses are 7028 and 2,425,000, respectively. . Land Use Study Area Page 2 Vehicle Trip Generation Report December 16, 1992 Residential use is not proposed in this alternative. Land Use Alternative 2 is a 50-50 mix of single family and multi-family dwellings. Land Use Alternative 3 has approximately 90% of the area as education use with the remainder as retail, financial, insurance, real estate services (office) and single family residential uses. Total jobs and square footage for the education, retail and office uses are 4279 and 2,278,000, respectively. Also included in Table 1 are estimated jobs and building square footage for existing land uses in this study area. Talbot Road Study Area: This area, as shown on Figure 3, is located north of South 192nd Street and between • SR 167 and the top of the hill east of Talbot Road. The two land use alternatives identified for this study area are presented in Table 1. Land Use Alternative 1 is totally multi-family use while Land Use Alternative 2 is a 50-50 mix of single family and multi-family units. Also included in Table 1 is the estimated dwelling units for the existing residential use in this study area. Trip Generation Estimates of dwelling units,jobs and building square footage for the land use alternatives in the three study areas were provided by the Long Range Planning Section of the City of Renton. Trip generation rates for each land use are based on information in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual (fifth edition, 1991). The trip rate per square foot of building floor area was used because the Trip Generation manual did not provide information on trip rate per employee for several of the land uses. Detailed listings of land use • data and estimated trip generated by each land use alternative in the three study areas are provided in Appendix A. Table 2 summarizes the trip generation estimates of daily and PM peak hour trips for each land use alternative in the study areas. These estimates represent average daily and PM peak hour trips and indicate future traffic demands on the street system after "build-out" of each land use alternative. Also included in Table 2 are the estimated daily and PM peak hour trip generation for the existing land uses in each study area. Trip Generation by Land Use.Alternative-Summary of Findings North Renton Study Area: • Land Use Alternative 2 (Neighborhood Proposal) is estimated to generate the least daily and PM peak hour trips (14,780 and 1660 respectively) of the three land use alternatives. (It should be noted that the Neighborhood Proposal is representative of existing conditions.) Land Use Alternative 1 (Planning Commission Proposal) is estimated to generate 18,440 daily and 2130 PM peak hour trips. Land Use Alternative 3 (Requests) is estimated to generate the most daily and PM peak hour trips (25,050 and 2930, respectively). Airport Way Study Area: • • Land Use Alternative 1 (representing existing conditions) is estimated to generate the least daily and PM peak hour trips (2200 and 270, respectively) of the three land use alternatives. Land Use Alternative 3 (Planning Commission proposal) is estimated to generate 3010 daily trips and 380 PM peak hour trips. Land Use Alternative 2 (Commercial/Single Family) is estimated to generate the most daily and PM peak hour trips (5130 and 650, respectively). McMahon Property Study Area: Iiimmsmommommismimmie ( • Land Use Alternative 2 (SF/4 mix) is estimated to generate the least daily and PM peak hour trips (8510 and 840, respectively) of the three land use alternatives. Land Use Alternative 1'(office) is estimated to generate 24,020 daily trips and 3110 PM peak hour trips. Land Use Alternative 3 (Education - Institution) is ( 4176 Q CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING & PUBLIC WORKS k. •••......„....N....z......q.....................i....1 N...-LAKE W ASHIsYGTON .'� _ — I lici::::16 , --\.,;? I I, ' • •A —1 ,. 1 • A -s• . i:91/LiFE--;—.1.. in Ji ., • 51(1 .' Pi -01 .1 _ >1 x ,,, c_ Pr Et,tillt � . • ... • S ,-\.1 ‘... •-71!:\ Atyitt ,,:. • :-i-d-77—\ 1°.1 ,i,F, . DiN.,.1 .....\ =I alp - 1 X ek : :::,AIRPORT WAY STUDY ?Alta;, ` . • { ARE ;': ...::. ;. .{ti)•. LAND USE ALTERNATIVES ) - :> x3 Sr 1. I«CIsrrNG USE: ,�! • 2. PLANNING COhIIvtISSiON PROPOSAL(CA ZONE) 11 '� Lei.s 1 i 3 CRCIAL/SZNGLE FAMILY MI�C -. vt':ti% '""�: J 1,, ,,ILL : ..il.,.,--..._,;.,,,t..-.7.-,,,...:.--,... ..77nA , , -ND__ • • f; ., :# >'"q. :... 1, } \../ 1 1;71.v6 . . gni.: .: .:§ii:: 7.71.g:;i .-.:0!..,..-..!i. ... ......„..........., • .„:„...... • ..,...., ... ., ••....„ .. ... . n . :.[•••Vn:li �i ::,. ,,,,,... �'{y:{}tirtiti -:,,:,..:,.-;... ---1..g - --- ..::,,,o,„.. • :',44.10` :?.:2.; ...., X„.,...„3%.. „,............7 t... '?:is ..... ... ..