HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA-08-140 1 of 2_HearingTo be considered by the
Metropolitan King County Council on
May 10, 2004 at 9:30 a.m.
SUMMARY INFORMATION
FOR THE
METROPOLITAN KING COUNTY COUNCIL
REGARDING AN
APPEAL
FROM THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE
HEARING EXAMINER
Proposed Ordinance No. 2004-0013
Department of Development and Environmental Services
File No. L03P0015
NICHOLS PLACE
Preliminary Plat and Proposal for Transfer of Density Credits
-------------------------------------------------------
Ordinance Concurring with Examiner's
Recommendation
Vicinity Map
Examiner's Summary of Appeal Issues
Appeal Arguments
C.A.R.E./Gwendolyn High
Appeal Responses
TABLE OF CONTENTS
U.S. Land Development Association
Shirley Day
Examiner's Report and Decision
Department of Development and Environmental
Services Preliminary Report
Department of Development and Environmental
Services Corrections to the Preliminary Report
Page No.
3
4
6
19
34
35
49
69
Proposed No. 2004-0013.1
KING COUNTY
Signature Report
April 28, 2004
Ordinance
Sponsors Phillips
1200 King County Courthouse
516 Third A venue
Seattle, WA 98104
AN ORDINANCE authorizing a subdivision on certain
property located west of 160th Ave SE, south of SE 138'h
St (if extended) at 13815 1601h Ave SE, Howard Stansbury,
US Land Development Assoc agent for Mark & Barbara
Nichols, department of development and environmental
services file no. L03P0015.
1 I
Ordinance
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF KING COUNTY:
SECTION 1. This ordinance does hereby adopt and incorporate the findings and
conclusions contained in the March 2, 2004 report and decision by the hearing examiner
and adopts as the decision of the council the decision by the hearing examiner to approve
the transfer of eight (8) density credits and to grant the application for preliminary
approval, subject to the conditions recommended by the examiner, of the proposed 23 lot
plat ofNichols Place, received May 19, 2003 in DDES file no. L03P0015.
SECTION 2. The appeal of the March 2, 2004 decision of the hearing examiner
by Citizens for a Responsible Evendell ("C.A.R.E.") is denied.
ATTEST:
Anne Noris, Clerk of the Council
KING COUNTY COUNCIL
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Larry Phillips, Chair
APPROVED this __ day of ______ ,, __ .
Ron Sims, County Executive
Attachments None
2
w
(/)
LLi
.~
i!: 1~6TH ST
a:> .
:!: t,l
SE 12 TH ST
EXAMINER'S SUMMARY OF APPEAL ARGUMENTS
RE: Department of Development and Environmental Services
File No. L03POOl5
I.
Proposed Ordinance No. 2004-0013
Nichols Place
Preliminary Plat and Proposal for Transfer of Density Credits
Examiner: James N. O'Connor
2. Parties to the Appeal:
3.
4.
5.
Appellants:
Respondents:
Location:
Issues on Appeal:
Citizens Alliance for a Responsible Evendell
("C.A.R.E."), represented by Gwendolyn High
U.S. Land Development Association,
Represented by Duana Kolouskova
Shirley Day
West of 160'h Avenue Southeast, south of Southeast
138'h Street (if extended) at 13815-160'h
A venue Southeast
A. Should the transfer of eight (8) density credits to this site be approved, to permit the
development of23 lots on 3.82 acres in the R-4 zone?
B. Should additional conditions be placed on the revised plat to reduce the danger from trees
on adjacent properties that may be damaged or exposed to wind as a result of the
development?
Appellant's Arguments:
A. There is not a shortage of housing capacity that requires additional density on this
property. The transfer of density credits to this site is inconsistent with County Wide
Planning Policies and Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies, as required by KCC
2IA.37.0IO. This location is not one where necessary infrastructure already exists or can
be provided at the lowest public cost.
Although located in the Renton potential annexation area, required interlocal agreements
have not been made by King County with Renton. King County has failed to address
issues raised by the City of Renton.
New development in existing neighborhoods should build on existing patterns. This
neighborhood is now divided into Jots ranging from 15,000 square feet to I Y.. acres,
'I
6.
giving an overall impression of a suburban or somewhat rural area. It is isolated from
fully developed areas.
B. DOES proposed a condition for the adjacent plat ofEvendell to protect trees on the
property adjacent to the west ofEvendell by establishing an easement over the drip line
areas on the Evendell property. Removal of trees on the subject property will expose
off site trees to winds that creates a risk to the safety of adjacent property owners.
Respondent's Arguments:
A. The County's Transfer of Density Rights ("TOR") program designates areas within the
county that may receive density credits. A site within a designated receiving area has an
outright ability to use density credits. A proposed development using density credits is
processed as a regular subdivision, without additional subjective review related to the use
of density credits. This property is in a designated receiving area, being in an
unincorporated urban area zoned R-4. KCC 21A.37.030 (A)(!). R-4 allows a maximum
density of 6 dwelling units per acre using density credits. The proposed plat revision is
within that maximum.
A new TOR review process that would apply Countywide Planning Policies and the
Comprehensive Plan directly to a subdivision is not contained in the county code or
permitted by state law. No code provision bars development in an area not subject to an
interlocal agreement. The City of Renton supported this subdivision by allowing 23
sewer hook-ups for the property.
B. No county code provision addresses impact to trees on adjacent properties. There is no
legal basis to impose additional conditions.
Examiner's Recommendation:
No change from March 2, 2004 decision.
F:ECEi\/f:D
2D04 M.f:9 15 M1 U: 56
... " CL::i,K
r.,.'i 1 COUH i f COIJ/IC/1.
BEFORE THE KING COUNTY COUNCIL
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Re: Preliminary Plat and Proposal for O.L03P0015
RECEIVED
MAR I 7 2004
~~1.'.· _,NER
Transfer of Density Credits for the Proposed Plat of
Nichols Place
Proposed Ordinance No. 2004-0013)
_______________ __,STATEMENT OF APPEAL
Titis Appeal Statement is submitted by Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell ("C.A.R.E."), a
Washington non-profit corporation representing over 80 households and 150 residents of the community
surrounding the proposed Nichols Place site. C.A.R.E. has participated fully in the proceedings before the King
. County Hearing Examiner in this matter.
I. INTRODUCTION
U. S. Land Development Association/Centurion ("U.S. Land") originally submitted a Preliminary Plat .
application in conjunction with a Zone Reclassification application for the parcel known as Nichols Place lying
West of 160th Ave. S, South of SE 138th St. (if extended) at 13815 160th Ave. SE. These applications were deemed
complete by the Department of Development and Environmental Services ("DOES") as of June 19, 2003. Upon the
issuance of the Memorandum of Decision, dated January 27, 2004, from the Honorable Deborah Fleck -which
upheld the actions of the Hearing Examiner and the King County Council in the denial of the adjacent Evendell
Zone Reclassification application-U.S. Land withdrew its Zone Reclassification application and proceeded with
the intent to utilize the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program. The plat application proposes a 23 unit
subdivision-15 units in compliance with the current zoning designation ofR-4, plus 8 units through TOR.
Statement of Appeal -Page I of 13
C.A.R.E., after having been granted the right to Intervene on behalf of the surrounding community by
Hearing Examiner pro tempore James O'Conner, presented the concerns of, and outstanding issues raised by, the
residents of the surrounding community at the Public Hearing ofFebruary 24, 2004. In his Report and Decision of
March 2, 2004, the King County Hearing Examiner recommended approval, subject to conditions, of the revised
Nichols Place plat application.
Il. A.PPEAL ARGUMENT
The Hearing Examiner's Recommendation of Approval is Inconsistent With Countywlde Planning Policies
and Inadequately Weighs King County Goals and Policies as Required by KCC llA.37.010.
1,cc 21 \.J7.0IO Tr.111,fr·r of (k\l_•lopllll'lll righls ( I 1)1{) prot,!r:llll -Jllffl)O"il',
A. The purpose of the transfer of development rights program Is to provide a voluntary, incentive-based
process for permanently preserving the rural resource and Urban Separator lands that provide a public benefit. The
TOR provisions are intended to supplement lands use regulations, resource protection efforts and open space
acquisition programs and to encourage increased residential development density, especially inside cities,
where It can best be accommodated with the least Impacts on the natural environment and public services
by:
I. Providing an effective and predictable incentive process for rural, resource and Urban Separator land
property owners to preserve lands with public benefit as describes in K.C.C. 2 IA.37 .020; and
2. Providing an efficient and streamlined administrative review system to ensure that transfers of
development rights to receiving sites are evalnated In a timely way and balanced with other county goals and
olicles and are ad usted to the s eclfic conditions of each recelvln site.
Though the legislation regulating the TOR program, in general, allows increased density within the entire
area of the Urban Growth Boundary, the statement of purpose acknowledges that not all parcels within that area are
equally capable of supporting such increased density. KCC llA.37.010 requires three things:
A. Appropriate Location: Density increases resulting from the use ofTDR must be located where they
. can best be accommodated with the least impacts
B. Balance of Goals and Policies: All of the goals and policies of King County must be balanced when
evaluating applications for utilization of the TOR program
C. Adjustment to the Site: The use ofTDR must be adjusted to fit the circumstances of the each receiving
site
A. Appropriate Location
The total number of lots and the plat layout, the proposed improvements to the roads and sewers systems,
as well as the traffic, drainage and environmental impacts of the Nichols Place proposal utilizing TOR are identical
to those under the original proposal for Zone Reclassification. The solitary difference between these proposals is the
replacement of the words "Zone Reclassification" with "Transfer of Development Rights" ("TOR"). If the real-world
impacts under one scheme are not allowed, those same impacts must also disallow the proposal under any scheme.
Statement of Appeal • Page 2 of 13
h.ing Conni,\ Compnlu•nsiH· Plan Polit'.~ l -1 D
New residential development in the Urban Growth Area should occur where facilities and services can he
provided at the lowest public cost and in a timely fashion. The Urban Growth Area should have a variety of
housing types and prices, including mobile home parks, multi-family development, townhouses and small-lot,
single-family development.
"Best" and "least" are absolute superlatives. There is no legislative justification for approval of increased
density in areas that cannot "best" accommodate its negative consequences with the "least" impacts.
The Issaquah School District has determined that there is no safe walkway for students between the Nichols
Place site and any of the local schools (Briarwood Elementary, Maywood Middle School or Liberty High School)
even though they are only blocks away. ODES has recommended a condition, which C.A.R.E. supports, that
requires additional walkway facilities to accommodate school children walking to the middle and high schools.
There is no possibility of constructing a safe walkway to the elementary school. In the ODES Recommendations
Report (Exhibit 59 in Record), the Issaquah School districts requirements are clearly articulated." ... new
developments nearby should provide acceptable walking facilities to the local schools ... The district views this bus
service as temporary only and requests that with construction of new nearby housing developments, safe walking
access to schools be provided." All Elementary children will still have to be bussed at taxpayer expense under
exceptional arrangements because this site is inside the 'walking radius' where bus service is not provided by the
district. The requirement for additional taxpayer funds to bus school children from Nichols Place to schools merely
blocks away clearly violates the "lowest public cost" requirement of U-113.
h.iug Co1111 I~ Count~\\ ide Planning Polir~
Phasing Development within the Urban Growth Area
Development in the Urban Area will be phased to promote efficient use of the land, add certainty to
infrastructure planning, and to ensure that urban services can be provided to urban development ...
LU-28 Within the Urban Growth Area, growth should be directed as follows: a) first, to Centers and urbanized
areas with existing infrastructure capacity; b) second, to areas which are already urbanized such that infrastructure
im rovements can be easil extended; and c last, to areas re uirin ma'or infrastructure im rovements.
LU-28 employs the superlative "first" in directing that growth should be directed where services and
infrastructure currently exist in adequate levels to accommodate new growth. The closest Urban Center is in
downtown Renton and is not full, neither have the areas inside the Renton City Limits been developed to the point of
depleting capacity. Therefore, there is no justification for increasing density in the unincorporated area where major
Statement of Appeal -Page 3 of I 3
infrastructure improvements, such as significant construction of new sewer system network and liftstations, are
required. Such areas are specifically designated by LU-28 to develop "last".
B. Balance of Goals and Policies
I{('( 20.0~.00:i lfrl:11io11ship to (omprclu.·nsi,L· Plan and (;1m,th \la11:1gl'IIH'III \l'I.
The provisions of Ordinance 11653 relating to zoning and development review are hereby enacted as a
development regnlation to be consistent with and implement the comprehensive plan in accordance with RCW
36.70A.120.
In case of conflict, provisions of this title take precedence over procedures presently contained in Title 19 and Title
21A.
l,CC 20. I0.020 Ph,t,L' I polil'iL''i :icloJJIL'tl.
A. The Countywide Planning Policies attached to Ordinance 10450• are hereby approved and adopted for purposes
of complying with RCW 36.70A.2 IO to begin the process of city review and ratification; to provide a policy
framework for developing and updating jurisdictions' comprehensive plans; to provide a policy framework for
interim controls to the extent the policies expressly require them; and to establish a program for the additional
work necessary to refine, amend and implement the Countywide Planning Policies, including SEIS review and
fiscal anal sis.
I,( ( 20.12.0l5 lkl,1tio11ship ol Co111prd1t.•11.,i\L' Plan to p1L'\iou,I\· adopll'II pl:111,. polil'il's. and
l.1111111,c n·:_:ul:lliou,.
3. For aspects of proposals where either the comprehensive plan or a previously adopted community plan, but not
both, has applicable policies or plan map designations, the plan with the applicable policies or designations shall
overn·
King County shall implement the Countywide Planning Policies through its Comprehensive Plan and through
Potential Annexation Area, service and other interlocal a reements with the cities.
Ideally, the policies and goals that must be balanced in consideration of applications for the use ofTDR
would be codified in the King County Code and the Comprehensive Plan. These regulatory instruments are
formulated under the framework established in the Countywide Planning Policies in accordance with the Growth
Management Act. However, the King County Code and the Comprehensive Plan are inconsistent with the
Countywide Planning Policies, ratified by all jurisdictions in King County in 1992 and incorporated into the King
County Code in KCC 20.10.020. After more than IO years since the adoption of the Countywide Planning Policies,
King County has failed to fully implement the specific requirements of the several applicable Countywide Planning
Policies into the King County Code, the Comprehensive Plan or the required interlocal agreements with Cities in
regard to their Potential Annexation Areas. Thus, in accordance with the priorities established by the above listed
Statement of Appeal -Page 4 of 13
~---------------------------------------------------
regulations, the Countywide Planning Policies themselves are the most specific regulation currently in force, and
must be applied to this specific application.
h'.ing Count~ Count~" ick Planning Polk~
LU-29 All Jurisdictions shall develop growth phasing plans consistent with applicable capital facilities plans
to maintain an Urban Area served with adequate public facilities and services to meet at least the six-year
intermediate household and employment target ranges consistent with LU-67 and LU-68. These-growth phasing
plans shall be based on locally adopted definitions, service levels, and financing commitments, consistent with
State Growth Management Act requirements. The phasing plans for cities shall not extend beyond their potential
annexation areas. Interlocal agreements shall be developed that specify the applicable minlmnm zoning,
develo ment standards im act mill ation and future annexation for the otential annexation areas.
l,iut! ( 011111, Count~" ilk l'l:i1111i11t?, Polk~
LU-33 Land within a city's potential annexation area shall be developed according to that city's and King
County's growth phasing plans. Undeveloped lands adjacent to that city should be annexed at the time
development is proposed to receive a full range of urban services. Subsequent to establishing a potential
annexation area, infill lands within the potential annexation area which are not adjacent or which are not
practical to annex shall be developed pursuant to interlocal agreements between the County and the affected
city. The interlocal agreement shall establish the type of development allowed in the potential annexation area and
standards for that development so that the area is developed in a manner consistent with its future annexation
potential. The interlocal agreement shall specify at a minimum the applicable zoning, development
standards Im act miti ation and future annexation within the otentlal annexation area.
Refusal to acknowledge the phasing plans of Renton violates LU-29 and LU-33. City of Renton Long
Range Waste Water Management Plan I East Cedar River Basin Sewer Collection Report (see Exhibit 76 in
Record), which, with their Comprehensive Plan, defines their development phasing plan for this area, states that a
gravity lift station at the Elliot Bridge is the best sewer system extension option for the following reasons:
• Least requirement for force main pipe of all options considered
• Lowest cost of all options considered -for both construction and maintenance
• Better performance than pump lift station systems
• More reliable than pump lift station systems -less chance of enviromnenta!.darnage due to failure
If our community must bear an unequal burden of density in the name of the public interest that would be
served by the provision of additional sewer infrastructure, we are entitled to a system that does not subject us to the.
potential consequences of an inferior infrastructure.
King County is in violation of the Countywide Planning Policies articulated in LU-29 and LU-33. Though
LU-29 and LU-33 employ the imperative "shall", there is not one interlocal agreement between the City of Renton,
in whose Potential Annexation Area Nichols Place is located, and King County regarding these specified land use
Statement of Appeal -Page 5 of 13
/O
II
issues. As a result, all plat and related land use applications have been, and continue to be, processed in violation of
these fundamental legislative requirements.
King County is not allowed the option to neglect to negotiate and adopt interlocal agreements ''that specify
the applicable minimum zoning, development standards, impact mitigation and future annexation for the potential
annexation areas" at its discretion. This is a fundamental legislative requirement.
1,in;.,! ('011111~ Co11111~nitk Pla1111i11~ Polky
Infill Development
Urban grawth occurs both in new neighborhoods and in existing neighborhoods. Existing neighborhoods have a
history of development patterns which have created a sense of identity. At the same time a vital neighborhood
adapts to change and develops its own image. New development In these neighborhoods should build on the
existing patterns in a manner which respects and enriches the neighborhood ...
LU-69 All jurisdictions shall develop neighborhood planning and design processes to encourage infill development
and enhance the existin comm uni character and mix of uses.
Approval of the requested increased density violates LU-69. Increased density has been proven to be
incompatible with the existing community character. This application proposes exactly the same density and
developed character as the originally proposed -and withdrawn as untenable · rezone proposal. The Comprehensive
Plan and County Code fail to specify criteria of character to be considered with application for use oflDR, so again,
the Countywide Planning Policy is the most specific applicable regulation.
The development pattern of the wider surrounding neighborhood indicates a well defined scale of not
greater than R-4 development that has been in place since the early 1960s. In his recommendations for the adjacent
Evendell applications, the King County Hearing Examiner recorded his acknowledgment of these conditions:
"Existing development in the area surrounding Evendell is generally on lots ranging from 15,000 square feet to I 14
acres, with a few smaller and a few larger. Redevelopment and infill will occur over time in much of the area,
creating smaller lots, but a substantial portion of the area will remain as currently developed for the indefinite future.
The general character of existing development is individually built homes, with yards, gardens, trees and some
pasture area and outbuildings, generating an overall impression of a suburban or somewhat rural area."
Many of the members ofC.A.R.E. have purchased their homes fairly recently, as compared to our
neighbors of thirty or more years. The most consistent factor in their decision criteria has been that this community
Statement of Appeal -Page 6 of 13
is one of the last places in King County that offers housing on large lots with large trees. Not only will the proposed
development be immediately incompatible with the character of the existing neighborhood, but the site plan itself
completely prevents the possibility of growth of the species or scale of trees to ever mask its presence or mitigate its
impact. It will remain an expanse of rooftops and blacktop forever.
In 2003 the City of Renton conducted a major study of the East Renton Plateau Potential Annexation Area
in which the proposed Nichols Place development is located. Like King County's, Renton's Comprehensive Plan is a
relatively recent legislative development -the result of the requirement of the Growth Management Act for local
jurisdictions to plan for their share of anticipated growth. Interestingly, the Evendell, Liberty Grove/Liberty Grove
Contiguous and Nichols Place applications were critical motivations for these studies. These applications brought to
staffs attention the need to refme the zoning and development standards for this area to provide sufficient authority
to ensure that the development of Renton's PAA would allow the achievement of core Comprehensive Plan Polices.
(Renton Strategic Planning Department -Staff Reports of June 3, September 2 3, October I, October IO Exhibit 9 3
in Record; Renton Planning Commission Recommendation of October 22 Exhibit 94 in Record; Ordinance 5026
Exhibit 95 in Record; and Renton City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of November 24, 2003 Exhibit 96 in
Record)
As the acknowledged future local govermnent for the East Renton Plateau PAA, the City of Renton is best
qualified to evaluate the long term potential for development, best utilization, and the associated costs of such
development. The results of their research are dramatic. The assumptions at the start offthe process included the
option of either confinning the extension of the city's standard base density of R-8(net) throughout the p AA or
setting aside 2 limited bonus areas ofup to R-6(net) within an area-wide designation ofR-4(net). Ultimately, Renton
determined that either standard would critically impede the implementation of other of its Comprehensive Plan
Policies. The final action resulted in adoption of updates to their Comprehensive Plan which designates the entire
PAA as R-4(net) and requires new, more stringent, site and building design restrictions being added.
Statement of Appeal -Page 7 of 13
I~
/~
"illl! ( (111111~ ( 01111l~nidt• l'la1111i11!,! Polky
RF-4 Each city with a potential annexation area shall enter Into an lnterlocal agreement with the County for
defining service delivery responsibilities. A financing plan for investments in the annexation areas shall be
included in the interiocal agreement for capital facilities and service delivery. Level-of-service standards and
financial capacity should be considered for each area, together with density issues and phasing of developments.
RF-5 In order to transition governmental roles so that the cities become the provider of local urban services and the
County becomes the regional government providing Countywide and rural services, unincorporated Urban Growth
Areas are encouraged to annex or incorporate within the 20-year timeframe of these Policies. To achieve this goal,
all cities that have identified potential annexation areas shall enter Into lnterlocal agreements with King
County that Includes a plan for development standards and financing of capital and operating expenditures
durln the erlod rlor to annexation.
King County is in violation of the Countywide Planning Policies articulated in RF-4 and RF-5. Since there
still are no interlocal agreements as required by these policies, the Countywide Planning Policy is the only adopted
criteria by which the application for use ofTDR can be evaluated in this potential annexation area.
l'-ill~ ( 1111111, Compn·ht'll"ih l' Pl:111 Polit·~ I ·-111
" ... King County supports increases in urban residential density through a rezone or a proposal to increase density
through the density transfer or the density incentive programs when the proposal will help resolve traffic, sewer,
water arks or o en s ace deficiencies in the immediate nei hborhood. 11
In his recommendations for the adjacent Evendell applications, the King County Hearing Examiner
recorded the following in regard to U-122: " ... Most of the same improvements also would be built to support the 46
lot alternative plat proposed under the existing R-4 zone classification. The impacts from the development of 46 lots
require similar sewer and surface water drainage improvements ... " C.A.R.E. supports this finding and finds it
directly applicable to the current application for the use ofTDR. Since there are negligible net gains in the
improvements to be provided under current zoning density as compared to the requested increased density, there is
no justification to grant that requested density.
King County and the cities shall collaboratively address level-of-service standards and costs. King County and the
cities ma share the costs of needed ca ital im rovement ro ams and other services.
The city of Renton specifically identified the need for roadway widening, pavement section, curb and
gutter, sidewalks, street lighting, internal street system (including right-of-way width) to be constructed to City of
Renton standards in their letter of January 14, 2004. DOES failed to fulfill the requirement to "collaboratively
address level-of-service standards and costs". In fact, they failed to even acknowledge the issues raised by Renton.
h.in:4 Lounl~ Co111pnht'll"ih t' Plan Polit·~ lJ-109
Statement of Appeal -Page 8 of 13
If a city desires a level-of-service higher than King County's service standard, the city should be responsible for
· all of the incremental costs of the hi her level-of-service above what the Coun would rovide.
Since DOES failed to engage with the City of Renton in any way, Renton was not afforded to opportunity
to pay any incremental cost associated with their higher design and construction standards. Additionally, the City of
Renton provides fire protection services for this area of unincorporated King County. This constitutes a kind of
functional interlocal agreement for which consideration ofRenton's standards for the accommodation of emergency
vehicles and zoning must be included in the evaluation of these applications. Renton requires additional site access
and road network connectivity, as well as wider and thicker road surfaces with larger turning radii.
In the absence of the interlocal agreements required by the Countywide Planning Policies, the requirement
of Comprehensive Plan Policies U-208 and 209 carry all the more weight. It is not an option for King County to
address these issues, or not, at its discretion. King County is required to address the issues raised by the City of
Renton. DOES utterly failed to do so, and thus the recommendations proposed by staff are in violation of KC
Comprehensive Plan Policy U-208 and must not be approved.
Failure to coordinate the standards to which infrastructure improvements are to be constructed with the
jurisdiction in whose PAA the subject parcels are found violates LU-28, LU-29, LU-33 U-208and U-209. Required
mitigation must be modified to the negotiated satisfaction of both King County and the City of Renton.
l,in!,! Cou111, Co1111t.'"idl' Planning Polk.'
Urban Areas Designated for Growth Beyond 2002
In Urban Areas designated for growth beyond 2002, there will be a mix of existing services which may or may not
be at urban service levels. The appropriate infrastructure improvements for sewer and water systems will vary
according to existing site conditions. New developments should occur contiguous .to 1existing,fully-developed
areas so that extension of services occurs in an orderly and cost-effective manner.
Phased and Cost Effective Extension of Urban Water and Sewer Systems
C0-11 To the extent practicable, all new plats shall be contiguous to the areas identified for growth for the
next ten years. The phased expansion should respect basin boundaries or other natural landscape features.
The proposed Nichols Place development is completely and without exception isolated from any fully-
developed areas. Approval of any of these applications would violate KC Countywide Planning Policy CO-I I.
Statement of Appeal -Page 9 of 13
/(
Comp l'l.111 Chapll'r 2 -B. lh-!\idl'llli.tl L:111d liw
1. Residential Densities
The density of eight homes per acre expressed below ls a long-term goal and would be an average density of
sin le-famll and multifamll develo ments.
According to the 2003 Annual Growth Report, 50% of the anticipated growth in King County for the entire
20 year planning cycle has been achieved in the first 38% of that cycle. Even more telling, the Unincorporated Area
of the South Subregion, in which the proposed Nichols Place is located, has achieved 37% of its total 20 year goal in
the last 2 years (9% of the total period). (King County Benchmark Report 2003: Land Use -excerpts Exhibit 90 in
Record) This rate far exceeds the anticipated and planned rate of growth, and the impacts are sorely felt in our
community. Achieved Density on New Plats and Achieved Density on New Permits far exceeded the Average
Planned Density for areas, such as ours, currently zoned 3-5 DU/acre in the South Subregion. Our area is more than
meeting its growth targets and fulfilling the goals of the Comprehensive Plan for urban densities inside the UGB.
There is no shortage of housing or of housing capacity. The Buildable Lands Evaluation Report 2002 has
indicated no such shortage now or in the foreseeable future. (Bui/dable Lands Evaluation Report 2002 -excerpts
Exhibit 91 in Record) On page 183, the Residential Capacity Analysis for the South County urban unincorporated .
area, in which the proposed Nichols Place site is located, states: 'The South County Urban Unincorporated Area has
a total residential capacity of 17,283 units. Its remaining target to 2012 is 4,935 households. This amounts to a
surplus capacity of 12,384 units greater than its target. It has achieved 53% of its target in the first eight years of the
twenty year plauning period."
On page 9 the following summary conclusions are reported for the entire County:
• King County has well over the capacity needed to accommodate the growth that is expected to occur by 2012.
• Sufficient capacity exists to accommodate further growth beyond the 2012 planning horizon.
• All the sub-areas of King County show adequate capacity for the target period through 2012, and beyond.
The data clearly shows that we have much more than sufficient capacity in this area, and in all of King
County, to meet all mandated targets -without approval of any application for densities higher than the current base
densities anywhere in the County or at any time within the planning period.
tlfl"' Statement of Appeal -Page IO of 13 ,~
To achieve an average density within the Urban Zone, county wide, ofup to eight houses per acre, there
must be areas with density lower than that average. Where circumstances in a specific area, such as ours, make
higher density inappropriate, this provision for the allowance of lower density makes it not only possible, but
necessary to allow that lower density to be maintained.
The Washington State Office of Financial Management sets the projected growth targets for all local
governments. Its 2003 reports show that the rate of population increase has slowed sharply. There is a significant
probability that all growth targets inside King County will be lowered as a result of these trends. (State, County, City
Populations Exhibit 92 in Record)
C. Adjustment to the Site
h:( C 211.2~.11711111)
The examiners recommendation may be to grant or deny the application or appeal, or the examiner may
recommend that the council adopt the application or appeal with such conditions, modifications and restrictions as
the examiner finds necessary to carry out the applicable sta.te laws and regulations and the regulations, including
cha ter 43.21C RCW ...
l{C\\ ~3.21C.11211i2)
In order to carry out the policy set forth in this chapter, it is the continuing responsibility of the state of Washington
and all agencies of the state to use all practicable means, consistent with other essential considerations of state
policy, to improve and coordinate plans, functions, programs, and resources to the end that the state and its citizens
may:
(a) Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding generations;
(b) Assure for all people of Washington safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically arid culturally pleasing
surroundings;
(c) Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk to health or safety, or
other undesirable and unintended conse uences; ...
DDES presented additional conditions during the Public Hearing for the adjacent Evendell applications.
(DDES Revised Recommendations/Additional Conditions Exhibit 97 in Recora) Item·#21 states: "The drip line of
trees off-site west of the proposed Lots 12-19 shall be established and easement(s) shall be placed over the drip line
area(s) on the lots of the subject plat. Easement area within the drip line shall be left in a natural state and no
grading, placement structures or other improvements shall be allowed. Establishment of the drip line area shall be
completed at the time of the engineering review."
Since submission of this recommended condition by DDES, events have transpired exactly as predicted by
C.A.R.E. and its expert witness, arborist Scott Baker. During the summer and fall of 2003, the owner of the
easternmost Evendell parcel removed several significant maples and firs in the vicinity of the west border. In the
Statement of Appeal -Page 11 of 13
ll
wind storm of December 2003, several trees fell on and caused several thousands of dollars of damage to the homes
on adjacent parcels. (Tree Damage to Kezele and Thorbeck Homes Exhibit 98 and 100 in Record) Diane Kezele.
reports that in 30 years of residency there has never been an instance of trees falling is this area, much less
precipitating damage on the homes. Nothing but random luck saved the occupants from injury or death.
At the Nichols Place Public Hearing on February 24, Claude Stachowiak, who owns that parcel at 15652
SE 139"' Place adjacent to the southwest comer of the Nichols Place parcel, presented detailed testimony and maps
that indicate several very large trees near and on the property line. Site preparation will kill these trees and endanger
Mr. Stachowiak's home and property.
These County and State regulations guarantee protection of citizens. We request that the adjacent parcels be
protected from further damage through adequate mitigation requirements. King County Council has both the
authority and the obligation to apply the policies, the county code and the long term goals of the county in a manner
that is balanced, fair and legal. Higher density is not appropriate for this site and must not be approved.
When the examiner renders a decision or recommendation, he or she shall make and enter findings of fact and
conclusions from the record which support the decision and the findings and conclusions shall set forth and
demonstrate the manner In which the decision or recommendation Is consistent with, carries out and helps
Implement applicable state laws and regulations and the regulations, policies, objectives and goals of the
comprehensive plan, subarea or community plans, the zoning code, the land segregation code and other
official laws, policies and objectives of King County, and that the recommendation or decision will not be
unreasonabl incom atible with or detrimental to affected ro erties and the eneral ublic.
In light of complete lack of interlocal agreements between the City of Renton and King County for the
Potential Annexation Area in which the Nichols Place site is located, which are required by Countywide Planning
Policies LU-29, LU-33, RF-4 and RF-5 as well as are required by Comprehensive Plan Policy RP-202, the Hearing
Examiner's Findings are incomplete. There is no demonstration that the recommendations recorded are consiste.nt
with, carry out or implement the goals and policies required to be balanced in consideration of applications for the
use ofTDR as set forth in KCC 2IA.37.0IO. Further, the Hearing Examiner's recommendations fail to protect the
adjacent properties from damage as is required by KCC 20.24.070(B) and RCW 43.21 C.020(2).
Statement of Appeal -Page 12 of 13
III. CONCLUSION
We are the Public. Our interest is in protecting our homes, preserving the character of our existing
neighborhood, promoting fair and reasonable use of property for all land owners and preventing harm to our
community. King County is obligated to craft and enforce the implementation of land use regulations which are self-
consistent and which protect the interests of its citizens.
The Nichols Place proposal for increased density is not in the public interest. On the contrary, the proposed
higher density development will cause the destruction of the character of the existing and established surrounding
neighborhood, precipitate permanent and substantial damage to adjacent properties, and burden the community with
increased noise, traffic and pollution.
Approval of this application as currently recommended would not only violate the specific requirements
and limitations ofKCC 21A.37.010, the Comprehensive Plans of both King County (RP-202, U-113, U-122, U-208,
U-209 and T-321) and the City of Renton, as well as the Countywide Planning Policies (LU-28, LU-29, LU-33, LU-
69, RF-4, RF-5 and CO-I I}, but also jeopardizes King County's interests and its express goal of accelerated
annexations of the Urban Unincorporated Areas by exacerbating the existing infrastructure deficit and by failing to
collaboratively address level-of-service standards of the City of Renton in its Potential Annexation Area.
Based on the foregoing and the record in this matter, Citizen's Alliance for a Responsible Evendell
respectfully requests that this Council deny the use of Transfer of Development Rights for the Nichols Place
Preliminary Plat, applications LOIPOOJS, and that mitigation sufficient to prevent damage to neighboring properties
be required.
DATED this /5tfi day of ,~1(:1;
~/~lft
Gwendolyn High-President
Citizens' Alliance for a Responsible Evendell
P.O. Box 2936
Renton, WA 98059
Statement of Appeal -Page 13 of 13
,2004.
,,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-,,,-_
;
'.,)
r> c·:J
(.'._'..) _...
. .,.
: .. .,
:.-,J c·:,
\/.?1 ~
BEFORE THE KING COUNTY COUNCIL
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
In re: Citizens's Alliance for a Responsible
Evendell Appeal of
NO. L03P0015
-<-~} -0
. -,r -
,··1
\ l.
/
Proposed Preliminary Plat and Proposal for
Transfer of Density Credits for
NICHOLS PLACE
APPLICANT U.S. LAND'S RESPONSE TO
C.A.R.E.'S STATEMENT OF APPEAL
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
The Applicant, U.S. Land, has submitted a subdivision application for Nichols
Place. The Nichols Place site is located in the Renton Highlands area within the
unincorporated Urban Growth Area.
U.S. Land has applied for a 23-lot subdivision using density credits for 8 lots
pursuant to the Transfer of Development Rights program (the "TDR program"), chapter
21A.37 King County Code. A central reason for relying on the TDR program for the
Nichols Place subdivision were prior statements made by County Council members in
support of the TDR program when reviewing the adjacent Evendell site rezone request.
The County's Department of Development & Environmental Services reviewed
the application under applicable King County Code and performed environmental review
REsPONSETOSTATEMENTOFAPPEAL-1 ofl5 JOHNS MONROE MITSUNAGA PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1500 114" Ave. SE, Suite 102
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Tel: (425) 451 2812 / Fax (425) 451 2818 19
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
under the State Environmental Policy Act. The County's Mitigated Determination of
Nonsignificance was not appealed.
On February 24, 2004, the Hearing Examiner held the preliminary plat hearing for
the Nichols Place subdivision application and issued an approval with conditions on
March 2, 2004. This is the decision that <!:itizens for a Responsible Evendell
("C.A.R.E.") has appealed to the King County Council.
II. SUBSTANTIVE RESPONSE TO C.A.R.E.'S APPEAL
U.S. Land is not requesting a rezone for the Nichols Place site. C.A.R.E.'s
implication that this Council should undertake some sort of subjective rezone review is
not appropriate. U.S. Land has applied for a straight subdivision using density credits, as
expressly allowed for by King County Code.
C.A.R.E. does not directly challenge any specific condition that the Hearing
Examiner imposed in his approval of the 23-lot subdivision. In fact, C.A.R.E.'s
substantive briefing does not relate at all to any specific condition contained in the
Hearing Examiner's decision.
Instead, C.A.R.E. asks this Council to create a new subjective review process on
an ad hoc basis for subdivisions which use the TDR program. C.A.R.E. 's arguments are
set within a framework that fundamentally misinterprets the TDR program. C.A.R.E.
attempts to create a new three step review based on an incorrect reading of the chapter's
purpose section. However, the operative code sections under the TDR chapter do not
support this additional layer of review.
All of C.A.R.E.'s arguments are based on its misinterpretation of County Code.
Therefore, C.A.R.E.'s appeal must simply be dismissed in its entirety.
REsPONSE TO STATEMENT OF APPEAL -2 of J 5 JOHNS MONROE MITSUNAGA PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1500 I 14~ Ave. SE, Suite 102
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Tel: (425) 451 2812 / Fax (425) 451 2818
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
A. The Hearing Examiner Properly Approved the Nichols Place Subdivision
Under the TDR Chapter.
I U.S. Land's major revision using density credits complies with the TDR
chapter.
The Growth Management Act ("GMA") encourages the use of innovative zoning
techniques such as the Transfer of Development Rights ("TDR") program adopted by
King County. RCW 36.70A.090.
The TDR program, chapter 21A.37 King County Code, provides that designated
receiving sites within the County's urban growth areas can purchase density credits from
designated sending sites in the rural and urban separator areas. The purpose of the TDR
program is to provide an incentive-based program to preserve rural and urban separator
lands. KCC §21A.37.010. The TDR program complies with the GMA goals of
13 preserving rural areas, encouraging growth in urban areas, and discouraging suburban
14 sprawl. RCW 36.70A.020(1) and (2). The TDR program also indirectly helps to
15 promote affordable housing and the County's economic vitality. RCW 36.70A.020(4)
16 and (5).
17 The process of developing property using density credits under the TDR program
18 is clearly set forth in King County Code. This process promotes the GMA by providing
19 timely and fair permit processing to ensure predictability. RCW 36.70A.020(7). The
20 program is integrated into the County's zoning code such that DDES and the Hearing
21 Examiner can process a subdivision application involving density credits as a regular
22 subdivision without any additional subjective review related to the use of density credits.
23 KCC §21A.37.030 regulates receiving sites. The Nichols Place site is clearly
24 designated as a receiving site und_er subsection (A)(1): the site is in an unincorporated
25
REsPONSETOSTATEMENTOF APPEAL-3 of 15 JOHNS MONROE MITSUNAGA PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1500 114"' Ave. SE, Suite 102
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Tel: (425) 451 2812 / Fax (425) 451 2818
o?I
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
urban area zoned R-4. Under County Code, there is no further review regarding the
propriety of using density credits for this site.
However, this does not mean that there is no further regulation of the site. First,
the amount of density credits that can be used for any particular receiving site is limited
under the zoning code. KCC §21A.37(C). In this case, the R-4 zone allows a maximum
density of six dwelling units/acre. KCC §21.A.12.030. U.S. Land's proposal complies
with this maximum density limit.
Second, the application continues under the review process pertaining to the
particular development application: in this case subdivision review. DOES and the
Hearing Examiner properly followed that process for the Nichols Place site. Pursuant to
this process, the Hearing Examiner issued his decision approving the 23-lot preliminary
plat for Nichols Place.
C.A.R.E. does not dispute that the Nichols Place site is a proper receiving site
under chapter 21A.37 KCC or that the density credits U.S. Land is purchasing for the site
are compliant with chapter 21A.37 KCC. C.A.R.E. also does not raise any issues related
to the Hearing Examiner's approval of the preliminary plat or the conditions he placed on
the approval.
2. The TDR program does not provide authority for C.A.R.E. 's concept of a
three step subjective review.
DOES and the Hearing Examiner do not perfonn any balancing of goals under the
TOR program when reviewing a specific subdivision application; the County Council
already balanced the goals stated in KCC §21A.37.0IO in adopting the TOR program
itself. As is evident from the record, U.S. Land has fully followed the TOR program
requirements. The Hearing Examiner approved the 23-lot subdivision using density
REsPONSE TO STATEMENT OF APPEAL-4 of J 5 JOHNS MONROE MITSUNAGA PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1500 114"' Ave. SE, Suite 102
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Tel: (425) 451 2812 / Fax (425) 451 2818
------------------------------------------------
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
credits. C.A.R.E. 's statement of appeal does not dispute any of the foregoing.
C.A.R.E.'s arguments are not supported by anything in King County Code or
state law. C.A.R.E. relies exclusively on the purpose clause of the TDR program found
in KCC §21A.37.010 to try to create three new site-specific, subjective, review elements
under the TDR program. However, C.A.R.E. 's creation of three new site specific review
elements is not supported by KCC §21A.37.0IO, any operative section of the TDR
chapter, or any other section of King County Code. C.A.R.E.'s review system would
violate an applicant's constitutional right to substantive due process by creating and
applying a system not supported by King County Code.
