The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLUA-08-093 (2 OF 3)_Report 01/ Communit Alliance to Reach Out & Engage P.O. Box 2936 Renton, WA 98056 highlands_neighbors@hotrnail.com 206.888.7152 Hearing Examiner King County Hearing Examiner's Office 400 Yesler Way -Suite 404 Seattle WA 98104 Fax: 206.296.1654 July 3, 2008 Liberty Gardens Preliminary Plat Application L04P0034: Notice of SEPA Appeal Dear Mr. Examiner, With this letter, Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage (CARE) submits Notice of our intent to Appeal the SEPA Determination Non-Significance issued by DOES on June 20, 2008 for the Liberty Gardens Preliminary Plat application (L04P0034). Gwendolyn High, our president, will represent CARE in this matter. If a fax number should prove necessary, please call 425.226.9686 before you send anything so that the machine can be made ready to receive. Text presented in this document inside boxes is quoted from the Hearing Examiner's Rules of Procedure. IV. FILING REQUIREMENTS A. Notice of Appeal Notices of appeal to the examiner, together with any fees required by ordinance, are to be filed in accordance with applicable provisions of the King County Code or other governing statute, ordinance or regulation. Timely filing of the notice of appeal and appeal fee (if required) is a jurisdictional requirement; appeals which do not meet the filing requirements cannot be considered bv the examiner. CAR E's submission of this Notice of Appeal to the Office of the Hearing Examiner and to DOES, along with delivery of the required $250 filing fee in person to DOES today meets the Hearing Examiner's Rules of Procedure timeliness requirements. IV. FILING REQUIREMENTS C. Content 1 . Notice of Appeal The notice of appeal must identify clearly and specifically: • The action or decision appealed, including the date thereof; • The County department, division or office which took the action or made the decision; • The name and address of the appellant; • The name, address, telephone and fax number of the attorney or other representative, if any, for the appellant; • If more than one person joins in a single appeal, a single representative of all of the persons joining as appellants is reauired to be named for orocedural ourooses. CAR E's Notice of Appeal meets all the Content requirements of the Hearing Examiner's Rules of Procedure. If there is any insufficiency or error in any of our submissions, CARE looks forward to notification and b-e_ g_s t_o opR __ ~Qrtui:1-·;mubmit corrections. We are not experts or lawyers and submit all documents, testimony an~~~ ~fy,wd, Pf~ nd c1t1zens. I L:'. r---= • \,j --· '. 1 1 l) Hardcopies of all documents submitted today are being forwarded to all parties toda~em~~1:,n9 q~ 001:nd delivery. Please feel free to call me at home (425.917.0117) with any comments and/or quesiions. T'J,t!'/k you for,your t1m9i ~nd attention, K .. c. o.o.E.S. ~..;;';;',:;1\~J-""' ! i__ ~;r,,t\~ 8?PV el p ~::::::~der penalty of erjury pursuant to the laws of the State of Washington that the forego~ue aC:~ J ft"' I )-z= ,I ® sefl{__ King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest R~nton, WA 98057-5212 1ft ?<, 1 ~: l-O l{ fVO:/{ ,, . ..J,,, ;/ L, fJe,,i.,71 t7a,w/c,n~ Received from (! ' /} , {!_ t ~ "" ;;. i DmfiloHqfjf,ij \ " tTff:ti''.H' Amount $ Cash Tendered $ Check# --L Chanae $ Money Order 0645 (Rev. 2/07) ...... "°""'@ No. 196755 Date: 7 f-J / 2~t)()[/ j , $ l!so. Vl) Project#: Parcel#: By: t!-sc~ • ~- /1 . . l • ·~ _____ C_o~mmun_i!y Alliance to Reach Out & Engage Hearing Examiner King County Hearing Examiner's Office 400 Yesler Way -Suite 404 Seattle WA 98104 Fax: 206.296. 1654 July 3, 2008 P.O. Box 2936 Renton, WA 98056 highlands_neighbors@hotrnail.com 206.888.7152 lfo'i iK (~ I 2 (/ '1. 11.7 i~ D IJlJi;:;< ~L_J .'L'::_11n1, I I ' ·JUL O } 2008 L'::j Liberty Gardens Preliminary Plat Application L04P0034: Request for Consolidated ~eG!e~!)if?.CS'~erence Dear Mr. Examiner, With this letter, Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage (CARE), requests a Consolidated Pre-Hearing Conference. Gwendolyn High, our president, will represent CARE in this matter. Pre-Hearing Conference is necessary because there are multiple issues that are not without anticipated contention yet must be resolved before the Hearing on the subject application is opened: We believe the CARE Petition to Intervene is likely to be opposed by the applicant and we request opportunity for oral response to such opposition. CARE is submitting a request for the Hearing Examiner to issue an order allowing future amendment of our Statement of Appeal of the SEPA Determination for this application. We believe this request is likely to be opposed by the applicant and we request opportunity for oral response to such opposition. CARE is requesting that the SEPA Appeal Hearing and the Preliminary Plat Hearing dates be reset to allow lull participation of all parties and interested persons. We believe this request is likely to be opposed by the applicant and we request opportunity for oral response to such opposition. Tex1 presented in this document inside boxes is quoted from the Hearing Examiner's Rules of Procedure. Ill. JURISDICTION AND INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS C. Scheduling and Notice of Hearings and Pre-Hearing Conferences 8. Scheduling and Notice of Pre-hearing Conferences a. If a hearing date has already been set when the decision is made to conduct a pre-hearing conference, the conference normally will be scheduled, if feasible, for a date at least fourteen (14) days prior to the scheduled hearing date. As it is not possible to schedule the Pre-Hearing Conference fourteen (14) days prior to the scheduled hearing date, we request that the current Hearing Date of July 17, 2008 be canceled and that the Pre-Hearing Conference scheduled in its stead. VI. PRE-HEARING MOTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS A. Consolidation Consolidation of hearings may be ordered in either of the following circumstances: 1. Multiple Hearings on a Single Proposal a. If a proposal requires more than one County permit or appeal hearing, consolidation may be requested by written motion made by any party not less than 21 days prior to the date of the first scheduled hearing. The request shall identify issues likely to be addressed at each of the hearings which are sought to be consolidated. The examiner may solicit written comments on the request from other parties prior to acting thereon, or may grant or deny the motion at his/her discretion if it appears on its face to provide sufficient information to support the examiner's action. Consolidation may also be ordered by the examiner in appropriate circumstances without a motion by any party. b. Consolidation shall be ordered whenever feasible. The primary considerations shall be whether greater efficiency of time and effort, and a reduction of costs to the parties and County would be achieved by consolidation, without denvinq due process of law to any oartv. CAR E's current Pre-Hearing Requests to the Office of the Hearing Examiner are all related to the same Plat application, the parties and interested persons are the same and the staff and expert witnesses likely to be called for all these issues are the same. Because all of these Pre-Hearing Reqje;s;;t;00 11 before t7;;;p;;; y· all parties can be expected to save time, money and effort if all these issues are addressed in a single session instead of several we request a single consolidated Pre-Hearing Conference to address and decide these issues. VIII. PRE-HEARING CONFERENCES A. Purpose and Initiation Pre-hearing conferences promote efficient case management by providing an informal process for early identification of issues and resolution of procedural matters in complex cases. Evidence generally will not be received at a pre-hearing conference, except when required in order for the examiner to rule on a motion. (Pre-marking and introduction of exhibits to which there is no objection may occur at the discretion of the examiner.) The examiner, on motion of any party or upon his/her own motion, may convene a prehearing conference to: 1. Identify, clarify, limit or simplify issues. 2. Hear and consider pre-hearing motions. 3. Schedule hearings, identify parties and witnesses, determine the order of and limits upon testimony, obtain stipulations as to facts and law, identify and admit exhibits, order discovery, and consider and act upon any other matter which may aid in the efficient disposition of the hearing. B. Requests for Conference A motion to convene a pre-hearing conference shall be made to the examiner as soon as the need for a conference is recognized by the moving party (at least 21 days prior to the scheduled hearing date), and shall state the reasons for the request, including any motions to be presented. For good cause stated in the motion, the examiner may consider a request that fails to meet the 21-day requirement. For hearings authorized under KCC 20.24.080, a motion by any party for a pre-hearing conference shall be granted if timely. However, unless consented to by all parties or otherwise ordered for good cause by the examiner, no pre-hearing conference on an appeal can be convened later than 45 days after receiot of the statement of anneal by the hearina examiner's office. CAR E's current Pre-Hearing Requests to the Office of the Hearing Examiner include a Petition to Intervene which must be decided, and CARE's standing confirmed, before it is possible to consider and decide our other Pre-Hearing Requests and all of these must be decided before the Hearing in the subject application is opened. Because CAR E's Pre-Hearing Requests for Continuation of Appeal and Plat Hearings to be rescheduled, we expect that all parties may wish to be present for the complex task of coordinating schedules for those dates. Because of the unusual Notice issuance timing, the inherent delay in records review under the Public Disclosure Request process, DDES staff's not keeping the on-line Action Report for this application up to date and CARE team summer vacations, we were not aware of the need to request a Pre-Hearing Conference until July 1, 2008. Because of the multiple separate but simultaneous documents that the Hearing Examiner's Procedure requires for each of the Pre-Hearing Requests, we were not able to submit our Requests until today. We are not requesting any event to be scheduled outside of the 45 day maximum specified in the Procedures. CAR E's Request for Consolidated Pre-Hearing Conference should be granted because it meets all the requirements of the Hearing Examiner's Procedure for such a request and because it affords the opportunity for the most efficient use of time, effort and money in the resolution of several outstanding issues. If there is any insufficiency or error in any of our submissions, CARE looks forward to notification and begs to opportunity to submit corrections. We are not experts or lawyers and submit all documents, testimony and exhibits as interested parties and citizens. Hardcopies of all documents submitted today are being forwarded to all parties today via email and US Mail or hand delivery. Please feel free to call me at home (425.917.0117) with any comments and/or questions. Thank you for your time and attention, ~~n~M----Wet-- President ursuant to the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. 2CX-O • Hearing Examiner King County Hearing Examiner's Office 400 Yesler Way-Suite 404 Seattle WA 981 04 Fax: 206.296.1654 July 3, 2008 Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage P.O. Box 2936 Renton, WA 98056 highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com 206.888.7152 @,-:=if;;\ - . L~ rG; /2/D' ii 1"2/Q ' iY '-~ , ,; Is n I JLJIL LI: · a 1 2aa8 , __ j K.c. o.o.;::s Liberty Gardens Preliminary Plat Application L04P0034: PRELIMINARY Statement of SEPA Appeal · Dear Mr. Examiner, With this letter, Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage (CARE), submits our PRELIMINARY Statement of SEPA Appeal. Gwendolyn High, our president, will represent CARE in this matter. Separately we have submitted Request for Amendment of Statement of SEPA Appeal. We submit this document under the expectation that our Request for Amendment shall be granted and that supporting exhibits will be submitted at the SEPA Appeal Hearing. If all exhibits must be submitted prior to the Appeal Hearing, we request notice as soon as possible indicating the full requirements for proper submission. DOES staff have assured us that SEPA appeal is not necessary nor appropriate for our concerns in regard to the proposed extension of 162°d AVE SE. Note D on the Detenmination of Non-Significance for Liberty Gardens (ODES File No. L04P0034) is intended to announce this. This is newly drafted note has not been found in any previous DNS or MONS issued by the Department and appears to directly contradict text in the previously issued MONS issued for the Threadgill plat application (L05P0026) in regard to a specific common issue to these plats (proposed extension of 162nd Ave SE) as well as testimony of King County Staff with responsibility for this issue at the Hearing for Threadgill. Additionally, no ODES recommended road improvements or mitigations have ever been excluded from SEPA determinations for Preliminary Plat in this community. With separate requests to this office we have initiated steps to preserve our right to appeal SEPA. It may yet be proven that staff assurances are correct, in which case it will be necessary to address these and other issues sole through the Hearing. Therefore, we consider it necessary to submit documents with very similar and overlapping requests. We apologize for the duplication of effort. Issues for which we have concern were originally identified during the consideration and Hearing for the Threadgill Preliminary Plat Application (L05P0026). Threadgill, Cavalla (L06P0001 ), and Liberty Gardens are each being required by ODES to jointly construct the proposed extension of 162"' AVE SE. Staff and Threadgill applicant successfully argued that the proper process step for addressing our concerns for this road extension was a SEPA appeal. After the issuance of the Hearing Examiner's Decision for Threadgill, CARE notified DOES, DOT, Hearing Examiner and all three Applicants of our concerns for this joint project and that, while we would not appeal the Hearing Examiner's Decision for Threadgill, our concerns remained and we would address them during the SEPA step for Cavalla and Liberty Gardens. Thus, beginning in January 2008, CARE continued to submit comments and questions to King County staff. We have been particularly concerned in following any Variance application to address the violations of the King County Road Standards. Emails made available via Public Disclosure Request show responsible staff agreeing that "obviously'' a variance is needed, but so far, no record of any such a variance has been made available, though the application is now scheduled for Hearing. Copies of emails detailing our conversations with the King County Roads Engineer on this issue are attached to our Request for Amendment of Statement of SEPA Appeal also submitted today. I KING COUNTY ROAD STANDARDS CHAPTER 3. DRIVEWAYS, SIDEWALKS, BIKEWAYS, TRAILS Jot A p(f)f Lct1fba1'1 3.02 Concrete Sidewalks Sidewalks shall be required and constructed on urban category, curb and gutter type streets, Figures 2-002 and 2-003, unless otherwise allowed by these Standards or the County Road Engineer. They shall be located and constructed as follows; 1. On all arterials, neighborhood collectors, subcollectors, subaccess, attached dwelling, business access streets, and industrial access streets, both ";A~o 7. Sidewalks shall be a minimum width of 5 feet on residential access streets and arterials. Minimum sidewalk width shall be six and one-half feet on arterials if curb is next to traveled lane. Sidewalks shall be a minimum width of eight feet on commercial access streets. Sidewalks are required on urban category, curb and gutter type streets such as the proposed 162"' AVE SE, but not all of the length of the proposed extension is proposed to have sidewalks, and some of the extension is not being required to have any walkway improvements. No application for variance is known to have been submitted to waive this requirement of the KCRS. Sidewalks must be required. We have also previously submitted record of other neighbor's traffic concerns during consideration of the Threadgill application (which is being required to jointly construct 162"' AVE SE), and we would like to emphasize them again here: RE: CARE Update: Please send in your statement of support! From:Mike Ritchey (mike-ritchey@comcast.net) Sent: Sun 12/16/07 2:49 PM To: 'Highlands Neighbors' (highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com) You have our full support. We live at 14225 164th Ave SE to the south of the Liberty ball fields. There is 5 acres to our north that they want to develop and we are very concerned for traffic and water run off. A number of years ago they made an attempt to develop the acreage and in doing so caused the water flows to change and ourselves and neighbors had water under our homes. None had water prior to the skinning of the lots. We are also very concerned about pushing 164th Ave SE through and the increased amount of traffic. We have lived in our home since we built it in 1990. We get a lot of traffic during the ball season when people park and walk into the Liberty ball fields. The parking in front of our home and neighbors leads to the dumping of ash trays, garbage and the blocking of the mail boxes for deliveries. It would be very nice if the developments left a green belt from the exiting homes to help protect the wildlife and preserve our views of a rural environment. Mike Ritchey KCC 14.56.010 Findings and declaration of purpose. Non-motorized transportation, in the form of pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian travel in King County, should be safe. The prevention of accidents is a paramount element in the design and operation of all county transportation facilities as well as in developed and newly developing communities in the county. This policy is consistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan and the plans and programs for county parks and recreation. Therefore, it is the intent of the King County council to seek a coordinated administration of these non-motorized transportation goals and policies through the development of a functional plan which defines service levels, facility standards, funding mechanisms, project enaineerina, and desian and operation to be conducted throuah a oublic review orocess. [_}Qt.iG COUNTY ROAD STANDARDS 2.03(8) Urban Local Access Roadways • (Curb Roadway Section} Classification Neighborhood Subcollectors Subaccess Minor Access Collectors Access Restricted, Lots front As needed with Subaccess streets are Permanent cul-de-sacs on local access street some restrictions .1 not supportive of or short loops with low where feasible. through traffic. traffic volumes that Generally permanent provide circulation and cul-de-sacs or short access to off-street loop' streets that parking within connect to residential development suboollectors. limits. Public or Private Public Streets Public Streets Public Streets Public or Private ( See Section 2.06) Seiving Potential Number of Over 10()3 I 100 Maximum• I 50Maximum 16 Maximum Lots or Dwelling Units Design Speed' 35mph 30 mph Low Speed Cuive Low Speed Curve (See (See Section 2. 10) Section 2. 10) Max Superelevation See Section 2.046 See Section 2.046 See Section 2.04B See Section 2.046 Hortzorrtilt Curvature See Table 2.2 See Table 2.2 Low Speed Curve Low Speed Curve (See (See Section 2. 10) Section 2.10) Maximum Grade' 11% I 12% I 12% 12% Minimum Stopping Sight See Table 2.2 See I aoie 2. 2 150 feet 150feet Distance Minimum Entering Sight See Table 2.2 --- Distance Typical Traveled Way 22 feet' 22 feet 22 feet 22 feet Typical Roadway Width 32 feet' 28 feet 24 feel 22 feet Minimum Right-of-Way Width 56 feet 48 feet 40 feet" 40 feel" Minimum Half Street Width 20 feet 20 feet 20 feel 20 feet Minimum One Way Paved 20 feet 20 feet. 20 feet 20 feet Width Minimum Sidewalk Width See Section 3.02 See Section 3.02 See Section 3.02 See Section 3.02 Curb TyPQ Vertical Vertical1/Rolled VerticaURolled Vertical/Rolled 1 See Section 2.20 for urhan exceptions. Also, when Section 2.20 applies the curbing shall be vertical. 2 Sec Section 2.15 for one-way loops. 1 Sre Section 2.20 for residential access connection requirements. 4 Sec Section 2.20 for urban exception criteria. ' Design speed is a basis for dctcmlining geometric elements and does not imply posted or legally pennissiblc speed. 6 Maximum grade may be exceeded for short distances. Sec Section 2.11. 7 Neighborhood collectors intersecting with artt!rials shall be 36 feel wide for the first 150 feet. See Section 4.05 for tapers. 8 1be righl-of-way width may be reduced tn minimum roadway width plus stonn drainage, sidewalk, and one-foot beyond road improvements including sidewalks, provided that the curbing is vertical, the minimum clear zone requirements are met, and all potential serving utilities arc accommodated within 2.20 Exception for Maximum Dwelling Units on Urban Subcollectors Proposed subcollectors serving new urban area developments with an average density of seven to eight dwelling units per acre and that meet the access requirements of Section 2 .19 may serve up to 250 dwelling units, if approved by the Development Engineer. In this situation, the curbing shall be vertical. Prior to approval, the applicant must submit a traffic circulation study demonstrating a balanced traffic flow ofless than 1500 vehicles per day past any access point. Street trees shall be mandatory along subcollectors serving higher densities of seven to eight dwelling units per acre and shall be in conformance with Section 5.03. Based on the known number of dwelling units for which 162nd Ave SE will serve as access, Urban Subcollector is not an appropriate road classification for the proposed road extension. Primary Access Threadgill Cavalla Liberty Gardens Liberty Lane McKendry Thatcher Wilmot 15 38 37 12 1 1 1 105 Plus possible new connections to existing lots: Lee 1 McNair 1 Mohr J. 3 Trips from Liberty Grove: 34 and lots north of 1361h: 18 --~ 52 Brendan -to develop: 35 Reasonable expectation: 195 An exception under section 2.20 is not available to this project because this area is zoned for 4 DUs per acre with a maximum fully developed density of 6 DUs per acre (which would require TDRs), and with existing large lots can not be expected to achieve the required 7 to 8 DUs per acre in the foreseeable future. No application for variance is known to have been submitted to waive this requirement of the KCRS. Appropriate road classification for the proposed road extension must be required. ! KING COUNTY ROAD STANDARDS 2.07 Half Streets A. A half street, figure 2-009, may be permitted as an interim facility when: 3. Traveled way shall be surfaced the same as the designated road type to a width not less than 20 feet, sidewalk shall be constructed as required for the desi Q'11ated road type: and 6. The intersection of a half street shall be improved to full width standards, Sidewalks are required on half streets. Half street intersections must be built to full width standards. Yet, the Preliminary Road Improvements Plan and Profile submitted on January s'" shows only a half street intersection. No application for variance is known to have been submitted to waive this requirement of the KCRS. Sidewalks and full width intersection improvements for the proposed road extension must be required. KCC 14.42.060 Variances. B. Any variances from these standards may be granted by the county road engineer upon evidence that the variance is in the public interest and that requirements for safety, function, fire protection, transit needs, appearance and maintainability are fully met, based upon sound engineering and technical judgment. C. Variance requests for subdivisions should be proposed at the preliminary plat stage and prior to any public hearing. All known variances must be approved prior to approval of the engineering plans for construction. It is the responsibility of the county road engineer to interpret the standards. Any anticipated variances from these standards that do not meet K.C.C. Title 17 shall also reauire concurrence bv the fire marshal. An application for variance is required in order for the proposed violations of the King County Road Standards to be allowed. Such application should have been submitted and approved before this application is presented in Public Hearing before the King County Hearing Examiner. No application for variance is known to have been submitted to waive any improvement required by the KCRS. I KING COUNTY ROAD STANDARDS 2. Subcollectors Subcollector streets are the second highest in the local roadway classification hierarchy. Subcollcctors provide circulation within neighborhoods and typically a,nncct to neighborhood collectors. Although they typically allow direct driveway access there are some project related exceptions. Table 2.2 Urban Residential Access Streets Design Values Design Speed (mph) 25 30 35 Horizontal Curvature, for 6% 135 215 320 Superelevation, Radius (Ft.) Horizontal Curvature, for 4% 145 230 345 Superelevation, Radius (Ft.) Horizontal Curvature, for 2% 155 250 375 Superelevation, Radius (Ft.) Horizontal Curvature, Normal Crown 180 300 460 Section, Radius (Ft.) Stopping Sight Distance (Ft.) 155 200 250 Entering Sight Distance (Ft.) 280 335 390 2.10 Intersections and Low-Speed Curves A. Intersections l. Angle of intersection (measured at 10 feet beyond road classification right-of-way) 2. Minimum centerline radius (2-lane) (radii are for minor or subaccess streets) 3. Minimum curb radius a. Arterials and roads classified neighborhood collector or higher: b. Residential access street intersections where the highest classification involved is subcollector: 4. Minimum right-of-way line radius: Minimum 85 degrees Maximum 95 degrees 55 feet 35 feet 25 feet 25 feet B. Spacing between adjacent intersecting streets, whether crossing or T-connecting, shall be as follows: When highest classification involved is: Principal arterial Minor arterial Collector arterial Neighborhood collector Any lesser street classification Minimum centerline offset shall be: 1,000 feet 500 feet 300 feet 150 feet 100 feet SE 144th St is an Arterial Collector according to the 2006 Arterial Classification Map. The proposed intersection of 162°0 Ave SE with SE 1441h St requires that there to be a minimum of 300 feet spacing to the next intersection. Centerline of 162"" Ave SE ROW to centerline of 161" Se on the north side of Se 1441h St is 177.42 feet. Centerline of 162°0 Ave SE ROW to centerline of 161 '' Se on the south side of Se 1441h St is approximately 135 feet. An application for variance is required in order for the proposed violations of the King County Road Standards to be allowed. Per KCC 14.42.060.C it is the responsibility of the applicant to have applied for a variance before this application comes to hearing. Such application should have been submitted and approved before this application is presented in Public Hearing before the King County Hearing Examiner. No application for variance is known to have been submitted to waive any improvement required by the KCRS. [_filt,it:> COUNTY ROAD STANDARDS 2.11 Maximum Grade and Grade Transitions A. Maximum roadway grade as shown in Sections 2.02 and 2.03 may be exceeded for short distances of 300 feet or less, upon showing that no practical alternative exists. Grades greater than 15 percent that exceed the 300-foot distance must be approved by the County Road Engineer through the road variance process. Additionally, the maximwn grade shall not exceed 15 percent unless verification is obtained from the Fire Marshal that additional fire protection requirements will be met and the applicant's engineer must demonstrate what method will be used fo ensure drainage will be controlled. Grades excet:ding 12 percent shall he paved with hot mix asphalt (HMA) or portland cement concrete (PCC). B. Grade transitions shall be constructed as smooth vertical curves, without angle points, except in intersections where 1he difference in grade is one percent or less and upon approval of the County Road Engineer or Development Engineer. 