Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscEXHIBITS Project Name: Project Number: Dorhn Meadows Preliminary Plat LUA14-001280, ECF, PP Date of Hearing Staff Contact Project Contact/Applicant Project Location 10/13/2015 Kris Sorensen Joe Pruss; Civic Development 3815 & 3767 Monterey Pl NE Associate Planner Chad Allen; Encompass Eng. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit 1 ERC Report Exhibit 2 Zoning and Neighborhood Map Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 Exhibit 6 Exhibit 7 Exhibit 8 Exhibit 9 Exhibit 10 Exhibit 11 Exhibit 12 Exhibit 13 Exhibit 14 Exhibit 15 Exhibit 16 Exhibit 17 Exhibit 18 Exhibit 19 Exhibit 20 Exhibit 21 Exhibit 22 Exhibit 23 Exhibit 24 Exhibit 25 Exhibit 26 Exhibit 27 Exhibit 28 Exhibit 29 Exhibit 30 Aerial Preliminary Plat Plan, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/12/15 Boundary, Topographic Survey, Tree Inventory, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/12/15 Preliminary Grading Plan, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/12/15 Generalized Utility Plan, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/12/15 Preliminary Cutting, Land Clearing, Landscape Plan, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/12/15 Preliminary Street Profile, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/12/15 Revised Preliminary Technical Drainage Information Report, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/13/15 Geotechnical Evaluation, Earth Solutions NW LLC, date 9/18/14 and Addendum to the Geotechnical Evaluation prepared by Earth Solutions, NW LLC, date 3/2/15 Project Narrative Environmental Checklist Tree Retention Worksheet Density Worksheet Wetland Reconnaissance Evaluation, Altman Oliver & Associates, date 9/8/14 Advisory Notes -City Staff City Transportation Determination for Monterey Pl NE, date 7 /25/13 Report to Hearing Examiner Coal Creek Utility District Certificate of Water Availability, date 10/16/14 Renton School District and Bus Eligibility Renton School District Capacity, email date 10/10/14 Environmental "SEPA" Determination, ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Affidavit of posting and mailing Vested Development Standards and Critical Areas Regulations City of Renton -Slopes Transportation Concurrency Public Comment, from Marc Cadieux, date 10/1/14 Agency Comment, from City of Newcastle, date 10/8/15 Presentation, Public Hearing, date 10/13/15 ----------Ren tOil ® DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT --------Kenton® REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER A. SUMMARY AND PURPOSE OF REQUEST HEARING DATE: Project Name: Owners: Applicant/Contact: Contact: File Number: Project Manager: Project Summary: Project Location: Site Area: October 13, 2015 Dohrn Meadows Preliminary Plat Natalie Dorhn & John Wade; 2205 W 136'h St; Broomfield CO 80023; and Gregg Dohrn; 2129 S Rockwood Blvd; Spokane WA 99203 Joe Pruss; Civic Development; 18211 240'h Ave SE; Maple Valley WA 98038 Chad Allen; Encompass Eng.; 165 NE Juniper St, Suite 201; Issaquah WA 98027 LUA14-001280, ECF, PP Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner The applicant is requesting Hearing Examiner Preliminary Plat review and Environmental (SEPA) review for a 9-lot single family residential subdivision. The 89,819 square foot (2.06-acre) site is a combination of two parcels located at 3815 and 3767 Monterey Pl NE (APNs 3345700181 and 3345700182) within the Residential-8 (R-8) zone and Kennydale Community Planning Area. Proposed single-family lot sizes range from approximately 5,201 square feet to 8,270 square feet. Two existing single family homes, one on each parcel, would be demolished. Approximately 15,028 square feet is proposed to be dedicated public streets. Two tracts are proposed, one for the subdivision stormwater facility at approximately 9,404 square feet in the northwest corner of the site and the other tract would be a 14,213 square-foot critical areas tract containing 5,087 square feet of a Category 2 wetland in the southwest corner of the site. The proposal has a net density of 5.63 dwelling units per net acre. Steep slopes are located on the site. Eight trees are located in the critical areas tract and would be retained. Approximately 60 new trees would be added to the site. The project would result in approximately 4,500 cubic yards of excavation for site grading and road and plat construction and fill would be required for future home building pads. Street frontage improvements would be provided along Monterey Pl NE. A new internal dead- end road is proposed with curb, gutter and sidewalk that would provide access to the lots with a connection to Monterey Pl NE. The applicant submitted a drainage report, geotechnical report, wetlands reconnaissance, environmental checklist, and a tree inventory and retention plan. 3815 & 3767 Monterey Pl NE 89,819 sf (2.06 acres) Project Location Mop HEX Report 14-001280 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development DOHRN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT Preliminary Plat Report & Decision LUAl4-00l280, ECF, PP Hearing Date: October 13, 2015 Page 2 of 14 I 8. EXHIBITS HEX: Exhibit 19 Exhibit 20 Exhibit 21 Exhibit 22 Exhibit 23 Exhibit 24 Exhibit 25 Exhibit 26 Exhibit 27 Report to Hearing Examiner Coal Creek Utility District Certificate of Water Availability, date September 16, 2014 Renton School District and Bus Eligibility Renton School District Capacity, email date October 10, 2014 Environmental "SEPA" Determination, ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Affidavit of posting and mailing Vested RMC Title IV Development Standards for Residential Zoning Designations (RMC 4-2- 110) and Critical Areas Regulations (RMC 4-3-050) City of Renton Maps -Slopes Transportation Concurrency I C. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1. Owners of Record: 2. Zoning Designation: Natalie Dorhn & John Wade; 2205 W 135th St; Broomfield CO 80023; and Gregg Dohrn; 2129 S Rockwood Blvd; Spokane WA 99203 Residential -8 du/ac (R-8) 3. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: Residential Single Family Density (RS) 4. Existing Site Use: Two single family residences, one on each parcel. 5. Neighborhood Characteristics: a. b. c. d. North: East: South: West: . Single Family Residential (R-8 zone) Single Family Residential (R-8 zone) Single Family Residential (R-8 zone) Single Family Residential (R-8 zone) 6. Access: Access to the plat is proposed via Monterey Pl NE. Internal access is proposed via a new dead end street that includes a hammerhead turnaround at the west of the subject site (Exhibits 2 & 3). 7. Site Area: 2.06 acres I 0. HISTORICAL/BACKGROUND: Action Comprehensive Plan (Vested) Duncan Annexation Zoning (Vested) HEX Report 14-001280 Land Use File No. N/A N/A N/A Ordinance No. 5099 4275 5100 Approved Date 11/01/2004 7/29/1990 11/01/2004 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development DOHRN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT Preliminary Plat Report & Decision LUAl4-00l280, ECF, PP Hearing Date: October 13, 2015 Page 3 of 14 I E. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Utilities a. Water: Water service is provided by Coal Creek Utility District. b. Sewer: Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. There is an existing 8-inch gravity sewer main along Lincoln Ave NE that would be connected to through an acquired easement across the neighboring property to the west at 3792 Lincoln Ave NE. c. Surface/Storm Water: There is no existing storm water pipe along the Monterey Pl NE frontage on the project side. 2. Streets: There are no frontage improvements on the project side. 3. Fire Protection: City of Renton Fire Department. F, APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE (RMC): 1. Chapter 2 Zoning Districts -Land Use Districts a. Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts b. Section 4-2-060: Zoning Use Table -Uses Allowed in Zoning Designations c. Section 4-2-110: Residential Development Standards d. Section 4-2-115: Residential Design and Open Space Standards 2. Chapter 3 Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts a. Section 4-3-050: Critical Areas Regulations 3. Chapter 4 City-Wide Property Development Standards a. Section 4-4-030: Development Guidelines and Regulations -General b. Section 4-4-060: Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations c. Section 4-4-130: Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations 4. Chapter 6 Street and Utility Standards a. Section 4-6-030: Drainage (Surface Water) Standards b. Section 4-6-060: Street Standards 5. Chapter 7 Subdivision Regulations a. Section 4-7-080: Detailed Procedures for Subdivisions b. Section 4-7-120: Compatibility with Existing Land Use and Plan c. Section 4-7-150: Streets -General Requirements and Minimum Standards d. Section 4-7-160: Residential Blocks -General Requirements and Minimum Standards e. Section 4-7-170: Residential Lots-General Requirements and Minimum Standards 5. Chapter 9 Permits-Specific 6. Chapter 11 Definitions G. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 1. Land Use Element 2. Community Design Element HEX Report 14-001280 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development DOHRN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT Hearing Date: October 13, 2015 ! H. FINDINGS OF FACT: Preliminary Plat Report & Decision LUA14-001280, ECF, PP Page 4 of 14 1. The applicant requested SEPA Environmental Review and Preliminary Plat approval for a 9-lot subdivision. Preliminary Plat approval is being requested in order to subdivide a 2.06-acre site into 9 single family lots, one storm drainage tract, and one wetland critical areas tract. The lots range in size from 5,201 square feet to 8,270 square feet. The proposal results in a net density of 5.63 dwelling units per acre. 2. The project is vested to the R-8 zoning standards prior to the adoption of the Interim R-8 Zoning standards approved through Ordinance 5724 and prior to the new R-8 Zoning standards approved through Ordinance 5758. The project is also vested to the Critical Areas Ordinance prior to the adoption of the updated Critical Areas Ordinance adopted through Ordinance 5757. 3. The City ordinances governing the development of land up to and including adopted Ordinance No. 5723. 4. The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the SEPA Environmental Review and Preliminary Plat application for review on September 19, 2014 and determined it complete on October 9, 2014 (Exhibit 15). The project was put on-hold to receive additional information. Including the on-hold process, the project complies with the 120-day review period. 5. The proposed plat would be located on the west side of Monterey Pl NE, just north of NE 37th Pl. 6. The property is in the Residential Single Family (RS) Comprehensive Plan land use designation and the Residential 8 (R-8) zoning classification. 7. The two-parcel site currently contains one single family residence on each parcel and accessory garage and shed structures. All existing structures are proposed for demolition. 8. The project site is comprised of two parcels: Parcel Numbers 3345700181 and 3345700182 (Exhibit 2). 9. The following table includes proposed approximate dimensions for Lots 1-9 and Tracts A and B: As Pro11osed Lot Size (Sguare Feet} Width (Feet} De11th (Feet) Lotl 6,312 60 104.3 Lotz 5,213 50 104.3 Lot3 5,212 50 104.3 Lot4 5,201 50 103 Lots 5,400 50 80 Lot6 5,175 50 103.5 Lot 7 5,175 50 103.5 Lots 5,216 50 103.5 Lot9 8,270 75 102.5 Storm Drainage -Tract A 9,404 99 90 Wetland Critical Area -14,213 95 175 Tract B 10. Access to all lots would be provided along a new local limited residential access dead-end street off of Monterey Pl NE into the plat. The proposed road terminates at the west end in a hammerhead turnaround where the wetland tract is located (Exhibit 4). There is no future connection considered for the new dead-end street to continue west due to the presence of critical areas. 11. Topographically, the overall site slopes from the southeast corner to the northwest corner with an elevation change from 178 feet to 134 feet across the entire project site, an approximate 44-foot HEX Report 14-001280 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development DOHRN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT Hearing Date: October 13, 2015 Preliminary Plat Report & Decision LUAl4-001280, ECF, PP Pages of 14 elevation change. The south central portion of the site has the steepest slope, a 16-foot tall slope with approximate 34% gradient, and is limited in extent and appears to have been created in part from previous grading activities associated with the existing development (Exhibit 4 and Exhibit 5). A geotechnical report and addendum for the site was prepared by Earth Solutions, NW, LLC (dated September 18, 2014 and March 2, 2015; Exhibit 11); the report states that the proposed development activity is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. 12. There are approximately 60 significant trees on the site and the applicant is proposing to retain 10 trees (Exhibits 5 & 15). 13. The applicant submitted a conceptual landscape plan which includes the installation of a variety of street trees within a proposed 8-foot planter along the frontage of the internal roads in addition to 60 perimeter trees. Additional vegetation and a variety and shrubs and groundcover are also proposed onsite (Exhibit 8). 14. The applicant submitted a Wetland Reconnaissance and Evaluation report prepared by Altmann Oliver Associates LLC (dated September 8, 2014; Exhibit 16). According to the report, there is one wetland in the southwest area of the subject site as depicted on the submitted site survey (Exhibit 4). The wetland extends beyond the subject site boundaries to the west and south. 15. The applicant submitted a Revised Technical Information Report (TIR), prepared by Encompass Engineering & Surveying (dated August 13, 2015; Exhibit 10). The report addresses compliance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. The engineer proposes an onsite stormwater combination detention/water quality pond located in proposed Tract A. The stormwater pond is proposed to connect with the public stormwater system in Lincoln Ave NE through a private utility easement on the westerly property 3792 Lincoln Ave NE. 16. On September 21, 2015, the Environmental Review Committee, pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.21C, 1971 as amended), issued a Determination of Non- Significance -Mitigated (DNS·M) for Dohrn Meadows Preliminary Plat (Exhibit 23). The DNS-M included one mitigation measure. A 14-day appeal period commenced on September 25, 2015 and ended on October 9, 2015. As of the date of this report no appeals of the threshold determination have been filed. 17. Based on an analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) issued the following mitigation measure with the Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated: The applicant shall be required to comply with the recommendations included in the Geotechnical Evaluation, Earth Solutions NW LLC, dated September 18, 2014 and Addendum to the Geotechnical Evaluation prepared by Earth Solutions NW LLC dated March 2, 2015, for the duration of clearing, grading, site and building construction. 18. Staff received no public or agency comments. 19. Representatives from various city departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and address issues raised by the proposed development (Exhibit 17). These comments are contained in the official file, and the essence of the comments have been incorporated into the appropriate sections of this report. 20. The proposal requires Preliminary Plat Review. The following table (Section I. Conclusions) contains project elements intended to comply with Subdivision Regulations, as outlined in Chapter 4-7 RMC. 1 ,. CONCLUSIONS: HEX Report 14-001280 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development DOHRN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT Preliminary Plat Report & Decision LUA14-001280, ECF, PP Hearing Date: October 13, 2015 Page 6 of 14 PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW CRITERIA: 1. CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The site is designated Residential Single Family (RS) on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The proposal is consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Community Design Element policies if all conditions of approval are complied with: ., Policy LU-158. Net development densities should fall within a range of 4 to 8 dwelling units per acre in Residential Single Family Neighborhoods. Objective CD-C. Promote reinvestment in and upgrade of existing residential neighborhoods ., through redevelopment of small, underutilized parcels with infill development, modification and alteration of older housing stock, and improvements to streets and sidewalks to increase property values. Policy CD-12. Sidewalks or walking paths should be provided along streets in established ., neighborhoods, where sidewalks have not been previously constructed. Sidewalk width should be ample to safely and comfortably accommodate pedestrian traffic and, where practical, match existing sidewalks. Policy CD-15. Infill development should be reflective of the existing character of established neighborhoods even when designed using different architectural styles, and /or responding ., to more urban setbacks, height or lot requirements. Infill development should draw on elements of existing development such as placement of structures, vegetation, and location of entries and walkways, to reflect the site planning and scale of existing areas. ., Policy CD-45. Interpret development standards to support new plats and infill project designs that address privacy and quality of life for existing residents. 2. COMPLIANCE WITH THE UNDERLYING ZONING DESIGNATION: The site is classified Residential-8 du/ac (R-8) on the City of Renton Zoning Map. RMC 4-2-llOA provides development standards for development within the R-8 zoning classification. The project is vested to the R-8 zoning standards prior to the adoption of the Interim R-8 Zoning standards approved through Ordinance 5724 and prior to the new R-8 Zoning standards approved through Ordinance 5758. The project is also vested to the Critical Areas Ordinance prior to the adoption of the updated Critical Areas Ordinance adopted through Ordinance 5757. Exhibit 25 contains the vested RMC that is applicable to the subject project in addition to the standards identified below. The proposal is consistent with the following development standards if all conditions of approval are complied with: Density: The minimum density allowed in the R-8 zone is 4 dwelling units per net acre (du/ac). The maximum density permitted in the R-8 zone is 8.0 du/as. Net density is calculated after the deduction of critical areas, areas intended for public rights-of-way, and private access easements. Calculations for minimum or maximum density that result in a fraction that is 0.50 or greater shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number. Those density calculations resulting in a fraction that is less than 0.50 shall be rounded down to the nearest whole number. Staff Comment: After factoring in all density deductions (public streets, private access easements and critical areas) the site has a net square footage of 89,819 square feet or 2.06 net acres. Specifically, the applicant is proposing lS,028 square feet of road for public right- of-woy dedications and 5,087 square feet of area far the on-site wetland, totaling 20,115 square feet. The total deduction of area for net density calculation is 69,704 square feet. The 9 lot proposal would arrive at a net density of 5.6 dwelling units per acre /9 lots/ 1.6 acres= 5.6 du/ac), which falls within the permitted density range for the R-8 zone. HEX Report 14-001280 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development DOHRN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT Preliminary Plat Report & Decision LUA14-001280, £CF, PP Hearing Date: October 13, 2015 Page 7 of 14 Compliant if Conditions of Approval Met Lot Dimensions: The minimum lot size permitted in the R-8 zoning designation is 4,500 square feet for sites greater than one acre in area. A minimum lot width of 50 feet is required for interior lots and 60 feet for corner lots. Lot depth is required to be a minimum of 65 feet. Staff Comment: As demonstrated in the table above under finding of fact 9, all lots meet the requirements for minimum lot size, width and depth. Setbacks: The minimum front yard setback in the R-8 zone is 15 feet; minimum side yard is 5 feet and, minimum side yard along a street 15 feet for the primary structure; minimum rear yard is 20 feet. Staff Comment: The setback requirements for the proposed lots would be verified at the time of building permit review. The proposed lots appear to contain adequate area to provide all the required setback areas. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that a demolition permit be obtained and all required inspections be completed for the removal of the existing single family residences and accessory structures prior to Final Plat recording, as these structures would not comply with setbacks if permitted to remain on the site. Building Standards: The R-8 zone permits one single family residential structure per lot. Accessory structures are permitted at a maximum number of two per lot with a maximum size of 720 square feet each, or a maximum of one per lot with a maximum of 1,000 square feet. Accessory structures are permitted only when associated with a primary structure located on the same parcel of land. The maximum building height in the R-8 zone is 30 feet. Building height is based on the measurement of the vertical distance from the grade plane to the average height of the roof surface. The grade plane is the average of existing ground level adjoining the building at exterior walls. Where the finished ground level slopes away from the exterior walls, the reference plane shall be established by the lowest points within the area between the building and the lot line, or where the lot line is more than 6 feet from the building, between the building and a point 6 feet from the building. The maximum building coverage in the R-8 zone, for lots larger than 5,000 sf, is 35 percent or 2,500 sf, whichever is greater. The maximum impervious surface area is 75 percent. Staff Comment: The building standards for the proposed Jots would be verified at the time of building permit review. Landscaping: Landscaping is required for all subdivisions including plats. A detailed landscape plan is usually required to be approved prior to issuance of street or utility construction permits. A ten foot-wide on-site landscaped area is required along all public street frontages, with the exception of areas for required crosswalks and driveways. This landscaped area shall be on-site and shall include a mixture of trees, shrubs and ground cover. Two trees are required in the front yard of each lot, when no street trees are provided in front of a residence. A minimum planting strip width between the curb and sidewalk are established according to the street development standards of RMC 4-6-060. Street trees and, at a minimum, groundcover per subsection RMC 4-4-070 L.2, are to be located in this area when present. Spacing standards shall be as stipulated by the Department of Community and Economic Development, provided there shall be a minimum of one street tree planted per address. HEX Report 14-001280 City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development DOHRN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT Preliminary Plat Report & Decision LUA14-001280, £CF, PP Hearing Date: October 13, 2015 Page 8 of 14 Any additional undeveloped right-of-way areas shall be landscaped unless otherwise determined by the Administrator. Any stormwater facilities require a minimum amount of landscaping per RMC 4-4-070H.6. Refer to the City's Approved Tree list and spacing standards available through the Department of Community and Economic Development and on the City's website. In addition, where there is insufficient right-of-way space or no public frontage, street trees are required in the front yard of each lot. Staff Comment: The applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan {Exhibit 8). The proposed landscape plan includes an 8-foot wide planting strip between sidewalks and curb, 15 feet of landscaping around the perimeter of Tract "A", the 10-foot wide on-site planting strip on Lots 1 and 9 along Monterey Pl NE, and is missing the 10-foot wide on-site planting strip along the new proposed access road for the other proposed lots. The landscaping plan proposes 24 street trees and 60 trees generally around the north and west boundaries of the stormwater tract and the southern boundary of the plat. Specific species of plants are not identified although the 60 trees proposed are identified as 2-inch diameter at 9-foot on center spacing. Specific trees species and plants to be provided as part of site improvements would be reviewed as part of construction permit application materials through a Detailed Landscape Plan. Staff would review the required Detailed Landscape Plan for compliance with the City's development standards at time of submittal. The Tract A stormwater tract is identified with a 15-foot wide perimeter landscape strip /Exhibit 7). The submitted conceptual landscape plan identifies trees to be planted in the strip and the Detailed Landscape Plan submitted by the applicant, for future development stages, would be reviewed with applicable development regulations including the Surface Water Design Manual and RMC 4-4-0lOH.6 "Storm Drainage Facility Landscaping." A final detailed landscape plan shall be submitted ta, and reviewed for approval, by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit issuance. The final detailed landscape plan shall comply with the requirements of RMC 4-8-120 and shall include a 10 foot on-site landscape strip along the frontage of all lots. Parking: Pursuant to RMC 4-4-080 each unit is required to accommodate off-street parking for a minimum of two vehicles. Staff Comment: Sufficient area exist, on each lot, to accommodate off-street parking for a minimum of two /2} vehicles. Compliance with individual driveway requirements would be reviewed at the time of building permit review. 3. CRITICAL AREAS: The proposal is consistent with critical area regulations as stated in RMC 4-3-050. Compliant if Conditions of Approval Met Critical Areas: Manage development activities to protect wetlands, aquifer protection areas, fish and wildlife habitat, frequently flooded and geologically hazardous areas as defined by the Growth Management Act and RMC 4-3-050, Critical Area Regulations. Staff Comment: The applicant submitted a critical area report prepared Altmann Oliver Associates LLC {doted September 8, 2014; Exhibit 16} and a geotechnicol report and addendum, dated October 29, 2014 and March 2, 2015, were submitted by Earth Solutions NW, LLC /Exhibit 11). According to the critical area report, there is an onsite wetland area located in the southwest portion of the site {Exhibit 4). According to the geotechnical report ond addendum, the geotechnicol engineer states that there are slopes on the site and a man-made 34% slope in the center of the site. The wetland is classified as a Category 2 wetland, is located on a slope thot slopes generally from south to north and is part of a larger wetland that extends off-site to the south. The on- site portion of the wetland is dominated by grasses, buttercup, and field horsetail and soils in HEX Report 14-001280 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development DOHRN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT Hearing Date: October 13, 2015 Preliminary Plat Report & Decision LUA14-001l80, ECF, PP Page 9 of 14 the wetland are generally saturated near the surface. The critical area report states that the wetland area an the site provides very limited functions due to its position on o slope and low plant species and structural diversity. The wetland area an the subject site is approximately 5,087 square feet and requires a 50-faot critical areas buffer. The applicant has proposed no impacts to the wetland and/or it's buffer. The wetland and associated buffer are proposed to be located in Tract B which will be a Native Growth Protection Area tract {Exhibit 4). Staff recommends, as a condition of approval for the wetlands area, that the common boundary between a native growth protection tract and the abutting land must be permanently identified. This identification shall include permanent wood split rail fence and wood or metal signs on treated or metal posts. Sign locations and size specifications along with fence elevations shall be submitted to, and reviewed for approval, by the Current Planning Project Manager and installed prior to short plat recording. Staff also recommends, os o condition of approval for the wetlands area, that the following note shall appear on the face of the short plat and shall also be recorded as a covenant running with the land on the title of record for all affected Jots on the title: "MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY: All owners of lots created by or benefiting from this City action abutting or including a native growth protection tract are responsible for mointenonce ond protection of the tract. Maintenance includes ensuring that no alterations occur within the tract and that all vegetation remains undisturbed unless the express written authorization of the City hos been received." The submitted geotechnical evaluation report excavated six test pits and the majority of the test pits contacted soil materials characterized os medium dense to dense weathered and unweathered till deposits known os "Alderwood" soils (Exhibit 11). The geotechnical reports state that subject proposol would not increose the threat of geological hozards to adjacent properties beyond pre-development conditions, that the proposal would not adversely impact other critical areas, and that the development can be safely accommodated on the site (Exhibit 11). A protected slope area between 40 and 90 percent grade is identified on the City of Renton Maps (Exhibit 26). Protected slopes per RMC 4-11-190 "Definitions S" states that "Protected slopes" are both 40 percent or greater grade and have a minimum vertical rise of 15 feet. The geotechnical evaluation and addendum provide evaluation of the slope orea {Exhibit 11} based on site visit and the "overall slope height is 16 feet, with a gradient on the order of 30 to 34 percent". Although the height of the slope is approximately 16 feet, the slope is not considered a protected slope becouse the slope is less than 40 percent according to the geotechnica/ evaluation. 4. COMMUNITY ASSETS: The proposal is consistent with the following community asset requirements. Tree Retention: Existing trees shall be retained where feasible. RMC 4-4-130 requires 30 percent of trees to be retained. If the required number of trees cannot be retained, they must be replaced according to RMC 4-4-130H. Staff Comment: The applicant is required to retain 30 percent of the trees located on site that are not located within critical areas, proposed rights-of-way and access easements. Of the 60 significont trees on the site, 12 would be excluded from the retention requirement os they are located in the proposed street improvements ond 8 would be excluded as they ore in the wetland and wetland buffer area and would not be removed. Therefore, based on 40 trees, the applicant is required to retain a minimum of 12 trees or provide for replacement trees. The applicant has proposed to retain two 10-inch diameter fir trees locoted along the HEX Report 14-001280 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development DOHRN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT Preliminary Plat Report & Decision LUA14-001280, ECF, PP Hearing Date: October 13, 2015 Page 10 of 14 southern property line of the site /Exhibit 8). The applicant proposes to plant 60 replacement trees at 2-inch diameter minimum (Exhibit 8} as identified in the Tree Retention Worksheet and would meet the requirement for replacement trees for the R-8 zone. 5. COMPLIANCE WITH SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS: RMC 4-7 Provides review criteria for the subdivisions. The proposal is consistent with the following subdivision regulations if all conditions of approval are complied with: Access: Each lot must have access to a public street or road. Access may be by private access easement street per the requirements of the street standards. The maximum width of single loaded garage driveways shall not exceed 9 feet and double loaded garage driveways shall not exceed 16 feet. Staff Comment: Access to each of the proposed new lots would be provided via a new public dead-end street that provides access to the plat from Monterey Pl NE. The new dead-end street would terminate in a hammerhead at the westerly end of the property where the Compliant if critical areas tract is located /Exhibit 4). Individual driveway curb cuts are proposed to each Conditions of lot /Exhibit 4). Approval Met The southern portion of the hammerhead turnaround can provide access to Lot 5 rother than the proposed curb cut identified at the northeast corner af the site. Reducing the curb cut proposed to Lot 5 by requiring the access point to be from the hammerhead pervious surface can accomplish the requirement to provide access to the lot as the hammerhead is similar to a driveway entronce into the Lot 5 area. Therefore, staff recommends, as a condition of approval, that Lot 5 gain access through the hammerhead turnaround and not through a separate curb cut along the proposed sidewalk. The applicant shall update all future plan sets and identify this requirement. N/A Blocks: Blocks shall be deep enough to allow two tiers of lots. Lots: Width between side lot lines at their foremost points (i.e., the points where the side lot lines intersect with the street right-of-way line) shall not be less than eighty percent ,/ (80%) of the required lot width except in the cases of lots on a street curve or the turning circle of cul-de-sac (radial lots), which shall be a minimum of thirty five feet (35'). Staff Comment: As demonstrated in Exhibit 4, all lots meet the minimum requirements for lot width. Streets: The proposed street system shall extend and create connections between existing streets per the Street Standards outlined in RMC 4-6-060 Street Standards. Alleys are to be considered for R-8 zoned projects per RMC 4-2-llOA, except that the maximum shall be 6 dwelling units per net acre when alleys are considered practical and are not part of the street configuration. Staff Comment: Access to the site is proposed via a new dead-end limited residential access street that would connect with Monterey Pl NE. The new street would split the plat north ta Compliant if south, and provide access ta each of the proposed residential lots. There are few east-west Conditions of through streets that would connect Monterey Pl NE with Lincoln Ave NE to the west that Approval Met could provide a more connected street grid in the vicinity. Staff reviewed the proposal for a potential connection to the west, were the project's proposed dead end would potentially connect with a future thru street ta Lincoln Ave NE. Additionally, staff considered the existing wetland on the subject site that extends onto the abutting property to the west where a potential east-west thru street could be located over time. Given the location of the wetland and its associated buffer on the subject site and the continuation of the wetland onto the abutting property to the west, a thru street is not recommended by staff due to the potential impacts to the critical area. The improvements proposed from the dedications for new public HEX Report 14-001280 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development DOHRN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT Hearing Date: October 13, 2015 Preliminary Plat Report & Decision LUA14-00l280, ECF, PP Page 11 of 14 right-of-way (along Monterey Pl NE and the new street) totals 15,028 square feet (0.35 acres) (Exhibit 4/. In consideration of a plat layout with alleys, the proposal is less than 6 dwelling units per net acre which is a threshold for when alleys should be part of R-8 projects. The proposal is 5. 63 dwelling units per acre. The existing right-of-way width in the collector street Monterey Pl NE is approximately 60 feet. A determination by the City Transportation Division, dated July 25, 2013, provides specific improvements to be made to streets in vicinity of the subject project including Monterey Pl NE (Exhibit 18/. No lots in the proposal would gain access directly from Monterey Pl NE. In order to meet the City's complete street standards and street improvements, the following minimum design standards apply to half-street improvement of Monterey Pl NE: An 11-foot wide travel lane, 5-foot wide bike lane, 0.5-foot wide curb, 8-foot wide landscape strip, 5-foot wide sidewalk, and 1-foot wide clear width bock of sidewalk. A 0.5-foot wide right-of-way dedication along Monterey Pl NE frontage is required by the applicant to provide the required improvements. The applicant is not required to install on 8- foot sidewalk along Monterey Pf NE as required by code (RMC 4-6-060} as noted in the staff advisory notes (Exhibit 7), but rather o 5-foot wide sidewalk would be required. Therefore, staff recommends the applicant provide o street modification request to install a lesser 5- foot wide sidewalk along Monterey Pl NE that shall be reviewed and approved prior to construction permit application. The proposed new limited access residential street that would provide access to each proposed lot is identified with a slope up to 14% (Exhibit 9}. The street slopes from east to west towards the wetland. The limited access residential street is proposed with 20-foot wide paved width for travel lanes and no parking area, 0.5-foot wide curb, 8-foot wide planter strip, and 5-foot wide sidewalk on both sides of the street. A hammerhead turnaround for fire emergency is proposed ot the deod end of the internal access street. Sidewalks would dead-end into the hammerhead portion of the public dead-end street. The stormwoter tract in the northwest corner of the site would be provided access directly from the north portion of the hammerhead dead-end street. ft is also anticipated that the proposed project would result in impacts to the City's street system. In order to mitigate transportation impacts, the applicant would be required to meet code-required frontage improvements, City of Renton's transportation concurrency requirements (Exhibit 27) based upon o test of the citywide Transportation Pion ond pay appropriate Transportation Impact Fees. Currently, this fee is assessed at $2,214.44 per net new single family home (13 x $2,214.44 = $28, 787.72/. This fee is payable to the City at the time of building permit issuance, the fee will be changing in 2016. Street lighting is required per RMC 4-6-0601. Therefore staff recommends, as a condition of approval, that o lighting plan shall be submitted to, and approved by the Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit approval. Relationship to Existing Uses: The proposed project is compatible with existing surrounding uses. Staff Comment: The subject site is bordered by single-family homes to the south, north, east, and west. The properties surrounding the subject site are developed with residential single- family homes and ore designated R-8 on the City's zoning mop. The proposal is similar to existing development patterns in the area and is consistent with the Comprehensive Pion and Zoning Code, which encourage residential infill development. The proposed storm water pond wall and surrounding perimeter landscaping is designed to be compatible with the character of the single-family neighborhood as the exterior wall HEX Report 14-001280 City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development DOHRN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT Preliminary Plot Report & Decision LUA14-001280, ECF, PP Hearing Date: October 13, 2015 Page 12 of 14 height and proposed vegetation would create a screening of the open pond from neighboring properties. The exterior wall of the storm water pond is identified on Exhibit 7 ("Section A-A") where approximately 4 feet of the exterior wall on the westerly side would be above the proposed grade, with the first 2 feet covered by a slope and the upper 2 feet not covered. On the apposite easterly side, the top of the wall of the storm water pond would be approximately at grade plane with the ground. A 15-foot wide landscape perimeter is proposed around the pond, to provide planting area far a vegetated screening of those portions of the pond wall that extend above the surrounding grade plan. To provide an obscuring landscape visual buffer, staff recommends, as a condition of approval, that the landscape buffer around the stormwater pond walls be screened by a "Fully Sight-obscuring Landscaped Visual Buffer" per RMC 4-4-070H that is required to be a minimum 6-foot high screening at plant maturity and one hundred percent sight obscuring. 6. AVAILABILITY AND IMPACT ON PUBLIC SERVICES: ,/ ,/ ,/ Compliant If Conditions of Approval Met Police and Fire: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicates that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development, subject to the condition that the applicant provides Code required improvements and fees. An approved turnaround is required for dead end streets that exceed 150 feet in length and the proposed hammerhead turnaround is acceptable. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.10 per single-family unit and fees change year to year. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Parks: City codes currently do not require open space to be set aside in R-8 zone subdivisions. It is anticipated that the proposed development would generate future demand an existing City parks and recreational facilities and programs. A Parks Impact Fee, based on new single family lots, will be required in order ta mitigate the proposal's potential impacts to City parks and recreational facilities and programs, thereby complying with RMC 4-7-140 Parks and Open Space. The fee is payable to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code. For 2015 the fee is $1,395.25 and fees change year to year. Schools: It is anticipated that the Renton School District can accommodate any additional students generated by this proposal at the following schools: Hazelwood Elementary /7100 116'h Ave SE, Renton), McKnight Middle School /1200 Edmonds Ave NE, Renton), and Hazen High School /1101 Hoquiam Ave NE) /Exhibit 22). RCW 58.17.110/2} provides that no subdivision be approved without making a written finding of adequate provision made for safe walking conditions for students who walk to and from school. The schools where students would attend are not within walking distance and would be eligible for bussing (Exhibit 21). As part of the subject proposal, sidewalks would be constructed along the new residential street and on the project side of Monterey Pl NE. The existing street has painted shoulders where travel lanes are separated from walking areas with the painted line. The new proposed sidewalk improvements by the subject proposal would connect to the existing shoulder areas on the street at the north and to sidewalks at the south where the Taylor Court development is located. A School Impact Fee, based on new single family lats, will also be required in order to mitigate the proposal's potential impacts ta Renton School District. The fee is payable to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of building permit application. Currently, the 2015 fee is assessed at $5,730.00 per single family residence. Storm Water: An adequate drainage system shall be provided for the proper drainage of all surface water. Staff Comment: The subject project is located in the Lake Washington drainage basin. Based HEX Report 14-001280 City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development DOHRN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT Preliminary Plat Report & Decision LUA14-001280, ECF, PP Hearing Date: October 13, 2015 Page 13 of 14 on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Condition and requires a flow control facility sized to match the flow duration of forested conditions. The applicant's engineer has designed a combination detention/water quality pond to be located in a tract at the northwest corner for the site. The stormwater pond would discharge to Lincoln Ave NE through a utility easement across the neighboring property to the west. The applicant submitted a Preliminary Drainage Report {Technical Information Report-TIR}, prepared by Encompass Engineering & Surveying (dated September 12, 2014 and revised an August 13, 2015; Exhibit 10}. According to the TIR, the site storm drainage system has been design according to the standards set forth by the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual and the City of Renton Amendments to the county manual. The proposed detention facility for the site will be an open water pond designed to accommodate both live and dead storage volumes and designed to Flow Control Duration Standards. The facilities will be design to match developed discharge durations to the pre-developed durations for the range from 50% of the 2-year peak flow up to the full 50-year peak flow, while also matching the 2- yr and 10-yr peak flows. Water quality will be provided within the combined detention pond in the form of dead storage. Appropriate individual lot storm water flow control best management practices will be required to be provided by the project. A geotechnical report and addendum for the site was prepared by Earth Solutions, NW, LLC (dated September 18, 2014 and March 2, 2015; Exhibit 11). A SEPA mitigation measure (Exhibit 23) was imposed by the City's Environmental Review Committee (ERC}, requiring that the project construction comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted geotechnical report and associated addendum. The report identifies that soils are Everett Gravelly Sandy loam and Ragnar deposits with Alderwood till also mapped in the vicinity of the site according to King County Soil Survey. Based on the test pits in the field as part of the evaluation of the site, the geotechnical report states that subsurface conditions throughout the site ore relatively consistent and can be characterized as medium dense ta dense weathered and unweathered till deposits known as Alderwood soils. A locally perched groundwater seepage area was observed in one of the six test pits at a depth of 2 feet, otherwise no groundwater was encountered in any of the other text locations. A Construction Stormwater General Permit from Department of Ecology will be required. Finally, the maintenance and operation of the proposed storm drainage facilities will be the responsibility of the City upon recording of the plat. However the maintenance of the vegetation proposed in Tract A would remain the responsibility af the home owners within the subdivision, therefore staff recommends as a condition of approval that the applicant create a Home Owners Association ("HOA") that maintains all landscaping improvements in Tract A. A draft of the HOA shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Renton Project Manager and the City Attorney prior to final Plat recording. Such document shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. Water and Sanitary Sewer: This site is located in Coal Creek Utility District for water and the City af Renton Sewer District service boundaries. A water availability certificate was submitted to the City (Exhibit 20}. Approved water plans from Coal Creek Utility District for ../ water are required far the utility construction plan review . New hydrants shall be installed per Renton's fire department standards ta provide the required coverage of all lots. All plats shall provide separate water service stubs and separate side sewer stubs to each building lot prior to recording of the plat. System development charges {SOC} for sewer are payable at the time the utility construction permit HEX Report 14-001280 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development DOHRN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT Hearing Date: October 13, 2015 is issued. I J. RECOMMENDATIONS: Preliminary Plat Report & Decision LUA14-001280, ECF, PP Page 14 of 14 Staff recommends approval of the Dohrn Meadows Preliminary Plat, LUA14-001280, ECF, PP (as depicted in Exhibit 4) subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measure issued as part of the Determination of Nonsignificance-Mitigated, review by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on September 21, 2015 (Exhibits 1 & 23). 2. The applicant shall obtain a demolition permit(s) and complete all required inspections for the removal of the existing single family residences and accessory structures located on the subject site prior to Final Plat recording. 3. The common boundary between a native growth protection tract and the abutting land must be permanently identified. This identification shall include permanent wood split rail fence and wood or metal signs on treated or metal posts. Sign locations and size specifications along with fence elevations shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager and installed prior to short plat recording. 4. The following note shall appear on the face of the short plat and shall also be recorded as a covenant running with the land on the title of record for all affected lots on the title: "MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY: All owners of lots created by or benefiting from this City action abutting or including a native growth protection tract are responsible for maintenance and protection of the tract. Maintenance includes ensuring that no alterations occur within the tract and that all vegetation remains undisturbed unless the express written authorization of the City has been received." 5. A final detailed landscape plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit issuance. The final detailed landscape plan 5hall comply with the requirements of RMC 4-8-120 and shall include a 10 foot on-site landscape strip along the frontage of all lots. 6. The vehicle access point to Lot 5 shall be through the hammerhead rather than a separate driveway curb cut and the applicant shall update all future plan sets for construction and building permits with this requirement. 7. A street lighting plan shall be submitted at the time of construction permit review for review and approval by the City's Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit issuance. 8. The applicant shall submit a street modification request to the City to install a 5-foot wide sidewalk along Monterey Pl NE instead of the required 8-foot wide sidewalk. The street modification shall be reviewed and approved prior to construction permit application or an 8 foot wide sidewalk shall be provided. 9. The stormwater pond wall in Tract A shall be screened with landscaping, meeting the minimum standards of RMC 4-4-070H.3 "Fully Sight-Obscuring Landscaped Visual Buffer." 10. The applicant shall create a Home Owners Association ("HOA") that maintains all landscaping improvements in Tract "A", all maintenance and repairs of the split rail fence and signage about the wetland, and any and all other common improvements. A draft of the HOA documents shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Renton Project Manager and the City Attorney prior to Final Plat recording. Such document shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. HEX Report 14-001280 EXHIBITS Project Name: Project Number: Dorhn Meadows Preliminary Plat LUA14-001280, ECF, PP Date of Hearing Staff Contact Project Contact/Applicant Proj~ct Location 10/13/2015 Kris Sorensen Joe Pruss; Civic Development 3815 & 3767 Monterey Pl NE Associate Planner Chad Allen; Encompass Eng. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit 1 ERC Report Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 Exhibit 6 Exhibit 7 Exhibit 8 Exhibit 9 Exhibit 10 Exhibit 11 Exhibit 12 Exhibit 13 Exhibit 14 Exhibit 15 Exhibit 16 Exhibit 17 Exhibit 18 Exhibit 19 Exhibit 20 Exhibit 21 Exhibit 22 Exhibit 23 Exhibit 24 Exhibit 25 Exhibit 26 Exhibit 27 Zoning and Neighborhood Map Aerial Preliminary Plat Plan, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/12/15 Boundary, Topographic Survey, Tree Inventory, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/12/15 Preliminary Grading Plan, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/12/15 Generalized Utility Plan, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/12/15 Preliminary Cutting, Land Clearing, Landscape Plan, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/12/15 Preliminary Street Profile, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/12/15 Revised Preliminary Technical Drainage Information Report, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/13/15 Geotechnical Evaluation, Earth Solutions NW LLC, date 9/18/14 and Addendum to the Geotechnical Evaluation prepared by Earth Solutions, NW LLC, date 3/2/15 Project Narrative Environmental Checklist Tree Retention Worksheet Density Worksheet Wetland Reconnaissance Evaluation, Altman Oliver & Associates, date 9/8/14 Advisory Notes -City Staff City Transportation Determination for Monterey Pl NE, date 7/25/13 Report to Hearing Examiner Coal Creek Utility District Certificate of Water Availability, date 10/16/14 Renton School District and Bus Eligibility Renton School District Capacity, email date 10/10/14 Environmental "SEPA" Determination, ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Affidavit of posting and mailing Vested Development Standards and Critical Areas Regulations City of Renton -Slopes Transportation Concurrency -----~RentOil ® EXHIBIT 1 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Renton® ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT ERC MEETING DATE: Project Name: Project Number: Project Manager: Owner(s): Applicant: Contact: Project Location: Project Summary: Exist. Bldg. Areo SF: Site Area: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: September 21, 2015 Dohrn Meadows Preliminary Plat LUA14-001280 ECF, PP Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner Natalie Dorhn & John Wade; 220S W 1361h St; Broomfield CO 80023; and Gregg Dohrn; 2129 S Rockwood Blvd; Spokane WA 99203 Joe Pruss; Civic Development; 18211 2401 h Ave SE; Maple Valley WA 98038 Chad Allen; Encompass Eng.; 165 NE Juniper St, Suite 201; Issaquah WA 98027 3815 & 3767 Monterey Pl NE The applicant is requesting Hearing Examiner Preliminary Plat review and Environmental (SEPA) review for a 9-lot single family residential subdivision. The 89,819 square foot (2.06-acre) site is a combination of two parcels located at 3815 and 3767 Monterey Pl NE within the Residential-8 (R-8) zone and Kennydale Community Planning Area. Proposed single-family lot sizes range from approximately 5,201 square feet to 8,270 square feet. Two existing single family homes, one on each parcel, would be demolished. Approximately 15,028 square feet is proposed to be dedicated for a new public street. Two tracts are proposed, one for the subdivision stormwater facility at approximately 9,404 square feet in the northwest corner of the site and the other tract would be a 14,213 square-foot critical areas tract containing 5,087 square feet of a Category 2 wetland in the southwest corner of the site. The proposal has a net density of 5.63 dwelling units per net acre. Steep slopes are located on the site. Eight trees are located in the critical areas tract and would be retained. Approximately 60 new trees would be added to the site. The project would result in approximately 4,500 cubic yards of excavation for site grading and road and plat construction and fill would be required for future home building pads. Street frontage improvements would be provided along Monterey Pl NE. A new internal dead-end road is proposed with curb, gutter and sidewalk that would provide access to the lots with a connection to Monterey Pl NE. The applicant submitted a drainage report, geotechnical report, wetlands reconnaissance, environmental checklist, and a tree inventory and retention plan. 5,580 sf to be demolished 89,819 sf (2.06 acres) Proposed New Bldg. Area (footprint): Proposed New Bldg. Area (gross): Total Building Area GSF: Eventual development of new homes None Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M). ERC Report 14-00lZBOvZ Final City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development DOHRN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT , Report of September 21, 2015 Project Location Map Environmental Review Committee Report WA14-D01280 ECF, PP Page 2 of 7 L PART O~E: PROJECT ~ESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND ... _ _ ···1 The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review in order to subdivide a 2.06-acre site into 9 single-family lots and two tracts, one for storm drainage and the other for wetland critical area tract, resulting in a density of 5.63 du/ac. In addition to Environmental Review, a Preliminary Plat review has also been requested. The plat would be located on two existing parcels located at 3815 Monterey Pl NE (PID 3345700181) and 3767 Monterey Pl NE (PID 3345700182) north of NE 37'h Pl on the west side of Monterey Pl NE. The applicant has acquired an easement across a westerly abutting parcel to provide storm and sewer connection from the proposed plat to City of Renton utilities on Lincoln Ave NE. The property is in the Residential Medium Density (RMD) Comprehensive Plan land use designation and the Residential-8 (R-8) zoning designation. The proposed subdivision would result in 9 lots ranging in size from 4,700 square feet to 8,270 square feet. The project is vested to the R-8 zoning standards prior to the adoption of the Interim R-8 Zoning standards approved through Ordinance 5724 and prior to the new R-8 Zoning standards approved through Ordinance 5758. The project is also vested to the Critical Areas Ordinance prior to the adoption of the updated Critical Areas Ordinance adopted through Ordinance 5757. The subject site is bordered by single-family homes to the west and north and a single-family subdivision called Taylor Court to the south. Access to all lots identified would be from a new dead-end public street proposed in the center of the site. The new street would extend from Monterey Pl NE and would dead-end into a hammerhead to the west. The street would also provide access to the proposed storm drainage facility in the northwest corner of the site. No impacts to the existing Category 2 wetland or SO-foot buffer are anticipated by the proposal. Street frontage improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk, and a bike lane along Monterey Pl NE. Monterey is classified as a collector street and has no existing frontage improvements. The site grade descends to the west-northwest with approximately 44 feet of elevation relief from the southeast corner to the northwest corner. The average slope is approximately 9 percent, with slopes ranging from 3 to 60 percent. Steep slopes run east to west in the south central area near proposed Lots 6 and 7 of the site. Preparation of the project site would result in approximately 4,500 cubic yards of soil stripping and for stormwater pond excavation. Excavated soils are proposed for re-use for street and plat construction. Structural import fill material from local sources would be required for building pads. ERC Report 14-001280vZ Final City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development DOHRN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT Environmental Review Committee Report LUA14-001ZBO ECF, PP Report of September 21, 2015 Page 3 of7 The site is a combination of two single-family residential properties, with existing homes on each lot that would be removed as part of site preparation. Both existing single-family homes and a detached represent approximately 5,580 square feet of building area. The site contains grassy and treed areas including a wetland and 60 significant trees. Of the 60 significant trees inventoried, 12 are located where the new public right-of-way and street improvements are proposed, 8 would remain in the wetland tract area, with 2 proposed to be retained outside the wetland area. The applicant proposes approximately 60 new trees around the site, primarily around the stormwater tract in the northwest corner of the site and along the southerly boundary of the site. New street trees would also be planted in planter strips within right-of- ways. The applicant provided a wetland reconnaissance report by Altmann Oliver Associates, LLC, dated September 8, 2014. Based on the biological investigation, part of a Category 2 wetland is located in the southwest corner of the site and extends onto abutting properties. A new critical areas tract of approximately 14,213 square feet is proposed. This would contain approximately 5,087 square feet ofthe Category 2 wetland with the rest of the area proposed as the required critical areas buffer. I PART TWO: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In compliance with RCW 43.21C.240, the following environmental (SEPA) review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. A. Environmental Threshold Recommendation Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials: Issue a DNS-M with a 14-day Appeal Period. 