A declaration of purpose does not have any operative force in and of itself.
Hartman v. State Game Comm'n, 85 Wn.2d 176, 532 P.2d 614 (1975). The TDR
purpose section does not regulate a specific site. Instead, the purpose section provides
information on the overall TDR program, acts as a guide to understanding the operative
sections of the chapter, and explains why the County adopted the program.
The TDR program's overarching goal is "to provide a voluntary, incentive-based
process for permanently preserving rural resource and Urban Separator lands that provide
a public benefit." KCC §21A.37.0IO(A). C.A.R.E. ignores this goal and the County's
dual responsibility to preserve rural areas and encourage density in urban areas.
C.A.R.E., being a limited-interest, neighborhood-specific group, does not take into
account the county-wide considerations with which this Council must grapple in
•
addressing zoning and long-range, county-wide planning.
Pursuant to this overarching goal, KCC §21A.37.010 makes several purpose
statements without creating a hierarchy among them. For example, subsection (A)(2)
states a general purpose of ensuring that the use of density credits is balanced with other
RESPONSE TOSTATEMENTOF APPEAL· 5 of 15 JOHNS MONROE MITSUNAGA PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1500 114., Ave. SE, Suite 102
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Tel: (425) 451 2812 / Fax (425) 451 2818
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
county goals and policies and is adjusted to conditions of each receiving site. However,
KCC §21A.37.010(A)(2) also states in the same sentence a goal or purpose of providing
"an efficient and streamlined administrative review system" and evaluation in a timely
manner. C.A.R.E. focuses exclusively on the former statement without acknowledging
any of the other TDR program purposes.
All of the purpose statements found in KCC §21A.37.010 were used by this
Council in adopting the TDR program itself. The purpose statements are already
integrated into the operative sections of the TDR program, KCC §21A.37.020-.170.
KCC §21A.37.020-.I 70 are the sections that provide the actual rules and regulations that
both an applicant and reviewer must follow.
C.A.R.E.'s theoretical three-step review process does not exist anywhere in King
County Code. C.A.R.E. 's issue with the TDR program as a whole is simply not related to
the site specific review of the Nichols Place subdivision. Instead, C.A.R.E.'s true
complaints are with the TDR program itsel( C.A.R.E. must raise its real concerns to the
Council in the Council's legislative capacity. The Council reviews this appeal as a quasi-
judicial body and must apply adopted King County Code to the proposed Nichols Place
subdivision. Therefore, the Council cannot consider C.A.R.E.'s arguments in this review
process.
U.S. Land respectfully requests this Council to reject C.A.R.E. 's attempt to create
an entirely new layer of review that is not supported by adopted King County Code, and
dismiss C.A.R.E.'s appeal in its entirety.
REsPONSE TO STATEMENT OF APPEAL-6 of 15 JOHNS MONROE MITSUNAGA PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1500 114"' Ave. SE, Suite 102
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Tel: (425) 451 2812 / Fax (425) 451 2818
~----------------------------------------
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
JI
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
B. The Countywide Planning Policies, King County Comprehensive Plan, and
Recent City of Renton Planning Activities do Not Apply to the Nichols Place
Subdivision.
C.A.R.E.' s exclusive reliance on the purpose section of the TDR chapter also
circumvents state law and the hierarchy of planning and zoning documents. C.A.R.E.
asks this Council create a new review process under the TDR program and apply the
Countywide Planning Policies and the Comprehensive Plan directly to the Nichols Place
subdivision. Such a review process is not contained anywhere in King County Code and
not permitted state law.
The Growth Management Act ("GMA") created a hierarchy of land use planning
documents. The Countywide Planning Policies ("CPPs") direct the Comprehensive Plan,
and the Comprehensive Plan in turn directs development regulations. Development
regulations are "the controls placed on development or land use activities by a county or
city, including, but not limited to, zoning ordinances, critical areas ordinances, shoreline
master programs, official controls, planned unit development ordinances, subdivision
ordinances, and binding site plan ordinances together with any amendments thereto."
RCW 36.70A.030(7).
CPPs and the Comprehensive Plan do not apply to a specific development
proposal. Instead, the County's development regulations, i.e. King County Code, govern
review of the Nichols Place subdivision.
]. Countywide Planning Policies and the Comprehensive Plan are not
applicable to a site specific development, i.e. the Nichols Place subdivision.
According to state law, "a 'county-wide planning policy' is a written. policy ·
statement or statements used solely for establishing a county-wide framework from
which county and city comprehensive plans are developed and adopted pursuant to this
REsPONSE TO STATEMENT OF APPEAL-7 of 15 JOHNS MONROE MITSUNAGA PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1500 114"' Ave. SE, Suite 102
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Tel: (425) 451 2812 / Fax (425) 451 2818
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
chapter." RCW 36.70A.210(1) (emphasis added). Countywide Planning Policies
("CPPs") are adopted by a county and the cities within its boundaries in order to provide
guidance for each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan. See, King County v. Central Puget
Sound Growth Management Hearings Board, 138 Wn.2d 161,979 P.2d 374 (1999). The
Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board has clearly ruled that CPPs
are a planning policy document. CPPs are not development regulations under the GMA
and do not guide specific development proposals. City of Snoqualmie v. King County,
CPSGMHB Case No. 92-3-0004, page 58 (code publishing) (Final Decision and Order,
March 1, 1993).
A comprehensive plan is also a planning policy document: "a generalized
coordinated land use policy statement of the governing body of a county or city .... "
RCW 36.70A.030(4). A comprehensive plan is not an act of zoning or any other land use.
development regulation. Instead, a comprehensive plan provides goals and policies that
shape the County's development regulations.
Comprehensive plans do not control the issuance of pennits nor directly control
the use of land. Rather, comprehensive plans are directive to development
regulations and capital budgeting decisions.
McVittie v. Snohomish County (McVittie V), CPSGMHB Case No. 00-3-0016, page 10 of
30 (website decision) (Final Decision and Order, April 12, 2001).
A comprehensive plan does not provide specific criteria necessary to make land
use decisions on site specific proposals. Comprehensive plan policies and goals are not
intended to be "specific regulations necessary to give 'effective or meaningful guidance'
to applicants, to design professionals, or to the public officials ... who are responsible
for enforcing the code." Pinecrest Homeowners Association v. Glen A. Cloninger
Associates, 115 Wn. App. 611, 62 P.3d 938 (2003) (citations omitted). Otherwise, use of
RESPONSE TO STATEMENT OF APPEAL-8 of 15 JOHNS MONROE MITSUNAGA PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1500 114" Ave. SE, Suite 102
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Tel: (425) 451 2812 / Fax (425) 451 2818
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
a comprehensive plan to review a site specific proposal would result in "ad-hoc case-by-
case policy making" that has been soundly rejected by our courts. Pinecrest, 115 Wn.
App. at 622 (citing Anderson v. City of Issaquah, 70 Wn. App. 64, 79, 851 P.2d 744
(1993)).
Virtually all of C.A.R.E. 's arguments are based on CPPs and comprehensive plan
statements and policies. As shown above, C.A.R.E.'s arguments must be rejected since
they are not based on specific development regulations, i.e. King County Code authority.
2. Renton 's city standards and planning review performed subsequent to its
approval of sewer hookups for Nichols Place are not relevant.
C.A.R.E. also makes several arguments related to the planning relationship
between the County and the City of Renton. C.A.R.E. appears to have a strong desire for
an interlocal agreement between the two jurisdictions. However, these arguments have
nothing to do with the Council's site specific review of the Nichols Place subdivision.
C.A.R.E. must raise its concerns to this Council when acting in its legislative capacity at
another time.
C.A.R.E. has no authority or practical basis for its argument. The fact that King
County and the City of Renton have not finalized an interlocal agreement is not a basis
for regulating or denying the Nichols Place subdivision. There is nothing in King County
Code that bars development in an area not subject to an interlocal agreement. Instead, the
County's review of the Nichols Place subdivision must be performed under the King
County Code provisions in effect at the time U.S. Land submitted a complete application.
C.A.R.E.'s comments related to the City of Renton's review of the East Renton
Plateau Potential Annexation Area are likewise not relevant to the Nichols Place
subdivision or this Council's review. The Nichols Place subdivision is located in
REsPONSE TO STATEMENT OF APPEAL-9 of J 5 JOHNS MONROE MITSUNAGA PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
I 500 I I 4" Ave. SE, Suite 102
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Tel: (425) 451 2812 / Fax (425) 451 2818
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
unincorporated King County; Renton's planning activities for the most part do not have
relevance to the area until Renton actually annexes land. Renton's planning activities
only become relevant where Renton has a duty to provide a particular public service, in
this case sewer.
The Nichols Place subdivision was vested to King County regulations upon
submission of the complete development application. Under those regulations, Renton
had the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed subdivision. Renton
supported the subdivision by allowing 23 sewer hookups for the property. DOES
Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner: February 24, 2004 hearing ("Staff Report"),
Attachment 6. Renton's other planning activities are simply not relevant.
c. The Nichols Place Subdivision is Consistent with King County Code.
While C.A.R.E. does not make any arguments related to the Hearing Examiner's
approval of the subdivision or his conditions, C.A.R.E. does make certain inferences to
which U.S. Land hereby responds.
I. C.A.R.E. 's attempt to import rezone review into this subdivision proposal is
inappropriate.
C.A.R.E. attempts to draw inappropriate parallels between the County's rezone
process and the Nichols Place subdivision which ·relies on density credits. C.A.R.E.'s
arguments related to rezones are not relevant. U.S. Land is not pursuing a rezone request
for the Nichols Place subdivision.
Rezone review is a subjective review of various criteria which are set forth in
County Code and case law. In contrast, County Code does not provide any subjective
review process similar to a rezone for an increase in density under the TDR program. If a
site falls within the definition of a 'receiving site' under KCC §21A.37.030 and an
REsPONSE TOSTATEMENTOF APPEAL-JO of] 5 JOHNS MONROE MITSUNAGA PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1500 114"' Ave. SE, Suite 102
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Tel:(425)4512812/ Fax(425)4512818.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
applicant purchases the density credits, that applicant 1s entitled to subdivide that
property up to the maximum density allowed for the zone.
C.A.R.E.' s arguments that the Nichols Place subdivision application should
somehow include considerations similar to those in a rezone review do not make sense
under County Code. Had U.S. Land pursued a rezone application, the Hearing Examiner
would not have reviewed the underlying subdivision unless the rezone was granted. A
subdivision is reviewed under the adopted zoning, whether that zoning is adopted through
a site specific rezone or area-wide action. King County Code does not support the idea
that rezone criteria or similar considerations should somehow be infused into review of a
straight forward subdivision. Rezone criteria, concepts or analogies simply have no place
in the County's review of the Nichols Place subdivision application.
2. C.A.R.E. 's arguments related to the Evende/1 subdivision are not relevant to
the Council's review of Nichols Place.
Further, any facts or argument related to the Evendell subdivision to the north are
not relevant to the Nichols Place subdivision. The two subdivision applications were
submitted separately for totally distinct developments with different access and
infrastructure. For purposes of the Council's review, it is irrelevant that U.S. Land is the
applicant for both subdivisions. Each subdivision has its own1;set bf circumstances and is
reviewed as a distinct subdivision application. C.A.R.E.'s attempt to intermingle the two
applications is not appropriate, does not lend any value to its arguments and simply
serves to confuse what is in fact a clear process under King County Code.
C.A.R.E. has imported the majority of its statement of appeal from its appeal of
the Evendell subdivision without even removing certain portions that pertained directly
and solely to the Evendell site. See e.g., C.A.R.E. Statement of Appeal, page 8, second
REsPONSE TO STATEMENT OF APPEAL· 11 ofl5 JOHNS MONROE MITSUNAGA PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1500 114th Ave. SE, Suite 102
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Tel: (425) 451 2812 / Fax (425) 451 2818
---------------------------------·-----------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
paragraph. C.A.R.E.'s lackadaisical approach to its appeal of Nichols Place reveals
C.A.R.E.'s true goal of forcing U.S. Land to spend money on frivolous appeals and delay
the County's final approval of a subdivision that is expressly permitted under County
Code.
3. The County's Buildable Lands Report is not Relevant.
C.A.R.E.'s arguments related to the buildable lands report are also not relevant.
C.A.R.E.' s arguments here again relate to County planning policy, not to this specific
subdivision. C.A.R.E. does not dispute that King County Code permits the 23-lot
subdivision.
4. Appropriate Infrastructure and Public Services Will Support the Nichols
Place Subdivision.
First, C.A.R.E. argues that busing elementary school children to school violates
Comprehensive Plan policy U-113. As explained above, comprehensive plan policies do
not pertain to site specific development proposals and cannot be used as a basis of
evaluation. C.A.R.E. 's arguments here must be dismissed.
C.A.R.E. argues that the School District requested that safe walking access be
provided with the construction of new housing developments. C.A.R.E. Statement of
Appeal, pg. 3. U.S. Land would note that C.A.R.E.'s support for this statement is
'Exhibit 59 in Record', however, there is no Exhibit 59; the Hearing Examiner's list of
exhibits ends with Exhibit 36. C.A.R.E. clearly imported its arguments from a prior
appeal to this Council without any effort to review the Nichols Place underlying record or
attempt to make arguments truly based on the actual Nichols Place subdivision.
The Hearing Examiner imposed .conditions to ensure safe walking for school
children to maximum extent possible. Hearing Examiner Decision, Conditions 19 and
REsPONSE TO STATEMENT OF APPEAL-12 ofl5 JOHNS MONROE MITSUNAGA PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1500 114'" Ave. SE, Suite 102
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Tel: (425) 451 2812 / Fax (425) 451 2818
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
20. C.A.R.E. has not appealed these conditions. As part of these conditions, U.S. Land
will participate in constructing a walkway system for school children to satisfy the
School District's request. With the completion of surrounding residential developments,
a walkway system will be put in place for safe walking for school children, not just for
those new children moving to the area, but also for those children living in the area today
who do not have a safe walkway to their nearby schools.
Second, C.A.R.E. implies that the County should supenmpose the City of
Renton's standards as a condition of County approval, particularly Renton's street
standards. As C.A.R.E. notes, the County and Renton do not have an adopted interlocal
agreement that would somehow allow King County to impose City of Renton standards
in unincorporated areas. In fact, there is nothing that would allow the County to impose
City of Renton standards upon developments located in unincorporated King County. To
the contrary, an attempt to impose street standards which are not set forth under King
County Code would be a fundamental violation of U.S. Land's vested and constitutional
rights.
Third, C.A.R.E. would apparently prefer a gravity lift station at the Elliot Bridge
for sewer service. C.A.R.E. raises this issue for the first time in this appeal. Ironically,
although C.A.R.E. wishes the County to impose Renton street standards upon Nichols
Place without any lawful authority, C.A.R.E. also argues the County should not consider
Renton's standards and decision to approve U.S. Land's request for sewer hookups for
Nichols Place even though Renton has authority to approve or deny an applicant's
request for sewer hookups.
C.A.R.E. again has not challenged the conditions imposed by the Hearing
Examiner relating to sewer service. Instead, C.A.R.E. relies solely on Countywide
REsPONSETOSTATEMENTOFAPPEAL-13 of15 JOHNS MONROE MITSUNAGA PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1500 114"' Ave. SE, Suite 102
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Tel:(425)4512812/ Fax(425)4512818 ~,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Planning Policies for its argument, which, as stated above, are inapplicable to this site
specific development review. There is no substantive appeal issue here.
Renton clearly approved sewer hookups for the Nichols Place subdivision. ODES
Staff Report, Attachment 6. Renton has determined that a system of developer-funded
lift stations (versus an Elliot Bridge regional station option) will be a satisfactory method
of providing sewer service. Pursuant thereto, Renton authorized sewer service for the
Nichols Place site.
There is no simply legitimate dispute that Nichols Place will be supported by the
necessary infrastructure. King County Code has set up a comprehensive review process
that ensures urban subdivisions are fully supported by urban services. U.S. Land has
complied with King County Code and will comply with the Hearing Examiner's
conditions of approval.
5. C.A.R.E. did not Appeal the SEPA Determination.
C.A.R.E. finally makes a generalized request to the Council to impose some
vague new mitigation related to impacts upon trees on adjacent properties. Any impacts
related to trees on adjacent properties might only have been considered in environmental
review under the State Environmental Policy Act. Otherwise, no County Code sections
speak to this issue. C.A.R.E. did not appeal the County's environmental determination
and mitigation requirements under SEPA. Therefore, C.A.R.E.'s attempt to raise this
issue now is untimely.
Further, U.S. Land has not begun any site development work on the Nichols Place
site. Mr. Stachowiak's fears are simply that. U.S. Land has already made itself available
in the event C.A.R.E. wishes to contact U.S. Land directly such issues.
There is simply no legal or evidentiary support the imposition of additional
RESPONSE TO STATEMENT OF APPEAL -) 4 ofl 5 JOHNS MONROE MITSUNAGA PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1500 114" Ave. SE, Suite 102
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Tel: (425) 451 2812 I Fax (425) 451 2818
~---·-----· ---------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
conditions at this time.
III. CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, U.S. Land respectfully requests this Council to dismiss
C.A.R.E.'s appeal in full.
In addition, U.S. Land respectfully requests this Council to review the
administrative appeal related to the Nichols Place subdivision as a separate appeal from
any other C.A.R.E. appeals. In the event other C.A.R.E. appeals, for example that related
to Evendell, are consolidated with the Nichols Place matter, such consolidation will
likely result in even more delay for the Evendell plat, which was decided upon by the
Hearing Examiner several weeks before his decision regarding Nichols Place. Further,
consolidation could result in confusion between any specific site issues or an
inappropriate import of the appellant's arguments from one appeal to another.
U.S. Land respectfully requests this Council to review and address each
subdivision on its own merits.
DATED this b ~ay of _ _,_A-4'-'{C"-'C\-'--\ _____ _,, 2004.
2101-2 Response to Appeal 4-1-04
REsPONSETOSTATEMENTOFAPPEAL-15 of15
JOHNS MONROE MITSUNAGA, PLLC
By~, td_.
anaKolouskova, WSBA #27532
Attorneys for U.S. Land Development
JOHNS MONROE MITSUNAGA PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1500 I 14., Ave. SE, Suite 102
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Tel: (425) 451 2812 / Fax (425) 451 2818
Shirley Day
14412-167th. Place SE
Renton, WA 98059
( 425) 255-7005
March 29, 2004
Clerk of the Council
Room W1025
King Country Courthouse
516-3'd.Avenue
Seattle, WA 98104
RE: File No's L03P0006, L03P0005, L03P0015
2004 Mr-? 3 l ~.M 10: 05
CLEriK
,-:·,,c: UUSiY CQIJHCII. ' ....
Liberty Grove, Liberty Grove Contiguous and Nichols Place
I am writing to protest the transfer of density credits for the above Plats, allowing an
increase from R-4 to R-6. This is an increase of 50% in an area not able to handle the
growth. It has already been determined that R-6 is not compatible with the character and
scale of the surrounding neighborhood.
As a resident of the above address for 34 years, I am aware that growth is inevitable.
However, what has happened in our area, is growth with ·no consideration to the existing
area or the traffic congestion;
Homes are being built all around us in wetland areas. Water retention ponds are on
ahnost every block. I believe this is a health and safety hazard.
My block has had homes and garages flooded since they cleared the area for homes North
of 144th. Water retention ponds have overflowed in years of heavy rains. I find it hard to
believe that there are adequate provisions for drainage and our problems will not
mcrease.
Traffic on NE. 4th.and 156th. SE can not handle the existing traffic. There are no plans for
improving the roads to accommodate all the homes recently built, let alone all those
being plarmed.
I hope you will consider the potential problems that increased density will have on our
area. There should be no reason that the developer can not build using R4 density.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
--~~~
Shirley rfa;' /
J(
r
!
I
OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
400 Yesler Way, Room 404
Seattle, Washington 98104
Telephone (206) 296-4660
Facsimile (206) 296-1654
March 2, 2004
REPORT AND DECISION
SUBJECT: Department of Development and Environmental Services File No. L03P0015
Proposed Ordinance No. 2004-0013
NICHOLS PLACE
Proposed Preliminary Plat and Proposal for Transfer of Density Credits
Location:
Applicant:
Intervenor:
West of 160'h Avenue Southeast, south of Southeast 138'h Street
(if extended) at 13815 -l 60'h Avenue Southeast
U.S. Land Development Associates, represented by
Michael J. Romano
Centurion Development Services
22617 -g•h Drive Southeast
Bothell, Washington 98021
Telephone: (425) 486-2563
C.A.R.E., represented by
Gwendolyn High
13405 -1581h Avenue Southeast
Renton, Washington 98059
King County: Department of Development and Environmental Services, represented by
Karen Scharer
900 Oakesdale A venue Southwest
Renton, Washington 98055
Telephone: (206) 296-7114
Facsimile: (206) 296-6613
SUMMARY OF DECISION/RECOMMEND A TJON:
Department's Preliminary Recommendation:
Department's Final Recommendation:
Examiner's Decision:
Approve, subject to conditions
Approve, subject to conditions (modified)
Approve, subject to conditions (modified)
L03P0015 -Nichols Place Page 2 of 14
ISSUESffOPICS ADDRESSED:
• Transfer of density credits
• Surface water drainage
• Road improvements
• Safe walking conditions
• Tree preservation
SUMMARY:
Application for a tran~fer of a maximum of eight density credits, and approval of a preliminary plat to
subdivide approximately 3.82 acres into 23 lots in the urban area, are granted preliminary approval.
EXAMINER PROCEEDINGS:
Hearing Opened:
Hearing Closed:
February 24, 2004
February 24, 2004
Participants at the public hearing and the exhibits offered and entered are listed in the attached minutes.
A verbatim recording of the hearing is available in the office of the King County Hearing Examiner.
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner
now makes and enters the following:
FINDINGS:
I. General Information:
Proponent:
Representative:
Location:
Sectionffownship/Range:
Acreage Plat:
Current Zoning:
Number of Lots:
U.S. Land Development Association
P.O. Box 22200
Seattle, WA 98122
Michael Romano
Centurion Development Services
22617 8th Dr. SE, Bothell, WA 98021
Phone: 425-486-2563
Facsimile: (425) 486-3273
Email: Michael.romano@verizon.net
The site is located west of 160th Ave. SE, south of SE 138'h Street
(if extended) at 13815 160'h Ave. SE
SE 14-23-05
3.82 acres
R-4
Parcels# 142305 9058
23 proposed using 8 TDR's
L03P0015 -Nichols Place
Density:
Lot Size:
Proposed Use:
Sewage Disposal:
Water Supply:
Fire District:
School District:
Community Plan:
Drainage Subbasin:
King County Permits:
Complete Application Date:
Threshold Determination:
Date oflssuance:
KC Permit Contact:
6 dwellings per acre
4,320 square feet
single family
City of Renton
Water District #90
King County Fire District # 25
Issaquah
Newcastle
Lower Cedar River
Subdivision
June 19, 2003
Mitigated Determination ofNonsignificance (MONS)
December 23, 2003
Karen Scharer, Project Manager II,
Current Planning Section, LUSD
Page 3 of 14
Phone no. (206) 296-7114 or email at karen.scharer@metrokc.gov
2. Except as modified herein, the facts set forth in the King County DOES preliminary report to the
Hearing Examiner for the February 24, 2004, public hearing are found to be correct and are
incorporated herein by this reference. Said report is exhibit no. 2 iri the hearing record.
The drainage detention area planned to serve the subject property will be sized to accommodate
surface water drainage from the proposed development of Nichols Place only. The proposed plat
of Evendell, adjacent to the north, will have a separate surface water detention facility.
3. On February 4, 2004 the King County Hearing Examiner issued his report and decision granting
preliminary approval for the revised plat of Evendell, based upon transfer of 20 density credits
that would allow for development of 70 lots on 12.43 acres. This would provide a density of 5.6
dwelling units per acre on the Evendell property, which is adjacent to the north of the subject
property. The maximum density permitted in the R4 zone classification is 6 dwelling units per
acre, utilizing density incentives or transferred development rights. The Examiner's decision
approving the Even dell plat revision, file no. LO I POO 16, is incorporated by reference in the
hearing record of this proceeding.
4. To the east, south and west of the subject property are larger lots and parcels, ranging from
approximately 12,600 square feet to 2.25 acres in size.
5. King County's "Transfer of Development Rights (TOR)" program is governed by Chapter
21A.37 of the King County Code. The TOR program establishes a property right which is
separable from the fee-simple title to certain lands within King County, and provides a method
for the transfer and utilization of that new right, which is colloquially known as a development
right or "density credit." A density credit has a substantial market value.
The underlying purpose of the TOR program is to allow for the movement of residential density
from rural areas to urban areas of King County. The code is intended to provide, " ... an efficient
and streamlined administrative review system to ensure that transfers of development rights to
receiving sites are evaluated in a timely way and balanced with other County goals and policies,
and are adjusted to the specific conditions of each receiving site." KCC 21A.37.010.2.
L03POOl5-Nichols Place Page 4 of 14
Receiving sites are required to meet the provisions ofKCC 21A.37.030. Those requirements are
that the receiving site:
I. be within an unincorporated urban area, zoned R-4 or higher, or be within a potential
annexation area;
2. be within a city where new growth is or will be encouraged, and where facilities and services
exist or public investments in facilities and services will be made; or
3. be within RA-2.5 and RA-5 zoned parcels, subject to stringent criteria.
The subject property is within the first category of eligible receiving sites listed in KCC
21A.37.030. Sites within the unincorporated urban growth area are not required to have any
specific level of available facilities and services. Development approvals that utilize density
credits must meet only those service criteria that apply generally to development of the number of
dwelling units proposed on the site.
King County Code chapter 21A.12 governs densities and development standards in residential
zones. The R-4 zone in the urban residential area allows for a maximum density of six dwelling
units per acre, which may be achieved only through the application of residential density
incentives or transfers of development rights. KCC 21A.12.030.A. and B. I. When density
credits are used, development shall comply with dimensional standards of the zone having a base
density most comparable to the total approved density. KCC 21 A.37.030.B.
6. The foregoing provisions of the King County Zoning Code are generally consistent with policies
of the King County Comprehensive Plan governing residential land use. In particular, the Zoning
Code provisions are generally consistent with:
Policy U-113, that new residential development in the Urban Growth Area should
occur where facilities and services can be provided at the lowest public cost and in a
timely fashion;
Policy U-114, that the County seek to achieve an average zoning density of at least
seven to eight homes per acre in the Urban Growth Area through a mix of densities,
allowing for lower density zones to recognize existing subdivisions with little or no
opportunity for infill or redevelopment;
Policy U-122, that supports increases in urban density through a rezone or a proposal
to utilize density transfer, when the proposal will help resolve traffic, utility, parks or
open space deficiencies in the immediate neighborhood. This proposal will extend
sewer service further into the urban area, and will provide recreation facilities and
open space available to future residents on the subject property.
7. The subject property is in the City ofRenton's potential annexation area. The City is considering
modifications to its comprehensive plan that would limit density on property in this area to a
maximum of 4 dwelling units per acre. However, those plan changes were not in effect at the
time a complete application for this subdivision was submitted, and the property is not presently
within the City ofRenton'sjurisdiction.
8. ODES, this Applicant and the developers of other properties in the vicinity have agreed upon
right-of-way dedications and road improvements to mitigate the impact of traffic which this
•
L03POOI5 -Nichols Place Page 5 of 14
proposal will generate adjacent to and in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development.
The dedications and improvements to be provided by this proposal will indude the west side of
160th Avenue Southeast.
Improvements that will be made to Southeast 136'h Street, from 1561h Avenue Southeast to 160 1h
Avenue Southeast, will result in a new east-west route that will divert traffic from the high
accident intersection of Southeast 128 1h Street and 1601h A venue Southeast. Those Southeast
136th Street improvements may be made by other developers prior to the development of Nichols
Place, or may be made jointly by this plat in cooperation with other developers.
9. The Issaquah School District plans to operate a school bus stop for elementary school children at
the intersection of Southeast 136th Street and 160th Avenue Southeast. The internal road
improvements and frontage improvements on 160th Avenue Southeast will provide a safe route
for children to use between the lots of this subdivision and that bus stop. Additionally, the
Applicant will provide school walkway improvements pursuant to the requirements of condition
no. 22 below, to provide safe walking conditions to the high school and middle school serving the
area.
I 0. Surface water from the adjacent property to the north (Evendell) sheetflows onto the subject
property, which is divided into an easterly and westerly basin. The west basin is approximately
1.48 acres in area. Surface water from this basin currently sheetflows over the west and south
boundaries, creating nuisance conditions on adjacent properties.
11.
A surface water drainage adjustment has been approved to divert surface water flow from the
west basin to the east basin, where surface water detention will be sized to provide level 2 flow
control. It is proposed to allow some undetained runoff from the southwest portion of the subject
property to continue to sheetflow over the west and south property boundaries to maintain, but
not increase, existing flows.
The development of the plat ofEvendell, together with Nichols Place, will control and divert
surface water runoff away from Southeast 139th Place ·and 156th Avenue Southeast, where severe
conveyance problems exist. Improvements that already have been made to the conveyance
system on 160th A venue Southeast, and additional improvements required as conditions of this
and other developments in the area, are expected to provide adequately for the conveyance of
surface flow as far as lot 6 of Cedar Park 5-acre tracts.
Lot 6 of Cedar Park 5-acre tracts has undersized culverts, identified as locations 50 and 5 I in the
level 3 offsite drainage analysis prepared for the plat ofEvendell. Surface water backs up within
a depressed area on that property where it causes nuisance flooding. However, the owner of that
property has advised the Applicant that he will not grant permission to improve the existing
conveyance channel through lot 6, and King County has advised the Applicant that it would not
approve relocating that channel. The requirement of the surface water drainage adjustment that
level 2 flow control be provided is sufficient mitigation, according to the King County Surface
Water Drainage Manual, for the nuisance flooding impact that this development will have on lot 6
of Cedar Park 5-acre tracts.
It is anticipated that a sewage lift station will be located within the plat of Nichols Place. This
facility is likely to be located in the southeast corner of the plat, within the area now identified as
y'o
L03POOJ 5 -Nichols Place Page 6 of 14
"detention/recreation." A separate tract may be required for the lift station. No part of the lift
station tract will count toward the requirement for provision of onsite recreation area.
12. The size of the lots proposed by the Applicant generally does not allow for the retention of
existing trees within the plat. Removal of trees from property being developed commonly
subjects trees on adjacent properties to stress and increases the windthrow hazard. Trees that
remain in an area which is substantially cleared present an increased risk to persons and property
on and off the site of the remaining trees. However, there is no King County regulation
applicable to the subject property that restricts clearing or tree removal to protect trees on
adjacent properties from increased stress or risk ofwindthrow. The environmental review of this
proposal did not identify impacts of clearing or tree removal as a significant adverse
environmental impact of the proposal.
CONCLUSIONS:
I. If approved subject to the conditions recommended below, the proposed subdivision will comply
with the goals and objectives of the King County Comprehensive Plan, subdivision and zoning
codes, and other official land use controls and policies of King County.
2. If approved subject to the conditions recommended below, this proposed subdivision will make
appropriate provision for the public health, safety and general welfare, and for open spaces,
drainage ways, streets, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supply, sanitary waste,
parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds and safe walking conditions for
students who only walk to school; and it will serve the public use and interest.
3. The conditions for final plat approval required below are in the public interest and are reasonable
requirements to mitigate the impacts of the development upon the environment.
4. The dedications of land or easements within and adjacent to the proposed plat, as required for
final plat approval or as shown on the proposed preliminary plat submitted by the Applicant on
May 19, 2003, are reasonable and necessary as a direct result of the development of this proposed
plat, and are proportionate to the impacts of the development.
5. The Applicant has negotiated for the purchase of development rights that would allow for an
increase in the number of lots to be developed on the subject property to a total of 23. The
development of 23 lots on the subject property will be within the maximum density of 6 dwelling
units per acre permitted in the R4 zone classification in the urban area. The proposed
development of the subject property, utilizing up to 8 density rights, is consistent with all
applicable development standards and other provisions of the king county code. Provisions of the
City of Renton Comprehensive Plan concerning density of development on this property are not
applicable to this proposal.
6. The road improvements proposed and agreed to by the Applicant, including those shown on the
May 19, 2003 preliminary plat and set forth in the conditions below, will reasonably mitigate the
impacts of traffic generated by the proposed development.
L03P0015 -Nichols Place Page 7 of 14
7. Safe walking conditions for children who walk to school from the subject property will be
provided by using one of the alternatives for improvements incorporated into this proposal and
set forth in condition no. 20 below.
8. The conditions of approval of the surface water drainage adjustment L03V0036, and the
conditions recommended by ODES and agreed to by the Applicant, incorporated into the
conditions below, adequately mitigate the impacts of surface water drainage from this proposed
development in accordance with adopted King County standards.
9 There is no applicable provision of the King County Code to restrict the removal of trees in the
course of the development of the subject property, or to protect trees on neighboring properties
from increased stress and risk ofwindthrow.
DECISION:
The proposed preliminary plat of Nichols Place, as received May 19, 2003, utilizing up to 8 density
credits (transferable density rights) is approved, subject to the following conditions of final plat approval:
I. Compliance with all platting provisions of Title 19 of the King County Code.
2. All persons having an ownership interest in the subject property shall sign on the face of the final
plat a dedication which includes the language set forth in King County Council Motion No. 5952.
3. a. The plat shall comply with the maximum density (and minimum density) requirements of
the R-4 zone classification. All lots shall meet the minimum dimensional requirements
of the R-6 zone classification or shall be as shown on the face of the approved
preliminary plat, whichever is larger, except that minor revisions to the plat which do not
result in substantial changes may be approved at the discretion of the Department of
Development and Environmental Services.
b. The Applicant shall provide Transfer of Density Credit documentation to DOES prior to
final approval to allow transfer of a maximum of eight density credits.
4. The Applicant must obtain final approval from the King County Health Department for
abandonment of existing septic systems on-site.
5. All construction and upgrading of public and private roads shall be done in accordance with the
King County Road Standards established and adopted by Ordinance No. 11187, as amended
( 1993 KCRS).
6. The Applicant must obtain the approval of the King County Fire Protection Engineer for the
adequacy of the fire hydrant, water main, and fire flow standards of Chapter 17.08 of the King
County Code.
7. Final plat approval shall require full compliance with the drainage provisions set forth in King
County Code 9.04. Compliance may result in reducing the number and/or location oflots as
shown on the preliminary approved plat. Preliminary review has identified the following
conditions of approval which represent portions of the drainage requirements. All other
YI
L03POOl5-Nichols Place Page 8 of 14
applicable requirements in KCC 9 .04 and the Surface Water Design Manual (SWDM) must also
be satisfied during engineering and final review.
a. Drainage plans and analysis shall comply with the 1998 King County Surface Water
Design Manual and applicable updates adopted by King County. DOES approval of the
drainage and roadway plans is required prior to any construction.
b. Current standard plan notes and ESC notes, as established by DOES Engineering
Review, shall be shown on the engineering plans.
c. The following note shall be shown on the final recorded plat:
All building downspouts, footing drains, and drains from all impervious surfaces such as
patios and driveways shall be connected to the permanent storm drain outlet as shown on
the approved construction drawings# on file with DOES and/or the King
County Department of Transportation. This plan shall be submitted with the application
of any building permit. All connections of the drains must be constructed and approved
prior to the final building inspection approval. For those Jots that are designated for
individual Jot infiltration systems, the systems shall be constructed at the time of the
building permit and shall comply with plans on file."
d. The stormwater detention design shall comply with the Level 2 Flow Control
requirements per the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM).
e. The storm water control facility shall be located in a separate tract and dedicated to King
County unless portions of the drainage tract are used for required recreation space in
accordance with KCC 2 I A.14.180.
f. If a sewage lift station is located within the subject property, it shall be placed within a
separate tract or easement area, that shall not be counted when computing the provision
of onsite recreation area.
g. When engineering plans are submitted for review, the owners of the adjacent property to
the southwest (15652 Southeast 139th Place) shall be notified that the plans have been
filed with DOES and that they are available for public review.
8. The drainage detention facility shall be designed to meet, at a minimum, the Level 2 Flow
Control and Basic Water Quality menu in the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual
(KCSWDM).
9. (Condition no. 9 is deleted.)
I 0. A surface water adjustment (L03V0036) is approved for this subdivision. All conditions of
approval for this adjustment shall be met prior to approval of the engineering plans.
I I. The following road improvements are required to be constructed according to the 1993 King
County Road Standards (KCRS):
L03P0015 -Nichols Place Page9of14
a. SE 139th St. shall be improved at a minimum to the urban subaccess street standard.
b. FRONTAGE: The frontage of the site along 160th Ave SE (west side only) shall be
improved to the urban neighborhood collector standard.
c. Tracts A, Band C shall be improved as joint use driveways per Section 3.01 of the
KCRS. These driveways shall be owned and maintained by the lot owners served. Notes
to this effect shall be shown on the engineering plans and on the final plat map.
d. Modifications to the above road conditions may be considered according to the variance
provisions in Section 1.08 of the KCRS.
12. There shall be no direct vehicular access to or from 1601h Ave. SE from those lots which abut this
street. A note to this effect shall appear on the engineering plans and final plat.
13. All utilities within proposed rights-of-way must be included within a franchise approved by the
King County Council prior to final plat recording.
14. The Applicant or subsequent owner shall comply with King County Code 14.75, Mitigation
Payment System (MPS), by paying the required MPS fee and administration fee as determined by
the applicable fee ordinance. The applicant has the option to either: (I) pay the MPS fee at final
plat recording, or (2) pay the MPS fee at the time of building permit issuance. If the first option
is chosen, the fee paid shall be the fee in effect at the time of plat application and a note shall be
placed on the face of the plat that reads, "All fees required by King County Code 14.75,
Mitigation Payment System (MPS), have been paid." If the second option is chosen, the fee paid
shall be the amount in effect as of the date of building permit application.
15. Suitable recreation space shall be provided within one tract that may be separate or may be
combined with the drainage tract in accordance with KCC 21 A.14.180. Improvements shall be
consistent with the requirements of KCC 21A.14.180 and KCC 21A.14.190, including provision
of sport court[s], children's play equipment, picnic table[s], benches, etc.
a. A detailed recreation space plan (i.e., landscape specs, equipment specs, etc.) shall be
submitted for review and approval by DDES and King County Parks prior to or
concurrent with the submittal of the engineering plans. This plan shall comply with
Ordinance# 14045.
b. A performance bond for recreation space improvements shall be posted prior to recording
of the plat.
16. A homeowners' association or other workable organization shall be established to the satisfaction
ofDDES which provides for the ownership and continued maintenance of the recreation, open
space and/or sensitive area tract(s).
I 7. Street trees shall be included in the design of all road improvements, and shall comply with
Section 5.03 of the KCRS and KCC 21A.16.050:
Y.J
'If
L03P0015 -Nichols Place Page 10ofl4
a. Trees shall be planted at a rate of one tree for every 40 feet of frontage along all roads.
Spacing may be modified to accommodate sight distance requirements for driveways and
intersections.
b. Trees shall be located within the street right-of-way and planted in accordance with
Drawing No. 5-009 of the 1993 King County Road Standards, unless King County
Department of Transportation determines that trees should not be located in the street
right-of-way.
c. If King County determines that the required street trees should not be located within the
right-of-way, they shall be located no more than 20 feet from the street right-of-way line.
d. The trees shall be owned and maintained by the abutting lot owners or the homeowners
association or other workable organization unless the County has adopted a maintenance
program. Ownership and maintenance shall be noted on the face of the final recorded
plat.
e. The species of trees shall be approved by ODES iflocated within the right-of-way, and
shall not include poplar, cottonwood, soft maples, gum, any fruit-bearing trees, or any
other tree or shrub whose roots are likely to obstruct sanitary or storm sewers, or that is
not compatible with overhead utility lines.
f. The Applicant shall submit a street tree plan and bond quantity sheet for review and
approval by DOES prior to engineering plan approval.
g. The street trees must be installed and inspected, or a performance bond posted prior to
recording of the plat. If a performance bond is posted, the street trees must be installed
and inspected within one year of recording of the plat. At the time of inspection, if the
trees are found to be installed per the approved plan, a maintenance bond must be
submitted or the performance bond replaced with a maintenance bond, and held for one
year. After one year, the maintenance bond may be released after ODES has completed a
second inspection and determined that the trees have been kept healthy and thriving.
A landscape inspection fee shall also be submitted prior to plat recording. The inspection
fee is subject to change based on current County fees.
18. The following have been established by SEP A as necessary requirements to mitigate the adverse
environmental impacts of this development. The Applicant shall demonstrate compliance with
these items prior to final approval.
Individually, or joint with other area developers, the Applicant shall design and
construct improvements to Southeast I 28th Street at 1601h Ave. SE to mitigate project
impacts at the High Accident Location.