2.12 Stopping Sight Distance A. Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) is the sum of two distances: the distance traveled during perception and reaction time and the distance required to stop the vehicle. The perception and reaction time used in design is 2.5 seconds. 1 On residential access slreet intersections where the highest classification involved is a subcolleclor. the minimum curb radius is 25 feel The stopping sight distance is calculated using a constant deceleration rate of 11.2 feet/second 2 • SSD, see Tables 2.1 and 2.2, applies to street classifications as shown in Sections 2.02 and 2.03. B. Available stopping sight distance is calculated for a passenger car using an eye height of 3 .50 feet and an object height of 0.50 foot. Although AASHTO allows a 2-foot object height, a 0.50-foot object height is used because objects with a height between 0.5-foot and 2 feet may be perceived as hazards that would likely result in an erratic maneuver. C. When calculating stopping sight distance, use h 1=3.50 feet and h2=0.50 foot. D. The grade of the roadway has an effect on the vehicle's stopping sight distance. The stopping distance is increased on downgrades and decreased on upgrades. When evaluating sight distance wi1h a changing grade, use the grade for which the longest sight distance is needed. Road grades other than those shown in exhibit 2-1 must be interpolated. Exhibit 2-1. Stopping Sight Distance on Grades DOWNGRADE DESIGN SPEED (MPH) 3 Percent 6 Percent 9 Percent 60 598 638 686 55 520 553 594 50 446 474 507 45 378 401 428 40 315 333 354 35 258 271 288 30 205 215 227 25 158 165 173 20 116 120 126 F. Intersecting Stopping Sight Distance. I. Stopping sight distances for the design speeds of proposed commercial access streets, neighborhood collector streets and arterials must be met when intersecting arterials. 2. The minimum stopping sight distance on proposed intersection approaches for all other access to intersecting roadways shall be 125 feet. In light of the stopping distances listed in the King County Roads Standards, we also have considerable concern that the reverse slope (roughly 2%) between the bottom of the 12 % grade and the proposed intersection of SE 1441h is only about 150 feet as proposed. In the chart above, the minimum stopping distance for a 9% grade at 30 miles an hour is 227 feet. Therefore, the proposed intersection of 162"" Ave SE and SE 1441h St must be considered a particularly dangerous proposal endangering the life and property of all vehicle and pedestrian traffic at this intersection (also proposed as the primary school walkway for residents of the project to Maywood Middle School) as well as to the residents (Bill and Dina Mokin -14404 16200 AVE SE) and across the proposed 'T' intersection on the south side SE 1441h ST. No guard rail, wall or any other facility improvements have been proposed to be installed on the south side of SE 144th ST to prevent a car which fails to stop at the end of the to-be-constructed 162nd Ave SE from landing in the current residents' back yard. The substantially increased risk to life and property that will be borne by the owners and residents of the property directly south of this proposed intersection is disproportionate to all the surrounding community and all due care must be extended to prevent harm to them. Additionally, we find no consideration of the traffic flow patterns from the retail enterprise of Alpine Nursery whose customers often arrive in very large vehicles or with trailers and which located at the corner of 144th and 161 51 • Full engineering to determine the appropriate improvements to be required for turn lane, turn pocket, signage etc. must be required for the safe and smooth function of the SE144th ST arterial after extension of 162"d. Full en~ineering studies for the full impacts and appropriate mitigations for the proposed intersection of 162"d Ave SE and SE 144 h St must be required before this application can be approved. An application for variance is required in order for the proposed violations of the King County Road Standards to be allowed. Per KCC 14.42.060.C it is the responsibility of the applicant to have applied for a variance before this application comes to hearing. Such application should have been submitted and approved before this application is presented in Public Hearing before the King County Hearing Examiner. No application for variance is known to have been submitted to waive any improvement required by the KCRS. .. KCG 14.42.005 Purpose • intent. A. Chapter 36.75 RCW authorizes the county to perform all acts necessary and proper tor the administration of the county roads. County roads shall be established, laid out, constructed, altered, repaired, improved and maintained by the legislative authority of the county or by private individuals or corporations who are allowed to perform such work under an agreement with the county legislative authority. The work and improvements shall be done in accordance with adopted county standards under the supervision and direction of the county road engineer. B. The purpose of the King County Road Design and Construction Standards ("the standards") is to set forth specific, consistent and acceptable road design and construction elements for developers and other private parties constructing or modifying road or right-of-way facilities that require county licenses or permits and to establish uniform criteria to guide the county's own design and construction of new county roads or reconstruction of existing roads. The standards support the county's goals for achieving affordable housing, providing adequate facilities for development in an efficient manner, complying with storm water management and environmental and cultural resource policies, and balance these goals with the general safety and mobility needs of the traveling public. C. The county requires standardization of road design elements when necessary tor consistency and to ensure, so far as practicable, that motoring, bicycling, transit, equestrian and pedestrian public safety needs are met. Considerations include safety, convenience, pleasant appearance, proper drainage, economical maintenance and cultural and environmental resource protection. The standards also provide requirements for the location and installation of utilities within the right-of-way. KCC 14.42.040 Developments. A. Any land development that impacts the service level, safety or operational efficiency of roads serving the land development or that is required by other ordinance to improve the roads shall improve those roads in accordance with these standards. Otfsite roadway improvements shall be based on an assessment of the impacts of the proposed land development by the reviewinq aqencv. 14.80.060 Relation to other permit authority. The procedures set forth in this chapter do not limit the authority of King County to deny or to approve with conditions the following: A. Any zone reclassification request, based on its expected traffic impacts; B. Any proposed development or zone reclassification if King County determines that a hazard to safety would result from its direct traffic impacts without roadway or intersection improvements, regardless of level of service standards; or C. Anv orooosed develooment reviewed under the authority of the Washinaton State Environmental Policy Act. King County Code specifies the King County Road Standards as the legally binding standard to which new roads will be constructed in order establish consistent rules that will protect the lives and interests of the citizens of King County. In the event that it may be possible to grant exceptions to the King County Road Standards, the King County Code has established a formal, consistent standard process by which an applicant may submit a proposal demonstrating that such exception shall provide for mobility, safety and all other material requirements specified under the code -application for a road variance. No application for variance is known to have been submitted to waive any improvement required by the KCRS. KCC 14.42.060 Variances. B. Any variances from these standards may be granted by the county road engineer upon evidence that the variance is in the public interest and that requirements for safety, function, fire protection, transit needs, appearance and maintainability are fully met, based upon sound engineering and technical judgment. C. Variance requests for subdivisions should be proposed at the preliminary plat stage and prior to any public hearing. All known variances must be approved prior to approval of the engineering plans for construction. It is the responsibility of the county road engineer to interpret the standards. Any anticipated variances from these standards that do not meet K.C.C. Title 17 shall also require concurrence by the fire marshal. An application for variance is required in order for the proposed violations of the King County Road Standards to be allowed. Such application should have been submitted and approved before this application is presented in Public Hearing before the King County Hearing Examiner. No application for variance is known to have been submitted to waive any improvement required by the KCRS. We request that the DDES Determination of Non-Significance tor Liberty Gardens (DDES File No. L04P0034) should be invalidated by the King County Hearing Examiner and that this application should be remanded to the department until such time as either 1) the proposed plans for the extension of 162 00 AVE SE comply fully with the King County Road Standards, or 2) a full road variance application addressing the concerns detialed above has been submitted and approved by the King County Road Engineer. In the event of remand to the department, we request specifically that the Hearing Examiner require: o New Traffic Impact Analyses and full engineering plans should be required to: o Evaluate the actual impacts of the lack of sidewalk construction along the entire length of the extension of 162"d AVE SE to pedestrian traffic -in particular for school children walking to Maywood Middle School o Evaluate the actual impacts of the proposed intersection of 162"d Ave SE -including what possible mitigations would allow this intersection to be constructed in violation of the King County Roads Standards governing intersection spacing. Mitigations to be determined should include but not limited to: o Turn lanes and pockets o Traffic control structures such as signals and signage o Barrier on the south side of the intersection o Stopping distance and road slope IV. FILING REQUIREMENTS B. Statement of Appeal 1. Required to Establish Jurisdiction Filing a statement of appeal is a requirement separate from, and in addition to, filing the notice of appeal. The statement of appeal must be filed with the County department, division or office which took the action or made the decision being appealed. Filing is required within 15 days of the date of issuance of the decision appealed. This requirement is also jurisdictional; failure to timely file the statement of appeal results in the hearing examiner being unable to consider the appeal. C. Content 2. Statement of Appeal The statement of appeal must identify clearly and specifically: • The errors which the appellant believes were made in the action or decision which is being appealed, or the procedural irregularities associated with that action or decision. • Specific reasons why the County's action should be reversed or modified. • The harm suffered or anticipated by the appellant as a result of the action or decision being appealed. (If the appellant is a group or organization, the harm to any one or more members of the group or organization must be stated.) • The desired outcome of the appeal. Unless an amendment to the statement of appeal is authorized by the examiner, the identification of errors and statement of reasons for reversal or modification will define and limit the issues which the examiner will consider. CAR E's Preliminary Statement of SEPA Appeal meets all the requirements of the Hearing Examiner's Rules of Procedure. We have submitted a separate Request for Amendment of SEPA Appeal, and thus reserve the right to amend this statement after DDES and DOT have fully and correctly responded to our Public Disclosure Requests and our expert witness has had the opportunity to review and respond to the materials. If there is any insufficiency or error in any of our submissions, CARE looks forward to notification and begs to opportunity to submit corrections. We are not experts or lawyers and submit all documents, testimony and exhibits as interested parties and citizens. Hardcopies of all documents submitted today are being forwarded to all parties today via email and US Mail or hand delivery. Please feel free to call me at home (425.917.0117). Thank you for your time and attention, c:A.q, tJ\ . =+--1_,, 1 _ 'Gwendolyn~h-r----'7f" ....______ President ' ' Windows I,,ive Hotmail Print Message Page I of 8 D Windows Live· : RE: STATUS REQUEST: CARE DOT Public Disclosure Request ! From: McMurdo, Craig (Craig.McMurdo@kingcounty.gov) i Sent: Fri 4/18/08 2: 08 PM i To: Highlands Neighbors (highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com) ' Dear Ms. High - My apologies for not getting back with you sooner. I have been told by Roads staff that they are in the process of collecting the materials for your most recent request and should have everything wrapped and sent to DOES' Renton Office by May 2nd. I will send you another email as soon as I'm notified that the transfer of documents have been completed. Please feel free to email or call me at 206-684-1005 if you have any other questions or concerns. Sincerely, Craig McMurdo From: Highlands Neighbors [mailto:highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:53 AM To: McMurdo, Craig Subject: STATUS REQUEST: CARE DOT Public Disclosure Request Dear Mr. McMurdo, K''~ oo-c.: ,,r_,,, , .t .. .._1, We would like to know when the materials requested in the emails copied below (3/6/2008, 3/13/2008, and 4/7/2008) will be made available for our review. We have not yet been informacd as to when the materials will be available for requests submitted over a month ago. Ifit is convenient for you, we would very much appreciate if you would again send the materials to the DOES office for our review as you did in February, as that is most convenient for our team. Please let us know as soon as you are able so that we may make the appropriate arrangements with our volunteers. Lc16' AfaJ 07 ~t/R,t,sd http:! /bl 140w. blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=461fd381-a... 7 /3/20ls Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Thank you. Gwendolyn High C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evcndell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsncighbors.org CARE DOT Public Disclosure Request04/07 /2008 - From: Highlands Neighbors (highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com) Sent: Mon 4/07/08 11:20 AM To: craig.mcmurdo@kingcounty.gov Cc: highlands_nelghbors@hotmail.com; mtcdebi@msn.com Dear Mr. McMurdo, Page 2 of8 With this email, we continue our series of Public Disclosure Requests. We expect to renew this request each month for the next sequential time period. We request all records (correspondence, emails, reports, plans, schedules, notes of meetings and phone calls, and any other category of information) in all formats (electronic, hardcopy and all other media) created, generated or received by King County related in any way to the proposed extension of 162nd Ave SE and/or to the following DDES file numbers: LOSP0026: Threadgill L06P0001: Cava Ila L04P0034: Liberty Gardens L07P0009: Heritage The period to be covered by this request shall be from our last request of March 13, 2008 thru today's date of April 7, 2008. This request is submitted by: CARE -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 _!:ii_g bland s_ne ig ht;o rs@h Qtm1i i l,~Qm Contact: Debi Eberle -Vice President Phone: 425.226.9946 FAX: 425.226.6520 Please address all correspondence in this matter to: Debi Eberle: mtcdebi@msn.com And Gwendolyn High: tJjghlands_neigt:,t;Qrs@hotr11ail.com Also, please inform us via response to this email of the date on which these requested materials will be made available for review and copy. http:/ !bl 140w .blul 40.mail.live.corn/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=461fd381-a... 7/3/2008 Windows tive Hotmail Print Message Thank You, Gwendolyn High C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... wvy w_. high I a nds_r,e i g h qqrs_, grg From: McMJJrdo, Craig To: Debi Eberle Sent: Monday, March 17. 2008 2:05 PM Subject: RE: DOT Public Disclosure Request -Debi Eberle Debi Eberle mtcdebi@msn.com Dear Ms. Eberle: My apologies for the delay in your 5-day response. I was out of the office unexpectedly for a few days last week and am catching up on my outstanding workload today. I have spoken with several people from the King County DOT Road Services Division and they are searching through their records for responsive materials. It is my understanding that similar records have been requested by multiple parties and we are therefore managing our responses case by case since they do not all ask for identical materials. Due in part to this, KCDOT needs additional time to sort through the materials you have requested. Roads staff will require additional time to compile, copy and review the documents you requested for exemptions under the Washington State Public Records Act and other applicable laws. I anticipate that the information you requested will be available to you by no later than April 18. I will let you know immediately when the processing of your request has been finalized. Please call me at 206-684-1005 if you have any questions about this letter and thank you for your patience in this matter. Sincerely, Craig McMurdo KCDOT Public Disclosure Coordinator -----Original Message----- From: Debi Eberle [mailto:mtcdebi@msn.com] Page 3 of8 http:! /bl 140w. blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=messagc&cpids=46 l fd3 81-a. .. 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 11:30 AM To: McMurdo, Craig Cc: high_la_0ds_neighbors@hotm<1iLc<Jm Subject: DOT Public Disclosure Request Dear Mr. McMurdo, We have not recieved notice from your office of when the materials requested via Public Disclosure Request on 3/6/2008 will be made available for our review. Our understanding is that you are required to provide this information within 5 business days of a request. By our calculations, that makes your deadline today. Please make let us know when and were the materials will be made available for our review as soon as possible. Thank you, Debi Eberle 425-226-9946 or contact Gwendoyn High at higlllands_neigh b_ors@h<Jtmai I. com THANK YOLJ!I!! C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org DOT Publlc Disclosure Request From:Debi Eberle (mtcdebi@msn.com) Sent: Thu 3/13/08 11:48 AM Pa)le 4 of g To: craig.mcmurdo@kingcounty.gov Cc: highlands_neighbors@hotmail .corn; Paulette.Norman@kingcounty.gov; Kristen. Langley@kingcounty.gov; Fatin. Kara@kingcounty.gov To Whom it May Co~cern: With this email, we initiate a new series of Public Disclosure Requests. We will renew this request each week for the next sequential time period. http:/ /bl 140w .blul 40.mail. live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=461 fd38 l-a... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page 5 of8 We request all records (correspondence, emails, plans, schedules, notes of meetings and phone calls, and any other category of informat~on) in all formats (electronic, hardcopy and all other media) created, gene~ated or received by King County related in any way to the proposed extension of 162r-d Ave SE and/or to the following DDES file numbers: LOSP0026, Threadgill L06P0001: Cavalla L04POD34: Liberty Gardens L07SA56l, SEATTLE REDEVELOPMENT LLC ~07P0009: Heri~age The period to be covered by this request shall be all inc:usive th~u http:/ !bl 140w. blu 140.mail. live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx ?type=message&cpids=461fd381-a... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page 6 of~ today's date of March 13, 2008. This request is submitted by: CARE -Citizens' Alliance for a ~esponsible Evendell PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 Highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Contact: Debi Eberle -Vice President Phone, 425.226.9946 FAX, 425.226.6520 Please inform us via response to this err.ail of the date on wh:ch these requested materials will be made available for review and copy. Also, please let us know if any further information is necessary from us. http:/ /bl 140w. blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=461 fd38 l-a... 7/3/2008 Windows bve Hotrnail Print Message Thank You, Debi Eberle C.A.R.E. -Citize~s 1 Alliance for a Responsible Evendell .. doir:.g what we can, with our neighbo:c-s, for our corr,munity .. www.highlandsneighbors.org DOT Public Disclosure Request From:Debi Eberle (mtcdebi@msn.com) Sent: Thu 3/06/08 2: 13 PM To: craig.mcmurdo@kingcounty.gov Page 7 of8 Cc: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com; Paulette. Norma n@kingcounty.gov; Kristen. Lang!ey@ki ngcounty .gov; Fatin. Kara@kingcounty.gov To Whom it May Concern: With this email, we initiate a new series of Public Disclosure Requests. We will renew this request each week for the next sequential time period. We request all records (correspondence, emails, plans, schedules, notes of meetings and phone calls, and any other category of information) in all formats (electronic, hardcopy and all other media) created, generated or received by King County related in any way to the proposed extension of 162nd Ave SE and/or to the following DOES file numbers: L05P0026: Threadgill L06POOO 1: Cava Ila L04P0034: Liberty Gardens L07SA561: SEATILE REDEVELOPMENT LLC L07P0009: Heritage http:/ /bl l 40w. blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=461fd381-a... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message The period to be covered by this request shall be all inclusive thru today's date of March 6, 2008. This request is submitted by: CARE -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 Highlands_neighbors@hotmail._com Contact: Debi Eberle -Vice President Phone: 425.226.9946 FAX: 425.226.6520 Page 8 of-8 Please inform us via response to this email of the date on which these requested materials will be made available for review and copy. Also, please let us know if any further information is necessary from us. Thank You, Debi Eberle C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org http:/ !bl 140w. blu 140.rnail. live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=rnessage&cpids=461fd381-a... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page 1 of6 19 Windows Live- RE: CARE DDES Public Disclosure Request 4/7/2008 to 6/9/2008 From: McMurdo, Craig (Craig.McMurdo@kingcounty.gov) Sent: Wed 7/02/08 8:38 AM To: Highlands Neighbors (highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com) Hi Gwendolyn - I was informed by Roads that a disc of information was sent to Tim Attebery last week. They also gave me a new batch of information late last week that I had to review for exemptions. My apologies that it didn't make it there by yesterday. I will send the packet to you in the mail today and try to find out why the disc did not get to Tim, as I was informed. I also received your updated request and will assign it to Roads staff. I'll let you know how long they will need in the next couple of days. Thank you - -Craig From: Highlands Neighbors [mailto:highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 4:56 PM To: Ortiz, Cathy; McMurdo, Craig Cc: Debi Eberle Subject: RE: CARE DDES Public Disclosure Request 4/712008 to 6/9/2008 Hello All! Cathy, thank you so much for all your help! K.C. o.o.E.S. Craig, nobody could find the materials from DOT. Liz and Ruby looked yesterday and Liz and Cathy looked today. Debi and I were at the DDES records center yesterday from about 1 to 3pm. Also, Debi & I came in from 8:30 to 1 Dam and I was was able to come back again from 1 to 3 today after the DDES Permit Fee Technical Citizens Advisory Committee meeting. The 4th of July holiday weekend is practically here. As a volunteer organization it is always a challenge to arrange volunteers' schedules to meet the county's working hours and schedules. We really needed to review the materials you indicated would be available today. I am very disappointed. Please let us know when the materials will indeed be made available. 1./;t/PD~'/ http:! /bl 140w. blu 140.mail. live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=7bebd890-5 .. . 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Thank you, Gwendolyn High C.A.R.E. -Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... 206.888. 7152 Subject: RE: CARE DOES Public Disclosure Request 4/712008 to 6/9/2008 Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 13:54:20 -0700 From: Cathy.Ortiz-Olguin@kingcounty.gov To: Cathy.Ortiz-Olguin@kingcounty.gov; Craig.McMurdo@kingcounty.gov CC: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com; mtcdebi@msn.com Hi Craig: Gwen is here today and was wondering if you have the documents ready for her review? From: Ortiz, Cathy Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 3:56 PM To: McMurdo, Craig Cc: 'Highlands Neighbors'; Debi Eberle Subject: RE: CARE DOES Public Disclosure Request 4/7/2008 to 6/9/2008 Hi Craig; Page 2 o[6 I just learned that you will be bringing some documents too, for this public disclosure request. It is my understanding that you will have them here on Tuesday , July 1st. is there any way you could have them here on Monday, June 30th? I think Gwendolyn High and Debi Eberle were coming in on Monday. Please reply to all of us so they are in the loop. Also, I will be out of the office on Monday so please put the materials in the Records Center I have three boxes there labeled C. A. R. E. Thanks again! http:/ !bl 140w. blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=7bebd890-5... 