„... : - 4:\ ::„122.2! i ,.. ?.<1\N6 ''''. ''''. gr.:/. 1 %-- . Lailli ,- ?I. i 5.1 Li '' in zri Li. 1-;11 • • 1,.. ...0.3 .1"-) vox 1 ^P!i NORTH RENTON STUDY AREA ,.—� '�-� � 3. REQUESTS IIZ v. A 1. .... 1,.. i gal __....._,. .... a %,...... t �• ,-a FIGURE 1 • ........i ' .7- \T • , l CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING. & PUBLIC WORKS ) icii 1 i \I'L--t-ilri > �� a2! SZ . i tiE i .. 1,-a WjI,•E"i i . , . -7., ,� am1----y..._.,::: \! ;'- • .7y, ,..,,>),.....„:r?.-'1 t �;�I 1E!-,\\.-_ --=-:.:. '41-,-.‘,, \,.......„i 1)[11-1-'\ ,.. rt C.,. 2 E a. Et S cIJI oi .• Ar--8 • • . _,c_______J 1 w I& C.: ?E let sr et ; A .kts_r -/- x________,..... 1;1L ---T :____________________. I G � r (......t - ,,,, ,:::.::„,:„:„:„,„„„,,,„,,,N,-*,,i„,:„.,,,„,:,„,,,„.,,:„„.,:„,,:,,:„,„,,,:,:„„:,:„:,:,,,,:: . w.1-4 pi C ,........ 7. :_,..1- :::„.........,......w....w.......,„...,::...........::.:.::„::.::.:,:.:,:,::::„:,,::,,:::,,:,:::,,.:::::,:,:::„„:::,::::„:„.4.,:.,,.:„. ,i;l 7 ii sL,.....___iii: iM1; it:`•i:i:::i:°i::•ii'':j!�•. ':/3 .......x.„.....„:„..:„:.:„„.,,../..„..„:„..,::..4„,....,:,....::„:„..„::.,:,.,.....„:„....„..::::::.:„.,....:,:,...„..,„.,.. • rl i C L_ McMAHON PROPERTY STUDY AREA • • • LAND USE ALTERNATIVES 1. OFFICE . FE. - I ` 2. SINGLE FAMILY/4 MIX t d� 3. SINGLE FAMILY/EDUCATION-INSTITUTION CENTER raj . . • • 44,1, Y wiz a� . ...0;. _...A>(. . i 5)----: . . . . • . .,/24 cmi ( . FIGURE•2 , . - . • . , .1[ CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING & PUBLIC WORKS Tr Iv wi 7E7.(1 b C-,11 - !T ,.., \rr IN_-, it_is.r.Ll1 i:nl....., 1 . • • ro V . _...) ___. ,....,\I 1... ..;1 .. c... i ,..Ff:7.‘..44 .-- — --?•,•:;•arlI. h ?"‘ -k > -c -c . • o , / /7 - ! T72-4 ST • AFL .?,1 • 1.6 1 • ‘111*191 ei.j ,Firisilffisofir2i.,„____ 1,.. St Nth s7 ., • ,..1 QL , IX 1 lea I = L • liv •4371 / i - . _ i • / -.. • . .(P TLAL,BOTTIRFOAL y ADSTUDi 4:AREA I, LAND USE ALTERNATIVES • / 2. SINGLE FAMILY 5.(N7 _ . I :::: 2.0:et,.i.:.:....:.:.:.:.........:..,1::.:•:::..•. ..• ..:.,..:...:..•..:....•.:...:.:...:. ...•:.. ... ..:.••:.:.:• )r11 I. ,.. .]FI • 1 --n__1;cati....s.•:\-_\,*-c4_• r n;. 3i66 r; "c411 FIGURE 3 . .) , . . TABLE 1 STUDY AREA LAND USE ALTERNATIVES NORTH RENTON I AIRPORT WAY STUDY AREA LAND USE ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 ALTERNATIVE 3 EXISTING PLANNING COMLMUS1ON PROPOSAL NEIGHBORHOOD PROPOSAL REQUESTS NORTH RENTON AREA 42 Units 441 Units Single Family 441 Units 441 Units 41'5 Units 923 Units 415 Units Multi-Family 444 Units Total 885 856 965 856 Retail 240 Jobs 108,000 Sq.Ft. 128 Jobs 58.000 Sq.Ft. 709 Jobs 319.000 Sq.Ft. 128 Jobs 58.000 Sq. Education 76 Jobs 46.000 Sq.Ft. 40 Jobs 24,000 Sq.Ft. 0 0 40 Jobs 23,000 Sq. Manufacturing 201 Jobs 111.000 Sq.Ft. 63 Jobs 35,000 Sq.Ft. 26 lobs 16,000 Sq.Ft. 63 Jobs 35,000 Sq. Financial,Insurance,Real Estate Services(FIRES) 2231 Jobs 634,000 Sq.Ft. 1968 Jobs 590,000 Sq..Ft. 2589 Jobs 777.0000Sq.Ft. 19688 Jobs 590.000 Sq. Wan:house 24 Jobs 46.000 Sq.Ft. 0 0 2336 c95,000 Total 2199 707.000 3324 1,112.000 2199 707,000 ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE.2 ALTERNATIVE 3 EXISTING EYISTING USE PLANNING cosaasSiON PROPOSAL COMMERCIAL/SINGLE FAMILY . (CA ZONE) AIRPORT WAY AREA 39 Units IS Units Single Family 13 Units 0 Units 19 Units =6 Units 13 Units 19 Units Multi-Family 19 52 37 Total 37 Retail 70 Jobs 32.000 Sq.Ft. 202 Jobs 91,000 Sq.Ft. 101 Jobs 45.000 Sq.Ft. 70 Jobs 32.000 Sq. Manufacturing 70 Jobs 39.000 Sq.Ft. 101 Jobs 56,000 Sq.Ft. 50 Jobs 28,000 Sq.Ft. 70 lobs 39,000 Sq. Financial.Insurance.Real E.tatc Services(FIRES) 50 lobs 15.000 Sq.Ft. 202 Jobs 61.000 Sq.Ft. 101 Jobs 31.000 Sq.Ft. 50 Jobs 15,000 Sq. Total 190 86.000 505 208,000 252 104,000 190 86.000 CIIIIIIIIIIIIImmilli.1.111111111.11111111"111111111)111thiAHON PROPERTY STUDY AREA LAND USE ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 ALTERNATIVE 3 EXISTING • OFFICE SINGLE FAMILY/4 MIX SINGLE FAMILY/EDUCATION- INSTITUIION CENTER 0 575 Units 45 Units 0 Single Family 575 Units 0 0 Multi-Family 0 0 1150 45 Total0 214.Jobs 96,000 Sq.Ft. 0 0 Rama 351 Jobs 158.000 Sq.Ft. 0 0 Education 0 0 0 0 3209 Jobs 1.925.000 Sq.Ft. 0 1054 lobs 508,000 Sq.Ft. 0 0 0 0 10 Jobs 6,000 Sq. Manufacturing 257,000 Sq.Ft. Financial.Insurance.Real 0 856 Johs 195 Jobs 59.000 Sq. Estate Services(FIRES) 5673 Jobs 1.687.000 Sq.Ft. 0 4356279 2?78,000 195 59.000 Total 702E 2.425.000 0 0 • TALBOT ROAD STUDY AREA LAND USE ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 EXISTING MULTI FAMILY SINGLE FAMILY/4 MIX Units Single Family 0 305 to 450 Units 25 0 Multi Family 940 to 1210 Units 305 to 450 Units Total 940 to 1210 610 to 900 25 Source: City of Renton Long Range Planning Section RLMYA:r1 REW w4b _ TABLE 2 LAND