Or, the Applicant shall reduce the project impacts at the High Accident Location by
completing the remainder of the improvements to Southeast 136th Street (i.e. additional
L03POO IS -Nichols Place Pagellofl4
paving, concrete curbs, gutters and sidewalks), between 158th Avenue SE and 160th
Avenue SE, and, revise the channelization at the intersection of 156th Avenue SE/SE
136th Street to provide a southbound left turn lane.
School Mitigation Fees
19. Lots within this subdivision are subject to King County Code 21A.43, which imposes impact fees
to fund school system improvements needed to serve new development. As a condition of final
approval, fifty percent (50%) of the impact fees due for the plat shall be assessed and collected
immediately prior to recording, using the fee schedules in effect when the plat receives final
approval. The balance of the assessed fee shall be allocated evenly to the dwelling units in the
plat and shall be collected prior to building permit issuance.
School Walkways
20. The Applicant, individually or in conjunction with other developers, shall construct an off-site
walkway to Liberty High school from the site. The walkway shall be constructed within the
right-of-way from 160th Ave SE, east along SE 135th Street to 166th Ave SE, and south to
Liberty High School at SE 136th Street, or via alternative right-of-way and easements that
become available and are approved by DOES. One acceptable alternative would be to use future
right-of-way of Southeast 136th Street and 162nd Avenue Southeast to connect with the sidewalk
improvement of"five lot subdivision," and through the plat of"five lot subdivision"/LOOP0023 to
the southwest gate of Liberty High School. The walkway shall be designed and constructed in
accordance with the 1993 King County Road Standards and shown on the engineering plans for
ODES review and approval.
Any surfacing alternative from the King County Road Standards (KCRS 3.09) may be submitted
for approval through a road variance application.
ORDERED this 2nd day of March, 2004.
County Hearing Examiner pro tern
TRANSMITTED this 2nd day of March, 2004, to the parties and interested persons of record:
Marshall Brenden
18225 SE I 28th
Renton WA 98059
Robert Darrow
Haozous Engineering
13428 -45th Court
Mukilteo WA 98275
Ronda Bryant
15406 SE 136th Street
Renton WA 98059
Shirley Day
14412 -167th Pl. SE
Renton WA 98059-6828
Carolyn Ann Buckett
16524 SE 145th St.
Renton WA 98059
Edward June & Kristy Hill
13527 156th Ave. SE
Renton WA 98059
L03POOl5 -Nichols Place
Kathy Graves
13020 -160th Ave. SE
Renton WA 98059
Rebecca Lind
City of Renton
I 055 S Grady Way
Renton WA 98055
Mark & Barbara Nichols
13815 -160th Ave. SE
Renton WA 98059
Roger Paulsen
15657 SE 139th Place
Renton WA 98059
Seattle KC Health Dept.
E. Dist. Environ. Health
14350 SE Eastgate Way
Bellevue WA 98007
Penny Thorbeck
15650 SE 138th Pl.
Renton WA 98059
Laura Casey
DDES/LUSD
Wetland Review
MS OAK-DE-0100
Karen Scharer
DDES/LUSD
Current Planning
MS OAK-DE-0100
Bruce Whittaker
DDES/LUSD
Pre!. Review Engineer
MS OAK-DE-0100
Victor & Gwendolyn High
13405 -158th Ave. SE
Renton WA 98059
James Mahoney
14011 -160th Ave. SE
Renton WA 98059
Gary Norris
Gary Struthers & Associates
3150 Richards Road #200
Bellevue WA 98005
Mike Romano
Centurion Development Services
22617 8th Drive SE
Bothell WA 98021
Claude & Eloise Stachowiak
15652 SE 139th Pl.
Renton WA 98059-7422
Kevin M. Wyman
16540 SE 149th St.
Renton WA 98059
Kristen Langley
DDES/LUSD
Land Use Traffic
MS OAK-DE-0100
Steve Townsend
DDES/LUSD
Land Use Inspections
MS OAK-DE-0100
Page 12 of 14
Don & Diane Kezele
15657 SE 137th Pl.
Renton WA 98059
Kathy Nelson
Transportation Dept.
805 -2nd Ave. S.
Issaquah WA 98027
Richard & Anita Oliphant
16519 SE 145th St.
Renton WA 98059
Vicki & Dale Roppe
14005-160thAve. SE
Renton WA 98059
Howard Stansbury
Centurion Development
22617 -8th Dr. SE
Bothell WA 98021
Greg Borba
DDES/LUSD
MS OAK-DE-0100
Carol Rogers
DDES/LUSD
MS OAK-DE-0100
Larry West
DDES/LUSD
Geo Review
MS OAK-DE-0100
In order to appeal the decision of the Examiner, written notice of appeal must be filed with the Clerk of
the King County Council with a fee of $250.00 ( check payable to King County Office of Finance) on or
before March 16, 2004. If a notice of appeal is filed, the original and six (6) copies of a written appeal
statement specifying the basis for the appeal and argument in support of the appeal must be filed with the
L03P0015 -Nichols Place Page 13 of 14
Clerk of the King County Council on or before March 23, 2004. Appeal statements may refer only to
facts contained in the hearing record; new facts may not be presented on appeal.
Filing requires actual delivery to the Office of the Clerk of the Council, Room I 025, King County
Courthouse, 516 3"' Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98104, prior to the close of business (4:30 p.m.) on the
date due. Prior mailing is not sufficient if actual receipt by the Clerk does not occur within the applicable
time period. The Examiner does not have authority to extend the time period unless the Office of. the
Clerk is not open on the specified closing date, in which event delivery prior to the close of business on
the next business day is sufficient to meet the filing requirement.
If a written notice of appeal and filing fee are not filed within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date of
this report, or if a written appeal statement and argument are not filed within twenty-one (21) calendar
days of the date of this report, the decision of the hearing examiner contained herein shall be the final
decision of King County without the need for further action by the Council.
MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 24, 2004, PUBLIC HEARJNG ON DEPARTMENT OF
DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FILE NO. L03P0015.
James N. O'Connor was the Hearing Examiner in this matter. Participating in the hearing were Karen
Scharer, Bruce Whittaker and Kristen Langley, representing the Department; Michael Romano and Duana
Koluskova representing the Applicant; and Gwendolyn High, Kristy Hill, Claude Stachowiak, Gary
Noris, Diane Kezele, Ronda Bryant, and Robert Darrow.
The following exhibits were offered and entered into the record:
Exhibit No. I
Exhibit No. 2
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
Exhibit No. 3
Exhibit No. 4
Exhibit No. 5
Exhibit No. 6
Exhibit No. 7
Exhibit No. 8
Exhibit No. 9
Exhibit No. I 0
Exhibit No. 11
Exhibit No. 12
Exhibit No. 13
Exhibit No. 14
Exhibit No. 15
Exhibit No. 16
DOES file no. L03P0015
ODES preliminary report for L03POOl 5, with the following attachments:
Lot plat design
Density calculations (R-4 with 8 TD Rs), dated 5/29/03
Memo from Issaquah School District, dated 5/23/03
Certificate of water availability, dated 6/18/03
City of Renton letters, dated 6/15/01, 1/15/03 and 1/14/04
City of Renton sewer certificate,.dated 5/18/01
Certificate of Transportation Concurrency, dated 5/22/02
Corrections/revisions to the 2/24/04 Preliminary Staff R~port
Application for land use permit (no. L03TY 404)-Nichols Place zone
reclassification, received 5/19/2003
Environmental checklist, received 5/19/2003
SEP A mitigated determination of non-significance, issued 12/23/2003
Affidavit of posting indicating a posting date of6/30/2003, received 7/02/2003
Site plan (23 lot preliminary plat map), received 5/19/2003
Assessors map(!) SE 14-23-05, revised 12/03/2000
Density Credit Transfer Agreement for 5 TDRs, dated 2/20/2004
Density Credit Transfer Agreement for 3 TDRs, dated 2/20/2004
Traffic Impact Analysis by Garry Struthers Assoc., received 5/19/2003
Revised Traffic Impact Analysis, received 11/12/2003
Walkway study prepared by dmp, inc., dated 8/18/2003
Walking Route Analysis, annotated by ODES, prepared 2/23/2004
Email from Issaquah School District re: school walkways as related to plat conditions
ofLOOP0023, dated 3/10/2003
L03P0015 -Nichols Place
Exhibit No. 17
Exhibit No. 18
Exhibit No. 19
Exhibit No. 20
Exhibit No. 21
Exhibit No. 22
Exhibit No. 23
Exhibit No. 24
Exhibit No. 25
Exhibit No. 26
Exhibit No. 27
Exhibit No. 28
Exhibit No. 29
Exhibit No. 30
Exhibit No. 31
Exhibit No. 32
Exhibit No. 33
Exhibit No. 34
Exhibit No. 35
Exhibit No. 36
JNO:ms
L03POOJ5 RPT
Page 14 of14
TIR by Haozous Engineering, PS, dated 5/18/2003
King County SWDM adjustment, no. L03V0036, dated 9/04/2003
Wetland and Drainage Corridor Site Reconnaissance Assessment by Habitat
Technologies, dated 10/11/2002
Tributary area map, annotations by DOES, prepared 2/2004
Haozous Engineering update/response to screening Jetter, dated 10/27/2003
Hearing Examiner Report and Decision for Evendell (file no. L03RE038), dated
2/04/2004
Email from Shirley Day, dated 2/03/2004
Letter from Gwendolyn High for CARE, dated I /26/2004
Email from James Mahoney, dated 7/09/2003
Email from Claude & Eloise Stachowiak, dated I 1/16/2003
Letter from Bill & Dona Mokin, dated 2/07/2004
Letter from Anita & Richard Oliphant, dated 1/29/2004
Statement from Diane Kezele, dated 2/09/2004
Statement from Anita & Rich Oliphant, dated 2/24/2004
CARE response, dated 2/24/2004
CARE updated household list
Not used
Sign-in sheet for 2/24/2004 hearing
Revisions to traffic study from Gary Norris of Garry Struthers Assoc., dated
2/24/2004
Statement from Claude R. & Eloise M. Stachowiak, dated 2/23/2004
A.
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
LAND USE SERVICES DIVISION
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER
February 24, 2004 -PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:30 AM
Hearing Room at DDES
900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest
Renton, WA 98055-1219
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF NICHOLS PLACE
FILE NO: L03POOI5
PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO: #2004-0013
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION:
This is a request for preliminary plat approval of Nichols Place to allow 23 lots through
use of density credit transfer (TDR). The 23 lots would mostly be 4,320 square feet in area and
have a width of 45 feet. As part of the plat, a recreation area serving the plat is proposed. The
drainage detention area planned will serve Nichols Place and be.sized to accommodate drainage
for the Plat of Evendell immediately to the north. Access to the Nichols Place lots is proposed
via 160th Ave. SE. See Attachment I.
B. GENERAL INFORMATION:
Proponent:
Representative:
Location:
U.S. Land Development Association
P.O. Box 22200
Seattle, WA 98122
Michael Romano
Centurion Development Services
22617 81h Dr. SE, Bothell, WA 98021
Phone: 425-486-2563
Facsimile: ( 425) 486-3273
e-mail: Michael.romano@verizon.net
The site is located west of 1601h Ave. SE, south of SE 1381h Street
(if extended) at 13815 160th Ave. SE
Section/Township/Range: SE 14-23-05 Parcels# 142305 9058
Acreage Plat: 3.82 acres
Current Zoning: R-4·
Number of Lots: 23 proposed using 8 TDR's
C.
Density: 6 dwellings per acre
Lot Size: 4,320 square feet
Proposed Use: single family
Sewage Disposal: City of Renton
Water Supply: Water District #90
Fire District: King County Fire District# 25
School District: Issaquah
Community Plan: Newcastle
Drainage Subbasin: Lower Cedar River
King County Permits: Subdivision
Complete Application Date: June 19, 2003
L03P0015/Nichols Place
Page 2
Threshold Determination: Mitigated Determination ofNonsignificance (MDNS)
Date oflssuance: December 23, 2003
KC Permit Contact: Karen Scharer, Project Manager II, Current Planning Section, LUSD
Phone# 296-7114 or e-mail at karen.scharer@metrokc.gov
HISTORY /BACKGROUND:
1. For the preliminary plat of Nichols Place (L03POO 15), the Subdivision Technical
Conunittee (STC) of King County has conducted an on-site examination of the subject property.
The STC discussed the proposed development with the applicant and clarified technical details of
the application to determine the compatibility with applicable King County plans, codes, and
other official documents.
In mid December 2003, the STC determined that there was sufficient information presented to
proceed with issuance of a SEPA TD and scheduling of a public hearing on the request.
2. The applicant originally applied for rezone to R-6 (L03TY404) or alternatively use TDR
credits to develop the proposed plat with 23 lots. The applicant chose to withdraw the rezone and
base the plat design on R-4 zoning and use of 8 TDR density credits.
D. THRESHOLD DETERMINATION OF ENVIRONMENT AL SIGNIFICANCE:
Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW 43.21C, the responsible official of
the Land Use Services Division (LUSD) issued a threshold determination -mitigated
determination of non-significance (MDNS) for the proposed development on December 23, 2003.
This determination was based on the review of the environmental checklist and other pertinent
documents, resulting in the conclusion that the proposal would not cause probable significant
adverse impacts on the environment with implementation of mitigation for the proposal.
Therefore, an environmental impact statement (EIS) was not required prior to proceeding with the
review process.
Agencies, affected Native American tribes and the public were offered the opportunity to
conunent on or appeal the determination for 21 days. The MDNS was not appealed by any party,
including the applicant, and it has been incorporated as part of the applicant's proposal.
E.
F.
The MONS states:
L03P0015/Nichols Place
Page 3
The following mitigation measures shall be attached as conditions of permit issuance. These
mitigation measures are consistent with policies, plans, rules, or regulations designated by
KCC 20.44.080 as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority and in effect when this
threshold determination is issued. Key sources of substantive authority for each mitigation
measure are in parentheses; however, other sources of substantive authority may exist but are not
expressly listed.
Individually, or joint with other area developers, the Applicant shall design and construct
improvements to Southeast 128th Street at 160 1h Ave. SE to mitigate project impacts at
the High Accident Location.
Or, the Applicant shall reduce the project impacts at the High Accident Location by
completing the remainder of the improvements to Southeast 136th Street (i.e. additional
paving, concrete curbs, gutters and sidewalks), between 158th Avenue SE and 160th
A venue SE, and, revise the channelization at the intersection of 156th A venue SE/SE
136th Street to provide a southbound left turn lane.
AGENCIES CONT ACTED:
I. King County Natural Resources & Parks Division: No response.
2. King County Fire Protection Engineer: Fire protection engineering preliminary approval
has been granted as requested.
3. Seattle-King County Health Department: No response.
4. Issaquah School District: See comments contained in report and Attachment 3.
5. Water District# 90: See Attachment 4.
6. City of Renton: See Attachments 5 and 6.
7. Washington State Department of Ecology: No response.
8. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife: No response.
9. Washington State Department of Natural Resources: No response.
10. Washington State Department ofTransportation: No response.
11. METRO: No response.
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT:
I. Topography: The site appears level and only slightly slopes with a IO-foot difference in
elevation from the north west corner to the southeast corner of the site.
2. Soils: Surface soils are found on this site per King County Soil Survey, 1973 include:
'5'/
L03POO 15/Nichols Place
Page4
AgC -Alderwood gravely, sandy loam; 6-15 % slopes. Runoff is slow and the erosion hazard is
slight. This soil type has a moderate limitation for low building foundations due to a seasonally
high water table, and severe limitations for septic tank filter fields due to very slow permeability
in the substratum.
3. Sensitive Areas: A Wetland Report by Habitat Technologies, dated October 11, 2002 was
received by DDES and the site has been field checked by DOES staff. No sensitive areas were
observed or documented. There is a probable class 2 wetland and a class 3 stream along the
downstream drainage route from this property.
Improvements to the downstream drainage system will have to be reviewed to ensure that
wetlands are not being drained or flooded as a result, streams will not be placed in pipes, or
damaged by increased flows. Enlarging culverts, if any, in a sensitive area may require a clearing
and grading permit if not approved under plat review.
4. Hydrography: A Level Three Downstream Drainage Analysis, dated October 27, 2003
was submitted to King County DOES.
The Nichols Place subdivision is located in the Orting Hills subbasin of the Lower Cedar River
drainage basin. A low north/south ridge divides the site into eastern and western subbasins. The
western subbasin sheetflows to the southwest across the west and south property lines onto
adjoining parcels. These flows eventually reach 156th Ave SE via SE 139th Place. The larger
eastern basin sheetflows across the south property line and into the existing roadside ditch on the
west side 1601h Ave NE. The downstream path continues south in the roadside ditch to a cross
culvert under 1601
h Ave SE to the east side. Then the flow continues south along the east side in
a ditch, through two culverts, and turning east across an undeveloped parcel south of house
#14028 (approx. 650 feet downstream). This area contains wetlands (likely class 2) and the flow
enters the site as a class 3 stream. The stream continues east through this parcel to the unopened
right-of-way for 162"d Ave SE. The stream turns south and continues to SE 144 1h St. The
drainage then turns west in the SE 1441
h St. drainage system, eventually flowing into the Cedar
River.
The cross culvert under 160 1h Ave SE and the two downstream culverts along the east side have
recently been upsized. There are two undersized conveyance culverts on the above undeveloped
parcel that have a history of conveyance nuisance flooding problems. The proposed plat
conditions include upsizing these two culverts, if permission can be obtained from the owner.
The proposal is to collect most runoff from the project site and direct it to a single detention and
water quality facility in the southeast comer of the site. The detention facility is required to meet
the Level 2 flow control requirements and Basic water quality menu in the 1998 King County
Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM).
Conditions of the Drainage Adjustment, L03V0036, September 4, 2003 approval, allows the
diversion of runoff from the natural location to a single facility draining to 1601h Ave. SE.:
L03P0015/Nichols Place
Page 5
I. The release rates for the detention facility will be based on only that portion of the site that
naturally drains to the location that is being diverted to.
2. The volume for the detention facility will be based on all flows directed to the
facility at full development under current zoning. The allowed release rate will be
reduced by any undetained flows that would bypass the proposed subdivision
drainage facilities. The detention volume shall be sized using the Level Two flow
control standard in the 1998 KCSWDM. A 10 to 20 percent volumetric factor of
safety must be applied to all storm events requiring detention. The design Technical
Information Report shall state the factor of safety selected and the basis of that
determination.
3. Water quality facilities must be sized based on the entire proposed subdivision
draining to the facilities including any required frontage improvements.
4. The onsite drainage facility must be located in a public right-of-way, recreation
space tract with easement or storm drainage tract dedicated to King County.
5. Any additional storm drainage requirements identified by SEP A or the plat hearing
review will apply to this project.
5. Vegetation: The western edge of the site is forested with Douglas Fir and Maple and a
row of evergreen trees is present along the frontage to 1601h Ave SE. Most of the site is in
pasture.
6. Wildlife: Both small birds and animals likely frequent the site.
G. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS:
The site is located in the east potential annexation area of Renton. Properties located nearby vary
in size from large 5-acre parcels to small urban lots. The neighborhood is rapidly changing from
a rural-suburban character to an urbanized area with mostly single family,h~mes and some related
services such as schools, a fire station, churches and parks. Developed lots· immediately nearby
are on septic systems. These lots are approximately 9,000 square feet to 30,000 square feet in
size. Many of the parcels are currently considered as under utilized within the urban designation.
Zoning immediately surrounding the plat of Nichols Place is R-4.
The plat of Evendell located immediately to the north was preliminarily approved for 46 lots.
King County is currently processing an application for major revision (L03RE038) to allow 70
lots based on R-4 zoning with 20 TOR -density credit transfers. The examiner's hearing on this
application was held on January 22, 2004 and decision was issued on February 4, 2004 approving
the plat ( unless appealed).
H.
L03P0015/Nichols Place
Page 6
Liberty Grove L03P0006 and Liberty Grove Contiguous L03P0005 are scheduled for plat hearing
on February I 0, 2004. Liberty Grove with 24 lots (5 TDR credits) is located north ofEvendell.
Liberty Grove Contifuous with 36 Jots (4 TDR credits) is located on the east side of 1601h Ave.
SE south of SE 136 1 St. Both of these plats include requests for TDR credits.
Anyone wishing to obtain a copy of the examiner's decision regarding any of these plats should
contact the examiner's office at 206-296-4660.
The primarily approved plat of Hamilton Place (L02POOI J) is located on property which is a
parcel north of Liberty Grove between 158 1h Ave. SE & 1601h Ave. SE. Lots proposed would
average approximately 5,000-sq. ft. each. Transfer of 6 density credits was approved for this plat.
The parcel with the preliminarily approved plat of"5 Lot Subdivision" also known as Dickinson,
LOOP0023 is located south off 162"d Ave. SE and contains 5 lots averaging .9 d.u.'s per acre.
Homes would be served by septic, and dry sewers will be installed as part of plat approval. This
plat is currently in for engineering review.
DDES also has held other pre-application meetings for plats in the immediate area. Timing for
submittal of further applications is unknown.
On-Site: The existing residence centrally located on the property is accessible off 1601h Ave. SE.
There are also out buildings just west of the house and a shed near the south property line. The
majority of the site is in pasture with evergreens along the west and east property lines. Most of
the existing trees will need to be removed for plat and home construction.
SUBDIVISION DESIGN FEATURES:
1. Lot Pattern and Density: The proposed lot and street layout is in conformance with King
County Codes (i.e. KCC 21A and the 1993 King County Road Standards. Density calculations
for the plat average 6 d.u.'s per acre. The 23 Jots ranging in area from 4,230 square feet.
2. Internal Circulation: Most Jots will front onto a J>ublic street that provides an internal
street system within the subdivision and exits out to 160 Ave. SE. Three Joint Use
Development Tracts (JUDT's) that connect to the public street will serve a few other lots. See
the proposed plat layout, Attachment 1 to this report.
3. Roadway Section: As proposed by the applicant, 160th Ave. SE frontage would be improved
with urban improvements, including curd, gutter and sidewalks.
The public street planned as SE 139th St. will be improved as a urban subaccess street. There are
three J.U.D.T.'s, one south central on the site and the other two at the west end of the plat. Each
will each serve two lots.
4. Drainage: The proposal is to collect most runoff from the project site and direct it to a
single detention and water quality facility in the southeast corner of the site. The detention
L03POO 15/Nichols Place
Page 7
facility is required to meet the Level 2 flow control requirements and Basic water quality menu in
the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM).
The Level One Drainage Analysis identified downstream drainage complaints associated with the
proposed discharge location. Recent conveyance upgrades have been installed along this route to
mitigate for these previous complaints. Due to the accumulative effect of increased development
in this area, more conveyance upgrades are needed.
The proposed plat conditions include upsizing two culverts down stream,, if permission can be
obtained from the owner. At present, permission has not been obtained. Instead ofupsizing
culverts on his property, it is the understanding of DOES that the owner requested the applicant
to re-route flows around the perimeter of his property. Since there are both wetlands and a stream
these flows contribute to on this site, neither county code or county policy would support the
relocation of the stream to the perimeter edge.
I. TRANSPORTATION PLANS:
I. Transportation Plans: The King County Transportation Plan indicates that 1601h Ave. SE
is a non-Arterial Road. The King County Nonmotorized Transportation Plan does not designate
this roadway for bicycles of equestrian use. The subject subdivision is not in conflict with this
Transportation Plan, the King County Regional Trails Plan, nor Nonmotorized Plan.
2. Subdivision Access: The subdivision will gain access from one access points: 160th Ave.
SE. Trips will be sent to the intersection of Southeast 128th Street at 160th Avenue Southeast
which has, as of June 2003, been placed upon King County DOT's High Accident Location list
(ID: HAL #16). The recommended countermeasure is to construct both east and west left turn
channelization at the intersection. These improvement measures ·are appropriately required prior
to King County approving further development that would reduce the level of safety by adding
vehicles trips to this intersection. Therefore, due to the additional impacts, mitigation of project
impacts at this intersection is necessary and was made a condition of the MONS. Alternatively, if
another local access route is· provided and development impacts are mitigated, then improvements
at the intersection could be deferred.
The alternative local access route would be at SE 1361h St. between 1561h Ave. SE and 160 1h Ave.
SE provided that the 70 lot plat design for Evendell is approved and constructed. The Evendell
improvements with the 70 lot design include a 'half-street' improvement opposite the frontage of
the proposed plat of Liberty Grove (L03P0006). Completion of the balance of the improvements
by this Applicant (Nichols Place) could provide a more attractive alternative route for project-
generated trips that would otherwise enter the HAL at SE 1281h St. identified by King County
DOT. This alternative is afforded under the MONS.
Typically, absent a direct connection to this roadway, improvements to Southeast 136th Street by
the Applicant would not be required as a condition of plat approval or under a MONS. However,
by completing the improvements to Subcollector Street (Urban) standards, project-generated trips
of the plat of would have an alternative westbound access (towards the City of Renton) along
J.
L03POO 15/Nichols Place
Page 8
Southeast 128th Street at the signalized intersection of 156th Avenue SE. Additionally, project-
generated trips would have the alternative access to SR-169 from plat-generated trips by use of
SE 1361h Street (in lieu of traveling northbound on 1601h Ave. SE., making the left tum at the
intersection of 128 1h Street -the HAL -and another left tum at the 1561h Ave. SE signal).
Mitigation is listed in Section D of this report.
Under either scenario, road improvements would be completed to assure a safe access route for
resulting traffic from this plat.
3. Traffic Generation: It is expected that approximately 230 vehicle trips per day will be
generated with full development of the proposed subdivision. This calculation includes service
vehicles (i.e., mail delivery, garbage pick-up, school bus) which may currently serve this
neighborhood, as well as work trips, shopping, etc.
4. Adequacy of Arterial Roads: This proposal has been reviewed under the criteria in King
County Code 14.70, Transportation Concurrency Management; 14.80, Intersection Standards; and
King County Code 14.75; Mitigation Payment System.
a. King County Code 14.70 -Transportation Concurrency Management: The
Transportation Certificate of Concurrency indicates that transportation
improvements or strategies will be in place at the time of development, or that a
financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements or strategies
within six (6) years, according to RCW 36.70A.070(6).
b. King County Code 14.80 -Intersection Standards: The arterial system will
accommodate the increased traffic volume generated by this proposal provided the
conditions of the SEPA MONS are implemented. See Section D of this report for
conditions and Section I. 2. above for a discussion of the status of the intersect of
SE I28 1h St. and 1601h Ave SE.
c. King County Code 14.75 -Mitigation Payment System:
King County Code 14. 75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS), requires the
payment of a traffic impact mitigation fee (MPS fee) and an administration fee for
each single family residential lot or unit created. MPS fees are determined by the
zone in which the site is located. This site is in Zone 452 per the
MPS/Quartersection list. MPS fees may be paid at the time of final plat recording,
or deferred until building permits are issued. The amount of the fee will be
determined by the applicable fee ordinance at the time the fee is collected.
PUBLIC SERVICES:
I. Schools: This proposal has been reviewed under RCW 58.17 .110 and King County Code
21A.28 (School Adequacy).
L03POOl 5/Nichols Place
Page 9
a. School Facilities: The subject subdivision will be served by the Issaquah School
District (Briarwood, Maywood Middle, & Liberty High schools).
b. School Capacity: The Issaquah School Board has adopted capacity figures which
indicate their ability to accommodate additional students. The capacity figures for 2004
through 2008 show at minimum an excess capacity of 779 per the 2002 Capital Facilities
Plan for the District. The figures reveal the district has adequate capacity to accommodate
the anticipated students generated by this proposal.
c. School Impact Fees: The Issaquah School District has adopted a fee of$4,617 for
each new single family residential unit. A total of 23 new dwellings would be added to
the Issaquah District.
d. School Access: The Issaquah District has provided information as to the location
of existing bus stops. This information is reflected on the School Walkway Access Study
submitted Sept. 3, 2003 for the Plats of Liberty Grove and Liberty Grove Contiguous.
The current bus stop for middle and high school students is located at the intersection of
SE 1301h Street with 162nd Ave SE. Bussing occurs at present due to lack.of safe
walkways to the schools. It is the District's position that with the influx of new students
in the area as a result of new homes being built, these new development nearby should
provide acceptable walking facilities to the local schools.
The local schools serving this property are all within one mile of the plat of Nichols Place.
The school district has submitted updated information since their written response (see
attachment 3) indicating that at the existing bus stop for Liberty High School and
Maywood Middle School is at SE 1301h Street and 162nd Ave. SE. Currently the area is
underdeveloped and has poor pedestrian connections; bus service for students within one
mile of the schools has been provided by the district. The district views this bus service
as temporary only and requests that with construction of new nearby housing
developments, safe walking access to schools be provided.
Per a request by DDES, the applicant of Liberty Grove!and;Liberty Grove Contiguous
provided information clarifying which streets that have been improved with pedestrian
walkways. A narrative indicated that a walkway system to Liberty High School as
infeasible. DDES staff has taken exception to this analysis and finds that a walkway is
feasible along SE 135th Street between 160th Ave SE and 1661h Ave. SE. (then south on
I 661h Ave SE one block to the school). This location of a walkway would provide a high
level of visibility of the students walking from nearby residences and students would only
need to walk past one wooded parcel on the south side of SE 135'h Street. DDES does
concede that that location for a walkway would be costly to construct do to the existing
driveways and open ditch construction along this corridor.
An alternative access to Liberty High School is being planned in conjunction with the plat
of"5 Lot Subdivision". Paved sidewalks and a paved pedestrian walkway are planned
from the subdivision frontage on 162nd Ave. SE east/southeast to the southwest corner of
the Liberty High School where there is a gated school entry.
K.
L03POO 15/Nichols Place
Page 10
This subdivision is also scheduled to construct safe access to the middle school, a four
foot wide graveled path south from the southeast comer of the plat, south along 1641h Ave.
SE to SE 142nd St. (if extended). The district has determined that the walking area
between SE 142nd St. and SE 1441h St. on 1641h Ave SE is safe, as the street paving is
approximately 30 feet wide with very little traffic. There are already safe walking
conditions on SE 1441h St. for school children to walk from 1641h Ave SE east to the
middle school.
2. Parks and Recreation Space: The nearest public park is located on the south west comer
of 152nd Ave. SE and SE 1361h St. The applicant has proposed on-site recreation areas Tract D
and a portion of the detention area Tract E. Recreation area will be on the east/central portion of
the plat. The details of improvements will be designed and submitted for approval prior to final
plat.
KCC 2 IA.14 requires subdivisions in the UR and R zone classifications to either provide on-site
recreation space or pay a fee to the Parks Division for establishment and maintenance of
neighborhood parks.
The required recreation area equals 8,970 s. f. Tract D with 4,950 s.f. (rec. area) and E with
26,257 s.f. (detention) will be required to be combined and comply with the minimum sq. ft. for
recreation area under the standards ofKCC 2IA.14.180.
Per KCC 21A.14.180 E, one tot lot and one additional playground/recreational facility will be
required.
3. Fire Protection: The Certificate of Water Availability from W. D. 90 indicates that water
is presently available to the site in sufficient quantity to satisfy King County Fire Flow Standards.
Prior to final recording of the plat, the water service facilities must be reviewed and approved per
King County Fire Flow Standards.
UTILITIES:
I. Sewage Disposal: A letter from the City of Renton, dated January 15, 2003 states the
availability of sewer and indicates the city's capability to serve the proposed development. A
sewage pump station will be required to be constructed as this plat can not be served by gravity
flow. Currently, the lift station planned associated with Evendell would be located at the
southeast comer of Nichols Place to provide the best service to the neighborhood. The existing
sewer line will be extended east along SE 136'h Street and south along 1601h Ave. SE to provide
connection to Renton' s sewer system.
2. Water Supply: The applicant proposes to serve the subject subdivision with water from
Water District 90. A Certificate of Water Availability, dated June 18, 2003, indicates this
district's capability to serve the proposed development.
L.
I.
COMPREHENSIVE AND COMMUNITY PLAN:
Comprehensive Plan 2000 Land Use Map:
L03P0015/Nichols Place
Page 11
This proposal is governed by the 2000 King County Comprehensive Plan with Land Use Map
that designates this area as "Urban Residential, 4-12 dwellings per acre".
Comment: The proposal would yield an overall density of 6 dwellings per acre.
2. Comprehensive Plan Policy:
Policy U-113 New residential development in the Urban Growth Area should occur where
facilities and services can be provided at the lowest public cost and in a timely fashion. The
Urban Growth Area should have a variety of housing types and prices, including mobile home
parks, multi-family development, townhouses and small-lot, single-family development.
Policy U-114 King County shall seek to achieve through future planning efforts over the next
twenty years, an average zoning density of at least seven to eight homes per acre in the Urban
Growth Area through a mix of densities and housing types. A lower density zone may be used to
recognize existing subdivisions with little or no opportunity for infill or redevelopment.
U-122 King County supports increases in urban residential density through a rezone or a
proposal to increase density through the density transfer or density incentive programs when the
proposal will help resolve traffic, sewer, water, parks or open.-s.pace deficiencies in the immediate
neighborhood.
Comment: The proposal is in conformance with the above policies. Note that the Zoning Code does not
specify that any special thresholds or requirements beyond SEPA and platting requirements for providing
adequate services to support the development that is proposed.
In this specific case, the development will provide extension of sewer:and locate a pump station with the
ability to serve over a 37 acre area providing future opportunity for se\'ler.hook-up by other nearby
property owners.
Under the SEPA MONS, SE 1281
h Street intersection improvements, or alternativelr frontage
improvements along the north side of SE 1361
h St. will be constructed between 158 1 Ave. SE and SE
1601h Street.
Additionally, the applicant will be required to provide safe walkways to middle and high schools, and
also safe access to the elementary bus stop which will add to pedestrian safety in the neighborhood.
3. Under the 2000 Comprehensive Plan and Ord.# 14049, both effective as of March 12, 2001,
all new residential development in the urban area must be served by sewer. Providing sewer to this
and other properties in the immediate area will require a sewage pump station to facilitate new
residential development. As a result, development of the subject property and a pump station will
help to make possible new homes on other properties nearby.
M. PLAT STATUTES/CODES:
L03POOl 5/Nichols Place
Page 12
I. If approved with the recommended conditions in this report, the proposed development
will comply with the requirements of the County and State Platting Codes and Statutes,
and the lots in the proposed subdivision will comply with the minimum dimensional
requirements of the zone district.
2. King County Road Standards Section 1.03 -Responsibility to Provide Roadway
Improvements:
A. Any land development which will impact the service level, safety, or operational
efficiency of serving roads or is required by other County code or ordinance to improve
such roads shall improve those roads in accordance with these Standards. 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 ...
3. RCW 58.17.110 Approval or disapproval of subdivision and dedication-Factors to
be considered-Conditions for approval-Finding-Release from damages.
(1) The city, town, or county legislative body shall inquire into the public use and interest
proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall
· determine: a) If appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health,
safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other
public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation,
playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts,
including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for
students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the pubHc interest will be
served by the subdivision and dedication.
(2) A proposed subdivision and dedication shall not be approved unless the city,
town, or county legislative body makes written findings that: (a) Appropriate provisions
are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and for such open spaces,
drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stoy~. potable water
supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools' and schoolgrounds
and all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure
safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) the public
use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication. If it
finds that the proposed subdivision and dedication make such appropriate provisions and
that the public use and interest will be served, then the legislative body shall approve the
proposed subdivision and dedication ...
4. KCC 20.24.180 Examiner findings. When the examiner renders a decision or
recommendation, he or she shall make and enter findings of fact and conclusions from the
record which support the decision and the findings and conclusions shall set forth and
demonstrate the manner in which the decision or recommendation is consistent with, carries
out and helps implement applicable state laws and regulations and the regulations, policies,
~---------------------------------------
L03P0015/Nichols Place
Page 13
objectives and goals of the comprehensive plan, subarea or community plans, the zoning
code, the land segregation code and other official Jaws, policies and objectives of King
County, and that the recommendation or decision will not be umeasonably incompatible
with or detrimental to affected properties and the general public.
5. KCC20.24.195 Additional examiner findings -preliminary plats. When the examiner
makes a decision regarding an application for a proposed preliminary plat, the decision
shall include additional findings as to whether:
A. Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and
for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit
stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools
and school grounds and all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning
features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from
school; and
B. The public use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and
dedication. (Ord. 12196 § 38, 1996: Ord. 9544 § 16, 1990).
6. 21A.12.030 Densities and dimensions -residential zones.
A. Densities and dimensions -residential zones.
Base Density: 4 dwelling units per acre
Maximum Density: 6 dwelling units per acre
Minimum Density: 85% of base density
B. Development conditions.
I. This maximum density may be achieved only thrnugh the application of
residential density incentives in accordance with ... transfers of development
rights in accordance with K.C.C. chapter 21A.37 ...
7. 21A.37.030 Transfer of development rights (TOR) program -receiving sites.
A. Receiving sites shall be:
I. King County unincorporated urban sites, ... zoned R-4 .... The sites may also
be within potential annexation areas established under. the countywide planning
policies; or. ..
B. Except as provided in this chapter development of an unincorporated King County
receiving site shall remain subject to all zoning code provisions for the base zone,
except TDR receiving site developments shall comply with dimensional standards
of the zone with a base density most closely comparable to the total approved
density of the TDR receiving site development.
C. An unincorporated King County receiving site may accept development rights
from one or more sending sites, up to the maximum density permitted under
K.C.C. 21A.12.030 and 21A.12.040.
N. ANALYSIS / CONCLUSIONS:
1. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW 43.21 C, the responsible
official of the Land Use Services Division (LUSD) issued a threshold determination -
mitigated determination of non-significance (MDNS)for the proposed rezone and plat on
(Q\
L03P0015/Nichols Place
Page 14
December 23, 2003. This determination was based on the review of the environmental
checklist and other pertinent documents, resulting in the conclusion that with implementation
of mitigation, the proposal would not cause probable significant adverse impacts on the
environment.
2. Comprehensive Plan Policy U-122 supports increases in urban residential density when the
proposal will help resolve traffic, sewer, water, parks or open space deficiencies in the
immediate neighborhood. This plat will provide basic neighborhood infrastructure benefits in
the form of road improvements on 160th Avenue Southeast, school walkways and other
improvements which are commonly be required as part of preliminary approval for a plat.
There has not been an offer by the applicant to provide neighborhood improvements beyond that
which would normally be expected with preliminary plat approval under the R-4 designation
and SEP A. Nor has staff suggested any further conditions as appropriate.
It is noted that KCC 2 IA.37 -transfer of density does not require an applicant of a plat to
"benefit a neighborhood" beyond the basic needs for implementation and approval of the plat.
The plat application is in conformance with this policy and also U-113 and U-114 regarding
urban density and development.
3. King County has notified the City of Renton and other local agencies of the request. The City
did express concern with road improvement standards to be used. At this time an interlocal
agreement has not been signed between the two jurisdictions by which King County would
alternatively recognize City of Renton standards for street improvements.
4. The subject subdivision with density credit transfer will comply :with the goals and objectives
of the King County Comprehensive Plan and will comply with the requirements of the
Subdivision and Zoning Codes and other official land use controls ·of King County, based on
the recommendation below conditions for final plat approval.
0. RECOMMENDATIONS:
L03POOl5 -Grant preliminary approval of the May 19, 2003 preliminary plat of Nichols Place with the
transfer of eight density credits, subject to the following conditions of final approval:
I. Compliance with all platting provisions of Title 19 of the King County Code.
2. · All persons having an ownership interest in the subject property shall sign on the face of
the final plat a dedication which includes the language set forth in King County Council
Motion No. 5952.
3. a. The plat shall comply with the maximum density (and minimum density) requirements
of the R-4 zone classification. All lots shall meet the minimum dimensional
requirements of the R-6 zone classification or shall be as shown on the face of the
approved preliminary plat, whichever is larger, except that minor revisions to the plat
L03P0015/Nichols Place
which do not result in substantial changes may be approved at the discretion of the
Department of Development and Environmental Services.
Page 15
b. The Applicant shall provide Transfer of Density Credit documentation to ODES prior
to final approval to allow transfer of a maximum of eight density credits.
4. The applicant must obtain final approval from the King County Health Department for
abandonment of existing septic systems on-site.
5. All construction and upgrading of public and private roads shall be done in accordance
with the King County Road Standards established and adopted by Ordinance No. 11187,
as amended ( 1993 KCRS).
6. The applicant must obtain the approval of the King County Fire Protection Engineer for
the adequacy of the fire hydrant, water main, and fire flow standards of Chapter 17.08 of
the King County Code.
7. Final plat approval shall require full compliance with the drainage provisions set forth in
King County Code 9.04. Compliance may result in reducing the number and/or location
oflots as shown on the preliminary approved plat. Preliminary review has identified the
following conditions of approval which represent portions of the drainage requirements.