7/3/2008 Windows :tive Hotmail Print Message From: Highlands Neighbors [mailto:highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 3:44 PM To: Ortiz, Cathy: Debi Eberle Subject: RE: CARE ODES Public Disclosure Request 4/7/2008 to 6/9/2008 Hi Cathy! Thanks so much! Page 3 of6 Did they let you know if the materials from both ODES and DOT are there, is this the ODES part only? The reason I ask is because I got a seperate from Mr. McMurdo notifying us that the DOT materials would be at ODES on July 1. Only a day's difference, but the volunteer schedule is really tight right now, and if both sets of materials could be available on Monday ii actually makes a big difference to our team. Oh! and you will be out Monday ... Thanks for letting us know that. I will give a ring so I might be sure to catch you today. Thank you! Gwendolyn C.A.R.E. -Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage ... doing what we can, with our neighbors. for our community ... 206.888. 7152 Subject: RE: CARE ODES Public Disclosure Request 4/7/2008 to 6/9/2008 Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 15:09:14 -0700 From: Cathy.Ortiz-Olguin@kingcounty.gov To: mtcdebi@msn.com CC: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Hi Debi and Gwendolyn: All the materials have been collected and will be in the Records Center. No one gave me a disk so I am assuming all information has been printed and taken to the Records Center. See you soon. Cathy Ortiz P.S. I will be out of the office on Monday, but here the rest of the week. From: Debi Eberle [mailto:mtcdebi@msn.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:01 PM To: Ortiz, Cathy http:/ ;bl 140w.blu 140.mail. live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=7bebd890-5. .. 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Cc: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Subject: Re: CARE DOES Public Disclosure Request 41712008 to 61912008 Thank you so much for your quick work. Debi Eberle ----Original Message ----- From: O.rti:z, Cathy To: mtQc:li1bi@rnsn.com ; Highlands_Neighb_ors@hotmailg_o_rn Cc: .A._!teb!ll}',_Tirn Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 1 :53 PM Subject: CARE DOES Public Disclosure Request 41712008 to 61912008 Dear Ms. Eberle and Ms. High: Page 4 of6 Thank you for your public disclosure request which was received by me on June 11, 2008. DDES staff are currently collecting materials responsive to your request. To review these materials, please visit the ODES Records Center anytime on June 30, 2008, or the next 30 days thereafter. Records Center staff can assist you in reviewing the files and will facilitate any copying that you require at the standard County rate. Please keep in mind that the ODES Records Center will only hold these materials for 30 days. Therefore, if you do not contact the Records Center prior to July 30, 2008, you will need to make another public disclosure request. If you have questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at 206-296-6704. Sincerely, Catherine Ortiz Olguin DOES Director's Office http ://b 1140w. blu 140 .mail. live. com/mail/PrintShe 11.aspx ?type=message&cpids=7bebd890-5... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message From: Attebery, Tim Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 200810:31 AM To: Ortiz, Cathy Subject: FW: CARE DOES Public Disclosure Request 4/7/2008 to 6/9/2008 From: Highlands Neighbors [mailto:highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 11 :35 AM To: Attebery, Tim Cc: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com; mtcdebi@msn.com Subject: CARE ODES Public Disclosure Request 4/7/2008 to 6/9/2008 Dear Mr. Attebery, Page 5 of6 With this email, we continue our series of Public Disclosure Requests. Though we are late in our submission this time around, we expect to renew this request each month for the next sequential time period. We request all records (correspondence, emails, reports, plans, schedules, notes of meetings and phone calls, and any other category of information) in all formats (electronic, hardcopy and all other media) created, generated or received by King County related in any way to the proposed extension of 162nd Ave SE and/or to the following ODES file numbers: L05P0026: Threadgill L06P0001: Cavalla L04P0034: Liberty Gardens L07P0009: Heritage The period to be covered by this request shall be from our last request of April 7, 2008 thru today's date of June 9, 2008. This request is submitted by: CARE -Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Contact: Debi Eberle -Vice President Phone: 425.226.9946 FAX: 425.226.6520 Please address all correspondence in this matter to: Debi Eberle: mtcdebi@msn.com And Gwendolyn High: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Also, please inform us via response to this email of the date on which these requested materials will be made available for review and copy. Thank You, Gwendolyn High CARE. -Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org <http://www.highlandsneigh_borsorg/> http:/ /bl 140w. blu 140.mail. live.com/mail/PrintShcll.aspx?type=message&cpids=7bebd890-5 ... 7/3/2008 Windows -Live Hotmail Print Message Page 1 of2 I! Windows Live· RE: CARE DOT Public Disclosure Request June 9, 2008 to July 1, 2008 From: Highlands Neighbors (highlands_neighbors@hotmaii.com) . Sent: Tue 7/01/08 9:28 PM To: craig.mcmurdo@kingcaunty.gov ; Cc: mtcdebi@msn.com Dear Mr. McMurdo, With this email, we continue our series of Public Disclosure Requests. Though we are early in our submission this time around, we expect to renew this request each month for the next sequential time period. Please note that this request is structurally and substantively different than our previous similar requests. REQUEST PART 1 We request all records (correspondence, emails, reports, plans, schedules, notes of meetings and phone calls, and any other category of information) in all formats (electronic, hardcopy and all other media) created, generated or received by King County related in any way to the following DDES file numbers: LOSP0026: Threadgill L06P0001: Cavalla L04P0034: Liberty Gardens L07P0009: Heritage The period to be covered by this request for the Part 1 materials shall be from our last request of June 9, 2008 thru today's date of July 1, 2008. REQUEST PART 2 Additionally, we request all records (correspondence, emails, reports, plans, schedules, notes of meetings and phone calls, and any other category of information) in all formats (electronic, hardcopy and all other media) created, generated or received by King County related in any way to the proposed extension of 162nd Ave SE under any application or other action known by King County including specifically (but not limited to): -deparment review, investigation, analysis, consideration of this proposed road extension -application for King County Roads Standards variance -all records related in any way to the assignment for creation, purpose of, meaning of and all other discussion/research of the text presented in Note D of the DDES SEPA Determination of Non-Significance for file # L04P0034 issued June 20, 2008. The period to be covered by this request for the Part 2 materials~~ (e; p ri w1 Is 'i "'\ all inclusive thru today's date of July 1, 2008. \ ~< 1,_=, \..J _':::; ',"' J .::Cs 1 'J J This request is submitted by: uf"'1J JIJL G 7 2008 , _ _, CARE -Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com K.C. D.D.E.S. Contact: Debi Eberle -Vice President u'/;Pe,e,1'/ http:! /bl 140w. blu 140 .mail. live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type~message&cpids~523 72d4 7-4... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Phone: 425.226.9946 FAX: 425.226.6520 Please address all correspondence in this matter to: Debi Eberle: mtcdebi@msn.com And Gwendolyn High: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Also, please inform us via response to this email of the date on which these requested materials will be made available for review and copy. Thank You, Gwendolyn High C.A.R.E. -Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www. highlandsneig hbors. org Page2of2 http:/ /bl l 40w.blul 40.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=52372d4 7-4... 71312008 ! Windows I..:ive Hotmail Print Message Page I of3 I"! Windows Live· : RE: Public disclosure request -Debi Eberle -FW: CARE DOT Public l Disclosure Request April 7, 2008 from: McMurdo, Craig (Craig.McMurdo@kingcounty.gov) Sent: Fri 6/20/08 1:07 PM To: Highlands Neighbors (highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com) Hi Gwendolyn - I'll do my best to get the email files converted to Outlook 2003. If that's not possible, I'll just print the records out and forward them to Tim Attebery, as you stated. Thanks and have a good weekend - -Craig McMurdo From: Highlands Neighbors [mailto:highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2008 12:31 PM To: McMurdo, Craig Subject: RE: Public disclosure request -Debi Eberle -FW: CARE DOT Public Disclosure Request April 7, 2008 Dear Mr. McMurdo, Thank you very much. Now that I think of it, I should have added one small request below. Last time you very kindly sent a CD with email files. We do indeed prefer to recieve electronic copies of the requested data, however, the files were in Outlook 2007, and none of us have access lo Outlook later than 2003. It is is possible, should you send electronic files in future, please save the files as either Outlook 2003 or even HTML format. If this is not possible, then I think we might have to go back to the paper. Thanks so much for all your help and consideration! Gwendolyn High CARE. -Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community .. 206.888.7152 lo) -.c; 1;:;,, 1c; r. n ,, @ D . I ::i 1. G I c:' I ! \'i: 2 / "'LJ·.· '1 I --u~J .•. n \ ! J I I i ! -~-JUL O 7 2008 ,___, K.C. D.D.E.S. Subject: FW: Public disclosure request· Debi Eberle -FW: CARE DOT Public Disclosure Request April 7, 2008 to June 9, 2008 Date: Fri, 20 Jun 200811:13:17-0700 From: Craig.McMurdo@kingcounty.gov http:! /bl 140w. blu 140 .mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=b02efb44-b... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message To: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Dear Ms. Eberle - Page 2 of 3 I am writing to confirm that Road Services will have all new materials forwarded to Tim Attebery's office on July 1, 2008. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Craig McMurdo From: McMurdo, Craig Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 1 :20 PM To: Van Hom, Maria Subject: Public disclosure request -Debi Eberle -FW: CARE DOT Public Disclosure Request April 7, 2008 to June 9,2008 Hi Maria - Please forward this to appropriate staff and let me know how long you need to get everything collected. 1·11 forward the information to Tim Attebery at DES for distribution when it's ready. Thanks! -Craig From: Highlands Neighbors [mailto:highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 11 :37 AM To: McMurdo, Craig Cc: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com; mtcdebi@msn.com Subject: CARE DOT Public Disclosure Request April 7, 2008 to June 9, 2008 Dear Mr. McMurdo, With this email, we continue our series of Public Disclosure Requests. Though we are late in our submission this time around, we expect to renew this request each month for the next sequential http:! /bl 140w. blu 140 .mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=b02efb44-b... 7/3/2008 ' ' Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page 3 of3 time period. We request all records (correspondence, emails, reports, plans, schedules, notes of meetings and phone calls, and any other category of information) in all formats (electronic, hardcopy and all other media) created, generated or received by King County related in any way to the proposed extension of 162nd Ave SE and/or to the following ODES file numbers: L05P0026: Threadgill L06PDOD1: Cavalla LD4P0034: Liberty Gardens L07POD09: Heritage The period to be covered by this request shall be from our last request of April 7, 2008 thru today's date of June 9, 2008. This request is submitted by: CARE -Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 highlands_n<,!gh_born@botmail,com Contact: Debi Eberle -Vice President Phone: 425.226.9946 FAX: 425.226.6520 Please address all correspondence in this matter to: Debi Eberle: mtc:deb[@msn,c;_gm And Gwendolyn High: highlands_neighbors@hotmsiJl,com Also, please inform us via response to this email of the date on which these requested materials will be made available for review and copy. Thank You, Gwendolyn High CARE. -Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsnei_gh_bors.org http:/ !bl l 40w.blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShelLaspx?type=message&cpids=b02efb44-b... 7/3/2008 DOT Public Disclosure Request From: Debi Eberle (mtcdebi@msn.com) Sent: Fri 3/14/08 11:30 AM To: craig.mcmurdo@kingcounty.gov Cc: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Dear Mr. McMurdo, We have not recieved notice from your office of when the materials requested via Public Disclosure Request on 3/6/2008 will be made available for our review. Our understanding is that you are required to provide this information within 5 business days of a request. By our calculations, thaL. makes your deadline today. Please make let us know when and were the ma>:erials will be made available :or our :::.-eview as soon as possible. Thank you, Debi Eberle 425-226-9946 or contact Gwendoyn High at highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com THANK YOU!!!! C .A. R. E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing ·.,,,rhat. we can, with our P-eighbors, for our community ... vJ\ovW.highlandsneighbors.org . I · Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page 1 of3 [! Windows Live - RE: CARE DDES Public Disclosure Request 6/9/2008 to 7/1/2008 : From: Highlands Neighbors (highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com) : Sent: Tue 7/01/08 9:35 PM ! To: Cathy Ortiz (cathy.ortiz~o!guin@kingcounty.gov) Cc: mtcdebi@msn.com; t1m.attebery@kingcounty.gov Hello All, I forgot to change the date range in the subject line below. It should read: CARE DDES Public Disclosure Request 6/9/2008 to 7/1/2008 I apologize for the mistake. Gwendolyn C.A.R.E. -Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... 206.888.7152 --------J ··-------- From: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com To: cathy .ortiz-olguin@kingcou nty .gov CC: mtcdebi@msn.com; tim.attebery@kingcounty.gov Subject: RE: CARE DDES Public Disclosure Request 4/7/2008 to 6/9/2008 Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 21:33:17 -0700 Dear Ms. Ortiz, With this email, we continue our series of Public Disclosure Requests. Though we are early in our submission this time around, we expect to renew this request each month for the next sequential time period. Please note that this request is structurally and substantively different than our previous similar requests. REQUEST PART 1 We request all records (correspondence, emails, reports, plans, schedules, notes of meetings and phone calls, and any other category of information) in all formats (electronic, hardcopy and all other media) created, generated or received by King County related in any way to the following DDES file numbeio): ,_ --"_ Cc, -.. n :-11_, -.= ID LOSP0026: Threadgill I O i:: 1 ln IS ! 1 \V/ I 2, D\ L06P0001: Cava Ila , -~ ·-, ·----·" • -) L04P0034: Liberty Gardens J\j 1 • , B , __ j L07P0009: Heritage JUL J 7 tnO The period to be covered by this request for the Part 1 materials shall be from our last request of June 9, 2008 thru today's date of July 1, 2008. '<.C. D.D.E.S. v;'-l~t/ http:/ /bl 140w. blu 140.mail. live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=a43b0452-L. 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message REQUEST PART 2 Additionally, we request all records (correspondence, emails, reports, plans, schedules, notes of meetings and phone calls, and any other category of information) in all formats (electronic, hardcopy and all other media) created, generated or received by King County related in any way to the proposed extension of 162nd Ave SE under any application or other action known by King County including specifically (but not limited to): -deparment review, investigation, analysis, consideration of this proposed road extension -application for King County Roads Standards variance -all records related in any way to the assignment for creation, purpose of, meaning of and all other discussion/research of the text presented in Note D of the ODES SEPA Determination of Non-Significance for file # L04P0034 issued June 20, 2008. The period to be covered by this request for the Part 2 materials shall be all inclusive thru today's date of July 1, 2008. REQUEST PART 3 Finally, we request review of all materials related to the Liberty Gardens Preliminary Plat application (file# L04P0034) in the possession of any project manager that has ever been assigned to that permit application, The period to be covered by this request for the Part 3 materials shall be all inclusive thru today's date of July 1, 2008. This request is submitted by: CARE -Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 high la nds_neig hbors@hotma ii. com Contact: Debi Eberle -Vice President Phone: 425.226. 9946 FAX: 425.226.6520 Please address all correspondence in this matter to: Debi Eberle: mtcdebi@msn.com And Gwendolyn High: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Also, please inform us via response to this email of the date on which these requested materials will be made available for review and copy. Thank You, Gwendolyn High C.A.R.E. -Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www. highlandsneigh bars. org Page 2 of3 http:/ /bl l 40w.blu 140.mail.livc.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=a43 b0452-f... 7/3/2008 ,e-• Windows Live Hotrnail Print Message REQUEST PART 2 Additionally, we request all records (correspondence, emails, reports, plans, schedules, notes of meetings and phone calls, and any other category of information) in all formats (electronic, hardcopy and all other media) created, generated or received by King County related in any way to the proposed extension of 162nd Ave SE under any application or other action known by King County including specifically (but not limited to): -deparment review, investigation, analysis, consideration of this proposed road extension -application for King County Roads Standards variance -all records related in any way to the assignment for creation, purpose of, meaning of and all other discussion/research of the text presented in Note D of the DOES SEPA Determination of Non-Significance for file # L04P0034 issued June 20, 2008. The period to be covered by this request for the Part 2 materials shall be all inclusive thru today's date of July 1, 2008. REQUEST PART 3 Finally, we request review of all materials related to the Liberty Gardens Preliminary Plat application (file# L04P0034) in the possession of any project manager that has ever been assigned to that permit application. The period to be covered by this request for the Part 3 materials shall be all inclusive thru today's date of July 1, 2008. This request is submitted by: CARE -Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 hig hlands_neigh bo rs@hotmai I. com Contact: Debi Eberle -Vice President Phone: 425.226.9946 FAX: 425.226.6520 Please address all correspondence in this matter to: Debi Eberle: mtcdebi@msn.com And Gwendolyn High: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Also, please inform us via response to this email of the date on which these requested materials will be made available for review and copy. Thank You, Gwendolyn High C.A.R.E. -Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org Page 2 of3 http:/ /bl 140w. blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=a43b0452-f... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message rJ Windows Live· RE: CARE DDES Public Disclosure Request 6/9/2008 to 7/1/2008 From: Highlands Neighbors (highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com) Sent: Tue 7/01/08 9:35 PM To: Cathy Ortiz (cathy.ortiz-olguin@kingcounty.gov) ! Cc: mtcdebi@msn.com; tim.attebery@kingcounty.gov Hello All, I forgot to change the date range in the subject line below. It should read: CARE DDES Public Disclosure Request 6/9/2008 to 7/1/2008 I apologize for the mistake. Gwendolyn C.A.R.E. • Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... 206.888.7152 From: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com To: cathy .ortiz-olguin@kingcounty.gov CC: mtcdebi@msn.com; tim.attebery@kingcounty.gov Subject: RE: CARE DDES Public Disclosure Request 4/7/2008 to 6/9/2008 Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 21:33:17 -0700 Dear Ms. Ortiz, With this email, we continue our series of Public Disclosure Requests. Though we are early in our submission this time around, we expect to renew this request each month for the next sequential time period. Please note that this request is structurally and substantively different than our previous similar requests. REQUEST PART 1 We request all records (correspondence, emails, reports, plans, schedules, notes of meetings and phone calls, and any other category of information) in all formats (electronic, hardcopy and all other media) created, generated or received by King County related in any way to the following DDES file numbers: LOSP0026: Threadgill L06P0001: Cavalla L04P0034: Liberty Gardens L07P0009: Heritage The period to be covered by this request for the Part 1 materials shall be from our last request of June 9, 2008 thru today's date of July 1, 2008. Page I of3 ·~ http:/ /bl 140w .blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=a4 3b0452-f... 7/3/2008 Wir-d<>ws 1'.ive Hotmail Print Message Pagel of3 f!I Windows Live" ; RE: CARE ODES Public Disclosure Request 4/7/2008 to 6/9/2008 i From: Ortiz, Cathy (Cathy.Ortiz-Olguin@kingcounty.gov} Sent: Fri 6/27/08 3:09 PM , To: Debi Eberle (mtcdebi@msn.com) i Cc: highlands~neighbors@hotmail.com Hi Debi and Gwendolyn: All the materials have been collected and will be in the Records Center. No one gave me a disk so I am assuming all information has been printed and taken to the Records Center. See you soon. Cathy Ortiz P.S. I will be out of the office on Monday, but here the rest of the week. From: Debi Eberle [mailto:mtcdebi@msn.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1 :01 PM To: Ortiz, Cathy Cc: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Subject: Re: CARE DDES Public Disclosure Request 4/7/2008 to 6/9/2008 Thank you so much for your quick work. Debi Eberle -----Original Message ----- From: Ortiz, Cathy To: mtcdebi@msn.com; Highlands_Neighbors@hotmail.com Cc: Attebery, Tim Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 1 :53 PM Subject: CARE DDES Public Disclosure Request 4/7/2008 to 6/9/2008 Dear Ms. Eberle and Ms. High: K.C. D.D.E.S. Thank you for your public disclosure request which was received by me on June 11, 2008. DDES staff are currently collecting materials responsive to your request. To review these materials, please visit the DOES Records Center anytime on June 30, 2008, or the next 30 days thereafter. Records Center staff can assist you in reviewing the files and will facilitate any copying that you require at the standard County rate. Please keep in mind that the DDES Records Center will only hold these materials for 30 days. Therefore, if you do not contact the Records Center prior to July 30, 2008, you will need to make another public disclosure request. Windows Live Hotmail Print Message P'<1ge;, of 3 If you have questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at 206-296-6704. Sincerely, Catherine Ortiz Olguin DDES Director's Office From: Attebery, Tim Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 10:31 AM To: Ortiz, Cathy Subject: FW: CARE DDES Public Disclosure Request 4/7/2008 to 6/9/2008 From: Highlands Neighbors [mailto: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 11:35 AM To: Attebery, Tim Cc: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com; mtcdebi@msn.com Subject: CARE DDES Public Disclosure Request 4/7/2008 to 6/9/2008 Dear Mr. Attebery, With this email, we continue our series of Public Disclosure Requests. Though we are late in our submission this time around, we expect to renew this request each month for the next sequential time period. We request all records (correspondence, emails, reports, plans, schedules, notes of meetings and phone calls, and any other category of information) in all formats (electronic, hardcopy and all other media) created, generated or received by King County related in any way to the proposed extension of 162nd Ave SE and/or to the following DDES file numbers: L05P0026: Threadgill L06P0001: Cavalla L04P0034: Liberty Gardens L07P0009: Heritage The period to be covered by this request shall be from our last request of April 7, 2008 thru today's date of June 9, 2008. This request is submitted by: CARE -Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Contact: Debi Eberle -Vice President Phone: 425.226.9946 FAX: 425.226.6520 Please address all correspondence in this matter to: Debi Eberle: mtcdebi@msn.com http:/ /bl 140w. blul 40.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=70cc7 cee-7... 7/3/2008 ' --1' .. Wimlcws nive Hotmail Print Message Page 3 of3 And Gwendolyn High: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Also, please inform us via response to this email of the date on which these requested materials will be made available for review and copy. Thank You, Gwendolyn High C.A.R.E. • Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org < http://www. highlandsneighborsorg/> http:/ !bl 140w. blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx9 type=message&cpids=70cc7 eee-7... 7/3/2008 • Wi;idows live Hotmail Print Message Page I of3 f!I Windows Live· ! RE: STATUS REQUEST: CARE ODES Public Disclosure Request : From: Attebery, Tim {Tim.Attebery@kingcounty.gov) / Sent: Thu 4/17/08 10:22 AM : To: Highlands Neighbors (highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com) ; Cc: mtcdebi@msn.com ' I've got new information for you to review. Come down to the Records Center anytime. I'll leave the docs there for you. From: Highlands Neighbors [mailto:highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:04 AM To: Attebery, Tim Cc: mtcdebi@msn.com; highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Subject: STATUS REQUEST: CARE DOES Public Disclosure Request Dear Mr. Attebery, We would like to know when the materials requested in the emails copied below (3/6/2008 and 3/13/2008) will be made available for our review. After you spoke with Ms. Eberle last week, we reviewed our records and confirmed that the last time we came to DDES to review materials provided as a result of a Public Disclosure Request was on 2/22/2008. On that date we reviewed materials made available by DOT only, none from DDES. Also, that date preceded the requests we copy below for which we have been waiting to receive notification of when they will be made available for over a month. Please let us know as soon as you are able so that we may make the appropriate arrangements with our volunteers. Thank you. Gwendolyn High DOES Public Disclosure Request From:Debi Eberle (mtcdebi@msn.com) Sent: Thu 3/13/08 11:58 AM To: Tim.Attebery@kingcounty.gov K.C. o.o.E.S. http:/ /bl 140w. blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=8967eOe4-8... 