Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutREPORT 01_..,.,. __ ,.,,.i;,c ~· ~,.----~· lfl~t"ttQD .43· o· ,4.1 ,I' .)1 •• • ,e o· .. 1J,B' rn t e gr.~/~ r"" ~t+UHATfO '~lll. n::=~ vt:RiCN..W.S.WX C~TEOME""'AlSO\() UJR.Afj'flAUGi.AZNG ------'--JT I f~OS"UJATl>-10..N)LHHI ____ ,.,"''""""" -----------Pt(Nl)JC ','INEl C,,lf41A1'1WALLCLJ.llN G ELEVAT!C) C' ·, .. ) ·-------------.. ,,...___,. __ .._., ..... , NORTH 3RD STREE T (S OUTH ) ELEVATION 1/16"=1 '-0 " -----------iffO< CUDJ.NG C~f,1(1.ALSIONG NORTH 4TH STREET (NORTH ) ELEVATION 1/16"=1'-0 " SARTORI ELEM ENTARY SCHOOL 315 N GARDEN AVE, RENTON , WA 98057 _........ ~-----~· •n~rt!QD : !f -~: ,31·.4· integ r.~-/~,.., ~P"'El. -------~.~k.'A>B. ----------<>«(>-(l,l!UiG 1Uf 0AA.HD1Al..'AI ---'olRllCAl.$..N~ PERFWTEJ~Al v,:::.11CN. SIIN9iNX ... . .. ·-------· ••• • •••••••• ••• • •••••••• t ••••••••• iiit -iiiiiiiiiiii ELE\/AflOf'JS -----,o:aAOO,",G ~-----IST~T~I i,t).,.714G GARDEN AVE (EAST) ELEVATION 1 ; 16 " = 1 , -o· /l{f .V-000 ~G£NCi 9 /;'i,',(i{ M :)J4ll0 TO CAS1 91,\llCW ~-------t::l.[ AC 'Q ;iJ'./liHIR l .(.IIM'l f. r--=----0:JmUjATEO MEi,\l SOM) -------u.JlTAJN w;,u GL,VJNG V!l~(UPt.NI I -t -~::~~~-~:~-_;_l__ 1H f>:C.A1)1'.WI I I PAR K AVE (WEST) ELEVATION 1/16"=1'-0" SARTORI ELEMENTARY SCHOO L 315 N GARDEN AVE, REN TON, WA 9805 7 .. ~/~· •n~[ttQD ,10' ,. tr -u· integr.~{~,.., VJEST ELEV,~T!ON--DETAIL SEC TI ON THROUGH PED ESTRI AN PLAZA AND N . 3RD STR EE T l /8" = l ' -O" SA RTORI ELE M ENTARY SCHOOL 315 N GARDEN AVE , RENTON , WA 9805 7 _/~ ~O!QD ,ntegr,~,~ .. ., Legend ..llll lllL : : Proposed Lot Line & Outer Boundary -1tmm-l I Parcel s N 0 ~ 200 4 00 Feet A SARTORI ELEMENTAR Y SC HOOL 31 5 N GARDEN AVE , RENTON, WA 980 57 Di , ..... below. :anNf,:n,,... .. ::::~r ·:i fa~~r /7~,~~,.:~·~_-=, -: ·":r-·.'.:~~, 0 ,~1m1fi~ .. ._,/•j) -~/ , ~TO•lr '•• > ' ,. .... ) .. , · J ·•,'. '~-'. ·: ,·r: ·~ . ', i' .... ~1 L.1 b ··~ C()NNfCHO~?'. ii fAj~'i 'I;: CA1c:_ ,o~ I ; . .... •: "'.~{ .:: ... ' ' . i '.,.f- ·-.4 ~: • 1:~j~~ :~-~~-- •'I•.-: -,, y., ... ~ u ....... , .. I J .. l ---, .. r-~ .. ! , • ~ ... l I' L J :-Ir 'I~ I t ' J· :·,;-l j •. 'l' ) -1 ,~ u '.·:I I I ..... * . . .. i.•• ... ~ I . "' i ' .;~l i1 ...... ~, !):,1 .. :i "~~-·"'" .. " ;: r~~~1~i · CL ! tll .. ,,.e "~.·-·· __ ,,,,\ !I.~~ I I I I I I -~,,;-- FFE=38.50 t-f ~\r~ -:- ' I I .;·,· ,' ~·r.