All other applicable requirements in KCC 9.04 and the Surface Water Design Manual
(SWDM) must also be satisfied during engineering and final review.
a. Drainage plans and analysis shall comply with the 1998 King County Surface
Water Design Manual and applicable updates adopted-by King County. ODES
approval of the drainage and roadway plans is required prior to any construction.
b. Current standard plan notes and ESC notes, as established by DOES Engineering
Review, shall be shown on the engineering plans.
c. The following note shall be shown on the final recorded·plat:
All building downspouts, footing drains, and drains. from all impervious surfaces
such as patios and driveways shall be connected to the permanent storm drain
outlet as shown on the approved construction drawings # on file
with DOES and/or the King County Department of Transportation. This plan shall
be submitted with the application of any building permit. All connections of the
drains must be constructed and approved prior to the final building inspection
approval. For those lots that are designated for individual lot infiltration systems,
the systems shall be constructed at the time of the building permit and shall
comply with plans on file." ·
d. The stormwater detention design shall comply with the Level 2 Flow Control
requirements per the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual
(KCSWDM).
L03POO 15/Nichols Place
Page 16
e. The storm water control facility shall be located in a separate tract and dedicated
to King County unless portions of the drainage tract are used for required
recreation space in accordance with KCC 2IA.14.180.
8. The drainage detention facility shall be designed to meet at a minimum to the Level 2 Flow
Control and Basic Water Quality menu in the 1998 King County Surface Water Design
Manual (KCSWDM).
9. Offsite drainage improvement: The two existing downstream culverts across undeveloped
Lot 6 of Cedar Park Five Acre Tracts shall be upgraded per the Level 3 Offsite Analysis
(locations 50 and 51 ). Permission is required from the owner to construct the
improvements. If permission cannot be obtained following a documented good faith effort,
this improvement is not required.
I 0. A surface water adjustment (L03V0036) is approved for this subdivision. All conditions of
approval for this adjustment shall be met prior to approval of the engineering plans.
I I. The following road improvements are required to be constructed according to the 1993
King County Road Standards (KCRS):
a. SE 139th St. shall be improved at a minimum to the urban subaccess street
standard.
b. FRONTAGE: The frontage of the site along 160'h Ave SE (west side only) shall be
improved to the urban neighborhood standard.
c. Tracts A, Band C shall be improved as joint use driveways per Section 3.01 of the
KCRS. These driveways shall be owned and maintained by the Jot owners served.
Notes to this effect shall be shown on the engineering plans and on the final plat
map.
d. Modifications to the above road conditions may be considered according to the
variance provisions in Section 1.08 of the KCRS.
12. There shall be no direct vehicular access to or from 160'h Ave. SE from those lots, which
abut this street. A note to this effect shall appear on the engineering plans and final plat.
13. All utilities within proposed rights-of-way must be included within a franchise approved
by the King County Council prior to final plat recording.
14. The applicant or subsequent owner shall comply with King County Code 14.75,
Mitigation Payment System (MPS), by paying the required MPS fee and administration
fee as determined by the applicable fee ordinance. The applicant has the option to either:
(I) pay the MPS fee at final plat recording, or (2) pay the MPS fee at the time of building
permit issuance. If the first option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the fee in effect at the
time of plat application and a note shall be placed on the face of the plat that reads, "All
L03P0015/Nichols Place
Page 17
fees required by King County Code 14.75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS), have been
paid." If the second option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the amount in effect as of the
date of building permit application.
15. Suitable recreation space shall be provided within one tract that may be combined with
the drainage tract in accordance with KCC 21A.14.180 consistent with the requirements
KCC 21A.14. l 80 and KCC 21A.14.190 in providing sport court[s], children's play
equipment, picnic table[s], benches, etc.
a. A detailed recreation space plan (i.e., landscape specs, equipment specs, etc.) shall
be submitted for review and approval by ODES and King County Parks prior to or
concurrent with the submittal of the engineering plans. This plan shall comply
with Ordinance# 14045.
b. A performance bond for recreation space improvements shall be posted prior to
recording of the plat.
16. A homeowners' association or other workable organization shall be established to the
satisfaction of DOES which provides for the ownership and continued maintenance of the
recreation, open space and/or sensitive area tract(s).
17. Street trees shall be included in the design of all road improvements, and shall comply
with Section 5.03 of the KCRS and KCC 21A.16.050:
a. Trees shall be planted at a rate of one tree for every 40 feet of frontage along all
roads. Spacing may be modified to accommodate siglit distance requirements for
driveways and intersections. ·
b. Trees shall be located within the street right-of-way and planted in accordance
with Drawing No. 5-009 of the 1993 King County Road Standards, unless King
County Department of Transportation determines that trees should not be located
in the street right-of-way.
·,
c. If King County determines that the required street trees should not be located
within the right-of-way, they shall be located no more than 20 feet from the street
right-of-way line.
d. The trees shall be owned and maintained by the abutting lot owners or the
homeowners association or other workable organization unless the County has
adopted a maintenance program. Ownership and maintenance shall be noted on
the face of the final recorded plat.
e. The species of trees shall be approved by DOES iflocated within the right-of-way,
and shall not include poplar, cottonwood, soft maples, gum, any fruit-bearing
trees, or any other tree or shrub whose roots are likely to obstruct sanitary or storm
sewers, or that is not compatible with overhead utility lines.
L03P0015/Nichols Place
Page 18
f. The applicant shall submit a street tree plan and bond quantity sheet for review
and approval by ODES prior to engineering plan approval.
g. The street trees must be installed and inspected, or a performance bond posted
prior to recording of the plat. If a performance bond is posted, the street trees must
be installed and inspected within one year of recording of the plat. At the time of
inspection, if the trees are found to be installed per the approved plan, a
maintenance bond must be submitted or the performance bond replaced with a
maintenance bond, and held for one year. After one year, the maintenance bond
may be released after ODES has completed a second inspection and determined
that the trees have been kept healthy and thriving.
A landscape inspection fee shall also be submitted prior to plat recording. The inspection
fee is subject to change based on current County fees.
18. The following have been established by SEPA as necessary requirements to mitigate the
adverse environmental impacts of this development. The applicants shall demonstrate
compliance with these items prior to final approval.
Individually, or joint with other area developers, the Applicant shall design
and construct improvements to Southeast I 28th Street at l 60'h Ave. SE to
mitigate project impacts at the High Accident Location.
Or, the Applicant shall reduce the project impacts at the High Accident
Location by completing the remainder of the improvements to Southeast
136th Street (i.e. additional paving, concrete curbs, gutters and sidewalks),
between 158th Avenue SE and 160th Avenue SE, and, revise the
channelization at the intersection of 156th Avenue SE/SE 136th Street to
provide a southbound left turn lane.
School Mitigation Fees
19. Lots within this subdivision are subject to King County Code 21A.43, which imposes
impact fees to fund school system improvements needed to serve new development. As a
condition of final approval, fifty percent (50%) of the impact fees due for the plat shall be
assessed and collected immediately prior to recording, using the fee schedules in effect
when the plat receives final approval. The balance of the assessed fee shall be allocated
evenly to the dwelling units in the plat and shall be collected prior to building permit
issuance.
School Walkways
L03POO 15/Nichols Place
Page 19
20. The Applicant, individually or in conjunction with other developers, shall construct an
off-site walkway to Liberty High school from the site. The walkway shall be constructed
within the right-of-way from 160th Ave SE, east along SE 135th Street to 166th Ave SE,
and south to Liberty High School at SE 136th Street, or via alternative right-of-way and.
easements that become available and are approved by DDES. One acceptable alternative
would be to use future right-of-way of Southeast 136th Street and 162nd Avenue
Southeast to connect with the sidewalk improvement of "five lot subdivision," and
through the plat of "five lot subdivision" /LOOP0023 to the southwest gate of Liberty High
School. The walkway shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the 1993
King County Road Standards and shown on the engineering plans for DDES review and
approval.
Any surfacing alternative from the King County Road Standards (KCRS 3.09) may be
submitted for approval through a road variance application.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS:
1. The subdivision shall conform to KCC 16.82 relating to grading on private property.
2. Development of the subject property may require registration with the Washington State
Department of Licensing, Real Estate Division.
3. Preliminary approval of this application does not limit the applicant's responsibility to
obtain any required permit or license from the State or other regulatory body. This may
include, but is not limited to the following:
a. Forest Practice Permit from the Washington State Dept. of Natural Resources.
b. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit from WSDOE.
c. Water Quality Modification Permit from WSDOE.
d. Water Quality Certification (401) Permit from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
REPORT ATTACHMENTS:
I. 23 Lot Plat Layout
2. Density Calculations for development with density credits
3. Issaquah School District
4. Certificate of Water Availability
5. City of Renton
6. City of Renton Sewer Certificate
7. Transportation Concurrency
Prepared 02/05/2004 3:35 PM
TRANSMITTED TO PARTIES LISTED HEREAFTER:
BORBA,GREG
CURRENT PLANNING SUPERVISOR DDES/LUSD MS: OAK-DE-0100
BRENDEN,MARSHALL
18225 SE 128™ RENTON, WA 98059-8732
BUCKETT, MRS. CAROLYN ANN
16524 SE 145TH ST. RENTON, WA 98059
CASEY, LAURA
WETLAND REVIEW DDES/LUSD CRITICAL AREAS MS: OAK -DE-0100
GRAVES, KATHY
13020 160TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98059
HIGH, GWENDOLYN & VICTOR
13405 158TH A VE SE RENTON, WA 98059
JUNE, EDWARD and HILL, KRIS
13527 156TH A VE SE RENTON, WA 98059
KEZELE, DON & DIANE
15657 SE 137TH PL. RENTON, WA 98059
LANGLEY, KRIS
TRAFFIC REVIEW DDES/LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100
LIND, REBECCA
CITY OF RENTON 1055 S. GRADY WAY RENTON, WA 98055
MAHONEY, JAMES
14011 160TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98059
NELSON, KATHY
ISSAQUAH SD TRANSPORT.DEPT. 805 2ND A VE SOUTH ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
NICHOLS, MARK & BARBARA
13815 160TH A VE SE RENTON, WA 98058
OLIPHANT, ANITA & RICHARD
16519 SE 145TH ST. RENTON, WA 98059
PAULSEN, ROGER
15657 SE 139TH PL RENTON, WA 98059
ROGERS, CAROL
CURRENT PLANNING SECTION DDES/LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100
ROMANO, MIKE
CENTURION DEVELOPMENT SVCS 22617 8TH DR SE BOTHELL, WA 98021
ROPPE, VICKI & DALE .
14005 160TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98059
SCHARER, KAREN
PROGRAM MANAGER DDES/LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0 I 00
SEATTLE KC HEALTH DEPT.
E.DIST. ENVIRN. HEAL TH 14350 SE EASTGA TE WAY BELLEVUE, WA 98007
STACHOWIAK, CLAUDE & ELOISE
I 5652 SE 139TH PL. RENTON, WA 98059-7422
STANSBURY, HOWARD
CENTURION DEVL SVCS/US LAND DEV. 22617 8TH DR SE BOTHELL, WA 98021
THORBECK, PENNY
15650 SE 138TH PL. RENTON, WA 98059
TOWNSEND, STEVE
LAND USE INSPECTIONS DDES/LUDS MS: OAK-DE-0100
WEST,LARRY
WETLAND REVIEW DDES/LUSD CRITICAL AREAS MS: OAK-DE-0100
WHITTAKER, BRUCE
PREL. REVIEW ENGINEER DDES/LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100
WYMAN, KEVIN M.
16540 SE 149TH ST. RENTON, WA 98059
L03P0015/Nichols Place
Page20
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
LAND USE SERVICES DIVISION
KING COUNTY, ·WASHINGTON
PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER
February 24, 2004-PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:30 AM
Hearing Room at DOES
900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest
Renton, WA 98055-1219
CORRECTIONS TO THE
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF NICHOLS PLACE
FILE NO: L03P0015
PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO: #2004-0013
A. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION:
H.
This is a request for preliminary plat approval of Nichols Place to allow 23 lots through
use of density credit transfer (TDR). The 23 lots would mostly be 4,320 square feet in area and
have a width of 45 feet. As part of the plat, a recreation area serving the plat is proposed. +he
draiHage deteHtieH area plaHHed will serYe Niehels Plaee aHd be sized te aeeemmedate draiHage
fer the Plat efEYeHdell immediately te the Herth. Access to the Nichols Place lots is proposed
via 1601
h Ave. SE. See Attachment I.
SUBDIVISION DESIGN FEATURES:
3. Roadway Section: As proposed by the applicant, 1601h Ave. SE frontage would be improved
with urban improvements, including curdh, gutter and sidewalks.
0. RECOMMENDATIONS:
L03POOl5 -Grant preliminary approval of the May 19, 2003 preliminary plat ofNichols Place with the
transfer of eight density credits, subject to the following conditions of final approval:
11. b. FRONTAGE: The frontage of the site along 160th Ave SE (west side only) shall be
improved to the urban neighborhood collector standard.
Add BLA Condition:
21. A Boundary Line Adjustment (BLA) shall be completed to resolve boundary issues with
the property to the north (Evendell).
~---~~ --~-..,. •,....---TY" r........-----,-............. ..,...._..._......... ........................................ ~., .. ---~·"·-·-................. ~-........,.,.....~ ·1··· .... ~-~-------····· aw
. '2j~l_~+-----
\ LO:,. ?CCl'S -· ---. ·t -----. -----1----------___ .. "1 \<;:-~~~·\ ~~ ---------
'
I
.I
4. Hydrography: A Level Three Downstream Drainage Analysis, dated October 27, 2003
was submitted to King County DOES.
The Nichols Place subdivision is located in the Orting Hills subbasin of the Lower Cedar River
drainage basin. A low north/south ridge divides the site'into eastern and western subbasins.
The western subbasin sheetflows to th_e southwest across the west and south property lines onto
adjoining·parcels. These flows eventually reach 156'h Ave SE via SE 139th Place. The larger
eastern basin sheetflows across the south property line and into the existing roadside ditch on
the west side 160<11 Ave. NE .. The downstream path continues south in the roadside ditch to a
cross· culvert under 160th Ave SE to the east side. Then the flow continues south along the east
side in a ditch, through two culverts, and turning east across an undeveloped parcel south of· . . .
house #14028 (approx. 650 feet downstream). This area contains wetlands (likely class 2) and
the flow enters the site as a class 3 stream. The stream continues east through this parcel to the
unopened right-of-way for 162"d Ave SE. The stream turns south and continues to SE 144th St.
The drainage then turns west in the SE 144'h St. drainage system, eventually flowing into the
Cedar River.
The cross culvert under 16Q<h Ave SE and the two downstream culverts along the east side have
recently been upsized.' There are two undersized conveyance culverts on the above
undeveloped parcel that have a history of conveyance nuisance flooding problems. The
proposed plat conditions include upsizing these two culverts, if permission can be obtained
from the owner.
The proposal is to collect most runoff from the project site and direct it to a single detention
and water quality facility in the southeast corner of the site. The detention facility is required
to meet the Level 2 flow control requirements and Basic water quality menu in the 1998 King
County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM).
1~-
-------··
i
I
--.1
1 •
-------------JW WWW--·--.,.., ... • -------· ----------~-----------------------~-----.
?V'C> se~ ~ ~ .;..!... ..;:, --~~ ------
?Ire>-"<~ ... :.,. ---~-~-..,..__~_ ~~ .... ~ t.p l1 4 ~~
_ _ 1-F}s:9 ,:a !. ... if' 33,.,.... , ::U:,__ -\-r ...._ 'J _ _ _
~ L)Cbc'-.,,_,J _~---~---~~~~-~ -l~--~ ... '"'-L
!14:a,..,.,:,5 . _l~ ~ ~~~
-:--~---_--~ k~ ~~~ tee-t~~ ) l.;~~~~
---------~~~;;,~~ ._ --
'"l""""~~~--~ ~\ ... oe>_ :.
-~~-~ ~~~ :· -
a_re ~-• • • "\-l"!::> 'C"'e'6• .,~-,l. --. ----. "t-. ------·----------. .
----'?-_~c-~~ _4. ~--\"': -~c&e..,r-J ~~
'. I -----------------:----------------
·-=:::::: 7 _ ,<::: ~"""".'\.~ _":"..:>~~ -~ '-<:)~ ---~=''.'At-\ ~~
v""\c::r:l.-~~V""O>~\r'-_~ __ -h:, 4-~~ ~
'~?~.:-S-~=~~ -_\8,'!:'~·;...,,.....__~~~ \.~~rc.~-~:::'.b -
I~-~ ~.c. --\:aa, e.-.. <..l~1r--. •
{,o"=\_~-G.,~ L,"':> ~ ~ ... -C:..~-~~~ -
-~c:\·~ ~ --~q:_.,~~ --0-., . --'
~ ~~I;--' __ _ __ _ -24.~ ___ -e . ee _ :-__ -q~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ .
_ to~ _ _ , l$.D · \~ _
'-~-=t?-'... ---~~ ---
-------~en_it_ _____ • _ _;!,\_ ___ -. ":2-.. ---------------
----l -~ ci,o~ ~ ___ ,";) __ ~_\ .D{.o __ J_~_
---~J~:S 1=,· -2>~ -~ '"_.:.. _., --~ ""~ ~-1 -----_________ t ______ ·-·-----------------------------------------
--C.,,,....,,d z., ------------'------· ----------------
-------------------
. 'l~~°" ~,'-l -~ ~-~
~ ~-<'="e. -( -__ be..:.~ -1....=<\,\ -~ -----
I -------------· --------------------------------------------------------' -----
I
------~----~-----~-...J~ --------------~......-. --· 1 -··········r1 ·--· ···-·---. --~~--.
I . -. !
I 2,)21~
. -. .. --I-. . . . -. -
--.. ~~·~:R!~ ~~~j ~-. ---------------------------. --
' -. . .. -. ---··--. . ·---. -. . . . . . --
. --··· ---. ---... -.. -~\ J
.. Ccur--. ... \Act~-, -~L~-~~r~~_q.e__
.. -. . I r'e_CJD...-ds. . --. ---. -·-----. .. . .. -
--~°21"""-.)\\\ l"".c:..s=,r-~ o,.t::-l""---\c. ~1:...> ~-_ .. --_
l -------------------------
I
I -----------------------------· -
d.~~~~-V"\U~ ~-\-._--._~ ~~ -
.... U!l~. \q_77 'f>V"JC)\.c-us~;'_ . _ _ _ _ . __
.... -·---· -.
rSu~ '--.,D~ L~~~---
=7 r f..-. 6 ti., 1 r \: K'.;,,, ~ ~ :.C:'c":l 4-~ °""'" _i;_~t
. _ _ _ .. J~7-Z .p"'-4.~o, """-~~-~~ -?~~ ___ . . .
T-:10 c.~ ?~·
·-----. -------.. ----
. . . -
' :------------l----------------------
: --]--11-. ------. -
--------;J _t:-\ '\--:\":c_~_ , -. -
----. _' ---1 · -------· ------·-·----
~?1----~c:t ~~ =:7 _ '?o-e.l_t"-"' ~ lR..-_ u~~ -~--~-______ _
~-/---_I ___ ~_ -~~., \:,u+ -----. -------
.. ------1 _1,o~\l.~t~ ""'"*·-_ E'l< ~l. -::::._7_ c,...,t~~ s:o(ri_ __ . ______ _ __ ___ __
1
1 _ ~C°"'_e..-l~~ t:>_~e.J_ c::><,, 'TJ~p?-s:n·_o, <ll. __
_ . _ __ _ ~ ~~-'=~ '. 'i<e_c.c,r.'9~~ Ce~ 9t: \2.-:cn'.¥_101_1 .l. __
. ______ rec:bc:e ~ -~ / ~-'l'"~~-~C""'~
_____ . _ __ _ _c~~ ~s l.!>ol'-.~ 'etn=.b t--..., _________ . _ __ _ _ _
. ----1--·-. ---~c:W=-~e-h ~ ~-t~ ~·:~{:~----.
-------r~~-e-.6 _@. -~·~.$. I c:2.j:n::£ ... ~; c:le...~ --~~-
---·----1'.t°'',),\ ,i:-, --V \,e_,~.s. ----. . .. -. . . .. -
_______ . ~~l~' ~: / Cl
0
tv;_\ _ ~~\"\-~v. ____ _
-------r ------~(?, lY'lh~ ----· --i_L>lo_~:~~-!)~,
---· 11'<~~~ ·.
------_-r.D,?. ·--.. -----·-. -·--··----
. _ _ . ___ 9..--: l_o T~L~ '1:20, ~ / Gt, ck. Je ~ ~ 4~~-c.. .. __
, -~o::> '""\-t\~ ":"to~ . ---· ------
__ -------1-~e.e.4_~ _ -\-o .. t>.ea. _ ~.clci=,as.e..e-J. _ _ _ _ _ _
-------Jd~.,,...~-'-~c:W.A.·ei-· _ Q. _ 4~_ --~-A-~-~~~-::. ___ _
_ _ _ _ _ __ d_""~ _ fr.-.a.uc... ~-Jo _ 'o~~ __ be-.. ,-.~ ___________ _
--_I_ -C+.\ -5eLseA.J) _ ---· -------------·----
-... --. J . . . -· --·-
~~~---··. .. I
I
--... -1
-~.'° ~· ~ -·--•------------------------·----·-
__ D~"$ ~~.>~~-c~.
l~~:, -~ _:_ ·--~.k+ ~-~. ' .
-----~ __ \'9.~ c__.,.. ~
. --. -· _a..~~ ~-~ ~-
. . ~-.U.,_~ ~ -.;>'5~ -+• ~ 0~
···--· ·-'-~-~
. -~-SS.c:s~----~ \~
. -. .. . ... --C~t~_ .:S~~ ~~-.. --. -
-~--~~.:~~ ~o . .:A~~c~~-
.:::;:..._ ?. -r" .. -t-~,c:_ -. . .
.,...,-,-.\ ' \· . _· rc""!le 2:, . c--. ~· ·'""'\-'"'' ~-"""1-... _\., -"~ ' .
. '""T"<:"e e ::._ . ~ ' \\ .. -LJ <:::> --a> .. "'--\ ~~
. -·. -.'P~~-c::..~~~-~"\ --~~~---·--· -·· -.. ----
'
nc,,1; ~~-~ -!-~~-\. -~~~ ~
. _ _ ... _ . __ Ceo_....:._!;:_ cl_ ___ c,...... . _d-0-.j I..~-"'-'=>*. -~..::::,.
.... Do. c::kv .. :s.~J..~--/ co.~a .. ~ ,;. li•n+...
\ IL. +~,., f-\ ·._.,<,, 1 :
I
.. ..
. c::..u.'"'!' .....,,_ ~ ""'· f"' ~-:-:f-""?\' ?, ... :.. . . .
j ~e.e.--\~~t~ ~-:, ~o-....\.uc..:J, _,&. e,.-, 0,.:,--......._..,t~..._ _
I --· ------
-------------------·-----------------~ ----------------·----------.--------------
-------· ------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------·-------------.
@
Department of Development and Environmental Services
Land Use Services Division
Notice of Hearing,
Recommendation &
SEPA Decision
900 Oakesdale A venue Southwest
Renton, Washington 98055·1219
File No.: L03P0015
SEPA Threshold Determination, Type 3
Project Name: · Nichols Place
DOES Project Manager: KarenJ. Scharer, 206,296-7114 or e-mail karen.scharer@metrokc.gov
Applicant: Howard Stansbury, .
Project Location:
Project Description:
.Permits Req11ested:
SEP A Threshold
· U'.S. Land Development Associates
c/o Michael J, Romano
Centurion· Development Services
22617 -81
' Dr. SE
Bothell,. WA ~.8021 425~486-2563
The site is locatecl.\vest of 160 1h Ave. SE, south of SE f38''Street
(if ~xtended) at 13815 160 1h Ave. SE ·
Proposed is subdivision.of 3.82•acres.into 23 lotsfor detached single family
residences, recreation and drainage facilities. The applicant proposes to use
8 density credit transfers to plat the 23 lots. Rezone from R-4 to R-6 has
been withdrawn from this proposal.
Snbdivision
Determination: Mitigatecl Determination of Non-Significance (MONS)
issued December 23, 2003
Department Recommendation.
to the Hearing Examiner: Approve, subject to condition.s
Public Hearing Date:
Location of Public Hearing:
February 24, 2004 at 9:30 a.m.
DDES, Hearing Room -first floor
900 OakesdaleAveirne· Soutliwest
Renton, WA 98055-12i9
Comment/Appeal Procedure: Comments on this SEPA determination are welcome. This SEPA determination may
also be appealed in writing to the King County Hearing Examiner. A notice of appeal must be filed with the Department
of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) Land Use Services Division (LUSD) at the address listed below prior
to 4:30 p.m. on January 16, 2004, and be accompanied with a filing fee of $250.00 p~yable to King County Office of
Finance.
If a timely Notice of Appeal has been filed, the appellant shall also file a Statement of Appeal with DDES/LUSD at the
address listed below prior to 4:30 p.m. on January 16, 2004. The Statement of Appeal shall identify the decision being
appealed (including the file number) and the alleged errors in that decision. Further, the Statement of Appeal shall state:
1) specific reasons why the decision should be reversed or modified; and 2) the harm suffered or anticipated by the
appellant, and the relief sought. The scope of an appeal shall be based on matters or issues raised in the Statement of
. Appeal. Failure to timely file a Notice of Appeal, appeal fee or Statement of Appeal, deprives the Hearing Examiner of
jurisdiction to consider the appeal. Appeals must be submitted to DDES.
DDES will issue a written report and recommendation to the Hearing Examiner two weeks prior to the public hearing. Persons
wishing to receive a copy should contact DDES/LUSD. Following the close of the public hearing, the Hearing Examiner will issue
a written recommendation for the rezone and a decision for the plat which may be appealed to the Metropolitan-King County
Council. Appeal procedw;-es will be stated in the Examiner's written recommendation and decision.
Any person wishing additional information on this proposed project should contact DDES/LUSD at the address and/or telephone
nwnber listed. Written comments may also be submitted to DDES ..
A public hearing as required by law will be held to consider the approval of this application. Jfthe Renton School District
announces a district-wide school closure due to adverse weather conditions or similar area emergency, the public hearing on this
matter will be postponed. Interested parties will be notified of the time and date of the rescheduled hearing. Any questions
regarding postponements and rescheduling can be directed to the Hearing Examiner's Office at (206) 296-4660.
December 23 2 2003
Date Mailed
DDES--Land Use Services Division
Attn: Permit Center
900 Oakesdale Avenne Southwest
Renton, Washington 98055-1219
Jfyou have any questions regarding the appeal procedures, please contact the project manager at the phone number listed
above. If you require this material in braille, audio cassette, or large print, call (206) 296-6600 (voice) or (206) 296-7217
(TTY).
. \
·' King County
Department of Development and Environmental Services
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)
Mitigated Determination Of Non-Significance
for
Date oflssuance:
. Project:
Location:
King County Permits:
County Contact:
Proponent:
. Existing Zoning:
Drainage Subbasin:
Section/Township/Range:
Notes: ·
Nichols Place, File No. L03P0015
December 23, 2003
Proposed is subdivision of the 3.82 acre site into 23 lots for detached
single family residences and tracts for recreation and drainage facilities.
The applicant proposes to use 8 density credit transfers to plat the 23
lots.
The site is located west of 1601h Ave. SE, south of SE 138 1h Street
(if extended) at 13815 1601h Ave. SE
Formal Plat
Karen Scharer, Program/Project Manager II
Phone: (206) 296-7114
e-mail -karen.scharer@metrokc.gov
Howard Stansbury, U.S. Land Development Associates
c/o Michael J. Romano ·
Centurion Development Services
22617 -81h Dr. SE
Bothell, WA 98021
425-486,2563
R-4
Orting Hills subtiasin of Cedar River
SE 14-23-5
A. This finding is based on review of the project site plan received May 19, 2003 for 23 lots;
Environmental Checklist, dated May 19, 2003; Surface Water Adjustment -L03V0036, received May
19, 2003; Level Three Downstream Drainage Analysis, dated October 27, 2003; Wetland Report by
Habitat Technologies. dated October 11, 2002; Revised Traffic Impact Analysis, dated November 6,
2003; and other documents in the file.
B. Issuance of this threshold determination does not constitute approval of the permit(s). This proposal
will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable King County policies, codes which regulate
development activities,. ii,c!uding the Uniform Fire and Building Codes, Road Standards, Surface
Water Design Manual, and the Sensitive Areas Regulations.
WHITTAKER, BRUCE
/'REL. REVIEW ENGINEER
DDES/LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0 J 00
l0JP0015
Nichols Place:
December 23, 2003
Page 2
C. The density with this plat of 23 lots would yield an average density of 6 dwellings per acre (based on
the site area). This density requested is within the density range of 4-12 dwelling units per acre as
shown on the Land Use Map of the King County Comprehensive Plan. The lots will mostly be 4,320
square feet in area and have a width of 45 feet.
D. The proposed project will send trips into the intersection of Southeast !28th Street at 160th Avenue
Southeast which has, as of June 2003, been placed upon King County DOT's High Accident Location
list (ID: HAL #16). The recommended countermeasure is to construct both east and west left turn
channelization at the intersection.
These improvement measures are appropriately required prior to King County approving further
development that would reduce the level of safety by adding vehicles trips to this intersection.
Therefore, due to the additional impacts, mitigation of project impacts at this intersection is necessary
and could be accomplished with the recommended road widening and channelization. Alternatively,
development impacts could be mitigated and improvements at the intersection could be deferred if
another local access route would be provided.
The alternative local access route will be at SE 136th St. between 156'h Ave. SE and 160"' Ave. SE. As
a result of submittal of a major rev_ision of the plat of Evendell, Southeast 136th Street is again
proposed to be constructed by the Applicant of Evendell. Their proposed improvements include a
'half-street' improvement opposite the frontage of the proposed plat of Liberty Grove. Completion of
the balance of the improvements by this Applicant of Nichols Place could provide a more attractive
alternative route for project-generated trips that would otherwise enter the HAL identified by King
County DOT.
Typically, absent a direct connection to this roadway, improvements to Southeast 136th Street by the
Applicant for the proposed plat would not be required as a condition of plat approval. However, by
completing the improvements to Subcollector Street (Urban) standards, project-generated trips of the
plat of Liberty Grove would have an alternative westbound access (towards the City of Renton) along
Southeast 128th Street at the signalized intersection of 156th Avenue SE. Additionally, project-
generated trips would have the alternative access to SR-169 from plat-generated trips by use of SE
136th Street (in lieu of traveling northbound on 160'h Ave. SE., making the left tum at the intersection
of !28th Street -the HAL -and another left tum at the 156th Ave. SE signal).
E. Renton will provide sewer service. Extension ofa 10" or 12" diameter sewer trunk will be located
along SE 136th St. and a sewage pump station will be required off site to provide service.
Threshold Determination
The responsible official finds that the above described proposal does not pose a probable significant adverse
impact to the environment, provided the mitigation measures listed below are applied as conditions of permit
issuance. This finding is made pursuant to RCW 43 .2 l C, KCC 20.44 and WAC 197-11 after reviewing the
· environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency and considering mitigation
measures which the agency or the applicant will implement as part of the proposal. The responsible official
finds this information reasonably sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact of this proposal.
\ . ' -------------1
·-Nichols Place i·. _. , c , •.
December 23, 2003
Page 3
Mitigation List
The following mitigation measures shall be attached as conditions of permit issuance for the plat. These
mitigation measures are consistent with policies, plans, rules, or regulations designated by KCC 20.44.080 as
a basis for the exercise of substantive authority and in effect when this threshold determination is issued. Key
sources of substantive authority for each mitigation measure are in parentheses; however, other sources of
substantive authority may exist but are not expressly listed.
Individually, or joint with other area developers, the Applicant shall design and construct
improvements to Southeast 128th Street at 160'" Ave. SE to mitigate project impacts at the High
Accident Location.
Or, the Applicant shall reduce the project impacts at the High Accident Location by completing the
remainder of the improvements to Southeast 136th Street (i.e. additional paving, concrete curbs,
gutters and sidewalks), between 158th Avenue SE and 160th Avenue SE, and,.revise the
chann~lization at the intersection of 156th Avenue SE/SE 136th Street.to provide a southbound left
tum lane.
Comments and Appeals
Written comments or any appeal of this threshold determination must be received by King County's Land Use
Services Division prior to 4:30 PM, January 16, 2004. Appeals must be accompanied by a nonrefundable
filing fee. Please reference the file numbers when corresponding.
Appeals must be in writing and state the perceived errors in the threshold determination, specific reasons why
the deiermination should be reversed or modified, the harm the appellant will suffer if the threshold·
determination remains unchanged, and the desired outcome of the appeal. If the appellant is a group, the harm
to any one or more members must be stated. Failure to meet these requirements may result in dismissal of the
appeal.
Comment/appeal-deadline:
Appeal filing fee:
Address for comment/appeal:
.Responsible Official:
~~
Current Planning Section
Land Use Services Division
Date Mailed: December 23, 2003
4:30 PM on January 16, 2004
$250 check or money order made out to the King County
Office of Finance
King County Land Use Services Division
900 Oakesdale Avenue SW
Renton, WA 98055-1219
ATTN: Current Planning Section
/z..faY/o3
; .> Date Signed
!
EXHIBITS
Plat of Nichols Place/ FILE NO. -L03P0015
Exhibit No. l ODES file L03POOl5
Exhibit No. 2 DOES preliminary report for L03POO 15, prepared 02/05/2004 with attachments
as follow:
2. l. 23 Lot Plat Design
2.2. Density Calculations R-4 w/ 8 TDR's
2.3. Issaquah School District
· 2.4. Certificate of water availability
2.5. City of Renton letters
2.6. City of Renton Sewer Certificate
2.7. Certificate of Transportation Concurrency
' Exhibit No. 3 Corrections/Revision to Preliminary Staff Repo_rts dated 2/24/2004
Exhibit No. 4 Application for land use permit/plat L03POO 15 received 5/19/2003
Exhibit No. 5 Environmental checklist received 5/19/2003
Exhibit No. 6 Mitigated determination of non-significance dated 12/23/2003
' Exhibit No. 7 Affidavit of posting indicating posting date of6/30/03 & & rec'd 7/2/03
Exhibit No. 8 Site plan (23 lot preliminary plat map) received 5/19/2003
Exhibit No. 9 Assessors map (I) SE 14-23-05 revised 12/3/2000
Exhibit No. l O Density Credit Transfer Agreement for 5 TD R's, Dated 2/20/04
Exhibit No. l l Density Credit Transfer Agreement for 3 TDR's, Dated 2/20/04
Exhibit No. 12 Traffic Impact Analysis by Gary Struthers Associates, date rec'd 5/19/2003
Exhibit No. 13 Revised Traffic Impact Analysis, date rec'd l l/12/2003
Exhibit No. 14 Walkway Study prepared by dmp, inc., dated 8/18/03
Exhibit No. 15 Walkway Study Map Annotated by ODES, prepared 2/23/04
Exhibit No. 16 3/10/03 e-mail from Issaquah School District regarding school walkways
to Liberty High, Maywood Middle, and Briarwood Elementary School for
plat conditions of LOOP0023 ·
Exhibit No. 17 TIR dated 5/18/2003 by Haozous Engineering, PS
Exhibit No. 18 King County SWDM Adjustment L03V0036
Exhibit No. 19 Wetland & Drainage Corridor Reconnaissance Assessment by Habitat
Technologies I O/l l/200 l
Exhibit No. 20 Tributary Area Map annotations by ODES staff prepared 2/2004
Exhibit No. 21 Haozous Eng. Update/Response to Screening letter, dated 10/27/03
Exhibit No. 22 Hearing Examiner Report & Decision for Evendell/L03RE038, issued 2/4/2004
Exhibit No. 23 E-mail letter from Shirley Day-14412 167 1h Place SE 02/03/2004
Exhibit No. 24 Gwendolyn High, Pres. of CARE, PO BOX 2936, Renton, WA 98056, lette~
dated l /26/04 ·
Exhibit No. 25 E-mail letter from James Mahoney-14011 1601h Ave. SE 7/9/2003
Exhibit No. 26 E-mail letter from Claude & Eloise Stachowiak -15652 SE 139"' Place
l 1/16/2003
Exhibit No. 27 Bill and Dona Mokin-14404 162"d Ave. SE, letter 2/7/2004
Exhibit No. 28 Anita and Richard Oilphant-16519 SE 145 1h St., Letter 1/29/2004
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
LAND USE SERVICES DIVISION
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER
February 24, 2004 -PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:30 AM
Hearing Room at ODES
900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest
Renton, WA 98055-1219
CORRECTIONS TO THE
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF NICHOLS PLACE
FILE NO: L03P0015
PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO: #2004-0013
A. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION:
H.
This is a request for preliminary plat approval of Nichols Place to allow 23 lots through
. use of density credit transfer (TDR). The 23 lots would mostly be 4,320 square feet in area and
have a width of 45 feet. As part of the plat, a recreation. area serving the plat is proposed. +he
EiraiHage EieteHtisH aFea rlam1ea vlill se1Ye Niehsls Plaee aHEi ee sizes ts aeesmmsaate EIFaiHage
feF the Plat sf E<'.\'eHEiell immediately ts the Hsrth. Access to the Nichols Place lots is proposed
via 1. 60'h Ave. SE. See Attachment 1.
SUBDIVISION DESIGN FEATURES:
3. Roadway Section: As proposed by the applicant, 160'h Ave. SE frontage would be improved
with urban improvements, including cure!!, gutter and sidewalks.
0. RECOMMENDATIONS:
L03P0015 -Grant preliminary approval of the May 19, 2003 preliminary plat of Nichols Place with the
transfer of eight density credits, subject to the following conditions of final approval:
11. b. FRONTAGE: The frontage of the site along 160'h Ave SE (west side only) shall be
improved to the urban neighborhood collector standard.
Add BLA Condition:
21. A Boundary Line Adjustment (BLA) shall be completed to resolve boundary issues with
the property to the north (Evendell).
•I
/}{/ COPY
esoruvf:o
Mukilteo. WA 982 75
(4251 745-5872
13428-45'1
' Courr
fax (425) 745.5114
rob~rt@hao:;.ous.com
October 27. 2003 '
U.S. Land Development Associates
Clo Mike Romano
Centurion Development Services
22617 -8th Drive SE
Bothell. WA 98021
Re: Response to King County Screening Transmittal
Nichols Place Plat
Dear Mr. Romano:
This report provides information to address items 2.a. 2.b. and 4 as requested by King County in
their Screening Transmittal dated August 12. 2003. Item 2.a asked for an investigation of the
feasibility of replacing culverts shown at locations 50 and 51 in the Level I Analysis for Nichols
Plat. Item 2.b asked for a review of the culvert at location 40. Item 4 asks for a conceptual
frontage road improvement pl~n that includes related drainage improvements.
Item 2.a. Culvert Replacement Investigation
We designed new culverts to replace the existing 12-inch concrete pipe at location 50 and the
18-inch corrugated metal pipe (CMP) at location 51. The Evendell Plat Level 3 Downstream
Drainage Analysis by Haozous Engineering. P.S. was reviewed to confirm the basin
assumptions and obtain peak flow rates for the 25-year and 100-year events for these existing
culverts. These flow rates are:
Storm Return Period
' I 25 year 100 year '
Location Description (cfs) (cfs)
Culvert 50 12-inch 25.5 31.2
concrete
'
' Culvert 51 18-inch CMP 32.0 39.4
The level 3 downstream analysis assumed existing conditions for the basin when calculating
these peak flows. If a level 2 detention pond is used for the Nichols site it would match
durations. but not the peak flows for the 25-year storm event. Additionally. a level 2 pond
would not match durations or peak flows for the I 00-year storm event. This usually means
the 25-year and 100-year peak flows from the developed site would be somewhat higher than
I of 14
those calculated for the level 3 downstream analysis. For the Nichols site, however. the
Preliminary T.I.R. indicated that the developed 25-year peak flow from the pond would
match the existing rate of 0.18 cfs and the developed I 00-year peak flow would be 0.20 cfs"
versus 0.31 cfs for the existing. This situation is probably due to the increase of the pond
volume to account for the bypass of runoff from I 60'h Avenue SE. When the bypass flow is
relatively large compared to main basin the pond volume can increase disproportionately.
The l 0% factor of safety would magnify that effect.
An analysis using XP-Culvert2000 indicated that replacing the existing culverts with 30-inch
lined. corrugated polyethylene pipe I LCPE ). lowering the pipe inverts and regrading ditches
would allow the design flows up to the JOO-year event to pass through satisfactorily. Figure
A shows a plan view of these improvements and the backup calculations are included in
appendix A.
These improvements were then discussed with the property own·er. Jerry Smith to get his
permission. however. Mr. Smith said he would not allow any work to be done on the existing
culverts. Mr. Smith said his reason was that he thought the improvements would not improve
the situation of substantial runoff from 160'" Avenue SE flowing across his property and
flooding his barn. He said he would be agreeable to drainage improvements on his property
if the flow from 160'h Avenue SE were piped completely across the north or south boundary
of the lot.