7/3/2008 • Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page. 2 of.3 highlands_neig hbors@hotmail.com; Stephanie. Warden@kingcounty.gov; Joe. Mlles@kingcounty.gov; Cc: Lisa. Dinsmore@kingcounty.gov; Chad .Tibbits@kingcounty.gov; Jim.Sanders@kingcounty.gov; Bruce. Whittaker@kingcounty .govKristen. Langley@kingcounty.gov To Whom it May Concern: With this email, we initiate a new series of Public Disclosure Requests. We will ren We request all records (correspondence, emails, plans, sched~les, notes of meetings formats (electronic, hardcopy and all other media) created, generated or re8eived by 162nd Ave SE and/or to the following DDES file numbers: LOSP0026: Threadgill L06P0001: Cavalla L04P0034: Liberty Gardens L07SA561: SEATTLE REDEVELOPMENT LLC L07P0009: Heritage The period to be covered by this request shall be all inclusive thru today's date of This request is submitted by: CARE -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 High:'...ands_neighbors@hotmail.com Contact: Debi Eberle -Vice President Phone: 425.226.9946 FAX: 425.226.6520 Please inform us via response to this email of the date on which these requested mat please let us know if any further information is necessary frorr, us, Thank You, Debi Eberle C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org > > ODES Public Disclosure Request From:Debi Eberle (mtcdebi@msn.com) Sent: Thu 3/06/08 2: 07 PM To: Tim.Attebery@kingcounty.gov highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com; Stephanie. Warden@kingcoLinty.gov; Joe. Miles@kingcoLinty.gov; Cc: Lisa. Dinsmore@kingcounty.gov; Chad. Tibbits@kingcoLinty.gov; Jim .Sanders@k!ngcounty.gov; Bruce. Wh itta ker@kingco LI nty. g av; Kristen. Lang I ey@k in g COLI nty. gov To Whom it May Concern: With this email, we initiate a new series of Public Disclosure Requests. We will renew this request each week for the next sequential time period. We request all records (correspondence, emails, plans, schedules, notes of meetings and phone calls, and any other category of information) in all formats (electronic, hardcopy and all other media) created, generated or received by King County related in any way to the proposed extension of 162nd Ave SE and/or to the following DOES file numbers: http:/ /bl 140w. b Ju 140 .mail. live. com/mail/PrintShell. aspx ?type=message&cpids=8 967 e0e4-8... 7/3/2008 • Wir,dows Live Hotmail Print Message L05P0026: Threadgill L06P0001: Cavalla L04P0034: Liberty Gardens L07SA561: SEATTLE REDEVELOPMENT LLC L07P0009: Heritage The period to be covered by this request shall be all inclusive thru today's date of March 6, 2008. This request is submitted by: CARE -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 Highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Contact: Debi Eberle -Vice President Phone: 425.226.9946 FAX: 425.226.6520 Page 3 of3 Please inform us via response to this email of the date on which these requested materials will be made available for review and copy. Also, please let us know if any further information is necessary from us. Thank You, Debi Eberle C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org C.A. R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org http:/ /bl 140w .blu 140 .mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=8967eOe4-8... 7/3/2008 ·,Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page I of8 I:! Windows Live· DDES Public Disclosure Request From: Debi Eberle (mtcdebi@msn.com) Sent: Mon 3/17/08 1:20 PM : To: dav1d.spohr@kingcounty.gov , Cc: Kimberly .C\aussen@kingcounty.gov; Tim.Attebery@kingcounty.gov; Lisa.Dinsmore@kingcounty.gov; Joe. Miles@kingcounty.gov; Bruce. Whittaker@kingcounty.gov; Arlene. Marlano@kingcounty.gov; Chad. Tibbits@kingcounty.gov; Jim .Sanders@kingcounty.gov; Kristen. Langley@kingcounty.gov; Nicole. Kel I e r@ki ngco u nty. gov; era ig. mcm u rdo@ki ng county.gov; Pa u I ette. Norma n@ki ngcou nty. gov; Fati n. Ka ra@klngcou nty. gov; steph an ie. wa rden@ki n g county. gov; ha raid. tan ig uch i@ki n g county .gov; i highlands~neighbors@hotmai!.com; mtcdebi@msn.com i Attachments: 20080306 ODES Pu~lic ~isclosure Request.email.mht (6. 1 KB), Security scan upon download ,Z,t,I'!'l· 20080313 DOT Public Disclosure Request.email.mht (1.5 KB), ' I_ 20080314 Status Request_Q_OT Public_Disclosure Request.d_Qc. (20.0 KB), 20080306 DOT Public Disclosure Request.email.mht ( 5. 9 KB), 20080312_AtteberyDeclinationOfOfferNotice.doc (20.0 KB) Dear Mr. Spohr, I am writing to you at the suggestion of Gwendolyn High. I am Debi Eberle, VP of CARE where Gwendolyn is President. Gwendolyn spoke to you on 3/10 and described the proposed alternative to our Public Disclosure Request that Mr. Attebery proposed. We declined his offer (see attached copy of that email). Yet, as you see below, at the very least, Ms. Claussen has not been made aware that Mr. Attebery's offer was declined and that the full and official Public Disclosure Request is what we expect and for which we are still waiting. Additionally, please see the other attached copies of our outstanding and on-going Public Disclosure Requests. We still have not received any reply from DOT and according to our calculations; the deadline for our notification of when information will be made available for our review has now passed for our request of 3/6/2008. We fully understand that your plate is likely very full, but we would very much appreciate your assistance in interfacing or facilitating more effective communication of our requirements to DDES and DOT staff in regard to our outstanding and on-going Public Disclosure Requests. If you are not able to assist us, please recommend to whom we might correctly address this request for help. We would be most grateful to learn what we have failed to do to properly and effectively request public records. If you need any further information, please do not hesitate to contact us. Thank you again for all your time and assistance. Debi attached: 3/6/2008 DOT Request 3/6/2008 DDES Request 3/12/2008 Email Declining Mr. Attebery's offer 3/13/2008 DOT Request 3/13/2008 DDES Request 3/14/2008 email requesting status on 3/6/2008 DOT Request r-;::, re~ '12 i-i ,_,,; --1_ ~ r;D~,\ ::i' ,..., 1\1,' c,,,' I::_., \ .r;, I_, i_ ·~· --' I ' -~ u -". I J ' I lllL \l 7 2\lLti , __ .,, Ms. Eberle • I've been asked to provide an update on the following projects, in lieu of a public disclosure request per conversation between yourself and Tim Attebery of DDES · http:/ /bl 140w .blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx ?type=mcssage&cpids=c K.C. o.o.E.S 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message The following information associated with the plats of Cavalla (L06P0001) and Liberty Gardens (L04P0034) has been submitted to ODES and will be available for review by the end of next week (March 21st) L06P0001 -Revised preliminary plat map & landscape plan Revised SEPA environmental checklist Level 3 stormwater mitigation report Revised plan for 162nd Ave SE road extension L04P0034 -Level 3 Downstream drainage report Revised plan for 162nd Ave SE road extension note, the road vacation application has been appealed to the King County Council -if you have questions re this vacation please contact Nicole Keller at King County Dept. of Transportation L07SA561 -This application has been withdrawn L07P0009 -This project is currently on hold pending the submittal of additional information by the applicant. The deadline for this submittal has been extended to April 11, 2008 L05P0026 -Preliminary Plat hearing has closed and is pending with the Hearing Examiner. The file for this project is currently at the Hearing Examiner's office. Please let me know if you have further questions. I can be reached at 206-296-7167. Thank you. -----Original Message----- From: Debi Eberle [mailto:mtcdebi@msn.com] Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 11:50 AM To: Attebery, Tim Cc: "highlands_neighbors@hotmail.comStephanie. Wa rden"@kingcounty.gov; Miles, Joe; Dinsmore, Lisa; Tibbits, Chad; Sanders, Jim; "Bruce. Whitta ker@kingcounty.gov Kristen. Langley"@kingcounty.gov Subject: DOES Public Disclosure Request To Whom it May Concern: With this email, we initiate a new series of Public Disclosure Requests. We will renew this request each week for the next sequential time period. We request all records (correspondence, emails, plans, schedules, notes of meetings and phone calls, and any other category of information) in all formats (electronic, hardcopy and all other media) created, generated or received by King County related in any way to the proposed extension of 162nd Ave SE and/or to the following DDES file numbers: LOSPOD26: Threadgill Page 1 of8 http:/ /bl 140w. blul 40.mail. live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=cb2fl cOc-3... 7/3/2008 Windo'ws Live Hotmail Print Message L06P0001: Cavalla L04P0034: Liberty Gardens L07SA561: SEATTLE REDEVELOPMENT LLC L07P0009: Heritage The period to be covered by this request shall be all inclusive thru today's date of March 13, 2008. This request is submitted by: CARE -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 H ig hla nd s_neig hbors@hotma ii .com Contact: Debi Eberle -Vice President Phone: 425.226.9946 FAX: 425.226.6520 Please inform us via response to this email of the date on which these requested materials will be made available for review and copy. Also, please let us know if any further information is necessary from us. Thank You, Debi Eberle C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org --Forwarded Message Attachment-- From: mtcdebi@msn.com To: Tim.Attebery@kingcounty.gov Page 3 of8 CC: high lands_neighbors@hotma ii. com; Stephanie. Warden@ki ngcou nty .gov; Joe.Miles@kingcounty.gov; Lisa. Dinsmore@kingcounty.gov; Chad.Tibbits@kingcounty.gov; Jim .Sanders@kingcounty.gov; Bruce. Whittaker@kingcou nty .gov; Kristen. Langley@kingcounty.gov Subject: DDES Public Disclosure Request Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 14:07:33 -0800 To Whom it May Concern: With this email, we initiate a new series of Public Disclosure Requests. We will renew this request each week for the next sequential time period. We request all records (correspondence, emails, plans, schedules, notes of meetings and phone calls, and any other category of information) in all formats (electronic, hardcopy and all other media) created, generated or received by King County related in any way to the proposed extension of 162nd Ave SE and/or to the following DDES file numbers: http:/ !bl 140w. blu 140 .mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx9 type=mcssage&cpids=cb2fl cOc-3... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message L05P0026: Threadgill L06P0001: Cavalla L04P0034: Liberty Gardens L07SA561: SEATTLE REDEVELOPMENT LLC L07P0009: Heritage The period to be covered by this request shall be all inclusive thru today's date of March 6, 2008. This request is submitted by: CARE -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 Highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Contact: Debi Eberle -Vice President Phone: 425.226.9946 FAX: 425.226.6520 Page 4 of8 Please inform us via response to this email of the date on which these requested materials will be made available for review and copy. Also, please let us know if any further infomnation is necessary from us. Thank You, Debi Eberle C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell http:/ /bl l 40w.blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShcll.aspx?type=message&cpids=cb2fl cOc-3 ... 7/3/2008 'Windows Live Hotmail Print Message ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www. highla ndsneig h bors. org --Forwarded Message Attachment-- From: mtcdebi@msn.com To: craig.mcmurdo@kingcounty.gov CC; highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com; Paulette. Norman@kingcounty.gov; Kristen. Lang ley@ki ngcou nty. gov; Fa tin. Ka ra@kingcounty.gov Subject; DOT Public Disclosure Request Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 10:48:36 -0800 To Whom it May Concern: With this email, we initiate a new series of Pub:ic Disclosure Requests. We will renew this request each week for the next sequential time period. Page 5 of 8 We request all records (correspondence, emails, plans, schedules, notes of meetings and phone calls, and any other category of information) in all formats (electronic, hardcopy and all other media) created, generated or received by King County related in any way to the proposed exi:ension of 162nd Ave SE anti/or to the following ODES file numbers: L05P0026: Threadgill L06P0001, Cavalla L04P0034: Liberty Gardens L07SA561, SEATTLE REDEVELOPMENT LLC L07P0009, Heritage The period to be covered by this request shall be all inclusive thru coday's date of March 13, 2008. This request is submitted by: CARE -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Eve~dell PO Box 2936 Rentor. WA 98056 Highlands~neighbors@hotmail.com Contact: Debi Eberle -Vice President Phone, 425.226.9946 FAX, 425,226.6520 Please inform us via response to this email of the date on which these requested materials will be made available for review and copy. Also, please let us know :..t a:iy :urther information is r.ecessa:::-y from us. Thank You, Debi Eberle C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www. highlandsneighbors. org http:/ !bl 140w .blul 40.mail. live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=cb2fl cOc-3.,, 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message --Forwarded Message Attachment-- From: mtcdebi@msn.com To: craig.mcmurdo@kingcounty.gov CC: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com; Paulette. Norman@kingcounty.gov; Kristen.Langley@kingcounty.gov; Fatin.Kara@kingcounty.gov Subject: DOT Public Disclosure Request Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 14: 12:36 -0800 To Whom it May Concern: Page 6 of8 With this email, we initiate a new series of Public Disclosure Requests. We will renew this request each week for the next sequential time period. We request all records (correspondence, emails, plans, schedules, notes of meetings and phone calls, and any other category of information) in all formats (electronic, hardcopy and all other media) created, generated or received by King County related in any way to the proposed extension of 162nd Ave SE and/or to the following DOES file numbers: L05P0026: Threadgill L06P0001: Cavalla L04P0034: Liberty Gardens L07SA561: SEATILE REDEVELOPMENT LLC L07P0009: Heritage The period to be covered by this request shall be all inclusive thru today's date of March 6, 2008. This request is submitted by: CARE -Citizens· Alliance for a Responsible Evendell PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 Highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Contact: Debi Eberle -Vice President Phone: 425.226.9946 http:/ /bl l 40w.blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids-cb2fl cOc-3 ... 7/3/2008 -Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page 7 of8 FAX: 425.226.6520 Please inform us via response to this email of the date on which these requested materials will be made available for review and copy. Also, please let us know if any further information is necessary from us. Thank You, Debi Eberle http:/ !bl 140w. blu 140.mail.livc.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx ?type=message&cpidFcb2fl cOc-3... 7/3/2008 To Whom it May Concern: With this email, we initiate a new series of Public Disclosure Requests. We will renew this request each week for the next sequential time period. We request all records (correspondence, emails, plans, schedules, notes of meetings and phone calls, and any other category of information) in all formats (electronic, hardcopy and all other media) created, generated or received by King County related in any way to the proposed extension of 162nd Ave SE and/or to the following DDES file numbers: L05P0026: Threadgill L06P0001: Cavalla L04P0034: Liberty Gardens L07SA561: SEATTLE REDEVELOPMENT LLC L07P0009: Heritage The period to be covered by this request shall be all inclusive thru today's date of March 13, 2008. This request is submitted by: CARE -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 Highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Contact: Debi Eberle -Vice President Phone: 425.226.9946 FAX: 425.226.6520 Please inform us via response to this email of the date on which these requested materials will be made available for review and copy. Also, please let us know if any further information is necessary from us. Thank You, Debi Eberle C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org Page 1 of 1 t--u ! /~tDJ 'r fc;I./ ftx,JA/ mhtml :file:/ IF: ICARE\LandU se \Li bertyGarden s_ Cav al la \Li bertyGardens \PreHearingConfer... 7/3/2008 Public Disclosure Request rron·: Debi Eberle (mtcdebi@msn.com) Sent Wed 3/12/08 1 :43 PM Tc tim.atterbery@kingcounty.gov Cc: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Dear Mr. Attebery, ~har.k you for your phone call last Friday regarding your suggestion tha~ instead of our submitting a new Public Disclosure Request each week, that Kirn Claussen will let us know if anything important comes in. We appreciate your trying to make things easier, but we don't mind sending in the updated Requests, and after consulting with the team, we have decided that we are not comfortable going outside the protections of the US FOIA and WA public disclosure laws. However, if y01..1 think it would be possible to create a formal rolling Public Disclosure Request, as Gwendolyn High orginally requested, we would be happy to have our attor:ieys rev.";_ew your formal proposal, in writing, which will specifically indicate that all ~he protections of the US FOIA a:id VVA public disclosure laws shall apply to this specia} arrar~gement. Until such an agreement might be approved, we have decided that we ·1,1 i.ll p~oceed as we indicated and submit new requests each week. Thanks again for you all your efforts on our behalf, Debi Eberle K.C. 0.0.E.S. Hearing Examiner King County Hearing Examiner's Office 400 Yesler Way -Suite 404 Seattle WA 98104 Fax: 206.296.1654 July 3, 2008 Community Alliance to Reach Out & Eng~~ P.O. Box 2936 Renton, WA 98056 highlands~neighbors@hotmail.com 206.888.7152 K.C. D.D.E.S. Liberty Gardens Preliminary Plat Application L04P0034: Request for Amendment of Statement of SEPA Appeal Dear Mr. Examiner, With this letter, Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage (CARE), requests the Hearing Examiner to issue an order allowing future amendment of our Statement of Appeal of the SEPA Determination for this application. Gwendolyn High, our president, will represent CARE in this matter. Tex1 presented in this document inside boxes is quoted from the Hearing Examiner's Rules of Procedure. IV. FILING REQUIREMENTS D. Amendment of Appeal Statements 1. If, at the expiration of the filing period for a statement of appeal, an appellant has not timely received requested information relevant to the decision or action being appealed, and such information was requested from the responsible County agency 72 hours or more before the appeal statement deadline, the appellant may file with the appeal statement a notice that such statement is incomplete. The notice shall identify the matters subject to the outstanding information request, the date on which the request was made, the County employee to whom the request was directed, the nature of the information solicited and why its receipt is believed necessarv to a comolete statement of anneal. Issues for which we have concern were originally identified during the consideration and Hearing for the Threadgill Preliminary Plat Application (L05P0026). Threadgill, Ca val la (L06P0001) and Liberty Gardens are each being required by ODES to jointly construct the proposed extension of 162°d AVE SE. During the Threadgill Hearing, King County Staff and Threadgill applicant successfully argued that the proper process step for addressing our concerns for this road extension was a SEPA appeal. After the issuance of the Hearing Examiner's Decision for Threadgill, CARE notified ODES, DOT, Hearing Examiner and all three Applicants of our concerns for this joint project and that, while we would not appeal the Hearing Examiner's Decision for Threadgill, our concerns remained and we would address them during the SEPA step for Cavalla and Liberty Gardens. Thus, beginning in January 2008, CARE continued to submit comments and questions to King County staff. We have been particularly concerned in following any variance application to address the proposed violations of the King County Road Standards. Emails made available via Public Disclosure Request show responsible staff agree that "obviously" a variance is needed, but so far, no record of any such a variance has been made available, though the application is now scheduled for Hearing. Copies of emails detailing our conversations with the King County Roads Engineer on this issue are attached for full context. On June 6, 2008, CARE filed a Public Disclosure Request with DOT for the period of April 7, 2008 through June 6, 2008 including specific inquiry regarding the subject application's proposal to extend 162°d AVE SE. DOT staff indicated that the materials would be made available on July 1, 2008. The materials were not available for review at the date/time and place indicated. Our preliminary SEPA appeal is entirely concerned with the ex1ension of 162°' AVE SE. Our expert witness requires access to these materials and time to analyze them in order to prepare a competent and coherent Statement of Appeal. Our current Statement of Appeal is based on material made available to us in March 2008 subsequent to a previous Public Disclosure Request. We know that revisions to the proposed road extension have been submitted by the applicant based on materials supplied by ODES via a third separate Public Disclosure Request, but we must confirm what those revisions are, and then modify our Statement of Appeal as appropriate. Additionally, we submitted two new Public Disclosure Requests on July 1, 2008 to ODES and DOT requesting review of all materials for the period June 6, 2008 through July 1, 2008. DOT staff have responded that they will get back to us in a few days with the date materials will be made available. ODES staff have not yet responded. Based on our experience with monthly Public Disclosure Requests over the past six months, we have no expectation that materials can be made available before August 1, 2008. Email package with our full Public Disclosure history is attached for full contex1. Loi AP ()Jr( LP/ ,r,b;?f CAR E's expert witness (transportation/traffic engineer) has copies of the materials made available to us subsequent to Public Disclosure Requests in March, 2008, but materials that will result from the outstanding Public Disclosure Requests, including the recent substantive revisions for the proposed extension of 162°a Ave SE, will not be made available for him to review in time for the current deadline for SEPA Appeal Statement submission. CAR E's request to be allowed to amend our SEPA Statement of Appeal should be granted because we have not been afforded the opportunity to review materials critical to our ability to prepare that document despite our best efforts to prevent exactly this scheduling scenario. Also, we have met the requirements of all Hearing Examiner Procedures necessary to allow the requested Order. If there is any insufficiency or error in any of our submissions, CARE looks forward to notification and begs to opportunity to submit corrections. We are not experts or lawyers and submit all documents, testimony and exhibits as interested parties and citizens. Hardcopies of all documents submitted today are being forwarded to all parties today via email and US Mail or hand delivery. Please feel free to call me at home (425.917.0117) with any comments and/or questions. Thank you for your time and attention, ~LuC0-lety---+Lr;~ Gwendolyn High President Attachments: DOT Public Disclosure Requests Email Threads Package DDES Public Disclosure Requests Email Threads Package DOT 162"" AVE SE/Road Variance Concerns Email Threads Package ify under penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws of the State of Wa hington that the foregoing is true and correct. ~ 200. J. Hearing Examiner King County Hearing Examiner's Office 400 Yesler Way· Suite 404 Seattle WA 98104 Fax: 206.296.1654 July 3, 2008 Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage P.O. Box 2936 Renton, WA 98056 highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com 206.888.7152 00 [~ (~~ ~ 0 11W ~ ID) Jt.Jl O 7 2008 L __ K.C. D.D.E.S. Liberty Gardens Preliminary Plat Application L04P0034: Request for Continuance of SEPA Appeal Hearing Dear Mr. Examiner, With this letter, Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage (CARE). requests the Hearing Examiner to issue an order allowing Continuance of the SEPAAppeal Hearing for this application. Gwendolyn High, our president, will represent CARE in this matter. Text presented in this document inside boxes is quoted from the Hearing Examiner's Rules of Procedure. VI. PRE-HEARING MOTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS C. Request for Continuance (Postponement) 1. Prior to the scheduled hearing date a party may move to continue a public hearing. The motion shall be filed as soon as reasonably possible after the need for the continuance becomes known, and shall state the reason for the request. The examiner may take action on the motion based upon the supporting statement alone, may provide an opportunity for comments by other parties and interested persons, or may schedule a hearing on the motion. The examiner's action will consider whether the continuance request can be granted consistent with the time limit requirements stated in [Ordinance 11502, Sections 14 and 15], whether there are reasonable alternatives to a continuance, and whether other parties or interested persons will be prejudiced or unduly inconvenienced. Motions for continuance received less than 7 days prior to the scheduled hearing date normally will be granted only if the need for a continuance was not reasonably foreseeable, all parties consent, or on the basis of an emergency. Unless otherwise ordered, a continuance of a scheduled hearing shall not extend the deadlines for the conduct of pre- hearinq discovery. Issues for which we have concern were originally identified during the consideration and Hearing for the Threadgill Preliminary Plat Application (L05P0026). Threadgill, Cavalla (L06P0001) and Liberty Gardens are each being required by ODES to jointly construct the proposed extension of 162"d AVE SE. Staff and Threadgill applicant successfully argued that the proper process step for addressing our concerns for this road extension was a SEPA appeal. After the issuance of the Hearing Examiner's Decision for Threadgill, CARE notified DOES, DOT, Hearing Examiner and all three Applicants of our concerns for this joint project and that, while we would not appeal the Hearing Examiner's Decision for Threadgill, our concerns remained and we would address them during the SEPA step for Ca val la and Liberty Gardens. Thus, beginning in January 2008, CARE continued to submit comments and