USE STUDY AREAS SUMMARY OF VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION PROPOSED LAND USE EXISTING LAND USE STUDY AREA ESTIMATED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED DAILY TRIPS PM PEAK DAILY TRIPS PM PEAK •HOUR TRIPS HOUR TRIPS North Renton Land Use Alternative 1 18,440 2130 14,780 1660 (Planning Commission Proposal) Land Use Alternative 2* 14,780 1660 --- --- (Neighborhood Proposal) Land Use Alternative 3 25,050 2930 14,780 1660 (Requests) Airport Way Land Use Alternative 1 2200 270 --- --- (Existing Use) Land Use Alternative 2 5130 650 2200 270 (Planning Commission Proposal) Land Use Alternative 3 3010 380 2200 270 (Commercial/Single Family) *Represents existing land use 4.. McMahon Property Land Use Alternative 1 24,020 3,110 950 130 (Office) * * Land Use Alternative 2 8,510 840 950 130 (Single Family/4 Mix) Land Use Alternative 3 32,070 2,950 950 130 (Single Family/Education Institution) **Includes retail and manufacturing as supporting uses. . Talbot Road Land Use Alternative 1 5300 to 6500 480 to 590 300 30 (Multi Family) Land Use Alternative 2 4870 to 6800 470 to 630 300 30 (Single Family/4 Mix) • RL%l.3h+w/A:T'lb • Land Use Study Area Page 3 Vehicle Trip Generation Report December 16, 1992 estimated to generate 32,070 daily trips and 2950 PM peak hour trips. Land Use Alternative 3 generates 160 less PM peak hour trips than Land Use Alternative 1. This minor difference in PM peak hour trips is attributable to differences in peaking characteristics between office and education uses. • All three land use alternatives generate significantly more trips than the existing land uses. For Land Use: Alternatives 1 and 3, the combination of location, topography, existing traffic level of service, aquifer and adjacent single family neighbors make for an exceptionally challenging situation to addressing transportation needs. The trip generation indicates SOV needs equivalent to a 50q increase in capacity on Sunset Blvd. at N. 3rd and Maple Valley Highway intersections. Both of these intersections are currently operating at level of service F. Capacity improvements would require costly grade separations on Sunset Blvd. and Maple Valley Highway, I-405 revisions and extensive R/W acquisition. In addition, such improvements would be located in Zone 1 of the aquifer and would set up travel patterns that could have very negative impacts on residential neighborhoods, particularly in the Highlands. Therefore, the magnitude of new office development proposed in Land Use Alternative 1 must be located west of I-405 near regional transit centers. The institutional zoning proposed in Land Use Alternative 3 has some potential, but it would need to be greatly scaled down in terms of trip generation. • Each of the three land use alternatives could generate transit ridership; however, the densities proposed under Land Use Alternatives 1 and 3 should be located along future regional transit service connections. Talbot Road Study Area: • Land Use Alternative 1 (Multi-family) is estimated to generate from 5300 to 6500 daily trips and 480 to 590 PM peak hour trips. Land Use Alternative 2(Single Family/Multi-Family Mix) is estimated to generate 4870 to 6800 daily trips and 470 to 630 PM peak hour trips. At the low end of the range of estimated daily and PM peak hour trips, Land Use Alternative 2 generates less daily and PM peak hour trips than Alternative 2. At the high end of the range of estimated daily and PM peak hour trips, Land Use Alternative 1 generates less daily and PM peak hour trips. This reversal in trip generation is attributable to assumptions that multi-family use has a greater potential to generate transit ridership than single family use. Therefore, as the number of multi-family units increase, transit ridership increases and fewer vehicle trips are generated. • Both land use alternatives could generate transit ridership. For the reason stated above, Land Use Alternative 1 has higher transit ridership potential. R LM•3/w.../A:LusruDY'Jb • I •• • APPENDIX A Study Area Land Use and Estimated Trip Generation . -7-, . TABLE A-1 NORTH RENTON/AIRPORT WAY STUDY AREA Summary of Land Use and Estimated Trip Generation DAILY DAILY PM PEAK PM PEAK LAND USE UNITS QUANTITY TRIPS TRIPS HOUR TRIPS HOUR PER UNIT PER UNIT TRIPS Airport Way Alternative 1 - Existing Use Single Family d.u. 18 11.8 212 _ 1.28 23 Multi Family d.u. 19 10.7 203 0.82 16 Retail 1000 gsf 32 40.67 1300 4.93 158 Manufacturing 1000 gsf 39 3.55 138 0.75 29 Office(FIRES *) 1000 gsf 15 23.1 347 3.16 47 Warehouse 1000 gsf 0 --- Total: 2200 273 • Airport Way Alternative 2 - Planning Commission Proposal Single Family d.u. 0 --- --- --- --- Multi Family d.u. 26 10.11 263 0.77 26 Retail 1000 gsf 91 40.67 3.700 