Item 2.b. Culvert at Location 40
The existing culvert at location 40 was measured in the field as an 18-inch CMP. This
matches the size measured by the county.
Item 4. -Conceptual Frontage Road Improvement
A conceptual design was prepared for the road and drainage improvements on the west side
of 160'" Avenue SE along the frontage of the proposed Nichols plat. This design is presented
as Exhibit B. The concrete vault shown provides treatment fqr water quality only for flows
entering the street collection system. The proposed onsite detention pond was sized to
accommodate bypass of runoff from the right-of-way improvements so a separate detention
facility was not required (see Nichols Place Preliminary TIR).
We hope this information helps with the evaluation of the project and please contact me with any
questions.
Sincerely.
/ciMtlkuv~
Robert H. Darrow. P.E.
Principal Engineer
2 of 14
,:,i .•
I
OfflJt -
T#W/ r1 S/S
/ / ~ w.1.7
\
\
., ,., sr DWI. LCJ'E •
I
I
I
JERRY SMITH \
\ PROPERTY
/
OfflJt /
YWJl/h S/S
/
/
/ ----
:57.3 ,., .,. -LCJ'E .,.-
I
I
I
' '
--
J o 15 ~ .-----N-ICHOlS---PLA-· -T----.---1
1 SCAl£ IN l'EET KING <:OUNTY, WASHINGTON ElCHIIIIT i CULVERT REPUCEMENT
• Data, 1 o 15/03 INVESTIGATION t·'-----------------...;;=--===~---====.;.;.;;.;.. ___ .,L. _ _..
A
<."-:·
0•
3 ofl4
• • i
I
!
f
l I
~
'-....
z
~ ....
~
~
V,
(t)
(")
....
-4--~
=""-4~---
;t t j7,
-N
()
0
... ...
N --.J
""6\
... ...
"' (!) ...
".s; ' • ~ I I
X
I
~
C :,
C.
" "'-.,s'
.,,..,_ CB TY1 •
' RIM 448.9t
•s~
-\· *~-> ·-__ ,
~~: I
::0
CD rn a , "'
"' IE 445.9 :11 , 0
NN1 ' ~ ::0 ::01
(") (")I
""' N
00 ...
0
r'1 -N
()
0
... ... u, ...
"'
~t
26 LF ~-Djf ~
@ I~
~ --l. "' 0 -
IE
450
~.79 CB TY1 j C 0 RIM 448.56 :, £
7'"~ :, IE 446.56 0
:E C :, :,
C.
" ,
<O ,
0
C :,
C.
WEST, ROW
~
\;!' ' ' S ~ RIM 450.6 ~ ~z..
1
-67 g IE 447.6 2
-;._ 12 • @_,!-O~ CB TY1 ()' g
~ ~ RIM 450.15 ~ ~ IE 447.23 ti rr ~ ~
J.NT. 7'D X 4'W X 34.5'1.,_,. ~
iJREe'D VOL= 827 CF -w~ <::I IDC' C'I -,LUI ,::
CL ROW
160TH AYE" SE
t; rr, -·
NOTES:
-N
' ~
"
---
=*4 l q:-----
I -:::0 0
r'1 2 ~j" CD :::0 0 -· co N ... 3 () z_,.
9 I u, .... 0;1" ()1 ... u, -.... -.... 01 co :,. ()1 -N (!) .... .... u, 01 ;-;! (.()
t------30.0' ------t
1. EXl5nNG TOPOGRAPHY IS BY DRYCO SURVEYING & MAPPING,
JOB NO. 2003016, FEBRUARY, 2003.
2. THIS IS A SCHEMATIC DRAWING SHOWING ANTICIPATED ROAD ...... ~-~~·-j. ~-~: . 4 16-:~-~--.
450
1 · · 1r ·1112
~ 445 : :.9· :~ ,: : -~:::::: ~ ~~~; ~~ 1
' 445
AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS IN RIGHT-OF-WAY OF 160TH
AVENUE SE ACROSS THE FRONTAGE OF THE PROPOSED NICHOLS
PLAT.
: :~ c;s:-,y; · · · · · • · · ,._ -CS-TYi · · · • · · · · · • .........................
-... j440 440 [ I • . :x:_ -QUAI.RY ·VAUtT· · · · · · . . : : : : : : : : : : : : : ...... ~~-................ .
SECTION A-A
Haozous Engineering, P.S. PRELIMINARY
13428-451hCaurt Muldltso, WA 98275 " ···-··-· I I
425.745-6114 fax 425.745.&872 phone
id>atil &PIM'8 com
Data: 10/17/03
NicHuLS PLAT
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
ROW IMPROVEMENTS.
160TH AVENUE SE
FIGURE
8
----------------------
APPENDIX A
CULVERT50-25YEAR
,,·,,;_'-c:_·.·,,:
:-~\./.,/··· ;;'If,
::!~,~~<:·-;?,:.--\'J· ;:,.:.(,-.':(\:;ii'..::.-~
Culvert #1: Conduit Name: Culv 50
US Unit
US Unit
Circular
2.500
2.500
1.000
Input Units:
Output Units:
Culvert Shape:
Height:
Width:
Barrels:
Length: 91.800
Slope (%):
Roughness (n) :
US Invert Elev:
DS Invert Elev:
Entrance Type:
0.54
0.0130
421.0500
420.5500
Projecting
Entrance Loss:
Exit Loss:
Exp/Contr Loss:
Maximum Flow:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Velocity at Max. Flow:
Time at Max. Flow:
Headwater at Max. Flow:
Tailwater at Max. Flow:
Cntrl Type at Max. Flow:
Max. Velocity:
Flow at Max. Velocity:
Time at Max. Velocity:
HW at Max. Velocity:
TW at Max. Velocity:
Cntrl Type at Max. Vel.:
Ending Flow:
Ending Velocity:
Ending Headwater:
Ending Tailwater:
Ending Cntrl Type:
25.5006
5.1825
2.2333
424.1546
423.0061
Inlet Control
5.1825
25.5006
2.4333
424.1546
423. 0061
Inlet Control
25.4998
5.1823
424.1546
423.0061
Inlet Control
Weir Details:
=============
Weir #1: Weir Name:
Input Units:
Output·Units:
Approach Grade:
Departure Grade:
VC Length:
ROAD #1
US Unit
US Unit
0.100
0.100
3.300
4 of14
Weir Disch Coeff:
Road Width:
Weir Low Point:
Gravel (FHWA)
65.000
425.000
Maximum Flow:
Velocity at Max. Flow:
Time at Max. Flow:
Headwater at Max. Flow:
Tailwater at Max .. Flow:
Max. Velocity:
Flow at Max. Velocity:
Time at Max. Velocity:
HW at Max. Velocity:
TW at Max. Velocity:
Max. Velocity x Depth:
Ending Flow:
Ending Velocity:
Ending Headwater:
Ending Tailwater:
Ending Velocity x Depth
0.0000
0.0000
0.0333
422.7568
423.6927
0.0000
0.0000
0.0333
422.7568
423.6927
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
424.1546
423.0061
0.0000
Nomograph Details:
Inlet<-----------
Type Material
Nomograph Data ---------->
Shape Inlet Description
6 Corrugated Metal Circular Projecting
Culvert Time Series Details:
============================
Culvert #1: Conduit Name:
Time
(hrs)
Flow/Brrl. Velocity
(ftA3/s) (ft/s)
Culv 50
Depth
(ft)
Critical
(ft)
Normal
(ft)
HW
(ft)
TW Control
(ft)
2.083 25.500 5.18 3.105 1. 720 1.759 424.155 423.006 Inlet
Weir Details:
--===========
Weir #1: Weir Name:
Maximum Flow over this·Weir
Culvert Rating Curve:
=====================
Flow
(ftA3/s)
Depth
(ft)
HW
(ft)
25.408 3.096 424.146
ROAD #1
o.o
5 of 14
CULVERT 50 -100 YEAR
Culvert #1: Conduit Name: Culv 50
US Unit
US Unit
Circular
2.500
2.500
1.000
Input Units:
Output Units:
Culvert Shape:
Height:
Width:
Barrels:
Length: 91. 800
Slope (%): 0.54
Roughness (n):
US Invert Elev:
DS Invert Elev:
Entrance Type:
0. 0130
421. 0500
420.5500
Projecting
Entrance Loss:
Exit Loss:
Exp/Contr Loss:
Maximum Flow:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Velocity at Max. Flow:
Time at Max. Flow:
Headwater at Max. Flow:
Tailwater at Max. Flow:
Cntrl Type at Max. Flow:
Max. Velocity:
Flow at Max. Velocity:
Time at Max. Velocity:
HW at Max. Velocity:
TW at Max. Velocity.:.
Cntrl Type at Max. Vel.:
Ending Flow:
Ending Velocity:
Ending Headwater:
Ending Tailwater:
Ending Cntrl Type:
31.2002
6.3621
2.1000
424.6273
423. 0093.
Inlet Control
6.3621
31. 2002
2.1000
424.6273
423.0093
Inlet Control
31. 2002·
6.362T
424. 6273
423.0093
Inlet Control
Weir Details:
Weir #1: Weir Name:
Input Units:
Output Units:
Approach Grade:
Departure Grade:
VC Length:
Weir Disch Coe ff:
ROAD #1
US Unit
US Unit
0.100
0.100
3.300
Gravel ffHWA)·
6 of 14
Road Width:
Weir Low Point:
Maximum Flow:
65.000
425.000
Velocity at Max. Flow:
Time at Max. Flow:
Headwater at Max. Flow:
Tailwater at Max. Flow:
Max. Velocity:
Flow at Max. Velocity:
Time at Max. Velocity:
HW at Max. Velocity:
TW at Max. Velocity:
Max. Velocity x Depth:
Ending Flow:
Ending Velocity:
Ending Headwater:
Ending Tailwater:
Ending Velocity x Depth
Nomograph Details:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0333
423.2634
423.5374
0.0000
0.0000
0.0333
423.2634
423.5374
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
424.6273
423.0093
0.0000
Inlet<-----------
Type Material
Nomograph Data ---------->
Shape Inlet Description
6 Corrugated Metal Circular Projecting
Culvert Time Series Details:
Culvert #1: Conduit Name:
Time
(hrs)
Flow/Brrl Velocity
(ft'3/s) (ft/s)
Culv 50
Depth
(ft)
Critical
(ft)
Normal
(ft)
HW
(ft)
TW Control
(ft)
2.083 31. 200 6.36 3.577 1. 903 2.129 424.627 423.009 Inlet
Weir Details:
=============
Weir #1: Weir Name:
Maximum Flow over this Weir
Culvert Rating Curve:
=====================
Flow
(ft'3/s)
Depth
(ft)
HW
(ft)
31.053 3.557 424.607
ROAD #1
0.0
7 ofl4
CULVERT 51 -25 YEAR
Culvert #1: Conduit Name: Culv 51
US Unit
US Unit
Circular
2.500
2.500
1.000
Input Units:
Output Units:
Culvert Shape:
Height:
Width:
Barrels:
Length:
Slope (%):
Roughness (n) :
us Invert Elev:
DS Invert Elev:
Entrance Type:
Entrance Loss:
Exit Loss:
Exp/Contr Loss:
Maximum Flow:
37.300
1.34
0.0130
419.3000
418.8000
Headwall
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Velocity at Max. Flow:
Time at Max. Flow:
Headwater at Max .. Flow:
Tailwater at Max. Flow:
Cntrl Type at Max. Flow:
Max. Velocity:
Flow at Max. Velocity:
Time at Max. Velocity:
HW at Max. Velocity:
TW at Max. Velocity:
Cntrl Type at Max. Vel.:
Ending Flow:
Ending Velocity:
Ending Headwater:
Ending Tailwater:
Ending Cntrl Type:
32.0005
8.0747
2.0833
422.6188
420.1863
Inlet Control
8.0747
32.0005
2.0833
422.6188
420.1863
Inlet Control
32.0005
8.0747
422. 6188·
420.1863
Inlet Control
Weir Details:
=====:========
Weir #1: Weir NalILe:
Input Units:
Output Units:
Approach Grade:
Departure Grade:
VC Length:
Weir Disch Coeff:
ROAD #2·
us· unn
US Unit
0.100
0.100
3.300
Gravel (FHWA)
8 of 14
Road Width:
Weir Low Point:
Maximum Flow:
13. 000
423.520
Velocity at Max. Flow:
Time at Max. Flow:
Headwater at Max. Flow:
Tailwater at Max. Flow:
Max. Velocity:
Flow at Max. Velocity:
Time at Max. Velocity:
HW at Max. Velocity:
TW at Max. Velocity:
Max. Velocity x Depth:
Ending Flow:
Ending Velocity:
Ending Headwater:
Ending Tailwater:
Ending Velocity x Depth
Nomograph Details:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0333
419.3970
418.8236
0.0000
0.0000
0.0333
419.3970
418.8236
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
422.6188
420.1863
0.0000
Inlet<-----------
Type Material
Nomograph Data ---------->
Shape Inlet Description
4 Corrugated Metal Circular Headwall
Culvert Time Series Details:
========================-=--
Culvert #1: Conduit Name:
Time
(hrs)
Flow/Brrl Velocity
(ft'3/s) (ft/s)
Culv 51
Depth
(ft)
Critical
(ft)
Normal
(ft)
HW
(ft)
TW Control
(ft)
2.050 32.000 8.07 3.319 1.925 1.503 422.619 420.186 Inlet
Weir Details:
Weir #1: Weir Name:
Maximum Flow over this Weir
Culvert Rating Curve:
=====================
Flow
(ft'3/s)
Depth
(ft)
HW
(ft)
31. 881 3.308 422.608
ROAD #2
0.0
9 of 14
CULVERT 51 -100 YEAR
Culvert #1: Conduit Name: Culv 51
US Unit
US Unit
Circular
2.500
2.500
1.000
Input Units:
output Units:
Culvert Shape:
Height:
Width:
Barrels:
Length:
Slope (%):
Roughness (n):
US Invert Elev:
DS Invert Elev:
Entrance Type:
Entrance Loss:
Exit Loss:
Exp/Contr Loss:
Maximum Flow:
37.300
1.34
0.0130
419.3000
418.8000
Headwall
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Velocity at Max. Flow:
Time at Max. Flow:
Headwater at Max. Flow:
Tailwater at Max. Flow:
Cntrl Type at Max. Flow:
Max. Velocity:
Flow at Max. Velocity:
Time at Max. Velocity:
HW at Max. Velocity:
TW at Max. Velocity:
Cntrl Type at Max. Vel.:
Ending Flow:
Ending Velocity:
Ending Headwater:
Ending Tailwater:
Ending Cntrl Type:
39.4006
9.5350
2 .1667
423.4500
420.3343
Inlet Control
9.5350
39.4006
2.1167
423.4500
420.3343
Inlet Control
39.4006
9.5350
423.4500
420.3343
Inlet Control
Weir Details:
===========
Weir #1: Weir Name:
Input Units:
output Units:
Approach Grade:
Departure Grade:
VC Length:
Weir Disch Coeff:
Road Width:
ROAD #2
US Unit
US Unit
0.100
0.100
3.300
Gravel (FHWA)
13.000
10 of 14
Weir Low Point: 423.520
Maximum Flow:
Velocity at Max. Flow:
Time at Max. Flow:
Headwater at Max. Flow:
Tailwater at Max. Flow:
Max. Velocity:
Flow at Max. Velocity:
Time at Max. Velocity:
HW at Max. Velocity:
TW at Max. Velocity:
Max. Velocity x Depth:
Ending Flow:
Ending Velocity:
Ending Headwater:
Ending Tailwater:
Ending Velocity x Depth
Nomograph Details:
0.0000
0.0000
0.0333
419.4168
418.8349
0.0000
0.0000
0.0333
419.4168
418.8349
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
423.4500
420.3343
0.0000
Inlet<-----------
Type Material
Nomograph Data ---------->
Shape Inlet Description
4 Corrugated Metal Circular Headwall
Culvert Time Series Details:
============================
Culvert #1: Conduit Name:
Time Flow/Brrl Velocity
(hrs) (ft'3/s) (ft/s)
Culv 51
Depth
(ft)
Critical
(ft)
Normal
(ft)
HW
(ft)
TW Control
(ft)
2.067 39.400 9.53 4.150 2.114 1.739 423.450 420.334 Inlet
Weir Details:
=============
Weir #1: Weir Name:
Maximum Flow over this Weir
Culvert Rating Curve:
Depth
(ft)
HW
(ft)
39.395 4.149 423.449
ROAD #2
0.0
11 of 14
~ Cltdl Upwean'
Flew Element Trapezoidal Cha
Mdhod Manning's Form.
Solve Fc:r Olamel Depth
M~Co0.035
Slope :>5400 Ml
Depth 1.82 ft
Left Side 51Cf 2.00 H: \
Rl;t,t Side Sic 2. 00 H : \
Bottom Wdll 3. 00 ft
Disd'l..-go 31.20 d$
DITCH UPSTREAM OF CULV 50
Cross Section for Trapezoidal Channel
e,------3.00 n----1
V:1~
H:1
NTS
Prqecf Eriglneer:. Rctier1 H. DamM'
d~rqTlichols'wllchdt.culvert.frn2 . J.laazous ~ P.S.. AowMaster"'6;1 (et,4of
10/27'°3 09:56:04.AM OHaetladMethOd$.lnc. 37BrooksldeRoad YoAidelbwy,CT·0670BUSA (203)·755-1866 Paoe1·c11
12 of 14
'v\'orktiheet Otch Upstream t
Fl°"' Element Trapezoidal Olil
Method Manning's Fonm
&live Fer Olamel Depth
Mannings Co 0.035
Slope 54300 Mt
Dept, 1.02 ft_
Left Sklt1 Slq: 200 H : '
Righi Side $1( 2.00 H : \
Battom~ 3.00 ft
Clsd1ave 39.40 cfs
DITCH UPSTREAM UPSTREAM OF CULV 51
Cross Section for Trapezoidal Channel
>------3.00 ,,_ ____ _,
1.02 ft
_l
v,,b,,
H:1
NTS
Prqect Engineer; Robef1 H. -~·
d:1proj'nichd$'1'1ichds_QJtvert.fm2 HaalOus Englinnrtng. P.S. Aa.Masler v6.1' (8140)
10071D3 09:52:57AM OHastadMethods.lnc. 378rooksidcRoad V\lrterbury,·Cr:ti6708USA (203)75S-1ee6· Page1d1
13 of 14
Prqect Desaiptia,
V\bil:sheet Downstream t'
Flow Element Trapezoidal C
Method Manning's Fer
Schie Fer Oramet Dept!
Sectia, Da1a
Man,lngs Co 0.035
Sklpe 13000 Ml
Depth 1.21 ft
Left&da~ 2.00 H:'
Rtght Side Sit 2.00 H : '
Bottom Wdlh 5.00 ft
CJoc:hWge 38.40 ds
DITCH DOWNSTREAM OF CULV 51
Cross Section for Trapezoidal Channel
1--------,5.00 f>--------<
1.21ft
_J_
V:1 b,_
H:1
NTS
d:'oprofflkhoi.Wchah..wl\iert.tn2· Haozous ErvnMrlna, P.S.,
10/ZJ/03 09:55:02 AM C Haestad Methoda. Inc, 37 Bmckside Road watertiury.·cr 06708 USA (203) 755-1666
~oot Engineer..~ H. ~--
FlowMasl:er v6.11614of
Page 1.d 1
14 of 14
A PORTION
22
~<;°/lo
ortJ.!,~oB 9/~§N 1•. ,t:l~~~R~ s EAST. w':17~:#~o9:
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
23 24
' I I EV::lJDELL I
------~·· .. -----• UNE. 5.f ,;,, ~w 1;1. ~!: •!•. si:c. 1•-2J.-~
TRACT L
VOL 229, PGS 034-042
25 I 26 I 2,
m.it'.. / '; ,~/ ,; .• ~, X ~ :·:;;~ ,, , ,. ,
""'",;; '." ·. ·~·;: :~ .. ;~i~, ,:·".~) ~~!'."~" i.'~ ·1~~2.
H_!!!IJ)7'31"W ] 623.59
" ,o.00 <000
I~ 4
51!.00 <OO
~ : ;;/ ~a -3 ,~-2 •"
,,oo
" ••
1~ ~1;~ :;;z
!i=
JOCI 1...= ·-------],
J'
.,m,,.. ~= W_... ,• -7.• , .,_
j;!~ •/ l•S~Jl· .. ~ .-. .•.. , ... ~ Ao~
1
.(· .-· l/11 50lll <l .,· 50<'.ltl 0000 i;,.._~S ,/'.,~~ •:f . _ '-'ti.,. ~7-'\;I 'i:)':'I -,in,·. <i:,.. ~· G nC,-
;:;.\.. "'I.. "( ~ ... -, .• ~
:z ., . '-" ~ 'l,i<to· h'N f.;.
~& -/:=,., ~·!~ ~i~
~<:) <t~' :;;
. Q\..· "' ,t--·-[!/~
•oo
-""-----.50:l'l ~~ " .;., ··"
\~ ~
\ :; '""-..\"' \ ~~ •• ,,,, .• :··$·•· .. ,. .. •
\ J."'.JJ 15
~$
I
I ., ~$~.,._ z: :, ~ :_:,~ ' 1lf) 'f ·'-':.,,..:• ,,ft g
-~~ ,,.. . ~-I "·
.. ~ (.L.
''_¥, . ·-tTr-
.., .. ia,~.-.
--------11:~ b1
·-I 5
I~ <(
I~ ;;
,//if.~
\ 0 ((,!Ip 3
. __ ~ _ i .,'}'R~~Tr)
w U>l. H 1/•. ~" •I•
\l. 1/1 SEC. "•l.!-1 -----
uNPLA~-~rJ;J.
l ~ ~
SJ<!_/
!Mi
~i1J"• ''='11'
,•;(.p1~t
Ci,
"''" ··"
SCALE: 1" = 40'
,0 •.o ••
ODES FILE NO. L03P0015
~ /.!"· 19 ~8 20 ~8 Z-t )~s .11J
.; ,'~ ?, :;r ?;R ial ., 'f'""'~ i -~. .. ··\ .~ 72.17' 67K T~£L C "~i ~
~-9H? ~!l j:j"'
llOO •• •• •• "9!'1,:TJt. &I
~!ll:IWJt"• !1500
tt,??,J h7fz7 +~1~ a " ·--..,, ;'8 . ·.. 18 i~ ,.
23 ... . ' ;, ' i ;:l(J(lm ~-~ •• ~ JIW 6ZJ.7J
f1
~{)T .J-·'··
_.;'" . "K.:c.S.P. NO. 481066
,, .• ,.--, . RE( NO. 8.l.Q.~)00503
·-:,,,, ... _ .. / ./·I '\:
HO'UsE ADDRE,SSING
LOT 2
BS8l IUL.lllNG si:r a...c~ l.S'I£ •• ~ Hoiisi;.,\OO~ES'5 s.eru, roo l>d PL•T $11.,j.[ ·ac AS r~ J.0-0RCSSCS
~-'U. 8£·.~ ~00 TkE NOflf"t~50Jll-< Ro,,.t°S "'IH!<-ll-<E R..-.GE O l~l~ -
JJgO!I ,.,.0 "'"THIN l)"Jt !!ANG£ llf".l~~DO -l~GI~ FOR ll-<£"[...ST-,CST 110-.t'S
ll>tJll,C"lJ.I.L MlORCSSCS ..-L.L DC -~';l(;N(O TO.ii\£ P!II .. CIPAL El'i1'1U~(lc !lf" E"-Di
R(SIO(NC£ OIi f!Ull.t)<NG <H Aeq:rlOAA(:[ ,..n, IIING ~r, call" ,l~.oe.
e
•
fOUND 1/i" lltBAA "/'IU.l.Oi_;:~STIC Ci<l'
S..o.MPCO "COIIE 3&4118" •·
&ET 1/l" fltlll,R i#/'r£LLOW P!.4~1lC·~,
~TAWl't.l> "CQ<I[ 31!4&'!"
&ET <;lANIJARD ~ING L-OUNl'r C(ll;CR[T'[
"CWUWU<I IN CASI-
SET TA.Co< IN L[AO '"~l"'fR ST411PFO
"3114111!" CH PR<:FCRTY UN[ f.J<l'O<OCI) IN
UEU Of i'RONT CCflNER A~ F~
LOTS rnoNTING Tl![ NORTM SI!)£ or s.t:.
, 13!1TH ~t ... r 1 ~o· OFfS£T UNLESS M<lT!ll
0Tf£R~S£.
LOTS F~ON'l»IG l1'!( SOJTM 510C OF SE.
1J91'>l Sl . .\1 6.~ OFfSH U"Lt:SS IIIOlED
OlHERMSE.
NOTE
'>E[ SHO::T 5 FOR C...sEMCNTS or RECQRO AND
HSUC~l'; 10 BE ESl.o.ill.l'iHUl.
n-~~sPdin.Noh .:· .:· :-' ... ···
~~';:~~;;go~~ :""'~~~'id~~~·
STORM 0 DIWN-OOTI.El'"As SHOW>l:ON 'll-<E -OIIE!l col,lsmucrt011 ~Wl'tGS 1<0
Pf4CJl!:I ON nu: IIJl:11 K:NG CQ.MY Oo>1'.·0f' ~ ....0 QM~CNT,<(·•,, ..
S£l'MC£S (OOCS) Nti/Qfl. ~·-c COQ111Y DCl'l .. ~ TIWISKll!1},00Joi. n<r.;."JV,N
SHA.LL 8[ SUilMITT[O ... rnrrnc N'PUO.TIO>! or MT DIJ1Ll)ING PERI.Ill. M.L ·: .-.-
COllll(CTIONS or THE DfWI-IS M\/51:~ CONSTII\P{D "1<0 ~ PRJOH° TO THE -:-
FIIW. 8JIUII..C INSl'(C11()0I ~Ai...: f"OR T>;CS£ = I,W. AA£ D(~,Ul ~. ,-.
IN°""°'-"". LOT <H11UAATIOI-I SYSIT.MS. 1HE'-s'(S'rnis SHA.1.L.BE COtfSTRl,CIED AT l)f(·"
TM[ !lf" TI-lE lllal.lllNG P[RllfT Iii() SH,t,lL COI.IPI..Y \llffi1 l'LdE PIJffl Oft FU. AU;'
l'<OMlll'(. STl.ll-ouTS Nm INA."IR•TIOl,I Sl'ST(WS SIWJ.· ~ PIIIW,Tq.'/ Otl'Mll l!/0
l,IO,INTAINEO 11T TI£ lOT OWNER •• • .• • • •·
NOf'llr."liST#O>IG M NIOW.'. ~. LOT 23 S>W..L ~ l!OCf" .IIAAINS
~Y~Tl1~~~~~~ni-~:Sr~:·
WITHtll "WO TR.ICT.
SHEET 4 OF 5
'
mm
TRACT _NOTE
,I g
~I
I
,.
--:~·-r
,\ ·m ... cr ,s .......0 ?(Sl;fl\,£0 r(R SP[C,nQl uses INCLU:..G, !ll!T NOT u .. ,JW
l'O. l!CSfll\'E lRACTS. Rt.(REl,.TIOJ<. tJ'EN 51'AC£. SO<SITI.t' .ut£AS. SIJl,fi'.C£
WA!UI REJ'f)!TION, UTILITY FACU1lES ANO ACCl'S5, TRACTS AR( 1101'
COIISIO(RU) l.OTS (lll BtmDNG srn:s FOR f'URPOS.:S Cf F!ESCOl1'AL 01\WJNG
CONSTRUC1l0N. (KOC tllA..04 .JJO)
n.as Pl>! C0-11.t.U<S 1HE fCOU.O-~ Jlll.CIS-A. a. c. D. E -'-l<D F
.-·?
,F ·., .. ,_./"
"·~ ...... ··coRE,.
~OE~19·N
./~·
.~;tJE:~::!:
ENGINEEll,NG • PLA.l'i_NING:'• SUt(itEYINQ/'
JOB NO.
,.;;·=··
p
)
L03POOl5/Nichols Place
Page 2
C. . HISTORY/BACKGROUND:
D.
I. For the preliminary plat of Nichols Place (L03POOl5), the Subdivision Techn.ical
Committee (STC) of King County has conducted an on-site examination of the subject property.
The STC discussed the proposed development with the applicant and clarified technical details of
the application to determine the compatibility with applicable King County plans, codes, and
other official documents ..
In mid December 2003, the STC determined that there was sufficient information presented to
proceed with issuance of a SEP A TD and scheduling of a public hearing on the request.
2. The applicant originally applied for rezone to R-6 (L03TY404) or alternatively use TOR
credits to develop the proposed plat with 23 lots. The applicant chose to withdraw the rezone and
base the plat design on R-4 zoning and use of 8 TOR density credits.
THRESHOLD DETERMINATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE:
Pursuant to the State Environmental ·Policy Act (SEPA), RCW 43.21 C, the responsible official of
the Land Use Services Division (LUSD) issued a threshold determination -mitigated ·
determination of non-significance (MONS) for the proposed development on December 23, 2003.
This determination was based on the review of the environmental checklist and other pertinent
documents, resulting in the conclusion that the proposal would not cause probable significant
· adverse impacts on the environment with· implementation of mitigation for the proposal.
Therefore, an environmental impact statement (EIS) was not required prior to proceeding with the
review process.
Agencies, affected Native American tribes.and the public were offered the opportunity to
comment on or appeal the determination for 21 days. The MONS was not appealed by any party,
including the applicant, and it has been incorporated as part of the applicant's proposal. ·
The MDNS states:
The following mitigation measures shall be attached as conditions of permit issuance. These
mitigation measures are consistent with policies, plans, rules, or regulations designated by
KCC 20.44.080 as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority and in effect when this
threshold determination is issued. Key sources of substantive authority for each mitigation
measure are in parentheses; however, other sources of substantive authority may exist but are not
expressly listed .
. Individually, or joint with other area developers, tlie Applicant shall design and construct
· improvements to Southeast 128th Street at 1601h Ave. SE to mjtigate project impacts at
the High Accident Location. ·
Or, the Applicant shall reduce the project impacts at the High Accident Location by
completing the remainder of the improvements to Southeast 136th Street (i.e. additional
paving, concrete curbs, gutters and sidewalks), between 158th Avenue SE and 160th
Avenue SE, and, revise the channelization at the intersection of 156th A venue SE/SE
. 136th Street to provide a southbound left turn lane.
E. AGENCIES CONTACTED:.
I. King County Natural Resources & Parks Division: No response.
2: King County Fire Protection Engineer: Fire protection engineering preliminary approval
has been granted as requested.
3. Seattle-King County Health Department: No response.
4. Issaquah School District: See comments contained in report and Attachment 3.
5. Water District# 90: See Attachment 4.
'
l
.--WHITTAKER, BRUCE L03P0015
PREL. REVIEW ENGINEER
DDES/LUSD MS: OAK .DE-0100
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
LAND USE SERVICES DIVISION
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER
February 24, 2004 -PUBLIC HEARING AT 9:30 AM
Hearing Room at DDES
900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest
Renton, WA 98055-1219
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF NICHOLS PLACE
FILE NO: L03P0015
PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO: #2004-0013
A. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION:
This is a request for preliminary plat approval of Nichols Place to allow 23 lots through
use of density credit transfer (TDR). The 23 lots would mostly be_ 4,320 square feet in area and
have a width of 45 feet. As part of the plat; a recreation area serving the plat is proposed. The
drainage detention area planned will serve Nichols Place and be sized to accommodate drainage
for the Plat of Evendell immediately to the north. Access to _the Nichols Place lots is proposed
via 160th Ave. SE. See Attachment I.
B. GENERAL INFORMATION:
Proponent:
Representative:
Location:
U.S. Land Development Association
P.O. Box 22200
Seattle, WA 98122
Michael Romano
Centurion Development Services
22617 81
h Dr. SE, Bothell, WA 98021
Phone: 425-486-2563
Facsimile: ( 425) 486-3273
e-mail: Michael.romano@verizon.net
The site is located west of 160th Ave. SE, south of SE 138 1h Street
(if extended) at 13815 160th Ave. SE
Section/Township/Range: SE 14-23-05 Parcels# 142305 9058
Acreage Plat: 3.82 acres
Current Zoning: R-4
Number of Lots: 23 proposed using 8 TDR_'s
Density: 6 dwellings per acre
Lot Size: 4,320 square feet
Proposed Use: single family
Sewage Disposal: City of Renton
Water Supply: Water District #90
Fire District: King County Fire District# 25
School District: Issaquah
Community Plan: Newcastle
_Drainage Subbasin: Lower Cedar River
King County Permits: Subdivision
Complete Application Date: Jun_e 19, 2003
Threshold Determination: Mitigated Determination ofNonsignificance (MDNS)
Date·oflssuance: December 23, 2003
KC Permit Contact: Karen Scharer, Project Manager II, Current Planning Section, LUSD
Phone # 296-7114 or e-mail at karen.scharer@metrokc:gov
6. City of Renton: See Attachments 5 and 6.
7. Washington State Department of Ecology: No response.
L03P0015/Nichols Place
Page 3
8. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife: No response.
9. Washington State Department of Natural Resources: No response.
JO. Washington State Department of Transportation: No response.
11. METRO: No response.
F. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT:
I. Topography: The site appears level and only slightly slopes wiih a I 0-foot difference in
elevation from the north west comer to the southeast comer of the site.
2. Soils: Surface soils are found on this site per King County Soil Survey, 1973 include:
AgC -Alderwood gravely, sandy loam; 6-15 % slopes. Runoff is slow and the erosion hazard is
slight. This soil type has a moderate limitation for low building foundations due to a seasonally
high water table, and severe limitations for septic tank filter fields due to very slow permeability
in the substratum. · · ·
3. Sensitive Areas: A Wetland Report by Habitat Technologies, dated October 11, 2002 was
received by ODES and the site has been field checked by DDES staff. No sensitive areas were
observed or documented. There is a probable class 2 wetland and a class 3 stream along the
downstream drainage route from this property.
Improvements to the downstream drainage system will have to be reviewed to ensure that
wetlands are not being drained or flooded as a result, streams will not be placed in pipes, or
damaged by increased flows. Enlarging culverts, if any, in a sensitive area may require a clearing
and grading permit if not approved under plat review.
4. Hydrography: A Level Three Downstream Drainage Analysis, dated October 27, 2003
was submitted to King County ODES.
The Nichols Place subdivision is located in the Orting Hills subbasin of the Lower Cedar River
drainage basin. A low north/south ridge divides the site into eastern and western subbasins.
The western subbasin sheetflows to the southwest across the west and south property lines onto
adjoining parcels. These flows eventually reach 156th Ave SE via SE 139m Place. The larger
eastern basin sheetflows across the south property line and into the existing roadside ditch on
the west side 160th Ave NE. . The downstream path continues south in the roadside ditch to a
cross· culvert under l 60'h Ave SE to the east side. Then the flow continues south along the east
side in a ditch, through two culverts, and turning east across an undeveloped parcel south of·.
house #14028 (approx. 650 feet downstream). This area contains wetlands (likely class 2) and
the flow enters the site as a class 3 stream. The stream continues east through this parcel to the
unopened right-of-way for 162"" Ave SE. The stream turns south and continues to SE 144m St.
The drainage then turns west in the SE 144m St. drainage system, eventually flowing into the
Cedar River.
The cross culvert under 160th Ave SE and the two downstream culverts along the east side have
recently been upsized. There are two undersized conveyance culverts on the above
undeveloped parcel that have a history of conveyance nuisance. flooding problems. The
proposed plat conditions include upsizing these two culverts, if permission can be obtained
from the owner.
The proposal is to collect most runoff from the project site and direct it to a single detention
and water quality facility in the southeast corner of the site. The detention facility is required
to meet the Level 2 flow control requirements and Basic water quality menu in the 1998 King
County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM).
L03POO IS/Nichols Place
Page 4
Conditions of the Drainage Adjustment, L03V0036, September 4, 2003 approval, allows the
diversion of runoff from the natural location to a single facility draining to 1601h Ave. SE.:
I. The release rates for the detention facility will be based on only that portion of the site
that naturally drains to the location that is being diverted to.
2. The volume for the detention facility will be based on all flows directed to the
, facility at full development under current zoning. The allowed release rate will be
reduced by any undetained flows that would bypass the proposed subdivision
drainage facilities. The detention volume shall be sized using the Level Two flow
control standard in the 1998 KCSWDM. A IO to 20 percent volumetric factor of
safety must be applied to all storm events requiring detention. The design Technical
Information Report shall state the factor of safety selected and the basis of that
determination. · ·
3. Water quality facilities must be sized based on the entire proposed subdivisiori
draining to the facilities including any required frontage improvements.
4.. The onsite drainage facility must be located in a public right-of-way, recreation
space tract with easement or storm drainage tract dedicated to King County.
5. Any additional storm drainage requirements identified by SEPA or the plat hearing
review will apply to this project. ·
5. Vegetation: The western edge of the site is forested with Douglas Fir and Maple and a
row of evergreen trees is present along the frontage to 160 1h Ave SE. Most of the site is in
pasture.
· 6. Wildlife: Both small birds.and animals likely frequent the site.
<:i. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS:
The site is located in the east potential annexation area of Renton. Properties located nearby vary
in size from large 5-acre parcels to small urban lots. The neighborhood is rapidly changing from
a rural-suburban character to an urbanized area· with mostly single family homes and some related
services such as schools, a fire station, churches and parks. Developed lots immediately nearby
are on septic ·systems. These lots are approximately 9,000 square feet to 30,000 square feet in
size. Many of the parcels are currently considered as under utilized within the urban designation.
Zoning immediately surrounding the plat of Nichols Place is R-4.
The plat of Evendell located immediately to the north was preliminarily approved for 46 lots.
King County is currently processing an application for major revision (L03RE038) to allow 70
. lots based on R-4 zoning with 20 TDR -density credit transfers. The examiner's hearing on this
appiication was held on January 22, 2004 and decision was issued on February 4, 2004 approving
the plat (unless appealed).
Liberty Grove L03P0006 and Liberty Grove Contiguous L03P0005 are scheduled for plat hearing
on February 10, 2004. Liberty Grove with 24 lots (5 TDR credits) is located north ofEvendell.
Liberty Grove Conti!uous with 36 lots (4 TDR credits) is located on the east side of 1601h Ave.
SE south of SE 136 St. Both of these plats include requests for TDR credits. ·
Anyone wishing to obtain a copy of the examiner's decision regarding any of these plats should
contact the examiner's office at 206-296-4660.
The primarily approved plat of Hamilton Place (L02POO 11) is located on property which is a.
parcel north of Liberty Grove between 158'h Ave. SE & 1601h Ave. SE. Lots proposed would
average approximately 5,000-sq. ft. each. Transfer of6 density credits was approved for this plat.
The parcel with the preliminarily approved plat of "5 Lot Subdivision" also. known as Dickinson,
LOOP0023 is located south off 162nd Ave. SE and contains 5 lots averaging".9 d.u. 's per acre. . ' -.
L03POO 15/Nichols Place
Page 5
Homes would be served by septic, and dry sewers will be installed as part of plat approval. This
_plat is currently in for engineering review.
DOES also has held other pre-application meetings for plats in the immediate area. Timing for
submittal of further applications is unknown.
On-Site: The existing residence centrally located on the property is accessible off I 60'h Ave. SE.
There are also out buildings just west of the house and a shed near the south property line. The
majority of the site is in pasture with evergreens along the west and east property lines. Most of
the existing trees will need to be removed for plat and home construction.
H. SUBDIVISION DESIGN FEATURES:
I. .
I. Lot Pattern and Density:. The proposed lot and street layout is in conformance with King
County Codes (i.e. KCC 21A and the 1993 King County Road Standards. Density calculations
for the plat average 6 d.u. 's per acre. The 23 lots ranging in area from 4,230 square feet.
2. Internal Circulation: Most lots will front onto a fublic street that provides an internal
street system within the subdivision and exits out to 160 1 Ave. SE. Three Joint Use
Development Tracts (JUDT's) that connect to the public street will serve a few other lots. See
the proposed plat layout, Attachment 1 to this report.
3. Roadway Section: As proposed by the applicant, 1601h Ave. SE frontage would be improved
with urban improvements, including curd, gutter and sidewalks.
The public street planned as SE 139•h St .. will be improved as a urban subaccess street. There are
three J.U.D.T. 's, one south central on the site and the .other two at the west end of the plat. Each
will each serve two lots. ·
4. Drainage: The proposal is to collect most runoff from the project site and direct it to a
single detention and water. quality facility in the southe·ast corner of the site. The detention
facility is required to meet the Level 2 flow control requirements and Basic water quality menu in
the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM).
The LevelOne Drainage Analysis identified downstream drainage complaints associated with the
proposed dischargt, location. Recent conveyance upgrades have been installed along this route to
mitigate for these previous complaints. Due to the accumulative effect of increased development
in this area, more conveyance upgrades are needed.