questions to King County staff. We have been particularly concerned in following any Variance application to address the violations of the King County Road Standards. Emails made available via Public Disclosure Request show responsible staff agreeing that "obviously" a variance is needed, but so far, no record of any such a variance has been made available, though the application is now scheduled for Hearing. Copies of emails detailing our conversations with the King County Roads Engineer on this issue are attached to our Request for Amendment of Statement of SEPA Appeal also submitted today. On June 6, 2008, CARE filed a Public Disclosure Request with DOT for the period of April 7, 2008 through June 6, 2008 regarding the subject application's proposal to extend 162 00 AVE SE. DOT staff indicated that the materials would be made available on July 1, 2008. The materials were not available for review at the date/time and place indicated. Our SEPA appeal is entirely concerned with the extension of 162nd AVE SE. Our expert witness requires access to these materials and time to analyze them in order to prepare a competent and coherent Statement of Appeal. Our current Statement of Appeal is based on material made available to us in March 2008 subsequent to a previous Public Disclosure Request. We know that revisions to the proposed road extension have been submitted by the applicant based on materials supplied by ODES via a third separate Public Disclosure Request, but we must confirm what those revisions are, and then modify our Statement of Appeal as appr:;~· ~d;;6y7 subm7;,w¥;i:,°i? Requests on July 1, 2008 to DDES and DOT requesting review of all materials for the period June 6, 2008 through July 1, 2008. DOT staff have responded that they will get back to us in a few days with the date materials will be made available. DDES staff have not yet responded. Based on our experience with monthly Public Disclosure Requests over the past six months, we have no expectation that materials will be made available before August 1, 2008. Email package with our full Public Disclosure history is attached to our Request for Amendment of Statement of SEPA Appeal also submitted today. CAR E's expert witness (transportation/traffic engineer) has copies of the materials made available to us subsequent to Public Disclosure Requests in March, 2008, but materials that will result from the outstanding Public Disclosure Requests, including the recent substantive revisions for the proposed extension of 162"' Ave SE, will not be made available for him to review in time for the current deadline for SEPA Appeal Statement submission. VI. PRE-HEARING MOTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS D. Procedural Requirements Except as otherwise provided by these rules, pre-hearing motions shall conform to the following requirements: 1. All pre-hearing motions shall be made to the examiner in writing. Unless good cause is shown in support of a shorter period, motions shall be filed at least 21 days prior to the scheduled hearing date or 5 days prior to a scheduled prehearing conference. Notice of opportunity to respond in writing or present oral argument on the motion, if allowed, will be provided by the examiner's Office to other parties and interested persons. All parties shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard in response to a motion to dismiss. With respect to proceedings for which a pre-hearing conference is scheduled, oral argument on pre-hearing motions shall generally be set for the pre- hearina conference. Because of the unusual Notice issuance timing, the inherent delay in records review under the Public Disclosure Request process, DDES staff's not keeping the on-line Action Report for this application up to date and CARE team summer vacations, we were not aware of the need to request a Pre-Hearing Conference until July 1, 2008. Because of the multiple separate but simultaneous documents that the Hearing Examiner's Procedure requires for all of the Pre-Hearing Requests, we were not able to submit our Requests until today. We are not requesting any event to be scheduled outside of the 45 day maximum specified in the Procedures. XI. CONDUCT OF HEARING F. Procedural and other Defects 1. Inadequate Legal Notice Lack of required legal notice of the proceeding may be raised by any person at any time before the hearing is closed. To the extent possible consistent with due process, the effects of deficient notice shall be cured by providing adversely affected persons, through continuances and other procedural mechanisms, reasonable opportunity to effectively participate in the hearing. Unless otherwise required by law, the receipt of actual timely notice by a person of a proceeding shall generally be considered as having cured a deficiency in legal notice to that person. If other available corrective actions are not deemed adequate by the examiner, the examiner shall adjourn the hearing and order new notice to be issued. The examiner mav waive the time limits of KCC 20.24 to effect a cure to deficient notice. DDES used one Party of Record list for the distribution of Notice of Decision -SEPA Threshold Determination and Notice of Recommendation & Hearing but provided a substantially different Party of Record list to the Hearing Examiner's Office for the distribution of their Notice of Hearing. We are currently investigating whether this abnormality has materially affected any interested person. As soon as we have concluded that investigation we will report to all parties. In the meantime, the appearance of improper notice is considered another circumstance indicating continuance is the proper remedy as we are requesting. CAR E's request for Continuance of the SEPA Appeal Hearing should be granted because we have not been afforded the opportunity to review materials critical to our ability to prepare that document despite our best efforts to prevent exactly this scheduling scenario. Also, we have met the requirements of all Hearing Examiner Procedures necessary to allow the requested Order. If there is any insufficiency or error in any of our submissions, CARE looks forward to notification and begs to opportunity to submit corrections. We are not experts or lawyers and submit all documents, testimony and exhibits as interested parties and citizens. \ )J ,... Hardcopies of all documents submitted today are being forwarded to all parties today via email and US Mail or hand delivery. Please feel free to call me at home (425.917.0117). Thank you for your time and attention, t:5i,,.,_.. t 0 -lJ I ,I-<._ <.) G\ --\ ~ l .....__ cfwendolyn High () I'.) President Attachments: DOT Public Disclosure Email Threads Package ODES Public Disclosure Email Threads Package DOT 162"d AVE SE/Road Variance Concerns Email Threads Package I certif under penalty of perju cu I Gwen lyn High pursuant to the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. 1 7. 2cc • • ..... ------------~---C=--o=m_munity Alliance to Reach Out & Engage Hearing Examiner King County Hearing Examiner's Office 400 Yesler Way -Suite 404 Seattle WA 98104 Fax: 206.296.1654 July 3, 2008 P.O. Box 2936 Renton, WA 98056 highlands_neighbors@ hobnail .com I c;' /'(D /--1 r ,, -::i ~ ~s ,Ln ~ i1 11V/ ,i~ _- '--" ~ '" L; -==1 :l JUL O 7 2008 ~ K.C. 0.0.E.S. 206.866. 7152 Liberty Gardens Preliminary Plat Application L04P0034: Request for Continuance of Preliminary Plat Hearing Dear Mr. Examiner, With this letter, Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage (CARE), requests the Hearing Examiner to issue an order allowing future amendment of our Statement of Appeal of the SEPA Determination for this application. Gwendolyn High, our president, will represent CARE in this matter. Text presented in this document inside boxes is quoted from the Hearing Examiner's Rules of Procedure. V. DEPARTMENT FILES: REPORTS, SPECIAL STUDIES, REVIEWS AND RESPONSES B. Timely Report Not Jurisdictional; Continuance as Remedy Absence of the required department or division report, or delay in its issuance, shall not affect the jurisdiction of the examiner. Failure of the responsible County agency to timely issue the report required by KCC 20.24.150 shall constitute grounds for continuance upon motion by any party or interested person who demonstrates to the satisfaction of the examiner that the failure has resulted in prejudice to the moving party or person. In the absence of extenuating circumstances, a continuance qranted on this qround shall be for no lonqer than two weeks. DDES issued the Notice of Recommendation and Hearing on June 20, 1008. Normally, the Preliminary Recommendations Report to the Hearing Examiner is issued with the Notice. The DOES report still has not been made available to the Public. Access to this report is critical to our ability to prepare our response to this application VI. PRE-HEARING MOTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS C. Request for Continuance (Postponement) 1. Prior to the scheduled hearing date a party may move to continue a public hearing. The motion shall be filed as soon as reasonably possible after the need for the continuance becomes known, and shall state the reason for the request. The examiner may take action on the motion based upon the supporting statement alone, may provide an opportunity for comments by other parties and interested persons, or may schedule a hearing on the motion. The examiner's action will consider whether the continuance request can be granted consistent with the time limit requirements stated in [Ordinance 11502, Sections 14 and 15], whether there are reasonable alternatives to a continuance, and whether other parties or interested persons will be prejudiced or unduly inconvenienced. Motions for continuance received less than 7 days prior to the scheduled hearing date normally will be granted only if the need for a continuance was not reasonably foreseeable, all parties consent, or on the basis of an emergency. Unless otherwise ordered, a continuance of a scheduled hearing shall not extend the deadlines for the conduct of pre- hearina discovery. DOES staff have assured us that SEPA appeal is not necessary nor appropriate for our concerns in regard to the proposed extension of 162"' AVE SE. Note D on the Determination of Non-Significance for Liberty Gardens (DOES File No. L04P0034) is intended to announce this. This is newly drafted note has not been found in any previous DNS or MONS issued by the Department and appears to directly contradict text in the previously issued MONS issued for the Threadgill plat application (L05P0026) in regard to a specific common issue to these plats (proposed extension of 162nd Ave SE) as well as testimony of King County Staff with responsibility for this issue at the Hearing for Threadgill. Additionally, no DOES recommended road improvements or mitigations have ever been excluded from SEPA determinations for Preliminary Plat in this community. With separate requests to this office we have initiated steps to preserve our right to appeal SEPA. It may yet be proven that staff assurances are correct, in which case it will be necessary to address these and other issues sole through the Hearing. Therefore, we consider it necessary to submit documents with very similar and overlapping requests. We apologize for the duplication of effort. .... Issues for which we have concern were originally identified during the consideration and Hearing for the Threadgill Preliminary Plat Application (L05P0026). Threadgill, Cavalla (L06P0001 ), and Liberty Gardens are each being required by DDES to jointly construct the proposed extension of 162"d AVE SE. Staff and Threadgill applicant successfully argued that the proper process step for addressing our concerns for this road extension was a SEPA appeal. After the issuance of the Hearing Examiner's Decision for Threadgill, CARE notified DDES, DOT, Hearing Examiner and all three Applicants of our concerns for this joint project and that, while we would not appeal the Hearing Examiner's Decision for Threadgill, our concerns remained and we would address them during the SEPA step for Cavalla and Liberty Gardens. Thus, beginning in January 2008, CARE continued to submit comments and questions to King County stall. We have been particularly concerned in following any Variance application to address the violations of the King County Road Standards. Emails made available via Public Disclosure Request show responsible staff agreeing that "obviously'' a variance is needed, but so far, no record of any such a variance has been made available, though the application is now scheduled for Hearing. Copies of emails detailing our conversations with the King County Roads Engineer on this issue are attached to our Request for Amendment of Statement of SEPA Appeal also submitted today. On June 6, 2008, CARE filed a Public Disclosure Request with DOT for the period of April 7, 2008 through June 6, 2008 regarding the subject application's proposal to extend 162 00 AVE SE. DOT staff indicated that the materials would be made available on July 1, 2008. The materials were not available for review at the date/time and place indicated. Our SEPA appeal is entirely concerned with the extension of 162"" AVE SE. Our expert witness requires access to these materials and time to analyze them in order to prepare a competent and coherent Statement of Appeal. Our current Statement of Appeal is based on material made available to us in March 2008 subsequent to a previous Public Disclosure Request. We know that revisions to the proposed road extension have been submitted by the applicant based on materials supplied by DDES via a third separate Public Disclosure Request, but we must confirm what those revisions are, and then modify our Statement of Appeal as appropriate. Additionally, we submitted two new Public Disclosure Requests on July 1, 2008 to DDES and DOT requesting review of all materials for the period June 6, 2008 through July 1, 2008. DOT staff have responded that they will get back to us in a few days with the date materials will be made available. DDES staff have not yet responded. Based on our experience with monthly Public Disclosure Requests over the past six months, we have no expectation that materials will be made available before August 1, 2008. Email package with our full Public Disclosure history is attached to our Request for Amendment of Statement of SEPA Appeal also submitted today. CAR E's expert witness (transportation/traffic engineer) has copies of the materials made available to us subsequent to Public Disclosure Requests in March, 2008, but materials that will result from the outstanding Public Disclosure Requests, including the recent substantive revisions for the proposed extension of 162"d Ave SE, will not be made available for him to review in time for the current deadline for SEPA Appeal Statement submission. VI. PRE-HEARING MOTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS D. Procedural Requirements Except as otherwise provided by these rules, pre-hearing motions shall conform to the following requirements: 1. All pre-hearing motions shall be made to the examiner in writing. Unless good cause is shown in support of a shorter period, motions shall be filed at least 21 days prior to the scheduled hearing date or 5 days prior to a scheduled prehearing conference. Notice of opportunity to respond in writing or present oral argument on the motion, if allowed, will be provided by the examiner's Office to other parties and interested persons. All parties shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard in response to a motion to dismiss. With respect to proceedings for which a pre-hearing conference is scheduled, oral argument on pre-hearing motions shall generally be set for the pre- hearina conference. Because of the unusual Notice issuance timing, the inherent delay in records review under the Public Disclosure Request process, DDES staff's not keeping the on-line Action Report for this application up to date and CARE team summer vacations, we were not aware of the need to request a Pre-Hearing Conference until July 1, 2008. Because of the multiple separate but simultaneous documents that the Hearing Examiner's Procedure requires for all of the Pre-Hearing Requests, we were not able to submit our Requests until today. We are not requesting any event to be scheduled outside of the 45 day maximum specified in the Procedures. XI. CONDUCT OF HEARING F. Procedural and other Defects 1. Inadequate Legal Notice Lack of required legal notice of the proceeding may be raised by any person at any time before the hearing is closed. To the extent possible consistent with due process, the effects of deficient notice shall be cured by providing adversely affected persons, through continuances and other procedural mechanisms, reasonable opportunity to effectively participate in the hearing. Unless otherwise required by law, the receipt of actual timely notice by a person of a oroceedino shall aenerallv be considered as havina cured a deficiencv in leaal notice to that oerson. If other available • • • • corrective actions are not deemed adequate by the examiner, the examiner shall adjourn the hearing and order new notice to be issued. The examiner ma waive the time limits of KCC 20.24 to effect a cure to deficient notice. DOES used one Party of Record list for the distribution of Notice of Decision -SEPA Threshold Determination and Notice of Recommendation & Hearing but provided a substantially different Party of Record list to the Hearing Examiner's Office for the distribution of their Notice of Hearing. We are currently investigating whether this abnormality has materially affected any interested person. As soon as we have concluded that investigation we will report to all parties. In the meantime, the appearance of improper notice is considered another circumstance indicating continuance is the proper remedy as we are requesting. We offer the following suggestions to begin the scheduling discussions at the Pre-Hearing Conference we have requested separately: The Preliminary Plat Hearing Date should be set to no fewer than 21 days following the date on which materials are reviewed under our outstanding Public Disclosure Requests and no fewer than 7 days after the SEPA Appeal Hearing Date. CARE's request for Continuance of the Preliminary Plat Hearing should be granted because we have not been afforded the opportunity to review materials critical to our ability to prepare that document despite our best efforts to prevent exactly this scheduling scenario, because ODES stall have failed to provide the Preliminary Recommendations Report to the Hearing Examiner, there has been an irregularity in the Notices for this application and hearings, and because CAR E's outstanding Public Disclosure Requests have not been completed. Also, we have met the requirements of all Hearing Examiner Procedures necessary to allow the requested Order. II there is any insufficiency or error in any of our submissions, CARE looks forward to notification and begs to opportunity to submit corrections. We are not experts or lawyers and submit all documents, testimony and exhibits as interested parties and citizens. Hardcopies of all documents submitted today are being forwarded to all parties today via email and US Mail or hand delivery. Please feel free to call me at home (425.917.0117). Thank you for your time and attention, ~lO;_L~~ 4--tt-- Gwendolyn High President ry pursuant to the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. 73 200 f t , , Wind~.11s Liv~ Hotmail Print Message Page I of3 I! Windows Live· RE: Public Disclosure Request: DDES file Numbers L04P0034 and L06P001 From: Attebery, Tim (Tim.Attebery@kingcounty.gov) Sent: Tue 2/26/08 10: 56 AM , To: Highlands Neighbors (highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com); Warden, Stephanie , (Stephanie.Warden@kingcounty.gov); Norman, Paulette (Paulette.Norman@kingcounty.gov) Cc: Miles, Joe (Joe.Miles@kingcounty.gov); Dinsmore, Lisa (lisa.Dinsmore@kingcounty.gov); Tibbits, Chad ------{ C-had.'fibl>it-s@ktnjj<cOunty-,gov) ," · Sander-s,-Jtm -(Jim. SartdefS@kiRgWtfflty,gov)t Whtttaker,-Bruee- ( Bruce. Wh itta ker@ki ngcou nty. gov); Langley, Kristen (Kristen.Langley@kingcounty.gov); Kara, Fatin (Fatin .Kara@kingcounty.gov) Ms. High, RCW 42.56 docs not require governments to respond to rolling public disclosure requests. We are, however, required to respond to public disclosure requests asking for records within a specific timeframc. In this instance, we can collect records between DATE X and the date your request was received by this agency. If you would like to receive records subsequent to the date of your request, you will need to make another public disclosure request. I can't speak to your variance question. Tim Attebery DDES Public Affairs Director From: Highlands Neighbors [mailto:highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 7:23 AM To: Attebery, Tim; Warden, Stephanie; Norman, Paulette Cc: Miles, Joe; Dinsmore. Lisa; Tibbits, Chad; Sanders, Jim; Whittaker, Bruce; Langley, Kristen; Kara, Fatin Subject: RE: Public Disclosure Request: ODES file Numbers L04P0034 and L06P001 Good Morning, All, Thank you for making the previously requested materials available on 2/2212008. We will continue to review and analyze this information, and will provide feedback as soon as we are able. We are most interested to follow the progress related to Condition 7.h from the Hearing Examiner's Report and Decision for the Threadgill application (file no. L05P0026). Based on this Condition, and previously discussed violations of the King County Road Standards, it is our understanding that a Road Variance must be sought in order for the extension of 162nd Ave SE to be constructed as currently proposed. Is this understanding correct? Has or will a Road Variance be sought for the proposed exJ_ .nJ,Q_ . -~.i1@ ~~ ~~e/2/00_\ SE? T'nj~ I . . -1 I I , I / . .. JLJL D 7 2008 '·-:./ Also, at this time, we request instruction in the proper procedure by which we may successfully submit a recurring Public Disclosure Request. Given the significant lead time necessary for the preparation of files 'fu.r(il~t!I);)J:,e~ under your procedures, we would like to submit a standing request for the following information so that we may · review all relevant data in the most expedient manner possible. It is our preference to review newly available data on a weekly basis until the Threadgill, liberty Gardens and Cavalla projects are complete or until such time as we LoiAPOJ1 U>t/f'a,~t/ http:/ /bl 140w .blu I 40.mail. live.com/maiVPrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids~6d6585c 1-c... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message ' Page"'2 of 3 , suspend our Public Disclosure Request. Please provide instructions as soon as possible so that we may submit this new request correctly. We request review of all documents, files, notes of telephone calls and meetings created by or received by DOES or DOT staff in any way related to the ODES application files L05P0026, L06P001 and L04P0034. Review of electronic versions of documents may be an acceptable option if preparation of the physical files is a unrealistic burden. Thank you for your time and assistance, Gwendolyn High C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www. hig hlandsneig hbors.org Subject: RE: Public Disclosure Request: DOES file Numbers L04P0034 and L06P001 Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:54:43 -0800 From: Tim.Attebery@kingcounty.gov To: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com I just sent you a letter via US Mail stating when the records would be ready. From: Highlands Neighbors [mailto:highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 1 :57 PM To: Attebery, Tim Cc: Warden, Stephanie; Miles, Joe; Dinsmore, Lisa; Tibbits, Chad; Sanders, Jim; Whittaker, Bruce; Langley, Kristen; Kara, Falin Subject: Public Disclosure Request: DOES file Numbers L04P0034 and L06P001 To Whom It May Concern, I apologize for the formality of this communication. Normally we try to keep our correspondences on a much more conversational tone, but on advice of our attorneys, we submit this Public Disclosure Request today. This is the first one we have submitted a request quite this way. Please let me know as soon as possible if additional information, documentation or anything else is necessary to correctly and successfully request this information. Also, please let us know if we need to break this into separate requests for the different application files and/or for the personnel in the separate departments. http:/ /bl 140w. blu 140.mail. live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=6d6585c 1-c... 7/3/2008 ' ' ( r Windo.ivs Liw Hotmail Print Message Requesting Party: Gwendolyn High -president CARE -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 Highlands_ n§ghbors@hotII1aiL;;om 425.917.0117 (home) 425.226.6520 (fax) Requested Information: Page 3 of3 We request the opportunity to review and copy all correspondence to and from the applicants (including all submitted plans, letters, drawings and other documentation and records of interaction in electronic, faxed or hardcopy formats) regarding the proposed extension of 162nd Ave Se for the Liberty Gardens and Cavalla subdivision applications at your earliest convenience. DOES file Numbers: L04P0034 and L06POOI A hardcopy version of this request follows via US Mail to: Tim Attebery, Public Affairs Director Department of Development & Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98057-5212 Please let us know when this information will be made available. Thank you for your time and assistance, Gwendolyn High C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community www. highlandsneigh bars. org http:! /bl 140w. blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type911essage&cpids=6d6585c 1-c... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Pagel of2 rJ Windows Live - RE: Request to review file for Liberty Gardens Preliminary Plat Hearing (L04P0034) From: Ohrmundt, Ginger (Ginger.Ohrmundt@kingcounty.gov) ; Sent: Wed 7/02/08 9:19 AM : To: Highlands Neighbors (high\ands_neighbars@hotmail.com) You are welcome. Calling ahead would be appreciated. Have a safe Fourth of July!! -----Original Message----- From: Highlands Neighbors [mailto:highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 9:02 AM To: Ohrmundt, Ginger Subject: RE: Request to review file for Liberty Gardens Preliminary Plat Hearing (L04P0034) Good Morning, Ms. Ohrmundt, Thank you so much for your speedy and most helpful response. I shall endeavor to come in for a visit 7/3, but my schedule is very full presently so it is more likely that I won't make it until next week. Either way I will be certain to call ahead. Kind regards, Gwendolyn C.A.R.E. -Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... 