8. Mitigation Measures C. 1. The applicant shall be required to comply with the recommendations included in the Geotechnical Evaluation, Earth Solutions NW LLC, dated September 18, 2014 and Addendum to the Geotechnical Evaluation prepared by Earth Solutions, NW LLC dated March 2, 2015, for the duration of clearing, grading, site and building construction. Exhibits Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 Exhibit 6 Exhibit 7 Exhibit 8 ERC Report Zoning and Neighborhood Map Aerial Preliminary Plat Plan, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/12/15 Boundary, Topographic Survey, Tree Inventory, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/12/15 Preliminary Grading Plan, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/12/15 Generalized Utility Plan, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/12/15 Preliminary Cutting, Land Clearing, landscape Plan, Encompass Engineering & City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development DOHRN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT Environmental Review Committee Report LUA14-001280 ECF, PP Report of September 21, 2015 Page4of7 Exhibit 9 Exhibit 10 Exhibit 11 Exhibit 12 Exhibit 13 Exhibit 14 Exhibit 15 Exhibit 16 Exhibit 17 Exhibit 18 Surveying, date 8/12/15 Preliminary Street Profile, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/12/15 Revised Preliminary Technical Drainage Information Report, Encompass Engineering & Surveying, date 8/13/15 Geotechnical Evaluation, Earth Solutions NW LLC, date 9/18/14 and Addendum to the Geotechnical Evaluation prepared by Earth Solutions, NW LLC date 3/2/15 Project Narrative Environmental Checklist Tree Retention Worksheet Density Worksheet Wetland Reconnaissance and Evaluation Advisory Notes -City Staff City Transportation Determination for Monterey Pl NE, dated 7/25/13 D. Environmental Impacts The Proposal wos circulated ond reviewed by various City Departments and Divisions to determine whether the opplicont has adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to occur in conjunction with the proposed development. Staff reviewers have identified that the proposal is likely to have the following probable impacts: 1. Earth Impacts: The site grade descends to the west-northwest with approximately 44 feet of elevation relief from the southeast corner of the subject site to the northwest corner. The northern half of the subject site has a gentle slope to from east to west. In the south central area of the site, is a steep slope, identified in the geotechnical evaluation as a broken slope feature that is limited in extent and that appears to have been created in part from previous grading activities associated with the existing development (Exhibit 11, page 1). Deducting the wetland tract area of approximately 14,213 square feet, more than 1-1/2 acres would be cleared for the development of the plat. Preparation of the project site would result in approximately 4,500 cubic yards of soil stripping and excavation for the stormwater detention pond (Exhibit 13, page 3). Excavated materials would be re-used on-site where possible. Structural fill would be imported from local sources for building pads. Because the area to be cleared and graded is greater than one acre, the applicant will need to apply for and receive a Washington State Department of Ecology clear and grade permit prior to construction permit issuance. The applicant submitted a Geotechnical Evaluation prepared by Earth Solutions, NW LLC dated September 18, 2014, and an Addendum to the Geotechnical Evaluation prepared by Earth Solutions, NW LLC dated March 2, 2015 (Exhibit 11). The Addendum responds to City staff comments and states that there are no coal mine hazards or seismic hazards on the site. The Addendum also clarifies that the 16-foot tall slope with approximately 34% gradient in the center portion of the site is a man-made slope (Exhibit 11, Addendum). The geotechnical engineer states that the proposed development will not increase the threat of geological hazards to adjacent property beyond pre-development conditions and that it is their opinion that the proposal will not adversely impact other critical areas and that the development proposal can be safely City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development DOHRN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT Report of September 21, 2015 Environmental Review Committee Report LUA14-001280 ECF, PP Page 5 of7 accommodated on the subject site (Exhibit 11, Addendum). Based on the recommendations included in the provided report, staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the applicant comply with the recommendations included in the provided Geotechnical Evaluation during clearing, grading, site and building construction. Earth Solutions excavated six test pits across the project site (Exhibit 11). The majority of the test pits contacted soil materials characterized as medium dense to dense weathered and unweathered till deposits known as Alderwood soils (Exhibit 11, page 2). According to the report, existing fill on the site is localized and relatively shallow, extending to depths of about two feet with relative density of the native till deposits increasing with depth, exhibiting medium dense to dense characteristics at depths of roughly two to three feet. The Geotechnical Evaluation also analyzed groundwater levels in all test pits. Groundwater seepage was observed in one test pit location at a depth of two feet (Exhibit 11, page 2). Groundwater was not encountered at any of the other test pit locations. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall be required to comply with the recommendations included in the Geotechnical Evaluation, Earth Solutions NW LLC, dated September 18, 2014 and Addendum to the Geotechnical Evaluation prepared by Earth Solutions, NW LLC dated March 2, 2015 during clearing, grading, site and building construction. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Review Regulations. 2. Water a. Wetlands Impacts: The applicant provided a wetland reconnaissance and delineation report prepared by Altmann Oliver Associates LLC, dated September 8, 2014 (Exhibit 16). The report states that a site reconnaissance was conducted on May 12, 2014 and one wetland was identified and delineated in the southwest area of the subject site as depicted on the submitted site survey (Exhibit 5). The wetland extends off-site and was determined to be a Category 2 wetland according to City of Renton Critical Areas Regulations and is part of the same wetland that was previously determined to be located on the site of the Taylor Court Short Plat (LUA05-082). The portion of the wetland on- site is an approximate size of 5,087 square feet. With the required 50-foot buffer for Category 2 wetlands, the critical areas tract would be approximately 14,213 square feet as identified on the plat layout (Exhibit 4). The wetland is located on a slope and is part of a larger wetland that extends onto abutting properties to the south and to the west (Exhibit 16). The area where the wetland is located slopes from south to north approximately 16 feet in elevation change with an approximate 12 percent slope. The on-site portion of the wetland consists of a mowed pasture/lawn dominated by low growing vegetation of grasses, buttercup, and field horsetail. Eight trees located in the wetland and buffer area consist of firs, alder, and apple trees. The Altmann Oliver report describes soils within the wetland as generally saturated near the surface, and further states that surface runoff appears to infiltrate near the toe of the slope along the western property line (Exhibit 16). As a sloped wetland, there is not substantial stormwater storage capability (Exhibit 16). And, because the wetland and buffer have been mowed, the plant community limits the wetlands ability to maintain downstream water quality. City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development DOHRN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT Report of September 21, 2015 Environmental Review Committee Report LUA14-00lZ80 ECF, PP Page 6 of 7 Altmann Oliver states that the wetland provides for very limited function, providing low wildlife habitat. The wetland and buffer will be placed within a protective critical areas tract as part of the project. As a condition of preliminary plat approval, staff will recommend that a split rail fence and signage be installed to define the wetland buffer boundary. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: Not applicable b. Storm Water Impacts: A drainage plan and revised preliminary drainage report prepared by Encompass Engineering was for the project (Exhibit 7 and 10). Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Condition. A combined detention/ water quality pond is proposed to meet the detention and water quality needs of the project within a tract in the northwest corner of the site (Exhibit 4). The proposed facility will be a public storm water facility with a connection through an easement on the westerly abutting property with a connection to City storm facilities within Lincoln Ave NE. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: Not applicable 3. Vegetation Impacts: The site is currently covered with grassy and treed areas and other vegetation where the existing homes, gravel driveways, and accessory buildings are not located (Exhibit 5). The site is currently covered with vegetation including low growing groundcover and areas with mature evergreen and deciduous trees (Exhibit 5). As stated in the Environmental Checklist, the site would be approximately 58 percent impervious surface following full site development with the built-out lots and street improvements (Exhibit 13, page 3). The applicant is required to retain 30 percent of the trees located on site that are not located within critical areas, proposed rights-of-way and access easements. The mix of trees on the subject site is pine, fir, apple, cotton, alder, walnut, and holly species. Of the 60 significant trees on the site, 12 would be excluded for the proposed street improvements and 8 would be excluded as they are in the proposed wetland and wetland buffer area and would not be removed. Therefore, the applicant would be required to retain a minimum of 12 trees or provide for replacement trees. The applicant has proposed to retain two 10-inch diameter fir trees located along the southern property line of the site (Exhibit 8). The applicant proposes to plant 60 replacement trees at 2-inch diameter minimum (Exhibit 8). Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation needed. Nexus: Not applicable 4. Transportation Impacts: The proposed project would result in impacts to the City's street system as there would be 9 future residential homes on the proposed lots, where there have been two homes developed in the past. In order to mitigate transportation impacts the applicant would be required to pay an appropriate Transportation Impact Fee per City Code and prior to the issuance of building permits. City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development DOHRN MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT Report of September 21, 2015 Environmental Review Committee Repon LUA14-001280 ECF, PP Page 7 of 7 The proposed preliminary plat is located on the west side of Monterey Pl NE in an area with nearby rolling hills, steep slopes, and previously constructed subdivisions on hills. There are few east-west through streets that would connect Monterey Pl NE with Lincoln Ave NE to the west that could provide a more connected street grid in the vicinity. Staff reviewed the proposal for a potential connection to the west, were the project's proposed dead end would potentially connect with a future thru street to Lincoln Ave NE. Additionally, staff considered the existing wetland on the subject site that extends onto the abutting property to the west where a potential east-west thru street could be located over time. Given the location of the wetland and its associated buffer on the subject site and the continuation of the wetland onto the abutting property to the west, a thru street is not recommended by staff. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation needed. Nexus: Not applicable E. Comments of Reviewing Departments The proposal has been circulated to City Department and Division Reviewers. Where applicable, their comments have been incorporated into Exhibit 17 Advisory Notes to Applicant/Review Comments. ,/ Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File and may be attached to this report. The Environmental Determination decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within the 14-day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-680). Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing together with the required fee to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, on or before 5:00 p.m. on October 9, 2015. RMC 4-8-110 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner and additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -ih Floor, (425) 430-6510. w ..., u I I I I I I ,// I I I I I II I I I I / / R-, I I I I --' I I I I ZONING MAP BOOK PLANNING -TECHNICAL SERVICES PRINTED DATE: 10/02/2013 This document is a i,aphic representation, not ~want98d to survey accisao::y, a,d ts based oo the besi inlormation avail.able as of the date shown ThiS map is intended !Cf City display purposesontv. Community & Economic Development C.E."Cfoi/l_V"_ -'.,!o.,...,,.,,_,,, :;,11,"":,--, ----·--f1:,_'''~··;, - EXHIBIT 2 CA l R-10 R-8 ~ N 39TH PL R-8 R-8 N 39TH S R-8 PRIVATE RD N3 R-8 [ R=ll R-8 R-1 R-8 R-8 R-8 D4W05 T23N R5E W 112 0 420 Ja....;.'..-/ 840 I Feet C4W 1:9.490 32 T24N R5E W 112 Page5ofS0 City Llmlbl D (CV) Centa" Village D (R-B) RasidenUal Bdu/ac CJ RENTON D (IH) lnOOsbial Heavy c:J (RC) Resaurce Conserva~on Zoning Designation D !ILi ln00$trial Light c:J (RM-F) Residential Multi-Fami~ D {CA) CommercialArterrar D (IM} Industrial Vii!dium D (RM-T) Rasi. r,,tilti-Famlly Tradttlooal c:J (CO) Center DownlDwn CJ (R·l) Residential 1du/ac CJ (RM-U) Resi. Multi-Family lxban Center c:J (CN) Commac:ial Neigl-borhoad CJ (R-10) Residential 10du/a:: c:J ('RMH) Residential Mariu1adllred Homes [:J(COJ Commercial Office D (R-14) Residen~al 14du/i,; 0(UC.N1) Urbai Center Nllth 1 D (COR] CommerciaL'Olf,ce/Residental D (R-4) Residential 4du/ac c:J (UC-N2) Urblll Center Ncrth 2 12 m "' "' ---< ~ z ;o "' m m -"' N 1 ; None ~ I -----~I 0 1--~ 256 0 128 I 256 Feel : CityofR:.emon. Finance & IT Division i I EXHIBIT 3 City and County Boundary Addresses Parcels , I T'-!IS M . .;P ·S NO.,.-;O BE USED FO~ NA~IGA'I~~ -----=::1o"':":~.::-=i -~- ' 1 i I --, ,-1 l 1 1!,J 1' I ' I -'r:t-r• ' i ~ . Uo I ),, •' / ' ' I ,• ' I ' ,, I ,~- ' I ,, ' I .l Y1d A'l::J'rlN/W/13~d EXHIBIT 'f -i I• " I SMOGV3W N~HOQ i • ' i .~. Hil ------------~-------i _______ _ ' L 13S 3nN3AY 4lim) ____ ~ 2_8_NYW111H / / / / ------_J g.,,., -·---~ =-,.~~--= ------, I I -------- ,..~.---.-,.~- I '' ' I I • ~ --L~ I I ' I • ' . I I ' ----1 ' 1 ' ----I ' ...... ' . . t ' ----.. ~:.-:::-=:::: ' "'" .,,, ... L _·.....-_ -· • ' ' I ' ' .. I ' ' I N'rfld A~O.LN3/\NI 33cJ.1. "ii A31\~ns :JIHdWDOdO..UA~aNnoe S1''1001;f3'V'i N~HOO l3S 3flN3AV 1m:1i1 ___ ~_!B_NYWlllH ,,,.,t .,, ...• -· • • EXHIBIT 5 ... 1:,Bu ~ i ~ i ~i:H~~tt~: .;~;HHHHHl;~, ~ ~ ·,',~ ~=-~-, ·,~;,·,'a";~: ~, ~~ ',:,,,." "a; ~:,,,., ',. '•. ' J l ' \: ·\ . ' • ' , ..... 1.·. "' :: II I 1 ' i ' ' ' ' ,, I ,, ' I ,, ' I ,, ' J ' ' 'l.,~ • ' ' [ ' I ./ ' j , . ----· < N-----·-:a:::-ao N'tfld f>NIQ~f) ),Jf'fll/Wfl3~d ! SM001t3W N~HOO EXHIBIT6 I ---~ __ ~~B_NVW111H --·· :(~ ~ ~~ I i1i \U ' ' -~--------~_:_ __ _j ~,· • N~d A.J.111.J.n a3z1,~ vc3N3tJ SMOOIRW N~HOO ' 11 : I • ' I i ' '~ ' i.11 , •I I, -:-=-- EXHIBIT 7··~"' 1------- _,. __ .. -·---~ ,,, "" !:! !:~:-;.~! ~,: ~ :-: :-): ; ! NY?d 3d'v';JSQNV1/VNl~fV37:J ON'vl l:JNJJ..Ln:J 33~1 ,Uiv'NIW/73~d SMOQ\f'3W Nl:JHOO EXHIBIT 8 t.dBU~ • • 0 . "' : i 11! i ,--- ·!! e L-'--a---..--c= ·' ir X /~/ - : ,, ' :11 ' . ,. '( 31/dOl:ld 13~1S J..'tf1NIW/1~d ', ' ' SMOO\f3W M:IHOQ \:~ ... --- -.;,..i..,-~ .. ~."3 ' : ' ' • ,; =I EXHIBIT 9. II • • • • I I I • I I I • I ' I I I I EXHIBIT 10 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT for DOHRN MEADOWS City of RENTON 3815 and 3767 Monterey Place NE September 12, 2014 //Zet.111ED Q/11/15 Encompass Engineering & Surveying, Job No. 13690 .. t~IJG 1 -_! Cf-ti.-{tf Prepared bv: Encomoass ~ ~ ENGINEERING & SljRVEYING l,..,""" West.em Washington DMslan 165 i\iE 1uniper Street. 5utte 20! • lssaQ!mh, WA 98027 • Phone: (425) 592-WSO • Fax: ('17~J 191-JQSj Eas~m Washlngtoo Dfvls/or, I D8 E:ist 2nd Street• Cle Elurn, WA 98922 • Phone: (509) 674-l'IJJ • Fax: (509) 574-7419 Prepared for. CIVIC DEVELOPMENT Joe Pruss 18211 240'h Avenue SE Maple Vally, WA 98038 Entire Document Available Upon Request / September 18, 2014 ES-3581 ( Civic Develogment 18211 -240h Avenue Southeast Maple Valley, Washington 98038 Attention: Mr. Joe Pruss EXHIBIT 11 Subject: Geotechnical Evaluation Dohrn Meadows Short Plat 3815 and 3767 Monterey Place Northeast Renton, Washington Reference: Encompass Engineering Site Plan and Survey King County Soil Survey (NRCS Mapping) Dear Mr. Pruss: Earth Solutions NW LLC In accordance with your request, Earth Solutions NW, LLC (ESNW) has prepared this report and geotechnical evaluation for the proposed development. The project site is located along Monterey Place Northeast in the Kennydale area of Renton, Washington. Development plans include nine building lots and related infrastructure improvements. The attached test pit location plan illustrates the property limits with existing site features and topography. Existing residential developments are located to the north, south, and west of the site. Monterey Place Northeast borders the site to the east. The subject property is currently developed with two residential structures and related outbuildings which will be removed as part of the proposed development. The referenced site plan identifies a wetland tract and stormwater facility tract along the western site boundary. Based on site reconnaissance during the subsurface investigation phase of our evaluation, overall stability throughout the site is characterized as good. No indications of soil instability or areas of severe erosion were identified. An isolated (broken) slope feature exists throughout the south-central area of the site, and is limited in extent. This feature appears to have been created in part from previous grading activities associated with the existing development. No indications of soil instability were noted along this existing feature. Entire Document Available Upon Request / March 2, 2015 ES-3581 ' Earth Solutions N\V LLC Civic Develo~ment 18211 -240 ~ Avenue Southeast Maple Valley, Washington 98038 Attention: Subject: Reference: Dear Mr. Pruss: Mr. Joe Pruss Addendum Geotechnical Report and Response To Review Comments Dohrn Meadows Short Plat 3815 and 3767 Monterey Place Northeast Renton, Washington City of Renton Review Comments Dated December 18, 2014 Encompass Engineering Topographic Survey Dated September 12, 2014 Earth Solutions NW, LLC Geotechnical Evaluation ES-3581, dated September 18, 2014 In accordance with your request, Earth Solutions NW, LLC (ESNW) has reviewed the referenced City of Renton review comments. The city review comments pertinent to the geotechnical aspects of the project are provided below, followed by our response. City of Renton Comment -"Please update your geotechnical report in the same format of required content as listed under Geotechnical Report in RMC 4-8-120.D.7". ESNW Response -We have reviewed RMC 4-8-120.D.7. Given the level of proposed development activities (small residential plat) and the findings of the geotechnical investigation, the previously submitted report (ES-3581, dated September 18, 2014) contains the relevant "report sections" as detailed in RMC 4-8-120.D.7. The site does not contain coal mine or seismic hazards, and shoreline considerations do not apply. However, for clw~l"v~t,ect to geological hazards, the following is provided: K~t., '-' Entire Document Available Upon Request I '11 ... -r,~!:..: ~1: ~·--= DOHR.i"i MEADOWS PLAT PROJECT NARRATIVE • Project name, size and location of site: EXHIBIT 12 The Dohrn Meadows Plat is located at 3815 & 3767 Monterey Pl NE, Tax Parcels 334570-0181 & 334570-0182. The total area of the site is 89 ,8 I 9 sq. ft. (gross) • Land use permits required for proposed project: Preliminary Plat approval. • Zoning description of the site and adjacent properties: The current zoning of the property is R-8. The adjacent property is zoned R-8. Property to the north, south is single family residential (R- 8). Property to the east is unincorporated King County. • Current use of the site and any existing improvements: Tax Parcel 334570-0181 contains a house, detached garage and sports court. Tax Parcel 334570-0182 contains a house and shed. • Special site features (i.e., wetlands, water bodies, steep slopes): Wetland on the southwest corner of the site. There are no known categorized steep slopes on site. • Statement addressing soil type and drainage conditions: According to the NRCS King County are soils report, the site is approximately 15% Everett, Gravelly Sandy Loam (EvC), 61 % Ragnar-Indianola association, sloping (RdC), and 23% Alderwood gravelly sandy loam (AgD). • Proposed use of the property and scope of the proposed development: Proposed 9-lot single-family residential development of two existing tax parcels. ( :-:--l·, • For plats indicate the proposed number, net density, and range of sizes of the new lots: Nine lots, with lot sizes of smallest 5,201 sq ft, to the largest of 8,270 sq ft and 9,405 sq ft with a density of 5.625 units per acre. • Access: Lots I through 8 will access to proposed road that will access on to Monterey Pl NE, Lot 9 will access directly on to Monterey Pl NE • Proposed off-site improvements (i.e., installation of sidewalks, fire hydrants, sewer main, etc.): Curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscaping the property frontage. A sewer will need to be extended to the property • Total estimated constmction cost and estimated fair market value of the proposed project: Construction cost of about $150,000 and an estimated fair market value of $1,000,000 ±. • Estimated quantities and type of materials involved if any fill or excavation is proposed: Grading will be required for roads, pond and building pads. Approximately 4,500 cu.yds. of stripping material and pond excavation will be generated for road and plat construction. Structural fill material from local sources will be required for building pads. • Number, type and size of any trees to be removed: Thirty percent of trees required to be retained=>l2 trees. 12 trees will be retained or replaced. There will be (50) 8" -40" deciduous and conifer trees removed with this project. • Explanation of any land to be dedicated to the City: Onsite access road. • Any proposed job shacks, sales trailers, and/or model homes: NIA • Any proposed modifications being requested: None. • Distance in feet from the wetland or stream to the nearest area of work: 500'+ i PLANNINC EXHIBIT 13 ENVIRONMENT AL l,MC\.,l'\.L1"T City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases. you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in the checklist to the words "project,' "applicant." and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. p Er: • · Entire Document H:\CED\Data\Forms-Templa!es\Self-Help Handouts\ Available Upon Request . , Q6/09 City of Renton TREE RETE WORKS~ EXHIBIT 14 1. Total number of trees over 6" in diameter1 on project site: 1. __ 6_o ___ trees 2. Deductions: Certain trees are excluded from the retention calculation: Trees that are dead, diseased or dangerous2 o Trees in proposed public streets 12 Trees in proposed private access easements/tracts o Trees in critical areas3 and buffers s trees trees trees trees Total number of excluded trees: 3. Subtract line 2 from line 1: 2. 3. ___ 2_0 ___ trees ___ 4=-0'---trees 4. Next, to determin_e the number of trees that must be retained 4 , multiply line 3 by: 0.3 in zones RG, R-1, R-4, or R-8 0.1 in all other residential zones 0.05 in all commercial and industrial zones 4. ____ 1_2 __ trees 5. List the number of 6" or larger trees that you are proposing 5 to retain 4: 5. 2 trees 6. Subtract line 5from line 4/or trees to be replaced: 6. ____ 1_0 __ trees (If line 6 is less than zero, stop here. No replacement trees are required). 7. Multiply line 6 by 12" for number of required replacement inches: 7. 120 inches 8. Proposed size of trees to meet additional planting requirement: 8 2" . h {Minimum 2" caliper trees required) . -------IOC 9S 9. Divide line 7 by line B for number of replacement trees 6 : per tree (it remainder ts .5 or greater, round up to the next wllole number) 9. 60 trees Measured at chest height 2 Dead, diseased or dangerous trees must be certified as such by a forester, registered landscape arctiitect, or certified arborist, and approved by the City. 3 Critical Areas, such as wetlands, streams, floodplains and protected slopes, are defined in Section 4-3-050 of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC). ' Count only those trees to be retained outside of critical areas and buffers. 5 The City may require modification of the tree retention plan ta ensure retention of the maximum number of trees per AMC 4·4-130H7a 6 Inches of street trees. inches of trees added to critical areas/buffers. and inches of trees retained on site that are less than 6" but are greater than 2" can be used to meet the tree replacement requirement. -~ - H: \CED\Data \Fonns.-Temp !ates \Sd f-Help HandoutsiPlann i ng\ T reeRetention Worksheet.doc ~'(( 12/08 EXHIBIT 15 DENS11 WORKSHt:t: I City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 1. Gross area of property: 1. 89.819 square feet 2. Deductions: Certain areas are excluded from density calculations. These include: Public streets** Private access easements** Critical Areas* Total excluded area: 3. Subtract line 2 from line 1 for net area: 4. Divide line 3 by 43,560 for net acreage: 5. Number of dwelling units or lots planned: 6. Divide line 5 by line 4 for net density: 15.028 square feet 0 square feet 5,087 square feet 2. 20,115 square feet 3. 69.704 square feet 4. 1.60 acres 5. 9 units/lots 6. 5.625 = dwelling units/acre *Critical Areas are defined as "Areas determined by the City to be not suitable for development and which are subject to the City's Critical Areas Regulations including very high landslide areas, protected slopes, wetlands or floodways." Critical areas buffers are not deducted/excluded. •• Alleys (public or private) do not have to be excluded. f. --r. c' l Z. 1BHI DAT A'dobs (J)\ l 3\13690 Pruss\DOCS\Pre!iminary Plat Submittal\Dens1ty Worksheet I.doc 03lo8 / ( EXHIBIT 16 Altmann Olive1 J-\.Ssoc1ates, LLC 1AOA ' r• I \', " . -, ~ ;,, 1--', ; ; :. 1 ·;,,11 En, in)nllJ:t·nLtl Pbnni11g S.: September 8, 2014 Chad Allen Encompass Engineering and Surveying 165 NE Juniper Street, Suite 201 Issaquah, WA 98027 SUBJECT: Wetland Delineation for Dohrn Meadows 3767 and 3815 Monterey Pl. NE Renton, WA (Parcels 334570-0182 -0181) Dear Chad: , Lu1d".1p,· ,-\rcli i tect,llT AOA-4562 On May 12, 2014 I conducted a wetland reconnaissance on the subject property utilizing the methodology outlined in the May 2010 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0). One wetland (Wetland A) was identified and delineated in the southwest portion of the site during the field investigation. This wetland was subsequently surveyed and is depicted on your survey drawing. Wetland A Wetland A is located on a slope in the southwest corner of the property and is part of a larger wetland that extends off-site to the south. The on-site portion of the wetland consists of a periodically mowed pasture/lawn that was dominated by grasses, buttercup (Ranuncu/us sp.), and field horsetail (Equisetum arvense). Soils within the wetland were generally saturated near the surface and any surface runoff appears to infiltrate near the toe of the slope along the western property line. Attachment A contains data sheets prepared for a representative location in both the upland and wetland. These data sheets document the vegetation, soils, and hydrology information that aided in the wetland boundary determination. Wetland A on the site is part of the same wetland that was previously determined to be a Category 2 wetland during review of the Taylor Court Short Plat (L~Q§:082), which is located immediately to the southeast. Category 2 wetlands reqi!;if{"". standard SO-foot buffer per RMC 4-3-0SOM.6.c. Entire Document Available Upon Request Kris Sorensen From: Sent: To: John Altmann <john@altoliver.com> Wednesday, December 17, 2014 12:44 PM Kris Sorensen Cc: Tom Redding Subject: RE: Elec. Site Plan attached; FW: Renton; Dohrn Meadows Preliminary Plat Wetland Delineation Attachments: Tayor Ct--Posible Adjacent Wetland Buffer.pdf Hi Kris- After contacting Encompass, it is my understanding that the wetland off-site to the south of the Dohrn Meadows project site was sketched onto the site plan per the attachment. The off-site wetlands on this plan were mapped in 1998 by another consultant. I am not sure if it is a sketch or a survey since I do not see the flag numbers, but in any event I believe my delineation and off-site sketch more accurately reflects the current wetland conditions. Please let me know if you have questions. Thanks. John -----Original Message···-- From: Kris Sorensen [mailto:KSorensen@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2014 8:12 AM To: John Altmann Subject: Elec. Site Plan attached; FW: Renton; Dohrn Meadows Preliminary Plat Wetland Delineation Hi John -Thanks for calling and talking with Chad. If you can have an answer by Wednesday, that would be great. Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner, Planning Division, Community & Economic Development, City of Renton, 425-430-6593 ···-·Original Message····· From: Kris Sorensen Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 9:51 AM To: john@altoliver.com Subject: FW: Renton; Dohrn Meadows Preliminary Plat Wetland Delineation Resend, thanks for pointing that out. See new attachment. ·----Original Message----- From: John Altmann [mailto:john@altoliver.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 9:15 AM To: Kris Sorensen Subject: FW: Renton; Dohrn Meadows Preliminary Plat Wetland Delineation Hi Kris· 1 Could you please re-check the scans. They don't appear to match what you intended to send. Thanks. John John Altmann Altmann Oliver Associates, LLC 425.333.4535 john@altoliver.com www.altoliver.com -----Original Message----- From: Kris Sorensen [mailto:KSorensen@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Tuesday, December D9, 2014 4:10 PM To: john@altoliver.com Subject: Renton; Dohrn Meadows Preliminary Plat Wetland Delineation Hi John - I've got a follow-up question on the wetland delineation you provided for Encompass engineering and the Dohrn Meadows plat project in City of Renton. I've attached your wetland report and a some scans that I need clarification on. You can see in one attachment that I provided 3 plans (the plat plan for Dohrn Meadows, your November delineation with the wetland boundaries estimated on the neighboring properties, and your Taylor Court wetland delineation for the subdivision to the south that was done pre-2005). You can see on the three plans above that the wetland delineation on the southern side of the Dohrn project does not match the Dorhn meadows delineation. Although your November delineation shows the wetland boundaries matching up across the properties. Can you clarify that either your November delineation is where the wetland is located on the property to the south of the Dorhn Plat, or why there is inconsistency in the Dohrn Meadows submitted plat plan with the wetland boundaries. If the wetland to the south is located as shown on the Dohrn plat plan, as delineated as part of the Taylor Court project, a SO-foot buffer would require a larger critical areas tract on the Dorhn plat. I am open to talk on the phone and am asking to get clarification for the Environmental review committee report and for the future Hearing Examiner report. Thank you. Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner, Planning Division, Community & Economic Development, City of Renton, 425-430-6593 2 • I 'i ! ::· I · •e• 6 111 t\!~il-- (N3d0 J.ONI "3"N 3A y N3301l3B' I I t, ir 1-.I I , --. I I r ~ I " ~ L..::, ~ ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 14-001280 Application Date: September 19, 2014 Name: Dohrn Meadows Preliminary Plat EXHIBIT 17 Aonterey Pl NE 1, WA 98056-4210 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I September 17, 2015 . Technical Services Comments Contact: Amanda Askren j 425-430-7369 I aaskren@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Technical Services Amanda Askren 913115 from Bob MacOnie's previous comments For Final Plat Preparation: Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA 14 001280 and LND 1 o 0518, respectively, on the final plat submittal. The type size used for the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action number. Please note that the land use action number provided will change when this subdivision changes from preliminary to final plat status. Show two ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network. The geometry will be checked by the city when the ties have been provided. Provide sufficient information to determine how the plat boundary was established. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, per WAC32 130 100. Note the date the existing city monuments were visited and what was found, per WAC 332130 150. Provide lot closure calculations. Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the corners of the proposed lots. Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. The lot addresses will be provided by the city as soon as possible. Note said addresses and the street name on the plat drawing. On the final plat submittal, remove all references pertaining to utilities facilities, trees, concrete, gravel, decks and other items not directly impacting the subdivision. These items are provided only for preliminary plat approval. Do note encroachments. Remove from the "LEGEND" block all tree items, utilities facilities and mailbox references, but do include in said "LEGEND" block the symbols and their details that are used in the plat drawing. Do not include a utility provider's block, an owner's block, an engineer/surveyor block and an architect block. Do not include any references to use, density or zoning on the final submittal If the abutting properties are platted, note the lot numbers and plat name on the drawing otherwise note them as 'Unplatted'. Remove the building setback lines from the proposed lots. Setbacks will be determined at the time that building permits are issued. Note the research resources on the plat submittal. Note all easements, covenants and agreements of record on the plat drawing. The City of Renton "APPROVALS" blocks for the City of Renton Administrator, Public Works Department, the Mayor, City Clerk and the Finance Director . A pertinent approval block is also needed for the King County Assessor's Office. Provide signature lines as required. Do not make references to density and zoning information on the final plat drawing. If there is a Restrictive Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions document for this plat, then reference the same on the plat drawing and provide a space for the recording number thereof. Note that if there are restrictive covenants, agreements or easements to others (neighboring property owners, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawings and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The plat document will be recorded first (with King County). The recording number(s) for the associated Ran: October 06, 2015 Page 1 of 4 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 14-001280 of ... PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I September 17, 2015 Technical Services Comments Contact: Amanda Askren I 425-430-7369 I aaskren@rentonwa.gov document(s) (said documents recorded concurrently with, but following the plat) need to be referenced on the plat drawings. There needs to be language regarding the conveyance of the Tracts A & B created by the plat; please check with the Storm Water Utility to see if they will require that the City be the owner of Tract 'A' if not and if there is to be a Homeowners' Association (HOA) created for this plat, the following language concerning ownership of "Tract A" (Storm Water) applies to this plat and should be noted on the final plat drawing as follows: Upon the recording of this plat, Tract A is hereby granted and conveyed to the Plat of Name of Plat Homeowners' Association (HOA) for a Storm Water Detention and Managment. All necessary maintenance activities for said Tract will be the responsibility of the HOA. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in the Tract previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Otherwise, use the following language on the final plat drawing: Lots 1 through 9, inclusive, shall have an equal and undivided ownership interest in "Tract A". The foregoing statements are to be accompanied by language defining the maintenance responsibilities for any infrastructure located on the Tract serving the plat or reference to a separate recording instrument detailing the same. Similar language is required for Tract 'B'. Please discuss with the Storm Water Utility any other language requirements regarding surface water BMPs and other rights and responsibilities. All vested owner(s) of the subject plat, at the time of recording, need to sign the final plat. For the street dedication process, include a current title report notina the vested property owner. Fire Review • Building Comments Contact: Corey Thomas I 425-430-7024 I cthomas@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. The fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.1 O per single family unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit. Credit would be granted for the two existing homes. Code Related Comments: 1. The fire flow requirement for a single family home is 1,000 gpm minimum for dwellings up to 3,600 square feet (including garage and basements). If the dwelling exceeds 3,600 square feet, a minimum of 1,500 gpm fire flow would be required. A minimum of one fire hydrant is required within 300 feet of the proposed buildings and two hydrants if the fire flow goes up to 1,500 gpm. Existing hydrants are not within 300 feet of the furthest proposed dwelling, so a new hydrant and water main is required. A water availability certificate is required from Coal Creek Utility District. 2. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 20 feet wide fully paved, with 25 feet inside and 45 feet outside turning radius. Fire access roadways shall be constructed to support a 30 ton vehicle with 75 psi point loading. Access is reauired within 150 feet of all points on the buildinas. Dead end streets that exceed 150 feet in length require an aooroved turnaround. Planning Review Comments Contact: Kris Sorensen I 425-430-6593 I ksorensen@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Planning: 1. RMC section 4 4 030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Commercial, multi family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 3. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1st and March 31st of each year. The Development Services Division's approval of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of the permit. 4. A National Permit Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required when more than one acre is being cleared. 5. The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment, dispose of any materials, supplies or fluids, operate any equipment, install impervious surfaces, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. 6. The applicant shall erect and maintain six foot (6') high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees, or along the perimeter of a stand of retained trees. Placards shall be placed on fencing every fifty feet (50') indicating the words, "NO Ran: October 06, 2015 Page 2 of 4 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 14-001280 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I September 17, 2015 Planning Review Comments Contact: Kris Sorensen I 425-430-6593 I ksorensen@rentonwa.gov TRESPASSING -Protected Trees" or on each side of the fencing if less than fifty feet (50'). Site access to individually protected trees or groups of trees shall be fenced and signed. Individual trees shall be fenced on four (4) sides. In addition, the applicant shall provide sunervision whenever eauioment or trucks are movina near trees. Engineering Review Comments Contact: Rohini Nair I 425-430-7298] mair@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: I have reviewed the application for Dohrn Meadows preliminary plat located at 3815 & 3767 Monterey Place NE and have the following comments: EXISTING CONDITIONS WATER Water service will be provided Coal Creek Water service District SEWER The site will be served by City of Renton sewer service. STORM There is no existing storm water pipe on the Monterey Place frontage. STREETS Monterey Place NE is a collector street with existing right of way width of 60 feet. CODE REQUIREMENTS WATER 1. A water availability certificate from Coal Creek Utility District was provided. 2. Approved water plans from Coal Creek Utility District should be provided to the City at the utility construction permit stage. 3. New hydrants shall be installed per Renton's fire department standards to provide the required coverage of all lots. 1. SANITARY SEWERThe project proposes to get sewer service connection from the existing 8" diameter sewer main on Lincoln Ave NE via an easement on the neighboring parcel (parcel# 3345700185). 2. 8" diameter sewer main extension is proposed through the site to end at a manhole located at the property line between lots a and 9. 3. A minimum 12 feet wide gravel (or paved) access path is required on the sewer main located to the west side of lot 4 till the sewer manhole. 4. A letter is required to be provided from Coal Creek Utility District during utility construction permit stage confirming if the Coal Creek sewer latecomer fee is applicable or not applicable. 5. For this project, to meet the required separation between utility lines, it is allowable to locate the sewer main in the planter portion within the public right of way before the sidewalk of the proposed public street. This will be contingent on two conditions -(1) the dry utilities should be located back of the sidewalk to provide required separation with the sewer main, and (2) trees will not be allowed in the planter area with the sewer main. 6. Individual lots are to be served by individual side sewers. The side sewers should not be located under driveways. 7. System development charge (SDC) fee is applicable at the time of issuance of the utility construction permit. The current sewer SDC fee for a 1" meter is $2,135. SURFACE WATER 1. A drainage plan and drainage report prepared by Encompass Engineering was for the project. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Condition. A combined detention / water quality pond is proposed to meet the detention and water quality needs of the project. The proposed facility will be a public storm water facility. Appropriate individual lot storm water flow control BMPs will be required to be provided by the project. Bypass of runoff from non targeted surfaces shall be described in the drainage report. The plans submitted during the utility construction permit stage should show the public storm water pipes located outside the planter and outside the sidewalk. Required horizontal and vertical separation between the utility lines should be provided. Storm water pond geometry shall be in accordance with the City adopted 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) and associated City Amendments. Storm water pond access as per the City Amendments should be provided. Final plans and drainage report based on the requirements mentioned in the City of Renton Amendments to the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual is required to be submitted with the utility construction permit. 2. A gravel (or paved) access path is required on the west side of the storm water pond till the most northern catch basin. Storm water access as per the City Amendments should be provided. 3. A geotechnical report and an addendum were submitted by Earth Solutions NW, LLC. The report identifies the site soils as loam with till deposits in the vicinity of the site. 4. The current surface water system development charge (SDC) fee is $1,350.00 per new lot. Fees are payable prior to issuance of the construction permit and the fee rate that is current at the time of issuance of the utility construction permit will be applicable and the fees Ran: October 06, 2015 Page 3 of 4 A.DVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 14-001280 .. of PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I September 17, 2015 . Engineering Review Comments Contact: Rohini Nair I 425-430-7298 I rnair@rentonwa.gov are payable prior to issuance of the construction permit. 5. A Construction Stormwater General Permit from Department of Ecology is required for projects that have clearing and grading exceeding one acre. TRANSPORTATION /STREET 1. Payment of transportation impact fee is applicable on the single family houses. The current transportation impact fee rate is $2.214.44 per new lot. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit will be levied. Payment of the transportation impact fee is due at the time of issuance of the single family building permits. 2. Monterey Place NE is a collector street with existing right of way width of 60 feet. Monterey Place NE is a Collector Street. The available right of way (ROW) width on this street is 60 feet. The proposed Monterey Place NE half street section shows a 11 feet wide travel lane, 5 feet wide bike lane, 0.5 foot wide curb, 8 feet wide landscaped planter strip, and 5 feet wide sidewalk, and 0.5 foot wide clear width back of sidewalk, located within the right of way. A 1 feet wide clear width 'Is required back of the sidewalk (as was previously mentioned in the preapplication comments for the project). A 0.5 foot wide ROW dedication will be applicable on the Monterey Place NE frontage. A modification request will be required to be provided by the developer to provide the 5 feet wide sidewalk instead of the code required 8 feet width. Staff recommends support of the 5 feet wide sidewalk width to be consistent with the existing sidewalk along the corridor. Additional pavement widening (subject to survey) is required to provide the proposed 5 feet wide bike lane. Saw cut at the existing fog line and construct the bike lane to ensure that standard pavement thickness is provided under the bike lane. Restriping of Monterey Place NE frontage is also applicable. 3. A limited access residential street with 20 feet paved width is proposed as the internal site access. 0.5 feet wide curb, 8 feet wide landscaped planter, and 5 feet wide sidewalk are also shown on both sides of the street. A hammerhead turnaround is proposed at the dead end of the internal access street. The hammer head turnaround should meet with fire department requirements also. Parking is not allowed on streets with 20 feet or less paved width. 4. Adequate sight distance should be provided at the intersection of the proposed new street with Monterey Place NE. 5. No lot is proposed to gain direct access from Monterey Place NE. The individual driveways shall be as per RMC 4 4 060. 6. Paving and trench restoration as per the City's Standard Trench Restoration and Pavement Overlay Standards will be applicable for any utility work or any pavement cut work in the public street. 7. Street lighting as per City standards is required on the internal access road. Street lighting is not required on Monterey Place NE frontage due to the existing overhead power lines and transformer. Street lighting plans should be included with the civil plan submittal. 8. Sidewalks and ramps shall be ADA compliant. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. A licensed Civil Engineer shall prepare the civil plans. 2. Rockeries or retaining walls greater than 4 feet in height will be require a separate building permit. Structural calculations and plans shall be submitted for review by a licensed engineer. Special Inspection is required. 3. A tree removal and tree retention/orotection olan and a seoarate landscaoe olan shall be included with the civil olan submittal. Ran: October 06, 2015 Page 4 of 4 EXHIBIT 18 Lincoln Av NE from NE 44th Street east to the city limits With concurrence from Bob Mahn and Jim Seitz on July 25, 2013 Two lane street with bike lanes, 8 foot planting strip, 5 foot sidewalk and 1 foot clearance at back of sidewalk. Pavement width, with 11 foot lanes and 5 foot bike lane would be 32 feet. Total row required would be 60 feet, with 60 feet of existing row in most locations. Even with this concept, we will need survey and follow-up discussion on each site development to determine where to actually install the new curb relative to existing pavement. We may have locations where the existing pavement is outside of existing row, which will make it tricky to then install a planting strip and new sidewalk without substantial row dedication. Jim and I concur with your recommendation of 32 feet for the roadway width on Lincoln Ave NE. A 32 foot roadway width with an 8-foot planting strip, 5-foot sidewalk, and one foot behind the sidewalk on each side of the roadway would result in a total ROW width of 60 feet (rather than the 58 feet noted below in your e-mail). We also agree that there may be locations where the existing pavement is outside of the existing ROW, which will require ROW dedication to install the recommended street section. Bob Mahn Transportation Planning X-7322 From: Neil R. Watts Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 12:19 PM To: Jim Seitz; Bob Mahn; Kayren K. Kittrick Cc: Jan Illian; Rohini Nair Subject: Another arterial design request -Lincoln Av NE Sorry guys, seems like we are building on every street in the city this year. This one is tricky to install, regardless of the cross-section design because the existing pavement is so far on the north/east side of the existing row. So for Lincoln Av/Monterey Pl NE from NE 43 St and onward south/east to the city limits. Recommendation is for two lane street with bike lanes, 8 foot planting strip, 5 foot sidewalk and 1 foot clearance at back of sidewalk. Pavement width, with 11 foot lanes and 5 foot bike lane would be 32 feet. Total row required would be 58 feet, which is exceeded already in most places with 60 feet of existing row. Even with this concept, we will need survey and follow-up discussion on each site development to determine where to actually install the new curb relative to existing pavement. We may have locations where the existing pavement is outside of existing row, which will make it tricky to then install a planting strip and new sidewalk without substantial row dedication. Neil Jan For purposes of the pre-construction comments for the project at NE 43'' and Lincoln, our comments should say this is still under review, but our best guess at this point is new curb and gutter 16 feet from centerline of existing pavement, 8 foot planting strip, 5 foot sidewalk, 1 foot clearance at back of sidewalk. Depending on survey information, additional row dedication may be required to accommodate these required street improvements. The 43'' frontage is commercial, non-arterial -this one may be a challenge because of adjacent wetland issues. EXHIBIT 20 WATER AVAILABILITY CERTIFICATE 1Do not write 1n this box Number Name D D Building Permit Short Subdivision Preliminary Plat or PUD Rezone or other APPUCANTS NAME: Encompass-Dohrn Meadows PROPOSED USE: Preliminary Plat-9 Lots LOCATION: 3815&3767 Monterey Place Tax Lots #334570-0181/0182 (Au.,cl,, ...... µ&-leeal deacrlpllo11 ll 11eocMt1r1Jl WATER PURVEYOR INFORMATION: 1 A. D Water service will be provided by service connection only to an B. 2 A. B. 3 A. OR OR D D O!} B. 'I/ 4 A. r; existing size water main feet from the site. Water service will require an improvement to the water system of: ( 1) ..s.ll feet of water main to reach the water system of; (2) the construction of a distribution system on the site; and/or (3) other~see attached description Extension of main In Monterey Place to NE property corner. The water system improvement is in conformance with a District approved water comprehensive plan. The water system improvement will require a water comprehensive plan amendment. The proposed project is within the corporate limits of the district, or has been granted Boundary Review Board approval for extension of service outside the district or city. Annexation or BRB approval will be necessary to provide service. A portion of the property Is outside the District water service area and corporate boundary, Water is/or will be available at the rate of flow and duration Indicated below at no less than 20psl measured at the nearest fire hydrant ~ from the building/property (or as marked on the attached map): Rate of flow ouratlPD D D D less than 500 gpm (approx. D 500 to 999 gpm gpm) less than 1 hour 1 hour to 2 hours 2 hours or more other ~ D D 1,000 gpm or more flow test of gpm A. D calculation of gpm ~ D (Commerclal Building Permits require flow test or calculation) OR Water application required for all B. D Water system isn't capable of providing fire flow. COMMENTS/CONDITIONS General Faclllty Charge of $5000 per lot; Meter and Seattle Public Utilities Charges depending on meter size; Developer Extension Required I hereh1J certl11.3 that the o.bove water ae,e-nc,,i lnformatlon la hue. Thia certliloa.Uon shall be vahd for one qear hom the date of slenature. Todd Hynek Agency Name Coal Creek UttUty District Signatory Name (Print) Operations Manager ~~ 9-tG·t!' ~ignature Date Title Note: All conditions subject to change Edulog WebQuery EXHIBIT 21 WebQuery User Information: Address:3815 MONTEREY PL NEEdit User Information Grade: Program: Select a School: School Name HAZELWOOD ES 2016 PROPOSED NEW MIDDLE SCHOOL MCKNIGHT MS MEADOW CREST EARLY EDUCATION HAZEN HS SECONDARY LEARNING CENTER © Education Logistics. Inc. School School School Web Eligibility Code Map Site Description HAZ map Eligible 2016NEW map Eligible MCK map Eligible MCE map Eligible HHS map Eligible SLC map Eligible Page 1 of 1 Grades 01,02,03,04,05. K2. K2A, K2P,K2X,KA, KO, KP 06, 07, 08 06, 07, 08 P3,P4,PA, PD, PP.PS 09, 10, 11, 12, GD 07, 08, 09. 10, 11, 12, GD http://busroutes.rentonschools.us/edulog/webquery /W ebQuery RequestController?address... 