· The proposed plat conditions include upsizing two culverts down stream,, if permission can be
obtained from the owner. At present; permission has not been obtained. Instead ofupsizing
culverts on his property, it is the understanding ofDDES that the owner requested the applicant
to re-route flows around the perimeter of his property. Since there are both wetlands and a stream
these flows contribute to on this site, neither county code or county policy would support the
relocation of the stream to the perimeter edge.
TRANSPORTATION PLANS:
1. Transportation Plans: The King County Transportation Plan indicates that 160th Ave. SE
is a non-Arterial Road. The King County Nonmotorized Transportation Plan does not designate
this roadway for bicycles of equestrian use. The _subject subdivision is not in conflict with this
Transportation Plan, the King County Regional Trails Plan, nor Nonmotorized Plan.
2. Subdivision Access: The subdivision will gain access from one access points: 1601h Ave.
SE. Trips will be sent to the intersection of Southeast !28th Street at 160th Avenue Southeast
which has, as of June 2003, been placed upon King County DOT's High Accident Location list
(ID: HAL #16). The recommended countermeasure is to construct both east and west'left tum
channelization at the intersection. These improvement measures are appropriately required prior
to King County approving further development that would reduce the level of safety by adding
vehicles trips to this intersection .. Therefore, due to the additional ·impacts, mitigation of project
L_03P0015/Nichols Place
Page 6
impacts at this intersection is necessary and was made a condition of the MONS. Alternatively, if
another local access route is provided and development impacts are mitigated, then improvements
at the intersection could be deferred. ·
The alternative local access route would be at SE 1361h St. between 1561h Ave. SE and 1601h Ave.
SE provided that the 70 lot plat design for Evendell is approved and constructed. The Evendell
improvements with the 70 lot design include a 'half-street' improvement opposite the frontage of
the proposed plat of Liberty Grove (L03P0006). Completion of the balance of the improvernents
by this Applicant (Nichols Place) could provide a more attractive alternative route for project-
generated trips that would otherwise enter the HAL at SE 1281h St. identified by King County
DOT. This alternative is afforded under the MONS.
Typically, absent a direct connection to this roadway, improvements to ·southeast 136th Street by
the Applicant would not be required as a condition of plat approval or under a MONS. However,
by completing the improvements to Subcollector Street (Urban) standards, project~generated trips
.of the plat of would have an alternative westbound access (towards the. City of Renton) along
Southeast !28th Street at the signalized intersection of 156th Avenue SE. Additionally, project-
generated trips would have the alternative access to SR-169 from plat-generated trips by use of
SE 1361h Street (in lieu of traveling northbound on 160th Ave. SE., making the left turn at the
intersection of 1281h Street -the HAL -and another left tum at the 156th Ave. SE signal).
Mitigation is listed in Section D of this report. ·
Under either scenario, road improvements would be completed to assure a safe access route for
resulting traffic from this plat.
3. Traffic Generation: It is expected that approximately 230 vehicle trips per day will be
generated with full development of the proposed subdivision. This calculation includes service
vehicles (i.e., mail delivery, garbage pick-up, school bus) which may currently serve this
neighborhood, as well as work trips, shopping, etc.
4. Adequacy of Arterial Roads: This proposal has been reviewed under the criteria in King
County Code 14.70, Transportation Concurrency Management; 14.80, Intersection Standards; and
King County Code 14.75; Mitigation Payment System.
a. King County Code 14.70 -Transportation Concurrency Management: The
Transportation Certificate of Concurrency indicates that transportation
improvements or strategies will be in place at the time of development, or that a
financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements or strategies
within six (6) years, according to RCW 36.70A.070(6).
b. King County Code 14.80 --Intersection Standards: The arterial system will
accommodate the increased traffic volume generated by this proposal provided the
conditions of the SEPA MONS are implemented. See Section D of this report for
conditions and Section!. 2. above for a discussion of the status of the intersect of
SE 128th St. and 1601h Ave SE.
c. King County Code 14:75 -Mitigation Payment System:
King County Code 14.75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS), requires the
payment of a traffic impact mitigation fee (MPS fee) and an administration fee for
each single family residential lot or unit created. MPS fees are determined by the
zone in which the site is located. This site is in Zone 452 per the
MPS/Quartersection list. MPS fees may be paid at the time of final plat recording,
or deferred until building permits are issued. The amo\!nt of the fee will be
determined by the applicable fee ordinance at the time the fee is collected.
J. PUBLIC SERVICES:
I. Schools: This proposal has been reviewed under RCW 58. 17 .110 and King County Code
21A.28 (School Adequacy).
L03P0015/Nichols Place
Page 7
a. School Facilities: The subject subdivision will be served by the Issaquah School
District (Briarwood, Maywood Middle, & Liberty High schools).
b. School Capacity: The Issaquah School Board has adopted capacity figures which
indicate their ability to accommodate additional students. The capacity figures for 2004
through 2008 show at minimum an excess capacity of 779 per the 2002 Capital Facilities
Plan for the. District. The figures reveal the district has adequate capacity to
accommodate the anticipated students generated by this proposal.
c. School Impact Fees: The Issaquah School District has adopted a fee of $4,617for
each new single family residential unit. A total of 23 new dwellings would be added to
the Issaquah District.
d. School Access: The Issaquah District has provided information as to the location
of existing bus stops. This information is reflected on the School Walkway Access Study
submitted Sept. 3, 2003 for the Plats of Liberty Grove and Liberty Grove Contiguous.
The current bus stop for middle and high school students is located at the intersection of
SE l 30'h Street with l 62"d Ave SE. Bussing occurs at present due to lack of safe
walkways to the schools. It is the District's position that with the influx of new students
in the area as a result of new homes being built, these new development nearby should
provide acceptable walking facilities to the local schools.
The local schools serving this property are all within one mile of the plat of Nichols Place.
The school district has submitted updated information since their written response(see
attachment 3) indicating that at the existing bus stop for Liberty High School and
Maywood Middle School is at SE I 30'h Street and I 62"d Ave. SE. Currently the area is
underdeveloped and has poor pedestrian connections; bus service for students within one
mile of the schools has been provided by the district. The district views this bus service
as temporary only and requests that with construction of new nearby housing
developments, safe walking access to schools be provided.
Per a request by DOES, the applicant of Liberty Grove and Liberty Grove Contiguous
provided information clarifying which streets that have been improved with pedestrian
walkways. A narrative indicated that a walkway system to Liberty High School as
infeasible. ODES staff has taken exception to this analysis and finds that a walkway is
feasible along SE 135th Street between 160'h Ave SE and 166'h Ave. SE. (then south on
166'h Ave SE one block to the school). This location ofa walkway would provide a high
level of visibility of the students walking from nearby residences and students would only
need to walk past one wooded parcel on the south side of SE 135th Street. ODES does
concede that that location for a walkway would be costly to .co.nstruct do to the existing ·
driveways and open ditch construction along this corridor.
An alternative access to Liberty High School is being planned in conjunction with the plat
of"5 Lot Subdivision". Paved sidewalks and a paved pedestrian walkway are planned
from the subdivision frontage on 162"d Ave. SE east/southeast to the southwest comer of
the Liberty High School where there is a gated school entry.
This subdivision is also scheduled. to construct safe access to the middle school, a four
foot wide graveled path south from the southeast comer of the plat, south along 1641h Ave.
SE to SE 142"d St. (if extended). The district has determined that the walking area
between SE 142"d St. and SE 144 1h St. on 164 1h Ave SE is safe, as the street paving is
approximately 30 feet wide with very little traffic. There are already safe walking ·
conditions on SE 144'h St. for school children to walk from 164 1h Ave SE east to the
middle schooL
2. Parks and Recreation Space: The nearest public park is located on the south west comer
of l 52"d Ave. SE and SE 1361h St. The applicant has proposed on-site recreation areas Tract D .
and a portion of the detention area Tract E. Recreation area will be on the east/central portion of
the plat. The details of improvements will be designed and submitted for approval prior to final
plat. ·
. .. r··
L03P0015/Nichols Place
Page 8
· KCC 2 lA.14 requires subdivisions in the UR and R zone classifications to either provide on-site
recreation space or pay a fee to the Parks Division for establishment and maintenance of
neighborhood parks.
The required recreation area equals 8,970 s. f. Tract D with 4,950 s.f. (rec. area) and E with
26,257 s.f. (detention) wifl be required to be combined and comply with the minimum sq. ft. for
recreation area under the standards ofKCC 21A.14.180. ·
Per KCC 2 IA.14.180 E, one tot lot and one additional playground/recreational facility will be
required. ·
3. Fire Protection: The Certificate of Water Availability from W. D. 90 indicates that water
is presently available to the site in sufficient quantity to satisfy King County Fire Flow Standards.
Prior to final recording of the plat, the water service facilities must be reviewed and approved per
King County Fire Flow Standards.
K. UTILITIES:
I. Sewage Disposal: A letter from the City of Renton, dated January 15, 2003 states the
availability of sewer and indicates the city's capability to serve the proposed development. A
sewage pump station will be required to be constructed as this plat can not be served by gravity
flow. Currently, the lift station planned associated with Evendell would be located at the
southeast corner o(Nichols Place to provide the best service to the neighborhood. The existing
sewer line will be extended east along SE 1361h Street and south along 160th Ave. SE to provide
connection to Renton' s sewer system.
2. Water Supply: The applicant proposes to serve the subject subdivision with water from
Water District 90. A Certificate of Water Availability, dated June 18, 2003, indicates this
district's capability to serve the proposed development.
L. COMPREHENSIVE AND COMMUNITY PLAN:
I. Comprehensive Plan 2000 Land Use Map:
This proposal is governed by the 2000 King County Comprehensive Plan with Land Use Map
that designates this area as "Urban Residential, 4-12 dwelllngs per acre".
Comment: The proposal would yield an overall density of 6 dwellings per acre .
. 2. .comprehensive Plan Policy:
Policy U-113 New residential development in the Urban Growth Area should occur where
facilities and services can be provided at the lowest public cost and in a timely fashion. The
Urban Growth Area should have a variety of housing types and prices, including mobile home
parks, multi-family development, townhouses and small-lot, single-family development.
Policy U-114 King County shall seek to ·achieve through future planning efforts over the next
twenty years, an average zoning density of at least seven to eight homes per acre In the Urban
Growth Area through a mix of densities and housing types. A lower density zone may be used to
· recognize existing subdivisions with little or no opportunity for infill or redevelopment.
U-122 · King County supports increases in urban residential density through a rezone or a
proposal to increase density through the density transfer or density incentive programs when the
proposal will help resolve traffic, sewer, water, parks or open space deficiencies in the immediate
neighborhood.
Comment: The proposal is in conformance with the above policies. Note that the. Zoning Code does. not
specify that any special thresholds or requirements beyond SEP A and platting requirements for providing
adequate services to support the development that is proposed.
--------------~--
L03POOI5/Nichols Place
Page 9
In this specific case, the development will provide extension of sewer and locate a pump station with the
ability to serve over a 37 acre area providing future opportunity for sewer hook-up by other nearby
property owners.
Under the SEP A MONS, SE· I 28th Street intersection improvements, or alternativelf frontage
improvements along the north side of SE ! 36'h St. will be constructed between 158' Ave. SE and SE
l 60'h Street.
Additionally, the applicant will be required to provide safe walkways to middle.and high schools, and
also safe access to the elementary bus stop which will add to pedestrian safety in the neighborhood.
3. Under the 2000 Comprehensive Plan and Ord.# 14049, both effective as of March 12, 2001,
all new residential development in the urban area must be served by sewer. Providing sewer to this
. and other properties in the immediate area will require a sewage pump station to facilitate new
residential development. As a result, development of the subject property and a pump station will
help to make possible new homes on other properties nearby.
M. PLAT STATUTES/CODES:
I. If approved with the recommended conditions in this report, the proposed development
will comply with the requirements of the County and State Platting Codes and Statutes,
and the lots in the proposed subdivision will comply with the minimum dimensional
requirements of the zone district.
2. King County Road Standards Section 1.03 -Responsibility to Provide Roadway
Improvements:
3.
A. Any land development which will impact the service level, safety, or operational
efficiency of serving roads or is required by other County code or. ordinance to improve
such roads shall improve those roads.in accordance with these Standards. 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 ...
RCW 58.17.110 Approval or disapproval of subdivision and dedication-Factors to
be considered-Conditions for approval-Finding-Release from damages.
(I) The city, town, or county legislative body shall inquire into the public use and interest
proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall
determine: a) If appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health,
safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other
public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation,
playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts,
including sidewalks and other planning features that assure ·safe walking conditions for
students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the public interest will be
served by the subdivision and dedication.
(2) A proposed subdivision and dedication shall not be approved unless the city,
town, or county legislative body makes written findings that: (a) Appropriate provisions
are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and for such open spaces,
drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water
supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds
and all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other pl;mning features that assure
safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) the public
use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication. If it
finds that the proposed subdivision and dedication make such appropriate provisions and
that the public use and interest will be served, then the legislative body shall approve the
proposed subdivision and dedication... ·
. 4. KCC 20.24.180 Examiner findings. When the examiner renders µ decision or
,recommendation, he or she shall make and enter findings of fact and conclusions from the
record which support the decision and the findings and conclusions shall set forth and
demonstrate the manner in which the decision or recommendation is consistent with, carries .
I
I
I
L03P0015/Nichols Place
Page JO
out and helps implement applicable state Jaws and regulations and the regulations, policies,
objectives and goals of the comprehensive plan, subarea or community plans, the zoning
code, the land segregation code and other official laws, policies and objectives of King
County, and that the recommendation or decision will not be unreasonably incompatible
with or detrimental to affected properties and the general public.
5. -KCC20.24.195 Additional examiner findings -preliminary plats. When the examiner
makes a decision regarding an application for a proposed preliminary plat, the decision
shall include additional findings· as to whether:
A. Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and
for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit
stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools
and school grounds and all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and othe_r planning
features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from
school; and
B. The public use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and
dedication. (Ord. 12196 § 38, 1996: Ord. 9544 § 16,.1990).
6. 21A.12.030 Densities and dimensions -residential zones.
A. · Densities and dimensions -residential zones.
Base Density: 4 dwelling units per acre
Maximum Density: 6 dwelling units per acre
Minimum Density: 85% of base density
B. Development conditions.
1. This maximum density may be achieved only through the application of
residential density incentives in accordance with ... transfers of development
rights in accordance with K.C.C. chapter 21A.37 .. .
7. 21A.37.030 Transfer of development rights (TOR) program -receiving sites.
A. Receiving sites shall be: ·
I. King County unincorporated urban sites, ... zoned R-4 .... The sites may also
be within potential annexation areas established under the countywide planning
policies; or ...
B. Except as provided in this chapter development of an unincorporated King County
receiving site shall remain subject to all zoning code provisions for the base zone,
except TDR receiving site developments shall comply with dimensional standards
of the zone with a base density most closely comparable to the total approved
density of the TDR receiving site development.
C. An unincorporated King County receiving site may accept development rights
from one or more sending sites, up to the maximum density permitted under
K.C.C. 21A.12.030 and 21A.12.040.
N. ANALYSIS/ CONCLUSIONS:
I. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW 43.21C, the responsible
official of the Land Use Services Division (LUSD) issued a threshold determination -
mitigated determination of non-significance (MDNS) for the proposed rezone and plat on
December 23, 2003. This deiermination was based on the review of the environmental
· checklist and other pertinent documents, resulting in the conclusion that with implementation
of mitigation, the proposal would not cause probable significant adverse impacts on the
environment.
-2. Comprehensive Plan Policy U-122 supports increases in urban residential density when the
proposal will help resolve traffic, sewer, water, parks or open space deficiencies in the
immediate neighborhood. This plat will provide basic neighborhood infrastructure benefits in
the form of road improvements on 1601h A venue Southeast, school walkways and other
improvements which are commonly be required as part of preliminary approval for a plat.
There has not been an offer by the applicant to provide neighborhood improvements beyond that
· · which would normally be expected with preliminary plat approval under the R-4 designation
and SEP A. Nor has staff suggested any fiuiher conditions as appropriate.
..
L03POO 15/Nichols Place
Page 11
It is noted that KCC 2 IA.37 -transfer of density does not require an applicant of a plat to
"benefit a neighborhood" beyond the basic needs for implementation and approval of the plat.
The plat application is in conformance with this policy and also U-113 and U-114 regarding
urban density and development.
3. King County has notified the City of Renton and other local agencies of the request. The City
did express concern with road improvement standards to·be used. At this time an interlocal
agreement has not been signed between the two jurisdictions by which King County would
alternatively recognize City of Renton standards for street improvements.
4. The subject subdivision with density credit transfer will comply with the goals and objectives
of the King County Comprehensive Plan and will comply with the requirements of the
Subdivision and Zoning Codes and other official land use controls of King County, based on
the recommendation below conditions for final plat approval.
. 0. RECOMMENDATIONS:
L03P0015 -Grant preliminary approval of the May 19, 2003 preliminary plat ofNichols Place with the
transfer of eight density credits, subject to the following conditions of final approval:
1. Compliance with all platting provisions of Title 19 of the King County Code.
2. All persons having an ownership interest in the subject property shall sign on the face of
the final plat a dedicl!tion which includes the language set forth in King County Council
Motion No. 5952.
3. a. The plat shall comply with the maximum density ( and minimum density) requirements
of the R-4 zone classification. All lots shall meet the minimum dimensional
requirements of the R-6 zone classification or shall be as shown on the face of the
approved preliminary plat, whichever is larger, except that minor revisions to the plat
which do not result in substantial changes may be approved at the discretion of the
Department of Development and Environmental Services.
b. The Applicant shall provide Transfer of Density Credit documentation to DDES prior
to final approval to allow transfer of a maximum of eight density credits.
4. The applicant must obtain final approval from the King County Health Department for
abandonment of existing septic systems on-site.
5. All construction and upgrading of public and private roads shall be done in accordance
with the King County Road Standards established and adopted by Ordinance No. 1118 7,
as amended (1993 KCRS).
6. The applicant must obtain the approval of the King County Fire Protection Engineer for
the adequacy of the fire hydrant, water main, and fire flow standards of Chapter· 17 .08 of
the King County Code.
7. Final plat approval shall require full compliance with the drainage provisions set forth in
King County Code 9.04. Compliance may result in reducing the number and/or location
of lots as shown on the preliminary approved plat. Preliminary review has identified the
following conditions of approval which represent portions of the drainage requirements.
All other applicable requirements in KCC 9 .04 and the Surface Water Design Manual
(SWDM) must also be satisfied during engineering and final review.
a. Drainage plans and analysis shall comply with the 1998 King County Surface
Water Design Manual and applicable updates adopted by King County. DOES
approval of the drainage and roadway plans is required prior to any construction.
b. Current standard plan notes and ESC notes, as established by ODES Engineering
Review, shall be shown on the engineering plans.
·,
'
L03POOJ5/Nichols Place
Page 12
c. The following note shall be shown on the final recorded plat: .
All building downspouts, footing drains, and drains·from all impervious surfaces
such as patios and driveways shall be connected to the permanent storm drain
outlet as shown on the approved construction drawings # on file
with ODES and/or the King County Department of Transportation. This plan shall
be submitted with the application of any building permit. All connections of the
drains must be constructed and approved prior to th'e final building inspection
approval. For those lots that are designated for individual lot infiltration systems,
the systems shall be constructed at the time of the building permit and shall
comply with plans on file."
d. The stormwater detention design shall comply with the Level 2 Flow Control
requirements per the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual
(KCSWDM).
. e. The storm water control facility shall be located in a separate tract and dedicated
to King County unless portions of the drainage tract are used for required
recreation space in accordance with KCC 2 JA.14.180.
8. The drainage detention facility shall be designed to meet at a minimum to the Level 2 Flow
Control and Basic Water Quality menu in the 1998 King County Surface Water Design
Manual (KCSWDM).
9. · Offsite drainage improvement: The two existing downstream culverts across undeveloped
Lot 6 of Cedar Park Five Acre Tracts shall be upgraded per the Level 3 Offsite Analysis
(locations 50 and 5.1 ). Permission is required from the owner to construct the
improvements. If permission cannot be obtained following a documented good faith effort,
this improvement is not required.
10. A surface water adjustment (L03V0036) is approved for this subdivision. All conditions of
approval for this adjustment shall be met prior to approval of the engineering plans.
11. . The following road improvements are required to be constructed according to the 1993
King County Road Standards (KCRS):
a. · SE J39t11 St. shall be improved at a minimum to the urban subaccess street
standard.
b. FRONTAGE: The frontage of the site along 160th Ave SE (west side only) shall
be improved to the urban neighborhood standard.
c. Tracts A, Band C shall be improved as joint use driveways per Section 3.01 of
the KCRS. These driveways shall be owned and maintained by the lot owners
served. Notes to this effect shall be shown on the engineering plans and on the
final plat map.
d. Modifications to the above road conditions may be considered according to the
variance provisions in Section 1.08 of the KCRS.
12. There shall be no direct vehicular access to or from 160'h Ave. SE from those lots, which
abut this street. A note to this effect shall appear on the engineering plans and fi.nal plat.
13. All utilities within proposed rights-of-way must be included within a franchise approved
by the King County Council prior to final plat recording.
14. The applicant or subsequent owner shall comply with King County Code 14.75,
Mitigation Payment System (MPS), by paying the required MPS fee and administration
fee as determined by the applicable fee ordinance. The applicant has the option to either:
(I) pay the MPS fee at final plat recording, ()r (2) pay the MPS fee at the time of building
permit issuance. If the first option is chosen, the fee paid s.hall be the fee in effect at the
L03P0015/Nichols Place
Page 13
time of plat application and a note shall be placed on the face of the plat that reads, "All
fees required by King County Code 14.75, Mitigation Payment System (MPS), have been
paid." If the second option is chosen, the fee paid shall be the amount in effect as of the
date of building permit application.
15. Suitable recreation space shall be provided within one tract that may be.·combined with
the drainage tract in accordance with KCC 2JA.14.180 consistent with the requirements
KCC 21A.14.180 and KCC 2!A.14.!90 in providing sport court[s], children's play
equipment, picnic table(s], benches, etc.
a. A detailedrecreation space plan (i.e., landscape specs, equipment specs, etc.) shall
be submitted for review and approval by DOES and King County Parks prior to or
concurrent with the submittal of the engineering plans. This plan shall comply
with Ordinance # 14045.
b. A performance bond for recreation space improvements shall be posted prior to
recording of the plat.
16. A homeowners' association or other workable organization shall be established to the
satisfaction ofDDES which provides for the ownership and continued maintenance of the
recreation, open space and/or sensitive area tract(s) ..
17. Street trees shall be included in the design of all road improvements, and shall comply
with Section 5.03 of the KCRS and KCC 21A.16.050:
a. Trees shall be planted at a rate of one tree for every 40 feet of frontage along all
roads. Spacing may be modified to accommodate sight distance requirements for
driveways and intersections.
b. Trees shall be located within the street right-of-way and planted in accordance
with Drawing No. 5-009 of the 1993 King County Road Standards, unless King
County·Department of Transportation determines that trees should not be located
in the street right-of-way.'
c. If King County determines that the required street trees should not be located
within the right-of-way, they shall be located no more than 20. feet from the street
right-of-way line.
d. The trees shall be owned and maintained by the abutting lot owners or the
homeowners association or other workable organization unless the County has
adopted a maintenance program. Ownership and maintenance shall be noted on
the face of the final recorded plat.
e. The species of trees shall be approved by DOES iflocated within the right-of-way,
and shall not include poplar, cottonwood, soft maples, gum, any fruit-bearing
trees, or any other tree or shrub whose roots are likely to obstruct sanitary or storm
sewers, or that is not compatible with overhead utility lines.
f. The applicant shall submit a street tree plan and bond quantity sheet for review
and approval by ODES.prior to engineering plan approval.
g. The street trees must be installed and inspected, or a performance bond posted
prior to recording of the plat. If a performance bond is posted, the street trees must
be installed and inspected within one year of recording of the plat. At the time of
inspection, if the trees are found to be installed per the approved plan, a
maintenance bond must be submitted or the performance bond replaced with a
maintenance bond, and held for one year. After one year, the maintenance bond
may be released after DOES has completed a second inspection and determined
that the trees have been kept healthy and thriving.
A landscape inspection fee shall also be submitted prior to plat recording. The inspection
fee is subject to change based on current County fees.
L03POO 15/Nichols Place
Page 14
18. The following have been established by SEPA as necessary requirements to mitigate the
adverse environmental impacts of this development. The applicants shall demonstrate
compliance with these items prior to final approval.
Individually, or joint with other area developers, the Applicant shall design
and construct improvements to Southeast 128th Street at 160'h Ave. SE to
mitigate project impacts at the High Accident Location.
Or, the Applicant shall reduce the project impacts at the High Accident
Location by completing the remainder of the improvements to Southeast
136th Street ( i.e. additional paving, concrete curbs, gutters and sidewalks),
between 158th Avenue SE and 160th Averiue SE, and, revise the
channelization at the intersection of 156th Avenue SE/SE 136th Street to
provide a southbound left tum lane.
School Mitigation Fees
19. Lots within this subdivision are subject to King County Code 21A.43, which imposes
impact fees to fund. school system improvements needed to serve new development. As a
condition of final approval, fifty percent (50%) of the impact fees due for the plat shall be
. assessed and collected immediately prior to recording, using the fee schedules in effect
when the plat receives final approval. The balance of the assessed fee shall be allocated
evenly to the dwelling units in the plat and shall be collected prior to building permit
issuance.
School Walkways
20. The-Applicant, individually or in conjunction with other developers, shall construct an
off-site walkway to Liberty High school from the site. The walkway shall be constructed
within the right-of-way from 160th Ave SE, east along SE 135th Street to 166th Ave SE,
and south to Liberty High School at SE 136th Street, or via alternative right-of-way and
easements that become available and are approved by ODES. One acceptable alternative
would be to use future right-of-way of Southeast 136th Street and 162nd Avenue
Southeast to connect with the sidewalk improvement of "five lot subdivision," and
through the plat of"five lot subdivision"/LOOP0023 to the southwest gate of Liberty High
School. The walkway shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the I 993
King County Road Standards and shown on the engineering plans for DOES review and
approval.
Any surfacing alternative from the King County Road ·Standards (KCRS 3.09) may be
submitted for approval through a road variance application.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS:
1. .The subdivision shall conform to KCC 16.82 relating to grading on private property.
2. Development of the subject property may require registration with the Washington State
· Department of Licensing, Real Estate Division.
3.. Preliminary approval of this application does not limit the applicant's responsibility to
obtain any required permit or license from the State or other regulatory body. This may
include, but is not limited to the following: ·
a. Forest Practice Permit from the Washington State Dept. of Natural Resources.
b. · National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit from WSDOE.
c. Water Quality Modification Permit from WSDOE.
d .. Water Quality Certification (401) Permit from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
REPORT ATTACHMENTS:
I. 23 Lot Plat Layout
2. Density Calculations for development with density credits
3. Issaquah School District
4. · Certificate of Water Availability ·
5. City of Ren tori
6. City of Renton Sewer Certificate
7. Transportation Concurrency
Prepared 02/05/2004 3:35 PM
TRANSMITTED TO PARTIES LISTED HEREAFTER:
BORBA.GREG
CURRENT PLANNING SUPERVISOR DDES/LUSD MS: OAK-DE-0100
BRENDEN.MARSHALL
18225 SE 128TH RENTON, WA 98059-8732
BUCKETT, MRS. CAROLYN ANN
. 16524 SE 145TH ST. RENTON, WA 98059
CASEY, LAURA
WETLAND REVIEW DDES/LUSD CRITlCAL AREAS MS: OAK -DE-0100
. ORA VES, Kt\ THY
13020 160TH A VE SE RENTON, WA 98059
HIGH. GWENDOLYN & VICTOR
13405 158TH A VE SE RENTON, WA 98059
JUNE, EDWARD and HILL, KRIS
13527156TH A VE SE RENTON, WA 98059
KEZELE, DON & DIANE
. 15657 SE 137TH PL. RENTON, WA 98059
LANGLEY, KRIS
TRAFFIC REVIEW DDES/LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100
LIND, REBECCA
CITY OF RENTON 1055S.GRADYWAY RENTON, WA98055
MAHONEY, JAMES
140JJ 160TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98059
NELSON, KATHY
ISSAQUAH SD TRANSPORT.DEPT. 805 2ND A VE SOUTH ISSAQUAH, WA 98027
NICHOLS, MARK & BARBARA .
13815 160TH AVE SE RENTON, WA'98058
OLIPHANT, ANITA & RICHARD
16519 SE 145TH ST. RENTON, WA 98059
·P:O.ULSEN, ROGER
15657 SE 139TH PL RENTON, W :0. 98059
ROGERS.CAROL
CURRENT PLANNING SECTION DDES/LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100
ROMANO, MIKE
CENTURION DEVELOPMENT SVCS 22617 8TH DR SE BOTHELL, WA 98021
ROPPE, VICKI & DALE
14005 160TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98059
SCHARER, KAREN
PROGRAM MANAGER DDES/LUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100
SEATTLE KC HEALTH DEPT.
E.DIST. ENVIRN. HEALTH 14350 SE EASTGATE WAY BELLEVUE, WA 98007
STACHOWIAK, CLAUDE & ELOISE
15652 SE 139TH PL. RENTON, WA 98059-7422
STANSBURY, HOWARD
CENTURION DEVL SVCS/US LAND DEV. 22617 8TH DR SE BOTHELL, WA 98021
·THORBECK, PENNY
15650 SE 138TH PL. RENTON. WA 98059
TOWNSEND, STEVE
LAND USE INSPECTIONS DDES/LUDS MS: OAK-DE-0100
WEST, LARRY
WETLAND REVIEW DDES/LUSD CRITICAL AREAS MS: OAK -DE-0100
WHITTAKER, BRUCE
PREL. REVIEW ENGINEER DDESILUSD MS: OAK -DE-0100
WYMAN, KEVIN M.
16540 SE 149TH ST. RENTON, WA 98059
L03POO 15/Nichols Place
Page 15
• ---··
•
·t
' ' I
•••• ii I · •
i
I
I~
lulr1~t i fl I• . · l1l-
l tl·
f l
~t r,,1,-t U1i-11
1 -
,l.f~ htn h •-•ilu 1U t:
I I t·1t··
1 ·. r lit • dnd,h
,
~rj +-
~ s
2
~-\
\"l. ~
~CJl'~ancJ~~
. land LIiie Serw:a DMsioo
900 Oakesdale A---= SW
. Rentori. WA98055.1219
(206) ........
PLAT DEN5llY AND
DIMENSION CAL°':JlA TIONS
PRa.lMINARY SUBDMSION WORKSHEET RELATING TO DENSfN AND DIMENSIC)!ILS
A great meny crdinllnces plao/ a rokl in the Qeation of a wbdiYision witNn Ksl(1 Cointy. Determining the alc,-ble
~-maekrun density. "**'1tJm density. end lot width on a piece of property can be ccnfusing. lNs worksheet will
assist )QI in o:xredly ~ specific portioni. of the code and will be used 1D dnsfmnt if a ~ plat or short
pla1 ~ ht di,nsity and dimensic:ins prUYi8ions of the ~ Ouity Zor*1g Olde (TIiie 21AJ. This wc.b:heet is
prepared 1D IISSist applic:arrts. and docs rd lllpaC8 canpianai with adopecj local. state and Merlll taws..
PiEai,4Ai,.:allcw, ~ at"e n.:uo.au,.e..ded. These i::onfefences ~ 1D ~issues and~ cµ:,stions. They may
-)'CU bolh 1ime and rnonay by eima,aling delays resumg from requesis lo.-additional in1om1a6on and !Wisions.
You may c8II {206) 296-5640 1D find out how 1o arrange for a paappli:a:lb, ~-
DATE: .1.1::Mi!wt!
NAME OF Pl.AT: NIQ:IDI 5 Pl.ACF
COMPRe1ENS1VE Pl.AN LAND USE DESIGNA TK>N:
ZONING: 1M
COMMUNITY OR SUBAREA PLAN: -
ALE NO.:
Urben l'§idcntinll:1:12 I lnit; on: Arn:
. If more han one~ Plan Land Use designation CJI' :zorJe dassffica1ion ecists for 1he propeny. show 1he
bwndary ~ 1he lend U6eS or zones ·arw;1 1he area within E:8d, on 1he pn,1irnir*f plat map. If• eirigle k;,t is dr.ided
by a zone boundaly. trMSfening density across zone& on hat bt may be ~ suqed 1o 1he pn:Nision6 of Ko¢
21A.12...200.
. Plc@sc IJIDVllcln ooiy fbn e 5 I I ooctkm nf tbn bm
f,iln AIM (ICC C ZIA 06 1172)"
Sit2 -(JI square feet) is the gnJl,6 horiZontal -of 1he project site . .11::z subnerged lands 11$ defined by K.C.C.
_ 2 IA.06:t265. and =--.. lfflm m= required 1D be dedial!e!l on~~ ol a prqect sefor pubic mgts-of-way.
o square teet n soomerged land (any land bebw 1he ordila,y high wate.-mark
-see K.C.C. 21A.06.B25.)
+ o square feet n perimeler rights-of-way which wil be nlQlnd 1D be dedicaled
~.
(area 30 ~ from oenter line of road)
O Total
166,465 Groo& hc:rilDotal area of the project Gile
--'-"O Total~ lands.and~-
168.485 Site area in squaro "feet NOTE: To continua ~ cxrwert sne area
---in ~ feet 1D ZICn!& by dMdsig by "3.560
--~3~.82~ Sile arm in ans
a. Base Densit•,-"(k.C.C. 21A.IZ.030 -.040 Wiles):
The base densfty i& det.,,imined by the ZCll'le designation($) fQr the let.
,.._ _ .... .! du/'aae
L03P0015
f5J~t!EijW!Effj)
lf11 MAY 19 2003 l!dJ
K.C .. D.D.E.S.
Pl.AT DENSITY AND DIMENStoN CALCULATIONS
.111. M ti Pwrffionllnibaod Bc,,pdjn2 OC CC 21A 12 o:zm·
The base number" of a-llir)g units is cabJlati,d by multiplying the &n!I -by the base density in dwelling units per
acre (from K.C.C. ZIA.12.030 -.040 tables).
~site~ in~ (see Sedion l) 4 base density (see Section II.)
"' 15.29 a1cwab1e dwelling ooits
When calo..llaticns ffl;Uft in a fra::tion. the fradion is nu1ded 1D 1he nearest wtde nurmer as iollows.:
. 1. Fractions of .50 or atiow, st.18 bit n:u!(ted up: and
2. F~ bebw .50 shal be tOLnied doi,t,n.
rv. Bcmrimrt 9o:tsitn Bnctretioo '?matt QC CC 21A·14 180)·
This 59diDrl naJS1 be cx,mpeted onty ii the pq:,osm is e·"'5identiel di=-elcp.1.e,11 of more1han four dweling units in the
UR and R zcne&. ~~ in the NB zone on pn:iperty~ COmmmtial Outside of Center if more
than lour units. er any mbed use deo l p.e,,t ii' ITIOl1I than four units. ~ spec, must be c:ornpited by ·
~ 1he rea-eation ~ requi,ement per-uni type by tie propoGed runber of such ci-Ding units {K.C.C.
21A.14. 180). NOTE: )Ong Qxr.ly has the disaetio:, 1D accept e fee in lieu of all or a portion of 1he required~
space per K.C.C. 21A.14.185.
,11,panneots and 1DWntiouses. dew.toped at a density greater 1han eighl ooits per aae. and mDCl!ld use must pmo,ide
~ space II& 1olows:
90 square ie,,11: X propo6ed nl.fflbef of studio and ona be(!rtx O .
130~-=tX ~numberoft'IWbedroomunits O
170 squ.e feet X pn,posed number of three or moru bedroor-0
____ ReaeationSpaceFte,quwement -____________ o
Residential subdM5ions end ~ dwelopm at a density of eight. units or less per acre must prtMde ~
space es tolows:
390 5q1.iere feet X 23 proposed number of units • 8970
Mobile homo parks shall pro,,ide ~ spat;lt as follows:
260 SQUef"9 feet X proposed number of WR • 0
V. HrlBa?l 11 Au;a(l(CC 2tAOfinD·
This section is used for o:.mputing rnfr!irnurn derisitt end nal6t be o:xnplded orif if the siE is located in 1he R-4"1hftlugh
R-48 zone& tllnd designatllld llrban by hi ~ O::N.#dy O::,rn(.lrehen, f'tan. The net buildable area is 1he 6ilB an,a {see
Section I_) less 1he following' antas:
0 i11?10S m11:Jin..a pr1*d site which .-_rmpred 1D be dedicated b public righls...d.way in
eMCe8S of 6Dd)' feet (60j of width
+ o ~ arms and the.-buffers. to -tie tJXtent 1hey an, leQllind by IGng Cbunty 1D remain -+ 26.257 inas ~for abcM1 grOlnl ~ airrtroliaaities incfuding, but not.limited 1D.
teleiatio.w'delt.dio.1 ponds. lmfltndioo swalcs and $9tbacb from such ponds and swales
+ 4.485 ._ reqi.hd by l<lng County b be dedic:atl,d or reser.uf as Clfl..&ila reaeation areas. Dec
lhlli .....tlhin ~ oontn;,I faciily if n,questinv recreation space credit 85 dCJwed by ..
KCC 21A.14.180. (see Section IV.)
+ 0 n,gional utilitymrridcn. end
+ 0 clher~ edudi:ng secbecks. n,qqred by Kaig ~1D retnarl ~
~:
·-Puge2Qf4
30.742 Total~
166,465 in, area in squan Mt (see Sedio.t I.)
--~30~,7~42~ Total n,d!,ldion,; .
135.723 net bu&:lable mea in aquen. feet NOTE: OOIMIJ1 Gile arm n sq
--feet 1D acres by dMdng by "3.560
3.12. net buildable area n acres
~
·~
~
-~$
rf) (\\ -r l,
\') -\
I::, ........,N
f'l
Pl.AT DENSfTY AND OCMENStON CALCUl.ATIONS ·
VI. Miob:mnn lh:wm 9 I I 1W Denstt,(K GC ZIA 12 060)
~ mi*run dl!nsity ~ ~Jdt1D the R--4 hough R-48 mres. Mlnirrun density ii,~ by
nutipiying 1he base density in ~ units per ade (see Section 1.) by the net buildabla ern,a al the site in lla"6 (see
Set:licn V.) end 1hon muftis*,;ng the resulting produd: by~ "**1un den5ily peroentage from the K.C.C. ZIA.12.030
·table. The mininun density requi'ements meybe phased O'° waMld by King Qudyin ~ ceses. See K.C.C.
ZIA.12.060. . . .
"'*'-'
___ 4 basedersityinlt.llacjMeSedic 3.12 net buldableareainaaes (&eoSedicn V.) .
• 12..4& Xri'mundensity%.aetb1h in IC.C.C. 21A.12..0300f' es~inSedlai vn.· ----~·~·""=~ dw,dlng tnb, required
w. Mtom,m Peo&itt" tlafnrJS 1 aloSi nccc 2.ia12mm
Allsidential de eluµs_w:ots in l'le M. A..6 and ft.a zones mey modily the minirrun deosit:y.fac:tor in K.C.C. 21A.12.030
based on ht waghled ~ slope of h net buidatie a,ea af thlt • {see Sedion V.). To d!:e"*1e 1he wdgtit.ed
~ slope. a q,ographic survey ii raqund to CNCUA!l 1he net bJildabln --CS) wiltwri each of h lollowing slope
inaements anct 1hen ~ 1he ruri>er o1 ~ w n eedl s1ope ncnment b'J tie midan &k:ipe w1ue o1 ead'I
slope~ es toaow&:
!. sq. ft O • 5% lilcpe inaemi::nt X 2.5% median slope v;
+ O sq. ft 5-10".4 slope inaement X 7.5% mdlln sloptw
+ 0 sq. fl 10-15%slopeinaementX 12.5% medilri slope\
+ 0 sq. fl 15-20% slope mernent X 17.5% rne:ci1!n slope,
+ 0 i;q. ft 20 -~ slope inaement X 22.5% mecien slope
+ 0 sq. fl 25 -30% slope inaement X 27 A mecian slope
+ o sq. tt 30. 35% slope ~x 32.5% meaan s1ope
+ !.sq.ft 35--4nslopeinaementX 37.S'X.medilrislope
0 Tcbll squani _._ 0 ToW squ11re feel
in net buildatile area
_ .. _
"""""""' · o 1ol8I squm-e feet ~ 1or sk:,pe dMded by o 1cCzll square feet in net buildrlble area
---. ~ ....age slope of net b.lildable area
------%-{Notlt: ~by 100 to mmef1 ti:;i peram. round up 1o near85t whole pen;:el'lt)
Ui;;e 1he Wlla below to detemlire 1he mininun den&ily 1adDr. This der1$ily is ~ for ihe mn&num den&ity fadDr
· in K.C.C. 21A.12.030 1abl8 when ~ 1h11 ~ dl!nsity as ~ in Sedion VI. cf 'this woricsheet.