206.888.7152 Subject: RE: Request to review file for Liberty Gardens Preliminary Plat Hearing (L04P0034) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 08:47:54 -0700 From: Ginger.Ohrmundt@kingcounty.gov To: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Good Morning, Im I~ r-.ro 1-s I i \I 7 I c°u\ I C 1-0 "5 ~I I,~/ j__= .I) ) There are only two days next week (July 7-11) that our office has hca · J U / scheduled. They are: · UL O 7 2008 __, Wednesday, July 9 starting@ I :30 until 4:30 Thursday, July IO starting@ 9:30 until 4:30 K.C. D.D.E.S. Any of the other days someone will be here to assist you in looking at the Liberty Gardens Preliminary Plat Application file. Please call our office ahead of time so that the file will be ready for you to look at. If you would prefer to come in sometime yet this week (Note: our office will be closed this Friday, July 4), please feel free lo do so, but once again please call our office ahead of time. ldK 11 Pua 7 http:/ /bl 140w. blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=mcssage&cpids=cc3098b 1-6... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Ginger Ohrmundt -----Original Message----- From: Highlands Neighbors [mailto:highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 9:41 PM To: Hearing Examiner; hearex@kingcounty.gov Cc: Ohrmundt, Ginger Subject: Request to review file for Liberty Gardens Preliminary Plat Hearing (L04P0034) To Whom it May Concern, Page 2 of2 CARE requests the opportunity to review the files submitted by ODES to the Office of the Hearing Examiner regarding the Liberty Gardens Preliminary Plat Application (L04P0034) at your earliest convenience. Please feel free to call me at 425. 917. 0117 if further information is needed or to make arrangements. Thank you for your time and consideration, Gwendolyn High C.A.R.E. -Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... 206.888.7152 http:/ /bl 140w. blu 140.mail. live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=cc3098b 1-6... 7/3/2008 • t, ' • -' RE: Public Disclosure Request: All records related to Road Variance for ODES file Numbers L05P0026, F,orr,: Norman, Paulette (Paulette. Norman@kingcounty.gov) Scnl: Tue 2/12/08 1: 18 PM To: Highlands Neighbors (highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com) Cc: Kara, Fatin (Fatin.Kara@kingcounty.gov); Hoshibata, Lorraine ( Lorraine .Hoshibata@kingcounty.gov) Good Afternoon Ms. High Thank you for the background information. I am looking into the questions and concerns you raised in your emails and will be getting back to you shortly. In the meantime, attached is a link to the public rules, procedures for requesting a road variance. ht i::.p: / /V,J\""1.'. kingcoun ty _gov/ opera c.:..ons /policies/ rules/ ut i J.i ties /pu tl O 2pr _ aspx Paulette From: Highlands Neighbors [mailto:highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 8:33 AM To: Norman, Paulette Cc: Dougherty, Linda; Weder, Andrea Subject: RE: Public Disclosure Request: All records related to Road Variance for DDES file Numbers L05P0026, icJ) :s' ,J'l f2 , Good Morning, Ms. Norman, I r)j .::; '.".7 1'-~ V rP Jj fn'i . -JUL a -~'-cf D ) ? 2008 '--.:J kr: n Thank you for your time yesterday. As promised in our telephone conversation, I have atiaQii@.S an excerpt from our presentation of 1/22/2008 before the King County Hearing Examiner. This · document records the concerns we have with the anticipated transportation/traffic impacts from the proposed extension of 162nd Ave SE. If you find that our reasoning is in error, we would be most grateful for your correction of our understanding. Also, since it sounds like an electronic verision of the the administrative rule referenced in the KCC 14.42.060 may not be available, at your earliest convenience, please send a hardcopy version to: CARE PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 Thank you' I look forward to speaking with you again soon. Gwendolyn High C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org From: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com To: linda.dougherty@kingcounty.gov; paulette.norman@kingcounty.gov; andrea.weder@kingcounty.gov ' -,. . j Subject: Public Disclosure Request: All records related to Road Variance for DDES file Numbers L05P0026, L04P Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 09:02:15 -0800 Hello Again' While we await response to our inquires of 2/7/2008, we have been thinking that perhaps we also need to submit a seperate Public Disclosure Request to DOT to match the one we have already submitted to DDES. Please see the email copied below for the specs of this request. We are new to this Public Disclosure Request process, so please let us know ASAP if we have missed anything. We will be very happy to make whatever corrections are needed. Also, please note that our request to DOT requests data for file no. LOSP0026 (see subject line) which was not included in our original request to DDES. Thank you, Gwendolyn High C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org Public Disclosure Request: ODES file Numbers L04P0034 and L06POO I From:Highlands Neighbors (highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com) Sent: Wed 1/30/08 1:58 PM To: Cc: tim.allebery@ki ngcounty .gov stephanie.wardcn@kingcounty.gov; joc.miles@kingcounty.gov; Ii sa.dinsmore@kingcoun ty .gov; chad.ti bbits@kingcount y. gov; ji m. sanders@kingcounty.gov: bruce. w hi ttaker@ki ngcounl y .gov; kristcn.langley@kingcounty.gov; fatin.kara@kingcounty.gov • To Whom It May Concern, I apologize for the formality of this communication. Normally we try to keep our correspondences on a much more conversational tone, but on advice of our attorneys, we submit this Public Disclosure Request today. This is the first one we have submitted a request quite this way. Please let me know as soon as possible if additional information, documentation or anything else is necessary to correctly and successfully request this information. Also, please let us know if we need to break this into separate requests for the different application files and/or for the personnel in the separate departments. Requesting Party: Gwendolyn High -president CARE -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 Highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com 425.917 .0117 (home) 425.226.6520 (fax) Requested Information: We request the opportunity to review and copy all correspondence to and from the applicants (including all submitted plans, letters, drawings and other documentation and records of interaction in electronic, faxed or hardcopy formats) regarding the proposed extension of 162"d Ave Se for the Liberty Gardens and Cavalla subdivision applications at your earliest convenience. DDES file Numbers: L04P0034 and L06P001 A hardcopy version of this request follows via US Mail to: Tim Attebery, Public Affairs Director Department of Development & Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98057-5212 Please let us know when this information will be made available. Thank you for your time and assistance, Gwendolyn High C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org From: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com To: linda.dougherty@kingcounty.gov; paulette.norman@kingcounty.gov; andrea.weder@kingcounty.gov Subject: RE: Name of someone knowledgable about Road Variances Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 12:16:18 -0800 Hello All! Ms. Dougherty, thank you so much for such a speedy referral. This is extremely helpful! Ms. Norman, There are a number of questions we have about the Road Variance process, but perhaps we should start with a requesting a copy of the administrative rule referenced in the KCC excerpt below: 14.42.060 Variances. A. A road variance is required for any design or construction deviation from these standards. Detailed procedures for applicants requesting variances and appealing variance decisions are ' contained within a public rule that is available from the county road engineer or the reviewing agency. B. Any variances from these standards may be granted by the county road engineer upon evidence that the variance is in the public interest and that requirements for safety, function, fire protection, transit needs, appearance and maintainability are fully met, based upon sound engineering and technical judgment. C. Variance requests for subdivisions should be proposed at the preliminary plat stage and prior to any public hearing ... We (CARE) have been participating as recognized lntervenors in a preliminary plat application. I have attached the Hearing Examiner's Report & Decision in this matter for your reference. We still have grave outstanding concerns for the proposed road extension that is a condition for this project. According to our understanding, as currently proposed, this road improvement plan contains 3 significant violations of the KCRS. Per Condition 7.h of the attached Report and Decision, it appears that the applicant is now required to go through the formal Road Variance process. This is a process with which we are not yet familiar. Also, we currently have these questions -answers to some or all of which may well be made clear once we have an opportunity to study the applicable administrative rule: 1) What are the process steps and submission requirements for the Road Variance process? 2) What opportunity is available for affected parties other than the applicant (i.e. CARE) to participate in this Road Variance process, and what are the rules for that participation? 3) What is the appeal process, should such become necessary, for any decision that comes out of the Road Variance Process? Who may file an appeal? 4) Since the Hearing, and indeed the Decision, for this preliminary plat application is now complete, how does KCC 14.42.060.c affect the process steps (application and appeal) in this situation? We expect that we may discover new questions as we go forward and hope that you would be able to help us with those, too. Thank you all for your attention and assistance. This is an issue of intense concern to our entire community. We have no intention of causing any harm to any individual or party, but we are participating to whatever extent is available to us in order to protect all of our neighbors from unnecessary harm. Happy Thursday! Gwendolyn High -president C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org From: gwendolynhigh@hotmail.com To: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Subject: FW: Name of someone knowledgable about Road Variances Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 11:51:15 -0800 From: TDCarp@comcast.net To: gwendolynhigh@hotmail.com Subject: FW: Name of someone knowledgable about Road Variances Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 11 :48:47 -0800 From: Dougherty, Linda [mailto:Linda.Dougherty@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 11:47 AM To:Tom Cc: Norman, Paulette; Weder, Andrea Subject: RE: Name of someone knowledgable about Road Variances Tom, Gwendolyn should contact Paulette Norman, our County Road Engineer. Paulette can be reached by email at paulette.norman@kingcounty.gov or by telephone at 296-8208. Linda ' From: Tom [mailto:TDCarp@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 11:44 AM To: Dougherty, Linda Subject: Name Linda Thanks for your time the other day. If you could send me the name of the person you said could help explain the variance process, etc. Gwendolyn High would like to make contact soon. Tom • Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page 1 of9 f1 Windows live· RE: Road Variance Process (Reference Public Disclosure Request: All records related to Road Variance for ODES file Numbers L05P0026) From: Norman, Paulette (Paulette.Norman@kingcounty.gov) Sent: Tue 2/26/08 4:24 PM To: gwendolynhigh@hotmail.com Cc: TDCarp@comcast.net; highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com; Kara, Fatin (Fatin.Kara@kingcounty.gov); Langley, Krist-en--(Kffsten:Langley@k-tngcotfftty~gov); Sanders, Jim (Jim.Sarn:lers@kingcounty-.gov};--Dfnsmore, -Lisa ____ i { Lisa. Dinsmore@kingcounty.gov); Whittaker1 Bruce (Bruce. Whittaker@k1ngcounty.gov) Ms. High, Thank you for your email of February 7, 2008, on behalf of the Highlands Neighbors, also known as the Citzens' Alliance for a Responsible Evedell (C.A.R.E.), with questions about the Road Variance process, opportunity for applicant participation, and the appeal process. At this time, tbe Road Services Division and DDES have not received an application for a road variance on these developments. Please see below responses to your questions about the Road Variance process. • What are the process steps and submission requirements for the Road Variance process? --Road Variances related to housing developments: An applicant-developer submits a Road Variance application to the Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) after King County reviewing staff determine that a proposed design does not meet the King County Road Design and Construction Standards (KCRDCS) design criteria and circumstances needed to approve a variance. An applicant- developer may also initiate a variance application when they are aware of conditions requiring variance approval. The variance application requirements include: • • The application form that includes references to sections of the KCRD~;wif~~ _ variances arc sought; lf )::L <. ii~~ · 1/ / .. -"-" /7 ''.r -1..../ ( I I -, I ·-r IC: ,1 J'i/ :-::-/;~ The filing fee; JUL O O 1 :, D 1 · · · 1 f · d 1 · 'fi h I l 2008 L_,J An 1rntta assessment o supportmg ata t 1at JUst1 1es t e approva , f( r, ·v. D,D.£: Information about potential compensating enhancements or mitigations for the requeste~· vanance; The preliminary engineering plans and subdivision maps, or other pertinent detailed drawings. http:/ /bl 140w. blu 140 .mail. livc.com/mail/PrintShcll.aspx?type=message&cpids= J 3 fl a9db-8... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page 2 of9 Most applications are forwarded to the county road engineer after a preliminary assessment of information is provided, although the ODES development engineer has authority to grant variances to some of the KCRDCS criteria (see Section l .12F in the 2007 KCRDCS for the current list). A team of King County Department of Transportation's (DOT) Road Services Division's engineers (the variance committee) reviews the applicant's proposal with KCDOT and the senior variance engineer responsible for initial proposal analysis. The team may request the applicant provide additional data and/or justification for the variance application before forwarding a recommendation to the county road engineer. The county road engineer may then choose to accept the variance committee's recommendation, request additional information from the applicant-developer, approve with conditions (modifications), or deny the variance request. The decision of the county road engineer is final and requires no additional approvals. The Hearing Examiner may exercise his/her prerogative to deny a subdivision application that has an associated variance decision by the county road engineer; however, the variance decision itself is not within the scope of the examiner's decision-making authority. • What opportunity is available for affected parties other than the applicant to participate in this Road Variance process, and what are the rules for that participation? Variance decisions are strictly technical and pertain to compliance and/or approved alterations to the county's road standards within the statutory authority granted to the county road engineer; because of this, there is no public process. Per the public rule, there is no requirement to notify adjacent/interested property owners. • What is the appeal process, should such become necessary, for any decision that comes out of the Road Variance process, and who may file an appeal? Only the applicant-developer can appeal the county road engineer's decision, and this appeal is made only to the director of the KCDOT. • Since the hearing and decision for this preliminary plat application are now complete, how does KCC 14.42.060c affect the process steps for application and appeal in this situation? http://bl140w .blu 140.mail.live.corn/maiVPrintShell.aspx ?type=message&cpids~ 13 fl a9db-8... 7/3/2008 • Windows· Live Hotmail Print Message Page 3 of9 Occasionally, approved final engineering plans may need to be modified during construction of the roadway improvements. Recognizing that these possibilities exist, DDES has written a standard condition of approval stating "Modifications to the above road conditions may be considered according to the variance procedures in Section 1.08 of the KCRDCS." If it was determined, for example, that a design element of frontage or off-site roadway improvements needed a new variance approval, which was then denied, the applicant has several options: Seek reconsideration -either by providing additional information or adding more mitigation measures; • Appeal the county road engineer's decision to the KCDOT director; • Propose a redesign that might result in approval of a Variance; • Redesign the project to comply with the adopted KCRDCS standard. If the variance was denied following preliminary approval, and the developer-applicant was unsuccessful in submitting a reconsideration/appeal/redesign or unwilling/unable to comply with the adopted standard on an issue determined to require a variance, the final engineering plans could be left unapproved by the county (Section l .12C in the current KCRDCS). If denial of a variance occurred during construction, final approval of the improvements might not be granted. In those hypothetical situations, the final approval of the subdivision could be denied, and the preliminary approval of the project, in the case ofa subdivision, would expire. Thank you for writing with questions about the road variance processes. If you have additional questions or concerns, please feel to contact me by telephone at 206-296-8208, or by email at paulette.norman@kingcounty.gov. Paulette Norman, P.E. County Road Engineer 206-296-8208 FAX 206-205-5207 http:/ !bl 140w. blu 140.mail. live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids= 13 fl a9db-8... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message From: Norman, Paulette Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 1: 18 PM To: 'Highlands Neighbors' Cc: Kara, Fatin; Hoshibata, Lorraine Page'4 of9 Subject: RE: Public Disclosure Request: All records related to Road Variance for ODES file Numbers L05P0026, Good Afternoon Ms. High Thank you for the background information. I am looking into the questions and concerns you raised in your emails and will be getting back to you shortly. In the meantime, attached is a link to the public rules, procedures for requesting a road variance. http :JL"'ww .}cingcoun ty. go_v_L_c,pe,:c",t~Q_nsjpol ic_i_§s /i::_ul e__s;/u tili ti es _;'plll:J,Q_2pl'.'~_a_spx Paulette From: Highlands Neighbors [mailto:highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 8:33 AM To: Norman, Paulette Cc: Dougherty, Linda; Weder, Andrea Subject: RE: Public Disclosure Request: All records related to Road Variance for ODES file Numbers L05P0026, Good Morning, Ms. Norman, Thank you for your time yesterday. As promised in our telephone conversation, I have attached an excerpt from our presentation of 1/22/2008 before the King County Hearing Examiner. This document records the concerns we have with the anticipated transportation/traffic impacts from the proposed extension of 162nd Ave SE. If you find that our reasoning is in error, we would be most grateful for your correction of our understanding. http:/ !bl 140w. blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids= 13 fl a9db-8... 7/3/2008 Windows-Live Hotmail Print Message Page 5 of9 Also, since it sounds like an electronic verision of the the administrative rule referenced in the KCC 14.42.060 may not be available, at your earliest convenience, please send a hardcopy version to: CARE PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 Thank you! I look forward to speaking with you again soon. Gwendolyn High C.A.R.E. -Cit"izens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org From: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com To: linda.dougherty@kingcounty.gov: paulette.norman@kingcounty.gov: andrea.weder@kingcounty.gov Subject: Public Disclosure Request: All records related to Road Variance for ODES file Numbers L05P0026, L04P Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 09:02: 15 -0800 Hello Again! While we await response to our inquires of 2/7/2008, we have been thinking that perhaps we also need to submit a seperate Public Disclosure Request to DOT to match the one we have already submitted to ODES. Please see the email copied below for the specs of this request. We are new to this Public Disclosure Request process, so please let us know ASAP if we have missed anything. We will be very happy to make whatever corrections are needed. Also, please note that our request to DOT requests data for file no. L05P0026 (see subject line) which was not included in our original request to ODES. Thank you, Gwendolyn High C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... WWIN. ,highland so,,igh_bqrs .org Public Disclosure Request: DDES file Numbers L04P0034 and L06P001 From:Highlands Neighbors (highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com) Sent: Wed 1/30/08 I :58 PM To: tim.attebcry@kingcounty.gov stephanie.warden@kingcounty.gov; joe.miles@kingcounly.gov: lisa.dinsmorc@kingcounty.gov; Cc: chad. tibbits(a)kingcounty.gov; j im.sandcrs@kingcounty.gov; brucc .whittaker@kingcounty.gov; kristen.langlcy@.kingcounty.gov; fatin.kara@kingcounty.gov To Whom It May Concern, http:/ /bl 140w. blu 140.mail. live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids= 13 fl a9db-8... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page 5 of9 I apologize for the formality of this communication. Normally we try to keep our correspondences on a much more conversational tone, but on advice of our attorneys, we submit this Public Disclosure Request today. This is the first one we have submitted a request quite this way. Please let me know as soon as possible if additional information, documentation or anything else is necessary to correctly and successfully request this information. Also, please let us know ifwe need to break this into separate requests for the different application files and/or for the personnel in the separate departments. Requesting Party: Gwendolyn High -president CARE -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell PO Box2936 Renton WA 98056 Highlands_ neighbors@hotmail.com 425.917.0117 (home) 425.226.6520 (fax) Requested Information: We request the opportunity to review and copy all correspondence to and from the applicants (including all submitted plans, letters, drawings and other documentation and records of interaction in electronic, faxed or hardcopy formats) regarding the proposed extension of 162nd Ave Se for the Liberty Gardens and Cavalla subdivision applications at your earliest convenience. DOES file Numbers: L04P0034 and L06POOI A hard copy version of this request follows via US Mail to: Tim Attebery, Public Affairs Director Department of Development & Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98057-5212 Please let us know when this information will be made available. Thank you for your time and assistance, http:/ !bl 140w. blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?typc==message&cpids= l 3fl a9db-8. .. 7/3/2008 · Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Gwendolyn High C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org From: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Page 7 of9 To: lin da. doug he rty@kingcounty.gov; pa ulette. no rman@ki ngcounty. gov; and rea. weder@kingco u nty. gov Subject: RE: Name of someone knowledgable about Road Variances Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 12:16:18 -0800 Hello All! Ms. Dougherty, thank you so much for such a speedy referral. This is extremely helpful! Ms. Norman, There are a number of questions we have about the Road Variance process, but perhaps we should start with a requesting a copy of the administrative rule referenced in the KCC excerpt below: 14.42.060 Variances. A. A road variance is required for any design or construction deviation from these standards. Detailed procedures for applicants requesting variances and appealing variance decisions are contained within a public rule that is available from the county road engineer or the reviewing agency. B. Any variances from these standards may be granted by the county road engineer upon evidence that the variance is in the public interest and that requirements for safety, function, fire protection, transit needs, appearance and maintainability are fully met, based upon sound engineering and technical judgment. C. Variance requests for subdivisions should be proposed at the preliminary plat stage and prior to any public hearing ... We (CARE) have been participating as recognized lntervenors in a preliminary plat application. I have attached the Hearing Examiner's Report & Decision in this matter for your reference. We still have grave outstanding concerns for the proposed road extension that is a condition for this project. According to our understanding, as currently proposed, this road improvement plan contains 3 significant violations of the KCRS. Per Condition 7.h of the attached Report and Decision, it appears that the applicant is now required to go through the formal Road Variance process. This is a process with which we are not yet familiar. http:/ !bl 140w .blu 140.maiLlivc.com/mail/PrintShelLaspx?type=message&cpids= l 3fl a9db-8... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page'8 of9 · Also, we currently have these questions -answers to some or all of which may well be made clear once we have an opportunity to study the applicable administrative rule: What are the process steps and submission requirements for the Road Variance process? What opportunity is available for affected parties other than the applicant (i.e. CARE) to participate in this Road Variance process, and what are the rules for that participation? What is the appeal process, should such become necessary, for any decision that comes out of the Road Variance Process? Who may file an appeal? Since the Hearing, and indeed the Decision, for this preliminary plat application is now complete, how does KCC 14.42.060.c affect the process steps (application and appeal) in this situation? We expect that we may discover new questions as we go forward and hope that you would be able to help us with those, too. Thank you all for your attention and assistance. This is an issue of intense concern to our entire community. We have no intention of causing any harm to any individual or party, but we are participating to whatever extent is available to us in order to protect all of our neighbors from unnecessary harm. Happy Thursday! Gwendolyn High -president C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org From: gwendolynhigh@hotmail.com To: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Subject: FW: Name of someone knowledgable about Road Variances Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 11 :51: 15 -0800 From: TDCarp@comcast.net To: gwendolynhigh@hotmail.com Subject: FW: Name of someone knowledgable about Road Variances http:! /bl 140w. blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids= l 3fl a9db-8... 