4.93 449 Manufacturing 1000 gsf 56 3.64 203 0.75 42 Office(FIRES *) 1000 gsf 61 15.84 966 2.12 129 Warehouse 1000 gsf 0 --- Total: 5132 646 Airport Way Alternative 3 - Commercial /Single Family Single Family d.u. 39 11 429 1.18 46 Multi Family d.u. 13 5 150 0.86 11 Retail 1000 gsf 45 40.67 1830 4.93 223 Manufacturing 1000 gsf 28 3.41 96 0.75 20 Office(FIRES *) 1000 gsf 31 19 509 2.57 80 Warehouse 1000 gsf 0 _ Total: 3014 380 • * FIRES = Financial, Insurance, Real Estate Services d.u. = dwelling units gsf = gross square footage of floor area Source: Daily and PM peak hour trip rates per unit based on information in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trio Generation manual (5th edition, 1991) HLM. w/A:TA3rb _ TABLE A-1 ` 1i NORTH RENTON/AIRPORT WAY STUDY AREA Summary of Land Use and Estimated Trip Generation DAILY DAILY PM PEAK PM PEAK LAND USE UNITS QUANTITY TRIPS TRIPS HOUR TRIPS HOUR { PER UNIT PER UNIT TRIPS North Renton Alternative 1 - Planning Commission Proposal - 1 Single Family d.u. 441 9.18 4,048 0.94 412 Multi Family d.u. 445 6.09 2.710 0.55 250 • Retail 1000 gsf 108 40.67 4,390 4.93 532 Education 1000 gsf 46 11.2 515 0.28 13 1 Manufacturing 1000 gsf 111 3.77 418 0.75 83 Office(FIRES *). 1000 gsf 684 8.77 6,000 1.12 766 Warehouse 1000 gsf 46 7.76 357 1.67 78 ITotal: 18,438 2,134 North Renton Alternative 2 - Neighborhood Proposal Single Family d.u. 441 9.18 4,048 0.94 415 Multi Family d.u. 415 6.16 2,556 0.56 232 Retail 1000 gsf 58 40.67 2,359 4.93 286 Education 1000 gsf 24 13.46 323 0.28 7 l Manufacturing 1000 gsf 35 3.51 123 0.75 26 Office(FIRES *) 1000 gsf 590 9.10 5,369 1.17 690 Warehouse 1000 gsf 0 --- --- --- --- -Total: 14,778 1,656 iNorth Renton Alternative 3 Requests Single Family d.u. 42 11 462 1.20 50 Ti Multi Family d.u. 923 5.34 4,929 0.48 443 Retail 1000 gsf 319 40.67 12,974 4.93 1573 Education 1000 gsf 0 --- --- ---- --- 1 Manufacturing 1000 gsf 16 3.85 61 0.75 12 Office(FIRES *) 1000 gsf 777 8.53 6,628 1.09 847 Warehouse. 1000 gsf 0 --- --- ---- -- Total: 25,054 2,925 North Renton - Existing Land Use i Single Family d.u. 441 9.18 4,048 0.94 415 Multi Family d.u. 415 6.16 2,556 0.56 232 Retail 1000 gsf 58 40.67 2,359 4.93 286 Education 1000 gsf 24 13.46 323 0.28 7 Manufacturing 1000 gsf 35 3.51 123 0.75 26 Office(FIRES *) 1000 gsf 590 9.10 5,369 1.17 690 Warehouse 1000 gsf 0 --- - - --- -- • Total: 14,778 1,656 * FIRES = Financial, Insurance, Real Estate Services d.u. = dwelling units gsf = gross square footage of floor area ' 1 Source: Daily and PM peak hour trip rates per unit based on information in the Institute of Transportation Engineers ( (ITE)Trip Generation manual (5th edition, 1991) j RL%4-3A lA:TA30 Ce „ TABLE A-2 McMAHON PROPERTY Summary of Land Use and Estimated Trip Generation DAILY DAILY PM PEAK PM PEAK LAND USE TYPE UNITS QUANTITY TRIPS TRIPS HOUR TRIPS HOUR ' PER UNIT PER UNIT TRIPS - Alternative 1 - Office Single Family d.u. 0 --- --- --- --- Multi Family d.u. 0 --- --- --- --- Retail 1000 gsf 158 40.67 6,425 4.93 780 Education 1000 gsf 0 --- --- --- --- Manufacturing 1000 gsf 580 3.85 2,235 0.75 435 Office(FIRES *) 1000 gsf 1687 9.11 15,370 1.12 1890 Warehouse 1000 gsf 0 --- ---- --- --- Total: 24,020 3105 Alternative 2 - Single Family/4 Mix Single Family d.u. 575 9 5,175 0.91 525 Multi Family d.u. 575 5.82 3,345 0.54 310 Retail 1000 gsf 0 --- --- --- --- Education 1000 gsf 0 --- --- --- --- Manufacturing 1000 gsf 0 --- --- --- --- Office(FIRES *) 1000 gsf 0 --- --- -- --- Warehouse 1000 gsf 0 --- --- --- -- - Total: 8,510 835 Alternative 3 - Single Family/Education-Institution Center Single Family d.u. 45 11 495 1.17 53 Multi Family d.u. 0 --- --- --- --- Retail 1000 gsf 96 40.67 3,905 4.93 473 Education 1000 gsf 1925 12.87 24,775 1.06 2040 Manufacturing 1000 gsf 0 --- --- --- Office(FIRES *) 1000 gsf 257 11.24 2,890 1.47 379 Warehouse 1000 gsf 0 --- ---- --- ---- Total: 32,065 2,945 Existing Land Use Manufacturing 1000 gsf 6 3.33 20 0.75 5 Office(FIRES*) 1000 gsf 59 15.84 930 2.12 • 125 950 130 *FIRES = Financial, Insurance, Real Estate Services d.u. = dwelling units gsf = gross square footage of floor area RLM.F'../A:TA:.jb • , TABLE A-3 TALBOT ROAD STUDY AREA Summary of Land Use and Estimated Trip Generation DAILY DAILY PM PEAK PM PEAK LAND USE TYPE UNITS QUANTITY TRIPS TRIPS HOUR TRIPS HOUR PER UNIT PER UNIT TRIPS Alternative 1 -Multi Family Multi Family d.u. 940 5.62 5300 0.51 480 or Multi Family d.u. 1210 5.37 6500 0.49 590 Alternative 2 - Single Family!4 Mix Single Family d.u. 305 9.45 2,880 0.97 296 Multi Family d.u. 305 6.51 1.985 0.58 177 Total: 4,865 "473 or Single Family d.u. 450 9.11 4100 0.87 390 Multi Family d.u. 450 6 2700 0.54 240 Total: 6800 630 Existing Land Use Single Family d.u. 25 12 300 1.2 30 Multi