Weigted Avenlge Slq:le of Net
Buldable ;;:__,_, of Sile: Mnrun Density Fader:
0,. -less lhlln 5" 05.00"-
5'-less fllln 15% 83"4.. ie. 1.5'1. tcr em:fl 1% of
In eocess of 5%
15%--.111S140'T. 66% .... 2.~ tcr em:fl t,.. of
in DD!$$ of 15%
EXAMPLE CALCUlATION FOR MINIMUM DENSITY AOJUSTllENTS FOR MOOERATE SLOPES:
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
sq. fl O -5'1. &lc,pe incranSlt X 2.5% ll'IIDSl slope va1ue· ,------.sq. fl 5-1n.aope inaement:X7.~ mecimtstcpe"",----------
+ sq.ft 10-15'X.stipeincmnentX12.5%modien&lope,
+ aq. ft 15-2n. slope inaement X 17.5% med'Aln ~ _,.·=,--~-------
+ aq. fl 20 • 25'J. slope innment X 22.5% n-t., slope..... •
+ sq. ft 25 -30'7. slope increment X 27.5% median slope: :....,=a":--~.:-------
+ sq. ft 30 -3". slope inaffl1ent X 32.5% mi:dan. slope::-::l":--~·------
+ sq. ft 35 -40% dope inm=rnenl" X 37.5'1. meden slope;s""";a:,:,==="-.:::-----
-----~O Tomi square feel O TcW squsefeet
in nlll: bulldable -edjuAid tcr slope ,__.,
. .... a:,.lln teet ~ tcr slope clilided by "* lql81t feel In net bulldable ..-.
---.-~e,enigi,dopeofrwtbl.ildllblll riree .
• % {Nee: ndliply ~ 100 to c:m-i 1D percri-~ ~ 1D -.i: whDirl percen1)
Lllling 1he W. ab:iw.. an 11 '1. weW'Md -. slope of ni,t ~ 1n111 fall wltw, h 5% -lea than 15" ,av,
'M*fl hes • "**-~ fatfao' of an . ._ , » tor -=11 1, llf «-age s1ope 1n aass of 5%. Since 1 t% • n.
m.:Mt 5'1... ~ 6tinel 1.Swltil 'M:lllld llllJad n.. Stmlrac:l n. from.B:n. tor an~ llnlQII densilyfat:b'
of 74'1.. 1tis ~ tie rrininun densfty~in K.C.C. 21A.t2.030 tabii:t. ·-Page.3of_4
PLAT DENSITY ANO OIIIENSION CALctll.ATlONS
VIU. ~DD PMJri/rij) 'Dtts AlkPeed pc C C 21A t 2 Q.10-Q4Q)·
TI-= section shoukl be completed only it the proposal inc:b:m epp&;::atior, of residentiail density iocenfi,.e;
(K.C.C. 21A.34) or tnmr.. of densityaedil: (K.C.C. 21A.36 or 21A.55). Macim.Jm densify is eekuali,d t,y 2lddiflg h,
t:ioru. or V8l'l&tef-mils ~ to tie bll&8 inta ~ in Sedlai m. DI this ~ lha ffl2IDnUln density
permitlnd htlt9J ~ densityinc::emiiles is 150 pera:nt of the base densitf (see Sedion L) ol h, trder1yng
~ of l'le dll\aq..ae40f 200 pen::ent of the bw density tor pl'OpOGals will 100 pem,nt affordable units. The
rnmmnmn density pemitled hot911ranster-al density Dd 15 150 percent of 1he base dlln&ity (see Sediora I.) o1 h
~zoningofhde'elcpse.t. ·
____ O~densityinCMellir-,. unitspereaa (a:ieSedionll) X 151 0 mtaXimJm density
___ O_lnl!Dlirrundendlyindwdk,ginls·peram: X 3.8215108 &ile tareain-, o
maiciriun dweling mis~ utilzing denlity inc:enMs (K.C.C. 21A.34)
___ O_base density in dwelling units.pet"_(_ Sodion U.) X 21> 0 mmcinun density
___ 0 mmciin.am density in dweli,g units per atn! X 3.82 site an::e in 11C1 O
mmcirrun dweling tnts ~ utilimg density incentws wilh 100% afkJrdabln I.II.ts (K.C.C. 2'A.34)
___ 4_base d5dy in moelling tr& per acre (-Sodion D.) X 151 6 maii:irnum density
___ 6 msximum density in dwdla,g Iris per atn1 X 3..8215106 &m 1n111 in 11C1 . 22.92906336
lnlm!fQTI ~ irils aac-:t utilizing ~hnders (K.C.C. 21A.38 Of 21A.55) .
Calc:ulation:.
IX.
-----~175 base alloMitm ~ units c::akurab,d in Section ID.
+ 0 bonus~ aulhoriz:ed byK.C.C. 21A.34
+ 8 hn51erur.tsauhifhed byK.C.C. 21A.36or 21A.55
-----~23~~ ~ trils (cannot ellEzed l'll8ICirnums calculqid ebove)
Mnntna lat As-ea For Caistru::lion:
Eio:ept as pn:Mdcd tor nonconbmances in KCC21A.32:
A.
B.
. In 1he UR and R mnes no o:in=udiDn dd be penniD9d on a lol hit oonlains ao !Ra d
2.500 squmt1 ied °' 1hat doe& rot aimpiy Vl'itl lhe appicabla mininun 1o1 widlh. ea:Zpt fot
bwnhousedlr>.elu;i.1ads0f~~:and
In 1he A. F. °' RA mnea:
1. ~ SMI no1: be penritilld on a kit amaining llllss 1hen 5.000 squin feet. an:I
2. Ccnstrudion shef be _irr6.d k> orlO dweai'ig l#n arxf rcsic:IDnti8I aa-sory Ulel tor Job CD
~ 1han 5.000 ~feel.but leas than 12.500 ~teet. (KCCZIA.12.100)
X. ""-"""""
,._
Page4caf4
. .
lot wtdltJS shell be measunid by scail1g a ad., of 1he ~ <illrna,w wi1hin the bourdariea. of the lol BG
sllC!YWn below. pRMded 1htd an ao::ess easementdllll no1: be hdudad wilhin 1he cirdl,. (See KCC21A.12..050).
y
~
~
::s
2-
l
\N
{{;(:·:·;:~
. :>·
;,.,! t~~·:;:
;~J/.
.:: . , ..
''.,·
. . t:
·11
.,
!·'
It-t;:/ee' fr]~. 5~~
rk ~S'j~ .l),.-Jrr,cr-ev,//
ho le µ/ ;VA//";?-~ s~
µ;/~ fo ~ ks . -:;-lo17 #./.vV
c
~:. ·,:. -
r~::.:"' :
~:iii
' 1
f~'( (c.. c( ~E /'{elf ~ : ·
£k ~ ~ /µ,,a vdv/' --4-~s-,4 #< ' ~rU~~~-~-
t/.vm~· ( w-t. IY'!ln~ce,~. S~
· k f s/ttM. ,z/~
·. ft1nc/r"J_ f ~ 6r,,SJ1~ . .
· (ouft= ·)
'
·~
y, ~ I 1 -<J_3
() ·" . em-99086 VM 'Uo!U8l:I
L ;·_·,: ;y ..
[~,
.,
;-. ,.
Kmo """" I)epc. allJrcwlopa:m 1111 Buth I Scrvbl
·);· tadU..--. 900 Oid;ta,tak A'l'lllll &!alhwat
R-.,WA~~U
I I '.""'.3 I T....,..._ Sp,c;ajjij . . ,,,_ (425) ..,,_
SCHOOL DISTRICT 411 Pu (425) ""=1
Transpc:,:tab nil,. IC ~:ah.Wednet.eda
(~:,; ..
xrf: ; DATE: May 23. 2003
IC5·2Np_AViNlJJ!Q•~IJi.WAll9\tt1 ti?)}[::~
. N t"""'°"''· ~-·~ ll..,A~ · .. __ ">::_,::·
, iJM>"·' f!!""'"?I'.,_. ·-E\
: ::-<·:: IHIAYlb · School District, ATTN: ___ _ TO:
FM:
,:·_,·. RE:
Kfm Cfauasan, Pmltet(prgram Manager Ill ~
Proposed Plat & Rezone of Nichols Place .
(FIie Nos. L03P0015 & L03TY404).
i' J....~ t:. G-.,u:u.e ;;~~~
1l~i t ,
i
Tho Land Use 8elvloos Division (LUSD) has received an appllcatlon for a subdivision In your Dlslrict.
Enctosod ls a copy of the plat maps l1!Celved by tho I.and Use Se<v1ces Division on May 15, 2003.
In order for us lo edequately evaluate this proposal, provide tho most aocurate Information to tho public, and
fer LUSD fo serve tho SChool Dls1rict batter, please provide us with tho fo/lowlng JnfOITnatlcn:
. Which schools do you anllclpate tho students Jiving In this subdivision would attend?
I : k' Eiomomal>'. e,g_; f'luXX:d . 'wzo:) L · .• $!kJr.High/Mlddle l"f)~(0CY'.Yt O\tMk
:. ; ~Sr.High Lbe ~ %b
I · _: ~I the students walk or ba bussed to tllese schools? & g/, .. -1f.-... t.Elem~ . . · SS'
; '~~ . Jr. HJ~o P5$fil
: ~-
i~,;,.: .
! .·· r . Sr. High ~§Sed
. 1·. ·::··: . If the slUdonls wUI ba bussed, when, do you anUolpate the bus stops will ba Jo<:afod? If thalln!onnation Is not ' ·
,.., . avaJlable at thlstlme, currently, whe!e are tho closest bus stops_ located Jo this site?
/ : Elernoma,y ' /(ef)-11:, 6'rJ.Q :S-'c.. @S.£ J:::c,t~ST .
-1... Jr.High/Middle . /":'.')'6ih f't\>.J> S'<.:. ~ So·~ /~/~ ST
i > · Sr.High 1:s~w s-t ~-s-'c.131i!:-s.,
~ : : .:· * Comments: > ~£, 444,. f,r . ( ~ {((tN<if. "'7,u'#., "l>J(7
( .. '.~~ l.r~ 81' MIi w'd!f<;. :fo ~/ INL /Go ~k
1
·t 1:i!.a!J~!fJS:; AS w4( lb:· 5#2_ w#;tn-
: Please complete this fonn and retum ft by Juno 1~, 2003 to Iha address below. If you haVo questi;;::>
regardlngthls proposal, please caD Karen Scharef, at (206) 29$-7114. Thank you. · ~
King County Depal1ment of Development and Environmental Services
Land Use. 8elvlce8 Division
ATTN: Karen Scharer, Planner
~ .
800 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest PosW1° Fax Note 7671 l°"'r,,fu, /9 :;JJs!:• 7_ . I .
:t' ~
l ~ -.I'\
s..
~
\)\
Jun 1~ u~ 11,1wa kCVU ~u
-~ .... """"Y . ~-.DUES
06'JIRINEIIJ"<F DEVWJfMBlT NU)
BMRaDlffl"AL SBMCE5
500 Cleb!sdi* Awn.e Southwest
~.-98055-121':
·<tZb2774lt:;'B
lNs Q!ll1Dt:alll pn:Mda ... :ae.a. Khg
~~'lfNllicHelllhlnd
.. ~ olDlinlopmeril.end
Gw,u.ae.:tr.1s.w;.'db~
hll09IAIYID..-i~ -
King C.Ounty Certific;ate of Water Ava.-,bllity
"pol
!Dora::~~ re I
. DBIAI-IJil~·
OShlrt~
s~-~~-o lteZD!,e oratre: _____ _
~~°'11Utln.~
~ t.lZ S.,,R.
l..oalllcrl;OIS!Sl.«/"'~tlla'(Jlsl'fllt
(~ ~n::l le;al demt,aon. ~
Wate~ purveyor ,nformat1on:
1. D .. Water,.. be~ tir~ameamcn,tD mo&ang ,,, c-> "*;111'/*1 ttiat&fndml.1hestte.
Oil .
8 b. Wim"Rrtila!. wll l!ICJR an ~ID lll!-*'¥18" W.
O(J) Mi:IWll!:l'Rafrltur-=tiChesb;ll"ld{DI""
Q (2) The tueru,fbl fl a 115bt161n ~ an Iha*,; rd/Of . H(l} ~may~IDbe~tulr.EamieibWDE~
. l. .8 a. lbe-.tl:l"~bh~\lllthaO::iuatVippro,riedwistaQ)Jl4Refalftllplm.
·Oil .
0 b. 1bi1 wala" Sf'Slleln ~ b mtho:anfumlillllzlld:h ·~~ ........... cha ..
ptar lrd WIii ~ • wam"OJU41,ehaJ.c plan~ (this llllr"CillR•..-In~ i:11 penldt.ar -· ·.·. .
1 8 . a. Toe pupo,ed project es llllhA lhe o:qltQtl!l lbks: i:l lho-d$ldtt, ,. t1as 1:1een pm1 8QlSldlry "-"' lalrd
~ h~dsentm~ Ole clsUt:tor dlr. orls""*'lhll Ccudr~te'Vlceara d1 plrr;R,..,-~. .
OR •
D b. ~or &:umry AevleW BOMd'(!IRS) 1Pfl1'11V,l!.a bl! ~1Dpowtle set*e,
~ 8 L Waber" .m t,e·l'ldiltlle: • Che All! flflaw Ind' cuMtin lrdcl!lm below• ro less 1f)an l0 ps1 ~ a the
lll!RSt h hfOant liQ Ii=: ton. the ~ (er as marted Dli 1tle lltad\Cd l!l;!p): •
,w,,u,rtfoW«,,_.~ · · o..tioo ·
0 Is tlan SOO gprn (,ilPltl(. gxn) 0 b Ulan l lalf
D 5m ID 999 gprn O 1 hau-tD 2 IW:u'S
K) 1000 QPIII G -. iii 2 bcln or QIOtt o btatot Qlllrl -· B ·· . . ·
0 cai:zManol' ~ dbef"
·. (JtR: ~tdldklg permbwt*htrltldes ~,cnans n,p-eriow.-1estar _,
Clll
0 b. ...-.sp11e1nisn;,t~d~~l'lcM.
· s. 8 a. Ylal:8".._hlsel!l:fi:*Sol',...r\ft:or . ..,.iwt.dallnlsJlfflcicntlD~_.. OR . . . .
D b. Wals~does;raall8QrhMnei:zmaywatl!r,waw1'1121" llgtltdllms.-·.
Cc.we4*udb.i Q'.C ~ Hetti' Orc:p f450.00.. W/A'$125.00 lbr mdl lat ·
8§ PIIVTJP P!!MEWJDPff PaPB IPDRi
I cd'ylhlt aielb:ft .... ~bbmlCfon !I~ fllis~ Ital be'tal:ttrt-= diafl~
-CXJUIITY-DIS!IUCTm .............. • -M;W§
--. ·"'!;~'7 ·~ ~· Sll'8UKTBC8T . . . . ~ : . ·~~ . "" . . . -··.• ......
·~~~W*r~~Qxnr-
/\1\Ac,~ tv\EN1"° 4
RECEIVED
JUN 19 2003
l\ll~u COUNTY
lAND USE SERVIC[S·
\
\
!
I
I
I
. .!I;)
~ """'~-...,.. .
CITY OF RENTON
Planning/Building/Public Worl<s Department
G"U~"""'"' P.E.,Admlnlstrator
. January 14, 2004
Dopanniem of Development and l!nviionmelllal Semecs
Land Use Services Division · ·
Alto! Ksreo Scharer .
900 Oaicesda!e Avo. S.W .
Rontou, WA.9BOss...t2l9 .
'
SUBJECr: NICHOLSPLACE,NOTICEOFIIEAlUNGRECOMMENDATION&
SEPADECISION,FILEIIOl31.'00IS ..
Dear Ms. Scharer:
. 'lbank you for the oppo'1unity of~ and commeming OD 11m ~ject proposal' -·s
Planning/Buildinlic W~ Department commads aro as follows:
· I. The subject property is b:alod wilhin .lhe Soos W_. and Sew..-Service Area.
2c This deveiop,ne1¢ is located within Renton's Pctelltlol Annexaiion Atta ~ we
-thatimy improvem-(roa4w&Ywfdenmg and ~seolioo; cud>,~ •
sidowaik, -ligbting, etc. ) lo existing i 6o" A vo SE, abutmig the developmait site and lhe
new s!redWilhin lhe development site, be coostrocted lo City of Renton standanls. · _...,._,
Sincaely, . .
~n~,y~
-~ Zimmuman, Administratot .
~~licWodisDept.
· . cc: Neil Wo --... _
. --·
A1fA-c)t\i\4EN15 ~.
IOSSSoalhOradyWay-R-, Washmpn980SS RENTON . ·-~aa-.«!5,.....~---4B&A.D OP Tt111: c_oava
. ---··.a.=--·---·-··· ---·---·----·····-------------·
~ ~ ~* :-~
*"' ·~~
~
Jesse Tacner~J::!,
Janwuy 15, 2003
Michael I. Romano
Phmninf,/Building/PublicWoik.s Department
GrqgZhnmermaa. P.E.,Admlnbtrator
Centurion Development Services
22617-8~.DrivcSE ..
. · Bothell, WA 98021 . .
SUBJECT: .· ·SANITARY SEWERAVAILABILITY)IEQl)ESTC.EVENDELL PLAT
;IlEQUFSr FOR EXP,\J!"SION OF EJQS'.l'ING A VAJLUIILITY ... ·. ·
ADDinONAE PARCEL KCPID NO 142305-9058; 160111 AVENUE SE ·.• -· . -· . . . ./-'!. . . . . .
Dear Mr.· RomaDO: ·
. n,;s letteuhall se,,,c~ a~~~~~ ~~da!Pd!uoe 1;;ioo1, wit!, its .
· attaclied -dated June 15, 2001-:-:You have requestedthatlhc ~~· sewer aviiilabiliiy ·
approval fur the Evcndcll Plat be expanded to mcludi,Cihe above'refcrenced pareel located .
~southofyou,c,xistingpro(!<?S81. ~ity¥:reviewec!}'Olir~imdapprovesthe •
expansiou of the original sewer availability '?;l,~-1(9i'ID )'10 :!4230S.,9j)58. This approval is
. ~~ectto all ~~~~?~~~-~~r~:t.l~~:~#:~~r;} _._. ... -:
· ·· -· lcttm;·plcasi_ coutactme at (425}:430-7212, . --~~1:.-. ;·: .. -'5"':~-::_.. ,:> ·. _.. ·:.:-.: . ; ' .
·;/.:.>,--·
15) ll: t IE I 1/U IE f[J1
IJl1 .MAY 19 2003 . l1!J
K.C. D.D.E.S.
\IDAEOAL~S)'s\WWP W . . --------.......
Wttter:t:r\l !Se:arr t:raff_F 1 D 1......:wi-w~;vw,-O:M>OOOea., r zxla::.ce· 0 ------~
L O 3 P flS J'r"~•y-RCDlon, Wa.shington 9805S .··RE N T Q N . V V j ~pape,-~50"ll,rllC:)d,l,d,,_...JO'llo"'*_........ AH•AD OIi' Tlfa coav•
. !
ffe
Jesse J'am,cr.!. Ma:
June i5,2001
Michael I. Romano
Centurian Development Services
22617 -~ Dr. SE
Bothell, WA 98021
LJ. .l l'. U .I:' -l"' .1. 'l.1.1 "1 ·
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
GrqgZJmmermaa P.E.,~tor
. SIJBJECT: . SANITARY SEWER AV All.ABlLITl<' REQUEST-EVENDELL PLAT
KCPID NO 142305-9009 AND PORTION OF 9022 -SE 13fra Sf AND ·
1581BAVSE.
Dear Mr. Rom&lO;
~ letter shall serve as-a SllppicmCDi ~ die sewer availability request fonn dated June 15. 200 I ,
.. fur the subjectproi,erty. Samtary sewer service is corrcntly available to the property, but requi=
.an cidension of sewer to be scived. Our analysis at this point indicates that this development will
-:._. -~~ an extcusion of appri>xJinately 1300 linear feet of 1-0-inch main to get to the site.
· lDstallatioo of 8-incli mam withm the development will also be require<i Our analysis. also
indicates.·~ there is a·J)C!~ to .serw-~ lot by gravity~ but a lift station may be required io ·
:. -~toinieet all the desigri.requirements_. ·' · · ·
.. •. ' The~ mothod fur~ cau be ci~ at the tim~ you begin your cngiuecring process
·. fur.this plat. The City'il\coi!<nnic ~elopmen~ Ndgbborlioods and Strategic Planuing .
Departmeut have a1so noviewe,f this plaLThis plafis gcn<ral1y in compliance with the density ·
. ancias·snch is.~e _io-the City.Jri ~to-reccive_i.cwer service from the City the plat.
urus(a1so be developed as detaclied single fiunily and the property owner( s) will be required to
· ~-a~to annCXfonn. YOU-3:isomusitie llwafetbatthcCitywill re--revicwtbe .
. , _ .. -generaJ.·provisions of tbi; plat o~ you resubmit witb.-m·Ofe exact information SUCh as wetland and
· · .: • ioa,higbt-Of..way infunnatioo. ·
this availability, please coutact me at (425) 430-7212.
rB) IE t ll: I WI IE IQ'
lf\l HAY .19 2003 l1!J
K.C. D.D,E.S.
L03P0015
\\CllY_OF_RENlON\ltENTON\\SYSl\DEPfS\PBn'\DMSION.s\tnn..rTIE.s\~A,STg_wm.1
I 055 South Grady Way. Renton, Washington 98055
LOS PO O 1 :r---... --.,.--
~
\)~
~ ~,
!.,~
(') 0
SANITARY SEWER AVAILABILITY FOR SINGJ:;E FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
CITY OF RENTON
1055 S Grady Way, Re11too, WA 98055
Pbooe: (425} ~7200
Fn: (-425)430-7300 ·
TO BE FILLED Otrr B~ APPLICANT,. . . Date or Request . .sf'~ . .
Applicant'sNamec J6;~:::~~~PhoneNo.b,i1:4%-;,,zy
Mailing Admcssc 9f <h ~.:::>fo¥t<f&'o/ P'(cC7~~
City $4ZiV€{ l State tv/1-. Zip Code ~
CbcdcOOC:
PruposedSingloFamilyHome ~~
Existing Single Family H010e-OD Septic
Olher(Specify) G,..,,,,,i, 66?('(/~@K
-Locatian/A<Im=4gt1F" zm~r «' 15pn.1,l.,.k<f/~
KingCoautyTaxAccotmtN~~/F7'pZ?c-ugallyDesat..,i.,,
THJSAPPLJCATIONSHALL.INCUJDEACOPYOFTHEPROPOSEDSITE/PWTPLAN.
INroRMATION PROVIDED BY CITY,
I.
2:
a
... a
... a
JJ<.
~
Sanitary Sewer-Service. will be provided by side sewer connection only to an existing size
sewer Dl8Dl located~ · · · · · ----.-
City records~ a side sewez-srub to the property D Y O N . . .
Sanitary ~~willrequircan extension ofappro~------------of ___ size sewer main located within
1be proposed devcJopmcnt lies within service area; thcefore, the
app~ shall contact 1be District/ Agency at (phone) for sewer availability_
See-------------~---'-'-------
Payment of all applicable 'Y""" developm,ot r= (Fm arc subject to change without notice)
-Sy,tem Development~
• Re;idential building sewer pcrmic -~-~ LM_
~
per single family R:Sideoce
per single family rt:sidencc.
sa~q;+~/~ s . .
L03P0015
i1-=6r-&¥~/~. > s ~,Br.&?~~
s .. ¥,,At-= (G ~ . . (ewer)
MAY 19 2003
K.C. D.D.E.S.
I
. Sanitary Sewer Availal>ility Form
P>ge2
3. fl
4. a
s, y.
6. ,x
7. a
or)!{.
-8 .. 'F-
orD
9. JI{
or D
Ref=icedata ~filtw;~
Applicant shall abandon lbe exisling septic 'n"'" in aca>nlance with Section 1119 of lbe cwra,t
Uuifonn Plumbing Code and Section 4--6-0401.6 of the City Code. ·
~ connecting ID sanilmy ~ in King County, including Reoton's Sewer Service Aroa, aft«
Fdlrumy I, 1990, an: subject ID a sewage -capa,:i1y dwge. Tho purpose of Ibis King Oiuuty
charge is to pay for building sewage. trealIDCDt capacity IO serve newly COIIDCCted customcis.. Singlo,,
&mily alSIDDICn pay SIO.SO a moulb (billtd by Klag County as $63 evay six mombs) foe IS years. At
the cu:stomei's choice. this fee maybe pu1 to KiDg Coaaty as a Jump sum. ofSl,089.40. ·This fee is in
addition ID Ibo mo01hly dwge foc-that ReD1oo is rcquiied ID collcd and pass ID King County.
The Ram:m portion of the Wastr:wm:r Utility Rates for custoDlCIS outside tbe city limits ~ I .S times the
--lir c:ustancrs inside Ibo aty limits. (City Olde scotioo S-S-ISC)
Tho pn,posod pn,j<,ct is within lbe .,.;pono, limit> of Ibo City of -..-bas boeo gnmtal King
County Bourida,y Rrnew Boanl (BRB) approval fur-of senioc ootsidc lbo.Citr-
Anncutioo or BRB approval Jt(,c neassary for thfl: pl'Ovmon of sanitary sewer .service.
1bc sewer system improvcmmt is in conformance with a Cm:mtY approved sewer compdlcmive plan.
The SCWU' system improvement 'will rr:qu.ire an amendment to the Renton 1.ong,-Range Wastewater
Managan,m Plan. .
no ..,..,. .,,..., anprov,mem will be wnhiD an cdstmg mmchisc &om Kh,g County a11owmg lbe
mstalbtioo of~ in the County Right(s}ofWay.
1be sewu-sy;tem improvement will rcquiie that Rtntoo obtain a franchise fiom King County to imtaU
lbe1ilcilitio, in Ibo County IUgbl(s}ofWay.
CONDmONS OF CERTIFICATION,
I) It is lbe "'l'JOSibility of Ibo o ....... developa tu .V<rify, by an eogineeriDg sttldy, wbdlie, it is possible ID
coonect by gravity liDe to the existing City sewer sysccta (a private lift station may be installed. bot is ooc:
desirable). 1bc City aiay req\Jire. at it's option. the verification to be in the fonn of a ldm-signed by a
professiooal civil c,gmeer.
2) When oew sanitary St!Wer lines arc installed, the City typica1ly installs or requires to have installed stub-outs to
the property line. -This is done as a courtesy to the property owners.. The City docs not guarantee a stob for all
properties DO£ docs it guarantee the cooditioo or locatioo of die stul;> ..
It is the nsporwOility of the owna/con112ctor to have an approved COJmection from the bwlding sewer t9 the
City's sewer main. If there is a stub, it is in good condition, and the owner/conttactor can locate it, then it is
availablC for use. The determination of condition of existing sanitary sewer stubs shall be the sole
resp<)DSl"bility of the City and the City's decision shall be final
lftbe stub is broken or the City mspector determines that the ·stub's condition is not acctptiblc, it shall be the
owner/contractor's responsibility to repair the stub, tqilace the stub at the existing tee. or to-insbll a new stub
and tee dumlyinto the main. The mc1hod ofnpairmplaament to be determined by the City's inspector.
l hereby certify that the above sanitary sew.er information is true. This a:rtification shall be valid for one 'Jf:M mnn dale
of signature.. (Fee information is~ to change without notice).
---::t::)._,11e--~:§IF::k5E• {
Signato,y Name ~
LE ~A( ,e '.><'.'' w...,.._u,mi!jfj;<i?,!! ~ (,:z ( _/~ ... • f5) IE~ IE u w is O ·-
ll1l MAY 1 9 2003
FORMDCWS--tOOI i1120IOO
K.C. D.D.E.S.
' '
King County
Road Semces Division
Deparllllf"lll of TranSpon~1lo11
201 South JacksCJn Strt't't
Sf"aule. \\',\ 98J04<iR5B
. TYPE OF CERTIFICATE
181 ORIGINAL ..
0 CONDmONAL
May22,2002
Certificate # 01400
File Number: 02-:(15-10-02
Exnlres: M"" 22. 2003
CERTIFICATE OF TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY
0 Specific conditions are described on the reverse side of this certificate.
Pursuant to King County Code, Chapter 14. 70 as amended. this certificate confirms that the level of service standard
used iii the Tiarisport3.tion ConcurrCncy Managem_erit program has been satisfied and sufficient road capacity is ·
reserv'ed for the deve'Iopment proje.ct de.scribed below. IMPORTAAT: This cenificarC"lioe.s not gu:9rantce a ·
· develop~nt permit. Other transportation improvements and mitigation will be required to comply with Intersection
Standards, ~itigation Payment System, King County road standards. and/or safety needs.· ·
I. Applicant Name and Address: Mike Romano, Centurion Development Services
22617 8th Drive SE, Bothell, WA 98021
. 2. Property Location:
a.· Property Address: 13815 160th Avenue SE
b. Development Name:
c. Parcel Number: 1423059058
3. Type of Development Permit To Be Requested: Formal Plat
4. Proposed Land Use: Single Family Residential
5. Zone Location and Reserved Units:
a. Concurrency Zone: · 452 Community Planning Area: Newcastle·
~ Commercial Project. Total Square Feet: 0
H. Multi-fumily • Number of Units: 0
·111. Single family-Number of Units: 24
6. This Certificate is subject to the following general conditions:
a. This Certificate of Concurrency runs with the land and is transferable only to subsequent owners of the same.
property for the: stated development. subject to the terms. conditions and ~xpiration date listed herein. This
Certificate ofCOncuriency is n~t trdnsfe.rable tri any other property and has no commercial value.
This Certificate Expires: May 22, 2003
unless you apply for the developmerit permit dcscrib~d above. prior to that date. ff this requirement is nOt mer' the
King County Depa~ment ofTransponatiop.reserves the option to cancel your certificate and .capacity
reservation. · ·
When you apply fo~ a devi?lopment permit with King Coun~··s Dep~rtment of Development aa~ En~roa~eatal
Services (DDES). bring this Certificate,orTransportation Concurrency as part of the development 8ppliC8.tioo· package.
If you have any questions, please call (206) 263-4722. . ,.
ITS) [E (C [E ~ w [E rry
\f\l MAY. 1 9 2003 UdJ
K.G. D~D.E.S.
22617-8'" Dr. SE
Bothell, WA 98021
~
CENTURION DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
(425) 486-2563 OFF
/425) 486-3273 FAX
Nov~~~Woco PY
Karen Scharer
King County ODES
Land Use Services
900 Oakesdale Ave. SW.
Renton, WA 98055
NOV i 2 71103
RE: Plat of Nichols Place (KCDDES File #L03P0015)
In response to your Request for Additional Information dated 8/12/03 please find
enclosed the following materials:
, 10 sets of a report titled "Response to King County Screening Comments
Transmittal" dated October 27, 2003 prepared by Haozous Engineering
,.. 10 sets of a report titled "Traffic Impact Analysis for Nichols Place -Revised
November 6, 2003" prepared by Garry Struthers Associates
Below please find our response to the specific comments contained within your 8/12/03
screening letter. County comments are indicated in italics with responses in bold.
1. Property Description, Engineering & Surveying:
a. Proof of legal lot has been verified as the subject being established by Statutory
Warranty Deed dated April 2:1'1. 1963 and recorded under recording number
7412130033.
Based on the legal descriptions between the subject lot and the property
adjoining, there is the possibility of a gap or overlap due to the descriptions
coming from two different directions. The boundary line adjustment submitted on
the "Evende/1" property with other property (file no. L03L0013) possibly could be
revised to include the subject lot and correct any hiatus.
RESPONSE: Review by our surveyor indicated that there is a .07' (718") gap
between the legal descriptions of the Evendell property and the subject property.
In order to rectify this issue a revised Boundary Line Adjustment related to the
Evendell property (ODES File #L03L0013) has been submitted to Mike Meins for
review. The revision results in elimination of the .07' gap .
.. Let us 1ake the luad. ..
Karen Scharer
November 12, 2003
Page 2 of 6
b. Note that the boundary survey discloses a barn encroachment over the north line
of the subject property. This adjoining lot is the proposed plat of "Evendell" which
has already received preliminary approval. The survey also disclosed several
fences meandering along the property lines. These fences will need to be
removed prior to final plat approval.
RESPONSE: Comment noted.
Please contact Mike Meins at (206) 296-7201 should you have questions regarding the
comments above.
RESPONSE: We have been in contact with Mr. Meins resulting in submittal
of the revised Evendell BLA map and legal description mentioned above.
2. Drainage:
a. Location ID. 50 and 51 are shown in the Level 1 Analysis to be two 12-inch
culverts, downstream from much larger culverts. These culverts appear to have
capacity limitations. Please investigate the feasibility of replacing the culverts. A
letter of intent from the property owner is required to allow replacement of the
culverts. Note that this item has also been requested from the applicant of
Liberty Grove L03P0006.
RESPONSE: Enclosed please find 10 copies of a report prepared by
Haozous Engineers. Per the report the existing culverts are undersized for the
current flow conditions. In order to freely convey the existing flows 30" culverts
are required.
Although replacement of the existing culverts can physically be accomplished
the property owner (Mr. Jerry Smith) has indicated in conversations with Robert
Darrow of Haozous Engineering that he is unwilling to allow culvert replacement.
It should be noted that flooding on the Smith property meets the 1998 KCSWDM
definition of "Type 1 Conveyance System Nuisance Problem" as opposed to
"Severe Flooding" since there are no habitable structures impacted by the
flooding (pages 1-20 & 1-211998 KCSWDM). Per Table 1.2.3.A. Level 2 flow
controls are indicated for mitigation of this condition. Since Level 2 flow
controls are required for all proposed projects in this area of King County and are
proposed for the subject application no additional mitigation is indicated.
In addition, review of the hydraulic calculations contained in the preliminary TIR
indicate that 25-year developed peak rates match the existing rate of 0.18 CFS
and that developed 100 year peak rates will be .2 CFS as opposed to the existing
rate of .31 CFS, a reduction of about 35%.
··Let us take the load. ..
Karen Scharer
November 12, 2003
Page 3 of 6
Based on the above information the proposed Level 2 flow controls adequately
mitigate project related downstream stormwater impacts. No additional mitigation
is required.
b. Please review Location ID. 40; we field measured this culvert to be 18-inch vs.
12-inch as shown in the Level 1 Analysis.
RESPONSE: The culvert measures 18" in diameter. Please see the attached
report containing the engineers' commentary.
c. The drainage adjustment for the site (L03V0036) is currently being reviewed.
RESPONSE: Please note that the referenced drainage adjustment was
approved by King County on September 4, 2003.
d. Please provide ten (10) copies of documents noted above.
RESPONSE: Please find 10 copies of the referenced report attached.
Traffic Study:
Please provide a revised traffic study, which evaluates the following items:
a. Although the information in Tables 1 and 4 are not specifically indicated as being
an AM or PM peak hour analysis, it is presumed to be a PM peak hour. Please
provide an AM peak hour analysis of the intersections analyzed in the TIA
submitted with the plat application.
b. In the section identified as Accidents, please add a reference to the inclusion of
SE 12B1h Street! 16dh Avenue SE on the updated High Accident Location list
(July 2003), and that at least one (1) trip end (in the PM peak) and an estimated
two or three trip-ends in the morning peak (based upon 'reversing' the PM peak
hour volumes) will be benefited by the proposed correction of the HAL. The
County's consultant has identified the mitigation as the construction of center turn
lanes at this location. Please provide an estimated pro-rata share of the
correction of the HAL -based upon the percentage of the project trips relative to
the overall number of left turn trip ends (eastbound and westbound, combined) in
these proposed turn lanes.
..Let us take the luad. ..
Karen Scharer
November 12, 2003
Page 4 of 6
c. An alternatives analysis that addresses the Hearings' Examiners decision for the
plat of Evendell, specifically, the denial of the rezone request (and, reduction of
the permitted number of lots to 46), together with elimination of the requirement
of off-site construction of the SE 1361h Street (15f1h Avenue SE to 15B1h Avenue
SE) connection.
d. The distribution south along 16dh Avenue SE may be excessive under a "with SE
13(1h Street" scenario. The travel path to the intersection of 142"d Place SEISE
15(1h is nearly substantially further along that travel path as compared to that
using an extended SE 13(1h Street.
e. Please identify the location (i.e. address, intersection, etc.) at which the turning
movement counts were performed that were the source of the trip distribution.
Provide the back-up data (counts) that were the source of this distribution.
f Perform a travel time analysis to compare an actual morning peak hour travel
time along the 16dh Avenue to SE 144th Street to SE 15(1h Street trip versus a
theoretical SE 13(1h Street to 15f1h Avenue SE, with appropriate delays factored
into the westbound left turn to proceed southbound on 15(1h Avenue SE. The
newly constructed west leg of SE 13(1h Avenue SE may serve as a reasonably
accurate source of data on the delays required to complete a left turn across
15(1h Avenue SE. Other single lane approach "STOP" controlled intersections
along the portion of 15(1h Avenue SE, between SE 12B1h and SE 142"d Place.
Please provide ten (10) copies of submittals. For more detailed information regarding
the traffic study, please contact Kris Langley, Senior Engineer, Traffic & Engineering,
KCDOT at (206) 263-6102 or (206) 296-7155 (or kristen.lanqley@metrokc.gov.
RESPONSE: Attached please find 10 copies of report titled "Traffic Impact
Analysis for Nichols Place -Revised November 6, 2003" prepared by Garry
Struthers Associates.
This report redoes the original TIA in order to address comments 3a, 3b and 3c
above and provides additional information in response to items 3d, 3e and 3f.
In reference to comment 3b please note that the study concludes Nichols Place
contributes 1 left turn or 2% of the left turns at the HAL at SE 1281h Street and
1601h Ave. SE intersection.
..Let us take the load. ..
Karen Scharer
November 1_2, 2003
Page 5 of 6
4. Road Improvements:
Please submit a conceptual frontage road improvement plan, including the proposed
drainage concept for detention and water quality.
RESPONSE: Please see the Haozous Engineers study attached.
5. Pedestrian Connectivity/School Walkways:
a. Information has been provided in the past that school age pedestrians have a
gate available for access to the west side of the Liberty High School. Identify the
walking routes from Nichol's Place to the location of the gate. Identify the
conditions along the route. Where abutting the boundary of the plat, and, if not
otherwise required, provide frontage and off-frontage improvements to
accommodate this pedestrian activity.
RESPONSE: Please see the Garry Struthers report attached. According to a
recent study conducted by DMP, Inc. in conjunction with the Liberty Grove plats
there is no gate at the referenced location. Therefore there is no relevant walking
route. Pedestrian activity along the frontage of the property will be
accommodated by provision of half street improvements meeting urban
neighborhood collector standards.
b. Provide an analysis of walkway access to schools serving the plat (Liberty High
School, Maywood Middle School, and Briarwood Elementary). See the attached
comments from the Issaquah School District.
RESPONSE: Please see the Garry Struthers report attached. According to a
recent study conducted by DMP, Inc. in conjunction with the Liberty Grove plats
there are no safe walking routes to the schools serving Nichols Place. Per the
Issaquah School District all students will be bussed.
6. Wetland/Stream/Wildlife:
A site visit was made & staff verified there are no wetlands on this property.
Further, wildlife that would be regulated under the King County Comprehensive
Plan in the Urban Area was not observed on site.
RESPONSE: Comment noted .
.. Ler us 1ake rhe load.··
--'
Karen Scharer
November 12, 2003
Page 6 of 6
7. Revised Preliminary Plat(s):
Provide 15 copies of each revised preliminary plat, as necessary, as a result of
above-referenced requests for additional information and 4 copies of any special
study requested for each plat unless otherwise noted
As a result of the review of the information, additional information (studies,
revisions, etc) may be requested at a later date. Further evaluation of these
issues may result in the reconfiguration and/or loss of Jots.
RESPONSE: Comment noted. Since responding to the County's comments
did not require revisions to the plat no additional plat maps have been provided.
8. Rezone:
Based on the information submitted, DOES staff finds insufficient justification to
recommend reclassification of either rezone request, see Comprehensive Plan
Policy U-122. You may choose to submit further information, which addresses
this policy as it applies to this site. Please provide four copies.
RESPONSE: Comment noted. We have no further information to submit at
this time. Please note that there is only one rezone request associated with this
project.
Please call me at (425) 486-2563 if you have any questions. Thank you in advance for
your attention to this matter.
Enclosures
Sincerely,
CENTURION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
1flLl}z~
Michael J. Romano
Project Consultant
··Let us rake the load··
I
a,, V•u ........ "'-UO ..................... .