7/3/2008 · Windows ·Live Hotmail Print Message Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 11:48:47 -0800 From: Dougherty, Linda [mailto:Linda.Dougherty@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 11 :47 AM To:Tom Cc: Norman, Paulette; Weder, Andrea Subject: RE: Name of someone knowledgable about Road Variances Tom, Page 9 of9 Gwendolyn should contact Paulette Norman, our County Road Engineer. Paulette can be reached by email at paulette.norrmm@kingc;_ounty.gov or by telephone at 296-8208. Linda From: Tom [mailto:TDCarp@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 11:44 AM To: Dougherty, Linda Subject: Name Linda Thanks for your time the other day. If you could send me the name of the person you said could help explain the variance process, etc. Gwendolyn High would like to make contact soon. Tom Shed those extra pounds with MSN and The Biggest Loser! Lear_n more. http:/ /bl 140w. blu 140 .mail. live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids= 13 fl a9db-8... 7/3/2008 · Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page I of 11 I'! Windows Live· I ---------------------------··--··-··----------- i RE: Public Disclosure Request: DDES file Numbers L04P0034 and . L06P001 From: Norman, Paulette (Paulette.Norman@kingcounty.gov) Sent: Fri 3/07/08 7:52 AM To: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com Cc: Dinsmore, Lisa (Lisa.Dinsmore@kingcounty.gov); Sanders, Jim (Jim.Sanders@kingcounty.gov); Langley, Kristen (Kristen.Langley@kingcounty.gov); Kara, Fatin (Fatin.Kara@klngcounty.gov); Whittaker, Bruce (Bruce.Whittaker@kingcounty.gov); Nguyen, Viet (Viet.Nguyen@kingcounty.gov); Tibbits, Chad (Chad. Tib bits@kingco unty. gov) Ms. High Thank you for your email and clarification on variances you believe the applicant should seek. The Hearing Examiner has issued a Report and Decision for the project. It appears your concerns. were also raised in front of the Hearing Examiner and these issues were responded to by the Reviewing Agency --either in response to your direct questions, or, in staff rebuttal. As I mentioned in my email to you on February 26 the county had not received any road variance applications and as of this date no variances have been submitted to my office for consideration. For questions regarding the Hearing Examiner's Report and Decision please contact Lisa Dinsmore, Supervisor, Land Use Services Division, DOES an at 206-296-7171 and for questions regarding development engineering plan submittals please contact Jim Sanders, Development Engineer, Land Use Services Division. DOES, at 206- 296-7178. Sincerely, Paulette Nonman From: Highlands Neighbors [mailto:highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 2:03 PM To: Norman. Paulette Cc: Miles. Joe; Dinsmore, Lisa; Tibbits, Chad; Sanders, Jim; Whittaker, Bruce; Langley. Kristen; Kara. Falin; Nguyen. Viet; Warden. Stephanie Subject: RE: Public Disclosure Request: DOES file Numbers L04P0034 and L06P001 LL>lf Pee,Etf http:/ !bl 140w. blu 140.mail. live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=d21893c2-f... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page 2 bfH Dear Ms. Norman, Thank you for the opportunity to repeat our concerns. I hope to clarify the specifics in regard to KCRS violations for the extension of 162nd Ave SE as currently proposed. I have again attached the excerpts from our presentation to the Hearing Examiner on January 22, 2008. I sent this document to you on February 12, 2008. I have copied your response upon reading ii then in an attachment as well. KCRS 2.03(b) Based on the known number of dwelling units for which 152nd Ave SE will serve as access, Urban Subcollector is not an appropriate road classification for the extension. KCRS 2.20 An exception under section 2.20 is not available lo this project because this area is zoned for 4 DUs per acre with a maximum fully developed density of 6 DUs per acre (which would require TDRs), and with existing large lots can not be expected to achieve the required 7 to 8 DUs per acre in the foreseeable future. KCRS2.7 Sidewalks are required on half streets, but not all of the length of the proposed extension will have sidewalks, and some ofthe extension is nto required to have any walkway improvements. If the developer(s) is (are) not required to make these walkway improvements due to proportionality, will the County be required to make them? KCRS 2.1 O(b) SE 144th St is an Arterial Collector according to the 2006 Arterial Classification Map. The proposed intersection of 162nd Ave SE with SE 144th St requires that there to be a minimum of 300 feet spacing to the next intersection. Centerline of 152nd Ave SE ROW to centerline of 161 51 Se on the north side of Se 144th St is 177.42 feet. Centerline of 162nd Ave SE ROW to centerline of 161'1 Se on the south side of Se 144th St is approximately 135 feet. KCRS 2.11 and 2.12 In light of the stopping distances listed in the King County Roads Standards, we also have considerable concern that the reverse slope (roughly 2%) between the bottom of the 12 % grade and the proposed intersection of SE 144th is only about 150 feet as proposed. In the chart above, the minimum stopping distance for a 9% grade at 30 miles an hour is 227 feet. This circumstance begs the conclusion that the proposed intersection of 162"d Ave SE http:/ !bl 140w. blul 40.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=d21893c2-f... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page 3 of 11 and SE 144th St must be considered a particularly dangerous proposal. Additionally, we find no consideration of the traffic flow patterns from the retail enterprise of Alpine Nursery whose customers often arrive in very large vehicles or with trailers and which located at the corner of 144th and 161st, what kind of turn lane, turn pocket, signage etc. should be required for the safe and smooth function of 144th after extension of 162nd? No guard rail or wall or any other facility improvements have been proposed to be installed on the south side of SE 144th ST to prevent a car which fails to stop at the end of the to-be-constructed 162nd Ave SE from landing in the current residents' back yard. The substantially increased risk to life and property that will be borne by the owners and residents of the property directly south of this proposed intersection is disproportionate to all the surrounding community and all due care must be extended to prevent hamn to them. So, we believe that as currently proposed, the extension of 152nd Ave SE to and intersection with SE 144th St. violates at least six individual requirements of the adopted King County Road Standards. The King County Hearing Examiner's Report and Decision of January 29, 2008 (also attached) states that: 7. The following road improvements are required to be constructed according to the 1993 King County Road Standards (KCRS): h. Modifications to the above road conditions may be considered according to the variance provisions in Section 1.08 of the KCRS. Thus, we expect a road variance to be sought for full engineering review and development of appropriate mitigations in order to ensure that, in accordance with KCC 14.42.060, evidence shall be presented and considered _before_ approval is given for the construction of a road that is in violation of the KCRS is constructed and the public subjected to unnecessary risk to persons and property. KCC 14.42.060 Variances. B. Any variances from these standards may be granted by the county road engineer upon evidence that the variance is in the public interest and that requirements for safety, function, fire protection, transit needs, appearance and maintainability are fully met, based upon sound engineering and technical judgment. C. Variance requests for subdivisions should be proposed at the preliminary plat stage and prior to any public hearing. All known variances must be approved prior to approval of the engineering plans for construction. It is http:/ !bl 140w .blul 40.mail.livc.com/mail/PrintShcll.aspx?type=message&cpids=d21893c2-f... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page4 ofH the responsibility of the county road engineer to interpret the standards. Any anticipated variances from these standards that do not meet K.C.C. Title 17 shall also require concurrence by the fire marshal. I hope that this attempt at explanation is more successful than all previous attempts. Our current outstanding questions at this time are: 1) Has or will a Road Variance be sought for the extension of SE 162nd Ave SE as currently proposed? 2) If it is your opinion as King County Roads Engineer that a Road Variance is not required, will you please provide an explanation for those exemption from King County Code and KCRS for each of the specific violations listed above? We anxiously await your answers. Thank you, Gwendolyn High http:/ /bl 140w .blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=d21893c2-f... 7/3/2008 · Windows Live Hotmail Print Message C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org Subject: Re: Public Disclosure Request: ODES file Numbers L04P0034 and L06P001 Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 17: 15:35 -0800 From: Paulette.Norman@kingcounty.gov To: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com CC: Joe.Miles@kingcounty.gov; Lisa.Dinsmore@kingcounty.gov; Chad.Tibbits@kingcounty.gov; Jim. Sand ers@king county .gov; Bruce. Whittaker@kingcou nty. gov; Kristen. Lan gley@ki ngcounty. gov; Fatin.Kara@kingcounty.gov; Viet.Nguyen@kingcounty.gov; Stephanie.Warden@kingcounty.gov Ms. High Page 5 of 11 Thank you for your email. I would like to better understand your concerns regarding road variances. It would help me if you could clarify what variances you expect the applicant to seek for this project. I have reviewed the Hearing Examiner's report and decision and I am not aware of any variances which are required for this project. I understand from staff you may be concerned about the extent of improvements proposed on SE 162nd Avenue. I would like to clarify for you that the King County Road Standards, Section 1.03, specifically notes 'The extent of off-site improvements to serving roads shall be based on an assessment of the impacts of the proposed land development by the Reviewing Agency'. In this case the reviewing agency is DOES and Jim Sanders, ODES Development Engineer. As I noted in my previous email variance decisions are strictly technical and pertain to compliance and/or approved alterations to the county's road standards. I hope this helps to address your concerns. If you have additional questions or concerns, please feel to contact me by telephone at 206-296-8208, or by email at paulette.norman@kingcounty.gov. Thank you Paulette Norman -----Original Message ----- From: Highlands Neighbors <highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com> To: Warden, Stephanie; Norman, Paulette Cc: Miles, Joe; Dinsmore, Lisa; Tibbits, Chad; Sanders, Jim; Whittaker, Bruce; Langley, Kristen; Kara, Falin; Nguyen, Viet Sent: Thu Feb 28 06:45:37 2008 Subject: RE: Public Disclosure Request: DOES file Numbers L04P0034 and L06P001 Good Morning, We are quite anxious to make progress on these questions. If we have not addressed these questions to the appropriate persons, please let us know ASAP who we should address. If we have addressed the questions to the right people, please let us know whne we might hope for answers. http:/ /bl 140w. blu 140.mail. live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=d21893c2-f... 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Thank you, Gwedolyn High C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org From: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com To: stephanie.warden@kingcounty.gov; paulette.norman@kingcounty.gov CC: joe.miles@kingcounty.gov; lisa.dinsmore@kingcounty.gov; chad.tibbits@kingcounty.gov; jim.sanders@kingcounty.gov; bruce.whittaker@kingcounty.gov; kristen.langley@kingcounty.gov; fatin.kara@kingcounty.gov Subject: FW: Public Disclosure Request: DDES file Numbers L04P0034 and L06P001 Date: Tue, 26 Feb 200811:35:10 -0800 Good Morning, All, Page 6 of !·I As Mr. Attebery indicated, it appears that I have not correctly addressed some of the questions I submitted previously. If none of you (TO: and CC: line addressees) are the responsible parties to whom these questions are correctly addressed, I ask that you forward them to such responsible parties ASAP as I am not aware of the correct recipients. And so you do not have to scroll down again, I reiterate: We are most interested to follow the progress related to Condition 7.h from the Hearing Examiner's Report and Decision for the Threadgill application (file no. L05P0026). Based on this Condition, and previously discussed violations of the King County Road Standards, it is our understanding that a Road Variance must be sought in order for the extension of 162nd Ave SE to be constructed as currently proposed. Is this understanding correct? Has or will a Road Variance be sought for the proposed extension of SE 162nd Ave SE? Please consider these questions to apply regardless of the project under which a road variance application might be submitted. We intend the relevant identifying feature to be the proposed extension of 162nd Ave SE to intersect with SE 144th St itself, and not any specific DDES file number. Thank you, Gwendolyn High http:/ ;bl 140w. blul 40.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type-message&cpids-d21893c2-f... 7/3/2008 · Windows Live Hotmail Print Message C.AR.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org From: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com To: tim.attebery@kingcounty.gov; stephanie.warden@kingcounty.gov; pa ulette. norm a n@kingcounty.gov Page 7 of 11 CC: joe.miles@kingcounty.gov; lisa.dinsmore@kingcounty.gov; chad.tibbits@kingcounty.gov; ji m .sanders@ki ngco unty. gov; bruce. wh ittaker@kingcounty. gov; kristen. la ng I ey@kingcounty.gov; fati n. kara@king county. gov Subject: RE: Public Disclosure Request: ODES file Numbers L04P0034 and L06P001 Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11 :24:13 -0800 Good Morning, Mr. Attebery, Thank you for helping us understand the limits of the public disclusure request as defined by RCW 42.56. Please confirm then that in order for us to operationally achieve the periodically updated review of documents that we seek. we should submit a new public disclosure request each week specifying the new weekly period to be reviewed. Also, a new question for you ... We did not see the volumn of correspondence related to the specified ODES files between DOT staff and applicants that we had expected in the documents recently made available to us. We do understand that what we _expected_ may not in actuality exist. However, the possiblity has occured to us that we might not have properly requested that data from DOT, and thus the documents were not made available. Do you know if there is a counterpart to your position with whom we should be placing a seperate public disclosure request to cover correspndence with ? Thank you also for noting that the variance inquiries should be addressed elsewhere. I shall resend those questions shortly. We apprecate your assistance and look forward to hearing from you again soon on these 2 outstanding questions. Gwendolyn High C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community .. www.highlandsneighbors.org Subject: RE: Public Disclosure Request: DOES file Numbers L04P0034 and L06P001 Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 10:56:18 -0800 From: Tim.Attebery@kingcounty.gov To: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com; Stephanie.Warden@kingcounty.gov; Paulette.Norman@kingcounty.gov http:! /bl 140w.blu 140.mail.live.corn/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=d21893c2-f. .. 7/3/2008 Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page 8 df H CC: Joe.Miles@kingcounty.gov; Lisa.Dinsmore@kingcounty.gov; Chad.Tibbits@kingcounty.gov; Jim.Sanders@kingcounty.gov: Bruce.Whittaker@kingcounty.gov; Kristen.Langley@kingcounty.gov; Fatin.Kara@kingcounty.gov Ms. High, RCW 42.56 does not require governments to respond to rolling public disclosure requests. We are, however, required to respond to public disclosure requests asking for records within a specific timeframe. In this instance, we can collect records between DATE X and the date your request was received by this agency. If you would like to receive records subsequent to the date of your request, you will need to make another public disclosure request. Kara, Falin I can't speak to your variance question. Tim Attebery ODES Public Affairs Director From: Highlands Neighbors [mailto;hjghlands_neighbors@hotmaiLcom) Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 7:23 AM To: Attebery, Tim; Warden, Stephanie; Norman, Paulette Cc: Miles, Joe; Dinsmore, Lisa; Tibbits, Chad; Sanders, Jim; Whittaker, Bruce; Langley, Kristen; Subject: RE: Public Disclosure Request: DOES file Numbers L04P0034 and L06P001 Good Morning, All, Thank you for making the previously requested materials available on 2/22/2008. We will continue to review and analyze this information, and will provide feedback as soon as we are able. We are most interested to follow the progress related to Condition 7.h from the Hearing Examiner's Report and Decision for the Threadgill application (file no. L05P0026). Based on this Condition, and previously discussed violations of the King County Road Standards, it is our understanding that a Road Variance must be sought in order for the extension of 162nd Ave SE to be constructed as currently proposed. Is this understanding correct? Has or will a Road Variance be sought for the proposed extension of SE 162nd Ave SE? Also, at this time, we request instruction in the proper procedure by which we may successfully http:/ /bl 140w .blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=d21893c2-f... 7/3/2008 · Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page 9 of 11 submit a recurring Public Disclosure Request. Given the significant lead time necessary for the preparation of files for public review under your procedures, we would like to submit a standing request for the following information so that we may review all relevant data in the most expedient manner possible. It is our preference to review newly available data on a weekly basis until the Threadgill, Liberty Gardens and Cavalla projects are complete or until such time as we suspend our Public Disclosure Request. Please provide instructions as soon as possible so that we may submit this new request correctly. We request review of all documents, files, notes of telephone calls and meetings created by or received by ODES or DOT staff in any way related to the ODES application files L05P0026, L06P001 and L04P0034. Review of electronic versions of documents may be an acceptable option if preparation of the physical files is a unrealistic burden. Thank you for your time and assistance, Gwendolyn High C.A.R.E. -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ... doing what we can, with our neighbors, for our community ... www.highlandsneighbors.org Subject: RE: Public Disclosure Request: ODES file Numbers L04P0034 and L06P001 Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:54:43 -0800 From: Tim.Attebery@kingcounty.gov To: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com I just sent you a letter via US Mail stating when the records would be ready. From: Highlands Neighbors [mailto:highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 1 :57 PM To: Attebery, Tim Cc: Warden, Stephanie; Miles, Joe: Dinsmore, Lisa; Tibbits, Chad; Sanders, Jim; Whittaker, Bruce: Langley, Kristen; Kara, Falin Subject: Public Disclosure Request: DOES file Numbers L04P0034 and L06P001 To Whom It May Concern, http:/ /bl 140w. blu 140.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx ?type=message&cpids=d2 l 893c2-f. .. 7/3/2008 . ' Windows Live Hotmail Print Message Page 10 of 11 I apologize for the formality of this communication. Normally we try to keep our correspondences on a much more conversational tone, but on advice of our attorneys, we submit this Public Disclosure Request today. This is the first one we have submitted a request quite this way. Please let me know as soon as possible if additional information, documentation or anything else is necessary to correctly and successfully request this information. Also, please let us know if we need to break this into separate requests for the different application files and/or for the personnel in the separate departments. Requesting Party: Gwendolyn High -president CARE -Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell PO Box 2936 Renton WA 98056 Highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com <mai!tq:_Highlands_neighoors@hotmail,com> 425.917.0117 (home) 425.226.6520 (fax) Requested Information: We request the opportunity to review and copy all correspondence to and from the applicants (including all submitted plans, letters, drawings and other documentation and records of interaction in electronic, faxed or hard copy formats) regarding the proposed extension of 162nd Ave Se for the Liberty Gardens and Cavalla subdivision applications at your earliest convenience. DOES file Numbers: L04P0034 and L06P001 A hardcopy version of this request follows via US Mail to: Tim Attebery, Public Affairs Director Department of Development & Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue SW Renton, WA 98057-5212 Please let us know when this information will be made available. Thank you for your time and assistance, Gwendolyn High http:! /bl 140w. blul 40.mail. live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=d21893c2-f... 7/3/2008 Transportation Issues We are concerned that it appears that the impacts from this project have not been correctly considered. Traffic mitigations required by ODES of Evendell, Hamilton Place, Nichols Place, Liberty Grove and Liberty Grove Contiguous/Starwood developments have proven insufficient within five years of first occupancy of these projects (some are still under construction -so they can not have yet had an impact on area intersections). We have heard from 3 households that familymembers have been involved in accidents at the intersection of SE 1361h St and 1581h Ave SE (Evendell entrance). As part of our research for this Response, we contacted King County Roads personnel to find out more about the HAL and other traffic accident data. From:smith5124@aim.com Sent: Sun 12/16/07 7:04 PM To: highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com I don't know about 156th, but I was hit at the intersection of 136th and 158th . We were heading west towards 156th when a gal come from our left and hit us. That was Jan. 3rd before the stop signs were put up on 136th. We almost got hit there again last week when someone blew through the stop sign. Be very careful there! We would now like to call Mr. Perrin and Mr. Brown as witness~ i~ (~@ u \Vi L~@ LJ'LJ I'/ Henry Perrin JUL O 7 2008 . __ ., What is your job for King County? K.C. D.D.E.S. Did you receive a request from CARE for any High Accident Location data for the intersections on SE 128th St from 156th Ave SE through 168th Ave SE? Data for which intersection was supplied? And did you tell us "160th Avenue SE & SE 128th Street is HAL 61 on the 2007 draft HAUHARS list. There were a total of 1 O collisions in the three year analysis period (2003-2005), and the accident rate was 0.53 accidents per million entering vehicles. The predominant collision types were eastbound and westbound rear ends and left turn collisions. Possible safety improvements are being developed."? And did we submit the following followup inquiry? 1) Please confirm that the other intersections we listed: " ... we have heard conflicting rumors that there are others along 128th in that area ... say those from 156th Ave SE through 168th Ave SE or so ... " are not now and were not recorded for the HAL/HARS program during the analysis period (2003-2005) you reference below? ~ t(fbol '/ Page 1 of 14 • 2) Please provide specific reference to the "Possible safety improvements are being developed" you reference below so that we may correctly and successfully request documentation of these improvements and notice of progess in this effort. Have you responded to that inquiry? Are you prepared today to respond to that inquiry? Is all of this data available to Ms. Langley for her analysis of the Threadgill application? Keith Brown What is your job for King County? Can you give us a brief background into the installation of the roundabouts installed on SE 160'" Ave SE including when they were installed? Was this before, during or after construction of the Hamilton Place, Evendell, Liberty Grove, Liberty Grove Contiguous, and Nichols Place projects? What initiated the stop signs installation on 1581 " AVE SE -at the sole access for the Evendell subdivision? What was your analysis process and ultimate reason for deciding that signs were required? When were these signs installed? Is all of this data available to Ms. Langley for her analysis of the Threadgill application? Thank you, gentlemen. Our community is also home to many horses and their people. Equestrians ride in the SE 135th St, SE 136th St and 162nd Ave SE rights of way on their way to the park at the south side of Liberty High School. Again, despite King County policies to accommodate non-motorized transportation modes, nothing is offered to preserve this historically necessary component of our neighborhood identity and the character of our community. The applicants were not required to indicate the school bus stop location and configuration even in response to the School Districts' comments and even though the Cavalla project has been specifically required to indicate their bus stop and school walkway plans. From the DDES Preliminary Repon to the Hearing Examiner: c. School Access: The Applicant shall widen 162"' A venue SE, from the intersection of SE 136th Street to the nonheasterly curb return of the intersection of SE 137th Street (the plat street for the Libeny Lane subdivision) to provide adequate walkway conditions for school-age pedestrians walking to Liberty High School, and, ultimately, school-age pedestrians to both Briarwood Elementary School and Maywood Middle School. These improvements shall consist of a minimum 22-foot wide roadway together with a walkway that is: Page2of14 ·, (i) eight feet wide if directly abutting the traveled-way, or (ii.) five (5) feet wide if separated from the travel lane by an extruded curb (which requires an additional I-foot shy distance from the shoulder edge of the northbound travel lane -i.e., 162"' Avenue SE would need to be at least 23-feet wide) or, (iii) five (5) feet wide if physically separated from the roadway traveled-way by a gravel shoulder. These improvements may include construction of full urban improvements (curb, gutter and sidewalk) in lieu of these options. Note it is intended that this improvement will also be a condition of approval for the proposed plats of Liberty Gardens L04P0034 and Cavalla L06POOOJ. CHAPTER 3. DRIVEWAYS, SIDEWALKS, BIKEWAYS, TRAILS 3.02 Concrete Sidewalks Sidewalks shall be required and constructed on urban category, curb and gutter type streets, Figures 2-002 and 2-003, unless otherwise allowed by these Standards or the County Road Engineer, They shall be located and constructed as follows: 1. On all arterials, neighborhood collectors, subcollectors, subacccss, attached dwelling, business access streets, and industrial access streets, both sid=". 