Family d.u. 0 -- -- Total: 300 30 HLMI•3/ww/A:TA2/jb DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 14450 N.E. 29TH PLACE DEC 1 D 1999 BELLEWE, WA 98007 RECEIVED Prepared for: Transnation No. 868556 Customer Reference: BILL ARTHUR Escrow No. Seller M.A.Segale PO BOX 88028 Buyer/Borrower • -- TUKWILA, WA 98138 A , _ Attn: By `,V nJ cb r l For service on this order call: (425) 646-8589/1-800-441-7701 JOHN W. JONES, MARK S . NIKLASON CLAUDIA D. RELLIER or J. JAY PUGH (FAX # (425) 646-8593) FIFTH COMMITMENT SCHEDULE A EFFECTIVE DATE: August 20, 1999 at 8 :00 A.M. 1 . Policy or policies to be issued: Amount ALTA Owner' s Policy TO BE DETERMINED Premium (SEE NOTE 1) Standard Policy Tax Proposed Insured: TO BE DETERMINED (SEE NOTE 2) 2 . Title to fee simple estate or interest in said land is at the effective date hereof vested in: LA PIANTA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, A WASHINGTON LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AS TO PARCELS A AND B; AND MAS RESOURCES, INC. , A WASHINGTON CORPORATION, WHICH ACQUIRED TITLE AS M.A. SEGALE, INC. , A WASHINGTON CORPORATION, AS TO PARCEL C 3 . The land referred to in this commitment is described as follows: See "LEGAL DESCRIPTION: " Order No . 868556 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PARCEL A: PARCELS 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9 AND 10 OF CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LUA-95-200-LLA, ACCORDING TO THE LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 9604239004, BEING A PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 17, THE WEST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 AND THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 16, ALL IN TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M. ; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL B: THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 6, SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M. , DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS : BEGINNING AT THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 6, WHERE IT IS INTERSECTED BY THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF DEFENSE PLANT CORP. RIGHT-OF-WAY AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT OF MAPLE DIVISION NO. 2, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 39 OF PLATS, PAGE 39, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 30 SECONDS WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO INTERSECT THE EXTENDED EASTERLY LINE OF LOT 5, IN BLOCK 4 OF SAID PLAT; THENCE SOUTH 15 DEGREES 38 MINUTES 20 SECONDS WEST ALONG SAID EXTENDED LINE TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 5; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID BLOCK 4 TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF LOT 11 THEREOF; THENCE NORTH 70 DEGREES 36 MINUTES 07 SECONDS EAST, 180 . 94 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 45 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 20 SECONDS EAST, 210 FEET MORE OR LESS, TO THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF THE DEFENSE PLAT CORP. RIGHT-OF-WAY; THENCE NORTH 52 DEGREES 02 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE TO BEGINNING; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL C: THE NORTH 35 FEET OF THE SOUTH 115 FEET OF THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M. , LYING EAST OF MT. OLIVET CEMETERY ROAD AS CONVEYED TO KING COUNTY BY DEED RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 5947084, AND LYING WEST OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY CONVEYED TO PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY BY DEED RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 2500774; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. Page 2 Order No. 868556 SCHEDULE B REQUIREMENTS . Instruments necessary to create the estate or interest to be insured must be properly executed, delivered and duly filed for record. EXCEPTIONS . Schedule B of the policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company. A. 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 for value of record the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment . B. Standard exceptions set forth in inside of back cover. C. Special exceptions : 1 . Real Estate Excise Tax pursuant to the authority of RCW Chapter 82 .45 and subsequent amendments thereto. As of the date herein, the tax rate for said property is . 0178 . 2 . General Taxes, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent May 1; 2nd half delinquent November 1) Tax Account No. Year Billed Paid Balance 172305-9171-03 1999 $440 .39 $220 .20 $220 .19 (Covers Parcel 1) 162305-9007-04 1999 $4, 924 .33 $2, 462 .17 $2, 462 .16 (Covers Parcel 2) 162305-9009-02 1999 $2, 308 . 