-:. I ; '"" ·· .. ::: .. + ·1 :,~ ,, :{~' ·:~~·-:~ ~~:~ .. ~H<CH0!,>5' --· -~ l u ........... Ec,u =',I.,, -= . ~-___ .. , ______ :..;___ .. -,·· /u.t Rlt,l )t!IO r"·' 0 RW.»uo --...........,,._· ~;' ·' f ~ ' " i( r·· p - ., -ill i j 1~·1 I ' I I J. r; I .1 •. ri I !: ,! ' ~~ .. :J . l ; ;; ... I w I .f I ,: · · Ir I . I •' t; I t I ;·, . -~~t ,r ! ,}I . ,;..,._;.: '-'" 1 I!,~ ... , ... , SC"'l.• IAS(lolftll l!(~l '"" J ~•~l!IOO(>)lt ·ltf', I~ I r~ :. i JI ~j ·~ .\ I! i -·.-'..-... ·~:: · ~ --. -~ ~t ~·~ :".. ·; ---< ,--:·=iilijJK\;.\J'-. ~--~i .. ~~~f-·:±:·--;~~ PROPOSED LEGEND~ SJOAMCAJC>i&MIPI ---D ---STOAMlNE ---11)---......... --"• --U::ITIHOl"ftQ4"tJn'Y l.NE --------~~D-Of"t:Jln"l'l N ~ I' '.,.,o.r.-c. ' ;~:..~?::tc j ~i1UI Ul 0 ~ • .. '§/>:··r··"\· ·! ~};; n ~ .. :---:-::~=----; ' ;.1; .:.;it;: :.··'1~-'~ o • CONNfCf fO -°'¥~~~;1 _.L_ t llU:JHN ~ M.ATOt~-se:e:Mtr.'f: Ir w ~I: ~~/127 EA,SRJ,jQ sm: ~ PNICCU):ll 11AC ~~~4 MN:. 1'RIAOf~l•n w:. rul OCAnclN~OAIGNj TIOl'f ~l RACT~ DI.Sf'l,iATIQPi OI SOI. JO et """"O'IIHJ LOCAIION 180 I T N:.t,,IO\'tO co,mu,,cTCI". <b o,wtMC SCH..[ '.L 'LLd 1•,)0 FCEET Dtsign Otvt lopmtnt . ~ er,-:. ::,§ be,~ 0) <D +-' ~ ~= ~~ .• i ~ ~~ i: \=':.~==ii i ~~":r~. -0 I 0 u .s::. ·;:: -u ; en en 0 ~ A 0 ca I; -"' 0 C z .s::. CII ~ u E V) CII Ii C iii ~ 0 I -·c: C: 0 CII t:: a:: "' n:, .; V) _, "'"'' ..... 2100100 1)-.-ly: ,:,..AATON4 "**'-'W 'ltl F'ERST I .. 0.. T 0.-,. CIV IL GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN C1.00 ....... I,' , , . .. I . , t ,., .ti ' I t .... ,-'. •, ,, .• i•· • ~ ,I :.,. • .~ , .. _,, , ... , .-{11 .... 1·,. . .. !_.. •, ~ !::•.,, I ~ ,,. ,. ~ . :, . ·I "' l ;' :f .... f ,,, ..... ~· ,, ...... :,,.:·• ~ 1:: .,-t ! ";- IRRl<M.1ION ...... T'f:" """' oo,,unc w-.r,:111 M&:TtA CC'JM'1£Ct TO VUST"ttOW"Tt"--~CTT O [l0$TWO #Alt:" .... CON'4:C'TTO VOSTWCIWAl(R -~OS(O PACFt:ATV UN< ..,.,.., '""""'"' "" •a"':i• r .;'-'i i ,'. C, ... --.· . -~ ~ / .... '' : .. .r: -·· .... •I ·., . •> it~\> H ·= -·~~-- ~ I l I .;J, Ji ,.j .>: :ii i' ,I '!~ 1: ·--------·-r: --------------!) '•vsl0,t01....to..o j '): I ·~ :le ,, J/ + nu _______ .Jf,J..L:JJ.r .. ~:jj T~f I· ' l11" . J; !• t I l /: ·'b I ,I J ,lac--I '------- e I .~L \ ),.~;<~i1d ,U S::2:~t:-: 0 •-.. ,;r:· --_ ~~-~~C;":Oft"P:t 1 _ -..