10/06/2015 EXHIBIT 22 Kris Sorensen From: Sent: Randy Matheson < randy.matheson@rentonschools.us> Friday, October 10, 2014 7:30 AM To: Sabrina Mirante Cc: Kris Sorensen Subject: RE: City of Renton Notice of Preliminary Plat -Dorhn Meadows Preliminary Plat, LUA14-001280, ECF, PP Hi Sabrina. Thanks for making this an easier, online process. I responded to this in an earlier email, but failed to scroll down and see the form request. I'm on board now and will respond to these reuests using the form. Randy Matheson, Executive Director, Community Relations Renton School District I 300 SW 7th Street, Renton WA 98057 1 425.204.2345 I randy.matheson;@rentonschools.us I www.rentonschools.us I Jr j ,&.. Qfrrton From: Sabrina Mirante [mailto:SMirante@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Thursday, October 9, 2014 4:07 PM To: Randy Matheson Cc: Kris Sorensen Subject: City of Renton Notice of Preliminary Plat -Dorhn Meadows Preliminary Plat, LUA14-001280, ECF, PP October 9, 2014 Randy Matheson, Community Relations Renton School District 300 SW 7th Renton, WA 98057 Subject: Dohrn Meadows Preliminary Plat LUA14-001280, ECF, PP The City of Renton's Department of Community and Economic Development (CED) has received an application for a type of project located at 3815 & 3767 Monterey Pl. NE, Renton, WA. 1 Please see the enclosed Notice of Application for further details. In order to process this application, CED needs to know which Renton schools would be attended by children living in residences at the location indicated above. Please fill in the appropriate schools on the list below and return this notice to my attention, City of Renton, CED, Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98057 or fax to (425) 430-7300, by October 24, 2014 . Elementary School: Hazelwood Elementary Middle School: McKnight Middle School (In 2016, the new middle school assignment for both of these addresses will be the new middle school being built now in the northern end of the district in Newcastle.) High School: Hazen High School Will the schools you have indicated be able to handle the impact of the additional students estimated to come from the proposed development? Yes Yes, for 9 residential lots No __ _ Any Comments: _____________________ _ Thank you for providing this important information. If you have any questions regarding this project, please contact me at (425) 430-6593. Sincerely, Kris Sorensen Associate Planner Sa6rina 'Mirante, Pfa.nning Secretary City of Renton I CED I Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way I 6th Floor I Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425.430.6578 I Fax: 425.430.7300 I smirante@rentonwa.gov .. ~r~_ -·_··· -~· 1 I ,, r r t' ,-.~-·~ r ~· ',,,, 2 Denis Law Mctyor EXHIBIT 23 September 24, 2015 Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chip"Vincent, Administrator Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPAi THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ER(} on September 21, 2015: SEPA DETERMINATION: Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated (DNSM) PROJECT NAME: Dohrn Meadows Preliminary Plat PROJECT NUMBER: LUA14-001280 ECF, PP Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on October 9, 2015, together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. Please refer to the enclosed Notice of Environmental Determination for complete details. If you have questions, please call me at (425) 430-6593. For the Environmental Review Committee, Kris Sorensen Assistant Planner Enclosure cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division Boyd Powers, Department of Natural Resources Karen Walter, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Melissa Calvert, Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program Gretchen Kaehler, Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Ramin Pazooki, WSDOT, NW Region Larry Fisher1 WDFW Ouwamish Tribal Office US Army Corp. of Engineers Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton,Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE PROJECT NUMBER: APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME: -MITIGATED (DNS-M) LUA14-001280 ECF, PP Joe Pruss; Civic Development; 18211 240th Ave SE; Maple Valley WA 98038 Dohrn Meadows Preliminary Plat PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Hearing Examiner Preliminary Plat review and Environmental (SEPA) review for a 9-lot single family residential subdivision. The 89,819 square foot (2.06- acre) site is a combination of two parcels located at 3815 and 3767 Monterey Pl NE within the Residential-8 (R- 8) zone and Kennydale Community Planning Area. Proposed single-family lot sizes range from approximately 5,201 square feet to 8,270 square feet. Two existing single family homes, one on each parcel, would be demolished. Approximately 15,028 square feet is proposed to be dedicated for a new public street. Two tracts are proposed, one for the subdivision stormwater facility at approximately 9,404 square feet in the northwest corner of the site and the other tract would be a 14,213 square-foot critical areas tract containing 5,087 square feet of a Category 2 wetland in the southwest corner of the site. The proposal has a net density of 5.63 dwelling units per net acre. Steep slopes are located on the site. Eight trees are located in the critical areas tract and would be retained. Approximately 60 new trees would be added to the site. The project would result in approximately 4,500 cubic yards of excavation for site grading and road and plat construction and fill would be required for future home building pads. Street frontage improvements would be provided along Monterey Pl NE. A new internal dead-end road is proposed with curb, gutter and sidewalk that would provide access to the lots with a connection to Monterey Pl NE. The applicant submitted a drainage report, geotechnical report, wetlands reconnaissance, environmental checklist, and a tree inventory and retention plan. PROJECT LOCATION: 3815 & 3767 Monterey Pl NE LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under their authority of Section 4-9-070D Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. Because other agencies of jurisdiction may be involved, the lead agency will not act on this proposal for fourteen (14) days. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on October 9, 2015. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and more information may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. Dohm Meadows Preliminary Plat, LUA14-001280, ECF, PP DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PUBLICATION DATE: DATE OF DECISION: SIGNATURES: jL-v--- Terry Higashiyama, Administrator Community Services Department September 25, 2015 SEPTEMBER 21, 2015 1.1~1/l~ Date Date Mark PetflSOn/Administrator Fire & Emergency Services C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Administ tor Department of Community & Economic Development '! le I 1/5~ I I Date Dohm Meadows Preliminary Plat , LUA 14-001280, ECF, PP DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ~----Renton® DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNSM) MITIGATION MEASURES AND ADVISORY NOTES PROJECT NUMBER: APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME: LUA14-001280, ECF, PP Joe Pruss; Civic Development;18211 240'h ave SE; Maple Valley WA 98038 Dohrn Meadows Preliminary Plat PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Hearing Examiner Preliminary Plat review and Environmental (SEPA) review for a 9-lot single family residential subdivision. The 89,819 square foot (2.06-acre) site is a combination of two parcels located at 3815 and 3767 Monterey Pl NE within the Residential-8 (R-8) zone and Kennydale Community Planning Area. Proposed single-family lot sizes range from approximately 5,201 square feet to 8,270 square feet. Two existing single family homes, one on each parcel, would be demolished. Approximately 15,028 square feet is proposed to be dedicated for a new public street. Two tracts are proposed, one for the subdivision stormwater facility at approximately 9,404 square feet in the northwest corner of the site and the other tract would be a 14,213 square-foot critical areas tract containing 5,087 square feet of a Category 2 wetland in the southwest corner of the site. The proposal has a net density of 5.63 dwelling units per net acre. Steep slopes are located on the site. Eight trees are located in the critical areas tract and would be retained. Approximately 60 new trees would be added to the site. The project would result in approximately 4,500 cubic yards of excavation for site grading and road and plat construction and fill would be required for future home building pads. Street frontage improvements would be provided along Monterey Pl NE. A new internal dead-end road is proposed with curb, gutter and sidewalk that would provide access to the lots with a connection to Monterey Pl NE. The applicant submitted a drainage report, geotechnical report, wetlands reconnaissance, environmental checklist, and a tree inventory and retention plan. PROJECT LOCATION: LEAD AGENCY: MITIGATION MEASURES: 3815 & 3767 Monterey Pl NE The City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division 1. The applicant shall be required to comply with the recommendations included in the Geotechnical Evaluation, Earth Solutions NW LLC, dated September 18, 2014 and Addendum to the Geotechnical Evaluation prepared by Earth Solutions, NW LLC dated March 2, 2015, for the duration of clearing, grading, site and building construction. ADIVISORY NOTES: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes are provided as information only, they ore not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions. PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 21 September 17, 2015 Planning Review Comments Contact: Kris Sorensen I 425-430-6593 I ksorensen@rentonwa.gov On hold letter sent 12/18/14. Fire Review -Building Comments Contact: Corey Thomas I 425-430-7024 I cthomas@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. The fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $479.28 per single family unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit. Credit would be granted for the two existing homes. Code Related Comments: 1. The fire flow requirement for a single family home is 1,000 gpm minimum for dwellings up to 3,600 square feet {including garage and basements). If the dwelling exceeds 3,600 square feet, a minimum of 1,500 gpm fire flow would be required. A minimum of one fire hydrant is required within 300 feet of the proposed buildings and two hydrants if the fire flow goes up to 1,500 gpm. Existing hydrants are not within 300 feet of the furthest proposed dwelling, so a new hydrant and water main is required. A water availability certificate is required from Coal Creek Utility District. 2. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 20 feet wide fully paved, with 25 feet inside and 45 feet outside turning radius. Fire access roadways shall be constructed to support a 30 ton vehicle with 322 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. Dead end streets that exceed 150 feet in length require an approved turnaround, proposed hammerhead turnaround is acceptable. Technical Services Comments Contact: Bob MacOnie I 425-430-7369 I bmaconie@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Preliminary Plat: Bob Mac Onie 10/21/2014 Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA14 001280 and LND 10 0518, respectively, on the final plat submittal. The type size used for the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action number. Please note that the land use action number provided will change when this subdivision changes from preliminary to final plat status. Show two ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network. The geometry will be checked by the city when the ties have been provided. Provide sufficient information to determine how the plat boundary was established. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, per WAC32 130 100. Note the date the existing city monuments were visited and what was found, per WAC 332 130 150. Provide lot closure calculations. Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the corners of the proposed lots. Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 2 of 8 The lot addresses will be provided by the city as soon as possible. Note said addresses and the street name on the plat drawing. On the final plat submittal, remove all references pertaining to utilities facilities, trees, concrete, gravel, decks and other items not directly impacting the subdivision. These items are provided only for preliminary plat approval. Do note encroachments. Remove from the "LEGEND" block all tree items, utilities facilities and mailbox references, but do include in said "LEGEND" block the symbols and their details that are used in the plat drawing. Do not include a utility provider's block, an owner's block, an engineer/surveyor block and an architect block. Do not include any references to use, density or zoning on the final submittal If the abutting properties are platted, riote the lot numbers and plat name on the drawing otherwise note them as 'Unplatted'. PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 2 I September 17, 2015 Technical Services Comments Contact: Bob MacOnie I 42S-430-7369 I bmaconie@rentonwa.gov Remove the building setback lines from the proposed lots. Setbacks will be determined at the time that building permits are issued. Note the research resources on the plat submittal. Note all easements, covenants and agreements of record on the plat drawing. The City of Renton "APPROVALS" blocks for the City of Renton Administrator, Public Works Department, the Mayor, City Clerk and the Finance Director . A pertinent approval block is also needed for the King County Assessor's Office. Provide signature lines as required. Do not make references to density and zoning information on the final plat drawing. If there is a Restrictive Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions document for this plat, then reference the same on the plat drawing and provide a space for the recording number thereof. Note that if there are restrictive covenants, agreements or easements to others (neighboring property owners, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawings and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The plat document will be recorded first (with King County). The recording number(s) for the associated document(s) (said documents recorded concurrently with, but following the plat) need to be referenced on the plat drawings. There needs to be language regarding the conveyance of the Tracts A & B created by the plat; please check with the Storm Water Utility to see if they will require that the City be the owner of Tract 'A' if not and if there is to be a Homeowners' Association ( HOA) created for this plat, the following language concerning ownership of "Tract A" (Storm Water) applies to this plat and should be noted on the final plat drawing as follows: Upon the recording of this plat, Tract A is hereby granted and conveyed to the Plat of Name of Plat Homeowners' Association (HOA) for a Storm Water Detention and Managment. All necessary maintenance activities for said Tract will be the responsibility of the HOA. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page3of8 property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in the Tract previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Otherwise, use the following language on the final plat drawing: Lots 1 through 9, inclusive, shall have an equal and undivided ownership interest in "Tract A". The foregoing statements are to be accompanied by language defining the maintenance responsibilities for any infrastructure located on the Tract serving the plat or reference to a separate recording instrument detailing the same. Similar language is required for Tract 'B'. Please discuss with the Storm Water Utility any other language requirements regarding surface water BMPs and other rights and responsibilities. All vested owner(s) of the subject plat, at the time of recording, need to sign the final plat. For the street dedication process, include a current title report noting the vested property owner. Police Plan Review Comments Contact: Cyndie Parks I 425-430-7521 I cparks@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Minimal impact on police services. PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I September 17, 2015 Technical Services Comments Contact: Amanda Askren I 425-430-7369 I aaskren@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Technical Services Amanda Askren 9/3/15 from Bob MacOnie's previous comments For Final Plat Preparation: Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA14 001280 and LND 10 0518, respectively, on the final plat submittal. The type size used for the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action number. Please note that the land use action number provided will change when this subdivision changes from preliminary to final plat status. Show two ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network. The geometry will be checked by the city when the ties have been provided. Provide sufficient information to determine how the plat boundary was established. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, per WAC32 130 100. Note the date the existing city monuments were visited and what was found, per WAC 332 130 150. Provide lot closure calculations. Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the corners of the proposed lots. Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. The lot addresses will be provided by the city as soon as possible. Note said addresses and the street name on the plat drawing. On the final plat submittal, remove all references pertaining to utilities facilities, trees, concrete, gravel, decks and other items not directly impacting the subdivision. These items are provided only for preliminary plat approval. Do note encroachments. Remove from the "LEGEND" block all tree items, utilities facilities and mailbox references, but do include in said "LEGEND" block the symbols and their details that are used in the plat drawing. ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 4 of 8 Do not include a utility provider's block, an owner's block, an engineer/surveyor block and an architect block. Do not include any references to use, density or zoning on the final submittal If the abutting properties are platted, note the lot numbers and plat name on the drawing otherwise note them as 'Un platted'. Remove the building setback lines from the proposed lots. Setbacks will be determined at the time that building permits are issued. Note the research resources on the plat submittal. Note all easements, covenants and agreements of record on the plat drawing. The City of Renton "APPROVALS" blocks for the City of Renton Administrator, Public Works Department, the Mayor, City Clerk and the Finance Director . A pertinent approval block is also needed for the King County Assessor's Office. Provide signature lines as required. Do not make references to density and zoning information on the final plat drawing. If there is a Restrictive Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions document for this plat, then reference the same on the plat drawing and provide a space for the recording number thereof. Note that if there are restrictive covenants, agreements or easements to others (neighboring property owners, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawings and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The plat document will be recorded first (with King County). The recording number(s) for the associated document(s) (said documents recorded concurrently with, but following the plat) need to be referenced on the plat drawings. There needs to be language regarding the conveyance of the Tracts A & B created by the plat; please check with the Storm Water Utility to see if they will require that the City be the owner of Tract 'A' if not and if there is to be a Homeowners' Association (HOA) created for this plat, the following language concerning ownership of "Tract A" (Storm Water) applies to this plat and should be noted on the final plat drawing as follows: Upon the recording of this plat, Tract A is hereby granted and conveyed to the Plat of Name of Plat Homeowners' Association (HOA} for a Storm Water Detention and Managment. All necessary maintenance activities for said Tract will be the responsibility of the HOA. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have an equal and undivided ownership interest in the Tract previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Otherwise, use the following language on the final plat drawing: Lots 1 through 9, inclusive, shall have an equal and undivided ownership interest in "Tract A". The foregoing statements are to be accompanied by language defining the maintenance responsibilities for any infrastructure located on the Tract serving the plat or reference to a separate recording instrument detailing the same. Similar language is required for Tract 'B'. Please discuss with the Storm Water Utility any other language requirements regarding surface water BMPs and other rights and responsibilities. All vested owner(s) of the subject plat, at the time of recording, need to sign the final plat. For the street dedication process, include a current title report noting the vested property owner. ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page5of8 Fire Review -Building Comments Contact: Corey Thomas I 425-430-7024 I cthomas@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments: 1. The fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.10 per single family unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit. Credit would be granted for the two existing homes. Code Related Comments: l. The fire flow requirement for a single family home is 1,000 gpm minimum for dwellings up to 3,600 square feet (including garage and basements). If the dwelling exceeds 3,600 square feet, a minimum of 1,500 gpm fire flow would be required. A minimum of one fire hydrant is required within 300 feet of the proposed buildings and two hydrants if the fire flow goes up to 1,500 gpm. Existing hydrants are not within 300 feet of the furthest proposed dwelling, so a new hydrant and water main is required. A water availability certificate is required from Coal Creek Utility District. 2. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 20 feet wide fully paved, with 25 feet inside and 45 feet outside turning radius. Fire access roadways shall be constructed to support a 30 ton vehicle with 75 psi point loading. Access is required within 150 feet of all points on the buildings. Dead end streets that exceed 150 feet in length require an approved turnaround. Planning Review Comments Contact: Kris Sorensen I 425-430-6593 I ksorensen@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Planning: l. RMC section 4 4 030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Commercial, multi family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 3. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1st and March 31st of each year. The Development Services Division's approval of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of the permit. 4. A National Permit Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required when more than one acre is being cleared. 5. The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment, dispose of any materials, supplies or fluids, operate any equipment, install impervious surfaces, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. 6. The applicant shall erect and maintain six foot (6') high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees, or along the perimeter of a stand of retained trees. Placards shall be placed on fencing every fifty feet (50') indicating the words, "NO TRESPASSING -Protected Trees" or on each side of the fencing if less than fifty feet (50'). Site access to individually protected trees or groups of trees shall be fenced and signed. Individual trees shall be fenced on four (4) sides. In addition, the applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. Engineering Review Comments Contact: Rohini Nair I 425-430-7298 I rnair@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: I have reviewed the application for Dohrn Meadows preliminary plat located at 3815 & 3767 Monterey Place NE and have the following comments: EXISTING CONDITIONS WATER Water service will be provided Coal Creek Water service District SEWER The site will be served by City of Renton sewer service. STORM There is no existing storm water pipe on the Monterey Place frontage. STREETS Monterey Place NE is a collector street with existing right of way width of 60 feet. ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 6 of 8 CODE REQUIREMENTS WATER l. A water availability certificate from Coal Creek Utility District was provided. 2. Approved water plans from Coal Creek Utility District should be provided to the City at the utility construction permit stage. 3. New hydrants shall be installed per Renton's fire department standards to provide the required coverage of all lots. SANITARY SEWER The project proposes to get sewer service connection from the existing 8" diameter sewer main on Lincoln Ave NE via an easement on the neighboring parcel (parcel# 3345700185). 2. 8" diameter sewer main extension is proposed through the site to end at a manhole located at the property line between lots 8 and 9. 3. A minimum 12 feet wide gravel (or paved) access path is required on the sewer main located to the west side of lot 4 till the sewer. manhole. 4. A letter is required to be provided from Coal Creek Utility District during utility construction permit stage confirming if the Coal Creek sewer latecomer fee is applicable or not applicable. 5. For this project, to meet the required separation between utility lines, it is allowable to locate the sewer main in the planter portion within the public right of way before the sidewalk of the proposed public street. This will be contingent on two conditions -(1) the dry utilities should be located back of the sidewalk to provide required separation with the sewer main, and (2) trees will not be allowed in the planter area with the sewer main. 6. Individual lots are to be served by individual side sewers. The side sewers should not be located under driveways. 7. System development charge (SDC) fee is applicable at the time of issuance of the utility construction permit. The current sewer SDC fee for a 1" meter is $2,135. SURFACE WATER l. A drainage plan and drainage report prepared by Encompass Engineering was for the project. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Condition. A combined detention/ water quality pond is proposed to meet the detention and water quality needs of the project. The proposed facility will be a public storm water facility. Appropriate individual lot storm water flow control BMPs will be required to be provided by the project. Bypass of runoff from non targeted surfaces shall be described in the drainage report. The plans submitted during the utility construction permit stage should show the public storm water pipes located outside the planter and outside the sidewalk. Required horizontal and vertical separation between the utility lines should be provided. Storm water pond geometry shall be in accordance with the City adopted 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) and associated City Amendments. Storm water pond access as per the City Amendments should be provided. Final plans and drainage report based on the requirements mentioned in the City of Renton Amendments to the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual is required to be submitted with the utility construction permit. 2. A gravel (or paved) access path is required on the west side of the storm water pond till the most northern catch basin. Storm water access as per the City Amendments should be provided. 3. A geotechnical report and an addendum were submitted by Earth Solutions NW, LLC. The report identifies the site soils as loam with till deposits in the vicinity of the site. 4. The current surface water system development charge (SDC) fee is $1,350.00 per new lot. Fees are payable prior to issuance of the construction permit and the fee rate that is current at the time of issuance of the utility construction permit will be applicable and the fees are payable prior to issuance of the construction permit. 5. A Construction Stormwater General Permit from Department of Ecology is required for projects that have clearing and grading exceeding one acre. TRANSPORTATION/STREET l. Payment of transportation impact fee is applicable on the single family houses. The current transportation impact fee rate is $2,214.44 per new lot. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit will be levied. Payment of the transportation impact fee is due at the time of issuance of the single family building permits. 2. Monterey Place NE is a collector street with existing right of way width of 60 feet. Monterey Place ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 7 of 8 NE is a Collector Street. The available right of way (ROW) width on this street is 60 feet. The proposed Monterey Place NE half street section shows a 11 feet wide travel lane, 5 feet wide bike lane, 0.5 foot wide curb, 8 feet wide landscaped planter strip, and 5 feet wide sidewalk, and 0.5 foot wide clear width back of sidewalk, located within the right of way. A 1 feet wide clear width is required back of the sidewalk (as was previously mentioned in the preapplication comments for the project). A 0.5 foot wide ROW dedication will be applicable on the Monterey Place NE frontage. A modification request will be required to be provided by the developer to provide the 5 feet wide sidewalk instead of the code required 8 feet width. Staff recommends support of the 5 feet wide sidewalk width to be consistent with the existing sidewalk along the corridor. Additional pavement widening (subject to survey) is required to provide the proposed 5 feet wide bike lane. Saw cut at the existing fog line and construct the bike lane to ensure that standard pavement thickness is provided under the bike lane. Restriping of Monterey Place NE frontage is also applicable. 3. A limited access residential street with 20 feet paved width is proposed as the internal site access. 0.5 feet wide curb, 8 feet wide landscaped planter, and 5 feet wide sidewalk are also shown on both sides of the street. A hammerhead turnaround is proposed at the dead end of the internal access street. The hammer head turnaround should meet with fire department requirements also. Parking is not allowed on streets with 20 feet or less paved width. 4. Adequate sight distance should be provided at the intersection of the proposed new street with Monterey Place NE. 5. No lot is proposed to gain direct access from Monterey Place NE. The individual driveways shall be as per RMC 4 4 060. 6. Paving and trench restoration as per the City's Standard Trench Restoration and Pavement Overlay Standards will be applicable for any utility work or any pavement cut work in the public street. 7. Street lighting as per City standards is required on the internal access road. Street lighting is not required on Monterey Place NE frontage due to the existing overhead power lines and transformer. Street lighting plans should be included with the civil plan submittal. 8. Sidewalks and ramps shall be ADA compliant. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. A licensed Civil Engineer shall prepare the civil plans. 2. Rockeries or retaining walls greater than 4 feet in height will be require a separate building permit. Structural calculations and plans shall be submitted for review by a licensed engineer. Special Inspection is required. 3. A tree removal and tree retention/protection plan and a separate landscape plan shall be included with the civil plan submittal. ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 8 of 8 ... ··. ,. EXHIBIT 24 -· '"'·'" --.... , .-,,;;. ,J,f.1·.-:'~-·r~'"'.;··---,-· AFFIDAVIT OF. :.ERVICE B)',MAILINCJ ,-'., . . . . On the 3rd day of October, 2014, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Notice of Application and Acceptance documents. This information was sent to: Agencies See Attached Joe Pruss Contact Chad Allen Applicant Gregg & Natalie Dohrn Owners ---+-\KJ-'l,.,A,",A-Jl-rr--'-"u'---r --1-¥1 ~_...M'---"---'d--v-+'--------,,'' '"a".'~; 1 ',;, " ,,''...( y' vvf:1:,' • ;1 : 0 ..::: V '''''"\\1111,,. r'5' '/, :: ON ~ ... \,OM i!.t..o ,,,, ,, = ~ ~ ,,, ,, -.,;;; ff¥ o"'"'"r ~ ~ ~-:;; ""'"=~ ~ dlli '· .,. ~o ... • -i z ~ ,.. 1,u <J ! 0 ~ ., -t /:11,9\, .... " : J,.::.. ::: / ... l .., ,,-c, I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Sabrina Mirante ·",, <fii'',,,,, a.29·,,,·"~~ ff signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the 4~~'~,e-{· mentioned in the instrument. 'i 1 ,,1 \'"'''''''" (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING Public in and for the State of Washington \ ~-:, Notary (Print): ___ ~k~l_l,j_~l~t~1="~<.._1s.._ __________ _ My appointment expires: . -i a -::1 ,.\.,.j ,, > .\ a. -, 1 :io 1 ~ Dorhn Meadows Preliminary Plat LUA14-001280, ECF, PP template . affidavit of service by mailing Dept. of Ecology ** Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region • Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 I PO Box 330310 I Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers * Seattle District Office AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) WDFW -Larry Fisher* 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Issaquah, WA 98027 Duwamish Tribal Office* 4717 W Marginal Way SW Seattle, WA 98106-1514 KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Environmental Planning Supervisor Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. * Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 39015 -172"' Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092 Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program* Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert 39015172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Attn: Gretchen Kaehler I Attn: SEPA Reviewer Ms. Shirley Marroquin PO Box 48343 PO Box C-375S 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 Seattle, WA 98124 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Boyd Powers*** Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Tim McHarg Attn: Jack Pace 35030 SE Douglas St. #210 Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director Snoqualmie, WA 98065 12835 Newcastle Way, Ste 200 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle, WA 98056 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Metro Transit Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Senior Environmental Planner Kathy Johnson, Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Gary Kriedt 355 110'" Ave NE 6200 Southcenter Blvd. 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 Mailstop EST llW Tukwila, WA 98188 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, WA 98004 Seattle Public Utilities Jailaine Madura Attn: SEPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 "'Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of Application. """Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov "'"' *Department of Natural Resources is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice the following email address: sepacenter@dnr.wa.gov template -affidavit of service by mailing I ' Chad Allen Encompas-::; Engineering 165 NE Juniper St, Suite 201 Issaquah, WA 98027 JOE PRUSS 18211 240TH Ave SE MAPLE VALLEY, WA 98038 Natalie Dorhn 220S W 136th St Broomfield, CO 80023 Gregg Dohrn 2129 S Rockwood Blvd Spokane, WA 99203 3345700137 3345700211 3345700213 AKUTAGAWA DORAN+ TIEN ALBRECHT SUZANNE M ALLEN CREEK HOM ES LLC 1820 NE 38TH ST 2000 NE 37TH PL 2001 NE 37th Pl RENTON, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 3345700207 3345700207 3345700207 ALLEN CREEK HOMES LLC ALLEN CREEK HOMES LLC ALLEN CREEK HOMES LLC 2012 NE 37th Pl 8724 NE 134TH ST 8724 NE 134TH ST Renton, WA 98056 KIRKLAND, WA 98034 KIRKLAND, WA 98034 3345700172 3345700200 3345700200 BOLLINGER REX EUGENE+SUSAN CADIEUX MARC D+FORTIN KEN CADIEUX MARC D+FORTIN KEN 3812 MONTEREY PL NE 3720 Lincoln Ct NE PMB #154 RENTON, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 NEWCASTLE, WA 98059 3345700235 3224059082 9360900010 CARPENTER THOMAS E Ill CHAUDHRY MAT+AFSHAN CHEN LI 3601 LINCOLN AVE NE 2110 NE 36TH ST 19509 SE 27TH PL RENTON, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98056 SAMMAMISH, WA 98075 9360900010 3345700133 3345700141 CHEN LI COOPER KENNETH H COUSIN SYDNEY L JR+MARLENEA 8535 113th Ave SE 3821 LINCOLN AVE NE 1204 ELMSTEAD DR Newcastle, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98056 WINTERVILLE, NC 28590 3345700196 3345700161 3345700181 D'COSTA JOHN+SANDRA DEBOER DENIS E DOHRN NATALIE A+WADE JOHN G 3708 LINCOLN CT NE 3866 MONTEREY PL NE 13578 KING LAKE TRL RENTON, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98056 BROOMFIELD, CO 80020 3345700182 3345700203 3345700212 DOHRN RONALD G GREENWOOD CAPITAL 1 LLC HARLAN BRIAN M+JAIMI L DENN 2129 S ROCKWOOD BLVD 7517 GREENWOOD AVE N 3625 MONTEREY CT NE SPOKANE, WA 99203 SEATILE, WA 98103 RENTON, WA 98056 3345700220 3345700171 3345700192 HINES DELORES M JASLOWSKI RICHARD E JIMENEZ JOENALD+JIMENEZ GLENDA 1825 NE 38TH ST 3865 MONTEREY PL NE 3705 LINCOLN CT RENTON, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98056 3345700139 3345700221 3224059033 JOHNSTON AMY L+OYER scon D JUNG YOON SUN KENDALL HAROLD+SANDRA 1817 NE 38TH PL 2025 NE 37TH PL 8431116TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98056 9360900100 3345700131 3345700190 LI SHAOXIA LIM YANG KEUN+LIM SONGMI LIU YUNLONG+LI LIN 11305 SE 86TH PL 3815 LINCOLN AVE NE 3711 LINCOLN CT NE NEWCASTLE, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98056 3345700201 3345700183 3345700183 LUM MATIHEW+JUDY LUM TIMOTHY W H LUM TIMOTHY W H 2024 NE 37TH PL 12607 SE 78TH PL 3802 Monterey Pl NE RENTON, WA 98056 NEWCASTLE, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 3345700205 9360900230 3345700208 MASKER JOHN JOSEPH+CHAPMAN MEDA RAVINDRANATH MOROSO PAMELA J 2017 NE 37TH PL 8615 113TH AVE SE 3620 MONTEREY CT NE RENTON, WA 98056 NEWCASTLE, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98056 9360900030 9578070150 9578070160 NAN CARROW SHARON PFISTER NEWCASTLE CITY OF NEWCASTLE CITY OF 11302 SE 86TH PL 12835 NEWCASTLE WAY #200 12835 NEWCASTLE WAY #200 RENTON, WA 98056 NEWCASTLE, WA 980S6 NEWCASTLE, WA 98056 3345700219 3345700132 3345700130 NGUYEN MINH NIELSEN BRUCE NIELSEN KRIS L 2007 NE 37TH PL 3825 LINCOLN AVE NE 3835 LINCOLN AVE NE RENTON, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98056 3345700198 3345700135 3345700237 NIXON IAN W+DIANE P PASKETI GREGORY K+ANNE C PROFF VERNON+DOLORES 2100 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N #H305 1826 NE 38TH ST 3612 LINCOLN CT NE RENTON, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98056 3345700186 3345700216 3345700141 PRZASNYSKI JEREMY D+ JESSICA QUACH VAN MONG Resident 3723 LINCOLN CT NE 3636 LINCOLN AVE NE 1818 NE 38th Pl RENTON, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 3345700203 3345700182 3345700181 Resident Resident Resident 2018 NE 37th Pl 3767 Monterey Pl NE 3815 Monterey Pl NE Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 9360900020 9360900010 3345700170 Resident Resident SHAW LORELIE 8529 113th Ave SE 8535 113th Ave SE 3828 LINCOLN AVE NE Newcastle, WA 98056 Newcastle, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98056 3345700165 3345700179 9360900020 SHAW RALPH SHIAO-CHIN CHAO SHINN MARK D+ROXANNE L 909 N BLACKBIRD DR 601 S KING ST #302 6947 COAL CREEK PKWY SE GILBERT, AZ 85234 SEATILE, WA 98104 NEW CASTLE, WA 98059 9360900240 3345700210 3345700209 SIDDIQUI AAFREEN SORIA AMINADAB+OGUILVER HER SPRINGER LEON A+JACOBSEN LA 8607 113TH AVE SE 3626 MONTEREY CT NE 2006 NE 37th Pl NEWCASTLE, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98056 3345i00209 SPRINGER LEON A+JACOBSEN LA 2749 SW SYLVAN HEIGHTS DR SEATTLE, WA 98106 3345700185 TRUS GARY L & MAXINE D 3792 LINCOLN AVE NE RENTON, WA 98056 3345700194 SUGITA EUGENE HAYATO+ERICA 3702 LINCOLN CT NE RENTON, WA 98056 3345700188 ZOPE SATISH PANINl+MARSHA R 3717 LINCOLN CT NE RENTON, WA 98056 3224059013 TOOLE JAMES C+MARY PARYPA 11505 SE 85TH LN NEWCASTLE, WA 98056 NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DffiRMINATION OF NON-SlGNIFICANCE-MffiGATED (DNS-M) ~-Af>p-.,..k.lsbNn'Uwd,nd,~-"'"°"-of-......, .. J,:,,no..,. ................ (Cl'l>)-~Dlo,,ional1hlet,rof........,_ Thofo~t>Ml\-t11a.....n-""andlho--,y -- "-C"'C'l'D~ n,, •!ll'llaot ~ ~ HN!1nc Eun,;,,.,. _.,.,.. Pt« and EJM"'""'"ftbl {:5[1'~) -""'· ,,_ po=b tota'lnl 19,!l.S ,d IJ or....a.) <> ... "' ''"'" •"' P"'-ID l>o ,.,i,- ;,,,, i -tiol laa,.;,;, """-I•-tn<1ancl o.,.,.,,,,,, ......,.i,n O.n,,f'I _ I>< 5 i Oufoc. r.... o:ri<".J11 ..,,..,awoolo I>< <!omoff,""'1-!O< !Olm !Vl•""'"' 5,175 JltoS,.271.l ,d.-"'""' loeiwould b4 thmuch • _p,..biK'. ,,,_ :t,wt --.. t ... _,. .nd ~ -.d to Mo, ... .,.,. Pl N£. o:n<bl ,_,, !ncUO• • C.-2-.-.d ,od -.,od o,,fft,-,nd .,_,.,P"L lat!,"'°""""" Pl N[ ,.-.:1.,.. ,-?Ubl< _,wocl,j I>< lrnl>...-! ,..;u, ~A -· ;>lamj .. Jtrip.,nd-...,'k_ -IIJt,mM<,l "'ducl•-!llod>~ .. -. --"ta' d,o,:<li>t,d""""'" nport,,,."',,_t .. P>":.A""""..mrclrl""""'""""P"'~'"""'""-."'"'r..ral:t..w OPTIONALO(llRMIN.•cncN"" NQH..SlGf<lFIC.UICE. ,..,., .... Tlll ~~ ,._. & .. Ul;od >concy,""' Cf¥ or-.... d•to-""' "l"!l'.t:1nl """"'nm""tol ,mp,=..,. ,n,llely " rault m,,n thtl pro,,.,...:I pro~ T'!<CTm .... u ,,.,.,..ittoo ~"'""' ~CW.C.llC.llO,tho 0ty ,f-""' ~ .,;"11::!>o Optio,,.I O..S.M ~to Y"" aotlct °"' • o..s.,.~~~tol>o.......t Com""""P""Od>fu,tno;,n,)«tand:t>opr:po;.,10..r,.1,1,...."~-·""I" c,m"""";.,,i<>d· -~_.ii~"""""'"""' ~ '<>"""'Ire"'"-""" of ti>< Th~oid :..i.n,,.,,,~o" al~.,.. ~arce-"'""""'; (C..S.-.,.). ~;, "'"I l>o clw! or.ly o"""""""'I » ==•ot '" !t.o or,,.r:,n_, '"o><°" ol U.. pn;ro,al A).4,,/l!'P .. lp<C.od"'11fc-""'""'"-ofth<-D,6.M -..~'"''"'" l.l. Utl.4 O\adAl!,,r,,~E"Si<IHr.111'.&.5<>~l<r.lHEl,..,,ipo,SL, ,,. lDl/-h,WA 'Wl'1f .CS-3'2-<r250/ .,.,, ....... _ o ...... .., •• ,..,,...G-•thrica1•._.. '-'<ldsc:a.,. -~. w~ • ...:1 - 1><Frtm0mal...-n1ty~•-><--m{crt1]-Pbnnlo1 o;..,;.,.,,Slmi Floo< IWrti:ino+y~.rr. ,a;s s,,,,H, Gca,l,j ~y. """'"" WA ~· ,rfO"-Ylo n.e, """'"'"' •?'"l'OI="""' <Re,.,. i,.,,,,.,,""""""""n oo ~i<ornf"'...:I ?"',.c:. ""'1p-'M fen, o,,d <O<um :o: ::;c, ,>1~ ®-"""""I ~t.i>Jon. !CSS <;o. G~ Way, Romcn, W~911lS7. ,..,,,.,,,.. ""-= :,,,,,,0 Mffd""'"' i.,.,,,,,,..'Y .,.,, / Ll-"-l..OOU81l. ic~. ?9 "1.>JUNG-.0011£>1 C<y/St:,ll/z;11-~------- m.f."HO~ilf(Jc _________ _ ;;:;-;,:~:::;,';.~rndo<!O:,..,." ,C:CO:;,,,":;,~~ ""'1ton0ty1<a~'~"Ul5S-Gra,l,jW"I Tho!4~.i<~"'4a>Ml'....SF,n:h<c:.itya11111rton':,,,np ..... """' Uod'.x,tMap ..-.IA-1.or,!J><Ot'(H"""""'"P :=;:.:.:~~~~~~~;:: ""7-0II.S..l>dlvt,ion-..,.., 4-7-1:/ll -..,.,&.~r.ol II.op; ".d -"l>P"'>~«J<!e<and~u~ "1>o !r.il<lw"" Mltiptloo ""'"""*' wll IO:ely b< 'm;><wl °'.' tho pn>po,.,; ~ n..... -.,.,.r,dff .,_,;,,,, M.__ ,ednu ~J"<I mp;,ro ,,,. C1>ftm tr,-~ «>du ond ~·,O,llo<,I Udlad •-· fol-G-odl~lal <-1,-,,-.da~-lot vi., d-apm..,.. '"d ~-.tr,,,ct!on; f<>lla\ll.,....,.,ca,,tr,>l-..imHW,a Conl""'-""""''_ . ..,..._,,_l>o_;n-,onlffilll>=~~=·::~= O"""""-la';S """"Gr,,dyW~ • ...,,..,.,_ ::,~ ': ~ 7 .... ai,~,n,cl Olambor,, -r,,.,,-, ~.~,n 0<¥ Hall ,,,1,.,dulodh,ra.,,..tilk:t,<,,eec"",r-..,.;.._;, ,r:rm;,1 moou..,.. ?"'.,..,,.,,.<:t~Plaot"'lo,.,;,;,,,,::, l05SSoull1G<..tf"~•-"· Y""lr• """'"''.>l=o)Oo.as,. _ _,,.!l>lmuar,,,i,>/,t,e5[1'10,,..,,,;..-o, '"'""'tl<l•IN-lha>not,-~ 'c,...,,,.""'"P'dinCtlll,,,_ll>llc"tl><lltl•~ ... e,,,m,.,,r_,~ ::.:~:=:·.:,~::·~,-=;;:,~~=:.::t:.;!i::~1=.":,;·~1 IIH,,.c<IOta(ttl',,?f"Oj,,ctmllO•re,' ,.,,,.o,..i.,;n.,....rtfflcdol.,..,-nootl>d?f"Oj.c'- CONTACfPERSON: Kris S<lrensen, Associate Planner; Tel: {42.S} 430-0593; Eml: CERTIFICATION I, dfl¥>'•1 W' C".'5-,r:;.,'V\ . hereby certify that .., copies of the above document were posted in .3.__ conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Date.: __ 0"-1-_/_/.;..t_-..:.l~'I'-------,) /--,; /. L. Signed :_._(__.4"2·~~-Si<"".:.%%,;;.. ~e,...._L~z-<,C .... ~~~c.,=d«h~W=L __ STATE OF WASHINGTON 55 COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that _______________ _ signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): My appointment expires: ________________ _ EXHIBIT 25 4-2-110A 4-2-11 OA DEVELOPME ~L ZONING DESIGNATIONS (PRIMARY AND ATTACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES) DENSITY . . Minimum Net Density (for proposed short plats or subdivisions)'· ,s RC, R-1, none and R-4 R-8 4 dwelling units per net acre. R-10 For parcels over 1/2 gross acre: 4 dwelling units per net acre 30 R-14 10 dwelling units per net acre'o RM For any subdivision, and/or development:'o "U" suffix: 25 dwelling units per net acre. "T" suffix: 14 dwelling units per net acre. "F" suffix: 10 dwelling units per net acre. Maximum Net Density2, 14, 1s RC R-1 R-4 R-8 R-10 R-14 RM 1 dwelling unit per 10 net acres. 1 dwelling unit per 1 net acre, except that in designated Urban Separators density of up to 1 unit per gross acre may be permitted subject to conditions in RMC 4-3-110, Urban Separator Overlay Regulations. Assisted living bonus: A maximum density of 18 units/acre may be allowed subject to conditions of RMC 4-9-065, Density Bonus Review. 4 dwelling units per 1 net acre. 8 dwelling units per 1 net acre, except that the maximum shall be 6.00 dwelling units per net acre when alleys are considered practical, as specified in RMC 4-7-150.E.5, and are not part of the street configuration. 10 dwelling units per net acre. Assisted living bonus: A maximum density of 18 units/acre, for assisted living, may be allowed subject to conditions of RMC 4-9-065, Density Bonus Review. 14 dwelling units per net acre, except that density of up to 18 dwelling units per acre may be permitted subject to conditions in RMC 4-9-065, Density Bonus Review. Assisted living bonus: A maximum density of 18 units/acre, for assisted living, may be allowed subject to conditions of RMC 4-9-065, Density Bonus Review. Affordable housing bonus: Up to 30 dwelling units per net acre may be permitted on parcels a minimum of two acres in size if 50% or more of the proposed dwelling units are affordable to low income households with incomes at or below 50% of the area median income. "U" suffix: 75 dwelling units per net acre.2• "T" suffix: 35 dwelling units per net acre. "F" suffix: 20 dwelling units per net acre. 32 Assisted living bonus: 1.5 times the maximum density may be allowed subject to conditions of RMC 4-9-065, Density Bonus Review. Entire Document Available Upon Request 2 • 69 1 Revised 3/14) Slopes; Dohrn Meadows Pre Plat EXHIBIT 26 None ! ILege~:y ~:,~County Boundary '---------------------, 1 L.; OtyoiRent:-:n 0 o 32 1WGS_ 1984_Web_Mercator_Aux1l1ary_Sphere City of Renton Finance & IT Division 64 feet Addresses Parcels Wellhead Protection Area Zones =i Z.~ne 1 • Zone 1 Modified • Zone 2 Sinn? r.1tv nf RPntnn Information Technology -GIS RentonMapSupport@Rentonwa.gov 10/6/2015 D • >90'i, :Pmtecler:l, Environment Designations O Natural ~ ShoreLm, H1~h lntenst)' D Shoreline .sal~ted High Intensity O Shoreline ~es,dent,;il D Urban Co~se,',ancy Jurisdictions --, :,:-:r·,o, JI()(! out ':t,11,•:! '· ,·· ir ·,c· · JLC,1"';;; .0 ~·-' :,.•,, J<0·a ·~v<c·o ·~a· 88:·8-0r :, ·_-.; .. ,a~ ",1_. : .. · .~~) ~, 3SCL "3[C, :~: c ~,---• ~'r'cr '• ~8 ''°' ~C"' THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION EXHIBIT 27 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: October 6, 2015 TO: Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner FROM: Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager SUBJECT: Traffic Concurrency Test -Dohrn Meadows Preliminary Plat; File No. LUA14-001280, ECF, PP The applicant is requesting SEPA Environmental Review and Preliminary Plat approval for a 9-lot subdivision. The 2.06-acre site is located at 3815 & 3767 Monterey Pl NE within the Residential- 8 zoning district (APNs 3345700181 and 3345700182). The parcel would be divided into 9 residential lots, one storm drainage tract, and one critical areas Native Growth Protection Area tract and would result in a net density of 5.63 dwelling units per net acre. The applicant will dedicate 15,028 square feet for public streets with access from Monterey Pl NE to a new residential street that will provide access to each lot. The proposal includes roughly 535 linear feet of public roadway (with utilities) improvements in order to provide access to proposed lots. The proposed development would generate approximately 86 net new average weekday daily trips. During the weekday AM peak hour, the project would generate approximately 7 net new trips (1 inbound and 6 outbound). During the weekday PM peak hour, the project would generate approximately 9 net new trips (6 inbound and 3 outbound). The proposed project passes the City of Renton Traffic Concurrency Test per RMC 4-6-070.D as follows: Traffic Concurrency Test Criteria Pass Implementation of citywide Transportation Plan Yes Within allowed growth levels Yes Project subject to transportation mitigation or impact fees Yes Site specific street improvements to be completed by project Yes · Traffic Concurrency Test Passes ··-------- Transportation Concurrency Test -Dohrn Meadows Preliminary Plat Page 2 of 3 October 6, 2015 Evaluation of Test Criteria Implementation of citywide Transportation Plan: As shown on the attached citywide traffic concurrency summary, the city's investment in completion ofthe forecast traffic improvements are at 130% of the scheduled expenditure through 2013. Within allowed growth levels: As shown on the attached citywide traffic concurrency summary, the calculated citywide trip capacity for concurrency with the city adopted model for 2014 is 89,132 trips, which provides sufficient capacity to accommodate the 86 additional trips from this project. A resulting 89,046 trips are remaining. Project subject to transportation mitigation or impact fees: The project will be subject to transportation impact fees at time of building permit for each new single family residence. Site specific street improvements to be completed by project: The project will be required to complete all internal and frontage street improvements for the plat prior to recording. Any additional off-site improvements identified through SEPA or land use approval will also be completed prior to final occupancy. Background Information on Traffic Concurrency Test for Renton The City of Renton Traffic Concurrency requirements for proposed development projects are covered under Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-6-070. The specific concurrency test requirement is covered in RMC 4-6-070.D, which is listed for reference: D. CONCURRENCY REVIEW PROCESS: 1. Test Required: A concurrency test shall be conducted by the Department far each nonexempt development activity. The concurrency test shall determine consistency with the adapted Citywide Level of Service Index and Concurrency Management System established in the Transportation Element of the Renton Comprehensive Plan, according ta rules and procedures established by the Department. The Department shall issue an initial concurrency test result describing the outcome of the concurrency test. 2. Written Finding Required: Prior ta approval of any nonexempt development activity permit application, a written finding of concurrency shall be made by the City as part of the development permit approval. The finding af concurrency shall be made by the decision maker with the authority ta approve the accompanying development permits required far a development activity. A written finding of concurrency shall apply only ta the specific land uses, densities, intensities, and development project described in the application and development permit. < ' Transportation Concurrency Test -Dohrn Meadows Preliminary Plat Page 3 of 3 October 6, 2015 3. Failure of Test: if no reconsideration is requested, or if upon reconsideration o project foils the concurrency test, the project application shall be denied by the decision maker with the authority to approve the accompanying development activity permit application. The Concurrency Management System established in the Transportation Element on page Xl-65 of the Comprehensive Plan states the following: Based upon the test of the citywide Transportation Plan, consideration of growth levels included in the LOS-tested Transportation Plan, payment of a Transportation Mitigation Fee, and an application of site specific mitigation, development will have met City of Renton concurrency requirements. Dohrn M·9ado'ivS Pratitninary Plat Public Hearing Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner October 13, 2015 ----itenton e Community & Economic Development Gity of R"nton Zoning i••••a••••••••••••~ . . ' '. . ' ' 18\~ .. ... ,, \ .i )767 \ :< . . , ··-·-·-·-·-···-···-·-·-·-·*: ,oo, 2012 2018 2W4 IC\ \;,I 10/13/2015 J.pproxin1ate Location St·te Characteristics 1 Vesting The project is vested to the R-8 zoning standards prior to the adoption of the Interim R-8 Zoning standards approved through Ordinance 5724 and prior to the new R-8 Zoning standards approved through Ordinance 5 758. The project is also vested to the Critical Areas Ordinance prior to the adoption of the updated Critical Areas Ordinance adopted through Ordinance 5757. ® Analysis (•~r-Com~-,tt~h,-,-.,-w-,-,,-,-,-,m-,-,-.-,~~,,-,-,-,-,,-..,~""~~~~1------i vr • Tho p,opo .. 1 aim plies with the Counly\ ComprehensiV1! Plan I objectises and policies. Zonln1 Dnelopment S!1nd1rd Compll1nc1 and Con•l~nc:y • The propo .. 1 h11 demo,,slnited comph1nce w~h m<m deVl!!!opmenl ,t.ondordii or the R-B ion inc dau1fi<.11!1on if all roaimmendod conditions of approv.al aro complied w~h. Critical l\rn Complianu and Can,lsl1ncy • The p,oposal is compliant with Iha Critkal Ania R11ula~ons. Community Ailat Complianu ;md CoFllalnanq • The propo"'I ts compfomc wilh th• Commun it,-AHat rqulation,. .'l:ecommendation Staff recommends approval of the Dohrn Meadows Preliminary Plat, LUA14-001280, ECF, PP as depicted in Exhibit 2, subject to 10 conditions of approval. I 1 I\_ I ~- 10/13/2015 ;\:µprovais ;:t.eqi1ested The application was accepted for review on September 19, 2014 & determined complete on October 9, 2014. The City ordinances that govern the development of land up to and including adopted ORO 5723. Staff received one agency comment and one public comment during the 90 day comment period. On September 21, 2015 the ERC issued a DNS-M with 1 mitigation measure. An appeal period commenced on September 25, 2015 and ended on October 9, 2015. No appeals of the threshold determination have been filed. ® Analysis Subdlvi1lon Ret,llatlon Comp~•nu and Con11sti!ncy • aprapo•• Octlmp anlw< ! •n1 awcrter, rl ~"' v,fon1 punuant ta RMC 4-7 ii all '11<atnm•ndod conditlons ofappro~al ••• complied wltll. ' ,ufficient n,sourcH exist to tur"i"' service, to the propo .. d d"""'lopmont if Mqulrtd improvomont,; •nd f&os an, praYidad. • RCW S1l17.1l0(l) providu that no ,ubdi.i,ion bo approvod without ~dequale provision made for safe walkinir conditions for studenlS who walk lo "",;t fn:rm school • :~~~e~:~~~.°: 1 ;:::.:il~~i~!;~!~::::!:~:b:i~e~ ~! !~ • :h:,~:inary drain•ge pion and drain•ge report hu been ,ubmiitt,d ! with the application jn accordanco with th~ 2009 KCSWM. I!:\. ~-----------~ 2 ..,.-.. ___ _ g ' !. Utility and Pond Landscapir1g 10/13/2015 Coal Creek Water Certificate ... -----·-- Exhibit 20 3 Kris Sorensen From: Kris Sorensen Sent: Monday, October 12, 2015 1:56 PM 'Tim McHarg' To: Cc: Subject: Jeff Brauns; Bruce Johnson; Angela Gallardo Renton; LUA14-001280 RE: Dohrn Meadow Dohrn Meadows Engineering set 8-17-15.pdf Attachments: Mr. McHarg, Thank you for the email and comments below regarding stormwater discharge and the thru-street concept for the Dohrn Meadows preliminary plat (LUA14-001280). I have attached the layout. Below are responses to the comments you provided: • Whitehawk subdivision stormwater: The discharge information will be presented by me at the Hearing Examiner public hearing. The information has been provided to the city staff utilities reviewer working with the applicant. • Connection from Monterey to Lincoln: It is the City's preference to provide linkages and connections through new development as suggested. Unfortunately there is a critical area in the way. The staff review team looked at this opportunity early on in the project review process. provided analysis of the potential through street in the SEPA review. Staff recognizes the limited east-west connections in the vicinity. Given the location of the wetland and its associated buffer and the continuation of the wetland onto the abutting property to the west, staff has not recommended a through street. Thank you for taking time to provide comments. Your comments will be added to the public record tomorrow at the Hearing Examiner public hearing. Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner, Planning Division, Community & Economic Development, City of Renton, 425-430-6593 From : Tim McHar!f,t!.!JigaJ.!!i ltb\,o,,;.: illllf'.!11£.1,hi. n!J'e~wocc\.la,;s!!,tl!leeeJ. W"Y,aa,.11u;,,is Sent: Thursday, i:'tober 08, 2015 :41 PM To: Kris Sorensen' Cc: Jeff Brauns; Bruce~-=ef, Angela Gallardo Subject: Dohrn Meadow Mr. Sorensen: The City of Newcastle has the following comments on the Dohrn Meadows Preliminary Plat application: 1. The storm system from the Whitehawk subdivision discharges to a pipe that goes to the subject property. Provisions for this stormwater should be included in the plat engineering. 2. We strongly encourage the design of the new public street to allow future connection between Monterey Pl NE and Lincoln Ave NE. The through connection could be completed at the point in the future when the adjacent parcel addressed as 3792 Lincoln Ave NE were to subdivide. This would potentially eliminate another permanent cul de sac in this area, thereby improving neighborhood circulation and connectivity. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this application. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding our comments. 1 Tim McHarg, AICP Community Development Director City of Newcastle 12835 Newcastle Way, Suite 200 Newcastle, WA 98056-1316 (425) 649-4143 x112 2 Denis Law. Ma;:or Decenit;,er 23, 2014 ... · Marc Cadieux ·. 6947 Ccial Creek Pl<:wy SE · . PMl;l#154 Newcastle'; WA 98059 ··e-x-?,&·_····· srm £1~'.'