69 $1, 154 .35 $1, 154 .34 (Covers Parcel 3) 162305-9010-09 1999 $3, 589 . 82 $1, 794 .91 $1, 794 .91 (Covers Parcel 4) 162305-9027-00 1999 $1, 279 . 79 $639 .90 $639 . 89 (Covers Parcel 6) 162305-9131-03 1999 $3, 136 . 09 $1, 568 . 05 $1, 568 .04 (Covers Parcel 7) 162305-9006-05 1999 $173 .48 $86 .74 $86 .74 (Covers Parcel 9) 162305-9061-07 1999 $1, 235 .75 $617 .88 . $617 .87 (Covers Parcel 10) 162305-9048-05 1999 $667 .25 $333 . 63 $333 .62 (Covers Parcel B) Page 3 Order No. 868556 172305-9180-02 1999 $80 . 07 $40 . 04 $40 . 03 (Covers Parcel C) The levy code for the property herein described is 2100 for 1999 . 3. Noxious Weed Charge, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent May 1; 2nd half delinquent November 1) Tax Account No. Year Billed Paid Balance 172305-9171-03 1999 $1 .21 $0 . 60 $0 . 61 (Covers Parcel 1) 162305-9007-04 1999 $4 . 09 $2 . 04 $2 . 05 (Covers Parcel 2) 162305-9009-02 1999 $2 .38 $1.19 $1. 19 (Covers Parcel 3) 162305-9010-09 1999 $3 .19 $1.59 $1 . 60 (Covers Parcel 4) 162305-9027-00 1999 $1 . 84 $0 .92 $0 . 92 (Covers Parcel 6) 162305-9131-03 1999 $2 . 65 $1.32 $1.33 (Covers Parcel 7) 162305-9006-05 1999 $0 . 94 $0 .47 $0 .47 (Covers Parcel 9) 162305-9061-07 1999 $1 .75 $0 . 87 $0 . 88 (Covers Parcel 10) 162305-9048-05 1999 $1.21 $0 . 60 $0 . 61 (Covers Parcel B) 172305-9180-02 1999 $0 .85 $0 .42 $0 .43 ' (Covers Parcel C) • Page 4 Order No. 868556 4 . Conservation (CON) Service Charge, as follows, together with, interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent May lr 2nd half delinquent November 1) Tax Account No. Year Billed Paid Balance 172305-9171-03 1999 $5 .00 $2 .50 $2 .50 (Covers Parcel 1) 162305-9007-04 1999 $5 . 00 $2 .50 $2 .50 (Covers Parcel 2) 162305-9009-02 1999 $5 . 00 $2 .50 $2 .50 (Covers Parcel 3) 162305-9010-09 1999 $5 . 00 $2 .51 $2 .49 (Covers Parcel 4) 162305-9027-00 1999 $5 . 00 $2 .50 $2 .50 (Covers Parcel 6) 162305-9131-03 1999 $5 . 00 $2 .50 $2 .50 (Covers Parcel 7) 162305-9006-05 1999 $5 . 00 $2 .50 $2 .50 (Covers Parcel 9) 162305-9061-07 1999 $5 . 00 $2 .50 $2 .50 (Covers Parcel 10) 162305-9048-05 1999 $5 . 00 $2 .50 $2 .50 (Covers Parcel B) 172305-9180-02 1999 $5 .00 $2 .50 $2 .50 (Covers Parcel C) 5 . ALL COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS, EASEMENTS, OR OTHER SERVITUDES, if any, disclosed by Lot Line Adjustment No. LUA-95-200-LLA, recorded under Recording No. 9604239004 . RIGHTS OR BENEFITS, IF ANY, WHICH MAY BE DISCLOSED BY THE RECORDED DOCUMENT(S) ABOVE AFFECTING LAND OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARY DESCRIBED IN SCHEDULE A. 6 . EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: PURPOSE: Transmission line AREA AFFECTED: A strip 200 feet in width running West to South RECORDING NO. : 2513101 (1421 deeds 270) Page 5 Order No. 868556 7 . EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: PURPOSE: Transmission line AREA AFFECTED: A strip 100 feet in width running Southerly RECORDING NO. : 2571770 (1455 deeds 174) 8 . EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: PURPOSE: Electric distribution line AREA AFFECTED: 50 foot strip running diagonally RECORDING NO. : 3425304 9 . EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: PURPOSE: Electric distribution line AREA AFFECTED: As described therein RECORDING NO. : 4340046 10 . Reservations contained in deed from the State of Washington recorded under Recording No. 2060096, 4264136, 4592023 , 679888, 3201134 and 3875580, reserving to the grantor all oil, gases, coal, ores, minerals, fossils, etc. , and the right of entry for opening, developing and working the same, and providing that such rights shall not be exercised until provision has been made for full payment of all damages sustained by reason of such entry. Right of the State of Washington or its successors, subject to payment of compensation therefor, to acquire rights-of-way for private railroads, skid roads, flumes, canals, water courses or other easements for transporting and moving timber, stone, minerals and other products from this and other land, as reserved in deed referred to above. 