7. Sidewalks shall be a minimum width of 5 feet on residential access streets and arterials. Minimum sidewalk width shall be six and one-half feet on arterials if curb is next to traveled lane. Sidewalks shall be a minimum width of eight feet on commercial access streets. . We have also submitted record of other neighbor's traffic concerns, and we would like to emphasize them here: RE: CARE Update: Please send in your statement of support! From:Mike Ritchey (mike-ritchey@comcast.net) Sent: Sun 12/16/07 2:49 PM To: 'Highlands Neighbors' (highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com) You have our full support. We live at 14225 164th Ave SE to the south of the Liberty ball fields. There is 5 acres to our north that they want to develop and we are very concerned for traffic and water run off. A number of years ago they made an attempt to develop the acreage and in doing so caused the water flows to change and ourselves and neighbors had water under our homes. None had water prior to the skinning of the lots. We are also very concerned about pushing 164th Ave SE through and the increased amount of traffic. We have lived in our home since we built it in 1990. We get a lot of traffic during the ball season when people park and walk into the Liberty ball fields. The parking in front of our home and neighbors leads to the dumping of ash trays, garbage and the blocking of the mail boxes for deliveries. It would be very nice if the developments left a green belt from the exiting homes to help protect the wildlife and preserve our views of a rural environment. Page 3 of 14 Mike Ritchey Kristen Langley What is your job for King County? What is your responsibility in regard to the Threadgill application? What is current conditions data did you consult in order to make your analysis of the Threadgill application? Did you consult the data that Mr. Perrin and Mr. Brown today testified was available to you? Why did you not require that the Traffic Impact Analyses and revisions for the Threadgill application included the proposed extension of SE 162"' Ave? Did you consult the Arterial Classification Map as part of your review of the Threadgill application? Did you compare the physical characteristics of the existing road configuration and conditions on SE 1441 ' St to the King County Roads Standards? Did you consult the Transportation Needs Report to determine if there were any identified inadequacies in the roads network in the vicinity of the project site or any of its proposed mitigations? Why did you recommend the extension of 162"" Ave SE to intersect with SE 1441 ' St in violation of the intersection spacing requirements of the King County Roads Standards? Page 4 of 14 . ' 2.03(8) Urban Local Access Roadways • Curb Roadwav Section) "' =-,., .. ,,.., Classification Neighborhood Subcollectors Subaccess Minor Access Collectors Access Restricted, Lots front As needed with Subaccess streets are Permanent cul-de-sacs on local access street some restrictions.1 not supportive of or short loops with low where feasible. through traffic. traffic volumes that Generally perrnc11ent provide circulation and cul-de-sacs or short access to off-street loop' streets that parking within connect to residential development subcollectors. limits. Public or Private Public Streets Public Streets Public Streets Public or Private (See Section 2.06) Serving Potential Number of Over 1003 I 100 Maximum• I 50 Maximum 16 Maximum Lots or Dwelling Units Design Speed' 35 mph 30mph Low Speed Curve Low Speed Curve (See (See Section 2.10) Section 2.10) Max Superelevation See Section 2. 048 See Section 2.048 See Section 2.04B See Section 2.04B Horizontal Curvature See Table 2.2 See Table 2.2 Low Speed Curve Low Speed Curve ( See (See Section 2.10) Section 2.10) Maximum Grade' 11% I 12% I 12% 12% Minimum Stopping Sight See Table 2.2 See I aole ~.l 150 feet 150feet Distance Minimum Entering Sight See Table 2.2 --- Distance Typical Traveled Way 22 feeF 22 feet 22 feet 22 feet Typical Roadway Width 32 feet' 28 feet 24 feet 22 feet Minimum Right-of-Way Width 56 feet 48 feet 40 feet• 40 feel' Minimum Half Street Width 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet Minimum One Way Paved 20 feet 20 feet. 20 feet 20 feet Width Minimum Sidewalk Width See Section 3. 02 See Section 3.02 See Section 3.02 See Section 3.02 Curb Type Vertical Vertical'/Rolled Vertical/Rolled Vertical/Rolled -·-·~ 1 See Section 2.20 for urhan exceptions. Also, when Section 2.20 applies the curbing shall be vertical. 2 See Seclion 2.15 for one-way loops. 3 See Section 2.20 for residential access connection requirements. 4 See Section 2.20 for urban exception criteria. 5 Design speed is a basis for detcm1ining geometric clements and does not imply posted or legally permissible speed. 6 Maximum grade may be exceeded for short distances. See Section 2.11. 7 Neighborhood collectors int<..'TSccting with arterials shall be 36 feet wide for the first 150 feet See Section 4.05 for tapers. 8 The right-of-way width may be reduced to minimum roadway width plus storm drninage, sidewalk, and one-foot beyond road improvements including sidewalks, provided that the curbing is vertical, the minimum clear zone requirements are met, and all potential serving utilities arc accommodated within Page5of14 2.20 Exception for Maximum Dwelling Units on Urban Subcollectors Proposed subcollectors serving new urban area 'developments with an average density of seven to eight dwelling units per acre and that meet the access requirements of Section 2.19 may serve up to 250 dwelling units, if approved by the Development Engineer. In this situation, the curbing shalJ be vertical. Prior to approval, the applicant must submit a traffic circulation study demonstrating a balanced traffic flow of less than 1500 vehicles per day past any access point. Street trees shall be mandatory along subcollectors serving higher densities of seven to eight dwelling units per acre and shall be in conformance with Section 5.03. , . Based on the known number of dwelling units for which 162°d Ave SE will serve as access, Urban Subcollector is not an appropriate road classification for the extension. Primary Access Threadgill Cavalla Liberty Gardens Liberty Lane McKendry Thatcher Wilmot 15 34 37 12 1 1 1 101 Plus possible new connections to existing lots: Lee 1 McNair 1 Mohr 1 3 Trips from Liberty Grove: 34 and lots north of 1361h: 18 52 Brendan -to develop: 35 Reasonable expectation: 191 An exception under section 2.20 is not available to this project because this area is zoned for 4 DUs per acre with a maximum fully developed density of 6 DUs per acre Page 6 of 14 (which would require TDRs), and with existing large lots can not be expected to achieve the required 7 to 8 DUs per acre in the foreseeable future. 2.07 Half Streets A. A half street, figure 2-009, may be permitted as an interim facility when: 3. Traveled way shall be surfaced the same as the designated road type to a width not less than 20 feet, sidewalk shall be constructed as required for the desi 011 ated road tvnc: and 6. The intersection of a half street shall be improved to full width standards, Sidewalks are required on half streets. Half street intersections must be built to full width standards. Yet, the Preliminary Road Improvements Plan and Profile submitted on January 81 h shows only a halft street intersection. Recommendation 7.g from the DDES Preliminary report to the Hearing Examiner: Modifications to the above road conditions may be considered according to the variance provisions in Section 1 .08 of the KCRS. KCC 14.42.060 Variances. B. Any variances from these standards may be granted by the county road engineer upon evidence that the variance is in the public interest and that requirements for safety, function, fire protection, transit needs, appearance and maintainability are fully met, based upon sound engineering and technical judgment. C. Variance requests for subdivisions should be proposed at the preliminary plat stage and prior to any public hearing. All known variances must be approved prior to approval of the engineering plans for construction. It is the responsibility of the county road engineer to interpret the standards. Any anticipated variances from these standards that do not meet K.C.C. Title 17 shall also require concurrence by the fire marshal. A variance at this time is not appropriate, as King County Code states that applications for variances should occur at the preliminary plat stage -before any public hearing -such as today's. SEPA In order to address the incremental impacts of the development of the Threadgill plat, and the cumulative impacts with other pending development proposals in the area (Liberty Gardens, DDES File L04P0034, and Cavalla, ODES File L06POOOI), on the High Accident Location (HAL) at the intersection of SE 128"' Street/ 160"' Avenue SE), the Applicant shall individually or jointly with other developers in the area construct an offsite extension of Page 7 of 14 162"" Avenue SE in general conformance with the conceptual plan submitted to DDES (dated: July 2, 2007) for the plat of Cavalla, from the current south terminus of 162nd Avenue SE (near the SE 138xx block) to SE 144"' Street. These improvements shall include no less than 22 feet of roadway paving, plus all associated appurtenances, and all storm drainage conveyance/ detention/treatment facilities as determined by DDES. These improvements shall include a tight-lining of the existing water-course located on the westerly half of the 162nd Avenue SE right-of-way. (KCC 14.80.030B) Note: a multi-party agreement between the three pending plat applicants (Threadgill, Liberty Gardens, and Cavalla) has been reached to implement this requirement. Portions of this improvement are located along the frontage of the Liberty Gardens and Cavalla plats, and will require additional roadway frontage improvements as conditions of those plats' approvals. 2, In order to address the incremental impacts of the Threadgill development, by itself, on the HAL at the intersection of SE 128"' Street/ 160"' Avenue SE, this applicant shall -in addition to the requirements of the preceding SEPA condition-dedicate any additional right-of-way required along the SE 136th Street margin of the site needed to construct -in the future, by others (private or public) -an extension of SE 136"' Street from 162"" Avenue SE to 166th Avenue SE, The required additional right-of-way, as needed, may be based upon the preliminary road profile prepared by Baima & Holmburg dated 4118/2005, and based upon afuture 32-foot wide roadway with curb, gutter and sidewalks meeting applicable King County Road Standards, and any cut/fill slopes or retaining walls needed to allow others to construct this roadway. Any additional R/W needed to comply with this condition shall be determined prior to engineering plan approval and then shown as dedication on the final plat. (KCC 14.80.030B) Report to HE 3. Roadway Section: The roads will be designed and constructed to the urban standards of the 1993 King County Road Standards. The Applicant shall widen 162"" Avenue SE, from the intersection of SE 136"' Street to the northeasterly curb return of the intersection of SE 137"' Street (the plat street for the Liberty Lane subdivision) to provide adequate walkway conditions for school-age pedestrians walking to Liberty High School, and, ultimately, school-age pedestrians to both Briarwood Elementary School and Maywood Middle School. These improvements shall consist of a minimum 22-foot wide roadway together with a walkway that is: (i) eight feet wide if directly abutting the traveled-way, or (ii.) five (5) feet wide if separated from the travel lane by an extruded curb (which requires an additional I-foot shy distance from the shoulder edge of the northbound travel lane -i.e., 162nd Avenue SE would need to be at least 23-feet wide) or, (iii) five (5) feet wide if physically separated from the roadway traveled-way by a gravel shoulder. These improvements may include construction of full urban improvements (curb, gutter and sidewalk) in lieu of these options. Note it is intended that this improvement will also be a condition of approval for the proposed plats of Liberty Gardens L04P0034 and Cavalla L06P000I. a. FRONT AGE: The frontage along 162nd Ave SE (east side) shall be improved at a minimum to the urban subcollector street standard. After the requirement to build the extension of 162nd Ave SE was made by ODES, the Traffic Impact Analyses were never updated to show this extension nor calculate its impacts. Page 8 of 14 . . The maps submitted with the TIA and its revisions do not include the proposed extension of 162nd Ave SE. Also, SE 136th St does not continue past the site to the east as indicated in the maps. 2. Subcollectors Subcollector streets are the second highest in the local roadway classification hierarchy. Subcollectors provide circulation within neighborhoods and typically connect to neighborhood collectors. Although they typically allow direct driveway access there are some project related exceptions. Table 2.2 Urban Residential Access Streets Desian Values Design Speed (mph) 25 30 35 Horizontal Curvature, for 6% 135 215 320 Superelevation, Radius (Ft.) Horizontal Curvature, for 4% 145 230 345 Superelevation, Radius (Ft.) Horizontal Curvature, for 2% 155 250 375 Superelevation, Radius (Ft.) Horizontal Curvature, Normal Crown 180 300 460 Section, Radius (Ft.) Stopping Sight Distance (Ft.) 155 200 250 Entering Sight Distance (Ft.) 280 335 390 Page 9 of 14 2.10 Intersections and Low-Speed Curves A. Intersections l. Angle of intersection (measured at 10 feet beyond road classification right-of-way) 2. Minimum centerline radius (2-lane) (radii are for minor or subaccess streets) 3. Minimum curb radius a. Arterials and roads classified neighborhood collector or higher: h. Residential access street intersections where the highest classification involved is subcollector: 4. Minimum right-of~way line radius: Minimum 85 degrees Maximum 95 degrees 55 feet 35 feet 25 feet 25 feet B. Spacing between adjacent intersecting streets, whether crossing or T -connecting, shall be as follows: When highest classification involved is: Principal arterial Minor arterial Collector arterial N eighhorhood collector Any lesser street classification Minimum centerline offaet shall be: 1,000 feet 500 feet 300 feet 150 feet 100 feet . . . SE 144th St is an Arterial Collector according to the 2006 Arterial Classification Map. The proposed intersection of 162nd Ave SE with SE 1441h St requires that there to be a minimum of 300 feet spacing to the next intersection. Centerline of 162"d Ave SE ROW to centerline of 161 81 Se on the north side of Se 1441h St is 177.42 feet. Centerline of 162nd Ave SE ROW to centerline of 161 st Se on the south side of Se 1441h St is approximately 135 feet. SE 162nd Ave SE extension to and intersection with SE 1441h St as proposed violates the basic King County road standards specifications and must be denied. If SE 162nd Ave SE extension to and intersection with SE 1441h St is to be required by DDES, per KCC 14.42.oso.c it was the responsibility of the applicant to have applied for a variance before this application came to hearing. No variance was sought. This DDES recommended condition must be denied. If SE 162nd Ave SE extension to and intersection with SE 1441h St is to be required by the Hearing Examiner's decision, then the full engineering must be done and a Page 10 of 14 • ' 411 • variance application submitted before this application can properly be heard by the Hearing Examiner and any decision rendered. 2.11 Maximum Grade and Grade Transitions A. Maidmurn roadway grade as shown in Sections 2.02 and 2.03 may be exceeded for short distances of 300 feet or less, upon showing that no practical alternative exists. Grades greater than 15 percent that exceed the 300-foot distance must be approved by the County Road Engineer through the road variance process. Additionally, the maximum grade shall not exceed 15 percent unless verification is obtained from the Fire Marshal that additional fire protection requirements will be met and the applicant's engineer must demonstrate what method will be used to ensure drainage will be controlled. Grades exceeding 12 percent shall be paved with hot mix asphalt (HMA) or portland cement concrete (PCC). B. Grade transitions shall be constructed as smooth vertical curves, without angle points, except in intersections where the difference in grade is one percent or less and upon approval of the County Road Engineer or Development Engineer. 2.12 Stopping Sight Distance A. Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) is the sum of two distances: the distance traveled during perception and reaction time and the distance required to stop the vehicle. The perception and reaction time used in design is 2.5 seconds. 1 On residential access street intersections where the highest classification involved is a subcollector, the minimum curb radius is 25 feel The stopping sight distance is calculated using a constant deceleration rate of 11.2 feet/second 2 • SSD, see Tables 2.1 and 2.2, applies to street classifications as shown in Sections 2.02 and 2.03. B. Available stopping sight distance is calculated for a passenger car using an eye height of3.50 feet and an object height of0.50 foot. Although AASHTO allows a 2-foot object height, a 0.50-foot object height is used because objects with a height between 0.5-foot and 2 feet may be perceived as hazards that would likely result in an erratic maneuver. C. When calculating stopping sight distance, use h1=3.50 feet and hz=0.50 foot. D. The grade of the roadway has an effect on the vehicle's stopping sight distance. The stopping distance is increased on downgrades and decreased on upgrades. When evaluating sight distance with a changing grade, use the grade for which the longest sight distance is needed. Road grades other than those shown in exhibit 2-1 must be interpolated. Page 11 of 14 ~ .. . .. Exhibit 2-1. Stopping Sight Distance on Grades DOWNGRADE DESIGN SPEED (MPH) 3 Percent 6 Percent 9 Percent F. . 60 598 638 686 55 520 553 594 50 446 474 507 45 378 401 428 40 315 333 354 35 258 271 288 30 205 215 227 25 158 165 173 20 116 120 126 Intersecting Stopping Sight Distance. I. Stopping sight distances for the design speeds of proposed commercial access streets, neighborhood collector streets and arterials must be met when intersecting arterials. 2. The minimum stopping sight distance on proposed intersection approaches for all other access to intersecting roadways shall be 125 feet. In light of the stopping distances listed in the King County Roads Standards, we also have considerable concern that the reverse slope (roughly 2'Yol between the bottom of the 12 °/o grade and the proposed intersection of SE 1441 is only about 150 feet as proposed. In the chart above, the minimum stopping distance for a 9°/o grade at 30 miles an hour is 227 feet. This circumstance begs the conclusion that the proposed intersection of 162nd Ave SE and SE 1441h St must be considered a particularly dangerous proposal. Additionally, we find no consideration of the traffic flow patterns from the retail enterprise of Alpine Nursery whose customers often arrive in very large vehicles or with trailers and which located at the corner of 144th and 161 st, what kind of turn lane, turn pocket, signage etc. should be required for the safe and smooth function of 144th after extension of 162nd? No guard rail or wall or any other facility improvements have been proposed to be installed on the south side of SE 144th ST to prevent a car which fails to stop at the end of the to-be-constructed 162nd Ave SE from landing in the current residents' back yard. The substantially increased risk to life and property that will be borne by the owners and residents of the property directly south of this proposed intersection Page 12 of 14 ' . ., ... is disproportionate to all the surrounding community and all due care must be extended to prevent harm to them. Full engineering studies for the full impacts and appropriate mitigations for the proposed intersection of 162nd Ave SE and SE 144th St must be required before this application can be approved. 14.42.005 Purpose -intent. A. Chapter 36.75 RCW authorizes the county to perform all acts necessary and proper for the administration of the county roads. County roads shall be established, laid out, constructed, altered, repaired, improved and maintained by the legislative authority of the county or by private individuals or corporations who are allowed to perform such work under an agreement with the county legislative authority. The work and improvements shall be done in accordance with adopted county standards under the supervision and direction of the county road engineer. B. The purpose of the King County Road Design and Construction Standards ("the standards") is to set forth specific, consistent and acceptable road design and construction elements for developers and other private parties constructing or modifying road or right-of-way facilities that require county licenses or permits and to establish uniform criteria to guide the county's own design and construction of new county roads or reconstruction of existing roads. The standards support the county's goals for achieving affordable housing, providing adequate facilities for development in an efficient manner, complying with storm water management and environmental and cultural resource policies, and balance these goals with the general safety and mobility needs of the traveling public. C. The county requires standardization of road design elements when necessary for consistency and to ensure, so far as practicable, that motoring, bicycling, transit, equestrian and pedestrian public safety needs are met. Considerations include safety, convenience, pleasant appearance, proper drainage, economical maintenance and cultural and environmental resource protection. The standards also provide requirements for the location and installation of utilities within the right-of-way. 14.42.040 Developments. A. Any land development that impacts the service level, safety or operational efficiency of roads serving the land development or that is required by other ordinance to improve the roads shall improve those roads in accordance with these standards. Offsite roadway improvements shall be based on an assessment of the impacts of the proposed land development by the reviewing agency. 14.56.010 Findings and declaration of purpose. Non-motorized transportation, in the form of pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian travel in King County, should be safe. The prevention of accidents is a paramount element in the design and operation of all county transportation facilities as well as in developed and newly developing communities in the county. This policy is consistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan and the plans and programs for county parks and recreation. Therefore, it is the intent of the King County council to seek a coordinated administration of these non-motorized transportation goals and policies through the development of a functional plan which defines service levels, facility standards, funding mechanisms, project engineering, and design and operation to be conducted through a public review process. 14.80.060 Relation to other permit authority. The procedures set forth in this chapter do not limit the authority of King County to deny or to approve with conditions the following: A. Any zone reclassification request, based on its expected traffic impacts; B. Any proposed development or zone reclassification if King County determines that a hazard to safety would result from its direct traffic impacts without roadway or intersection improvements, regardless of level of service standards; or C. Any proposed development reviewed under the authority of the Washington State Environmental Policy Act. Page13of14 It is necessary for us to request these improvements and for the Hearing Examiner to require them at this time and for this application, because if we wait for the other two projects cooperating on the extension of 162"d Ave SE, we expect argument will be raised that since these conditions were not applied to Threadgill, they can not be required of Liberty Gardens or Cavalla. Page14of14 .... Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage Hearing Examiner King County Hearing Examiner's Office 400 Yesler Way· Suite 404 Seattle WA 98104 Fax: 206.296.1654 July 3, 2008 Liberty Gardens Preliminary Plat Application L04P0034: Notice of SEPA Appeal Dear Mr. Examiner, P.O. Box 2936 Renton, WA 98056 highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com 206.888.7152 With this letter, Community Alliance to Reach Out & Engage {CARE) submits Notice of our intent to Appeal the SEPA Determination Non-Significance issued by ODES on June 20, 2008 for the Liberty Gardens Preliminary Plat application (L04P0034). Gwendolyn High, our president, will represent CARE in this matter. If a fax number should prove necessary, please call 425.226.9686 before you send anything so that the machine can be made ready to receive. Text presented in this document inside boxes is quoted from the Hearing Examiner's Rules of Procedure. IV. FILING REQUIREMENTS A. Notice of Appeal Notices of appeal to the examiner, together with any fees required by ordinance, are to be filed in accordance "with applicable provisions of the King County Code or other governing statute, ordinance or regulation. Timely filing of the notice of appeal and appeal fee (if required) is a jurisdictional requirement; appeals which do not meet the filing reauirements cannot be considered bv the examiner. _ CAR E's submission of this Notice of Appeal to the Office of the Hearing Examiner and to DOES, along with delivery of the required $250 filing fee in person to ODES today meets the Hearing Examiner's Rules of Procedure timeliness requirements. IV. FILING REQUIREMENTS C. Content 1. Notice of Appeal The notice of appeal must identify clearly and specifically: • The action or decision appealed, including the date thereof; • The County department, division or office which took the action or made the decision; • The name and address of the appellant; • The name, address, telephone and fax number of the attorney or other representative, if any, for the appellant; • If more than one person joins in a single appeal, a single representative of all of the persons joining as appellants is required to be named for orocedural ourooses. CAR E's Notice of Appeal meets all the Content requirements of the Hearing Examiner's Rules of Procedure. If there is any insufficiency or error in any of our submissions, CARE looks forward to notification and begs to opportunity to submit corrections. We are not experts or lawyers and submit all documents, testimony and exhibits as interested parties and citizens. Hardcopies of all documents submitted today are being forwarded to all parties today via email and US Mail or hand delivery. Please feel free to call me at home (425.917.0117) with any comments and/or questic«c DDES Tl).aljk you for 1your tim. e, ~nd attention, ~':'~µY---<-'-N LvL Gwendolyn High / 0 President ,..,'I) i ,~1AiN FILE corv CASHIER I certify under penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. !~«dc~c:v :h/~ '}0/Z-=J' lofA?~o7 1~10-1250 11.69 ,)."' '. . ' $ -l 23o ~"''] · ___ ... --~·~.~k,-·, -9-==--l.!J _ ... ...._