>~~itz,5:~·-~1 ···•-: i\ , ,·< j l, t«Y O It (t(i~ ~l .~-' -; -·-.OOJ,@., .~~- . Community &.Ecoriomii: Development6epartment CE."Qilp"Vincent,Administrator . Response to Public Co,,;ment; RE: LUA14~Ql2S0, Dobrri Meadows Pre-Plat Dear Mart cidieux: Thank you for providing ,;o~ment on the Dohr~ Meado~s, Residentiar9~1ot Prelimina~ Plat as . part ofthe public comment period.I apolcigizefo/the delayed respanse and was·colle_cting· • . clarifying information from the biologistwho performed the wetiand evaluation as it was . important to provJdingyou·spe.cific answers. Your email; dated October.21, 2014, specifled · ·. coricerns about the n;tlve growth. protection· easement oilyour.tesidentfal property;that the easement.has a season.stream that flows and scimetimes floods,,and ifthere will be any-work . 1 ·. performed as part of the prt>posed 9-lot pmj<;,ct that would impact your property's native, . · · growth area: _You additionally ask about any trees that will be cut down on the property .. Approximately 40 trees ail;! identified Ori the project .Sitethat ate not Within the.wetland ar~a Or · · where tlie.new.dead-end street is.propose~.Of the 40 trees,.thetity requires that 30% be . retained or be replaced·. The applicant is proposing t~ retain two.and proµosing to pla11t 1 60 new ·trees as part of site development. _Trees in the wetland and wetland buffer area wiU be kej,t. · · T~ regards to the native gr~_;;th'area eas~ment 011 yo~r property, the easemerii Would not be changed due to this' proposal and there would be nci work in this area as:it IS not within the .· bo'l.indaries ofthe subject·pmject. I have provided a delineation . .of the wetland l:ioundari~s from · ·. the biologist with a sk_etch of wh~re the biologist estimates the Wetland extends onto neighboring properties to the south and west. The wetland oil th.e project site isconsidered a . Category_2 wetland arid therefore requires a SQ..foot buffer. No development Is proposed in the wetland,orwetland buffer areas. . ' . Thank youfor-providing.comments. lfyou would like toreview the project file, the submitted documents are.available on the 5th Floor of City Hail. . . Sincerely, ~;..,.. ., . ., ........ Kris Sorensen Associate Planner cc: File Renton City Hall , 1055 South Grady Way. , Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov ' ' r ·. i- I I ' \ \ ! l"II" IL. . E.U~QJTil?i!§S i:::,, JOfl PRUSS ~; ,-. 11, ... __ "'"''"''~-=5-,,. ........... _,,._ -, ........ -·<1<-... ,.,,.~ ..... .,....., ......... ",.,'" SOUNDARY/TOPOGRAIIH'f' PLAN / l 'rl1d A~ifN/"1J/13Hd .,., .... , ... 1,., ... ,, .. ,., .. ~-·"""""""'" .... ,.. ..... , ~;; ~ ---!!II ~ IIO<·IO!MUl-..,•0<10-t<fl!t~-·(!nH>M-•IO< ____ lllS" -,-0 .-.,-- SMOQIRW N~HOO ~ ssedllic>'5'ff3 ' . ~n 1,11 I • i! • 11 • iih ,; 11 1, ' ill 1!· • ,!; . 11 l, !'i .. a. i i '1n'1. l :11 !l!! 1! d! • le ~ I;'. l;'.l;'.l;'.l;'.t'.t;l;'.t;I;'. I;~ l;'.t; u! Ji ! !l:1 l ~ 111111:111111m~ ~a 1111 ?:j li!i! :11 ·r i1111i1! .,llMh i 1~mmu !I !! ~· ll1 i ~1 • 'I' ~gl; n;~~ n.1 ii . i i ilililil811!181t iih' !l!I I"'! ; 1 i ! i I immm ! I · . I ill I !!lil mil 'I' Ii ii 'I i '-········ n 1-Ii I ' I 11 II hli j !1 11 l'mma, ii ii .iii ~ ~! ,I ,i,., ,Iii! Sil~ ------------~-------i _______ _ 1 ' T l 1 I / ' ' ,. ' I ' ' (,R.I L ___ ,, ___ _ Kris Sorensen From: Kris Sorensen Sent: To: Tuesday, December 23, 2014 2:31 PM Marc Cadieux {cadu98@yahoo.com) Subject: Attachments: FW: 3767 Monterey Place NE, Renton 20141223143542813.pdf; PLAT PLAN.pd/ Second try. I have also attached the proposed plat plan that depicts the wetland area and boundary area. From: Kris Sorensen Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2014 2:21 PM To: 'Marc Cadieux' Subject: RE: 3767 Monterey Place NE, Renton See attached scan of the hardcopy mail and wetland map that is being sent to you. From: Marc Cadieux (mailto:cadu98@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2014 11:38 AM To: Kris Sorensen Subject: Re: 3767 Monterey Piace NE, Renton Hi. Thank you for the quick response! Would you mind changing my mailing address: 6947 Coal Creek Pkwy SE PMB#154 Newcastle, WA 98059 Thank you very much for your help! Ciao! Marc Y From: Kris Sorensen <KSorensen@Rentonwa.gov> To: 'Marc Cadieux' <cadu98@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2014 11 :22 AM Subject: RE: 3767 Monterey Place NE, Renton Hi Marc -I will provide you a print out of what they provided and a more official reply to your question. No work on your property can be done, and they have not proposed to change any of the wetland or wetland buffer on their site. Now that I have greater clarity on where the wetland biologist has identified the wetland, I will provide you the drawing and study. I should have a letter sent in the mail today or tomorrow. Thanks tor your questions, 1 Placement of NGPE. There is a seasonal stream that flows and sometimes floods on the property so concerned how this will affect my property/NGPE (SW corner). Will the do any work on the NGPE on my property? Marc Cadieux 206-579-7 486 -Sent from my iPad On 16 Oct,2014, at 1 :46 PM, Kris Sorensen <KSorensen@Rentonwa.gov> wrote: Hi Marc -I've attached a scan of the layout that shows a wetland in the area you are probably talking about, this is probably what is on the white board by the road. Kris From: Marc Cadieux [mailto:cadu98@yahoo.com) Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 9:37 AM To: Kris Sorensen Subject: Re: 3767 Monterey Place NE, Renton Hi. Thank you for sending this. Is there a lot layout? Especially concerned with NGPE. There's a creek that flows down on my property and wondered what they had planned. -Sent from my iPad On 1 O Oct,2014, at 9:01 AM, Kris Sorensen <KSorensen@Rentonwa.gov> wrote: Hi Marc -the 2 week comment period began yesterday on 10/9. You should have time to make comments. See the attachment for information. Let me know if you have further questions as you can review the file as city hall. Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner, Planning Division, Community & Economic Development, City of Renton, 425-430-6593 From: Marc Cadieux [mailto:cadu98@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 12:56 PM To: Kris Sorensen Subject: Re: 3767 Monterey Place NE, Renton Great. I'm leaving town until 10/14. Will I still have time to review and comment? Can you scan info when done? Thanks! -Sent from my iPhone On Oct 1, 2014, at 10:17 AM, Kris Sorensen <KSorensen@Rentonwa.gov> wrote: 3 <NOA DNSM Dorhn Meadows PP 14-001280.pdf> <20141016140058469.pdf> 5 EXHIBIT 25 4-2-110A 4-2-11 OA DEVELOPME ~L ZONING DESIGNATIONS (PRIMARY AND ATTACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES) I DENSITY ', ' ' ' ' ' ,' '' 1 Minimum Net Density (for proposed short plats or subdivisions)'· 15 RC, R-1, none and R-4 R-8 4 dwelling units per net acre. R-10 For parcels over 1/2 gross acre: 4 dwelling units per net acre 30 R-14 10 dwelling units per net acre30 RM For any subdivision, and/or development:30 "U" suffix: 25 dwelling units per net acre. "T" suffix: 14 dwelling units per net acre. "F" suffix: 10 dwelling units per net acre. I Maximum Net Density2• 14, 15 RC 1 dwelling unit per 10 net acres. R-1 1 dwelling unit per 1 net acre, except that in designated Urban Separators density of up to 1 unit per gross acre may be permitted subject to conditions in RMC 4-3-110, Urban Separator Overlay Regulations. Assisted living bonus: A maximum density of 18 units/acre may be allowed subject to conditions of RMC 4-9-065, Density Bonus Review. R-4 4 dwelling units per 1 net acre. R-8 8 dwelling units per 1 net acre, except that the maximum shall be 6.00 dwelling units per net acre when alleys are considered practical, as specified in RMC 4-7-150.E.5, and are not part of the street configuration. R-10 1 O dwelling units per net acre. Assisted living bonus: A maximum density of 18 units/acre, for assisted living, may be allowed subject to conditions of RMC 4-9-065, Density Bonus Review. R-14 14 dwelling units per net acre, except that density of up to 18 dwelling units per acre may be permitted subject to conditions in RMC 4-9-065, Density Bonus Review. Assisted living bonus: A maximum density of 18 units/acre, for assisted living, may be allowed subject to conditions of RMC 4-9-065, Density Bonus Review. Affordable housing bonus: Up to 30 dwelling units per net acre may be permitted on parcels a minimum of two acres in size if 50% or more of the proposed dwelling units are affordable to low income households with incomes at or below 50% of the area median income. RM "U" suffix: 75 dwelling units per net acre.26 "T" suffix: 35 dwelling unrts per net acre. "F" suffix: 20 dwelling units per net acre.32 Assisted living bonus: 1.5 times the maximum density may be allowed subject to conditions of RMC 4-9-065, Density Bonus Review. 2 -69 (Revised 3/14) 4-2-110A NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS. PER LOT . --·" .:· .. Maximum Number per Legal Lot2 RC, R-1, R-4, and 1 dwelling with 1 accessory dwelling unit.7 R-8 R-10and Detached single family dwellings: 1 dwelling with 1 accessory dwelling unit. R-14 Attached dwellings: n/a RM n/a 1..0T D1MENSIONS31/fot m ~~1$rand'ii~a<1'ustineri!s) \ . -. -· -. . · ·--.,-. '<: >. p:::':.~:::!!Liii(~"i:.'s->:::i!I':(\:;t;:;<:::;:}:> }_ :-. · ., ----,': ·--·-:·:. : :,;: )){i;i:::;::) ,f:·t;:' =,::,,, ::;;,' .1,;: _·.::_:' i;i;I'< Minimum Lot Size RC 28 10 acres R-1 28 1 acre, except 10,000 sq. ft. for cluster development.' R-420 8,000 sq. ft.11 , except for small lot cluster development 1°, where R-8 standards shall apply. R-82• 4,500 sq. ft. for parcels greater than 1 acre. 5,000 sq. ft. for parcels 1 acre or less. R-10 and No minimum lot size. However, developments of greater than 9 single family dwellings R-142• shall incorporate a variety of home sizes, lot sizes, and unit clusters. RM n/a Minimum Lot Width RC 150 ft. for interior lots. 175 ft. for corner lots. R-1 75 ft. for interior lots. 85 ft. for corner lots. Except for cluster development, where R-4 standards shall apply. R-4 70 ft. for interior lots. 80 ft. for corner lots.11 Except for small lot cluster development 10, where R-8 standards shall apply. R-8 50 ft. for interior lots. 60 ft. for corner lots. R-10and No minimum lot width. R-14 RM "T" suffix: 14 ft. All other suffixes: 50 ft. (Revised 3/l4) 2 -70 4-2-110A Minimum Lot Depth RC R-1 R-4 R-8 R-10 and R-14 RM 29 200 ft. 85 ft., except for cluster development, where R-4 standards shall apply.3 80 ft.11 , except for small lot cluster development10 , where R-8 standards shall apply. 65 ft. No minimum lot depth. 65 ft. Lot Configuration R-8, R-10, and R-14 Guidelines for R-10 and R-14: Building setbacks shall ensure separation of homes and private spaces while allowing high density. Visual functional continuity shall be maintained between housing units through similar setbacks and/or landscape buffers. Structures and parking areas may encroach into required set- backs if it can be shown that such encroachment allows significant trees or tree clusters to be retained. Encroachment shall be the minimum encroachment necessary to protect specified trees. In no case shall the yard be reduced to 50% or more of the required setback. Minimum Front Yards RC and R-1 30 ft. R-4 30 ft.12 Exceptions: R-8 R-10 and R-14 RM 1. For small lot cluster development10 , R-8 standards shall apply. 2. When parking lot is provided in the rear yard of the lot with access from a public right- of-way or alley, 20 ft. 3. The Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee may reduce the setback by a maximum of 50% of the required setback, when all of the following conditions apply: a. The setback that was required at the time of initial construction was less than 30 ft. b. A reduced setback is appropriate given the character of the immediate neighborhood. c. There are no other alternative locations that can reasonably accommodate the request without encroaching into a setback. 15 ft. Unit with Alley Access Garage: The front yard setback of the primary structure may be reduced to 10 ft. if all parking is provided in the rear yard of the lot with access from a public right-of-way or alley. 10 ft. 21 , except garage/carport setback which shall be 15 ft. "U" suffix: 5 ft.18·19 "T" suffix: 5 ft. "F" suffix: 20 ft. 2 -71 (Revised 4/12) 4-2-110A I Minimum Side Yard RC 25 ft. R-1 15 ft. R-4 5 ft. R-8 5 ft. R-10 and Detached Units: 4 ft. R-14 Attached Units: 4 ft. for the unattached side(s) of the structure. 0 ft. for the attached side(s).23 RM "T" suffix -Attached Units: A minimum of 3 ft. for the unattached side(s) of the structure. 0 ft. for the attached side(s). Standard Minimum Setbacks for all other suffixes: Minimum setbacks for side yards:24 Lot width: less than or equal to 50 ft. -Yard setback: 5 ft. Lot width 50.1 to 60 ft. -Yard setback: 6 ft. Lot width: 60.1 to 70 ft. -Yard setback: 7 ft. Lot width: 70.1 to 80 ft. -Yard setback: 8 ft. Lot width: 80.1 to 90 ft. -Yard setback: 9 ft. Lot width: 90.1 to 100 ft. -Yard setback 10 ft. Lot width: 100.1 to 110 ft. -Yard setback: 11 ft. Lot width: 110.1+ ft. -Yard setback: 12 ft. Additional setbacks for structures greater than 30 ft. in elevation: The entire structure shall be set back an additional 1 ft. for each 10 ft. in excess of 30 ft. to a maximum cumulative setback of 20 ft. Additional setbacks for lots abutting Single Family Residential Zones RC, R-1, R-4, R-8, and R-10: 25 ft. along the abutting side(s) of the property. I Side Yard Along a Street RC 30 ft. R-1 20 ft. R-4 20 ft.12 Exceptions: 1. For small lot cluster development10 , R-8 standards shall apply. 2. The Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee may reduce the setback by a maximum of 50% of the required setback, when all of the following conditions apply: a. The setback that was required at the time of initial construction was less than 20 ft. b. A reduced setback is appropriate given the character of the immediate neighborhood. c. There are no other alternative locations that can reasonably accommodate the request without encroaching into a setback. R-8 15 ft. for the primary structure R-10and 10 ft. except garage/carport setbacks which shall be 15 ft. R-14 RM "U" and "T" suffixes and on all previously existing platted lots which are 50 ft. or less in width: 10 ft. All other suffixes with lots over 50 ft. in width: 20 ft. (Revised 4/12) 2 -72 4-2-110A I Minimum Rear Yard RC 35 ft. R-1 25 ft. R-4 25 ft. Exceptions: 1. For small lot cluster development 1°, R-8 standards shall apply. 2. The Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee may reduce the setback by a maximum of 50% of the required setback, when all of the following conditions apply: a. The setback that was required at the time of initial construction was less than 25 ft. b. A reduced setback is appropriate given the character of the immediate neighborhood. c. There are no other alternative locations that can reasonably accommodate the request without encroaching into a setback. R-8 20 ft. R-10 and 12 ft.21 R-14 RM "U" suffix: 5 ft.16 -19 , unless lot abuts an RC, R-1, R-4, R-8, or R-10 zone, then 25 ft. "T" suffix: 5 ft. 11 F" suffix: 15 ft. I Minimum Freeway Frontage Setback RC, R-1, R-4, R-8, 10 ft. landscaped setback from the street property line. R-10, and R-14 I Clear Vision Area RC, R-1, R-4, R-8, In no case shall a structure over 42 in. in height intrude into the 20 ft. clear vision area R-10, and defined in RMC 4-11-030, Definitions C. R-14 I Reciprocal Use Easements RC, R-1, R-4 and n/a R-8 R-10, and In order to allow for opportunities that maximize space, reciprocal use easements are R-14 allowed. If used, all of the following are required: 1. Reciprocal side and/or rear yard use easements shall be delineated on the site plan. 2. Residential walls facing a reciprocal side yard shall not have any windows within 5 feet of ground level or doors entering into the yard space of the abutting home. 3. The design of use easements should not negatively affect the building foundations. 4. The layout of each home should be such that privacy is maintained between abutting houses. RM n/a 2 -73 {Revised 3/13) 4-2-11 OA BUILDING STANDARDS ' ,' < ,; . Maximum Building Height, except for uses having a "Public Suffix" (P) designation and public water system facilitiesa,9 RC,R-1, R-4, R-8 30 ft. and R-10 R-14 Residential and Civic Uses: 30 ft. Commercial Uses: 20 ft. RM "U" suffix: 50 ft. "T" suffix: 35 ft. "F" suffix: 35 ft. 20 Maximum Height for Wireless Communication Facilities (Including Amateur Radio Antennas) RC, R-1, See RMC 4-4-140G, Standards for Specific Types of Wireless Facilities. Amateur radio R-4, R-8, antennas are allowed a maximum height of six feet (6') without a conditional use permit. R-10, R-14 Larger structures will have maximum height determined via the conditional use permit and RM process, RMC 4-9-030, Conditional Use Permits, as it exists or may be amended. Maximum Building Coverage (Including Primary and Accessory Buildings) RC Lots 5 acres or more: 2%. An additional 5% of the total area may be used for agricultural buildings. Lots 10,000 sq. ft. to 5 acres: 15%. On lots greater than 1 acre, an additional 5% of the total area may be used for agricultural buildings. Lots 10,000 sq. ft. or less: 35%. R-1 20% R-4 and Lots greater than 5,000 sq. ft.: 35% or 2,500 sq. ft., whichever is greater. R-8 Lots 5,000 sq. ft. or less: 50% R-10 and n/a R-14 RM "U" suffix: 75% 11 T" suffix: 75% "F" suffix: 35% A maximum coverage of 45% may be obtained through the Hearing Examiner site development plan review process. (Revised 3/13) 2 • 74 4-2-110A I Maximum Impervious Surface Area RC Lots 5 acres or more: 20%. Lots 10,000 sq. ft.: 55%. For each additional 10,000 sq. ft. increase in lot size, the impervious coverage shall be decreased by 1.75% to a minimum of 20% fora 5-acre lot. Lots 10,000 sq. ft. or less: 55%. R-1 30% R-4 55% R-8 75% R-10 Detached units: 75% Attached units: 65% R-14 85% RM uu" and "T" suffixes: 85% All other suffixes: 75% I Building Design RM "U" suffix: Modulation of vertical and horizontal facades is required at a minimum of 2 ft. at an interval of a minimum offset of 40 ft. on each building face. ... "U" and "T" suffixes: See RMC 4-3-100 for Urban Design Regulations. I Maximum Number of Units per Building R-10 No more than four (4) dwelling units per building. R-14 No more than six (6) dwelling units per building. 2-74a (Revised 4/12) This page left intentionally blank. (Revised 4/12) 2-74b 4-2-110A DESIGN STANDARDS General RC, R-1, R-4, R-8, R-10,and R-14 RM See AMC 4-2-115, Residential Design and Open Space Standards Properties abutting a less intense residential zone may be required to incorporate special design standards (e.g., additional landscaping, larger setbacks, facade articulation, solar access, fencing) through the site development plan review process. LANDSCAPING!:', ? 'i'i,1i:::; i@'1~!!1iii!: t / ;' t Jp , General: See RMC 4-4-070. EXTERIOA·UGttt1NGJ'iJ~;j,i:,j!ilhi~!1;;!C, General R-10 and R-14 See AMC 4-4-075, Lighting, Exterior On-Site. Surface Mounted or Roof Top Equipment, or Outdoor Storage R~id ~-~4 , See AMC 4-4-095, Screening and Storage Height/Location Limitations. Recyclables and Refuse RM See AMC 4-4-090, Refuse and Recyclable Standards. Utilities R-10and R-14 Utility boxes that are not located in alleyways or away from public gathering spaces shall be screened with landscaping or berms. · Minimum Size and/or Location Requirements Guidelines for R-10 and R-14: Trash and recycling shall be located so that they are easily accessible to residents. They shall also be invisible to the general public. R-10 and R-14 General RC, R-1, R-4, R-8, R-10, and R-14 Both of the following are required, 1. Trash and recycling containers shall be located so that they have minimal impact on residents and their neighbors and so that they are not visible to the general public; and 2. A screened enclosure in which to keep containers shall be provided or garages shall be built with adequate space to keep containers. Screened enclosures shall not be located within front yards. See RMC 4-4-090, Refuse and Recyclable Standards. See AMC 4-3-050, Critical Areas Regulations, and 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations. 2 -74.1 (Revised 8/10) 4-2-110A PARKING AND LOADING General: See RMC 4-4-080 SIGNS General R·10, R-14 See RMC 4-4-100, Sign Regulations and RM SIDEWALKS, PATHWAYS,.ANO PEDESTRIAN EASEMENTS I General R-1 o and All of the following are required: R-14 General 1. Sidewalks shall be provided throughout the neighborhood. The sidewalk may disconnect from the road, provided it continues in a logical route throughout the development. 2. Front yards shall have entry walks that are a minimum width of 3 feet and a maximum width of 4 feet. 3. Pathways shall be used to connect common parks, green areas, and pocket parks to residential access streets, limited residential access streets, or other pedestrian connections. They may be used to provide access to homes and common open space. They shall be a minimum 3 ft. in width and made of paved asphalt, concrete, or porous material such as: porous paving stones, crushed gravel with soil stabilizers, or paving blocks with planted joints. Sidewalks or pathways for parks and green spaces shall be located at the edge of the common space to allow.a larger usable green and easy access to homes. 4. Pedestrian Easement Plantings: Shall be planted with plants and trees. Trees are required along all pedestrian easements to provide shade and spaced 20 feet on center. Shrubs shall be planted in at least 15 percent of the easement and shall be spaced no further than 36 inches on center. 5. For all homes that do not front on a residential access street, limited residential access street, a park, or a common green: Pedestrian entry easements that are at least 15 ft. wide plus a 5 ft. sidewalk shall be provided. Guidelines for R-1 O and R-14: Mailboxes shall be located so that they are easily accessible to residents. They shall also be architecturally compatible with the homes. R-1 O and All of the following are required: R-14 1. Mailboxes shall be clustered and located so as to serve the needs of USPS while not adversely affecting the privacy of residents; and (Revised 8/lO) 2. Mailboxes shall be lockable consistent with USPS standard; and 3. Mailboxes shall be architecturally enhanced with materials and details typical of the home's architecture; and 4. Newspaper boxes shall be of a design that reflects the character of the home. 2 -74.2 4-2-110A HOT TUBS,.POOLS, AND MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT General Guidelines for R-10 and R-14: Hot tubs, pools, and mechanical equipment shall be placed so as to not negatively impact neighbors. R-10 and Hot tubs and pools shall only be located in back yards and designed to minimize sight R-14 and sound impacts to adjoining property. Pool heaters and pumps shall be screened from view and sound insulated. Pool equipment must comply with codes regarding fencing. FENCES AND HEDGES 5 General R-~~1 ~nd See RMC 4-4-040 EXCEPTIONS . Pre-Existing Legal Lots RC, R-1, R-4, R-8, R-10 and R-14 Nothing herein shall be determined to prohibit the construction of a single family dwelling and its accessory buildings on a pre-existing legal lot; provided, that all setbacks, lot coverage, height limits, infrastructure, and parking requirements of the zone can be satisfied and provisions of RMC 4-3-050, Critical Areas, can be met. RM Nothing herein shall be determined to prohibit the construction of a single family dwelling and its accessory buildings or the existence of a single family dwelling or two attached dwellings, existing as of March 1, 1995, on a pre-existing legal lot; provided, that all setback, lot coverage, height limits, infrastructure, and parking requirements for this zone can be satisfied, and provisions of RMC 4-3-050, Critical Areas, and other provisions of the Renton Municipal Code can be met. (Ord. 4869, 10-23-2000; Amd. Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002; Ord. 5100, 11-1-2004; Ord. 5132, 4-4-2005; Ord. 5153, 9-26-2005; Ord. 5306, 9-17-2007; Ord. 5355, 2-25-2008; Ord. 5383, 6-2-2008; Ord. 5387, 6-9-2008; Ord. 5401, 7-14-2008; Ord. 5450, 3-2-2009; Ord. 5473, 7-13-2009; Ord. 5518, 12-14-2009; Ord. 5526, 2-1-201 O; Ord. 5528, 3-8-2010; Ord. 5529, 3-8-201 O; Ord. 5531, 3-8-201 O; Ord. 5590, 2-28-2011; Ord. 5649, 12-12-2011; Ord. 5650, 12-12-2011; Ord. 5675, 12-3-2012; Ord. 5702, 12-9-2013) 2 -74.3 (Revised 3/14) 4-2-1108 4-2-110B DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDINGS)5 MAXIMUM.NUMBER AND SIZE . ····:u/ . .. .. "" -_. ·<·'. General RC,R-1, Accessory structures shall only be allowed on lots in conjunction with a primary use. R-4, R-8, The total floor area of all accessory buildings shall not be greater than the floor area of R-10, R-14 the primary residential uses. and RM The lot coverage of the primary residential structure along with all accessory buildings shall not exceed the maximum lot coverage of the Zoning District.17 Accessory Dwelling Unit RC, R-1, R-4, R-8, 1 unit per lot of record -800 sq. ft. or 75% of primary residence, whichever is smaller.16 R-10 and R-14 RM n/a Other Types of Accessory Structures Allowed in Addition to Accessory Dwelling Unit RC and R-1 2 structures -max. 720 sq. ft. per structure, or 1 structure -max. 1,000 sq. ft. In addition, 1 barn or stable -max. 2,000 sq. ft., provided the lot is 5 acres or more. R-4 and 2 structures -max. 720 sq. ft. per structure, or R-8 1 structure -max. 1,000 sq. ft. R-10 and 1 structure per residential unit -max. 400 sq. ft.; provided, that they are architecturally R-14 consistent with the principal structure. Except greenhouses, sheds, or other similar accessory structures-max. 150 sq. ft. HEIGHT!· .·•.-···· ... ·~ •·!." ••• .. ·· .. -~!.!•!•! . ..·. . .. ,., ;, . _. . . . .. . :, > : >< Maximum Building Height except for uses having a "Public Suffix" (Pl designa- tion•,• RC Accessory building -15 ft. R-1, R-4 Accessory building -15 ft. and R-8 Accessory dwelling units -30 ft., except that the accessory unit structure (dwelling space, garage space, etc.) shall not be taller in height than the primary dwelling. Animal husbandry or agricultural related structures -30 ft. R-10 and Accessory building -15 ft. R-14 Accessory dwelling unit -30 ft. RM 25 ft., except in the RM-U District where the maximum height shall be determined through the site plan review process. (Revised 3/14) 2 -74.4 4-2-1106 Maximum Height for Wireless Communication Facilities (Including Amateur Radio Antennas) RC, R-1, See RMC 4-4-140G, Standards for Specific Types of Wireless Facilities. Freestanding R-4, R-8, vertical monopole amateur radio antennas are allowed a maximum height of forty five R-10, R-14, feet (45') without a conditional use permit. Larger structures will have maximum height and RM determined via the conditional use permit process, RMC 4-9-030, Conditional Use Permits, as ii exists or may be amended. LOCATION•· .. ·· ; i ,., ;; ::: > ;: , .. ···' .. . '·· ··,y·,,> ·········!''!{, ... co-" .-·_, ___ ,_.-.,_,_,-: __ "::..-.-,. _,,,. __ General RC, R-1, R- 4, R-8 and n/a R-10 R-14 Garages and carports shall only have access from the alley when lots abut an alley. When lots do not abut an alley, garages and carports shall be located in the rear yard or side yard and set back from the front of the primary structure by a minimum of 6 feet. RM "U" Suffix: Garages and carports shall only have access from the alley when lots abut an alley. When lots do not abut an alley, garages and carports shall be located in the rear yard or side yard. MINIMUM•.SETBACl:<Silli:1iO!•iOi: i"\·,,,,; ·,re;, • ;•' . l'f .;; , •• '.'i'o:-i'· '·'.,'?.:; ,<;;:;:,::;:'Id>\\'·\ ; ):,:.··_.: ______ . "'· """ ·. ' .. ··· .. : General RC, R-1, R-4, R-8, 6 ft. from any residential structure. If sited closer than 6 ft., the structure will be R-10, R-14 considered to be attached. and RM Side Yards for Accessory Buildings RC and R-1 5 ft., unless located between the rear of the house and the rear property line, then Oft. side yard is allowed. R-4, R-8, R-3 ft., unless located between the rear of the house and the rear property line, then Oft. 10, R-14 and RM side yard is allowed. Side Yards for Accessory Dwelling Units RC 25 ft., except when along a street, then 30 ft. R-1 25 ft., except when along a street, then 20 ft. R-4 5 ft. R-8 5 ft., except when along a street, then 15 ft.; or when part of an attached garage that accesses from the side yard along a street, then 20 ft. R-10and 4 ft., except when located on a corner lot then 8 ft., with an 18 ft. setback from the face R-14 of the garage to the back of the curb and/or to any sidewalk or pathway. RM n/a 2 -74.5 (Revised 3/13) 4-2-1108 Rear Yards for Accessory Buildings RC 5 ft. R-1, R-4, 3 ft., unless located between the rear of the house and the rear property line, then Oft. R-8, R-10, rear yard is allowed. R-14 and Except for garages, in order to ensure that there is adequate vehicular turning radius, RM garages on alleys shall be located as follows: 1. 9 ft. garage doors shall be at least 26 ft. from the back edge of the alley, or 2. 16 ft. garage doors shall be at least 24 ft. from the back edge of the alley. Rear Yards for Accessory Dwelling Units RC Determined through administrative review, to be no less than 10 ft. and no greater than 35 ft. R-1 and Determined through administrative review, to be no less than 10 ft. and no greater than R-4 25 ft. R-8 Determined through administrative review, to be no less than 5 ft. and no greater than 20 ft. R-10 and Determined through administrative review, to be no less than 5 ft. and no greater than 10 R-14 ft. RM n/a Front Yard/Side Yard Along Streets RC, R-1, R-4, R-8, Accessory structures are not permitted within required front yards or side yards along R-10, R-14 streets. and RM Special Setbacks for Animal Husbandry or Agricultural Related Structures RC, R-1, R-4, R-8, Agricultural related structures -50 ft. from any property line. R-10, and Stables and other animal husbandry related structures, see RMC 4-4-010. R-14 RM n/a Clear Vision Area RC, R-1, R-4, R-8, In no case shall a structure over 42 in. in height intrude into the 20 ft. clear vision area R-10, R-14 defined in RMC 4-11-030. and RM ~-"'' ~-,,,,:,·.···· ·~·-··,>,<.•!!•'•···.···· :;;,,· ... '',>i<; '< :: 'i<<·'; '.''C'' ::·:::,::~. "'i.; ,,, ._·:-·- General RC, R-1, Garages and carports must provide a minimum of 24 ft. of back-out room, either on site R-4 and or counting improved alley surface or other improved right-of-way surface. R-8 See RMC 4-4-080. R-10 and Garages shall be set back a minimum of 10 ft. from the front of the building facade or 7 R-14 ft. from the back of a porch or stoop. Garages shall have a minimum 18-foot driveway length from the face of the garage to the back of the sidewalk or access lane, unless accessed by an alleyway. (Revised 3/13) 2 -74.6 4-2-11 OB CRITICAL AREAS . . .. ./ .. · . , . General RC, R-1, R-4, R-8, See RMC 4-3-050 and 4-3-090. R-10, and R-14 (Amd. Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002; Ord. 4999, 1-13-2003; Ord. 5100, 11-1-2004; Ord. 5132, 4-4-2005; Ord. 5450, 3-2-2009; Ord. 5473, 7-13-2009; Ord. 5518, 12-14-2009; Ord. 5590, 2-28-2011; Ord. 5675, 12-3-2012) ' 2 -74.7 (Revised 3/I3) This page left intentionally blank. (Revised 3/13) 2 -74.8 4-2-110D 4-2-110D CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TABLE FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS 1. 2. 3. a. Phasing, shadow platting, or land reserves may be used to satisfy the minimum density requirements if the applicant can demonstrate that the current development would not pre- clude the provision of adequate access and infrastructure to future development and would allow for the eventual satisfaction of minimum den- sity requirements through future development. Within the Urban Cen- ter, surface parking may be consid- ered a land reserve. b. In the event the applicant can show that minimum density cannot be achieved due to lot configuration, lack of access, environmental or physical constraints, minimum density require- ments may be waived. Use-related provisions are not variable. Use-related provisions that are not eligible for a variance include: building size, units per structure/lot, or densities. Unless bonus size or density provisions are spe- cifically authorized, the modification of building size, units per structure, or densi- ties requires a legislative change in the code provisions and/or a Comprehensive Plan amendment/rezone. Within designated urban separators, clus- tering is required; individual lots shall not be less than ten thousand (10,000) square feet and development shall be consistent with RMC 4-3-110, Urban Separator Over- lay Regulations. Outside of designated urban separators, clustering may be allowed in order to meet objectives such as preserving significant natural features, providing neighborhood open space, or facilitating the provision of sewer service. The maximum net density shall not be exceeded; except within urban separators a density bonus may be granted allowing the total density to achieve one dwelling unit per gross contiguous acre. In order for the bonus to be allowed, projects must provide native vegetation cover (either existing or new) on sixty five percent (65%) of the gross area of all parcels in the land (Revised 3/13) 4. 2 -80 use action, including both the area within and outside the open space corridor. In addition, projects shall provide at least one of the following: a. Enhancement of wetlands at a ratio of one-half (1/2) acre enhanced for one acre delineated within the urban sepa- rator pursuant to RMC 4-3-050M12b, Evaluation Criteria, and RMC 4-3-050M 12c, Wetlands Chosen for Enhancement. Enhancement pro- posed for a density bonus may not also be used for a mitigation for other wetland alterations; or b. The removal of and/or bringing into conformance with Renton standards of legal nonconforming uses from the site; or c. Natural surface pedestrian trails with public access. The trails can be part of an adopted trail system or, where there is no planned trail system, of a configuration approved by the Com- munity and Economic Development Administrator. In the absence of either wetlands or legal nonconforming uses on the site, public access and trails shall be provided and approved by the Community and Economic Develop- ment Administrator. Allowed Projections into Setbacks: a. Fireplace Structures, Windows: Fireplace structures, bay or garden windows, enclosed stair landings, and similar structures as determined by the Zoning Administrator may project twenty four inches (24") into any set- back; provided, such projections are: (i) Limited to two (2) per facade. (ii) Not wider than ten feet (10'). b. Fences, Rockeries, and Retaining Walls: Fences, rockeries, and retain- ing walls with a height of forty eight inches (48") or less may be con- structed within any required setback; provided, that they are located outside 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. of the twenty-foot (20') clear vision area specified in RMC 4-11-030, defi- nition of "clear vision area." c. Steps and Decks: Uncovered steps and decks not exceeding eighteen inches (18") above the finished grade may project to any property line. Uncovered steps and decks having no roof covering and not exceeding forty two inches (42") high may be built within the front yard setback. d. Eaves: Eaves and cornices may project up to twenty four inches (24") into any required setback. e. Porches and Stoops: May project into front setbacks up to eight feet (8') and into side setbacks along a street up to five feet (5'). In order to be considered detached, a structure must be sited a minimum of six feet (6') from any residential structure. A front yard setback of less than typically allowed is penmitted if equal to or greater than the average of the front yard setback of the existing, abutting primary structures; however, in no case shall a minimum set- back of less than twenty feet (20') be allowed for garages which access from the front yard street(s). For assisted living developments meeting the conditions of RMC 4-9-065, Density Bonus Review, there is no maximum num- ber of dwelling units per lot. In no case shall building height exceed the maximum allowed by the Airport Related Height and Use Restrictions, for uses located within the Federal Aviation Admin- istration Airport Zones designated under RMC 4-3-020. Public facilities are allowed the following height bonus: a. Water towers/reservoirs are permit- ted up to a maximum height of one hundred seventy five feet (175') to the highest point of the reservoir. b. Water treatment facilities and pump stations are allowed up to fifty feet (50') subject to site plan development review. The setback standards may be modified to increase setbacks as 10. 2 -81 4-2-1100 part of the site plan development review approval. c. Public utility facilities exceeding fifty feet (50') in height shall be treated with public art consistent with RMC 4-9-160. Such public art shall be eligi- ble for one percent (1%) for art fund- ing and shall be reviewed by the Renton Municipal Arts Commission. d. Structures on Public Suffix (P) proper- ties are permitted an additional fifteen feet (15') in height above that other- wise penmitted in the zone if "pitched roofs," as defined herein, are used for at least sixty percent (60%) or more of the roof surface of both primary and accessory structures. In addition, the height of a publicly owned structure may be increased as follows: i. When abutting a public street, one additional foot of height for each additional one and one-half feet (1-1/2') of perim- eter building setback beyond the minimum street setback required; or ii. When abutting a common property line, one additional foot (1') of height for each additional two feet (2') of perimeter building setback beyond the minimum required along a common property line. Small lot clusters of up to a maximum of fifty (50) lots shall be allowed within the R-4 zone, when at least thirty percent (30%) of the site is permanently set aside as "significant open space." Such open space shall be situated to act as a visual buffer between small lot clusters and other development in the zone. The percentage of open space required may be reduced to twenty percent (20%) of the site when: a. Public access is provided to open space; and b. Soft surface trails are provided within wetland buffers; and c. Stonm water ponds are designed to eliminate engineered slopes requiring fencing and enhanced to allow pas- sive and/or active recreation. (Revised 3/13) 4-2-11 OD All portions of a site that are not dedicated to platted single family lots or a dedicated right-of-way shall be set in a separate tract and/or tracts to preserve existing viable stands of trees or other native vegetation. The tract may also be used as a receiving area for tree replacement requirements in accordance with RMC 4-4-130H. Such tracts shall be shown and recorded on the face of the plat to be preserved in perpetuity. Such tracts may be included in contiguous open space for the purposes of qualifying for small lot clustered development. Where trees are removed, they shall be replaced in accordance with RMC 4-4-130H. 11. Approval for lot size, width, and depth reductions may be approved when, due to lot configuration or access, four (4) dwell- ing units per net acre cannot be achieved. The reduction shall be the minimum needed to allow four (4) dwelling units per net acre and shall be limited to the follow- ing minimum dimensions: Lot size -seven thousand two hundred (7,200) sq. ft. Lot width -sixty feet (60'). Lot depth -seventy feet (70'). 12. When lot size is reduced for the purpose of achieving maximum density, reduced set- backs may also be approved. Setback reductions shall be limited to the following: Front -twenty feet (20'). Side yard along a street -fifteen feet (15') primary structure, twenty feet (20') attached garage with access from the side yard. 13. Reserved. 14. For plats that create lots of a size large enough to allow future division under cur- rent lot size minimums and allow the potential to exceed current density maxi- mums, covenants shall be filed as part of the final plat requiring that future division of those lots in question must be consistent with the maximum density requirements as measured within the plat as a whole as of the time of future division, as well as the (Revised 3/13) 2 -82 general lot size and dimension minimums then in effect. 15. Accessory dwelling units shall not be included in density calculations. 16. The square foot calculation shall not include porches, exterior stairs, or garages. 17. The lot coverage of accessory dwelling units shall not be calculated towards maxi- mum building/lot coverage. 18. Front and rear setbacks in the RM-U Zone may be reduced to zero feet (O') during the site development plan review process pro- vided the applicant demonstrates that the project will provide a compensatory ame- nity such as an entryway courtyard, private balconies or enhanced landscaping. 19. If the structure located in the RM-U Zone exceeds forty feet (40') in height, a fifteen foot (15') front setback from the property line shall be required of all portions of the structure which exceed forty feet (40'). This requirement may be modified during the site development plan review process to a unifomn five foot (5') front setback for the entire structure; provided, that the structure provides a textured or varied facade (e.g., multiple setbacks, brickwork and/or ornamentation) and consideration of the pedestrian environment (e.g., extra sidewalk width, canopies, enhanced land- scaping). 20. In the 'F' District, an additional ten feet (1 O') height for a residential dwelling struc- ture may be obtained through the provision of additional amenities such as pitched roofs, additional recreation facilities, underground parking, and additional land- scaped open space areas; as determined through the site development plan review process and depending on the compatibil- ity of the proposed buildings with adjacent or abutting existing residential develop- ment. In no case shall the height of a resi- dential structure exceed forty five feet (45'). 21. The Community and Economic Develop- ment Administrator or designee may mod- ify this provision through the site development plan review process where it is determined that specific portions of the required on-site perimeter landscaping strip may be developed and maintained as a usable public open space with an open- ing directly to a public entrance. 22. Provided that, in those cases where the subject yard abuts common open space, this setback is reduced to four feet (4'). 23. Setbacks shall be measured consistent with the "yard requirement" in chapter4-11 RMC, except in the case of "shadow lots," setbacks shall be measured from the "shadow lot lines" in the same manner as a conventionally subdivided lot. 24. For self storage uses, rear and side yard setbacks shall comply with the Commer- cial Arterial Zone (CA) development regu- lations in RMC 4-2-120A, Development Standards for Commercial Zoning Desig- nations. 25. Reserved. 26. Density bonus may allow up to one hun- dred (100) dwelling units per acre within the RM-U Zone located within the Urban Center Design Overlay and north of South 2nd Street pursuant to requirements in the RMC 4-9-065. 27. See RMC 4-3-100, Urban Design Regula- tions. 28. For lots created after November 10, 2004. 29. The density bonus may allow up to twenty five (25) dwelling units per acre within the RM-F Zone pursuant to requirements in RMC 4-9-065. 30. Minimum density requirements shall not apply to the renovation or conversion of an existing structure. Additionally, in the R-1 zone only, minimum density requirements shall not apply to the subdivision or devel- opment of a legal lot one-half (112) gross acre or less in size as of March 1, 1995. 31. In order to meet the variation requirements of RMC 4-2-115, lot dimensions and set- backs are allowed to be decreased and/or increased; provided, that when averaged 2 -82. 1 4-2-110D the applicable lot standards of the zone are met. (Amd. Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002; Ord. 5100, 11-1-2004; Ord. 5132, 4-4-2005; Ord. 5153, 9-26-2005; Ord. 5306, 9-17-2007; Ord. 5355, 2-25-2008; Ord. 5383, 6-2-2008; Ord. 5473, 7-13-2009; Ord. 5518, 12-14-2009; Ord. 5528, 3-8-201 O; Ord. 5531, 3-8-2010; Ord. 5573, 11-15-201 O; Ord. 5590, 2-28-2011; Ord. 5650, 12-12-2011; Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) (Revised 3/13) 4-3-050A 4-3-050 CRITICAL AREAS REGULATIONS: A. PURPOSE: 1. General: The purposes of this section are to: a. Manage development activities to protect environmental quality; b. Assist or further the implementation of the policies of the Growth Manage- ment Act, the State Environmental Policy Act, chapter 43.21 C RCW, and the City Comprehensive Plan; c. Provide City officials with information to evaluate, approve, condition or deny public or private development proposals with regard to critical area impacts; d. Protect the public life, health, safety, welfare, and property by minimizing and managing the adverse environmental im- pacts of development within and abutting critical areas; and e. Protect the public from: i. Preventable maintenance and re- placement of public facilities needed when critical area functioning is im- paired; ii. Unnecessary costs for public emergency rescue and relief opera- tions; and iii. Potential litigation on improper construction practices occurring in critical areas. 2. Aquifer Protection: The overall purpose of the aquifer protection regulations is to pro- tect aquifers used as potable water supply sources by the City from contamination by hazardous materials. Other specific purposes include: a. Protectthe groundwater resources of the City; (Revised 3/13) 3 -12 b. Provide a means of regulating spe- cific land uses within aquifer protection areas; c. Provide a means of establishing safe construction practices for projects built within an aquifer protection area; and d. Protect the City's drinking water sup- ply from impacts by facilities that store, handle, treat, use, or produce sub- stances that pose a hazard to groundwa- ter quality. 3. Flood Hazards: It is the purpose of the flood hazard regulations to: a. Minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in specific areas; and b. Minimize expenditure of public money and costly flood control projects; and c. Minimize the need for rescue and re- lief efforts associated with flooding and generally undertaken at the expense of the general public; and d. Minimize damage to public facilities and utilities such as water and gas mains, electric, telephone and sewer lines, streets, and bridges located in ar- eas of special flood hazard; and e. Help maintain a stable tax base by providing for the sound use and develop- ment of areas of special flood hazard so as to minimize future flood blight areas; and f. Ensure that those who occupy the ar- eas of special flood hazard assume re- sponsibility for their actions. 4. Geologic Hazards: The purposes ofthe geologic hazard regulations are to: a. Minimize damage due to landslide, subsidence or erosion through the con- trol of development; and b. Protect the public against avoidable losses due to maintenance and replace- ment of public facilities, property dam- age, subsidy cost of public mitigation of avoidable impacts, and costs for public emergency rescue and relief operations; and c. Reduce the risks to the City and its citizens from development occurring on unstable slopes; and d. Control erosion and sediment run-off from development. 5. Habitat Conservation: The primary pur- pose of habitat conservation regulations is to minimize impacts to critical habitats and to re- store and enhance degraded or lower quality habitat in order to: a. Maintain and promote diversity of species and habitat within the City; and b. Coordinate habitat protection with the City's open space system, whenever possible, to maintain and provide habitat connections; and c. Help maintain air and water quality, and control erosion; and d. Serve as areas for recreation, educa- tion, scientific study, and aesthetic appre- ciation. 6. Streams and Lakes: The purposes of the stream and lake regulations are to: a. Protect riparian habitat in order to provide for bank and channel stability, sustained water supply, flood storage, re- cruitment of woody debris, leaf litter, nu- trients, sediment and pollutant filtering, shade, shelter, and other functions that are important to both fish and wildlife; and b. Prevent the loss of riparian acreage and functions and strive for a net gain over present conditions through restora- tion where feasible; and c. Protect aquatic habitat for salmonid species. Other fish/aquatic species are addressed through Habitat Conservation regulations (see subsection A5 of this Section). 3 -13 4-3-0509 7. Wetlands: The purposes of the wetland regulations are to: a. Ensure that activities in or affecting wetlands do not threaten public safety, cause nuisances, or destroy or degrade natural wetland functions and values; and b. Preserve, protect and restore wet- lands by regulating development within them and around them; and c. Protect the public from costs associ- ated with repair of downstream proper- ties resulting from erosion and flooding due to the loss of water storage capacity provided by wetlands; and d. Prevent the loss of wetland acreage and functions and strive for a net gain over present conditions. (Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000; Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005) B. APPLICABILITY -CRITICAL AREAS DESIGNATIONS/MAPPING: 1. Lands to Which These Regulations Apply: The following critical areas, classified in subsections H1 through M1ofthis Section, are regulated by this Section: a. Aquifer protection areas. b. Areas of special flood hazard. c. Sensitive slopes, twenty five percent (25%) to forty percent (40%) and pro- tected slopes, forty percent (40%) or greater. d. Medium, high, and very high land- slide hazard areas. e. High erosion hazards. f. High seismic hazards. g. Medium and high coal mine hazards. h. Volcanic hazard areas. i. Critical habitats. (Revised 6/09) 4-3-050C j. Streams and Lakes. i. All applicable requirements of this Section apply to Class 2 to 4 water bodies, as classified in subsection L 1 of this Section. ii. Class 5 water bodies, classified in subsection L 1 of this Section, are exempt from all provisions of this Section. iii. Class 1 water bodies, defined in subsection L1 of this Section, are not subject to this section, and are regu- lated in AMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, and AMC 4-9-197, Shoreline Permits. k. Wetlands, Categories 1, 2 and 3. 2. Mapping -General: a. The exact boundary of each critical area depicted on maps referenced herein is approximate and is intended only to provide an indication of the presence of a critical area on a particular site. Addi- tional critical areas may be present on a site. The actual presence of critical areas and the applicability of these regulations shall be based upon the classification cri- teria for each critical area. b. The Public Works Department shall provide an annual docket process to up- date the maps. As of the effective date of the ordinance codified in this section (April 25, 2005), critical area reports pre- pared for permit applications shall be in- corporated into critical area mapping as part of the annual docket process. As a result of studies prepared through the permit application process, where the City requires increased buffers rather than standard buffers, it shall be noted on the map. (Ord. 5450, 3-2-2009) 3. Reports and Submittal Requirements: Study requirements and submittal require- ments are required in each regulated critical area as follows: a. General Submittal Requirements- All Critical Areas: See subsection F of this Section, Submittal Requirements (Revised 6/09) 3 -14 and Fees, and AMC 4-8-120, Submittal Requirements Specific to Application Type. b. Exempt Activities, Study Require- ments: See subsection C4c of this Sec- tion, Reports and Mitigation Plans Required. c. Aquifer Protection Area Permit Submittal Requirements: See subsec- tion H1 e of this Section and 4-9-015E. d. Flood Hazard Data: Flood hazard data is to be applied pursuant to subsec- tion 11 b of this Section, Mapping and Documentation. e. Geologic Hazards Special Studies Required: See subsection J2 of this Sec- tion, Special Studies Required. f. Habitat Conservation Assessment Required: See subsection K2 of this Section, Habitat Assessment Required. g. Streams and Lakes Studies Re- quired: See subsection L3 of this Sec- tion, Studies Required. h. Wetlands Studies Required: See subsection M3 of this Section, Study Re- quired. (Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000; Ord. 4992, 12-9-2002; Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005) C. APPLICABILITY -EXEMPT, PROHIBITED AND NONCONFORMING ACTIVITIES: 1. Applicability: Unless determined to be exempt from permitting and standards, all proposed development, fill, and activities in regulated critical areas and their buffers shall comply with the requirements of this Section. Expansion or alteration of existing activities shall also comply with the requirements of this Section. Any person seeking to deter- mine whether a proposed activity or land area is subject to this Section may request in writ- ing a determination from the City. Such a re- quest for determination shall contain the information requirements specified by the Department Administrator. a. Aquifer Protection Areas -Com- pliance with Regulations: The following developments, facilities, uses and activi- ties shall comply with the applicable pro- visions and restrictions of this Section and chapters 4-4, 4-5, 4-6, 4-9, and 5-5 RMC for the APA zone in which the de- velopments, facilities, uses and activities are located, except as preempted by Federal or State law: I. Development Permits: Devel- opment permits shall be reviewed for compliance with the aquifer protec- tion requirements of this Section. ii. Facilities: Facilities, as defined in RMC 4-11-060, Definitions F, which are existing, new, or to be closed, are subject to this Section as specified below: (a) Existing Facilities: All owners of facilities which store, handle, treat, use, or produce hazardous materials or have done so in the past must comply with the permit requirements, re- lease reporting requirements, and closure requirements as set forth in this Section; (b) Existing Facilities -Limi- tation on Material Increase: In Zone 1 of an APA, no change in operations at a facility shall be al- lowed that increases the quanti- ties of hazardous materials stored, handled, treated, used, or produced in excess of quanti- ties reported in the initial aquifer protection area operating permit with the following exception: An increase in the quantity of haz- ardous materials is allowed up to the amount allowed for a new fa- cility in Zone 1 as provided by subsection C8d(i) of this Section, Prohibited Activities -Aquifer Protection Areas, Zone 1; (c) New Facilities: All propos- als for new facilities within any zone of an aquifer protection area must be reviewed for com- pliance with th is Section prior to 3 -15 4-3-050C issuance of any development permits for uses in which hazard- ous materials are stored, han- dled, treated, used or produced or which increase the quantity of hazardous materials stored, handled, treated, used, or pro- duced; (d) Abandonment: No person, persons, corporation or other le- gal entity shall temporarily or permanently abandon, close, sell, or otherwise transfer a facil- ity in an APA without complying with the requirements of RMC 4-9-015F, Closure Permit, and permit conditions of this Section; 111. Hazardous Materials -Use, Production, Storage, Treatment, Disposal, or Management: Persons that store, handle, treat, use, or pro- duce a hazardous material as de- fined by chapter 4-11 RMC, Definitions, shall be subject to the re- quirements of this Section, and as further specified below: (a) All applications for develop- ment permits for uses in which hazardous materials are stored, handled, treated, used or pro- duced or which increase the quantity of hazardous materials stored, handled, treated, used, or produced at a location in the APA must be reviewed for com- pliance with this Chapter by the Department prior to approval. {b) The focus of review for all permits will be on the hazardous materials that will be stored, han- dled, treated, used, or produced; and the potential for these sub- stances to degrade groundwater quality. (c) An inventory of hazardous materials on forms provided by the Department shall be submit- ted to the Department u pan ap- plication for a development permit. (Revised 6/05) 4-3-050C (Revised 6/05) (d) Where required by the De- partment, plans and specifica- tions for secondary containment shall be submitted and shall comply with subsection H2d(i) of this Section, Secondary Contain- ment -Zones 1 and 2. Develop- ment permits shall not be issued until plans and specifications for secondary containment, if re- quired, have been approved by the Department. ( e) The Generic Hazardous Materials List attached and in- corporated as subsection R of this Section is provided for infor- mational purposes. iv. Application of Pesticides and Nitrates: Persons who apply pesti- cides and/or fertilizer containing ni- trate in the APA, except for homeowners applying only to their own property, shall comply with sub- section H3 of this Section, Use of Pesticides and Nitrates -APA Zones 1 and 2. v. Construction Activities: Per- sons engaged in construction activi- ties as defined in RMC 4-11-030, Definitions C, shall comply with sub- section H7 of this Section, Construc- tion Activity Standards -Zones 1 and 2, and RMC 4-4-030C8, Construc- tion Activity Standards -APA Zones 1 and 2; vi. Fill Material: Persons placing fill material on sites within the APA shall comply with subsection H8 of this Section, Fill Material Require- ments -Zones 1 and 2, and RMC 4-4-060L4, Fill Material; vii. Fuel Oil Heating Systems: Owners of facilities and structures shall comply with subsection C8d(i)(i) and C8d(ii)(f) of this Sec- tion, Prohibited Activities -Aquifer Protection Areas, Zones 1 and 2, re- lating to conversion of heating sys- tems to fuel oil and installation of new fuel oil heating systems. 