11. UNRECORDED AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BETWEEN: Thomas F. McMahon, Personal Representative of the Estate of John C. Edwards and the Estate of Anna G. McMahon deceased, and Rainier Sand and Gravel Inc. AND: The City of Renton AS DISCLOSED: In King County Probate Cause No. E236708 REGARDING: Maintenance and drainage 12 . AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: RECORDED: February 19., 1997 RECORDING NO. : 9702191181 REGARDING: Sewer Easement and Agreement 13 . ORDINANCE AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: RECORDED: June 21, 1996 RECORDING NO. : 9606210966 REGARDING: Assessment District Page 6 . Order No. 868556 14 . EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: Puget Sound Power & Light Company, a Washington corporation PURPOSE: Single line of poles or towers for transmission and distribution line AREA AFFECTED: 50 foot strip over Government Lot 1 and Government Lot 2 and other property RECORDING NO. : 3353433 15 . Reservations contained in deed recorded under Recording No. 3099834, as follows : Right reserved by the grantors to use, maintain, and repair the existing creek and ditch which crosses said property and which drains a portion of the adjoining real estate owned by the grantors . Grantors are: C.H. Farrell, A.F. Bird and wives (Affects only the southerly portion of Parcel 6 & Parcel A) 16 . Right to make necessary slopes for cuts or fills upon the land herein described as granted to City of Renton by deed recorded under Recording No. 7809071074 . 17 . Restrictions imposed by instrument recorded on June 9, 1983, under Recording No. 8306090718 . 18 . Unrecorded leaseholds, if any; rights of vendors and holders of security interests on personal property installed upon the land; and rights of tenants to remove trade fixtures at the expiration of the term. NOTE 1 : The Company has been asked to issue an owner' s policy without disclosure of the liability amount . This commitment shall be effective only when the amount of the policy committed for has been inserted in Schedule A hereof . The forthcoming policy must be issued in an amount at least equal to the full value of the estate insured in accordance with our rating schedule on file in the office of the Washington State Insurance Commissioner. The Company may have further requirements if the undisclosed amount to be insured exceeds the current assessed valuation. NOTE 2 : Title will be vested in parties. yet undisclosed. When title is vested, their title will be subject to matters of record against their names . NOTE 3 : There may be Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) Security interests filed with the Department of Licensing in Olympia affecting personal property, crops or agricultural facilities which are not covered by the policy to issue. Page 7 Order No. 868556 END OF EXCEPTIONS Investigation should be made to determine if there are any service, installation, maintenance or construction charges for sewer, water, or electricity. In the event this transaction fails to close, a cancellation fee will be charged for services rendered in accordance with our rate schedule. JWJ/cdr Copies have been sent to the following: PERKINS COIE 1201 THIRD AVENUE40TH FLOOR SEATTLE, WA 981013099 Attn: ELLEN DIAL M.A. SEGALE INC. P 0 BOX 88050 TUKWILA, WA 98188 Attn: ANN NICHOLS Page 8 TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 14450 N.E. 29TH PLACE BELLEVUE, WA 98007 Prepared for: Transnation No. 868556 Customer Reference : BILL ARTHUR Escrow No. • Seller SEGALE PO BOX 88028 Buyer/Borrower TUKWILA, WA 98138 Attn: By 4 For service—on� this order call: (425) 646-8589/1-800-441-7701 JOHN W. JONES, MARK S . NIKLASON CLAUDIA D. RELLIER or J. JAY PUGH (FAX # (425) 646-8593) SUPPLEMENTAL NO. 1 TO THE FIFTH. COMMITMENT ATTENTION: This Supplemental contains changes which impact title to property set forth in the above-referenced commitment. Effective Date: September 13, 1999 at 8 : 00 A.M. SCHEDULE "A" The vesting is changed as follows : LA PIANTA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, A WASHINGTON LIMITED PARTNERSHIP EXCEPT AS TO THE MATTERS REPORTED HEREINABOVE, THE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY COVERED BY THIS ORDER HAS N 0 T BEEN RE-EXAMINED. ---END--- JWJ/cdr Copies have been sent to the following: PERKINS COIE 1201 THIRD AVENUE4OTH FLOOR SEATTLE, WA 981013099 Attn: ELLEN DIAL M.A. SEGALE INC. P 0 BOX 88050 TUKWILA, WA 98188 0 Attn: ANN NICHOLS TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 14450 N.E. 29TH PLACE BELLEVUE, WA 98007 Prepared for: Transnation No. 868556 Customer Reference: BILL ARTHUR Escrow No. Seller SEGALE PO BOX 88028 Buye ,`:orro i er TUKWILA, WA 98138 1 Attn: By _ti A Fo se i•e • this order ca . ( 4. 5) 64 . -858 '/1-800-441-7701 JJHN W. JONES, MARK S . NIKLASON C► LUDIh. v . RE LIER or J. JAY PUt. - t• # (425) 646-8593) SUPPLEMENTAL NO. 2 TO THE FIFTH COMMITMENT ATTENTION: This Supplemental contains changes which impact title to property set forth in the above-referenced commitment . Effective Date : September 23, 1999 at 8 : 00 A.M. SCHEDULE "B" A) Paragraph No. 11 of the preliminary commitment is changed as follows : UNRECORDED AGRREMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BETWEEN: Thomas F. McMahon, Personal Representative of the Estate of John C. Edwards and the Estate of Anna G. McMahon deceased, and Rainier Sand and Gravel Inc. AND: The City of Renton AS DISCLOSED In King County Probate Cause No. 236708 REGARDING: Maintenance and drainage NOTE: Upon recordation of a residential plat, The Company will, upon request, issue a 110 . 