February 7, 2004
Karen Scharer
Project/Program Manager II
DDES/LUSD -Current Planning Section
900 Oakesdale.Ave SW, Ste.100
Renton, WA 98055-1219
RE:
L03POOOS -Liberty .Grove Contiguous (east of Evendell on' 160th -hearing on
Feb 10) .
LOJP0006 -liberty Grove (north of. Evendell on 160th. -hearing on Feb 10)
L03P0015 • Nichols Place (south of Evendell on 160th -hearing Qn Feb 24)
Dear Ms. Scharer:
I am writing to ask that you submit the written comments we made. for the. public
record for the Evendell re-zone application into the public record for the above-
listed Liberty Grove applications.
Our major concerns regarding increased. density are:
Character of our neighborhood
Increased traffic
Water runoff problems
As I write this (less than one year since our letter registering opposition to the_
Evendell rezone application) my wife and I have witnessed nothing that would ·
cause us to lessen our concerns in these three areas. In particular, we see-the
damage from water runoff as potentially very serious. The liberty Grove and
Evendell subdivisions represent a significant percentage of the total area directly
uphill from our house in the Cedar River watershed .... As these developments go in,
we are extremely concerned that, together, they will have an adverse and
unanticipated impact on drainage above, around and through our property.
There has been testimony in the public record. documenting_ problems already
occurring with drainage and runoff in our neighborhood: What assurances do we
have that these-new developments will not make the-problem worse?
Sincerely,
Bill and Dona Mokin
14404 162nd Ave. SE
Renton, WA 98059 .
(425) 430 2446
email: zigsterdog@mac.com
Exhibit No . ..a~:a...<.o..::... ___ _
Item No.bo1;2oao5.1.\ o3'(oool.:,
Received .2-IQ-ot/ • King County Hearing Examiner
-· 1 ..
n, ,.. • ._._...,. -..uo ..,, • .,.,,..._,..,._.,
February 7, 2004
Karen Scharer
Project/Program Manager II
DDES/LUSD -Current Planning Section
900 Oakesdale Ave SW, Ste. 100
Renton, WA 98055-1219
RE:
L03POOOS -Liberty .Grove Contiguous (east of Evendell on' 160th -hearing on
Feb 10) .
L03P0006 -Liberty Grove (north of Evendell on 160th -hearing on Feb 10)
L03P0015 ' Nichols Place (south of Evendell on 160th -hearing on Feb 24)
Dear Ms. Scharer:
~.,.., ..
I am writing to ask that you submit the written comments we made. for the public
record for the Evendell re-zone app.lication Into the ·public record for the above-
listed. Liberty Grove applications.
Our major concerns regarding increased. density are:
Character of our neighborhood
Increased traffic
Water runoff problems
As I write this (less than one year since our letter registering opposition to the
Evendell rezone application) my wife and I have witnessed nothing that would
cause us to lessen our concerns in these three areas. In particular, we see·the
damage from water runoff as potentially very serious. The liberty Grove and
. Evendell subdivisions represent a significant percentage of the total area directly
uphill from our house in the Cedar River watershed ... As these.developments go in,
we are extremely concerned that, together, they .will have an adverse and
unanticipated impact on drainage above, around and through ouf property.
There has been testimony in the public. record. documenting problems already
occurring with drainage and runoff in our neighborhood: What assurances do we
have that these new developments will not make the problem worse?
Sincerely,
Bill and Dona Mokin
14404 162nd Ave. SE
Renton, WA 98059
(425) 430 2446
email: zlgsterdog@mac.com
Exhibit No . ..;;:~:...<.o.=.-___ _
Item No.L.a1i'vooo5•\ o3~ooo(,.,,
Received .2-Jo-~t/ I
King County Hearing Examiner
02/11/2004 09:51 FAX 206 296 1654 K.C.Hearing Examiner ~001
----------------
,II'" ~ \. Post~it'" Fax Note 7671 oau~ .... 'J--//-U pagar.
TolJ....... .. 0 l • '"") F,om~'.:
-
Co/Depl, Co.
Phone•
Phone II.
fax# (., l L... I -<, Fax i
ds
se
'
... _. -... . ··,··
1/tPIN'E _
-\j I I --"c ~"' II~ vi \t I . Gil.?f:f:fJHOtf!:.,"e·< I u4.61 · 11<>.19 rP I[ 0 11 I lfl I
50' £ I C\;; ., ~ '-L/6' cJ c'.J LI :: : r, / ' IL I I I-Mt 141 Cl)J-:, I~.,.. II I ~-; . ';7 '.
CJ) '" 1colj· ,,. ,, 1r.>'l 1 I .).I · i~ r ._, __ , I
J 48 3 cB · _j · ,D14
·0 &· ~ i'.\ 1~=~-; , . _ . / / c """ r
~
-Cl. D UI '~---r-, ,,-No1>1I<. I
47 4 ' ·
13
. , ---r-J)i l 1ir,n1<. /· 1...1 :I: · ~1~4Z~ V) /;, 'c. I
5 ~ ~ I-i, D 12 -"> (} I 46 'I I CX> -W -. I . ·-. > Cl-! !CKE/,/ l
'I
1
.. -L<( FAr:.1,1 \
-I
-~~ _ 010U·
J
' ,, -
~A-1 ~-l/ -
431:a 11~ tli\8 . /) I ·-
--... 1:1.'!~,· v( -,. 16S02. 9 I Z 11
I t64 ill .. 164.44
'
. It(,
I /~
1J41
S),P.
'L. ~.-\ ~
I@
61301,(.
\~c·#;·
I
I Ja,k ii, Tibb(e5 \
s:,2.Ac.\
@,
'{]<.Bl'<,
'@
D@· ;:
~ ~.1,~.
@
c-":l 1,1,,, I.,
f'll,fr\, ii ~ :,,,
I '1 I>
( \ '\ ,.. .. , -, ,· V'°' )l :; I 1 ·,., r· ~ '· ' ' : . ·-,.,. .. ..)
~r .. ~-11 ~L-"'Lo.I ffl-W
" -v
4~-'-7 .\. po\_~-10·_ t,NJ_a~_r
60 '"
'-.
"' ,;
~
» &tv/ ....
C'.:i]
. -• . -,.1111<. e
../
, ..
.,v,,.
<@ I
@
515
cJ ~ ,s9o • ., '-I , "tJ'' -JO \
" C 'ii '" I ;'R-J--1 R ~ P . ~ K, -r
G~"/J,,.-,c_ fl ' < _ I EJ "' '·P·. 14f, ~ ~ ~514 I
$ ,OOU, "/Ol3
.1D~. • : "' "', NI __ . ,...-:_i, -
10 7 ,,, :C :.2CJ ~; Lr-1 ~
o TR A .. , b t< --.
st . .Jn !,Q 'l°-' 5HI 40%
g S,E. 48TH ~T.
329.95
1585.S
c=J,,+A<.
')r(:r,\,; (@ ~ ~ ~f6K~(;
10914
.?21
:~
/4613
e.q~.
/ ...... ·
1•;;.1:;" 7 j,
·y/
10( ----·---......, 5;<19 ,., •
1t -22
®
l!. 23/24~. ~us 12 /J ~1_
7 )
~
I>! --" ·E1·
PL.
~
L]
I "I ' 4 5 I 6 :;;1
\ _,
'./'
·•. I
' 1.3,0,~.
@
16
.. fl:, \ I
.::, :s ~-~-1' iq N·o· ;B . ~
"' ---
OJ [0;1
'1 .,..
145TH -§.T ! .a
250.03
82!'.:] ~.
a~1
11-! ·
"' 1/J~ 1~1
~i
TRACT "A
I 0 PEN --'Sr','\CE-
8 0 \ti .. m :',el 6i)tJ.
us \ 9
fil
ct-·
90
J4y{, MalhW;J
3,UAc. ,
CJ
@·"~ -~~
'"* Ac '@
~ ~917 ;;;j
ct S:· 1--, _-
"'67 l ~,
87 • 1
:81~ -~--~-~11· -. oi;
38 1~
L:...:
l .~.,
I
i
/
I
\ j
"' ....
28 ~ 29 30 31 32
"' 1'15 '1 84./5 103.85 104 if, 34 '~
i
I
I
"-
,,,
9 -y'" .,, '" C <
-y
·A.e, .. .:._.
Gov't.
10.40
. L ••
'""
...
gJC, CJ
,:J
Lot 4
Acre1s
,:W/~1
r'rXL
r ,·~ 0
~
-CE-Df!P...
;,;
~
',~
N
,,
'
z
' ' I '" \lb
~I
,, ,,
11 .191
P? ':"!!;,../,!,"' I
,,.,,_,,_. >c-vc,.,:' \ l:R 16
CC.'IC,,L-11,11-Ac. ~
·,n//1,1·,, 1 -r:.
1
: @ 1
t.· p,-,y!'d. • . I:
lil
~
1, ', ,,
:1
1'
,1
1' ,, ,,
,1 ,,
1'
,oo
CJ
!S93r'
i)l:>,,.y,·1.
{..(/.
/', C-111:A.:cf./ _ C...../ ,.H~·t,,,, ........... "" ,,
/
,1 I , ,1 ,.,.. , , ,
r 1 ,.· ,,,
,/
V:1trd ! :'t,r
"' nooa'1::{ . ''1: ', ; it II ~ LJ·: · /:_
¢" J
~ .
<N /'., ' . "' ~'. ~ '"
-··· "'
i·.'
,TRACT
. I
.,,..,
''' C
OPEN SPACE: A -P:.SA
.......______ .,,
31~
F
TRACT
L:--c
,-' j ~
~
"'
. I f.Vi, ~I .,,.
~]~
0
'E'
,o :
11·
12
Ii~
R
fl
C z
,'o>
9
&,I
53.85 l!! .. 8
• El~ A
V u.m 7~ 6JQ/ o\'.>,.JIJ
-... J&b~ S. E. ,,
13~.o, -~
e;J "' "'
!,'! ,,:;.:.::.:.::.
. I ~
\0 F'"'-----cc~--i D ~ , G 1050
; E c-
'= • :;.
a
3
j". tl9?A /-"> 3~~ -t.\. RD .. --<I; 1146
111
-
10
I .,,_.. . -
---------------~ .. 5
60
ll c.3ITS 1{
---------~----~!/ -,. ,. 1,
. ' ' , ~ Cc,/v;,, f/,iy..::;/,u/1, " ,,
"Lf,15' Av / /1
@ / /,.1
L -
5i ,:
-·-i. I
re l ..
ru·_"''C--""'\ii@. -~·-----,.-,.,_ .,: .. ,,. __ ,.~·-@; . ~):'/lb .. ,-? .~ ' •,q ' -.-x;;:#' _41 :.,-, I -
11
7
or:1
:,f1
4.
.~
·.%
1.-····
~f ~-
l
I
J
-._IE
-; 811
5 ~-
23;24 ~,
----, I I ' r~ 22w-_ :e.
I
1;5
'-
•:::
, .. ,
-----------02/11/2004 09:51 FAX 206 296 1654 K.C.Hearlng Examiner ~ 002
February 7, 2004
Karen Scharer
Project/Program Manager II
DDES/LUSD -Current Planning Section
900 Oakesdale Ave SW, Ste. 100
Renton, WA 98055-1219
D t # of .. Post-it" Fax Note 7671 a 8-z_J 1 \ pages
:..:~:::o t-'1::.:.:1.:..:i.:L..:::..:..:{<::..;~.:._----+.;F;;::ro-;;m'::-B.-\)C& I..:>"'•~
Co./Dept. Co. OD~~=,~~-------1
Phone# Phone# ZD~-~-,._~
Fax# 4'Z.':.-48"--3'Z.1:!, Fax# ~-25\b-<..C.~
RE: , "
. L03POOOS -Liberty Grove Contiguous (east of Evendell on 160th -hearing on
Feb 10)
L03P0006 -Liberty Grove (north of Evendell on 160th • hearing on Feb 10)
L03P0015 ' Nichols Place (south of Evendell on 160th -hearing on Feb 24)
Dear Ms. Scharer:
I am writing to ask that you submit the written comments we made for the public
record for the Evendell re-zone application into the public record for the above-
listed Liberty Grove.applications.
Our major concerns regarding increased density are:
Character of our neighborhood
Increased traffic
Water runoff problems
As I write this (less than one year since our letter registering opposition to the
Evendell rezone application) my wife and I have witnessed nothing that would
cause us to lessen our concerns in these three areas. In particular, we see the
damage from water runoff as potentially very serious. The Liberty Grove and
Evendell subdivisions represent a significant percentage of the total area directly
uphill from our house in the Cedar River watershed .. As these developments go in,
we are extremely concerned that, together, they will have an adverse and
unanticipated impact on drainage above, around and through our property.
There has been testimony in the public record documenting problems already
occurring with drainage and runoff in our neighborhood. 'what assurances do we
have that these new developments will not make the problem worse?
Slncerely,
Bill and Dona Mokin
14404 162nd Ave. SE
Renton, WA 98059
(425) 430 2446
emall: zlgsterdog@mac.com
Exhibit No. ~ C... ___ _
Item No l.c1i2ooc.:S",t.\ o'.!,~ooolD
Received .2-!o-oY'.' >
King County Hearing Examiner
)
"' 6'
N
"
~
ci :;: ,-
"' .. ;;;
Pc, ,:,fwre..
7
0""~.
ui .. ,;
;a
~
0 ~ ~ . ;;;
134
· 1 -.. · !"n.;;-I i'z.s, ,j~ ~ --__ ,.__ --__ ..,-.;. -
I ;~is.E. . 135TH , . ST.:;:
~ ~
~
6 2"' 18 " " " 18 ~"""'~·\t-;s.t "' ,., QQCJ.O· ,,.,,,-1 ,.r, 'aG , ' ,;t ,W-_·, .. -j I
...:, ~: cq . . . . ' • '' ~ ~ I~ -;.~42gs E~1ffi r'" a 2&:,;
I ~,r.hz ----. 84.••
Cj) 41 . 18 .. . " . ''._ ,. 18 ~
-
7 a:t§5 .::: rj 14 "' ~13 t; ·t,2t~ ~ i $ §10 ~
~.,l,tJ'l ,, . ., I
. . .,.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ,.. r--c r-C =
60 ~, . I ~ ~ c:f . -~ L:;_l L....:_l 60
L V b N ,.., ~ v~ !!! ,ll
;;
.,;
~
:;'(
,;
·I~
0 1<1ab/,·
~\':"'h\E: ..
w§oo:;
,;'
:Ji
~
I
I
El i
Go I . 595.1 . / 593.4,l
If:'.;~;rww:~:~,;&~:'N-~:::;·~"~~j;;.~:~.~:~~5'.~~:,~: . ,, ~,ii~'"Tu -!\ ~%1'"1[~'~]~-,~~;:1
l ~-~·"""'i!' "''.! ~--·(·--.,;!! '"ON
~ ~ 7,81 • 17.'3'3 I' M II '17.'1'3 64,,e s
136TH'. . , sF · 592.31 (5'2.31) ,'('\'·. · ; 7'r , . 0/'l N , , . . ~ ~ ·-<~j_:. NOT .,._. , 0 PEIi/;.···:·. "'·'·"~'',,.,, ........... ..,, __ . ..::....,,,c~-J4fi 2S.E.
3ol
(k,
~
0
I<.,!!
i)
,JO
; .,4':
SO' ~ ,
r,
~
L01P0016
EVENDELL
(L01TY401
75/44 LOT
-:::==.:.:_-_____ -----,,
" ,l "~oc:0,, Pa:.+1! re.
11;;; I!
fJV2
5'92,v,;, ~ .. ~. (593.~, J ; ~ 'c '"", 1 "-, -·.· s"2.~; ,,, ; ~~:;~\ '(~;; .. -; ,~ -"c.mc•_t,·
CJ :i O · 11 l36D1 " ~' ' ,, -'o. ~ -~ ,, 0 ~ ,.,. '-F I v E ! ~ g A c R E 1 9•· ~-i ~r
I
-\ . ~ .,., "'I
. c:o·
"'I; ' "'!. ·~· . ~ . a, d'I . 1 a, ,en
en -~ a,-~ 411• N N N
I ss4:ss (593.so>" _ J?. 594.5'9 (593.so> ,.,.:
r•,e,_•j.J lro I:
• -13/\Rl'J
F(t 5 lu2c
I~ II
t-· l",-, I•·-
11 ~:,2c1~1;R,1 ~~ .. :;,
~ ,;
N' "' I 1~--
,c• . IQ I 12 I II l
c p ,u"i . . . R ·.,
. ___ .,,·~· -, .. ,_. b--~ I a
. 596.68 . . 13?
I ,iu:z · ·· T . s /3604--dJ ·\ I "< \
' · l ~9::l.77) :;St.,l
1 . A11, i ... i :' ~s
"' ,.. \ .
6 ~ •"), "'
I ~ lo.'··(· -
\:2. ~ :;;re, ~ • 1~814. ·~ ;~::,,t .,;
""i ~ "-·· -'~,b,I, 11,.,,_ '"ED "m· :c r_
1
~~-_1.·;_ :;: (593.77)
,; (/A ~rr "'1 ·,, 598.77 :;: . 0 l'E? ··-"'
3
~I + 11(,, * -,,.11.&1 1 @ . •••• I
,. Ost>J ·'\VJ( ~ ~I ,,s13 oW> 0 sh.?198.,, (593.10) '.~;~
en -· ·· -~~ .'','"'·'i!t -I._ 1./ )(',",J:)'.J ·. . ~%;'~it~ '. . ... . g; (1::,,1 lo
:;; " ''"'l ~ ~ -)1<>:;,;,
I ~ .. "''J:,"il) :1,
~
'\
. ·_ '. ti·'~ EJ~
;;: .1\ \..,_
tifM'!··
N O r1-,
" -L,_J -ff? .~At. -@)
l (' ••
0 . .-. :::
N
t,OZ~
F·ci <.t·[, t .. . ,:
., ;\;.',l; .. ,f.)··,c 1~9•9
-'-":1 ·-. .., : n_::i "
L3 /.8~ lit,_
!@) ·ies~,
@
23.~
-.:::; ~,<ii,7.
:i .
O.~.~
®
,.,
. \~0~\,~'C(: / . ~--5 :;: @ .) 'hv, -
--.--f;_ ~··,~-~·,,··R6' --I•
So ~,
}!>
M ,!,i ,,, &'I -N
ijpmc.. r~,, ~
Cl<IA<.@
200 .
S~ l'f/ST ~ (P/:fV. RD -·· --· --,
D
,se2:1
. f. \'.
0/103
.~At. ,,y 1'. Ki'IJ'.:@ ~ . "'
)i(',
t-. ~3Jo
l,lJ~
'@ ·"''~-@
uiUJ~
~V'l-
~
11 · ; r"' /·-\ ,"'\ c
',,:1· { ,'/_.)_,; '4 ..
C. "'iht•.,;
,n 1-;t~,t-:\J N
I ~ l38l, · , ~ :r~ " ~ """ :"'1·.\: 4 (593.0/) "' '-I ':: ,, r. Goo. 86
., L~ ... ""'" ,,, <(
~I ,,. bOO.ijo ,wt_~. I ~ Isfi.'i o •• 0 • .:;. ··« "' 'Wt\J
/~Ow "''>!,<lrf.,;
"" "' ,.,,, j); N :::: 1 ; D · ~ ,1i!:!,~ ~ I"' c,} . CJ ~ ·t_,,;,c}
~--.,,;~;~t/i~ ';. ,,:: ~,; I.,; ~ !..J "' •. ,+. :t ('I
~;,,/ sf<f1 N ~-.
I
" .... ,_.,, :c' ~ "'" 1-I ,;;.:,'l:,,I
0 li (S94.o4) ':},~;'/'.1
<D
' ' 02 95 · "~'·--,
C 6 · ii'•': -1 •R . ,
5
1~
1!
" I~
c . ..:-
(·AR/,,r;s-J · -LJ .rel 6 ~ ·,:.·· '° ~'. ~;-c,
i;,: ";,it,
~j •':'L@os
----;=:....,i.ar.,.'-"-~LJ:),!.~~-'8''1,'!¥,J;.L-µi.-.i,J,i....ft"
IJ
\<;> ........ .,, • _Ii 605.04 (694.18)
l ~ ,z,(;2/r:,
@)
,, ""
BER
t'/j f.S. I! V.
D
0!I
--=-=~---------
:OUfl(J
52.§.
f,q,A<,
.@
!42os ~ ov
1
~
~itA<~I i' --'@
OCT 3 19ll
MA l'M SCALE:
. 7 t~ ...... 1il•1ihll.1-tti.;i;)1·i,f)1ti
-'" l!<l.!
(,CV :} F) ~ I
'0:,
.2
... _ ct
vi
I
607.13 "· ) (S.94,13)
I
~
' GA~· :,.. jsq "' " GJ om
'
ATLAS OF SEAiltk
KROLL MAP COMPANY, INC.
I IN.= 200FT. COPYRIGHT KROL · NY,IN
--·----====
\I -
V1--
l-
!• ., ,,
!-
! • .....
J
• I • • •
Nichols Place L03P0015
Proposed ERU Conditions
Bruce Whittaker 1/23/2004
8. The drainage detention facility shall be designed to meet at a minimum to the
Level 2 Flow Control and Basic Water Quality menu in the 1998 King County
Surface Water Design Manual(KCSWDM).
9. Offsite drainage improvement: The two existing downstream culverts across
undeveloped Lot 6 of Cedar Park Five Acre Tracts shall be upgraded per the
Level 3 Offsite Analysis(locations 50 and 51 ). Permission is required from the
owner to construct the improvements. If permission cannot be obtained following
a good faith effort, this improvement is not required.
10. A surface water adjustment(L03V0036) is approved for this subdivision. All
conditions of approval for this adjustment shall be met prior to approval of the
engineering plans.
11. The following road improvements are required to be constructed according to the
1993 King County Road Standards(KCRS):
a. SE 139'h St. shall be improved at a minimum to the urban subaccess street
standard.
b. FRONTAGE: The frontage of the site along 160'h Ave SE(west side only)
shall be improved to the urban neighborhood standard.
c. Tracts A,B and C shall be improved as joint use driveways per Section
3.01 of the KCRS. These driveways shall be owned and maintained by
the lot owners served. Notes to this effect shall be shown on the
engineering plans and on the final plat map.
d. Modifications to the above road conditions may be considered according
to the variance provisions in Section 1.08 of the KCRS.
Drainage Narrative
The Nichols Place subdivision is located in the Orting Hills subbasin of the Lower Cedar
River drainage basin. A low north/south ridge divides the site into eastern and western
subbasins. The western subbasin sheetflows to the southwest across the west and south
property lines onto adjoining parcels. These flows eventually reach 1561
h Ave SE via SE
139'11 Place. The larger eastern basin sheetflows across the south property line and into
the existing roadside ditch on the west side 1601h ave NE. The downstream path
continues south in the roadside ditch to a cross culvert under 160'h Ave SE to the east
side. Then the flow continues south along the east side in a ditch, through two culverts ,
and turning east across an undeveloped parcel south of house #14028(approx 650 feet
downstream). The flow continues east through this parcel to an existing stream channel
in the unopened right-of-way for l 62"d Ave SE. The flow turns south in the stream to SE
144th St. The drainage then turns west in the SE 144 111 St drainage system, eventually
flowing into the Cedar River.
The cross culvert under 160 111 Ave SE and the two downstream culverts along the east
side have recently been upsized. There are two undersized conveyance culverts on the
above undeveloped parcel, that have a history of conveyance nuisance flooding problems.
The proposed plat conditions include upsizing these two culverts, if permission can be
obtained from the owner.
The proposal is to collect most runoff from the project site and direct it to a single
detention and water quality facility in the southeast comer of the site.
The detention facility is required to meet the Level 2 flow control requirements and Basic
water quality menu in the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual(KCSWDM).
,. ®
King County
Department of Development
and Environmental Services
900 Oakesdale Avenue SW
Renton, WA 98055-1219
September 4, 2003
Mike Romano
Centurion Development Services
22617 Eighth Drive SE
Bothell, WA 98021
Robert H. Darrow, P.E.
Haozous Engineering, P.S.
13428 -45th Court
Mukilteo, WA 98275
RE: Nichols Place Subdivision 1998 KCSWDM Adjustment Request (file No. L03V0036)
Dear Applicant and Engineer:
The Land Use Services Division, Engineering Review Section, has completed review of the
. adjustment request for the Nichols Place subdivision. You are requesting approval for an
adjustment from the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) Core
Requirement No. 1, Section 1.2.1, Discharge at the Natural Location. Our review of the
information and a site visit provides the following findings:
I. The proposed Nichols Place subdivision is located at 13815 1601h Avenue SE in east
Renton. The 23 lot, 3.8 acre, proposed Nichols Place subdivision is filed under Land
Use Services Division (LUSD) file number L03P0015.
2. The Nichols Place subdivision is located in the Orting Hills subbasin of the Lower
Cedar River basin. The site is. subject to the Level Two flow control and Basic water
quality requirements of the 1998 KCSWDM.
3. A low, north/south ridge separates the site into eastern and western subbasins. The
smaller.western subbasin sheetflows to the southwest across the west and south
property lines onto adjoining parcels. These flows eventually reach 1561h Avenue SE
via SE 139th Place. The larger eastern subbasin sheetflows across the south property
line and into the roadside ditch on the west side of 1601h Avenue SE where all flows
from the eastern subbasin eventually converge. All of the site's runoff would
eventually recombine in the Cedar River. The parcel to the north sheetflows onto this
site but is also being developed as the proposed Evendell plat. Under developed
conditions, the Evendell plat's contribution of sheetflow to the Nichols Place site
would be significantly reduced.
Nichols Place/L03V0036
September 4, 2003
Page 2 of3 .
4. The proposal is to collect most runoff from the project site and direct it to a single
detention and water quality facility located in the southeast comer of the site. The
allowed release would then travel south on the west side of 1601h Avenue SE.
Nuisance flows across the west and south property line would be significantly
reduced. An increase in flow volume would occur in the 1601h Avenue SE conveyance
path. It is unclear if frontage improvements are included in the conceptual drainage
plan.
5. No decorative ponds or shallow wells have been identified that would be affected by
the proposed diversion.
6. The Level One Drainage Analysis identified downstream drainage complaints
associated with the proposed discharge location. Recent conveyance upgrades have
been installed along this route presumably to mitigate for these previous complaints.
Due the accumulative effect of increased development in this area, more conveyance
upgrades are needed.
7. A consolidation of facilities for the proposed subdivision will be more economical in
long term maintenance.
Based on these findings, we hereby approve this adjustment to allow the diversion of runoff to
a single facility draining to 1601h Avenue SE with the following conditions:
1. The release rates for the detention facility will be based on only that portion of the site
that naturally drains to the location that is being diverted to.
2. The volume for the detention facility will be based on all flows directed to the facility
at full development under current zoning. The allowed release rate will be reduced by
any undetained flows that would bypass the proposed subdivision drainage facilities.
The detention volume shall be sized using the Level Two flow control standard in the
1998 KCSWDM. A 10 to 20 percent volumetric factor of safety must be applied to all
storm events requiring detention. The design Technical Information Report shall state
the factor of safety selected and the basis of that determination.
3. Water quality facilities must be sized based on the entire proposed subdivision
draining to the facilities including any required frontage improvements.
4. The onsite drainage facility must be located in a public right-of-way, recreation space
tract with easement or storm drainage tract dedicated to King County.
5. Any additional storm drainage requirements identified by SEPA or the plat hearing
review will apply to this project.
If you have any further questions regarding this KCSWDM adjustment or the design
requirements, please contact Mark Bergam at (206) 296-7270.
---------------------------
Nichols Place/L03V0036
September 4, 2003
Page 3 of3
Sincerely,
James Sanders, P.E.
Development Engineer
Engineering Review Section
Land Use Services Division
Jim Chan, P.E.
Supervising Engineer
Site Engineering and Planning Section
Building Services Division
cc: Curt Crawford, P.E., Managing Engineer, Stormwater Services Section, KCDNR
Randall Parsons, P.E., Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD
Bruce Whittaker, Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD
Karen Scharer, Project/Program Manager II, Current Planning Section, LUSD
Mark Bergam, P.E., Senior Engineer, Engineering Review Section, LUSD
..
,,. '\.
l J
King County
Department of Development
And Environmental Services
900 Oakesdale A venue SW
Renton, WA 98055-1219
Project Name:
Nichols Place Plat
Project Address:
SE V. of Section 14. T23N, R5E
Applicant:
Mr. Mike Romano
Signature:
Address:
Centurion Development Services
22617 8'" Drive SE
Bothell. WA 98021
Phone:
( 425) 486-2563
Date:
()
DDES File No. ODES Engineer/Planned Name:
A03P0063 Bruce Whittaker P.E.
Design Engineer (submitting variance): Phone:
Robert H. Darrow. P.E. (425) 745-5872
~~~ Date: 5/18/03
Engineering Firm Name:
Haozous Engineering, P.S.
Address:
13428 -45th Court
Mukilteo, WA 98275
DESCRIPTION OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST: !_Standard Request
We request that the design of the stormwater facility that manages stormwater from
developed portions of Nichols Place be allowed to divert drainage from a net area of J .12
acres from the west basin to the east basin on the site.
APPLICABLE SECTION(S) OF STANDARDS:
The adjustment request is applicable to Core Requirement # 1: Discharge at the Natural
Location, Section 1.2.1 of the Surface Water Design Manual (King County Department
of Natural Resources, 1998).
JUSTIFICATION (see one-page attachment):
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURES:
DOES Director/Deslgnee Determination:
_ Approval Denial
_ DOES Approval Signed: . Date: 'f · 'f ~ :!>
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
J:! See attached memo dated: -.......J'rc.c•_.'/c_·:::.0-"-~=----
DOES, land Use Services Division, EngiMering Review S-
L03V0036
DOES, Bldg. s«v. Div., Sita~ & Planning S-
MAY 19 2003
K.C. D.D.E.S.
King County
Department of Development
And Environmental Services
9000akesdale Avenue SW
Renton, WA 98055-1219
Nichols Place -Diversion of Drainage -Adjustment Request
JUSTIFICATION:
Description of Site
The Nichols Place Plat project is a proposed residential development located within the
Renton Highlands area of unincorporated King County. The proposal for development
includes building 23 single-family dwellings on approximately 3.8 acres .. Offsite road
improvements along 160th Avenue SE are also proposed.
The site is located within the Orting Hills subbasin of the Cedar River watershed (King
County Department of Natural Resources, 1999). The site and area of offsite
improvements consist of two basins. The east onsite basin consists of 2.34 acres under
existing conditions and the offsite improvements consist of0.11 acre. The topography of
the east basin generally slopes from the northwest to the southeast. The west basin consists
'of l.48 acres under existing conditions. The topography of the west basin generally slopes
· from the north to the southwest. Runoff from the west basin sheet flows to adjacent yards
of single-family residences to the southwest and pasture to the south.
Stormwater Design
Under developed conditions, stormwater from the east basin will be collected and treated
onsite to basic water quality standards with a combined wetpond/detention pond.
Detention will be sized with a I 0% factor of safety and will accommodate the flow
transferred from the west basin and bypass of runoff from the offsite road improvements.
Stormwater from the offsite road improvements will be treated with a separate wet vault in
the right-of-way near the southeast corner of the site. Level 2 RID standards are required
by the King County Flow Application Maps and are recommended by Lower Cedar River
Basin and Nonpoint Action Plan.
Under developed conditions, 1.12-acres in the west basin will be routed to the
wetpond/detention pond in the east basin. To compensate for this diversion of drainage,
an area of0.36 acre of roofs and yards in the southwest portion of the site will be allowed
to sheet flow off the site without detention. The area of the developed area was adjusted
to approximate runoff amounts from the existing westerly basin (See Figures 2 & 3). The
following areas would contribute to the developed westerly basin: ·
'
Lot
14
15
16
17
<"> { }
Descriotion of Contributine: Flow
Backvard and back half of roof
Frontvard, backvard, entire roof, but not access drive.
Backvard and back half of roof
Frontvard, backvard, entire roof, but not access drive.
· Runoff from roofs in the developed west basin will be spread using downspout dispersion
systems. Runoff from yards will not be collected, but allowed to infiltrate or continue to
flow through the grass. The lots selected for downspout dispersion abut the property line
and dispersion approximate the discharge location of the existing flow pattern.
Managing runoff with the proposed diversion results in the following features:
• A larger combined wetpond/detention pond with a I 0% factor of safety
will manage runoff in the easterly basin arid will discharge to the ditch
system along 160th Avenue SE. · .. ·
• The discharge from the developed west basin will approximate the runoff
from the existing westerly basin, although it will be somewhat less.
• Considering that flow from the east basin is matching existuig and flow
from the west basin is somewhat less than existing, the combined
developed discharge is expected to be less than the existing basins.
• Facilities to be maintained by King County for this plat will be adjacent to
the plat entrance along 160th Avenue SE.
References
King County Department of Parks, Planning, and Resources, 1990. Sensitive Areas Map
Folio.
King County Environmental Division, 1990. Wetlands Inventory Notebook Volume 2.
East.
King County Department of Natural Resources, 1998. Surface Water Design Manual.
King County Surface Water Management Division, 1993a. Cedar River Current and
Future Conditions Report.
r .. .J.P"'-· -' l / "------1· ,-_,.,,.-.it!'''/.,...·
\,_;~c._--~~~~:==--~n~s-~:~~s.A.;,_.,,-<~<c:A'. ... ,,, ,.,,,( ·-'-·• ,, .,·,,,_ .. · . .c, .. ,.,,,.·.c·
I // PROPOSED .
,. '1 ,,,~ ,, .,,... ,,,J //,,., °'"'" EYEN QELL PLAT
" F<l:'\<.<l -.-'~ -1-~-----__,,_.;!,---·---~ -------// -' .·
,\ ls ~ "exwest" 1.48 A~~ ~Jist" '"2~Y4 /AC
30 ...._,~ , ,i. Hog ~-\ 1 '°"*-':,f,.: -_f ·-wr:n·n-.-i;'.11 f&" _ _ __
;,-·
•
"by.east"
(0.1'1 ,.~£):1
'. ~
(\
d ,;
J----__ '':"':,,._,~ ,,_....:.. " --".. ,,_ --" -. ~ -~-_:_j ·.--.--\::_~_:::.~ : .. -: :~;-~.\:: · .':.:::.!~': .:.:t~i' ~-·: .. .-~-·::·: ~.::.·:·"~] : ;:\l;~~;~;;;,~~-,~~~-~t2ik ~~t
l?.{!se u.lt, 76_ -· j:-· '''T·--·--j·, \;" I . ,.j , ;• •01 j , .• ·tCitfi'.',if:J\'.f"'.' · ,,.. I ... J '·' ·•• ••· $ ··
;ard~ · .'r.W" 4 , 10 · 9 .f '8 , 7,>"··: !6 · 5;;' ."' :r , 3 · 2 · ·W 1 .. t·'.f:i. ''''" ;,, ·*~-·.,·1 I ,ft' i./ I; 1 .. • I .···1 I· J·•·· · f·· "'"··
',\,.'~'-~·< ?-~,; .. \.('.~~~~\--_~Y'.1'0:;;:::,J) .. 'j. ~-.. ··. .. _t--i i.·-~.-
'""" ... ~-, ~ •
7
~ ;· '-.C" A c,,o </ ' ' ift't';deveast"-. . .. : -. . ::L . .:._ . ,"-. ---J ;-; ~/ '~)-.,, ~ ~~:;<~~-,-~!1 ·(7,i. ·-;-'7:~~~:;$jV.~10: I .·. I ; jl'i4
-.m,' •• ' ' ~ ··-.:. ... .,_, ____ ; ' ' •• ' f" ! ,i;'.,; ,nqj .. J~/D. :--,,, . _::, . . ,, :. , JL::"f'i11 : J, I ..... -·,. . ·, f · /( \ 18 .. ~ffi!j' ."j 20 : i .. 23 ·, . · ' .. : -. -r , \ ... . . · '""·f,1-: ·i I \ ~ I ·, f'T"'J "./ • !f .,,,. t J., ' ' '•' . "'~ ,, . . -~. · ~ ',. 7'---"' • ~ ,.:~-" --·---~--·-I ..... .., --~--I L ,: .. ~
H2.)3!'$0t'l! ,... evwes · · , : · ' · · ·-· ---,\\
....,,, · . ~(~-36 A . )''-ii,;J ·. --1-f"'·.. ·· .. 21 i 22 t "';'~ ...... . t._., ! ,_,,,,,,., "'' '·'
,:i '-. ..... : \. ·, .....
''.\ " i '\'t, ' "it,
~·
,,· •c .. • -~ ,,,
-~d·,··'.\r
~~m ·f
t{,\
•::,.,., ..
,·.;,
,;~,.·
,:,.t-.-
/
4' He9 \l.~t'<r-/ '··-.------:--t•ci., I
H~!4
Jr..;.·-:,,,
·4n,,,•, :'1~1
P.'"''"'"'"'
~--·~~,-·~ ~·~·"' {?( '\ :-i;
! ;q
t m;~
f )fi ' :·: ...
·lh !
ll.l.;r;;;",Y:· ,,,t ,:,
Haozous Engineering, P.S ..
aw. .lo sm: ENGINEERING
13428 -45Tlf COURT, MUKJLTEO, WA. 98275
425-745-5872
I t \!\1
NICHOLS PLACE
PRELIMINARY PLAT
...
.......... ......... -----. .. 100 DRAwtlm
..,..
RHD 5/18/113 .. ,.,
RHD rv1·· al••-•
DRAINAGE ADJUSTMENT
BASIN BREAKDOWN
,..,.....,
) _.,
,.---,,)
~·
1'[
1
Figure 2. Flow Duration Curves for RID -West Basin
iii u.
!,!_
:, .
.,;
0 ..,.
0
~ ..
0
0 ~ "' .. ~ 0 m .c u
~
i5
I
I
I
JI
N
.,;
9
10.
~
.._ ~
·~ ',\
~'
-.::
-·
10" 10 ·3
\
'o
10 -2 10 .,
tarwiist ,:tur o
de,,west.dur +
10"
ProbablUty Exceedenee ~-~~-lfi~""'i,jf~e .. ;;....,r.:r .. :,,#llllll~"~o-·,:~~~ --· --•. · , · ~L~ , .. ,·~ ·--• . ~.,_,;._, "· ___ ... !i;J.-, _ ,•·.·::,-,,-;.,,.-.? •. ~~~--""-"'''·-' ,.-~.·.'.",,--.··~v:."'c.-·.
5
--·-\
-J
'''' '1
~/
Existing Peak Flow Rates -West
Flow Frequency Analysis
Time Series File:exwest.tsf
Project Location:Sea-Tac_
---Annual Peak Flow Rates---
Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak
(CFS)
0.102 2 2/09/01 18:00
0.036 7 1/05/02 16:00
0.090 3 2/28/03 3:00
0.009 8 3/24/04 19:00
0.051 6 1/05/05 8:00
0.084 4 1/18/06 16:00
0.081 5 11/24/06 4: 00 ·
0 .165 1 1/09/08 6:00
Computed Peaks
Basin
( -_,)
\.
-----Flow Frequency Analysis-------
-Peaks Rank Return Prob
(CFS) Period
0.165 1 100.00 0.990
0 .102 2 25.00 0.960
0.090 3 10.00 0.900
0.084 4 5.00 0.800
0.081 5 3.00 0.667
0.051 6 2.00 0.500
0.036 7 1.30 0.231
0.009 8 1.10 0.091
0.144 50.00 0.980
Developed Peak Flow Rates -West Basin
Flow Frequency Analysis
Time Series File :devwest. tsf .
Project Location:Sea-Tac
---Annual Peak· Flow Rates---
Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak
(CFS)
0.066 6 2/09/01 2:00
0.053 8 1/05/02 16:00
0.079 3 2/27/03 7:00
0.058 7 8/26/04 2:00
0.069 5 10/28/04 16:00
0.070 4 1/18/06 16:00
0.083 2. 10/26/06 0:00
0.134 1 1/09/08 6:00
Computed Peaks
-----Flow Frequency Analysis---------Peaks Rank Return Prob
(CFS) Period
0.134 1 100.00 0.990
0 .. 083 2 25.00 0.960
0.079 3 10.00 0.900
0.070 4 5.00 0.800
0.069 5 3.00 0.667
0.066 6 2.00 0.500
0.058 7 1.30 0.231
0.053 8 1.10 0.091
0.117 50.00 0.980
/
. IQIU .. R!I' -------. ... -
••. 1 ,__,,
Haozous Engineering, P .S.
CML ,i STIE EHOINEERINO
13428 -4511i COURT. MUKILllO, WA 9827S
4:m-7411-15872 _,,,
RHO 0/10/03 _,,,
riHD .....
0/10/03
NICHOLS
PRELIMINARY PLAT
EXISTING
DRAINAGE BASINS
'
\
\
'-'
3 \