3 -16 v111. Pipelines: Owners of pipe- lines as defined in RMC 4-11-160 shall comply with subsection H6 of this Section, Pipeline Requirements; ix. Solid Waste Landfills: Owners of existing solid waste landfills shall comply with subsection H9 of this Section, Regulations for Existing Solid Waste Landfills -Zones 1 and 2; x. Surface Water Systems: Sur- face water systems shall meet the re- quirements of subsection H5 of this Section, Surface Water Require- ments, and RMC 4-6-030E, Drain- age Plan Requirements and Methods of Analysis; xi. Unauthorized Release: All per- sons shall comply with subsection H10 of this Section, Hazardous Ma- terials -Release Restrictions - Zones 1 and 2, and RMC 4-9-01 SG, Unauthorized Releases; xii. Wastewater Disposal Sys- tems: Owners of structures that are connected to existing on-site sewage disposal systems and proposed wastewater disposal systems shall comply with subsection H4 of this Section, Wastewater Disposal Re- quirements, and RMC 4-6-040J, Sanitary Sewer Standards, Addi- tional Requirements that Apply within Zones 1 and 2 of an Aquifer Protec- tion Area. 2. Permit Required: a. Permit Required-Development or Alteration: Prior to any development or alteration of a property containing a criti- cal area as defined in subsection B of this Section, Applicability -Critical Areas Designations/Mapping, the owner or des- ignee must obtain a development permit, critical area permit, and/or letter of ex- emption. No separate critical area permit is required for a development proposal which requires development permits or which has received a letter of exemption. If a proposed activity is not exempt and does not otherwise require a develop- ment permit, but is subject to this Sec- tion, the Department Administrator shall determine whether to grant or deny a separate critical areas permit based upon compliance with applicable standards and regulations of this Section. b. Aquifer Protection Area -Operat- ing and Closure Permits: Aquifer pro- tection area operating permit and closure permit requirements are contained in RMC 4-9-015, Aquifer Protection Area Permits. 3. Finding of Conformance Required: a. Genera I: Conformance with these critical area regulations shall be a finding in any approval of a development permit or aquifer protection area permit, and such finding shall be documented in writ- ing in the project file. b. Aquifer Protection Areas: No changes in land use shall be allowed nor shall permits for development be issued if the Department finds that the proposed land use, activity, or business is likely to impact the long-term, short-term or cu- mulative quality of the aquifer. The find- ing shall be based on the present or past activities conducted at the site; hazard- ous materials that will be stored, handled, treated, used or produced; and the po- tential for the land use, activity, or busi- ness to degrade groundwater quality. 4. Letter of Exemption: a. Aquifer Protection, Flood Haz- ards, Geologic Hazards, Habitat Con· servalion, Streams and Lakes, Wetlands: Except in the case of public emergencies, all exemptions in subsec- tions C5, C6 and C7 of this Section re- quire that a letter of exemption be obtained from the Department Adminis- trator prior to construction or initiation of activities. b. Applicability of Section Require- ments to Exempt Activities: Exempt activities provided with a letter of exemp- tion may intrude into the critical area or required buffer subject to any listed con- ditions or requirements. Exempt activities 3 -17 4-3-050C do not need to comply with mitigation ra- tios of subsection M11 of this Section, Wetlands Creation and Restoration, or subsection M12 of this Section, Wetland Enhancement, unless required in exemp- tion criteria. c. Reports and Mitigation Plans Re- quired: A report for the specific critical area affected, and/or enhancement or mitigation plan shall be required pursuant to subsections H to M of this Section, un- less otherwise waived by the Department Administrator. d. Administrator Findings: In deter- mining whether to issue a letter of ex- emption for activities listed in subsections C5, C6, and C7 of this Section, the Ad· ministrator shall find that: i. The activity is not prohibited by this or any other chapter of the RMC or State or Federal law or regulation; ii. The activity will be conducted us- ing best management practices as specified by industry standards or applicable Federal agencies or sci- entific pri nci pies; iii. Impacts are minimized and, where applicable, disturbed areas are immediately restored, unless the exemption is a wetland below the size thresholds pursuant to subsec- tion C5f(i) of this Section; iv. Where water body or buffer dis- turbance has occurred in accordance with an exemption during construc- tion or other activities, revegetation with native vegetation shall be re- quired. v. If a hazardous material, activity, and/or facility that is exempt pursu- ant to this Section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality, then the Depart- ment Administrator may require com- pliance with the aquifer protection requirements of this Section other- wise relevant to that hazardous ma- terial, activity, and/or facility. Such (Revised 6/05) 4-3-050C determinations will be based upon site and/or chemical-specific data. 5. Specific Exemptions -Critical Areas and Buffers: Specific exempt activities are listed in the following table. If an "X" appears in a box, the listed exemption applies in the specified critical area and required buffer. If an "X" does not appear in a box, then the ex- emption does not apply in the particular criti- cal area or required buffer. Where utilized in the following table the term "restoration" means returning the subject area back at a minimum to its original state following the per- formance of the exempt activity. Activities tak- ing place in critical areas and their associated buffers and listed in the following table are ex- empt from the applicable provisions of this Section, provided a letter of exemption has been issued per subsection C4 of this Sec- tion, Letter of Exemption. Whether the ex- empted activities are also exempt from permits will be determined based upon appli- cation of chapters 4-8 and 4-9 RMC, or other applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. . l;XEMPTA~!:\ii::$b-~l!RIIII,,,, IKGlll'nfJ~,yiEASAND A~ll',~p 1!1.1"1"1ifl$ii"F' ;,,,,.,,,_ "'"' Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes: Class EXEMPT ACTIVITY Area Are8 Area Area 2 to 4 Wetlands a. Conservation, Enhancement, Education and Related Activities: i. Natural Resource/Habitat Conservation X' X X X X X or Preservation: Conservation or preserva- tion of soil, water, vegetation, fish and other wildlife. ii. Enhancement activities as defined in X X X X X chapter 4-11 AMC. iii. Approved Restoration/Mitigation: Any X' X X X X X critical area and/or buffer restoration or other mitigation activities which have been approved by the City. b. Research and Site Investigation: i. Education and Research: Nondestructive X' X X X X X education and research. ii. Site Investigative Work: Site investiga-X' X X X X X tive work necessary for land use application submittals such as surveys, soil logs, perco- lation tests and other related activities. Investigative work shall not disturb any more than five percent (5%) of the critical area and required buffer. In every case, impacts shall be minimized and disturbed areas shall be immediately restored at a 1: 1 ratio. c. Agricultural, Harvesting, Vegetation Management: i. Harvesting Wild Foods: The harvesting X' X X X X X of wild foods in a manner that is not injurious to natural reproduction of such foods and provided the harvesting does not require till- ing ol soil, planting of crops or alteration of the critical area. 11f a hazardous material, activity, and/or facility that is exempt pursuant to this Section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality, then the Department Administrator may require compliance with the aquifer protection requirements of this Section otherwise relevant to that hazardous material activity and/or facility. (Revised 6/05) 3 -18 4-3-050C EXEMPT ACTIVITIES-PERMITIED WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes: Class EXEMPT ACTIVITY Area Area Area Area 2 to 4 Wetlands c. Agricultural, Harvesting, Vegetation Management: (Continued) ii. Existing/Ongoing Agricultural Activities: X X X X X Existing and ongoing agricultural activities including farming, horticulture. aquaculture and/or maintenance of existing irrigation systems. Activities on areas lying fallow as part of a conventional rotational cycle are part of an ongoing operation; provided, that the agricultural activity must have been con- ducted within the last five (5) years. Activi- ties that bring a critical area into agricultural use are not part of an ongoing operation. Maintenance of existing legally installed irri- gation, ditch and pipe systems is allowed; new or expanded irrigation, ditch, outfall or other systems are not exempt. If it is neces- sary to reduce the impacts of agricultural practices to critical areas, a farm manage- ment plan may be required based on the King County Conservation District's Farm Conservation and Practice Standards, or other best management practices. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) iii. Dead or Diseased Trees: Removal of X' X X X X: X: dead, terminally diseased, damagec, or dan-Limited to Tree cutting of gerous ground cover or hazard trees which cutting of hazard trees have been certified as such by a forester, hazard trees; or other registered landscape architect, or certified such hazard woody vege-arborist, selection of which to be approved by trees shall be talion accom-the City based on the type of information re-retained as plished such quired, or the City prior to their removal. large woody that trees are debris in the retained in the stream/ wetland and buffer corri-buffer where dor, where feasible. feasible. 'if a hazardous material, activity, and/or facility that is exempt pursuant to this Section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality, then the Department Administrator may require compliance with the aquifer protection requirements of this Section otherwise relevant to that hazardous material activity and/or facility. 3 • 18.1 (Revised 3/13) 4-3-0SOC .. EXEMPT ACTIVITIES"-PERMITTED WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes: Class EXEMPT ACTIVITY Area Area Area Area 2 to 4 Wetlands d. Surface Water: i. New Surface Water Discharges: New X X X surface water discharges to wetland Catego- ries 1, 2 and 3, or buffers of Categories 1, 2 and 3, and to streams or lakes from deten- tion facilities, presettlement ponds or other surface water management structures; pro- vided, the discharge meets the requirements of the Stonm and Surface Water Drainage Regulations (RMC 4-6-030); will not result in significant adverse changes in the water temperature or chemical characteristics of the wetland or stream/lake water sources; and there is no increase in the existing rate of flow unless it can be demonstrated that the change in hydrologic regime would result in equal or improved wetland or stream/lake functions and values. Where differences exist between these regulations and RMC 4-6-030, these regulations will take prece- dence. ii. New or Modified Regional Stormwater X Facilities: Regional stonnwater management facilities to be operated and maintained under the direction of the City Surface Water Utility that are proposed and designed con- sistent with the Washington State Depart- ment of Ecology Wetlands and Stonmwater Management Guidelines or meeting equiva- lent objectives. (Ord. 5526, 2-1-2010) iii. Flood Hazard Reduction: lmplementa-X X tion of public flood hazard reduction and public surface water projects, where habitat enhancement and restoration at a 1: 1 ratio are provided, and appropriate Federal and/ or State authorization has been received. iv. Storm Drainage Piping: Installation of X new storm drainage lines in any geologic hazard area when a geotechnical report clearly demonstrates that the installation would comply with the criteria listed in RMC 4-3-050J2b and that the installation would be consistent with each of the purposes of the geologic hazard regulations listed in RMC 4-3-050A4. Also, to qualify for the exemption, the report must propose appro- priate mitigation for any potential impacts identified in the report. 1 If a hazardous material, activity, and/or facility that is exempt pursuant to this Section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality, then the Department Administrator may require compliance with the aquifer protection requirements of this Section otherwise relevant to that hazardous material activity and/or facility. (Revised J/13) 3 -18.2 4-3-050C EXEMPT ACTIVITIES -PERMITTED WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes: Class EXEMPT ACTIVITY Area Area Area Area 2 to 4 Wetlands e. Roads, Parks, Public and Private Utilities: i. Relocation of Existing Utilities out of Criti-X' X X X X X cal Area and Buffer: Relocation out of critical areas and required buffers of natural gas, cable, communication, telephone and elec- tric facilities, lines, pipes, mains, equipment and appurtenances (not including substa- tions), with an associated voltage of fifty five thousand (55,000) volts or less. only when required by a local governmental agency, and with the approval of the City. Disturbed areas shall be restored. , 'If a hazardous material, activity, and/or facility that is exempt pursuant to this Section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality, then the Department Administrator may require compliance with the aquifer protection requirements of this Section otherwise relevant to that hazardous material activity and/or facility. 3 -18.2a (Revised 11/07) This page left intentionally blank. (Revised 11/07) 3 -18.2b 4-3-050C , EXEMPT ACTIVITIES-PERMITTED WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes: Class EXEMPT ACTIVITY Area Area Area Area 2 to 4 Wetlands e. Roads, Parks, Public and Private Utilities: (Continued) ii. New Trails, Existing Parks, Trails, Roads, X X X X Facilities, and Utilities -Maintenance, Oper- ation, Repair, and the Construction of New Trails: Normal and routine maintenance, operation and repair of existing parks and trails or the construction of new trails, streets, roads, rights-of-way and associated appurte- nances, facilities and utilities where no alter- ation or additional fill materials will be placed other than the minimum alteration and/or fill needed to restore those facilities or to con- struct new trails to meet established safety standards. The use of heavy construction equipment shall be limited to utilities and public agencies that require this type of equipment for normal and routine mainte- nance and repair of existing utility structures and rights-of-way. In every case, critical area and required buffer impacts shall be mini- mized and disturbed areas shall be restored during and immediately after the use of con- struction equipment. iii. Utilities, Traffic Control, Walkways, X X X X Bikeways Within Existing, Improved Right- of-way or Easements: Within existing and improved public road rights-of-way or ease- ments, installation, construction, replace-. ment, operation, overbuilding or alteration of all natural gas, cable, communication, tele- phone and electric facilities, lines, pipes, mains, equipment or appurtenances, traffic control devices, illumination, walkways and bikeways. If activities exceed the existing improved area or the public right-of-way, this exemption does not apply. Where applica- ble, restoration of disturbed areas shall be completed. 1 If a hazardous material, activity, and/or facility that is exempt pursuant to this Section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality, then the Department Administrator may require compliance with the aquifer protection requirements of this Section otherwise relevant to that hazardous material activity and/or facility. 3 -18.3 (Revised3/[4) 4-3-0SOC EXEMPT ACTIVITIES:-PERMITTED WITHIN CRITICAL.AREAS ANO ASSOCIATED BUFFERS Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes: Class EXEMPT ACTIVITY Area Area Area Area 2 to 4 Wetlands e. Roads, Parks, Public and Private Utilities: (Continued) iv. Modification of Existing Utilities and X X: X: Streets by Ten Percent (10%) or Less: Over-Exemption is Exemption is building (enlargement beyond existing proj-not allowed not al lowed in eel needs) or replacement of existing utility in Category 1 Category 1 systems and replacement and/or rehabilita-wetlands. wetlands. lion of existing streets, provided: (1) The work does not increase the foot- print of the structure, line or street by more than ten percent (10%) within the critical area and/or buffer areas, and occurs in the existing right-of-way boundary or easement boundary. (2) Restoration shall be conducted where feasible. Compensation for impacts to buf- fers shall include enhancement of the remaining buffer area along the impacted area where there is enhancement opportu- nity. (3) The Administrator detenmines that, based on best judgment, a person would not: (a) be able to meaningfully measure .. detect, or evaluate insignificant effects; or (b) expect discountable effects to occur. (4) This exemption allows for 10% maxi- mum expansion total, life of the project. After the 10% expansion cap is reached, future improvements are subject to all applicable provisions of this Section. V. Vegetation ManagemenVEssential Tree X X X X: X: Removal for Public or Private Utilities, Trees shall Tree cutting Roads, and Public Parks: Maintenance be retained and vegeta-activities, including routine vegetation man-as large tion manage- agement and essential tree removal, and woody debris ment accom- removal of non-native invasive vegetation or in the plished such weeds listed by the King County Noxious stream/bu!-that trees are Weed Board or other government agency, fer corridor, retained in the for public and private utilities, road rights-of-where feasi-wetland and way and easements, and parks. ble. buffer where feasible. If a hazardous material, activity, and/or facility that is exempt pursuant to this Section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality, then the Department Administrator may require compliance with the aquifer protection requirements of this Section otherwise relevant to that hazardous material activity and/or facility. (Revised 3/14) 3 -18.4 4-3-050C EXEMPT ACTIVmES-PERMITTED WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes: Class EXEMPT ACTIVITY Area Area Area Area 2 to 4 Wetlands f. Wetland Disturbance, Modification and Removal: i. Any Activity in Small Category 3 Wet-X lands: Any activity affecting hydrologically isolated Category 3 wetland no greater than two thousand two hundred (2,200) square feet when consistent with all of the following criteria: (1) Standing water is not present in suffi- cient amounts, i.e., approximately twelve inches (12") to eighteen inches (18") in depth from approximately December through May, to support breeding amphibians; (2) Species listed by Federal or State gov- ernment as endangered or threatened, or the presence of essential habitat for those species, are not present; (3) Some form of mitigation is provided for hydrologic and water quality functions, for example, stormwater treatment or landscap- i ng or other mitigation; and (4) A wetland assessment is prepared by a qualified professional demonstrating the cri- teria of the exemption are met. The wetland assessment shall be subject to independent secondary review at the expense of the applicant consistent with subsection F7 of this Section. ii. Temporary Wetland Impacts: Temporary X X disturbances of a wetland due to construe- tion activities that do not include permanent filling may be permitted; provided, that there . are no permanent adverse impacts to the critical area or required buffer, and areas temporarily disturbed are restored at a 1 :1 ratio. Category 1 wetlands and Category 2 forested wetlands shall be enhanced at a 2: 1 ratio in addition to being restored. For habi- tat conservation areas, this exemption applies only to Category 1 wetlands. g. Maintenance and Construction -Existing Uses and Facilities: i. Remodeling, Replacing, Removing Exist-X X X X ing Structures, Facilities, and Improvements: Remodeling, restoring, replacing or remov- ing structures, facilities and other improve- ments in existence on the date this section becomes effective and that do not meet the setback or buffer requirements of this sec- tion provided the work complies with the cri- teria in RMC 4-10-090. 11 If a hazardous material, activity, and/or facility that is exempt pursuant to this Section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality, then the Department Administrator may require compliance with the aquifer protection requirements of this Section otherwise relevant to that hazardous material activity and/or facility. 3 · 18.5 (Revised 6/05) 4-3-050C EXEMPT ACTIVmES-PERMITTED WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes: Class EXEMPT ACTIVITY Area Area Area Area 2to4 Wetlands g. Maintenance and Construction -Existing Uses and Facilities: (Continued) ii. Maintenance and Repair -Any Existing X X X X Public or Private Use: Normal and routine maintenance and repair of any existing pub- lie or private uses and facilities where no alteration of the critical area and required buffer or additional fill materials will be placed. The use of heavy construction equipment shall be limited to utilities and public agencies that require this type of equipment for normal and routine mainte- nance and repair of existing utility or public structures and rights-of-way. In every case, critical area and required buffer impacts shall be minimized and disturbed areas shall be restored during and immediately after the use of construction equipment. iii. Modification of an Existing Single Fam-X X X X ily Residence: Construction activity con- nected with an existing single family residence and/or garage; provided, that the work does not increase the footprint of the s.tructure lying within the critical area or buffer; and provided, that no portion of the new work occurs closer to the critical area or required buffers than the existing structure unless the structure or addition can meet required buffers. Existing or rebuilt acces- sory structures associated with single family lots such as fences, gazebos, storage sheds, and play houses are exempt from this Section. New accessory structures may be allowed when associated with single tam- ily lots such as fences, gazebos, storage sheds, play houses and when built on and located in a previously legally altered area. iv. Existing Activities: Existing activities X X X X X which have not been changed, expanded or altered, provided they comply with the appli- cable requirements of chapter 4-10 RMC. •If a hazardous material, activity, and/or facility that is exempt pursuant to this Section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality, then the Department Administrator may require compliance with the aquifer protection requirements of this Section otherwise relevant to that hazardous material activity and/or facility. (Revised 6/05) 3 -18.6 4-3-050C EXEMPT ACTIVITIES:-, PERMITTED WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS ANO ASSOCIATED BUFFERS Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams and Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation Lakes: Class EXEMPT ACTIVITY Area Area Area Area 2 to 4 Wetlands h. Emergency Activities: i. Emergency Activities: Emergency activi-X' X X X X X ties are those which are undertaken to cor- rect emergencies that threaten the public health, safety and welfare pursuant to the criteria in subsection C9b of this Section. An emergency means that an action must be undertaken immediately or within a time frame too short to allow full compliance with this Section, to avoid an immediate threat to public health or safety, to prevent an immi- nent danger to public or private property, or to prevent an imminent threat of serious environmental degradation. ii. Emergency Tree/Ground Cover Cutting X' X X X X: X: or Removal by Agency or Utility: Removal of Downed haz-Tree cutting trees and/or ground cover by any City ard trees and vegeta- department or agency and/or public or pri-shall be tion manage- vate utility in emergency situations involving retained as ment accom- immediate danger to life or property, sub-large woody piished such stantial fire hazards, or interruption of ser-debris in the that trees are vices provided by a utility. stream/ retained in the buffer. wetland and buffer where feasible. iii. Emergency Activities in Aquifer Protec-X' tion Area: Public interest emergency use, storage. and handling of hazardous materi· als by governmental organizations. I. Hazardous Materials: i. Federal or State Pre-emption: Cleanups, X' monitoring and/or studies undertaken under supeivision of the Washington Department of Ecology or the U.S. Environmental Protec- tion Agency. ii. Use of Materials with No Risk: Use, stor-X' age, and handling of specific hazardous materials that do not present a risk to the aquifer as determined and listed by the Department. If a hazardous material, activity, and/or facility that is exempt pursuant to this Section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality, then the Department Administrator may require compliance with the aquifer protection requirements of this Section otherwise relevant to that hazardous material activity and/or facility. 6. Limited Exemptions: Activities that are exempt from some, but not all provisions of this Section are listed in the following table. If an "X" appears in a box, the listed exemption applies in the specified critical area and re- quired buffer. if an "X" does not appear in a box, then the exemption does not apply in the particular critical area or required buffer. 3-18.7 Whether the exempted activities are also ex- empt from permits will be determined based upon application of chapters 4-8 and 4-9 AMC, or other applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. (Revised 6/05) 4-3-050C LIMITED EXEMPTIONS-WITHIN CRITICAL.AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS • Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation and Lakes: EXEMPT ACTIVITY Area Area Area Area Class 2 to 4 Wetlands a. Hazardous Materials: i. Materials for Sale in Original Small Con-X' tainers: Hazardous materials offered for sale in their original containers of five (5) gallons or less shall be exempt from requirements in subsections H2d(i) through (vi) of this Sec- tion and the requirements pertaining to removal of existing facilities in subsection H2a(i). ii. Activities Exempt from Specified Aquifer X' Protection Area Requirements: The following are exempt from requirements in subsec- tions H2d(i) through (vi) of this Section, the requirements pertaining to review of pro- posed facilities in subsection C8d, Prohibited Changes in Land Use and Types of New Facilities -Aquifer Protection Areas, and the requirements pertaining to removal of exist- ing facilities in subsection H2a(i). (1) Hazardous materials use, storage, and X' handling in de minimis amounts (aggregate quantities totaling twenty (20) gallons or less at the facility or construction site). Weights of solid hazardous materials will be converted to volumes for purposes of determining whether de minimis amounts are exceeded. Ten (1 O) pounds shall be considered equal to one gallon. (2) Noncommercial residential use, star· X' age, and handling of hazardous materials; provided, that no home occupation business (as defined by chapter 4-11 RMC) that uses, stores, or handles more than twenty (20) gal- Ions of hazardous material is operated on the premises. (3) Hazardous materials in fuel tanks and X' fluid reservoirs attached to a private or com- mercial motor vehicle and used directly in the operation of that vehicle. (4) Fuel oil used in existing heating sys-X' terns. (5) Hazardous materials used, stored, and X' handled by the City of Renton in water treat- ment processes and water system opera- tions. 1 If a hazardous material, activity, and/or facility that is exempt pursuant to this Section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality, then the Department Administrator may require compliance with the aquifer protection requirements of this Section otherwise relevant to that hazardous material activity and/or facility. (Revised 6/05) 3 -18.8 4-3-050C .. . LIMITED EXEMPTIONS -WITHIN CRmCAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS . Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation and Lakes: EXEMPT ACTIVITY Area Area Area Area Class 2 to 4 Wetlands a. Hazardous Materials: (Continued) (6) Fueling of equipment not licensed for X' street use; provided, that such fueling activi- ties are conducted in a containment area that is designed and maintained to prevent hazardous materials from coming into con- tact with soil, surface water, or groundwater except for refueling associated with con- struction activity regulated by subsection H7 of this Section, Construction Activity Stan- dards -Zones 1 and 2. (7) Hazardous materials contained in prop-X' erly operating sealed units (transformers, refrigeration units, etc.) that are not opened as part of routine use. (8) Hazardous materials in fuel tanks and X' fluid reservoirs attached to private or com- mercial equipment and used directly in the operation of that equipment. (9) Hazardous materials in aerosol cans. X' (10) Hazardous materials at multi-family X' dwellings, hotels, motels, retirement homes, convalescent centers/nursing homes, mobile or manufactured home parks, group homes, and daycare family homes or centers when used by owners and/or operators of such facilities for on-site operation and mainte- nance purposes. (11) Hazardous materials used for janitorial X' purposes at the facility where the products are stored. (12) Hazardous materials used for per-X' sonal care by workers or occupants of the fa- cility at which the products are stored includ- ing but not limited to soaps, hair treatments, grooming aids, health aids, and medicines. iii. Uses, Facilities, and Activities in Zone 1 X' Modified Aquifer Protection Area Exempt from Specified Aquifer Protection Area Requirements: Facilities located in the Zone 1 Modified Aquifer Protection Area in Figure 4-3-05001 are exempt from the following: (1) Removal requirements in subsection X' H2a(i) of this Section except that the stor- age, handling, use, treatment, and produc- tion of tetrachloroethylene (e.g., dry-cleaning fluid) shall continue to be prohibited; (2) Additional facility requirements in sub-X' section H2d(vi) of this Section; 1 If a hazardous material, activity, and/or facility that is exempt pursuant to this Section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality, then the Department Administrator may require compliance with the aquifer protection requirements of this Section otherwise relevant to that hazardous material activity and/or facility. 3 · 18.9 (Revised 6/05) 4-3-050C . . LIMITED EXEMPTIONS-WITHIN CRffiCAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED. BUFFERS Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation and Lakes: EXEMPT ACTIVITY Area Area Area Area Class 2 to4 Wetlands a. Hazardous Materials: (Continued) (3) Wastewater requirements in AMC X' 4-6-040J1 a but shall be subject to Zone 2 requirements in AMC 4-6-040J2; (4) The prohibition of septic systems con-X' tained in subsection CSd(i)(f) of this Section; and (5) Surtace water management require-X' ments of AMC 4-6-030E except that Zone 2 requirements contained in AMC 4-6-030E shall apply. 'If a hazardous material, activity, and/or facility that is exempt pursuant to this Section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality, then the Department Administrator may require compliance with the aquifer protection requirements of this Section otherwise relevant to that hazardous material activity and/or facility. 7. Exemptions in Buffers: The activities listed in the following table are allowed within critical area buffers, and are exempt from the applicable provisions of this Section, pro- vided a letler of exemption has been issued per subsection C4 of this Section, Letter of Exemption. If an "X" appears in a box, the listed exemption applies in the specified buffer. If an "X" does not appear in a box, then the exemption does not apply in the required buffer. Whether the exempted activities are also exempt from permits will be determined based upon application of chapters 4-8 and 4-9 AMC, or other applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. (Revised 6/05) 3-18.10 4-3-050C EXEMPTIONS WITHIN CRITICAL AREA BUFFERS .:: "' Aquifer Flood Geologic Habitat Streams Protection Hazard Hazard Conservation and Lakes: EXEMPT ACTIVITY Area Area Area Area Class 2 to4 Wetlands a. Activities in Critical Area Buffers: L Trails and Open Space: Walkways and trails, X X X X and associated open space in critical area buffers located on public property, or where easements or agreements have been granted for such purposes on private property. All of the following criteria shall be met. (1) The trail. walkway, and associated open space shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan. The City may allow private trails as part of the approval of a site plan. subdivision or other land use permit approvals. (2) Trails and walkways shall be located in the outer twenty-five percent (25%) of the buffer, i.e., the portion of the buffer that is farther away from the critical area. Exceptions to this requirement may be made for: . Trail segments connecting to existing trails where an alternate alignment is not practical. . Public access points to water bodies spaced periodically along the trail. (3) Enhancement of the buffer area is required where trails are located in the buffer. Where enhancement of the buffer area abutting a trail is not feasible due to existing high quality vegetation. additional buffer area or other mitigation may be required. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) (4) Trail widths shall be a maximum width of twelve (12) feet. Trails shall be constructed of per- meable materials. Impervious materials may be allowed if pavement is required for handicapped or emergency access, or safety, or is a designated nonmotorized transportation route or makes a . connection to an already dedicated trail, or reduces potential for other environmental impacts. ii. Stormwater Treatment and Flow Control Facil-X ities in Buffer: Stormwater management facilities shall not be built within a critical area buffer except as allowed in Reference 5. Wetlands Protection Guidelines of the City's Surface Water Design Manual and shall require buffer enhancement or buffer averaging when they are sited in areas of forest vegetation, provided the standard buffer zone area associated with the critical area classi- fication is retained pursuant to subsection L or M6c of this Section, and is sited to reduce impacts between the critical area and surrounding activi- ties. (Ord. 5526, 2-1-2010) 3-18.11 (Revised 3/13) 4-3-050C .. EXEMPTIONS WITHIN CRITICAL AREA BUFFERS: ... > .. Aquifer Protection EXEMPT ACTIVITY Area iii. StormwaterConveyance in Buffer: Necessary conveyance systems including stormwater disper- sion outfall systems designed to minimize impacts to the buffer and critical area, where the site topog- raphy requires their location within the buffer to allow hydraulic function, provided the standard buffer zone area associated with the critical area classification is retained pursuant to subsection L or M6c of this Section, and is sitec to reduce impacts between the critical area and surrounding activities. (Ord. 5526, 2-1-2010) 8. Prohibited Activities: Prohibited activi- ties are identified below for each critical area governed by this Section. a. General -All Critical Areas: No ac- tion shall be taken by any person, com- pany, agency, or applicant which results in any alteration of a critical area except as consistent with the purpose, objec- tives, and requirements of this Section. b. Prohibited Activities-Floodways: Encroachments, including fill, new con- struction, substantial improvements, and construction or reconstruction of residen- tial structures is prohibited within desig- nated floodways, unless it meets the provisions of subsection 14 of this Sec- tion, Additional Restrictions within Flood- ways. c. Prohibited Activities -Streams/ Lakes and Wetlands: Grazing of ani- mals is not allowed within a stream, lake, wetland or their associated buffers. d. Prohibited Changes in Land Use and Types of New Facilities-Aquifer Protection Areas. i. Zone 1: (a) Changes in land use and types of new facilities in which any of the following will be on the premises: (1) More than five hundred (500) gallons of hazardous mate- rial; Flood Hazard Area (Revised 3/l 3) 3-18.12 Geologic Hazard Area Habitat Streams Conservation and Lakes: Area Class 2 to4 Wetlands X X X (2) More than one hundred fifty (150) gallons of hazardous mate- rial in containers that are opened and handled; (3) Containers exceeding five (5) gallons in size; or (4) Tetrachloroethylene (e.g., dry-cleaning fluid). (b) Surface impoundments (as defined in chapters 173-303 and 173-304 WAC); (c) Hazardouswastetreatment, storage, and disposal facilities; (d) All types of landfills, includ- ing solid waste landfills; (e) Transfer stations; (f) Septic systems; (g) Recycling facilities that han- dle hazardous materials; (h) Underground hazardous material storage and/or distribu- tion facilities; (i) New heating systems using fuel oil except for commercial uses when the source of fuel oil is an existing above-ground waste oil storage tank; and 0) Petroleum product pipe- lines. ii. Zone 2: (a) Surface impoundments (as defined in chapters 173-303 and 173-304 WAC); (b) Recycling facilities that han- dle hazardous materials; (c) Hazardous waste treat- ment, storage, and disposal facil- ities; (d) Solid waste landfills; (e) Transfer stations; (f) New heating systems using fuel oil stored in underground storage tanks; and (g) Petroleum product pipe- lines. 9. Temporary Emergency Exemption Procedure: a. Temporary Emergency Exemption Purpose: Temporary emergency exemp- tions shall be used only in extreme cases and not to justify poor planning by an agency or applicant. b. Temporary Emergency Exemption Review Authority and Decision Crite- ria: Issuance of an emergency permit by the City does not preclude the necess~y to obtain necessary approvals from ap- propriate Federal and State authorities. Notwithstanding the provisions of this section or any other City laws to the con- trary, the Department Administrator may issue a temporary emergency exemption letter if the action meets the following re- quirements: i. An unacceptable threat to life or severe loss of property will occur if an emergency permit is not granted; ii. The anticipated threat or loss may occur before a permit can be is- sued or modified under the proce- dures otherwise required by this Section and other applicable laws; 3-18.13 4-3-0SOC iii. Any emergency exemption letter granted shall incorporate, to the greatest extent practicable and feasi- ble but not inconsistent with the emergency situation, the standards and criteria required for nonemer- gency activities under this Section. c. Temporary Emergency Exemption Letter Process and Timing: The emer- gency exemption shall be consistent with the following procedural and time re- quirements: i. Time Limits: The emergency shall be limited in duration to the time required to complete the authorized emergency activity; provided, that no emergency permit be granted for a period exceeding ninety (90) days except as specified in subsection C9c(ii) of this Section. ii. Restoration Required: Re- quire, within the ninety (90) day pe- riod, the restoration of any critical area altered as a result of the emer- gency activity, except that if more than ninety (90) days from the issu- ance of the emergency permit is re- quired to complete restoration, the emergency permit may be extended to complete this restoration. For the purposes of this paragraph, resto- ration means returning the affected area to its state prior to the perfor- mance of the emergency activity. iii. Public Notice Required: No- tice of the issuance of the emergency permit and request for public com- ments shall be posted at the affected site(s) and City Hall no later than ten (10) days after the issuance of the emergency permit. If significant com- ments are received, the City may re- consider the permit. iv. Expiration of Exemption Au- thorization: The emergency exemp- tion authorization may be terminated at any time without process upon a determination by the Department Ad- ministrator that the action was not or is no longer necessary to protect hu- man health or the environment. (Revised 3/14) 4-3-050D 10. Nonconforming Activities or Struc- tures: Regulated activities legally in exis- tence prior to the passage of this Section, but which are not in conformity with the provisions of this Section are subject to the provisions of RMC 4-10-090, Critical Areas Regulations- Nonconforming Activities and Structures. (Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000; Ord. 4992, 12-9-2002; Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005; Ord. 5308, 9-24-2007; Ord. 5702, 12-9-2013) D. ADMINISTRATION AND INTERPRETATION: 1. General Provisions -All Critical Ar- eas: a. Duties of Administrator: The Com- munity and Economic Development Ad- ministrator shall have the power and authority to enforce the provisions of this Section. For such purposes the Adminis- trator shall have the power of a law en- forcement officer. (Ord. 5450, 3-2-2009) b. Interpretation: The Administrator shall have the power to render interpreta- tions of this Section and to adopt and en- force rules and regulations supplemental to this Section as he/she may deem nec- essary in order to clarify the application of the provisions of this Code. Such inter- pretations, rules and regulations shall be in conformity with the intent and purpose of this Section. c. Compliance: Unless specifically ex- empted by this Section, the City shall not grant any approval or permit any regu- lated activity in a critical area or associ- ated buffer prior to fulfilling the requirements of this Section. 2. Aquifer Protection: a. Inspections Authorized: The Ad- ministrator or his/herdesignee shall have the right to conduct inspections of facili- ties at all reasonable times to determine compliance with this Section. (RcvisedJ/14) i. Annual Inspections: All permit- ted facilities in an APA will be subject to a minimum of one inspection per year by a Department inspector. 3-18.14 ii. Monthly Inspections: All per- mitted facilities in Zone 1 of the aqui- fer protection area will be subject to monthly inspections to determine compliance with the provisions of the Section. b. Potential to Degrade Groundwater -Zone 2: i. Potential for Impacts Equal to Facility in Zone 1: If the Administra- tor determines that an existing or pro- posed facility located in Zone 2 of an APA has a potential to degrade groundwater quality which equals or exceeds that of a permitted facility in Zone 1, then the Administrator may require that facility to fully comply with requirements for Zone 1 con- tained in subsections C1 ai, Develop- ment Permits, C8di, Zone 1, H2, Facilities, H4, Wastewater Disposal Requirements -Zones 1 and 2, and H6, Pipeline Requirements. ii. Criteria: Criteria used to make the detennination in subsection D2b(i) of this Section, Potential for Impacts Equal to Facility in Zone 1, shall include but not be limited to the present and past activities conducted at the facility; types and quantities of hazardous materials stored, han- dled, treated, used or produced; the potential for the activities or hazard- ous materials to degrade groundwa- ter quality; history of spills at the site, and presence of contamination on site. 3. Flood Hazards: a. Duties and Responsibilities of the Administrator: The duties of the Admin- istrator shall include, but not be limited to: i. Review all development permits to determine that the permit require- ments of this Section have been sat- isfied; and ii. Review all development permits to determine that all necessary per- mits have been obtained from those Federal, State or local governmental agencies from which prior approval is required; and iii. Review all development permits to determine if the proposed devel- opment is located in the floodway. If located in the floodway, assure that the encroachment provisions of sub- section 14 of this Section, Additional Restrictions within Floodways, are met; and iv Obtain, review, and reasonably utilize any base flood elevation and floodway data available from a Fed- eral, state or other source, when base flood elevation data has not been provided in accordance with subsection 11 bi of this Section in or- der to administer subsection 13, Spe- cific Standards, and subsection 14, Additional Restrictions Within Flood- ways. b. Information to Be Obtained and Maintained: The Administrator shall ob- tain and maintain the following informa- tion: i. Record Required: Where base flood elevation data is provided through the flood insurance study or required as in subsection D3a(iv) of this Section, use of other base flood data, the applicant shall obtain and record the actual elevation (in rela- tion to mean sea level) of the lowest floor (including basement) of all new or substantially improved structures, and whether or not the structure con- tains a basement. ii. Elevations and Certificates: For all new or substantially improved floodproofed structures: (a) The applicant shall verify and record the actual elevation (in relation to mean sea level); and (b) The Administrator shall maintain the floodproofing certifi- cations required in RMC 4-8-12006, Flood Hazard Data; and 3-18.15 4-3-050D (c) Flood elevation certificates shall be submitted by an appli- cant to the Development Ser- vices Division prior to the building's finished floor construc- tion. Finished floor elevation should be verified by a precon- struction elevation certificate at the time of construction of a sub- stantial structural element of the finished floor (i.e., foundation form for the concrete floor). An as-bu i It elevation certificate will be provided prior to issuance of final occupancy, and the certifi- cates shall be maintained by the Administrator. iii. Public Records: The Adminis- trator shall maintain for public inspec- tion all records pertaining to the provisions of the flood hazard regula- tions (e.g., elevation certificates, no- tification of alteration/relocation of watercourses, flood hazard regula- tion variances). c. Alteration of Watercourses: The Administrator shall: i. Notice Required: Notify abutting communities and the state of Wash- ington Department of Ecology prior to any alteration or relocation of a wa- tercourse, and submit evidence of such notification to the Federal Insur- ance Administration. ii. Maintenance: Require that maintenance is provided within the altered or relocated portion of said watercourse so that the flood-carry- ing capacity is not diminished. The City may require covenants, or other mechanisms to ensure maintenance. d. Interpretation of FIRM Bound- aries: The Administrator shall make in- terpretations where needed, as to exact location of the boundaries of the areas of special flood hazard (for example, where there appears to be a conflict between a mapped boundary and actual field condi- tions). The person contesting the location of the boundary shall be given a reason- able opportunity to appeal the interpreta- ( Revised 3/ t 3) 4-3-050D lion as provided in RMC 4-8-070G, Hearing Examiner, and RMC 4-8-110, Appeals). e. Record Required: The Administra- tor shall maintain the records of all appeal actions and report any variances to the Federal Insurance Administration upon request. 4. Review Authority: a. Review Authority -General: The Administrator is authorized to make the following administrative allowances and determinations: (Revised 3/13) i. Issue a critical areas permit for proposals not otherwise requiring a development permit per subsection C3 of this Section, Finding of Con- formance Required. ii. Issue written letters of exemption pursuant to subsection C4 of this Section. iii. Allow temporary emergency ex- emptions per subsection C7 of this Section. iv. Interpret critical areas regula- tions per subsection D1 b of this Sec- tion. v. Approve the use of alternates in accordance with subsection N1 of this Section and RMC 4-9-250E. vi. Waive report content or submit- tal requirements per subsection F6 of th is Section. vii. Grant administrative variances to those specified code sections listed in RMC 4-9-2508 and per sub- section N of this Section. viii. Require tests for proof of com- pliance. ix. Grant modifications per subsec- tion N of this Section. 3-18.16 b. Review Authority -Geologic Haz- ards, Habitat Conservation, Streams and Lakes, and Wetlands: The Admin- istrator is authorized to make the follow- ing administrative allowances and determinations: i. Geologic Hazards. (a) Waive independent review of gectechnical reports per sub- section F7 of this Section. (b) Increase or decrease re- quired buffer for very high land- slide hazard areas per subsection J7b of this Section. (c) Waive coal mine hazard re- ports per subsection JS of this Section. (d) Grant a modification for cre- ated slopes per subsection N2 of this Section. ii. Habitat Conservation: Waive habitat/wildlife assessment reports per subsection K2 of this Section. iii. Streams and Lakes: (a) Waive water body study re- quirement per subsection L3 of this Section. (b) Approve proposals for buffer width reductions in accor- dance with the review criteria stated in subsection L5c of this Section. (c) Approve proposals for buffer width averaging pursuant to the standards and criteria stated in subsection L5d of this Section. iv. Wetlands: (a) Waive wetland assessment requirement per subsection M3b of this Section. (b) Determine whether wet- lands are unregulated per sub- sections M1 a and M1 b of this Section. (c) Extend the valid period of a wetland delineation pursuant to subsection M4d of this Section. (d) Approve proposals for buffer width reductions of up to twenty five percent (25%) in ac- cordance with the review criteria stated in subsection M6e of this Section. (e) Approve proposals for buffer width averaging pursuant to the standards and criteria stated in subsection M6f of this Section. (I) Authorize other category level for created or restored wet- lands per subsection M11c of this Section. (g) Waive requirements of this Section upon determination that all impacts on wetlands would be mitigated as part of an approved area-wide wetlands plan that, when taken as a whole over an approved schedule or staging of plan implementation, will meet or exceed the requirements of this section (see subsection M9 of this Section). c. Review Authority -Aquifer Pro- tection Areas: The Administrator is au- thorized to make the following administrative allowances and determi- nations: i. Issue operating and closure per- mits. ii. Determine pipeline requirements per subsection H6a(iii) and H6b of this Section. iii. Determine if Zone 1 require- ments should apply in Zone 2 of an APA per subsection D2b, Potential to Degrade Groundwater-Zone 2, and C8d(ii), Zone 2. 4-3-050E 5. Authority to Approve, Condition, or Deny -General: Based upon site specific re- view and analysis, a proposal may be ap- proved, conditioned, or denied. 6. Relationship to Other Agencies and Regulations: Compliance with the provi- sions of this Title does not constitute compli- ance with other federal, state, and/or other local agency regulations and permit require- ments that may be required. The applicant is responsible for complying with these require- ments, apart from the process established in this Title. (Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000; Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005; Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) E. GENERAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, AND ALLOWED ALTERATIONS: 3-18.17 1. Performance Standards: The perfor- mance standards for each critical area are specified in subsections G to M of this Sec- tion. The standards are minimum standards. 2. Protection of Critical Areas: Critical ar- eas and any associated buffers shall be avoided, and undisturbed, unless alterations are permitted in accordance with the require- ments of this Section. 3. Allowed Alterations: Critical areas may be altered by authorized exempt activities, al- terations specifically allowed in subsections H to M of this Section and subject to listed cri- teria, or through approval of modifications or variances. 4. Native Growth Protection Areas: a. Applicability: i. Required: A native growth pro- tection area shall be instituted when required by subsections H to M of this Section in order to protect a criti- cal area from any proposed develop- ment for a non-exempt activity as follows: (a) Protected slopes per sub- section J5e of this Section. (Revised 3/13) 4-3-050E (b) Very high landslide hazard areas per subsection J7 c of this Section. (c) Class 2 to 4 streams or lakes and their associated buff- ers per subsection L7 of this Section. (d) Wetlands and their associ- ated buffers per subsection M7 of this Section. ii. Applied with Discretion: Native growth protection areas may be re- quired for very high landslide hazard area buffers, or for critical habitats and their buffers pursuant to subsec- tions J7 and K4 of this Section. iii. Application as Condition of Approval When Otherwise Not Re- quired: Where subsections H to M do not require a native growth protec- tion area, the proposal may be condi- tioned to provide for native growth protection areas. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) b. Standards: i. Trees and ground cover shall be retained in designated native growth protection areas. ii. Activities allowed in a native growth protection areas shall be con- sistent with applicable critical area regulations. iii. The City may require enhance- ment of native growth protection ar- eas to improve functions and values, reduce erosion or landslide potential, or to meet another identified purpose of this section or of critical area regu- lations. c. Method of Creation: Native growth protection areas shall be established by one of the following methods, in order of preference: (Revised 3/13) i. Conservation Easement: The permit holder shall, subject to the City's approval, convey to the City or 3-18.18 other public or nonprofit entity speci- fied by the City, a recorded easement for the protection of the critical area and/or its buffer. ii. Protective Easement: The per- mit holder shall establish and record a permanent and irrevocable ease- ment on the property title of a parcel or tract of land containing a critical area and/or its buffer created as a condition of a penmit. Such protective easement shall be held by the current and future property owner, shall run with the land, and shall prohibit devel- opment, alteration, or disturbance within the easement except for pur- poses of habitat enhancement as part of an enhancement project which has received prior written approval from the City, and from any other agency with jurisdiction over such activity. iii. Tract and Deed Restriction: The penmit holder shall establish and record a permanent and irrevocable deed restriction on the property title of any critical area management tract or tracts created as a condition of a per- mit. Such deed restriction(s) shall prohibit development, alteration, or disturbance within the tract except for purposes of habitat enhancement as part of an enhancement project which has received prior written approval from the City, and from any other agency with jurisdiction over such ac- tivity. A covenant shall be placed on the tract restricting its separate sale. Each abutting lot owner or the home- owners' association shall have an un- divided interest in the tract. d. Marking During Construction: The location of the outer extent of the crttical area buffer and areas not to be disturbed pursuant to an approved permit shall be marked with barriers easily visible in the field to prevent unnecessary disturbance by individuals and equipment during the development or construction of the ap- proved activity. e. Fencing: The City shall require per- manent fencing of the native growth pro- tection area containing critical area and buffers when there is a substantial likeli- hood of human or domesticated animal intrusion, and such fencing will not ad- versely impact habitat connectivity. f. Signage Required: The common boundary between a native growth pro- tection area and the abutting land must be penmanently identified. This identifica- tion shall include permanent wood or metal signs on treated or metal posts. Sign locations and size specifications shall be approved by the City. Suggested wording is as follows: "Protection of this natural area is in your care. Alteration or disturbance is prohibited by law." g. Responsibility for Maintenance: Responsibility for maintaining the native growth protection easements or tracts shall be held by a homeowners' associa- tion, abutting lot owners, the penmit appli- cant or designee, or other appropriate entity, as approved by the City. h. Maintenance Covenant and Note Required: The following note shall ap- pear on the face of all plats, short plats, PUDs, or other approved site plans con- taining separate native growth protection easements or tracts, and shall also be re- corded as a covenant running with the land on the title of record for all affected lots on the title "MAINTENANCE RE- SPONSIBILITY: All owners of lots cre- ated by or benefiting from this City action abutting or including a native growth pro- tection easement [tract] are responsible for maintenance and protection of the easement [tract]. Maintenance includes ensuring that no alterations occur within the tract and that all vegetation remains undisturbed unless the express written authorization of the City has been re- ceived." 5. Discretionary -Building or Develop- ment Setbacks: A building or activity set- back from a critical area or buffer may be required to ensure adequate protection of the critical area/buffer during construction and ongoing maintenance of the activity. A re- quirement for a setback shall be based on the findings of a critical area report or a peer re- view required for the activity. (Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005; Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) 4-3-050F F. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS AND FEES: 1. Applicability: When a regulated critical area or associated buffer is identified, the fol- lowing procedures apply. 2. Preapplication Consultation: Any per- son intending to develop properties known or suspected to have critical areas present is strongly encouraged to meet with the appro- priate City department representative during the earliest possible stages of project plan- ning before major commitments have been made to a particular land use and/or project design. Effort put into a preapplication con- sultation and planning will help applicants create projects which will be more quickly and easily processed due to a better understand- ing on the part of applicants of regulatory re- quirements. 3. Plans and Studies Required: When an application is submitted for any building per- mit or land use review and/or to obtain ap- proval of a use, development or construction, the location of the critical areas and buffers on the site shall be indicated on the plans submitted based upon an inventory provided by a qualified specialist. 4. Submittal Requirements: See chapter 4-8 RMC. 5. Fees: See RMC 4-1-170. 6. Waiver of Submittal or Procedural Re- quirements: The Department Administrator may waive any of the requirements of this subsection if the size and complexity of the project does not warrant a step in the pro- ceeding and provided criteria to waive stud- ies are met in subsections H to M of this Section. 7. Independent Secondary Review: The City may require independent review of an applicant's report as follows: a. Aquifer Protection Areas, Flood Hazards, Habitat Conservation, Streams and Lakes, Wetlands: When appropriate due to the type of critical ar- eas, habitat, or species present, or project area conditions, the applicant may be required to prepare and/or fund 3-18.19 (Revised 3/13) 4-3-050F analyses or activities, including, but not limited to: i. An evaluation by an independent qualified professional regarding the applicant's analysis and the effec- tiveness of any proposed mitigating measures or programs, to include any recommendations as appropri- ate. This shall be paid at the appli- cant's expense, and the Administrator shall select the third- party review professional; and/or ii. A request for consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington State De- partment of Ecology, or the local Na- tive American Tribe or other appropriate agency; and/or iii. Detailed surface and subsurface hydrologic features both on and abutting the site. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) b. Geologic Hazards: Independent secondary review shall be conducted in accordance with the following: (Revised 3/13) i. Required -Sensitive and Pro- tected Slopes, and Medium, High, or Very High Landslide Hazards: All geotechnical reports submitted in accordance with subsection J2 of this Section, Special Studies Re- quired, and chapter 4-8 RMC, Per- mits-General and Appeals, shall be independently reviewed by qualified specialists selected by the City, at the applicant's expense. An applicant may request that independent review be waived by the Department Admin- istrator in accordance with subsec- tion D4b of this Section, Review Authority -Geologic Hazards, Habi- tat Conservation, Shorelines, Streams and Lakes, and Wetlands. ii. Required for Critical Facilities in Volcanic, High Erosion, High Seismic, Medium Coal Mine, or High Coal Mine Hazards: The City shall require independent review of a geotechnical report addressing a crit- ical facility by qualified specialists se- 3-18.20 lected by the City, at the applicant's expense. An applicant may request that independent review be waived by the Department Administrator in accordance with subsection D4b of this Section, Review Authority - Geologic Hazards, Habitat Conser- vation, Shorelines, Streams and Lakes, and Wetlands. iii. At City's Discretion -Volca- nic, High Erosion, High Seismic, Medium Coal Mine, or High Coal Mine Hazards: For any proposal ex- cept critical facilities, the City may re- quire independent review of an applicant's geotechnical report by qualified specialists selected by the City, at the applicant's expense. 8. Mitigation Plan Required: a. Criteria: For any mitigation plans re- quired through the application of subsec- tions H to M of this Section, the applicant shall: i. Demonstrate sufficient scientific expertise, the supervisory capability, and the financial resources to carry out the mitigation project; and ii. Demonstrate the capability for monitoring the site and to make cor- rections during the monitoring period if the mitigation project fails to meet projected goals; and iii. Protect and manage, or provide for the protection and management, of the mitigation area to avoid further development or degradation and to provide for long-term persistence of the mitigation area; and iv. Provide for project monitoring and allow City inspections; and v. Avoid mitigation proposals that would result in additional future miti- gation or regulatory requirements for adjacent or abutting properties, un- less it is a result of a code require- ment, or no other option is feasible or practical; and (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) vi. For on-site or off-site mitigation proposals, abutting or adjacent prop- erty owners shall be notified when wetland creation or restoration, stream relocation, critical area buffer increases, flood hazard mitigation, habitat conservation mitigation, or geologic hazard mitigation have the potential to considerably decrease the development potential of abutting or adjacent properties. For example, if a created wetland on a property would now result in a wetland buffer intruding onto a neighboring prop- erty, the neighboring property owner would be notified. Notification shall be given as follows: (a) For applications that are not subject to notices of application per chapter 4-8 RMC, notice of the mitigation proposal shall be given by posting the site and no- tifying abutting or adjacent prop- erty owners with the potential to be impacted. Written notification may be made prior to or at the time of the SEPA determination. (b) For applications that are subject to notices of application, the mitigation proposal shall be identified in the notice of applica- tion and mailed to abutting or ad- jacent property owners with the potential to be impacted; if the determination of the mitigation requirements is not known at the time of the notice of application, written notice to abutting or adja- cent property owners shall be given instead at the time of the SEPA determination. b. Timing of Mitigation Plan -Final Submittal and Commencement: When a mitigation plan is required, the propo- nent shall submit a final mitigation plan for the approval of the Administrator prior to the issuance of building or construction permits for development. The proponent shall receive written approval of the miti- gation plan prior to commencement of any mitigation activity. (Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005) 4-3-050H G. SURETY DEVICES: 1. Required for Mitigation Plans: For any mitigation plans required as a result of the ap- plication of these regulations, a surety device shall be required to ensure performance con- sistent with RMC 4-1-230. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) 2. Time Period -Wetlands, Streams, and Lakes: For wetland and/or stream/lake miti- gation plans, the surety device shall be suffi- cient to guarantee that structures, improvements, and mitigation required by permit condition perform satisfactorily for a minimum of five (5) years after they have been completed. (Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005) H. AQUIFER PROTECTION: 1. Applicability: The aquifer protection regulations apply to uses, activities, and facil- ities located within an aquifer protection area (APA) as classified below. a. Aquifer Protection Ar11a (APA): Aquifer protection areas are the portion of an aquifer within the zone of capture and recharge area for a well or well field owned or operated by the City, as de- picted in subsection Q 1 of this Section, Maps. b. Aquifer Protection Zones: Zones of an APA are designated to provide graduated levels of aquifer protection. Zone boundaries are determined using best available science documented in the City of Renton Wellhead Protection Plan, an appendix of the City of Renton Water System Plan, as periodically updated. The following zones may be designated: i. Zone 1: The land area situated between a well or well field owned by the City and the three hundred sixty five (365) day groundwater travel time contour. ii. Zone 1 Modified: The same land area described for Zone 1 but for the purpose of protecting a high- priority well, wellfield, or spring with- drawing from an aquifer that is par- tially protected by overlying geologic strata. Uses, activities, and facilities 3-18.21 (Revised 3/13) 4-3-050H located in this area are regulated as if located within Zone 1 except as provided by subsection C6(a)(iii) of this Section. iii. Zone 2: The land area situated between the three hundred sixty five (365) day groundwater travel time contour and the boundary of the zone of potential capture for a well or well field owned or operated by the City. If the aquifer supplying water to a well, well field, or spring is naturally pro- tected by overlying geologic strata, the City may choose not to subdivide an APA into two (2) zones. In such a case, the entire APA will be desig- nated as Zone 2. c. Mapping: (Revised 3/13) i. Determination of Location within a Zone of an Aquifer Protec- tion Area: In determining the loca- tion of facilities within the zones defined by subsection Q1 of this Sec- tion, the following rules shall apply: (a) Facilities located wholly within an APA zone shall be gov- erned by the restrictions applica- ble to that zone. (b) Facilities having parts lying within more than one zone of an APA shall be governed as fol- lows: Each part of the facility shall be reviewed and regulated by the requirements set forth in this Section for the zone in which that part of the facility is actually located. (c) Facilities having parts lying both in and out of an APA shall be governed as follows: • That portion which is within an APA shall be governed by the applicable restrictions in this Section; and That portion which is not in an APA shall not be gov- erned by this Section. 3 -18.22 ii. Zone Maps: The locations of aquifer protection areas (APA) in the City are depicted by the map in sub- section 01 of this Section, Maps. d. Performance Standards: In addi- tion to the general standards of subsec- tion E of this Section, the following performance standards, subsections H2 to H10, apply to all non-exempt uses, ac- tivities, and facilities on sites located within an aquifer protection area per sub- section H1, Applicability. e. Authority to Require Hydrogeo- logic Assessment: The City may re- quire an applicant to prepare a hydrogeologic study if the proposal has the potential to significantly impact groundwater quantity or quality, and suffi- cient information is not readily available. Such a report shall be prepared by a qualified professional at the applicant's expense. Report content requirements may be specified by the City in accor- dance with State or Federal guidelines or tailored to the particular development ap- plication. Peer review of the applicant's report may be required in accordance with subsection F7 of this Section. 2. Facilities: a. Removal of Existing Facilities - Zone 1: i. The storage, handling, use, treat- ment or production of hazardous ma- terials in aggregate quantities greater than five hundred (500) gal- lons shall not be allowed within Zone 1 of an APA after October 14, 2002. The storage, handling, use, treat- ment or production of tetrachloroeth- ylene (e.g., dry-cleaning fluid) shall not be allowed within Zone 1 of an APA after March 31, 1999. ii. Once a facility in Zone 1 is closed, relocated, or the use of haz- ardous materials is tenninated, rein- statement of the use of hazardous materials on the site in quantities greater than that allowed for new fa- cilities locating in Zone 1 as de- scribed in subsection C8d(i) of this Section, Prohibited Activities, Zone 1 , shall be prohibited. iii. Closure of a facility or termina- tion of any or all facility activities shall be conducted in accordance with the closure requirements in RMC 4-9-015F, Closure Permit. b. Existing Facilities Change in Quantities -Zone 1: In Zone 1 of an APA, no change in operations at a facility shall be allowed that increases the ag- gregate quantity of hazardous materials stored, handled, treated, used, or pro- duced with the following exception: The aggregate quantity of hazardous materi- als may be increased not to exceed five hundred (500) gallons. c, Existing Facilities -Allowances in Zone 2: The storage, handling, treat- ment, use or production of hazardous materials at existing facilities shall be al- lowed within Zone 2 of an APA upon com- pliance with the provisions of this Section. d. Requirements for Facilities - Zones 1 and 2: The following conditions in subsections H2d{i) to (vi) of this Sec- tion will be required as part of any operat- ing permit issued for facilities in Zone 1 of an APA. Conditions in subsections H2d{i) to (v) of this Section shall apply to facili- ties in Zone 2 of an APA. i. Secondary Containment - Zones 1 and 2: (a) Materials Stored in Tanks subject to DOE -Zones 1 and 2: Hazardous materials stored in tanks that are subject to regula- tion by the Washington Depart- ment of Ecology under chapter 173-360 WAC are exempt from containment requirements in subsection H2d{i) of this Section, Secondary Containment-Zones 1 and 2, but are subject to appli- cable requirements in RMC 4-5-120, Underground Storage Tank Secondary Containment Regulations. 3-18.23 4-3-050H (b) Secondary Containment Devices and Requirements - Zones 1 and 2: Every owner of a facility shall provide secondary containment devices adequate in size to contain on-site any unau- thorized release of hazardous materials from any area where these substances are either stored, handled, treated, used, or produced. Secondary contain- ment devices shall prevent haz- ardous materials from contacting soil, surface water, and ground- water and shall prevent hazard- ous materials from entering storm drains and, except for au- thorized and permitted dis- charges, the sanitary sewer. Design requirements for second- ary containment devices are as follows: {1) The secondary contain- ment device shall be large enough to contain the volume of the primary container in cases where a single container is used to store, handle, treat, use, or produce a hazardous material. In cases where multiple containers are used, the secondary contain- ment device shall be large enough to contain the volume of the largest container. Volumes specified are in addition to the design flow rate of the automatic fire extinguishing system, if present, to which the secondary containment device is subjected. The secondary containment de- vice shall be capable of contain- ing the fire flow for a period of twenty (20) minutes or more. (2) All secondary containment devices shall be constructed of materials of sufficient thickness, density, and composition to pre- vent structural weakening of the containment device as a result of contact with any hazardous ma- terial. If coatings are used to pro- vide chemical resistance for secondary containment devices, they shall also be resistant to the (Revised 6/05) 4-3-050H (Revised 6/05) expected abrasion and impact conditions. Secondary contain- ment devices shall be capable of containing any unauthorized re- lease for at least the maximum anticipated period sufficient to al- low detection and removal of the release. (3) Hazardous materials stored outdoors and their attendant sec- ondary containment devices shall be covered to preclude pre- cipitation with the exception of hazardous materials stored in tanks that have been approved by and are under permit from the City of Renton Fire Prevention Bureau. Secondary containment for such tanks, if uncovered, shall be able to accommodate the volume of precipitation that could enter the containment de- vice during a twenty four (24) hour, twenty five (25) year storm, in addition to the volume of the hazardous material stored in the tank. Storage of hazardous ma- terials, both indoors and out- doors, shall, at all times, meet both the requirements of this Section and the Uniform Fire Code. (4) Secondary containment de- vices shall include monitoring procedures or technology capa- ble of detecting the presence of a hazardous material within twenty four (24) hours following a re- lease. Hazardous materials shall be removed from the secondary containment device within twenty four (24) hours of detection and shall be legally stored or dis- posed. (5) Areas in which there are floor drains, catchbasins, or other conveyance piping that does not discharge into a sec- ondary containment device that meets the requirements of this Chapter shall not be used for secondary containment of haz- ardous materials. Closure of ex- 3 -18.24 isling piping shall be according to procedures and designs ap- proved by the Department. (6) Primary containers shall be impervious to the contents stored therein, properly labeled, and fitted with a tight cover which is kept closed except when sub- stances are being withdrawn or used. (7) Hazardous materials stored outdoors when the facility is left unsupervised must be inaccessi- ble to the public. Such tech- niques as locked storage sheds, locked fencing, or other tech- niques may be used if they will effectively preclude access. (8) Stored hazardous materials shall be protected and secured, as needed, against impact and earthquake to prevent damage to the primary container that would result in release of hazard- ous materials that would escape the secondary containment area. ii. Hazardous Material Monitor- ing Requirements for Existing Fa- cilities -Zones 1 and 2: (a) The owners of all existing facilities shall implement hazard- ous materials monitoring. (b) All hazardous material monitoring activities shall include the following: (1) A written routine monitoring procedure which includes, when applicable: the frequency of per- forming the monitoring method, the methods and equipment to be used for performing the moni- toring, the location(s) from which the monitoring will be performed, the name(s) or title(s) of the per- son(s) responsible for perform- ing the monitoring and/or maintaining the equipment, and the reporting format. (2) Written records of all moni- toring performed shall be main- tained on-site by the operator for a period of three (3) years from the date the monitoring was per- formed. The Department may re- quire the submittal of the monitoring records or a summary at a frequency that the Depart- ment may establish. The written records of all monitoring per- formed in the past three (3) years shall be shown to the Depart- ment upon demand during any site inspection. Monitoring records shall include but not be limited to: • The date and time of all mon- itoring or sampling; • Monitoring equipment cali- bration and maintenance records; • The results of any visual ob- servations; • The results of all sample analysis performed in the laboratory or in the field, in- cluding laboratory data sheets; • The logs of all readings of gauges or other monitoring equipment, groundwater ele- vations or other test results; and • The results of inventory readings and reconciliations. (3) Visual monitoring must be implemented unless it is deter- mined by the Department to be infeasible to visually monitor. (c) On every day of operation, a responsible person designated by the permittee shall check for breakage or leakage of any con- tainer holding hazardous materi- als. Electronic sensing devices approved by the Department may be employed as part of the 3 -18.25 4-3-050H inspection process; provided, that the system is checked daily for malfunctions. iii. Emergency Collection De- vices -Zones 1 and 2: Vacuum suc- tion devices, absorbent scavenger materials, or other devices approved by the Department shall be present on site (or available within an hour by contract with a cleanup company ap- proved by the Department), in suffi- cient quantity to control and collect the total quantity of hazardous mate- rials plus absorbent material. The presence of such emergency collec- tion devices and/or cleanup contract are the responsibility and at the ex- pense of the owner and shall be doc- umented in the operating permit. iv. Inspection of Containment and Emergency Equipment - Zones 1 and 2: Owners shall estab- lish procedures for monthly in-house inspection and routine maintenance of containment and emergency equipment. Such procedures shall be in writing, a regular checklist and schedule of maintenance activity shall be established, and a log shall be kept of inspections and mainte- nance activities. Such logs and records shall be made available at all reasonable times to the Department for examination. v. Employee Training -Zones 1 and 2: Operators shall schedule training for all new employees upon hiring and once per year thereafter to explain the conditions of the operat- ing permit such as emergency re- sponse procedures, proper hazardous waste disposal, monitor- ing and reporting requirements, record keeping requirements, and the types and quantities of hazard- ous materials on site. These training sessions will be documented and re- corded and the names of those in at- tendance will be recorded. These records shall be made available at all reasonable times to the Department for inspection. (Revised 3/10) 4-3-050H (Revised 3/10) vi. Additional Facility Require- ments for Zone 1: Owners shall complete the following: (a) Site Monitoring: For facili- ties located in Zone 1 of an APA, an owner of a facility may, at their own expense, be required to in- stitute a program to monitor groundwater, surtace water run- off, and/or site soils. The Depart- ment may require that the owner of a facility install one or more groundwater monitoring wells in a manner approved by the De- partment in order to accommo- date the required groundwater monitoring. Criteria used to de- termine the need for site monitor- ing shall include, but not be limited to, the proximity of the fa- cility to the City's production or monitoring wells, the type and quantity of hazardous materials on site, and whether or not the hazardous materials are stored in underground vessels. Every owner required to monitor groundwater, surtace water run- off, and/or soils shall pertorm such monitoring semi-annually and obtain independent analyti- cal results of the presence and concentration of those chemicals requiring monitoring (including breakdown and transformation products) as identified by the De- partment in the operating permit. The analytical results shall be obtained through the use of De- partment of Ecology-approved methods for water and/or soils. The results shall be filed within ten (10) days with the Depart- ment. If a facility is required to pertorm site monitoring pursuant to sub- section H2d(vi) of this Section, Additional Facility Requirements for Zone 1, Site Monitoring, then a site monitoring plan will be re- quired. This plan must indicate procedures to be followed to as- sess groundwater, surtace water 3 • 18.26 runoff, and/or soil for concentra- tions of those chemicals requir- ing monitoring as identified by the Department in the operating permit. If a groundwater monitor- ing program is in effect per the requirements of 40 CFR 264 or 265, and this program includes all of the chemicals identified in the operating permit, then it shall be incorporated into the site monitoring plan which shall also include provisions to address the groundwater monitoring require- ments of subsection H2d{vi) of this Section, Additional Facility Requirements for Zone 1 , Site Monitoring, and RMC 4-9-015G3, Unauthorized Re- leases, Monitoring Results. (b) Site Improvements: (1) For facilities located in Zone 1 of an APA, the owner may be required to pave all currently un- paved areas of their facility that are subject to any vehicular use or storage, use, handling, or pro- duction of hazardous materials. (2) For those facilities located in Zone 1 of an APA in which the nature of the business involves the use of hazardous materials outside of fully enclosed struc- tures, the City shall evaluate the existing stormwater collection and conveyance system, and re- serves the right to require the owner to upgrade the system to meet the provisions of RMC 4-6-030E4f, Special Require- ment 6 -Aquifer Protection Area (APA). (3) For those facilities located in Zone 1 of an APA, the City may require the owner to test in- terior wastewater plumbing and the building side sewer for tight- ness according to subsection H6a(ii) of this Section, Pipeline Requirements -Zone 1 , and re- serves the right to require that such wastewater conveyance be repaired or replaced according to subsection H6a(i) ofthis Section, Pipeline Requirements -Zone 1 . (Ord. 5526, 2-1-2010) (c) capital Cost Reimburse- ment for Additional Operating Permit Requirements: The City shall pay fifty percent (50%) of documented capital costs up to twenty five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) for required instal- lation and construction of moni- toring wells, site paving, wastewater conveyance, and stormwater improvements as re- quired in subsections H2d(vi)(a) and (b) of this Section, Site Mon- itoring and Site Improvements. Payment by the City shall be made according to adopted ad- ministrative rules. 3. Use of Pesticides and Nitrates -APA Zones 1 and 2: a. Use of Pesticides: The application of hazardous materials such as pesti- cides shall be allowed in an APA, except within one hundred feet (100') of a well or two hundred feet (200') of a spring; pro- vided, that: i. The application is in strict confor- mity with the use requirements as set forth by the EPA and as indicated on the containers in which the sub- stances are sold. ii. Persons who are required to keep pesticide application records by RCW 17.21.100.1 and WAC 16-228- 190 shall provide a copy of the re- quired records to the Department within seventy two (72) hours of the application. b. Nitrate-Containing Materials: The application of fertilizers containing ni- trates shall be allowed in an APA except within one hundred feet (100') of a well or two hundred feet (200') of a spring; pro- vided, that: i. No application of nitrate-contain- ing materials shall exceed one-half 3 -19 4-3-050H (0.5) pound of nitrogen per one thou- sand (1,000) square feet per single application and a total yearly applica- tion of five (5) pounds of nitrogen per one thousand (1,000) square feet; except that an approved slow-re- lease nitrogen may be applied in quantities of up to nine-tenths (0.9) pound of nitrogen per one thousand (1,000) square feet per single appli- cation and eight (8) pounds of nitro- gen per one thousand (1,000) square feet per year; and ii. Persons who apply fertilizer con- taining nitrates to more than one con- tiguous acre of land located in the APA either in one or multiple applica- tion(s) per year shall provide to the Department within seventy two (72) hours of any application the following information: (a) The name, address, and telephone number of the person applying the fertilizer; (b) The location and land area of the application; (c) The date and time of the ap- plication; (d) The product name and for- mulation; (e) The application rate. 4. Wastewater Disposal Requirements - Zones 1 and 2: Refer to RMC 4-6-040J, San- itary Sewer Standards, Additional Require- ments that Apply within Zones 1 and 2 of an Aquifer Protection Area. 5. Surface Water Requirements -Zones 1 and 2: Refer to RMC 4-6-030E, Drainage Plan Requirements and Methods of Analysis for additional surface water requirements ap- plicable within Zones 1 and 2 of an Aquifer Protection Area. (Revised 3/10) 4-3-050H 6. Pipeline Requirements: a. Pipeline Requirements -Zone 1: ( Revised 3/10) i. All new and existing pipelines in Zone 1 shall be constructed or re- paired in accordance with material specifications contained in subsec- tion S of this Section, Pipeline Mate- rial. All existing product pipelines in Zone 1 shall be repaired and main- tained in accordance with best man- agement practices and best available technology. ii. All new pipelines constructed in Zone 1 shall be tested for leakage in conformance with the following provi- sions prior to being placed into ser- vice. (a) Pipeline leakage testing shall be conducted in accor- dance with best available tech- nology, to the satisfaction of the Department. (b) Pipeline leakage testing methods shall be submitted to the Department for review prior to testing and shall include a de- tailed description of the testing methods and technical assump- tions; accuracy and precision of the test; proposed testing dura- tions, pressures, and lengths of pipeline to be tested; and scale drawings of the pipeline(s) to be tested. (c) Upon completion of testing, pipeline leakage testing results shall be submitted to the Depart- ment and shall include: record of testing durations, pressures, and lengths of pipeline tested; and weather conditions at the time of testing. (d) Routine leakage testing of new pipelines constructed in Zone 1 may be required by the Department. iii. If the Department has reason to believe that the operation or pro- 3 · 20 posed operation of an existing pipe- line in Zone 1 of an APA may degrade ground water quality, the Department may require leakage testing of the existing pipeline in ac- cordance with subsection H6a(ii) of this Section; and installation, sam- pling, and sample analysis of moni- toring wells. Routine leakage testing of existing pipelines in Zone 1 may be required by the Department. Crite- ria for this determination is specified under subsection D2b(ii) of this Sec- tion, Potential to Degrade Ground- water -Zone 2, Criteria. iv. Should pipeline leakage testing reveal any leakage at any level then the Department shall require immedi- ate repairs to the pipeline to the sat- isfaction of the Department such that no infiltration of water into the pipe- line or exfiltration of substances con- veyed in the pipeline shall occur. Any repairs which are made shall be tested for leakage pursuant to sub- section H6a(ii) of this Section. b. Pipeline Requirements -Zone 2: If the Department has reason to believe that the operation or proposed operation of an existing pipeline in Zone 2 of an APA may degrade groundwater quality, the Department may require leakage testing in accordance with subsection H6a(ii) of this Section; installation, sam- pling, and sample analysis of groundwa- ter monitoring wells; repair of the pipeline to the satisfaction of the Department such that degradation of groundwater quality is minimized or eliminated. Crite- ria for this determination is specified un- der subsection D2b(ii), Potential to Degrade Groundwater -Zone 2, Criteria. 7. Construction Activity Standards - Zones 1 and 2: Refer to RMC 4-4-030C8, Construction Activity Standards -APA Zones 1 and 2. 8. Fill Material Requirements -Zones 1 and 2: Reier to RMC 4-4-060L4, Fill Material, regarding quality of fill and fill material source statement requirements within aquifer protec- tion areas. 9. Regulations for Existing Solid Waste Landfills -Zones 1 and 2: a. Materials: Earth materials used as fill or cover at a solid waste landfill shall meet the requirements of RMC 4-4-060L4, Fill Material. b. Groundwater Monitoring: The De- partment shall have the authority to re- quire an owner of a solid waste landfill to implement a groundwater monitoring pro- gram equal to that described by King County Board of Health Title 10 (King County Solid Waste Regulations) Section 10.72.020 and a corrective action pro- gram equal to that described by Section 10.72.030. The Department shall have the authority ascribed to the health officer in said regulations. Quarterly reports shall be provided to the Department de- tailing groundwater monitoring activity during the preceding three (3) months. Reports detailing corrective action re- quired by the Department shall be sub- mitted according to a written schedule approved by the Department. 10. Hazardous Materials -Release Re- strictions -Zones 1 and 2: Hazardous ma- terials shall not be spilled, leaked, emitted, discharged, disposed, or allowed to escape or leach into the air, into groundwater, surface water, surface soils or subsurface soils. Ex- ception: Intentional withdrawals of hazardous materials for the purpose of legitimate sale, use, or disposal and discharges permitted under federal, state, or local law. Any unau- thorized releases shall be subject to the pro- cedural requirements of RMC 4-9-015G, Unauthorized Releases. (Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000; Ord. 4992, 12-9-2002; Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005) I. FLOOD HAZARDS: 1. Applicability: Flood hazard regulations shall apply to all areas of special flood haz- ards within the jurisdiction of the City. In addi- tion, all other applicable critical area or Shoreline Master Program regulations shall apply within flood hazard areas. See RMC 4-3-090E for a description of Shoreline Mas- ter Program jurisdictional areas. 3 -20.1 4-3-050I a. Areas of Special Flood Hazard: Ar- eas of special flood hazard are defined as the land in the floodplain subject to one percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year. Designation on flood maps always include the letters A or V. b. Mapping and Documentation: i. Basic Map and Documentation Identifying Hazards: The areas of special flood hazard are identified by the Federal Insurance Administration in a scientific and engineering report entitled the Flood Insurance Study for the City of Renton, dated Septem- ber 29, 1989, and any subsequent revision, with accompanying flood in- surance maps which are hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this section. The flood insurance study is on file at the Pub- lic Works Department. (Ord. 5450, 3-2-2009) ii. When Federal Insurance Study is Not Available: When base flood elevation data has not been provided in accordance with subsec- tion 11 b(i) of this Section the Depart- ment Administrator shall obtain, review, and reasonably utilize any base flood elevation and floodway data available from a Federal, State or other source in order to administer subsection 13 of this Section, Specific Standards, and subsection 14 of this Section, Additional Restrictions Within Floodways. The best avail- able information for flood hazard area identification shall be the basis for regulation until a new Flood Insur- ance Rate Map is issued which incor- porates the data utilized under subsection D3a(iv) of this Section. iii. Interpretation of FIRM Bound- aries: Per subsection D3d of this Section, the Administrator shall make interpretations where needed, as to the exact location of the bound- aries of the areas of special flood hazard (for example, where there ap- pears to be a conflict between a mapped boundary and actual field conditions). The best available infor- ( Revised 3/ 13) 4-3-0501 mation for flood hazard area identifi- cation shall be the basis for regulation. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) iv. Data to be Used for Existing and Future Flow Conditions: The City shall determine the components of the flood hazard area after obtain- ing, reviewing and utilizing base flood elevations and available flood- plain data for a flood having a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year, often re- ferred to as the "one-hundred-year flood." The City may require projec- tions of future flow conditions for pro- posals in unmapped potential flood hazard areas. In mapped or un- mapped flood hazard areas, future flow conditions shall be considered for proposed bridge proposals cross- ing floodways. c. Performance Standards: In addi- tion to general standards of subsection E of this Section, the following regulations, subsections 12 through 14 of this Section, apply in all areas of special flood hazard. 2. General Standards: In all areas of spe- cial flood hazards, the following standards are required: a. Anchoring -All New Construc- tion: All new construction and substantial improvements shall be anchored to pre- vent flotation, collapse, or lateral move- ment of the structure. b. Anchoring -Manufactured Homes: All manufactured homes must likewise be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement, and shall be installed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage. Anchoring methods may include, but are not limited to, use of over-the-top or frame ties to ground anchors (reference FEMA's Man- ufactured Home Installation in Flood Hazard Areas guidebook for additional techniques). (Revised 3/13) 3 • 20.2 c. Construction Materials and Meth- ods: i. All new construction and substan- tial improvements shall be con- structed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage. ii. All new construction and sub- stantial improvements shall be con- structed using methods and practices that minimize flood dam- age. iii. Electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, and air-conditioning equip- ment and other service facilities shall be designed and/or otherwise ele- vated or located so as to prevent wa- ter from entering or accumulating within the components during condi- tions offlooding. d. Utilities: i. Water: All new and replacement water supply systems shall be de- signed to minimize or eliminate infil- tration of flood waters into the system. The proposed water well shall be located on high ground that is not in thefloodway (WAC 173-160- 171). ii. Sewer: New and replacement sanitary sewage systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate in- filtration of flood waters into the sys- tems and discharge from the systems into flood waters. iii. Waste Disposal: On-site waste disposal systems shall be located to avoid impairment to them or contam- ination from them during flooding. e. Subdivision Proposals: i. All subdivision proposals shall be consistent with the need to minimize flood damage; ii. All subdivision proposals shall have public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems located and con- structed to minimize flood damage; iii. All subdivision proposals shall have adequate drainage provided to reduce exposure to flood damage; and iv. All subdivision proposals shall show the flood hazard information and boundary on the subdivision drawing including the nature, loca- tion, dimensions, and elevations of the subdivided area. f. Project Review: i. Building Permits: Where eleva- tion data is not available either through the flood insurance study or from another authoritative source, i.e., subsection D3a(iv) of this Sec- tion, applications for building permits shall be reviewed to assure that pro- posed construction will be reason- ably safe from flooding. The test of reasonableness is a local judgment and includes use of historical data, high water marks, photographs of past flooding, etc., where available. Failure to elevate at least two feet (2') above grade in these zones may result in higher insurance rates. ii. Land Use Applications: Where base flood elevation data has not been provided or is not available from another authoritative source, it shall be generated for subdivision proposals and other proposed devel- opments which contain at least fifty (50) lots or five (5) acres (whichever is less). 3. Specific Standards: In all areas of spe- cial flood hazards where base flood elevation data has been provided as set forth in sub- section 11 b of this Section, Mapping and Doc- umentation, or subsection D3a(iv) of this Section, Use of Other Base Flood Data, where such data provides flood elevations that exceed the regulatory standards in the FEMA flood insurance study, the following provisions are required: 3 -20.3 4-3-050I a. Residential Construction: i. New construction and substantial improvement of any residential struc- ture shall have the lowest floor, in- cluding basement, elevated a minimum of one foot (1 ') above base flood elevation. ii. Fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that are subject to flood- ing are prohibited, or shall be de- signed to automatically equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and exit of flood waters. Designs for meeting this requirement must either be certified by a registered profes- sional engineer or architect or must meet or exceed the following mini- mum criteria: (a) A minimum of two (2) open- ings having a total net area of not less than one square inch for ev- ery square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding shall be pro- vided; and (b) The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one foot above grade; and (c) Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, or other coverings or devices; provided, that they permit the automatic entry and exit of flood waters. b. Manufactured Homes: i. All manufactured homes to be placed or substantially improved within Zones A 1-A30, AH, and AE on the community's Flood Insurance Rate Map, on sites outside of a man- ufactured home park or subdivision, in a new manufactured home park or subdivision, in an expansion to an existing manufactured home park or subdivision, or in an existing manu- factured home park or subdivision on which a manufactured home has in- curred "substantial damage" as the result of a flood, shall be elevated on a permanent foundation such that (Revised 6/05) 4-3-0501 the lowest floor of the manufactured home is elevated a minimum of one foot above the base flood elevation and be securely anchored to an ade- quately anchored foundation system to resist flotation, collapse and lateral movement. ii. Manufactured homes to be placed or substantially improved on sites in an existing manufactured home park or subdivision within Zones A1-30, AH, and AE on the community's Flood Insurance Rate Map that are not subject to the above manufactured home provisions shall be elevated so that either the lowest floor of the manufactured home is el- evated a minimum of one foot (1') above the base flood elevation or the manufactured home chassis is sup- ported by reinforced piers or other foundation elements of at least equivalent strength that are no less than thirty six inches (36") in height above grade and be securely an- chored to an adequately anchored foundation system to resist flotation, collapse, and lateral movement. c. Nonresidential Construction: New construction of any commercial, indus- trial or other nonresidential structure shall have the lowest floor, including base- ment, elevated a minimum of onefoot(1') above the level of the base flood eleva- tion. Substantial improvement of any commercial, industrial or other nonresi- dential structure shall have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated a minimum of one foot (1 ') above the level of the base flood elevation, or, together with attendant utility and sanitary facili- ties, shall: i. Be floodproofed so that below the minimum elevation required in sub- section 13c of this Section the struc- ture is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water; ii. Have structural components ca- pable of resisting hydrostatic and hy- drodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy; (Revised 6/05) 3 -20.4 iii. Be certified by a registered pro- fessional engineer or architect that the design and methods of construc- tion are in accordance with accepted standards of practice for meeting provisions of this subsection based on their development and/or review of the structural design, specifica- tions and plans. Such certifications shall be provided to the Department Administrator; iv. Nonresidential structures that are elevated, not floodproofed, must meet the same standards for space below the lowest floor as described in subsection 13a(ii) of this Section; v. Applicants floodproofing nonresi- dential buildings shall be notified that flood insurance premiums will be based on rates that are one foot (1 ') below the floodproofed level (e.g., a building floodproofed to the base flood level will be rated as one foot (1 ') below). d. Recreational Vehicles: Recre- ational vehicles placed on sites within Zones A 1-30, AH, and AE on the commu- nity's Flood Insurance Rate Map not in- cluding recreational vehicle storage lots shall either: i. Be on the site for fewer than one hundred eighty (180) consecutive days; ii. Be fully licensed and ready for highway use, on its wheels or jacking system, is attached to the site only by quick disconnect type utilities and se- curity devices, and has no perma- nently attached additions; or iii. Meet the requirements of sub- section 13b of this Section and the el- evation and anchoring requirements for manufactured homes. 4. Additional Restrictions within Flood- ways: Located within areas of special flood hazard established in subsection 11 b of this Section, Flood Hazards: Mapping and Docu- mentation, are areas designated as flood- ways. Since the floodway is an extremely hazardous area due to the velocity of flood waters which carry debris, potential projec- tiles, and erosion potential, the following pro- visions apply: a. Increase in Flood Levels Prohib- ited: Encroachments, including fill, new construction, substantial improvements, and other development are prohibited un- less certification by a registered profes- sional engineer demonstrates through hydrologic and hydraulic analyses per- formed in accordance with standard engi- neering practice that: i. Encroachments shall not result in any increase in flood levels during the occurrence of the base flood dis- charge; and ii. There are no adverse impacts to the subject property or abutting or adjacent properties; and iii. There are no higher flood eleva- tions upstream; and iv. The impact due to floodway en- croachment shall be analyzed using future land use condition flows. b. Residential Construction in Floodways: Construction or reconstruc- tion of residential structures is prohibited within designated floodways, except for: i. Repairs, reconstruction, or im- provements to a structure which do not increase the ground floor area; and ii. Repairs, reconstruction or im- provements to a structure, the cost of which does not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the market value of the structure either: (a) before the repair, reconstruction, or improvement is started; or (b) if the structure has been damaged, and is being re- stored, before the damage occurred. Work done on structures to comply with existing health, sanitary, or safety codes or to structures identi- fied as historic places may be ex- cluded in the fifty percent (50%). 3 -20.5 4-3-0501 c. Compliance Requirements: If sub- sections 14a and 14b of this Section are satisfied, all new construction and sub- stantial improvements shall comply with all applicable flood hazard reduction pro- visions of this Section. 5. Crltlcal Facility: Construction of new critical facilities shall be, to the extent possi- ble, located outside the limits of the special flood hazard area (SFHA) (one hundred (100) year) floodplain. Construction of new critical facilities shall be permissible within the SFHA if no feasible alternative site is avail- able. Critical facilities constructed within the SFHA shall have the lowest floor elevated three feet (3') or more above the level of the base flood elevation (one hundred (100) year) at the site. Floodproofing and sealing measures must be taken to ensure that toxic substances will not be displaced by or re- leased into flood waters. Access routes ele- vated to or above the level of the base flood elevation shall be provided to all critical facil- ities to the extent possible. 6. Compensatory Storage: a. Compensatory Storage Required: Development proposals and other alter- ations shall not reduce the effective base flood storage volume of the floodplain. If grading or other activity will reduce the effective storage volume, compensatory storage shall be created on the site or off the site if legal arrangements can be made to assure that the effective com- pensatory storage volume will be pre- served over time. Compensatory storage shall be configured so as not to trap or strand salmonids after flood waters re- cede and may be configured to provide salmonid habitat or high flow refuge whenever suitable site conditions exist and the configuration does not adversely affect bank stability or existing habitat. b. Additional Requirements - Springbrook Creek: The higher of the City hydrologic and hydraulic model re- sults for the one hundred (100) year fu- ture land use conveyance and storage events shall be used by the City to deter- mine the volume of compensatory stor- age required for filling within the one /Revised 6/05) 4-3-050J hundred (100) year flood zone of Spring- brook Creek. i. An exception to this requirement shall apply where the Federal Emer- gency Management Agency (FEMA) defined one hundred (100) year flood zone is lower than the City model re- sults for the one hundred (100) year future land use conveyance event. ii. Under the exception, the lower FEMA floodplain elevation shall be used. The exception only applies for the reach of Springbrook Creek be- tween SW 43rd Street and Oakes- dale Avenue near SW 41 st Street. c. Determining Finished Floor Eleva- tions According to FEMA: Although City model results will apply to compen- satory storage requirements, the FEMA one hundred (100) year flood plain eleva- tions shall be used to establish building finished floor elevations to comply with other National Flood Insurance Program requirements. (Amd. Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000; Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005) J. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS: 1. Applicability: The geologic hazard regu- lations apply to all nonexempt activities on sites containing steep slopes, landslide haz- ards, erosion hazards, seismic hazards, and/ or coal mine hazards classified below or on sites within fifty feet (50') of steep slopes, landslide hazards, erosion hazards, seismic hazards, and/or coal mine hazards classified below which are located on abutting or adja- cent sites. a. Steep Slopes: (Revised 6/05) i. Steep Slope Delineation Proce- dure: The boundaries of a regulated steep sensitive or protected slope are determined to be in the location identified on the City of Renton's Steep Slope Atlas. An applicant's qualified professional may substitute boundaries independently derived from survey data for the City's con- sideration in determining the bound- aries of sensitive or protected steep slopes. All topographic maps shall 3 -20.6 utilize two foot (2') contour intervals or the standard utilized in the City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas. ii. Steep Slope Types: (a) Sensitive slopes. (b) Protected slopes. b. Landslide Hazards: i. Low Landslide Hazard (LL): Ar- eas with slopes less than fifteen per- cent (15%). ii. Medium Landslide Hazard (LM): Areas with slopes between fif- teen percent (15%) and forty percent (40%) and underlain by soils that consist largely of sand, gravel or gla- cial till. iii. High Landslide Hazards (LH): Areas with slopes greater than forty percent (40%), and areas with slopes between fifteen percent (15%) and forty percent (40%) and underlain by soils consisting largely of silt and clay. iv. Very High Landslide Hazards (LV): Areas of known mappable land- slide deposits. c. Erosion Hazards: I. Low Erosion Hazard (EL): Ar- eas with soils characterized by the Natural Resource Conservation Ser- vice (formerly U.S. Soil Conservation Service) as having slight or moderate erosion potential, and that slope less than fifteen percent (15%). ii. High Erosion Hazard (EH): Ar- eas with soils characterized by the Natural Resource Conservation Ser- vice (formerly U.S. Soil Conservation Service) as having severe or very se- vere erosion potential, and that slope more steeply than fifteen percent (15%). d. Seismic Hazards: i. Low Seismic Hazard (SL): Ar- eas underlain by dense soils or bed- rock. These soils generally have site coefficients of types S1 or S2, as de- fined in the International Building Code. ii. High Seismic Hazard (SH): Ar- eas underlain by soft or loose, satu- rated soils. These soils generally have site coefficients of types S3 or S4, as defined in the International Building Code. (Ord. 5450, 3-2-2009) e. Coal Mine Hazards: i. Low Coal Mine Hazards (CL): Areas with no known mine workings and no predicted subsidence. While no mines are known in these areas, undocumented mining is known to have occurred. ii. Medium Coal Mine Hazards (CM): Areas where mine workings are deeper than two hundred feet (200') for steeply dipping seams, or deeper than fifteen (15) times the thickness of the seam or workings for gently dipping seams. These areas may be affected by subsidence. iii. High Coal Mine Hazard (CH): Areas with abandoned and improp- erly sealed mine openings and areas underlain by mine workings shal- lower than two hundred feet (200') in depth for steeply dipping seams, or shallower than fifteen (15) times the thickness of the seam or workings for gently dipping seams. These areas may be affected by collapse or other subsidence. f. Volcanic Hazards: Volcanic hazard areas are those areas subject to a poten- tial for inundation from post lahar sedi- mentation along the lower Green River as identified in Plate II, Map D, in the re- port U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey (Revised 1998), Vol- cano Hazards from Mount Rainier, Wash- ington. Open-File Report 98-428. 3 -20.7 4-3-050J g. Mapping: Maps of steep slopes, landslide, erosion, seismic, and coal mine hazards are documented and in- cluded in subsection Q of this Section, Maps. The actual presence or absence of the criteria listed above, as determined by qualified professionals, shall govern the treatment of an individual building site or parcel of land requiring compliance with these regulations. h. Performance Standards: In addi- tion to the general standards of subsec- tion E of this Section, the following performance standards, subsections J2 to J9 of this Section, apply to all regulated geologic hazard areas, unless the sub- section clearly identifies thatthe standard applies only to a specific geologic hazard category. Multiple performance stan- dards may apply to a site feature, for ex- ample steep slope, landslide and erosion hazards, based upon overlapping classi- fication systems. 2. Special Studies Required: a. Whenever a proposed development requires a development permit and a geologic hazard is present on the site of the proposed development or on abutting or adjacent sites within fifty feet (50') of the subject site, geotechnical studies by qualified professionals shall be required. Specifically, geotechnical studies are re- quired for developments proposed on sites with any of the following geologic hazards: i. Sensitive and protected slopes; ii. Medium, high, or very high land- slide hazards; iii. High erosion hazards; iv. High seismic hazards; v. Medium or high coal mine haz- ards. b. The required studies shall demon- strate the following review criteria can be met: (Revised 3/13) 4-3-050J i. The proposal will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to ad- jacent or abutting properties beyond pre-development conditions; and (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) ii. The proposal will not adversely impact other critical areas; and iii. The development can be safely accommodated on the site. c. A mitigation plan may be required consistent with subsection FB of this Sec- tion. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) 3. Independent Secondary Review: Inde- pendent secondary review is required consis- tent with subsection F7 of this Section. 4. Conditions of Approval: Conditions of approval may modify the proposal, including, but not limited to, construction techniques, design, drainage, project size/configuration, or seasonal constraints on development. Ad- ditional possibl.e conditions may be listed un- der the performance standards for each hazard type. Upon review of geotechnical studies, the development permit shall be con- ditioned to mitigate adverse environmental impacts and to assure that the development can be safely accommodated on the site and is consistent with the purposes of this Sec- tion. A mitigation plan may be required con- sistent with subsection FB of this Section. 