1 deletion endorsment deleting the above referenced title exception. EXCEPT AS TO THE MATTERS REPORTED HEREINABOVE, THE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY COVERED BY THIS ORDER HAS N 0 T BEEN RE-EXAMINED. ---END--- JWJ/cdr TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 14450 N.E. 29TH PLACE BELLEVUE, WA 98007 Prepared for: Transnation No. 868556 Customer Reference: BILL ARTHUR Escrow No. • Seller SEGALE PO BOX 88028 Buyer/AL rrw-r • TUKWILA, WA 98138 M1 �� Attn: By ' For -erv. •e o. this order call: (425 64 . 85871-800-441-7701 JOHN . J. ES, MARK S . NIKLASON CLAUDIA D. LLIER or J. JAY PUGH (FAX # (425) 646-8593) SUPPLEMENTAL NO. 3 TO THE FIFTH COMMITMENT ATTENTION: This Supplemental contains changes, which impact title to property set forth in the above-referenced commitment. Effective Date: October 6, 1999 at 8 :00 A.M. SCHEDULE "B" A) Paragraph No. 9 of the preliminary commitment is changed as follows : B) Paragraph No. 7 of the preliminary commitment is changed as follows : Said easement was modified by instrument recorded under Recording No. 7505280726 . EXCEPT AS TO THE MATTERS REPORTED HEREINABOVE, THE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY COVERED BY THIS ORDER HAS N 0 T BEEN RE-EXAMINED. ---END--- JWJ/cdr Copies have been sent to the following: PERKINS COIE 1201 THIRD AVENUE40TH FLOOR SEATTLE, WA 981013099 • Attn: ELLEN DIAL M.A. SEGALE INC. P 0 BOX 88050 TUKWILA, WA 98188 Attn: ANN NICHOLS TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 14450 N.E. 29TH PLACE ' BELLEVUE, WA 98007 Prepared for: Transnation No. 868556 Customer Reference: BILL ARTHUR Escrow No. Seller SEGALE PO BOX 88028 Buye ;ort r . , 1 TUKWILA, WA 98138 Attn: By For se 'vi e n this order call : (4 5) '.46 85 9/1-800-441-7701 JO.N J S, MARK S . NIKLASON CLA r+IA D. RELLIER or J. JAY PUGH (FAX # (425) 646-8593) , SUPPLEMENTAL NO. 4 TO THE FIFTH COMMITMENT' • ATTENTION: This Supplemental contains changes which impact title to property set forth in the above-referenced commitment . Effective Date: October 11, 1999 AT 8 : 00 A.M. SCHEDULE "A" The proposed insured for the Owner' s Standard policy coverage is changed as follows : DONALD J. MERLINO AND JOAN P. MERLINO, HUSBAND AND WIFE; GARY M. MERLINO AND DONNA M. MERLINO, HUSBAND AND WIFE The OWNER' S STANDARD policy coverage is changed as follows : ALTA Owner' s Policy 1111111111111111111 Premium Standard Policy SHORT TERM Tax Proposed Insured: SCHEDULE "B" A) Paragraph No. 9 is deleted. • EXCEPT AS TO THE MATTERS REPORTED HEREINABOVE, THE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY COVERED BY THIS ORDER HAS N 0 T BEEN RE-EXAMINED. ---END--- JWJ/cdr ! . li\ OC f 1 .1 19 bs RANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 14450 N.E. 29TH PLACE Halinea Law Offices; P.S. BELLEVUE, WA 98007 Prepared for: Transnation No. 868556 Customer Reference: BILL ARTHUR Escrow No. . Seller SEGALE PO BOX 88028 Buyer/-•, r•w-r . TUKWILA, WA 98138 r / Attn: By - . �`� � For -er i•e oh this order call : (42. ) 6, :-858•/1-800-441-7701 JO ' W. •NE• , MARK S . NIKLASON CLA "" A D. ° LLIER or J. JAY PUGH (FAX # (425) 646-8593) SUPPLEMENTAL NO. 5 TO THE FIFTH COMMITMENT ATTENTION: This Supplemental contains changes which impact title to property set forth in the above-referenced commitment. Effective Date: October 11, 1999 AT 8 : 00 A.M. SCHEDULE "B" A) Paragraph Nos . 16 and 17 are deleted. EXCEPT AS TO THE MATTERS REPORTED HEREINABOVE, THE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY COVERED BY THIS ORDER HAS N 0 T BEEN RE-EXAMINED. ---END--- JWJ/cdr Copies have been sent to the following: PERKINS COIE 1201 THIRD AVENUE40TH FLOOR SEATTLE, WA 981013099 Attn: ELLEN DIAL M.A. SEGALE INC. P 0 BOX 8.8050 TUKWILA, WA 98188 Attn: ANN NICHOLS HALINEN LAW OFFICES, P.S. 2115 N 30TH ST, #203 TACOMA, WA 98403 J' t k **************************************************************** City of Renton WA Reprinted: 12/15/99 17: 03 Receipt **************************************************************** Receipt Number: R9906233 Amount: 4 . 62 421/115/E9' 17: 03 Paymert Method: CHECK Notation: #1148 HALINEN ` Inrt: LMN Project #: LU9N9=1T9 r Type: LUA Land Use Actions Location: SOUI'HIDE OF NE 3RD ST, BTWN EDMONDS AND JEFF Total Fees : 4, 704 . 62 This Payment 4 . 62 Total ALL Pmts: 4, 704 . 62 Balance: . 00 **************************************************************** Account Code Description Amount 000 . 05 .519 .90 .42 . 1 Postage 4. 62