5. Protected Slopes: a. Prohibited Development: Develop- ment is prohibited on protected slopes. This restriction is not intended to prevent the subdivision or development of prop- erty that includes forty percent (40%) or greater slopes on a portion of the site, provided there is enough developable area elsewhere to accommodate building pads. b. Exceptions through Modification: Exceptions to the prohibition may be granted for: (Revised 3/13) i. Filling against the toe of a natural rock wall or rock wall, or protected slope created through mineral and natural resource recovery activities 3 • 20.8 or public or private road installation or widening and related transporta- tion improvements, railroad track in- stallation or improvement, or public or private utility installation activities pursuant to subsection N2 of this Section, Modifications. ii. Grading to the extent that it elim- inates all or portions of a mound or to allow reconfiguration of protected slopes created through mineral and natural resource recovery activities or public or private road installation or widening and related transporta- tion improvements, railroad track in- stallation or improvement, or public or private utility installation activities, pursuant to subsection N2 of this Section, Modifications. c. Exceptions through Variance: Ex- ceptions to the prohibition may be granted for construction, reconstruction, additions, and associated accessory structures of a single family home on an existing legal lot pursuant to a variance as stated in RMC 4-9-25091. d. Exceptions through Waiver: Ex- ceptions to the prohibition may be granted for installation of public utilities which are needed to protect slope stabil- ity, and public road widening where all the following provisions have been demon- strated: i. The utility or road improvement is consistent with the Renton Compre- hensive Plan, adopted utility plans, and the Transportation Improvement Program where applicable. ii. Alternative locations have been determined to be economically or functionally infeasible. iii. A geotechnical evaluation indi- cates that the proposal will not in- crease the risk of occurrence of a geologic hazard, and measures are identified to eliminate or reduce risks. iv. The plan for the improvement is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific infor- mation, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. Where the excepted activities above are allowed, the erosion control mea- sures in subsection J6 of this Sec- tion, Sensitive Slopes, Medium, High and Very High Landslide Hazards, and High Erosion Hazards, shall also apply. e, Native Growth Protection Areas - Protected Slopes: Unless development is allowed pursuant to subsections J5a through J5d of this Section, protected slopes shall be placed in a native growth protection area pursuant to subsection E4 of this Section, or dedicated to a con- servation organization or land trust, or similarly preserved through a permanent protective mechanism acceptable to the City. f. Conditions of Approval: Based upon the results of the geotechnical re- port and independent review, conditions of approval for developments on sites which include steep slopes may include, but are not limited to, vegetation en- hancement, slope stabilization, buffer zones, or other requirements. Mitigation plans may be required consistent with subsection F8 of this Section. g, Coordination with Stream and Lake Buffers: When a required stream/ lake buffer falls within a protected slope area, the stream/lake buffer width shall extend to the boundary of the protected slope. 6. Sensitive Slopes -Medium, High and Very High Landslide Hazards -High Ero- sion Hazards: The following standards apply to development on sensitive slopes, medium/ high/very high landslide hazard areas, and high erosion hazard areas: a. Erosion Control Plans: Develop- ment applications shall submit erosion control plans consistent with subsection J2 of this Section, Special Studies Re- quired, and chapter 4-8 RMC, Permits and Appeals. 3 -20.9 4-3-050J b. Conditions of Approval: A devel- opment proposal may be conditioned to achieve minimal site erosion, including, but not limited to, timing of construction and vegetation stabilization, sequencing or phasing of construction, clearing and grading limits, and other measures. Miti- gation plans may be required consistent with subsection F8 of this Section. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) c. On-Site Inspections: During con- struction, weekly on-site inspections shall be required at the applicant's expense. Weekly reports documenting erosion control measures shall be required. 7. Very High Landslide Hazards: a. Prohibited Development: Develop- ment shall not be permitted on land des- ignated with very high landslide hazards, except by variance, administered pursu- ant to RMC 4-9-25081, for construction of a single family home on an existing le- gal lot. b. Buffer Requirement: A buffer of fifty feet (50') shall be established from the top, toe and sides of a very high landslide hazard area. The Department Adminis- trator may increase or decrease the re- quired buffer based upon the results of a geotechnical report, and any increase or decrease based upon the results of the geotechnical study shall be documented in writing and included with the project approval. i. The modified standard shall be based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific infor- mation, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F shall be followed. Notification may be required pursuant to subsection F8 of this Section. ii. When a required stream/lake buffer falls within a very high land- slide hazard area or buffer, the stream/lake buffer width shall extend to the boundary of the very high land- slide hazard buffer. (Revised 3/13) 4-3-050J c. Native Growth Protection Area - Very High Landslide Hazards: The landslide hazard area shall be placed in a native growth protection area pursuant to subsection E4 of this Section, or dedi- cated to a conservation organization or land trust, or similarly preserved through a permanent protective mechanism ac- ceptable to the City. Based upon the re- sults of the geotechnical study, the buffer may be placed in a native growth protec- tion area, or it may be designated as a "no build" easement, or the area may be designated, in part, a native growth pro- tection area and, in part, a "no build" easement. 8. Coal Mine Hazards: a. Medium Hazard -Report Re- quired: Reports consistent with subsec- tion J2 of this Section, Special Studies Required, and chapter 4-8 RMC, Permits and Appeals, shall be prepared for devel- opment proposed within medium coal mine hazard areas and for development proposed within two hundred feet (200') of a medium coal mine hazard area. An applicant may request that the Depart- ment Administrator waive the report re- quirement pursuant to subsection D4b of this Section, Review Authority-Geologic Hazards, Habitat Conservation, Streams and Lakes, and Wetlands, where it has been determined through field documen- tation that coal mine hazards are not present. b. High Hazard -Report Required: Reports consistent with subsection J2 of this Section, Special Studies Required, and chapter 4-8 RMC, Permits and Ap- peals, shall be prepared for development proposed within high coal mine hazard areas and for development proposed within five hundred feet (500') of a high coal mine hazard area. An applicant may request that the Department Administra- tor waive the report requirement pursuant to subsection D4b of this Section, Review Authority -Geclogic Hazards, Habitat Conservation, Streams and Lakes, and Wetlands, where it has been determined through field documentation that coal mine hazards are not present. (Revised 3/13) 3-20.10 c. Conditions of Approval: Based upon the results of studies prepared, the City may condition approval of develop- ment by requiring mitigation. Potential mitigation may include, but is not limited to, backfilling and sealing mine entries and shafts, backfilling existing sinkholes, removal or regrading or capping coal mine waste dumps, limiting development on portions of the site, or other measures offering equal protection from the hazard. A mitigation plan may be required consis- tent with subsection FS of this Section. i. Additional Engineering Design and Remediation Specifications: After approval of the mitigation ap- proach proposed as a result of sub- section J8c of this Section, and prior to construction, the applicant shall complete engineering design draw- ings and specifications for remedia- tion. Upon approval of the plans and specifications, the applicant shall complete the remediation. Hazard mitigation shall be performed by or under the direction of a qualified en- gineer or geologist. The applicant shall document the hazard mitigation by submitting as-builts and a remedi- ation construction report. d. Hazards Found during Construc- tion: Any hazards found during any de- velopment activities shall be immediately reported to the Development Services Di- vision. Any coal mine hazards shall be mitigated prior to recommencing con- struction based upon supplemental rec- ommendations or reports by the applicant's geotechnical professional. e. Construction in Areas with Com- bustion: Construction shall not be per- mitted where surface or subsurface investigations indicate the possible pres- ence of combustion in the underlying seam or seams, unless the impact is ad- equately mitigated in accordance with the recommendations of the applicant's gee- technical professional. 9. Volcanic Hazards: Critical facilities on sites containing areas susceptible to inunda- tion due to volcanic hazards shall require an evacuation and emergency management plan. The applicant for critical facilities shall evaluate the risk of inundation or flooding re- sulting from mudflows originating on Mount Rainier in a geotechnical report, and identify any engineering or other mitigation measures as appropriate. Mitigation plans may be re- quired consistent with subsection F8 of this Section. (Amd. Ord. 4835, 8-7-2000; Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000; Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002; Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005) K. HABITAT CONSERVATION: 1. Applicability: The habitat conservation regulations apply to all nonexempt activities on sites containing or abutting critical habitat as classified below. a. Critical Habitat: Critical habitats are those habitat areas which meet any of the following criteria: i. Habitats associated with the doc- umented presence of non-salmonid (see subsection L 1 of this Section and RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, for salmonid species) species proposed or listed by the Federal government or State of Washington as endangered, threatened, candidate, sensitive, monitor, or priority; and/or ii. Category 1 wetlands (refer to subsection M1 of this Section for classification criteria). b. Mapping: i. Critical habitats are identified by lists, categories and definitions of species promulgated by the Wash- ington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (Non-game Data System Special Animal Species) as identified in WAC 232-12-011; in the Priority Habitat and Species Program of the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife; or by rules and reg- ulations adopted currently or hereaf- ter by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. ii. Referenced inventories and maps are to be used as guides to the general location and extent of critical 3-20.11 4-3-050K habitat. Critical habitat which is iden- tified in subsection K1 a of this Sec- tion, but not shown on the referenced inventories and maps, are presumed to exist in the City and are also pro- tected under all the provisions of this Section. iii. The actual presence or absence of the criteria listed above, as deter- mined by qualified professionals, shall govern the treatment of an indi- vidual building site or parcel of land requiring compliance with these reg- ulations. c. Performance Standards: In addi- tion to the general standards of subsec- tion E of this Section, the following performance standards, subsections K2 to KS of this Section, apply to all non-ex- empt activities on sites containing critical habitat areas per subsection K1a of this Section. 2. Habitat Assessment Required: Based upon subsection K1 of this Section, Applica- bility, the City shall require a habitat/wildlife assessment for activities that are located within or abutting a crrtical habitat, or that are adjacent to a critical habitat, and have the po- tential to significantly impact a critical habitat. The assessment shall determine the extent, function and value of the critical habitat and potential for impacts and mitigation consis- tent with report requirements in RMC 4-8-1200. In cases where a proposal is not likely to significantly impact the critical habrtat and there is sufficient information to deter- mine the effects of a proposal, an applicant may request that this report be waived by the Department Administrator in accordance with subsection D4b of this Section. 3. Bald Eagle Habitat: Bald eagle habitat shall be protected pursuant to the Washing- ton State Bald Eagle Protection Rules (WAC 232-12-292). 4. Native Growth Protection Areas: Based on the required habitat assessment, critical habitat areas and their associated buffers may be required to be placed in a na- tive growth protection area subject to the re- quirements of subsection E4 of this Section, or dedicated to a conservation organization (Revised 3/13) 4-3-050L or land trust, or similarly preserved through a permanent protective mechanism acceptable to the City. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) 5. Alterations Require Mitigation: If alter- ations to critical habitat/wildlife habitat or buff- ers are proposed, mitigation shall be required by the City. The applicant shall evaluate alter- native methods of developing the property using the following criteria in this order: a. Avoid any disturbances to the habitat. b. Minimize any impacts to the hab- itat. c. Compensate for any habitat im- pacts. 6. Mitigation Options: In addition to any performance standards or mitigation required by wetland regulations. additional mitigation may be required based upon the consultant report submitted by the applicant, and/or peer review of the applicant's consultant report by a qualified professional selected by the City at the applicant's expense, and/or by informa- tion from State or Federal agencies. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) a. On-Site Mitigation: Mitigation shall be provided on-site, unless on-site miti- gation is not scientifically feasible due to physical features of the property. The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to demonstrate that mitigation cannot be provided on-site. b. Off-Site Mitigation: When mitiga- tion cannot be provided on-site, mitiga- tion shall be provided in the immediate vicinity of the permitted activity on prop- erty owned or controlled by the applicant, and identified as such through a recorded document such as an easement or cove- nant, provided such mttigation is benefi- cial to the habitat area and associated resources. c. In-Kind Mitigation: In-kind mitiga- tion shall be provided except when the applicant demonstrates and the City con- curs that greater functional and habitat value can be achieved through out-of- kind mitigation. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) 7. Mitigation Plan: Mitigation plans may be required consistent with subsection F8 of this Section. (Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005) L. STREAMS AND LAKES: 1. Applicability/Lands to Which These Regulations Apply: These stream and lake regulations apply to sites containing all or portions of Class 2 to 4 streams or lakes and/ or their buffers as described below. This sec- tion does not apply to Class 1 waters which are regulated by RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, or to Class 5 waters which are exempt. All other critical area regulations, including, but not limited to, flood hazard regulations and wetland regula- tions, do apply to classified streams where applicable. a. Classification System: The follow- ing classification system is hereby adopted for the purposes of regulating streams and lakes in the City. stream and lake buffer widths are based on the fol- lowing rating system: i. Class 1: Class 1 waters are pe- rennial salmonid-bearing waters which are classified by the City and State as Shorelines of the state. ii. Class 2: Class 2 waters are pe- rennial or intermittent salmonid-bear- ing waters which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Mapped on Figure 04, Renton Water Class Map, as Class 2; and/or (b) Historically and/or currently known to support salmonids, in- cluding resident trout, at any stage in the species lifecycle; and/or (c) Is a water body (e.g., pond, lake) between one half (0.5) acre and twenty (20) acres in size. iii. Class 3: Class 3 waters are non-salmonid-bearing perennial wa- ters during years of normal rainfall. and/or mapped on Figure 04, (Revised 3/13) 3-20.12 Renton Water Class Map, as Class 3. iv. Class 4: Class 4 waters are non-salmonid-bearing intermittent waters during years of normal rain- fall, and/or mapped on Figure 04, Renton Water Class Map, as Class 4. v. Class 5: Class 5 waters are non- regulated non-salmonid-bearing wa- ters which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Flow within an artificially constructed channel where no naturally defined channel had previously existed; and/or (b) Are a surficially isolated wa- ter body less than one-half (0.5) acre (e.g., pond) not meeting the criteria for a wetland as defined in subsection M of this Section. b. Measurement: i. Stream/Lake Boundary: The boundary of a stream or lake shall be considered to be its ordinary high wa- ter mark (OHWM). The OHWM shall be flagged in the field by a qualified consultant when any study is re- quired pursuant to subsection L of this Section. ii. Buffer: The boundary of a buffer shall extend beyond the boundaries of the stream or lake to the width ap- plicable to the stream/lake class as noted in Subsection L5 of this Sec- tion, Stream/Lake Buffer Width Re- quirements. Where streams enter or exit pipes, the buffer in this subsec- tion L 1 b(ii) shall be measured per- pendicular to the ordinary high water mark from the end of the pipe along the open channel section of the stream. 3-20.13 4-3-0SOL Figure 4-3-0SOL 1 b(ii). Buffer mea- surement at pipe opening. c. Maps and Inventory: i. Mapped Streams and Lakes: The approximate location and extent of Class 2 to 4 water bodies within the City limits are indicated on a map in subsection Q of this Section, Maps. The map is to be used as a guide to the general location and ex- tent of streams. Specific locations and extents will be determined by the City based upon field review and ap· plicant-funded studies prepared pur- suant to subsection L3 of this Section. ii. Reclassification: Where there is a conflict between the Renton Wa- ter Class Map in Subsection Q and the criteria in subsection L 1 a of this Section, the criteria in subsection L1 a of this Section shall govern. The reclassification of a water body to a lower class (i.e., 2 to 3, or 3 to 4, etc.) requires administrator acceptance of a supplemental stream or lake study, followed by a legislative amendment to the map in subsection Q of this Section prior to its effect. The reclas- sification of a water body to a higher class (i.e., 5 to 4, or 4 to 3, or 3 to 2, etc.) requires either: administrator acceptance of a supplemental stream or lake study, or consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, followed by a legis- lative amendment to the rnap in Sub- section Q of this Section prior to its effect. (Ord. 5468, 7-13-2009) iii. Unmapped Streams and Lakes: Streams and lakes which are (Revised l 1/09) 4-3-050L defined in subsection L 1 a of this Sec- tion, Classification System, but not shown on the Renton Water Class Map in subsection Q of this Section, are presumed to exist in the City and are regulated by all the provisions of this Section. If the water body is un- mapped according to the City of Renton's Water Class Map (refer to subsection Q of this Section), and: (a) The width of the stream channel averages less than two feet (2') at the ordinary high wa- ter mark; or (b) The stream channel has an average gradient of greater than twenty percent (20%); or (c) The channel or water body is upstream of an existing, en- during, and complete barrier to salmonid migration, as inter- preted in subsection L 1 c(iv) of this Section, or as shown on the City of Renton's Salmonid Migra- tion Barrier Map, and the chan- nel or water body contains water only intermittently upstream of the barrier during years of nor- mal rainfall; or {d) The water body is isolated from any connected stream and/ or wetland; or (e) The water body is less than one-half (0.5) acre in size and connected to a stream meeting the criteria noted in subsections L1c(iii)(a) through (c) of this Sec- tion; Then the water body is consid- ered non-salmonid-bearing and water class would be assessed based upon the non-salmonid- bearing waters criteria in subsec- tions L1a(iii) through (v) of this section. However, if none of the conditions above apply, then the water body is considered Salmo- n id-Bearing -Class 2. Classifi- cation of an unmapped stream or lake requires the Administrator's (Revised 11/09) 3-20.14 determination, followed by a leg- islative amendment to the map prior to its effect. (Ord. 5468, 7-13-2009) iv. Salmonid Migration Barriers: For the purposes of classifying or re- classifying water bodies, features de- termined by the Administrator to be salmon id migration barriers per defi- nition in AMC 4-11-190 shall be mapped. The Administrator shall pre- pare and update the map as appro- priate and maintain a copy in the Planning Customer Service Area. (Ord. 5450, 3-2-2009) v. Experts or State Agency May Be Required or Consulted: The City may require an applicant to re- tain an expert or to consult the Wash- ington Department of Fish and Wildlife to assess salmonid-bearing status of the channel in question and prepare a report to the City detailing the facts and conclusion of their anal- ysis. vi. Criteria to Govern: The actual presence or absence of the stream and lake criteria listed in this subsec- tion L, as determined by qualified professionals, shall govern the treat- ment of an individual building site or parcel of land requiring compliance with these regulations. 2. Applicability-Activities to Which This Section Applies: This Section applies to all non-exempt activities on sites contain- ing Class 2 to 4 streams or lakes and their as- sociated buffers. 3. Studies Required: a. When Standard Stream or Lake Study Is Required: The applicant shall be required to conduct a standard stream or lake study per AMC 4-8-120 if a site contains a water body or buffer area or the project area is within one hundred feet {100') of a water body even if the wa- ter body is not located on the subject property. b. When Supplemental Stream or Lake Study is Required: The applicant shall be required to conduct a supple- mental stream or lake study per RMC 4-8-120 if a site contains a water body or buffer area and changes to buffer re- quirements or alterations of the water body or its associated buffer are pro- posed, either administratively or via a variance request. c. When Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan is Required: The applicant shall be required to conduct a stream or lake mit- igation plan per RMC 4-8-120 if impacts are identified within a supplemental stream or lake study. The approval of the stream or lake mitigation plan by the Ad- ministrator shall be based on the criteria located in subsection L3c(ii) of this Sec- tion. i. Timing of Mitigation Plan -Fi- nal Submittal and Commence- ment: When a stream or lake mitigation plan is required, the appli- cant shall submit a final mitigation plan for the approval of the Adminis- trator prior to the issuance of building or construction permits, whichever comes first. The applicant shall re- ceive written approval of the final mit- igation plan prior to commencement of any mitigation activity. ii. Criteria for Approval of Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan for Alter- ations of Streams and Lakes or Associated Buffers: In order to ap- prove a stream or lake mitigation plan the Administrator shall find that the plan demonstrates compliance with the following criteria: {a) Mitigation Location: Miti- gation location shall follow the preferences in subsections L3c(ii)(a)(1) to (4) of this Section. Basins and subbasins are indi- cated in subsection Q of this Section, Maps: (1) On-Site Mitigation: On- site mitigation is required unless a finding is made that on-site mit- 3-20.15 4-3-050L igation is not feasible or desir- able; (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) (2) Off-Site Mitigation within Same Drainage Subbasin as Subject Site: Off-site mitigation may be allowed when located within the same drainage subba- sin as the subject site and if it achieves equal or improved eco- logical functions over mitigation on the subject site; (3) Off-Site Mitigation within Same Drainage Basin within City Limits: Off-site mitigation may be allowed when located within the same drainage basin within the Renton City limits if it achieves equal or improved eco- logical functions within the City over mitigation within the same drainage subbasin as the project: (4) Off-Site Mitigation within the Same Drainage Basin Out- side the City Limits: Off-site mitigation may be allowed when located within the same drainage basin outside the Renton City limits if it achieves equal or im- proved ecological functions over mitigation within the same drain- age basin within the Renton City limits and it meets City goals. (b) Mitigation Type: Types of mitigation shall follow the prefer- ences in subsections L3c(ii)(b)(1) to (4) of this Section: (1) Daylighting (returning to open channel) of streams or re- moval of manmade salmonid mi- gration barriers: (2) Removal of impervious sur- faces in buffer areas and im- proved biological function of the buffer: (3) In-stream or in-lake mitiga- tion as part of an approved wa- tershed basin restoration project; (Revised 3/l3) 4-3-050L (RevisedJ/!3) (4) Other mitigation suitable for site and water body conditions that meet all other provisions for a mitigation plan. In all cases, mitigation shall pro- vide for equivalent or greater bio- logical functions per subsection L3c(ii)(e) of this Section. (c) Contiguous Corridors: Mitigation sites shall be located to preserve or achieve contigu- ous riparian or wildlife corridors to minimize the isolating effects of development on habitat areas, so long as mitigation of aquatic habitat is located within the same aquatic ecosystem as the area disturbed; and (d) Non-Indigenous Species: Wildlife or fish species not indig- enous to the region shall not be introduced into a riparian mitiga- tion area unless authorized by a State or Federal permit or ap- proval. Plantings shall be consis- tent with subsection L6c of this Section; and (e) Equivalent or Greater Bio- logical Functions: The Admin- istrator shall utilize the report "City of Renton Best Available Science Literature Review and Stream Buffer Recommenda- tions" by AC Kindig & Company and Cedarock Consultants, dated February 27, 2003, unless superseded with a City-adopted study, to determine the existing or potential ecological function of the stream or lake or riparian habitat that is being affected. Mit- igation shall address each func- tion affected by the alteration. Mitigation to compensate alter- ations to stream/lake areas and associated buffers shall achieve equivalent or greater biologic and hydrologic functions and shall include mitigation for ad- verse impacts upstream or downstream of the development proposal site. No net loss of ri- 3-20.16 parian habitat or water body function shall be demonstrated; and (f) Minimum Mitigation Plan Performance Standards: See Subsection FB of this Section. (g) Additional Conditions of Approval: The Administrator shall condition approvals of ac- tivities allowed within or abutting a stream/lake or its buffers, as necessary to minimize or miti- gate any potential adverse im- pacts. Conditions may include, but are not limited to, the follow- ing: (1) Preservation of critically im- portant vegetation and/or habitat features such as snags and downed wood; (2) Limitation of access to the habitat area, including fencing to deter unauthorized access; (3) Seasonal restriction of con- struction activities; and (4) Establishment of a duration and timetable for periodic review of mitigation activities. (h) Based on Best Available Science: The applicant shall demonstrate that the mitigation is based on consideration of the best available science as de- scribed in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are fol- lowed. 111. Perfonnance Surety: The Ad- ministrator shall require a perfor- mance surety to ensure completion and success of proposed mitigation, per subsection G of this Section and RMC 4-1-230. iv. Alternative Mitigation: The mitigation requirements set forth in this subsection L3 may be modified at the Administrator's discretion if the applicant demonstrates that im- proved habitat functions, on a per function basis, can be obtained in the affected sub-drainage basin as a re- sult of alternative mitigation mea- sures. d. Studies Waived: i. Standard Stream or Lake Study: May only be waived by the Administrator when the applicant provides satisfactory evidence that: (a) A road, building or other barrier exists between the water body and the proposed activity, or (b) The water body or required buffer area does not intrude on the applicant's lot, and based on evidence submitted, the pro- posal will not result in significant adverse impacts to nearby water bodies regulated under this Sec- tion; or (c) Applicable data and analy- sis appropriate to the proposed project exists and an additional study is not necessary. ii. Supplemental Stream or Lake Study: May only be waived by the Administrator when: (a) No alterations or changes to the stream or lake, or its stan- dard buffer are proposed; or (b) Applicable data and analy- sis appropriate to the proposed project exists and an additional report is not necessary. 111. Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan: May only be waived when no impacts have been identified through a supplemental stream or lake study. e. Period of Validity for Studies As- sociated with This Section: Studies submitted and reviewed are valid for five (5) years from date of study completion 3-20.17 4-3-050L unless the Administrator determines that conditions have changed significantly. 4. General Standards for Class 2 to 4 Wa- ters: a. Disturbance Prohibited: Streams and lakes and their buffer areas shall be undisturbed, except where the buffer is to be enhanced, or where exemptions al- lowed in subsection C of this Section are conducted, or where allowed to be al- tered in accordance with subsections L5, L7 and LB of this Section. Where water body or buffer disturbance has occurred in accordance with exemption or devel- opment permit approval during construc- tion or other activities, revegetation with native vegetation shall be required. b. No Net Loss: There shall be no net loss of riparian area or shoreline ecologi- cal function resulting from any activity or land use occurring within the regulated buffer area. 5. Stream/Lake Buffer Width Require- ments: a. Buffers and Setbacks: i. Minimum Stream/Lake Buffer Widths: The minimum width of the required buffers shall be based upon the water body class. (a) Class 2: one hundred feet (100'). (b) Class 3: seventy five feet (75"). (c) Class 4: thirty five feet (35'). ii. Piped or Culverted Streams: (a) Building structures over a natural stream located in an un- derground pipe or culvert except as may be granted by a variance in RMC 4-9-250 is prohibited. Transportation or utility cross- ings or other alterations pursuant to subsection LS of this Section are allowed. Pavement over a ( Revised 3/ l 3) 4-3-0SOL pre-existing piped stream is al- lowed. Relocation of the piped stream system around structures is allowed. If structure locations are proposed to be changed or the piped stream is being relo- cated around buildings, a hydro- logic and hydraulic analysis of existing piped stream systems will be required for any develop- ment project site that contains a piped stream to ensure it is sized to convey the one hundred (100) year runoff level from the total upstream tributary area based on future land use conditions. (b) No buffers are required along segments of piped or cul- verted streams. The City shall re- quire easements and setbacks from pipes or culverts consistent with stormwater requirements in RMC 4-6-030 and the adopted drainage manual. b. Increased Buffer Width: i. Areas of High Blow-down Po- tential: Where the stream/lake buffer is in an area of high blow-down po- tential as identified by a qualified pro- fessional, the buffer width may be expanded an additional fifty feet (50') on the windward side. Notifications may be required per subsection F8 of this Section. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) ii. Buffers Falling Within Pro- tected Slope or Very High Land- slide Area: When the required stream/lake buffer falls within a pro- tected slope or very high landslide hazard area or buffer, the stream/ lake buffer width shall extend to the boundary of the protected slope or the very high landslide hazard buffer. Notifications may be required per subsection F8 of this Section. c. Reduction of Buffer Width: (Revised 3/13) i. Authority: Based upon an appli- cant's request, and the acceptance of a supplemental stream or lake study, the Administrator may ap- 3-20.18 prove a reduction in the minimum buffer widths where the applicant can demonstrate compliance with sub- sections L5c(iv)(a), (c), (d), (e) and (f) of this Section and any mitigation re- quirements as a result of subsection L3c(ii) of this Section; or compliance with subsections L5c(iv)(b), (c), (d), (e), and (f) of this Section and any mitigation requirements as a result of subsection L3c(ii) of this Section. ii. Minimum Buffer Width Permis- sible by Administrator: An en- hanced buffer shall not be less than the widths specified below for re- duced buffers. (a) Class 2: seventy five feet (75'). (b) Class 3: fifty feet (50'). (c) Class 4: twenty five feet (25'). (d) Sites Separated from Stream or Lake: As determined by the Administrator, for develop- ment proposed on sites sepa- rated from the stream or lake by pre-existing, intervening, and lawfully created structures, roads, bulkheads/hard structural stabilization, or other substantial existing improvements. For the purposes of this Section, the in- tervening lots/parcels, roads, bulkheads/hard structural stabili- zation, or other substantial im- provements shall be found to: (1) Separate the subject up- land property from the water body due to their height or width; and (2) Substantially prevent or im- pair delivery of most riparian functions from the subject upland property to the water body. The buffer width established shall reflect the riparian functions that can be delivered to the regu- lated stream. Greater buffer width reductions than listed in subsections L5c(ii)(a) through (c) of this Sec- tion require review as a variance per subsection N3 of this Section and RMC 4-9-2508. Where a Class 2 or 3 stream is daylighted, greater buffer reductions may be allowed by modification in sub- section N2 of this Section. 111. Procedure: Such determination and evidence shall be included in the application file. Public notification shall be given as follows: (a) For applications that are not subject to notices of application per chapter 4-8 RMC, notice of the buffer determination shall be given by posting the site and no- tifying parties of record, if any, in accordance with chapter 4-8 RMC. (b) For applications that are subject to notices of application, the buffer determination or re- quest for determination shall be included with notice of applica- tion. Upon determination, notifi- cation of parties of record, if any, shall be made. iv. Criteria for Approval of Re- duced Buffer Width: The following criteria in subsections LSc(iv)(a) and (c) through (f), or criteria (iv)(b) through (f) of this Section shall be met: (a) Buffer Condition: Either subsection (1) and (3) through (5) shall be met or subsection (2) through (5) shall be met: (1) The buffer area land is ex- tensively vegetated with native species, including trees and shrubs, and has less than five percent (5%) non-native invasive species cover, and has less than fifteen percent (15%) slopes; or (2) The buffer can be en- hanced with native vegetation 3-20.19 4-3-050L and removal of non-native spe- cies per criteria in subsection L5c(iv)(c) of this Section, and has less than fifteen percent (15%) slopes; and (3) The width reduction will not reduce stream or lake functions, including those of anadromous fish or nonfish habitat; and (4) The width reduction will not degrade riparian habitat; and (5) No direct or indirect, short- term or long-term, adverse im- pacts to regulated water bodies, as determined by the City, will re- sult from a regulated activity. The City's determination shall be based on specific site studies by recognized experts, pursuant to subsection F3 of this section and RMC 4-8-120; or (b) The proposal includes day- lighting of a stream, or removal of legally installed, as deter- mined by the Administrator, salmonid passage barriers; and (c) The project includes a buffer enhancement plan using native vegetation and substanti- ates that the enhanced area will be equal to or improve the func- tional attributes of the buffer; or in the case of existing developed sites where a natural buffer is not possible, the proposal includes on-or off-site riparian/lakeshore or aquatic enhancement propor- tionate to its project specific or cumulative impact on shoreline ecological functions; and (d) The proposal will result in, at minimum, no net loss of stream/lake/riparian ecological function; and (e) The proposal does not re- sult in increased flood hazard risk; and (Revised 3/13) 4-3-050L (f) The proposed buffer stan- dard is based on consideration of the best available science as de- scribed in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are fol- lowed. d. Averaging of Buffer Width: (Revised 3/13) i. Authority: Based upon an appli- cant's request, and the acceptance of a supplemental stream or lake study, the Administrator may ap- prove buffer width averaging. ii. Minimum Averaged Buffer Widths: In no instance shall the buffer width be less than: (a) Class 2: fifty feet (50'). (b) Class 3: thirty seven and one-half feet (37.5'). (c) Class 4: twenty five feet (25'). Greater buffer width reductions than listed in subsections L5(d)(iii)(a) through (c) of this Section require review as a vari- ance per subsection N3 of this Section and RMC 4-9-250B. 111. Criteria for Approval: Buffer width averaging may be allowed by the Administrator only where the ap- plicant demonstrates all of the follow- ing: (a) The water body and associ- ated riparian area contains varia- tions in ecological sensitivity or there are existing physical im- provements in or near the water body and associated riparian area; and (b) Buffer width averaging will result in no net loss of stream/ lake/riparian ecological function; and 3 -20.20 (c) The total area contained within the buffer after averaging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer width prior to averaging; and (d) The proposed buffer stan- dard is based on consideration of the best available science as de- scribed in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are fol- lowed. iv. Buffer Enhancement May be Required: Where the buffer width is reduced by averaging per this sub- section, buffer enhancement shall be required where appropriate to site conditions, habitat sensitivity, and proposed land development charac- teristics. v. Notification: Notification may be required consistent with subsection FB of this Section. 6. Stream or Lake Buffer Use Restric- tions and Maintenance: Any activity or pro- posal subject to this subsection L shall comply with the following standards within re- quired buffer areas: a. Preservation of Native Vegetation: Existing native vegetation shall be pre- served to the extent possible, preferably in consolidated areas. b. Revegetation Required: Where wa- ter body buffer disturbance has occurred in accordance with exemption or devel- opment permit approval or other activi- ties, revegetation with native vegetation shall be required. c. Use of Native Species: When revegetation is required, approved native species, or other appropriate species naturalized to the Puget Sound region shall be used. A variety of species shall be used which serve as food or shelter from climatic extremes and predators, and as structure and cover for reproduc- lion and rearing of young. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) d. Removal of Noxious Species: When required as a condition of ap- proval, noxious or undesirable species of plants shall be removed or controlled so as to not compete with native vegetation. e. Impervious Surface Restrictions: Where impervious surfaces exist in buffer areas, such impervious surfaces shall not be increased or expanded within the buffer area. The extent of impervious sur- faces within the buffer area may only be rearranged if the reconfiguration of im- pervious surfaces and restoration of prior surfaced areas is part of an enhance- ment proposal that improves ecological function of the area protected by the buffer. 7. Criteria for Permit Approval -Class 2 to 4: Permit approval for projects on or near regulated water bodies shall be granted only if the approval is consistent with the provi- sions of this subsection L, and complies with the following: a. Creation of Native Growth Protec- tion Areas Required: As a condition of any approval for any development permit issued pursuant to this Section, the prop- erty owner shall be required to create a native growth protection area containing the stream/lake area and associated buffers based upon field investigations performed pursuant to subsection E4 of this Section; and b. At least one of the following condi- tions must apply: i. A proposed action meets the standard provisions of this Section and results in no net loss of regulated riparian area or shoreline ecological function in the drainage basin where the site is located; or ii. A proposed action meets alterna- tive administrative standards pursu- ant to this Section and the proposed activity results in no net loss of regu- lated riparian area or shoreline eco- 3 -20.21 4-3-050L logical function in the drainage basin where the site is located; or iii. A variance process is success- fully completed and the proposed ac- tivity results in no net loss of regulated riparian area or shoreline ecological function in the drainage basin where the site is located. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) 8. Alterations Within Streams and Lakes or Associated Buffers. a. Transportation Crossings: i. Criteria for Administrative Ap- proval of Transportation Cross- ings in Stream/Lake or Buffer Areas: Construction of vehicular or non-vehicular transportation cross- ings may be permitted in accordance with an approved supplemental stream/lake study subject to the fol- lowing criteria: (a) The proposed route is de- termined to have the least impact on the environment, while meet- ing City Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element require- ments and standards in RMC 4-6-060; and (b) The crossing minimizes in- terruption of downstream move- ment of wood and gravel; and (c) Transportation facilities in buffer areas shall not run parallel to the water body; and (d) Crossings occur as near to perpendicular with the water body as possible; and (e) Crossings are designed ac- cording to the Washington De- partment of Fish and Wildlife Fish Passage Design at Road Culverts, 1999, and the National Marine Fisheries Service Guide- lines for Salmonid Passage at Stream Crossings, 2000, as may be updated, or equivalent manu- als as determined by the Adm in- (Revised 3/13) 4-3-050L istrator; and (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) (f) Seasonal work windows are determined and made a condi- tion of approval; and (g) Mitigation criteria of sub- section L3c(ii) of this Section are met. b. Alterations of Streams and Lakes or Associated Buffers -Utilities: (Revised 3/13) i. Criteria for Administrative Ap- proval of Utilities in Stream/Lake or Buffer: New utility lines and facili- ties may be permitted to cross water bodies in accordance with an ap- proved supplemental stream/lake study, if they comply with the follow- ing criteria: (a) Fish and wildlife habitat ar- eas shall be avoided to the max- imum extent possible; and (b) The utility is designed con- sistent with one or more of the following methods: (1) Installation shall be accom- plished by boring beneath the scour depth and hyporheic zone of the water body and channel migration zone; or (2) The utilities shall cross at an angle greater than sixty (60) degrees to the centerline of the channel in streams or perpendic- ular to the channel centerline; or (3) Crossings shall be con- tained within the footprint of an existing road or utility crossing; and (c) New utility routes shall avoid paralleling the stream or following a down-valley course near the channel; and (d) The utility installation shall not increase or decrease the nat- 3 -20.22 ural rate of shore migration or channel migration; and (e) Seasonal work windows are determined and made a condi- tion of approval; and (f) Mitigation criteria of subsec- tion L3c(ii) of this Section are met. c. Alterations of Streams and Lakes or Associated Buffers -In-Water Structures and In-Water Work: i. Administrative Approval of In- Water Structures or In-Water Work: In accordance with an ap- proved supplemental stream or lake study, in-water structures or work may be penmitted, subject to the fol- lowing: In-stream structures, such as, but not limited to, high flow by- passes, sediment ponds, in-stream ponds, retention and detention facili- ties, tide gates, dams, and weirs, shall be allowed as part of an ap- proved watershed basin restoration project approved by the City of Renton, and in accordance with miti- gation criteria of subsection L3c(ii) of this Section. The applicant will obtain and comply with State or Federal per- mits and requirements. d. Alterations of Streams and Lakes or Associated Buffers -Dredging. i. Administrative Approval of Dredging: Dredging may be penmit- ted only when: (a) Dredging is necessary for flood hazard reduction purposes, if a definite flood hazard would exist unless dredging were per- mitted; or (b) Dredging is necessary to correct problems of material dis- tribution and water quality, when such problems are adversely af- fecting aquatic life; or (c) Dredging is associated with a stream habitat enhancement or creation project not otherwise exempt in subsection C of this Section; or (d) Dredging is necessary to protect public facilities; or (e) Dredging is required as a maintenance and operation con- dition of a federally funded flood hazard reduction project or a hazard mitigation project; and (f) Applicable mitigation criteria of subsection L3c(ii) of this Sec- tion are met. e. Alterations of Streams and Lakes or Associated Buffers -Stream Relo- cation: i. Administrative Approval of Stream Relocation: Stream reloca- tion may be allowed when analyzed in an accepted supplemental stream or lake assessment, and when the following criteria and conditions are met: (a) Criteria: Stream relocation may only be permitted if associ- ated with: (1) A public flood hazard reduc- tion/habitat enhancement project approved by appropriate State and/or Federal agencies; or (2) Expansion of public road or other public facility improve- ments where no feasible alterna- tive exists; or (3) A public or private proposal restoring a water body and re- sulting in a net benefit to on-or off-site habitat and species. (b) Additional Conditions: The following conditions also ap- ply to any stream relocation pro- posal meeting one or more of the above criteria: (1) Buffer widths shall be based upon the new stream lo- 3 -20.23 4-3-0SOL cation; provided, that the buffer widths may be reduced or aver- aged if meeting criteria of sub- section L5c or L5d of this Section or subsection L8e(i)(b)(2) of this Section. Where minimum re- quired buffer widths are not fea- sible for stream relocation proposals that are the result of activities pursuant to criteria in subsections L8e(i)(a)(1) and (2) of this Section, other equivalent on-or off-site compensation to achieve no-net-loss of riparian function is provided; (2) When Class 4 streams are proposed for relocation due to expansions of public roads or other public facility improve- ments per subsection L8e(i)(a)(2) of this Section, the buffer area between the facility and the relocated stream shall not be less than the width prior to the relocation. The provided buffer between the facility and the relocated stream shall be en- hanced or improved to provide appropriate function given the class and condition of the stream; or if there is no buffer currently, other equivalent on-or off-site compensation to achieve no net loss of riparian function is provided. (3) Applicable mitigation criteria of subsection L3c(ii) of this Sec- tion must be met. (4) Proper notifications and records must be made of stream relocations, per subsection D3b of this Section, Information to be Obtained and Maintained, and subsection D3c of this Section, Alterations of Watercourses, in cases where the stream/lake is subject to flood hazard regula- tions of this Section, as well as subsection FS of this Section if neighboring properties are im- pacted. (Revised 3/13) 4-3-050M f. Alterations-Single Family Home- Existing Legal Lot: If criteria to reduce or average a buffer cannot be met, con- struction, reconstruction, additions, and associated accessory structures of a sin- gle family home on an existing legal lot may be allowed to intrude into a buffer pursuant to a variance as stated in RMC 4-9-250B1. g. Alterations -Other: Proposed al- terations of a stream or lake or associ- ated buffer not addressed by subsections L8a to LSI of this Section require a vari- ance pursuant to RMC 4-9-2508 in order to be conducted. h. When Variance Is Required: If the proposed alteration applicable to Sub- sections L8a to L8g of this Section does not meet the above criteria, it shall re- quire a variance per subsection N3 of this Section and RMC 4-9-2508 in order to be conducted. 9. Incentives for Restoration of Streams Located in an Underground Pipe or Cul- vert: Daylighting of culverted watercourses should be encouraged and allowed with the following incentives: a. Modified Standards: i. Residential Zones: Reduced setbacks, lot width and lot depth standards of chapter 4-2 RMC may be approved without requirement of a variance for lots that abut the day- lighted watercourse to accommodate the same number of lots as if the wa- tercourse were not daylighted. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) ii. Mixed Use, Commercial, and Industrial Zones: (a) Where greater lot coverage allowances are provided for structured parking in chapter 4-2 RMC, lot coverage may be in- creased to the limit allowed for structured parking if instead a stream is daylighted. The in- crease in impervious surface al- lowed shall be equal to the area of stream restoration. (b) Density bonuses may be al- lowed pursuant to RMC 4-9-065 where specified. b. Standard buffers may be reduced per subsection L5c of this Section. If reduced buffers in subsection L5c of this Section along with other development standards of the zone would not allow the same de- velopment level as without the water- course daylighting, a modification may be requested as in subsection N of this Sec- tion. c. When designed consistent with the City's flood regulations in subsection 16 of this Section, portions of the daylighted stream/created buffer may be considered part of compensatory storage in flood hazard areas. d. Stream relocation is permitted sub- ject to subsection LS of this Section. (Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005) M. WETLANDS: 1. Applicability: The wetland regulations apply to sites containing or abutting wetlands as described below. Category 3 wetlands, less than two thousand two hundred (2,200) square feet in area, are exempt from these regulations if they meet exemption criteria in subsection C of this Section. a. Classification System: The follow- ing classification system is hereby adopted for the purposes of regulating wetlands in the City. Wetlands buffer widths, replacement ratios and avoid- ance criteria shall be based on the follow- ing rating system: i. Category 1: Category 1 wetlands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) The presence of species listed by Federal or State govern- ment as endangered or threat- ened, or the presence of essential habitat for those spe- cies; and/or (b) Wetlands having forty per- cent (40%) to sixty percent (Rev1sed3/13) 3 -20.24 (60%) permanent open water (in dispersed patches or otherwise) with two (2) or more vegetation classes; and/or (c) Wetlands equal to or greater than ten (10) acres in size and having three (3) or more vegetation classes, one of which is open water; and/or (d) The presence of plant asso- ciations of infrequent occur- rence; or at the geographic limits of their occurrence; and/or ii. Category 2: Category 2 wet- lands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Wetlands that are not Cate- gory 1 or 3 wetlands; and/or (b) Wetlands that have heron rookeries or osprey nests, but are not Category 1 wetlands; and/or (c) Wetlands of any size lo- cated at the headwaters of a wa- tercourse, i.e., a wetland with a perennial or seasonal outflow channel, but with no defined in- fiuent channel, but are not Cate- gory 1 wetlands; and/or (d) Wetlands having minimum existing evidence of human-re- lated physical alteration such as diking, ditching or channeliza- tion; and/or 111. Category 3: Category 3 wet- lands are wetlands which meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) Wetlands that are severely disturbed. Severely disturbed wetlands are wetlands which meet the following criteria: (1) Are characterized by hydro- logic isolation, human-related hydrologic alterations such as diking, ditching, channelization and/or outlet modification; and 3 -20.25 4-3-050M (2) Have soils alterations such as the presence of fill, soil re- moval and/or compaction of soils; and (3) May have altered vegeta- tion. (b) Wetlands that are newly emerging. Newly emerging wet- lands are: (1) Wetlands occurring on top of fill materials; and (2) Characterized by emergent vegetation, low plant species richness and used minimally by wildlife. These wetlands are gen- erally found in the areas such as the Green River Valley and Black River Drainage Basin. (c) All other wetlands not clas- sified as Category 1 or 2 such as smaller, high quality wetlands. b. Maps and Inventory: i. The approximate location and ex- tent of wetlands in the City is dis- played in subsection Q of this Section, Maps. The map is to be used as a guide to the general loca- tion and extent of wetlands. ii. Wetlands which are defined in subsection M1a of this Section, Clas- sification System, but not shown on the Renton Wetlands Map Inventory, are presumed to exist in the City and are also protected under all the provi- sions of this Section. iii. The actual presence or absence of the wetland criteria listed above, as determined by qualified profes- sionals, shall govern the treatment of an individual building site or parcel of land requiring compliance with these regulations. c. Delineation of Wetland Edge: For the purpose of regulation, the wetland edge should be delineated pursuant to subsection M4 of this Section. (Revised 3/13) 4-3-050M d. Regulated and Nonregulated Wet- lands: Refer to subsection M1a and M1e of this Section for applicability thresholds for regulatory and non regulatory wet- lands. e. Performance Standards: In addi- tion to general standards of subsection E of this Section. the following performance standards apply to all regulated wet- lands. (Revised 3/13) i. Regulated and Nonregulated Wetlands -General: Wetlands cre- ated or restored as a part of a mitiga- tion project are regulated wetlands. Regulated wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland sites for purposes other than wetland mitiga- tion, including, but not limited to. irri- gation and drainage ditches, grass- lined swales, canals, detention facili- ties, wastewater treatment facilities, farm pond, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construc- tion of a road, street, or highway. The Department Administrator shall de- termine that a wetland is not regu- lated on the basis of photographs, statements, and other evidence. ii. Nonregulated Category 3 Wet- lands: Based upon an applicant re- quest, the Department Administrator may determine that Category 3 wet- lands are not considered regulated wetlands, if the applicant demon- strates the following criteria are met: (a) The wetland formed on top of fill legally placed on a prop- erty: and (b) The wetland hydrology is solely provided by the compac- tion of the soil and fill material; and (c) The U.S. Army Corps of En- gineers has determined that they will not take jurisdiction over the wetland. 3 -20.26 2. General Standards for Permit Ap- proval: Permit approval for projects involving regulated wetlands or wetland buffers shall be granted only if the approval is consistent with the provisions of this Section. Addition- ally, approvals shall only be granted if: a. A proposed action avoids adverse impacts to regulated wetlands or their buffers or takes affirmative and appropri- ate measures to minimize and compen- sate for unavoidable impacts; and b. The proposed activity results in no net loss of regulated wetland area, value, or function in the drainage basin where the wetland is located; or c. A variance process is successfully completed to determine conditions for permitting of activity requested including measures to reduce impacts as appropri- ate. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) 3. Study Required: a. When Study Is Required: Wetland assessments are required as follows: i. Wetland Classification: The ap- plicant shall be required to conduct a study to determine the classification of the wetland if the subject property or project area is within one hundred feet (100') of a wetland even if the wetland is not located on the subject property but it is determined that al- terations of the subject property are likely to impact the wetland in ques- tion or its buffer. If there is a potential Category 1 or 2 wetland within three hundred feet (300') of a proposal, the City may require an applicant to con- duct a study even if the wetland is not located on the subject property but it is determined that alterations of the subject property are likely to impact the wetland in question or its buffer. ii. Wetland Delineation: A wetland delineation is required for any portion of a wetland on the subject property that will be impacted by the permitted activities. b. Study Waived: The wetland as- sessment shall be waived by the Depart- ment Administrator when the applicant provides satisfactory evidence that a road. building or other barrier exists be- tween the wetland and the proposed ac- tivity, or when the buffer area needed or required will not intrude on the applicant's lot, or when applicable data and analysis appropriate to the project proposed ex- ists and an additional report is not neces- sary. 4. Delineation of Regulatory Edge of Wetlands: a. Methodology: For the purpose of regulation, the exact location of the wet- land edge shall be determined by the wetlands specialist hired at the expense of the applicant through the performance of a field investigation using the proce- dures provided in the following manual: Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual, Washington State Department of Ecology, March 1997, Ecology Publication No. 96-94. b. Delineations-Open Water: Where wetlands are contiguous with areas of open freshwater, streams, or rivers, the delineation shall be consistent with the Washington State Wetlands Rating Sys- tem: Western Washington, Second Edi- tion, Washington State Department of Ecology, August 1993, Publication No. 93-74, Appendix 5, or another accepted Federal or State methodology, subject to City review. c. Adjustments to Delineation by City: Where the applicant has provided a delineation of the wetland edge, the City shall review and may render adjustments to the edge delineation. In the event the adjusted edge delineation is contested by the applicant, the City shall, at the appli- cant's expense, obtain the services of an additional qualified wetlands specialist to review the original study and render a fi- nal delineation. 3 -20.27 4-3-050M d. Period of Validity for Wetland De- lineation: i. Within City Limits: A final wet- land delineation, for properties within the city limits at the time the delinea- tion was prepared, is valid for five (5) years, unless the Administrator de- termines that conditions have changed. ii. Outside City Limits: The period of validity of wetland delineations for properties, which were unincorpo- rated at the time of the delineation, will be determined by the Administra- tor. Following a review of a wetland delineation prepared for an unincor- porated property, since annexed into the City, the Administrator may re- quire adjustments be made to the study or a new study prepared, per subsection M4 of this Section, Delin- eation of Regulatory Edge of Wet- lands. 5, Determination of Wetland Classifica- tion: Wetland studies shall determine the ap- propriate wetland classification according to subsection M1 of this Section, Wetlands. The City may accept a dual wetland classification for a wetland exhibiting a combination of Cat- egory 1 and 2 features or a combination of Category 1 and 3 features. The City will not accept a dual rating for a Category 2 wetland, such as a combined Category 2 and 3 rating. Dual ratings for a Category 1 wetland shall be consistent with the Washington State Wet- lands Rating System: Western Washington, Second Edition, Washington State Depart- ment of Ecology, August 1993, Publication No. 93-74 or as thereafter amended or up- dated. 6. Wetland Buffers: a. Buffers Required: i. Wetland buffer zones shall be re- quired of all proposed regulated ac- tivities abutting regulated wetlands. ii. Any wetland created, restored, or enhanced in conjunction with cre- ation or restoration as compensation for approved wetland alterations (Revised 3/13) 4-3-0SOM shall include the standard buffer re- quired for the class of the wetland be- ing replaced. iii. All required wetland buffer zones shall be retained in their natu- ral condition. Category 3 wetland buffers of twenty five feet (25') re- qui re the buffers be fully vegetated with native species or restored; oth- erwise increased buffer widths to protect functions and values may be required. iv. Where buffer disturbance has occurred during construction or other activities, revegetation with native vegetation may be required. b. Measurement of Buffers: All buff- ers shall be measured from the wetland boundary as surveyed in the field pursu- ant to the requirements of subsection M4a of this Section, Methodology. c. Standard Buffer Zone Widths: i. The width of the required wetland buffer zone shall be determined ac- cording to the wetland category. The buffer zone required for all regulated wetlands is determined by the classi- fication of the wetland. If standard buffer widths cannot be met, and buffer reductions per subsection M6e of this Section and buffer averaging per subsection M6f of this Section cannot be accomplished, a variance to buffer requirements may be re- quested per subsection N of this Sec- tion, Alternates, Modifications and Variances, and RMC 4-9-2506, Vari- ance Procedures. If the criteria in subsection M6d of this Section are met, standard buffers may be in- creased. Wetland Category Standard Buffer Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 (RevisedJ/13) 100 feet 50 feet 25 feet ii. To protect the buffer functions, permits shall be conditioned asap- 3 -20.28 propriate to the nature of the devel- opment. Conditions of approval may include, but are not limited to, the fol- lowing: (a) Fencing pursuant to sub- section E4e of this Section, plant materials, and signage pursuant to subsection E4f of this Section, to limit pet and human distur- bance; (b) Directing lights from build- ings or parking areas, or noise- generating activities, away from the wetland; (c) Implementing water quality treatment measures required in RMC 4-6-030, Drainage (Sur- face Water) Standards; (d) Avoidance of buffer distur- bance and retention of the buffer in a natural condition consistent with subsection M6a of this Sec- tion. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) d. Increased Wetland Buffer Zone Width: Each applicant shall document in required wetland assessments whether the criteria in subsections M6d(i) through (iv) of this Section are or are not met and increased wetland buffers are warranted. Based on the applicant's report or third party review, increased standard buffer zone widths may be required in unique cases, i.e., endangered species, very fragile areas, when a larger buffer is nec- essary to protect wetlands functions and values. Such determination shall be at- tached as a condition of project approval. Analysis shall be prepared as directed in subsection M6d(v) of this section, and notification shall be given pursuant to cri- teria in subsection M6d(vi) of this Sec- tion. i. The wetland is used by species listed by the Federal or the State gov- ernment as threatened, endangered and sensitive species and State- listed priority species, essential habi- tat for those species or has unusual nesting or resting sites such as heron rookeries or raptor nesting trees or evidence thereof; or ii. The subject property, or nearby lands to which the subject property drains in route to a wetland, are sus- ceptible to severe erosion, and ero- sion control measures will not effectively prevent adverse wetland impacts; or iii. The subject property or nearby lands to which the subject property drains in route to a wetland have min- imal vegetative cover or slopes greater than fifteen percent (15%) and conditions cannot be restored to prevent adverse wetland impacts; or iv. Wetland-dependent wildlife spe- cies are observed to be present in the wetland, and may require larger buffers based upon the evaluation in subsection M6d(v) of this Section; and v. For proposals meeting any of the criteria in subsections M6d(i) to (iv) of this Section, buffers are established using a site specific evaluation and documentation of buffer adequacy based upon The Science of Wetland Buffers and Its Implications for the Management of Wetlands, McMillan 2000, Wetlands in Washington State Volume 2: Guidance for Protecting and Managing Wetlands, Appendix BC (Hruby, et al., 2005), or similar ap- proaches; and vi. Notification is given consistent with subsection FB of this Section. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) e. Reduction of Buffer Width: Based upon an applicant's request, the Adminis- trator may approve a reduction in the standard wetland buffer zone widths on a case-by-case basis for Class 1 and 2 wetlands where the applicant can dem- onstrate compliance with subsections M6e(i) and (iii) or (ii) and (iii) of this Sec- tion. Such determination and evidence shall be included in the application file and public notification shall be given in accordance with M6e(iv) of this Section. 3 -20.29 4-3-050M Conditions may be applied in accordance with subsection M6e(v) of this Section. i. The buffer area land is exten- sively vegetated and has less than fifteen percent (15%) slopes and no direct or indirect, short-term or long- term, adverse impacts to regulated wetlands, as determined by the City, will result from a regulated activity. The City's determination shall be based on specific site studies by rec- ognized experts. The City may re- quire long-term monitoring of the project and subsequent corrective actions if adverse impacts to regu- lated wetlands are discovered; or ii. The project includes a buffer en- hancement plan using native vegeta- tion and substantiates that the enhanced buffer will be equal to or improve the functional attributes of the buffer. An enhanced buffer shall not result in greater than a twenty five percent (25%) reduction in the buffer width. Greater buffer width reduc- tions require review as a variance per subsection N3 of this Section. iii. The proposal shall rely upon a site specific evaluation and docu- mentation of buffer adequacy based upon The Science of Wetland Buffers and Its Implications for the Manage- ment of Wetlands, McMillan 2000, or similar approaches. The proposed buffer standard is based on consider- ation of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. iv. Public notification of the buffer reduction determination shall be given as follows: (a) For applications that are not subject to notices of application per chapter 4-8 RMC, notice of the buffer determination shall be given by posting the site and no- tifying parties of record, if any, in accordance with chapter 4-8 RMC. (Revised J/13) 4-3-050M (b) For applications that are subject to notices of application, the buffer determination or re- quest for determination shall be included with notice of applica- tion. Upon determination, notifi- cation of parties of record, if any, shall be made. v. Conditions of approval equiva- lent or greater than those identified in subsection M6c(ii) of this Section shall be applied to ensure that the re- duced buffer width protects the func- tions and values of the associated wetlands. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) f. Averaging of Buffer Width: Stan- dard wetland buffer zones may be modi- fied by averaging buffer widths. Upon applicant request, wetland buffer width averaging may be allowed by the Depart- ment Administrator only where the appli- cant demonstrates all of the following: (Revised 3/l 3) i. That the wetland contains varia- tions in ecological sensitivity or there are existing physical improvements in or near the wetland and buffer; and ii. That width averaging will not ad- versely impact the wetland function and values; and iii. That the total area contained within the wetland buffer after aver- aging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer prior to averaging; and iv. A site specific evaluation and documentation of buffer adequacy based upon The Science of Wetland Buffers and Its Implications for the Management of Wetlands, McMillan 2000, or similar approaches have been conducted. The proposed buffer standard is based on consider- ation of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. v In no instance shall the buffer width be reduced by more than fifty 3 -20.30 percent (50%) of the standard buffer or be less than twenty five feet (25') wide. Greater buffer width reductions require review as a variance per sub- section N3 of this Section and RMC 4-9-2508; and vi. Buffer enhancement in the ar- eas where the buffer is reduced shall be required on a case-by-case basis where appropriate to site conditions, wetland sensitivity, and proposed land development characteristics. vii. Notification may be required pursuant to subsection FB of this Section. 7. Wetlands -Native Growth Protection Areas: As a condition of any approval issued pursuant to this Section for any development pem,it, the property owner shall be required to create a separate native growth protection area containing the areas determined to be wetland and/or wetland buffer in field investi- gations performed pursuant to subsection M4 of this Section, Delineation of Regulatory Edge of Wetlands, and subsection M5 of this Section, Determination of Wetland Classifica- tion. Native growth protection areas shall be established pursuant to subsection E4 of this Section. 8. Wetland Changes -Alternative Meth- ods of Development: If wetland changes are proposed for a non-exempt activity, the applicant shall evaluate alternative methods of developing the property using the following criteria in this order and provide reasons why a less intrusive method of development is not feasible. In detemiining whether to grant per- mit approval per subsection M2 of this Sec- tion, General Standards for Permit Approval, a determination shall be made as to whether the feasibility of less intrusive methods of de- velopment have been adequately evaluated and that less intrusive methods of develop- ment are not feasible. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) a. Avoid any disturbances to the wet- land or buffer; b. Minimize any wetland or buffer im- pacts; c. Restore any wetlands or buffer im- pacted or lost temporarily; and d. Compensate for any permanent wet- land or buffer impacts by one of the fol- lowing methods: i. Restoring a former wetland and provide buffers at a site once exhibit- ing wetland characteristics to com- pensate for wetlands lost; ii. Creating new wetlands and buff- ers for those lost; and 3 -20.30a 4-3-050M (Revised 3/13) This page left intentionally blank. (Revised 3/ l 3) 3 -20.30b iii. In addition to restoring or creat- ing a wetland, enhancing an existing degraded wetland to compensate for lost functions and values. 9. Compensating for Wetlands Impacts: a. Goal: The overall goal of any com- pensatory project shall be no net loss of wetland function and acreage and to strive for a net resource gain in wetlands over present conditions. The concept of "no net loss" means to create, restore and/or enhance a wetland so that there is no reduction to total wetland acreage and/or function. b. Plan Requirements: The applicant shall develop a plan that provides for land acquisition, construction, maintenance and monitoring of replacement wetlands that recreate as nearly as possible the wetland being replaced in terms of acre- age, function, geographic location and setting, and that are equal to or larger than the original wetlands. c. Plan Performance Standards: Compensatory mitigation shall follow an approved mitigation plan pursuant to subsections MB to M 1 O of this Section and shall meet the minimum perfor- mance standards in subsection FB of this Section. d. Acceptable Mitigation -Perma- nent Wetland Impacts: Any person who alters regulated wetlands shall restore or create equivalent areas or greater areas of wetlands than those altered in order to compensate for wetland losses. En- hancement of wetlands may be provided as mitigation if it is conducted in conjunc- tion with mitigation proposed to create or restore a wetland in order to maintain "no net loss" of wetland acreage. Subsec- tions M10 through M12 provide further detail on wetland restoration, creation, and enhancement. e. Restoration, Creation, or Com- bined Enhancement Required -Com- pensation for Permanent Wetland Impacts: As a condition of any permit al- lowing alteration of wetlands and/or wet- land buffers, or as an enforcement 3 -20.31 4-3-050M action, the City shall require that the ap- plicant engage in the restoration or cre- ation of wetlands and their buffers (or funding of these activities) in order to off- set the impacts resulting from the appli- cant's or violator's actions. Enhancement in conjunction with restoration or creation may be allowed in order to offset the im- pacts resulting from an applicant's ac- tions. Enhancement is not allowed as compensation for a violator's actions. f. Compensating for Temporary Wet- land Impacts: Where wetland distur- bance has occurred during construction or other activities, see subsection C5f(ii) of this Section. g. Mitigation Bank Agreement -Gla- cier Park Company: Pursuant to the Wetland Mitigation Bank Agreement be- tween the City and the Glacier Park Com- pany, King County recording number 9206241805, wetland alteration and wet- land mitigation shall be conducted in ac- cordance with the agreement. 10. Wetland Compensation -Restora- tion, Creation, and Enhancement: The ap- plicant may propose a mitigation approach that includes restoration or creation solely or combines restoration or creation with en- hancement. The City may require one mitiga- tion approach in favor of another if it is determined that: a. There is a greater probability of suc- cess in ensuring no net loss of wetlands acreage, functions, and values; and b. The mitigation approach can be ac- complished on-site rather than off-site. 11. Wetlands Creation and Restoration: a. Creation or Restoration Propos- als: Any applicant proposing to alter wet- lands may propose to restore wetlands or create new wetlands, with priority first for on-site restoration or creation and then second, within the drainage basin, in or- der to compensate for wetland losses. Restoration activities must include restor- ing lost hydrologic, water quality and bio- logic functions. (Revised 6/05) 4-3-050M b. Compliance with Goals: Applicants proposing to restore or create wetlands shall identify how the restoration or cre- ation plan conforms to the purposes and requirements of this Section and estab- lished regional goals of no net loss of wetlands. c. Category: Where feasible, created or restored wetlands shall be a higher category than the altered wetland. In no cases shall they be lower, except as fol- lows: For impacts to Category 1 shrub- scrub and emergent wetlands, if it is in- feasible to create or restore a site to be- come a Category 1 wetland, the Administrator may allow for creation/res- toration of high quality Category 2 wet- lands at one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the normally required creation/replace- ment ratios of Category 1 shrub-scrub or emergent wetlands, within the basin. d. Design Criteria: Requirements for wetland restoration or creation as com- pensation areas shall be determined ac- cording to the function, acreage, type and location of the wetland being replaced. Compensation requirements should also consider time factors, the ability of the project to be self-sustaining and the pro- jected success based on similar projects. Wetland functions and values shall be calculated using the best professional judgment of a qualified wetland ecologist using the best available techniques. Mul- tiple or cooperative compensation projects may be proposed for one project in order to best achieve the goal of no net loss. Restoration or creation must be within the same drainage basin. e. Acreage Replacement Ratio: The ratios listed in subsection M11 e(i) of this Section, Ratios for Wetlands Creation or Restoration, apply to all Category 1, 2, or 3 wetlands for restoration or creation which is in-kind, on-or off-site, timed prior to alteration, and has a high probability of success. The required ratio must be based on the wetland category and type that require replacement. Ratios are de- termined by the probability of recreating successfully the wetland and the inability of guarantees of functionality, longevity, and duplication of type and/or functions. I. RATIOS FOR WETLANDS CREATION OR RESTORATION: Wetland Category Vegetation Type Creation/Restoration Ratio Forested 6 times the area altered. Category 1 Scrub-shrub 3 times the area altered. Emergent 2 times the area altered. Forested 3 times the area altered. Category 2 Scrub-shrub 2 times the area altered. Emergent 1.5 times the area altered. Forested 1.5 times the area altered. Category 3 Scrub-shrub 1.5 times the area altered. Emergent 1.5 times the area altered. (Revised 6/05) 3 -20.32 f. Increased Creation/Restoration/ Replacement Ratios: Ratios may be in- creased under the following circum- stances: uncertainty as to the probable success of the proposed restoration or creation; significant period of time be- tween destruction and replication of wet- land functions; projected losses in functional value; or off-site compensa- tion. The requirement for an increased replacement ratio will be determined through SEPA review, except in the case of remedial actions resulting from illegal alterations where the Administrator or Environmental Review Committee may require increased wetland replacement ratios. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) g. Decreased Creation/Restoration/ Replacement Ratios: i. Category 1: Ratios for Category 1 forested and scrub-shrub wetlands may be decreased to 2.0 times the area altered, and to 1.5 times the area altered for emergent wetlands, provided the applicant has success- fully replaced the wetland prior to its filling and has shown that the re- placement is successfully estab- lished for five (5) years. ii. Category 2: Ratios for Category 2 forested and scrub-shrub wetlands may be decreased to 1.5 times the area altered provided the applicant has successfully replaced the wet- land prior to its filling and has shown that the replacement is successfully established for two (2) years. Ratios for Category 2 emergent wetlands may be reduced to 1.25 times the area altered provided the applicant has successfully replaced the wet- land prior to its filling and has shown that the replacement is successfully established for two (2) years. iii. Category 3: (a) Ratios for Category 3 emer- gent wetlands may be decreased to 1.0 times the area altered pro- vided the applicant has success- fully replaced the wetland prior to its filling and has shown that the 3 -20.33 4-3-050M replacement is successfully es- tablished for twelve (12) months. Ratios for Category 3 scrub- shrub and forested wetlands may be reduced to 1.25 times the area altered provided the ap- plicant has successfully replaced the wetland prior to its filling and has shown that the replacement is successfully established for two (2) years. (b) If the applicant can aggre- gate two (2) or more Category 3 wetlands, each less than ten thousand (10,000) square feet, into one wetland, the replace- ment ratio shall be reduced to 1: 1. If the combined wetland would be rated as a Category 2 wetland as a result of the combi- nation, the buffer requirement may be reduced to twenty five feet (25') minimum provided the buffer is enhanced. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) h. Category 3 Replacement Option: The applicant, at his/her expense, may select to use accepted Federal or State methods to establish the functions and values for the Category 3 wetland being replaced in lieu of replacement by acre- age only. A third party review, funded by the applicant, and hired and managed by the City, shall review and verify the re- ports. Dependent upon the results of the functions and values evaluation, a Cate- gory 3 wetland may be replaced by as- suring that all the functions and values are replaced in another location, within the same basin. i. Minimum Restoration/Creation Ra- tio: Unless allowed by subsection M11 g of this Section, restoration or creation ra- tios may only be reduced by modification or variance pursuant to subsection N of this Section, Alternates, Modifications and Variances, and RMC 4-9-2506, Vari- ance Procedures, and RMC 4-9-2500, Modification Procedures. In order to maintain no net loss of wetland acreage, in no case shall the restoration or cre- ation ratio be less than 1: 1. This mini- (Revised 3/[3) 4-3-050M mum ratio may not be modified through the modification or variance process. 12. Wetland Enhancement: a. Enhancement Proposals -Com- bined with Restoration and Creation: Any applicant proposing to alter wetlands may propose to enhance an existing de- graded wetland, in conjunction with res- toration or creation of a wetland in order to compensate for wetland losses. Wet- land enhancement shall not be allowed as compensation if it is not accomplished in conjunction with a proposal to restore or create a wetland. b. Evaluation Criteria: A wetland en- hancement compensation project may be approved; provided, that enhancement for one function will not degrade another function unless the enhancement would provide a higher functioning wetland with greater or multiple environmental bene- fits. For example, an enhancement may degrade habitat for one wildlife species but overall it may result in a wetland that provides higher function to a wider vari- ety of wildlife species. Wetland function assessment shall be conducted in con- formance with accepted Federal or State methodologies. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) c. Wetlands Chosen for Enhance- ment: An applicant proposing to alter wetlands may propose to enhance an ex- isting Category 2 or 3 wetland. Existing Category 1 wetlands shall not be en- hanced to compensate for wetland alter- ation unless the wetland selected for enhancement is a Category 1 wetland only by virtue of its acreage and three (3) vegetation classes, where the existing vegetation is characterized partly or wholly by invasive wetland species. d. Mitigation Ratios: Wetland alter- ations shall be created, restored and en- hanced using the formulas in subsection M12d(i), Ratios for Wetland Restoration or Creation plus Enhancement. The fol- lowing is an example of use of the formu- las below: If one acre of Category 2, forested wet- land, were proposed to be removed, the creation/replacement ratio (subsection M11 e(i) of this Section) requires that three (3) acres of forested Category 2 wetland be restored or created; if wetland enhancement were proposed (subsec- . tion M12d(i) of this Section) for the Cate- gory 2, forested wetland, 1.5 acres of forested Category 2 wetland would have to be created/restored and two (2) acres of forested Category 2 wetland en- hanced, possibly in a different part of the same wetland. I. RATIOS FOR WETLAND RESTORATION OR CREATION PLUS ENHANCEMENT Wetland Category Vegetation Type Restoration or Creation Ratio Enhancement Ratio Forested 3 times the area altered plus 3.5 times the area altered Category 1 Scrub-shrub 1.5 times the area altered plus 2 times the area altered Emergent 1 times the area altered plus 1.5 times the area altered Forested 1. 5 times the area altered plus 2 times the area altered Category 2 Scrub-shrub 1 times the area altered plus 1.5 times the area altered Emergent 1 times the area altered plus 1 times the area altered Forested 1 times the area altered plus 1 times the area altered Category 3 Scrub-shrub 1 times the area altered plus 1 times the area altered Emergent 1 times the area altered plus 1 times the area altered (Revised 3/13) 3 -20.34 e. Ratio Modification and Minimum Restoration/Creation Ratio: i. An applicant may propose an in- creased creation or restoration ratio and a decreased enhancement ratio if the total combined ratio is main- tained overall. Restoration/creation or enhancement ratios shown in sub- section M12d of this Section may only be reduced by modification or variance pursuant to subsection N3 of this Section. Alternatives, Modifi- cations and Variances, and RMC 4-9-2508, Variance Procedures, and RMC 4-9-2500, Modification Proce- dures. In order to maintain no net loss of wetland acreage, in no case shall the restoration or creation ratio be less than 1: 1. This minimum ratio may not be modified through the vari- ance process. ii. Ratios may be increased under the following circumstances: uncer- tainty as to the probable success of the proposed restoration or creation or enhancement proposal; significant period of time between destruction and replication of wetland functions; projected losses in functional value; or off-site compensation. The re- quirement for an increased mitigation ratio will be determined through SEPA review, except in the case of remedial actions resulting from illegal alterations where the Administrator or Environmental Review Committee may require increased mitigation ra- tios. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) 13. Out-of-Kind Replacement: Out-of- kind replacement may be approved in place of in-kind compensation only where the appli- cant can demonstrate that: a. The wetland system is already signif- icantly degraded and out-of-kind replace- ment will result in a wetland with greater functional value; or b. Scientific problems such as exotic vegetation and changes in watershed hy- drology make implementation of in-kind compensation impossible or unaccept- able; or 3-20.35 4-3-050M c. Out-of-kind replacement will best meet identified regional goals (e.g., re- placement of historically diminished wet- land types). (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) 14. Off-Site Compensation: a. When Permitted: Off-site compen- sation may be approved in lieu of on-site compensation only where the applicant can demonstrate that: i. The hydrology and ecosystem of the original wetland and those abut- ting or adjacent land and/or wetlands which benefit from the hydrology and ecosystem will not be substantially damaged by the on-site loss; and ii. On-site compensation is not fea- sible due to problems with hydrology, soils, or other factors; or iii. Compensation is not practical due to potentially adverse impact from surrounding land uses; or iv. The proposed wetland functions at the mitigation site are significantly greater than the wetland functions that could be reasonably achieved with on-site mitigation, and there is no significant loss of function on-site, i.e., at the development project site; or v. Established regional goals for flood storage, flood conveyance, habitat or other wetland functions have been addressed and strongly justify location of compensatory measures at another site. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) b. Locations: Any off-site compensa- tion shall follow the preferences in sub- sections M14b(i) to (iii) of this Section. Basins and subbasins are indicated in subsection Q of this Section, Maps: i. Off-Site Mitigation within Same Drainage Subbasin as Subject Site: Off-site mitigation may be al- lowed when located within the same drainage subbasin as the subject site (Revised 3/13) 4-3-050M subject to criteria in subsection M14a of this Section; ii. Off-Site Mitigation within Same Drainage Basin within City Limits: Off-site mitigation may be al- lowed when located within the same drainage basin within the Renton City limits if it achieves equal or im- proved ecological functions within the City over mitigation within the same drainage subbasin as the project, and shall be subject to crite- ria in subsection M14a of this Sec- tion; iii. Off-Site Mitigation within the Same Drainage Basin Outside the City Limits: Off-site mitigation may be allowed when located within the same drainage basin outside the Renton City limits if it achieves equal or improved ecological functions over mitigation within the same drainage basin within the Renton City limits and it meets City goals, and shall be subject to criteria in sub- section M14a of this Section. c. Siting Recommendations: In se- lecting compensation sites, the City en- courages applicants to pursue siting compensation projects in disturbed sites which were formerly wetlands, and espe- cially those areas which would result in a series of interconnected wetlands. d. Timing: Compensatory projects shall be substantially completed and ap- proved by the City prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit. Construction of compensation projects shall be timed to reduce impacts to existing wildlife and flora. A surety device may be approved for completion of construction. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) 15. Cooperative Wetland Compensation: Mitigation Banks or Special Area Manage- ment Programs (SAMP): a. Applicability: The City encourages and will facilitate and approve coopera- tive projects wherein a single applicant or other organization with demonstrated ca- pability may undertake a compensation (Revised 3/13) 3 -20.36 project under the following circum- stances: i. Restoration or creation on-site may not be feasible due to problems with hydrology, soils, or other factors; or ii. Where the cooperative plan is shown to better meet established re- gional goals for flood storage, flood conveyance, habitat or other wetland functions. b. Process: Applicants proposing a co- operative compensation project shall: i. Submit a permit application; ii. Demonstrate compliance with all standards; iii. Demonstrate that long-term management will be provided; and iv. Demonstrate agreement for the project from all affected property owners of record. c. Mitigation Banks: Mitigation banks are defined as sites which may be used for restoration, creation and/or mitigation of wetland alternatives from a different piece of property than the property to be altered within the same drainage basin. The City of Renton maintains a mitigation bank. A list of City mitigation bank sites is maintained by the Public Works Depart- ment. With the approval of the Public Works Department, non-City-controlled mitigation banks may be established and utilized. (Ord. 5450, 3-2-2009) d. Special Area Management Pro- grams: Special area management pro- grams are those wetland programs agreed upon through an interjurisdic- tional planning process involving the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Washing- ton State Department of Ecology, any af- fected counties and/or cities, private property owners and other parties of in- terest. The outcome of the process is a regional wetlands permit representing a plan of action for all wetlands within the special area. e. Compensation Payments to Miti- gation Bank: If approved, compensation payments received as part of a mitigation or creation bank must be received prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) 16. Mitigation Plans: a. Required for Restoration, Cre- ation and Enhancement Projects: All wetland restoration, creation, and en- hancement in conjunction with restora- tion and creation projects required pursuant to this Section either as a permit condttion or as the result of an enforce- ment action shall follow a mitigation plan prepared by qualified wetland specialists approved by the City. b. Timing for Mitigation Plan Submit- tal and Commencement of any Work: See subsection F8 of this Section. c. Content of Mitigation Plan: Unless the City, in consultation with qualified wetland specialists, detenmines, based on the size and scope of the develop- ment proposal, the nature of the im- pacted wetland and the degree of cumulative impacts on the wetland from other development proposals, that the scope and specific requirements of the mitigation plan may be reduced, the miti- gation plan shall address all require- ments in RMC 4-8-12DD23, Wetland Mitigation Plan, and subsection F8 of this Section. d. Performance Surety: As a condition of approval of any mitigation plan, a per- formance surety shall be required per RMC 4-1-230 and subsection G of this Section. (Amd. Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000: Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005; Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) N. ALTERNATES, MODIFICATIONS AND VARIANCES: 1. Alternates: a. Applicability: See RMC 4-9-25DE. 3-20.37 4-3-050N 2. Modifications: a. Applicability: The Department Ad· ministrator may grant modifications, per RMC 4-9-250D1, Application Time and Decision Authority, in the following cir- cumstances: i. Aquifer Protection -Modifica- tions: The Department will consider modification applications in the fol- lowing cases: (a) The request is to find that a standard is inapplicable to that activity, facility, or development penmit due to the applicant's pro- posed methods or location; or (b) The request is to modify a specific standard or regulation due to practical difficulties; and (c) The request meets the in- tent and purpose of the aquifer protection regulations. Based upon application of the above tests in subsection N2a(i)(a), (b), and (c) of this Sec- tion, applications which are con- sidered appropriate for review as modifications are subject to the procedures and criteria in RMC 4-9-25DD, Modification Proce- dures. Requests to modify regu- lations or standards which do not meet the above tests shall be processed as variances. (d) In addition to the criteria of RMC 4-9-250D, Modification Procedures, the following criteria shall apply: The proposed modi- fication is based on consider- ation of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific in- fonmation, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. ii. Geologic Hazards -Modifica- tions: An applicant may request that the Administrator grant a modifica- tion to allow: (Revised 3/13) 4-3-050N (Revised 3/13) (a) Regrading of any slope which was created through previ- ous mineral and natural resource recovery activities or was cre- ated prior to adoption of applica- ble mineral and natural resource recovery regulations or through public or private road installation or widening and related transpor- tation improvements, railroad track installation or improve- ment, or public or private utility installation activities; (b) Filling against the toe of a natural rock wall or rock wall cre- ated through mineral and natural resource recovery activities or through public or private road in- stallation or widening and related transportation improvements, railroad track installation or im- provement or public or private utility installation activities; and/ or (c) Grading to the extent that it eliminates all or portions of a mound or to allow reconfigura- tion of protected slopes created through mineral and natural re- source recovery activities or pub- lic or private road installation or widening and related transporta- tion improvements, railroad track installation or improvement, or public or private utility installation activities. The following procedures shall apply to any of the above activi- ties: (1) The applicant shall submit a geotechnical report describing any potential impacts of the pro- posed regrading and any neces- sary mitigation measures; (2) All submitted reports shall be independently reviewed by qualified specialists selected by the City at the applicant's ex- pense; 3 -20.38 (3) The Department Adminis- trator may grant, condition, or deny the request based upon the proposal's compliance with the applicable modification criteria of RMC 4-9-2500; and (4) Any slope which remains forty percent (40%) or steeper following site development shall be subject to all applicable geo- logic hazard regulations for steep slopes and landslide haz- ards, in this Section. (5) In addition to the criteria of RMC 4-9-2500, Modification Procedures, the following criteria shall apply: The proposed modi- fication is based on consider- ation of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific in- formation, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are followed. 111. Wetlands -Modifications: An applicant may request that the Ad- ministrator grant a modification as follows: (a) Modifications may be re- quested for a reduction in cre- ation/restoration or enhance- ment ratios for a Category 3 wet- land; however, the creation/res- toration ratio shall not be re- duced below 1 :1. (b) In addition to the criteria of RMC 4-9-2500, Modification Procedures, the following criteria shall apply: (1) The proposal will result in no-net loss of wetland or buffer area and functions. (2) The proposed modification is based on consideration of the best available science as de- scribed in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are fol- lowed. iv. Streams -Modifications: An applicant may request that the Ad- ministrator grant a modification as follows: (a) Modifications may be re- quested for a reduction in stream buffers for Class 2 or 3 water- courses proposed to be day- lighted, below the stream buffer reduction levels of subsection L5c of this Section. (b) In addition to the criteria of RMC 4-9-2500, Modification Procedures, the following criteria shall apply: (1) The buffer is lowered only to the amount necessary to achieve the same amount of de- velopment as without the day- lighting. (2) The buffer width is no less than fifty feet (50') on a Class 2 watercourse and twenty five feet (25') on a Class 3 watercourse. (3) The proposed modification is based on consideration of the best available science as de- scribed in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-250F are fol- lowed. 3. Variances: a. Aquifer Protection -Variance: 4-3-0500 ii. Application Submittal: An ap- plication for a variance shall be filed with the Development Services Divi- sion. iii. Review Authority: A variance shall be decided by the Administrator based on the standards set forth in RMC 4-9-2508, Variance Proce- dures. (Ord. 5519, 12-14-2009) b. Flood Hazards -Variances: i. Applicability: Refer to RMC 4-9-2508. c. Geologic Hazards, Habitat Con- servation, Streams and Lakes - Classes 2 to 4, and Wetlands -Vari- ance: i. Applicability: If an applicant feels that the strict application of this Section would deny all reasonable use of the property containing a criti- cal area or associated buffer, or would deny installation of public transportation or utility facilities de- termined by the agency proposing these facilities to be in the best inter- est of the public health, safety and welfare, the public agency or an ap- plicant of a development proposal may apply for a critical areas vari- ance. ii. Application Submittal: An ap- plication for a critical areas variance shall be filed with the Development Services Division. iii. Review Authority: Variances shall be determined administratively by the Community and Economic Development Administrator, as indi- cated in RMC 4-9-2508. (Amd. Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000; Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005; Ord. 5519, 12-14-2009; Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) i. Applicability: If an applicant feels that the strict application of this Section would deny all reasonable use of the property or would deny in- stallation of public transportation or utility facilities determined by the public agency proposing these facili- ties to be in the best interest of the public health, safety and welfare, the applicant of a development proposal may apply for a variance. 0. APPEALS: 3 -20.39 1. General: See RMC 4-8-070, Authority and Responsibilities, and RMC 4-8-110. ( Revised 3/1 3) 4-3-050P 2. Record Required -Flood Hazards: The Administrator shall maintain the records of all appeal actions and report any variances to the Federal Insurance Administration upon request. (Amd. Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000; Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002; Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005; Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) P. ASSESSMENT RELIEF -WETLANDS: 1. City Assessments: Such landowner should also be exempted from all special City assessments on the controlled wetland to de- fray the cost of municipal improvements such as sanitary sewers, storm sewers, water mains and streets. (Ord. 5000, 1-13-2003; Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005) Q. MAPS: 1. Aquifer Protection: See Figure 4-3-05001 for reference map. 2. Flood Hazards: see Figure 4-3-05002 for reference map. 3. Geologic Hazards: a. Coal Mine Hazards: (RevisedJ/13) i. Map: See Figure 4-3-05003a(i) for reference map. ii. Mapping Criteria: (a) Low Coal Mine Hazards (CL): Areas not identified as high or medium hazards. While no mines are known in these areas, undocumented mining is known to have occurred. (b) Medium Coal Mine Haz- ards (CM): (1) Lands overlying coal mines, but not included in the high haz- ard category; and (2) Surrounding lands overly- ing a wedge between a plane ris- ing vertically from the mine and a plane rising from the mine at a break angle of between twenty five (25) and forty (40) degrees. The break angle is measured 3 -20.40 from the vertical. The break an- gle appropriate for the given seam is determined by the slope of the seam and the workings. Approximate mine depths and seam dip and break angles are provided in Appendices C and D of the Summary Report, Critical and Resource Areas Evaluation, GeoEngineers, 1991. (c) High Coal Mine Hazard (CH): All lands where underlying coal mines are within two hun- dred feet (200') below the ground surface, or fifteen (15) times the height of the mine workings be- low the surface, whichever is less. b. Erosion Hazards: i. Map: See Figure 4-3-05003b(i) for reference map. ii. Mapping Criteria: (a) Low Erosion Hazard (EL): All surface soils on slopes less than fifteen percent (15%). Mapped areas include all Natural Resource Conservation Service (formerly U.S. Soil Conservation Service) soils designated A, B, or C. (b) High Erosion Hazard (EH): All surface soils on slopes steeper than fifteen percent (15%). Mapped areas include all Natural Resource Conservation Service (formerly U.S. Soil Con- servation Service) soils desig- nated as D, E, or F. c. Landslide Hazards: i. Map: See Figure 4-3-05003c(i) for reference map. 4-3-050Q ii. Mapping Criteria: d. Seismic: (a) Low Landslide Hazard i. Map: See Figure 4-3-050Q3d(i) (LL): Areas with slopes less than for reference map. fifteen percent ( 1 5%). ii. Mapping Criteria: (b) Medium Landslide Haz- ard (LM): Areas with slopes be-(a) Low Seismic Hazard (SL): tween fifteen percent (15%) and All Vashon age glacial and older forty percent (40%) where the sediments. The mapped areas surface soi Is are underlain by include: permeable geologic units. The permeable units include: (1) All deposits of recessional and advance glacial deposits: (1) Fill: al, aim, and m; Qik, Qit, Qiv, Qpa, Qis, Qys, Qyg, Qur, Qsr, Qos, Qog. (2) Alluvium: Qac, Qaw, Qas, and Qa; (2) Vashon glacial deposits: Qg, Qgt, Qt, and Qvt; (3) Vashon recessional and ad- vance glacial deposits: Qik, Qit, (3) Pre-Vashon Pleistocene Qiv, Qpa, Qis, Qys, Qyg, Qvr, deposits: Qss, Qu, Qc, and Qcg; Qsr, and Qos; (4) Tertiary rock formations: Ts, (4) Vashon glacial deposits: n, Tr, Tl, Tet, Tiu, Tia, Tela, and Qg, Qgt, Qt, and Qvt. Ttl; (c) High Landslide Hazards (5) Areas of roadway fill, al and (LH): Areas with slopes greater aim, which overlay the above than forty percent (40%) and ar-units. eas with slopes between fifteen percent (15%) and forty percent (b) High Seismic Hazard (40%) where the surface soils (SH): Post-glacial deposits are underlain by low permeability which are likely to be saturated geologic units. The low perme-as they occupy low areas and ability units include: frequently overlay low perme- ability deposits. They include: (1) Post-glacial lake and peat silts: Qlp, Qp, Qlm, and Qvl; (1} Deposits of fill: af, aim, and m· ' (2) Pre-Vashon Pleistocene deposits: Qss, Qu, Qc, Qcg, and (2) Alluvium: Qaw, Qac, Qas, Qog; and Qa; (3) Tertiary rock formations: Ts, (3) Mass wasting deposits: n, Tr, Tl, Tet, Tiu, Tta, Teta, and Qmc, Qm, and QI; Ttl. (4) Post-glacial lake silts and (d) Very High Landslide Haz-peats: Qlp, Qp, Qlm, and Qvl. ards (LV): All mapped landslide deposits: Qmc, Qm, QI, and e. Steep Slopes: landslides known from public records. i. Map: Refer to the City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas and Figure 4-3-050Q3e(i) for reference map. 3-20.41 (Revised 6/05) 4-3-0500 f. Volcanic Hazards: Volcanic hazard areas are those areas subject to a poten- tial for inundation from post lahar sedi- mentation along the lower Green River as identified in Plate II, Map D, in the re- port U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey (Revised 1998), Vol- cano Hazards from Mount Rainier, Wash- ington. Open-File Report 98-428. 4. Streams and Lakes: See Figure 4-3-05004 for reference map identifying Class 2 to 4 water bodies. Water class shall be determined in accordance with subsection L 1 of this Section. For Class 1 waters, refer to RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations. 5. Wetlands: Refer to the City of Renton Wetland and Stream Corridors Critical Areas Inventory and see Figure 4-3-05005 for ref- erence map. 6. Drainage Basins: See Figures 4-3-05006a and b for maps identifying basins and subbasins in the Renton vicinity. (Revised 6/05) 3 -20.42 E )I RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE 11111111111111 Zone1 ~<%?~ Zone 1 Modified ~ Zone2 City Limits Figure 4-3-050Q1 AQUIFER PROTECTION ZONES 0 3 -20.43 4-3-0500 '~ I ! t j 5280' 10560' VT i l" = 1 MILE (Revised 6/05) 4-3-0500 Roads -Flood Hazards ( RevisOO 6/05) Figure 4-3-05002 FLOOD HAZARDS ~ Creeks ~ Rivers fW~1@ Lakes --- 3 -20.44 City Boundary Municipality Boundaries \ For Reference Only 1 Inch= !Mile \ ) KENT ; MERCER ISLAND Renton Municipal Code -lligb Hazard -Moderate Hazard Figure 4-3-050Q3a(i) COAL MINE HAZARDS ---Road.~ ---City Boundary ~ Unclassified 3 -20.45 Creeks -:-,.~'~:--:::.....;.::;::. Rivers Lakes 4-3-0500 Por Reference Only l Inch= 1 Mile (Revised 6/05) 4-3-0SOQ i I KENT Renton Mumcipal Code (Revised 6/05) Roads -High Hazard Figure 4-3-050Q3b(i) EROSION HAZARDS ~creeks ~Rivers i@:%.:~. ""£ Lakes ---City Boundary ___ Municipality Boundaries 3 -20.46 .J \ I Inch = I Mile MERCER \ Renton Municipal Code I Very High llazard High Hazard Figure 4-3-050Q3c(i) LANDSLIDE HAZARDS ~ Moderate Hazard ~@,v,.'.zj Unclassified 3 -20.47 ·-·-Roads _, ___ _,, Creeks _,. ,~":.;;:~ Rivers ---City Boundary 4-3-0500 .J I Inell -l Mile l I I (Revised 6/05) 4-3-0500 I I MERCER Renton Municipal Code -High Hazard iifi® Lakes (Revised 6/05) Figure 4-3-05003d(i) SEISMIC HAZARDS ---Roads ~Creeks ~Rivers ---City BoUlldary __ -Municipality Boundaries 3 -20.48 \ \ • ' /\ \ For Reference Only 11 Inch i 1 Miler Renton Municipal Code -25-40% Slope -40+%Slope Figure 4-3-050Q3e(i) STEEP SLOPES ~--. _., -. __./ Creeks ~:=:.:.-=:::::...-;::=::. Rivers [::;::.-;:, .. ~:J Lakes ---Roads ---City Boundary ---Municipality Boundaries 3 -20.49 4-3-0SOQ ' ' ' /\ ...J For Reference Only l Inch -l Mile (Revised 3/13) 4-3-050Q Figure 4-3-050Q4 STREAMS AND LAKES ' ', 'liJij r Classes!: 11=1 l i vu [ ·r .J hi j ' Community & Economic Development CF ''1"o' •,;,~,Ol '"-''' .,,,·,·a,·rio,·~,,,o,,,,," l'l "1~//;'/1 , .. uo,; Lli,,'E [l'lflf:.'X (Amd. Ord. 5355, 2-25-2008; Ord. 5468, 7-13-2009; Ord. 5675, 12-3-2012) (Revised J/!J) 3 -20.50 1-· . ~ -...._~,., _,_..j "; "" .,: \~ log,,nd CJ ct.~ Lnuts ::_:~; PM 8ou~dar; •t.:titer Bc:d,,.,s 12?.1 Shoreline Jurl'.ld1ot,011 l!IIH!Culverl StrMmCltls.s -C;a~a 3 C!a6S 4 MERCER Renton Municipal Code ~ Roads ~ -Wetlands ~~Wl Figure 4-3-05005 WETLANDS Creels Rivers Lakes --- 3 -20.51 • " City Boundary Municipality Boundaries 4-3-0500 ' ' ' ..J \ / \ \ I For Reference Only I Inch ~ I Mile (Revised 6/05) 4-3-0500 (Revised 6/05) Figure 4-3-050Q6a SURFACE WATER FACILITIES BASINS Bl;!Ck ~lv~er. . y' aa,n ----, :: ,,·.-. ---''-'----' __ ., . ; r L__~,., Surface Water Facilities Basins --· ---City Limits 3 -20.52 4-3-0500 Figure 4-3-050Q6b SURFACE WATER FACILITIES SUB-BASINS I Surface Water Facilities Sub-Basins ---· --· -City limits (Amd. Ord. 4992, 12-9-2002; Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000; Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005) 3 -20.53 (Revised 6/05) 4-3-050R R. GENERIC HAZARDOUS MATERIALS LIST: GENERIC HAZARDOUS MATERIALS LIST FOR INFORMATIONAL USE ONLY Acid and basic cleaning solutions Antifreeze and coolants Arsenic and arsenic compounds Battery acid Bleaches, peroxides Brake and transmission fluids Brine solution Casting and foundry chemicals Caulking agents and sealants Cleaning solvents Cooling water (not isolated from process chemicals) Corrosion and rust prevention solutions Cutting fluids Degreasing solvents Deicing materials Disinfectants Dyes Electroplating solutions Engraving solutions Etching solutions Explosives Fertilizers Food processing wastes Formaldehyde Fuels and additives Glues, adhesives, and resins Greases Hydraulic fluid Indicators Industrial and commercial janitorial supplies Industrial sludges and stillbottoms Inks, printing, and photocopying chemicals Laboratory chemicals Medical, pharmaceutical, dental, veterinary, and hos- pital solutions Metal dusts Mercury and mercury compounds Metals finishing solutions Oils Paints, pigments, primers, thinners, dyes, stains, wood preservatives, varnishing, and cleaning com- pounds Painting solvents PCBs Pesticides and herbicides Plastic resins, plasticizers, and catalysts Photo development chemicals Poisons Polishes Pool chemicals (Revised 6/05) GENERIC HAZARDOUS MATERIALS LIST FOR INFORMATIONAL USE ONLY Processed dust and particulates Radioactive sources Reagents and standards Refrigerants Roofing chemicals and sealers Sanitizers, disinfectants, bactericides, and algaecides Soaps, detergents and surfactants Solders and fluxes Stripping compounds Tanning industry chemicals Transformer and capacitor oils/fluids Wastewater treatment sludges (Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000) 3 -20.54 4-3-0508 S. PIPELINE MATERIAL: 1. PIPELINE MATERIAL REQUIREMENT Pipe Diameter in Inches Suggested Material Considerations Pipe Material <4 4-8 10-12 14-20 24-30 36-54 Spec (See subsection S2) Ductile Iron, Rubber Gaskets Cement Monar-Lined 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 AWWA C151, C104 abcdnopr Polyethylene-Lined 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 AWWAC151 abcdnopr Ductile Iron, Nitrile Gaskets Cement Mortar-Lined 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 AWWA C151, C104 bcdinopr Polyethylene-Lined 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 AWWAC151 bcdeinopr PVC, Rubber Gasket Joints CL 150or200 1,2 1,2 1,2 AWWAC900 abjlnoprt SDR 35 1 1 ASTM D3034 PVC, Nitrile Gasket Joints 1,2,3 1,2,3 AWWAC900 bijlnoprt CL 150 or 200 PVC, Solvent Welded Joints 2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 ASTM D1784, hjklnoprt Sch BO D1785 Welded Steel, Rubber Gaskets Cement Mortar-Lined 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 AWWA C200, C205 abfghnopr Dielectric-Lined 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 AWWA C200, C210 abfghnopr Welded Steel, Welded Joints Cement Mortar-Lined 1,2 1,2 AWWA C200, C205 fghnopr Dielectric-Lined 1,2,3 1,2,3 AWWA C200, C210 fghnopr High Density Polyethylene Pipe 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1 ASTM D1248 and hkpqu Corrugated High Density D3350 Polyethylene Pipe -Smooth 1 1 1 1 1 ASTM D1248 and kpqsu Interior AASHTO Slip Form Liner 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 ASTM D638 mnopqr PIPELINE SERVICE 1. Storm Sewer 2. Sanitary Sewer and Side Sewer 3. Leachate Pipeline 4. Rehab Existing Storm Sewer 5. Rehab Existing Sanitary Sewer 2. CONSIDERATIONS ON SELECTION OF PIPE MATERIALS The Utility maintains a list of materials meeting performance standards. Other materials meeting similar performance standards or developed as the result of new technology may be approved by the Utility. a. Rubber gaskets may be severely damaged by petroleum products, particularly in prolonged exposures to concentrated flows containing little or no storm water or sanitary sewage. In cases where heavy concentrations of petroleum products may be experienced, nitrile (Nitrile-Butadiene; i.e., NBR) gaskets should be used. b. Gasketed joints may not be leak-proof at zero or low pressures, it improperly installed. C. Mechanical joints may be less likely to leak at low pressures than push-on joints. d. May need protective coatings and/or cathodic protection against external corrosion. e. Considered most reliable gasket and lining material for ductile iron leachate pipeline. f. Very difficult to repair linings on inside of joints in pipe smaller than 24-inch diameter. g. Almost always needs protective coatings and cathodic protection against external corrosion. h. Properly made joints are considered leak-proof. i. Nitrile gaskets may require long delivery time. j. Requires special attention to bedding and backfill depth to avoid structural failure of pipe. 3 -20.55 (Revised 7/03) 4-3-050S k. Large thermal expansion coefficient. May need to limit solvent welded joints to 4-inch and smaller pipe. May require careful evaluation of pipe installation temperature and temperature of piped liquids to ensure joint integrity. I. Pipe not available over 12-inch diameter. m. Slip form lining is available in 6-inch through 60-inch diameter for almost any pressure, if sufficient pipe cross- sectional area is available. n. Pressure grouts and gels are not acceptable for rehabilitation or patching of storm and sanitary sewers. 0. Suitability of pipe lining and gasket material to resist chemical attack by conveyed fluids must be determined for each pipeline service considered. p. All storm and sanitary sewer manholes, catch basins, and inlets should be equipped with precast concrete bottom and sidewalls with rubber gasketed joints between sections, water-tight epoxy grout or other approved pipe entrances through walls, and approved waterproof coating of all interior floor and wall surtaces. Manholes, catch basins, and inlets should have no leakage when hydrostatically tested at atmospheric pressure. q. Has good resistance ta a number of chemicals, petroleum products, and hydrogen sulfide corrosion. r. "Zero leakage" test requirement may be impossible to achieve under the best conditions for any pipe materials because trapped air may distort test results, even in a drop-tight pipe. Pressure and leakage test requirements should consider whether the pipe has steep slope or will stand full of liquid. Pipelines should be tested with the intent to prevent or minimize leakage. Air testing should not be allowed; hydrostatic testing should be as stringent as any found in the industry. Pipe materials, without regard for chemical attack, corrosion, or puncture, are generally ranked as follows, in decreasing order of liquid-tight reliability: • welded steel with welded joints • PVC with solvent welded joints • slip form liner • ductile iron with viton or rubber gaskets • welded steel with rubber gasketed joints • PVC with viton or rubber gasketed joints s. Joints should consist of "heat-shrink" wrap, standard corrugated coupling, and full pipe band clamps. t. The use of PVC may be restricted by other Utility policy in regards to depth of pipe cover. u. HOPE may be adversely affected by solvents; its use is not recommended where contact with solvents may occur. (Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000) (Revised 7/03) 3 -20.56