-_ ~~.3R0Snt£El"' J· ~*-' ~\, I r-,; ~~ t. ' ~. t .. \' ~ •qi ·,1 .J . · .I; ·.1 t ·rt ! ~. ··~· b:tf--J.: ;i.'.? :.0~tmHt£::· . . \ ,./ -I ~. -··-·· ~TAU!I~ J -4..o SURFACIN G LEG END : ~1'4i,A.'o'YOVT'l'~T£ c==i ca,a,rn, ~~'o'YDJTY ~l ~ J TN«>NC)DUT'Y ...SPtW.t C==:=I (JgS'flHC~T N.~ EXISTING/PROPOSEO LNID use '"°"°"" l'R..oeu>l {'WITlotOUT Vf'iOVM: I [)llfflf'o0 ( (INQ..UOIHO C(OICATK'". O(QICArx.tl '°"' ...... <M"""' -·"'"'" -"""""' I I I I I ir,,~· ,,_-,~ a.w(HfCCNC"l.ll ~ K)[WAt.J(pc,ICm'O, --,QN:,!NfDl!,lltl)Cl(Til&.S I I t IMCVT 1 U ,.,.,..._,M0,00> : ~ ' ~ ~;,py.:./_\·f :: >\/1:f ,: ·.:. ·,.'. l"A ~'(IIIIUn CONCA£ll[ :: 1 NQllOR.ii.i CD PARK AVENUE STREET SECTION ir"·"°"""'"'~· ·~-, .. ·"'°"now, s, u.Noec.,tn CCMtHT eOHCM:n: fl\.AHTl.:11!. tolEWH.IC, l'lA OTT """""" flN«Jl,JIOO(lNLS '1 ,,..wruT 1 ,.,.o:=,.,., I .. ~ 7-:t,}f·~i.-<::1 ,,\,.~~%:,:-.··'.-::.Jg;}~_;' f)(:>'.: '.,.'. ' «•' NORTH 4TH STREET AND 0 ~~f.z1H 3RD STREET SECTIONS 0 ?.,~~j~N AVENUE NORTH SECTION f_ROPOSED LEGEND : • S,lrrHT,-,..VSll'IOI ~ INilTNff IIW(Jl'I 0..IENtOJf >< G,f.ft VJril.W:t,U ... n ltE OCPAJt.TMCN'TCOl'ff.cnc»I ,., ,:11t£Hl'Of1Nif . WAf!RICTVI 9 "" ---1---S-TAAr H wEA llNIE ---W ---'#AJCFIUN( ---, ---f:IM.30t'IIC(\.M ---, ---INltCA.IION~Utl ------VOSTf'tG~Cl'PfY lM --------~HIQf't'.lt'TYllHf: cb ........., ....... t. 'L L....---4' ,. ~ ,c ,u, Dt1 ign D1volopm1nt ~ : Cf)':. :,~ ~: CJ) Q) +-' ~ -8 u .s::. ·c: -u Ill en 0 ~ 0 ftl -0 C .s::. GI u E en GI C ui ,g ·c C: 0 GI t: 0::: ftl en -.... 0.-!!z ~: -· i' t ., ,. ,. ?: ,. i .. ~ Ii ti "' z " :> ! j "' .., "'"'' 11S!700 f M T()MA. "flEAlf a-..,!!J; l.10.7~ CIVIL UT ILITY AND SURFACING PLAN C2.00 > ~ m ::0 !!I m ~ i5 z -~ m z d ~ "O ~ ( '· ;I / ·-:-;.., I : I~~-. ,_ ./ X 1 ~l! ! ~'i! ~ li ~~ ! ~· ~;$ ~ ii f .. ~ ·~ ~ .. ii ! ta:~ ? ~ !. NORTH 4TH STREET .... .. " -.... +EB •m ::0 i Q ~nr g~ ii~ ~~al m J m m z ,';~.i ~, h -~i ih ~ 0 ;:.~:; . "ii ~-~ si~; . ~ ~g .~;; !;j !~. ~~i ~,~~ z if 6j ~3 V ;~ ~~i~ .... 0 ~ •o g 5 ~-· .. i ·~ ~h !i •!~ n :i•~' z ii ;I -11~3 a.-i .-: z ~ i·~~ ~ 'i!~ i : ,,! 0 !i ~.§ • ~I I< -~ iri ~ d ! ; "i ~~ ~!{ [,:> ! ~ ii ~ f ! ~!- Renton School District Sartori Elementary School I WEISMAN DESIGNGROUP I 1-.. l.,_. L--~ r--f'·-~" r- 315 Gan1en 1. .. nue N, Ronton WA N057 Q -~ m z > -~ C m . z 0 ~ ·, ' ., ,.v· ·-; :• ' .. ........ ,.--; '; <" g ~z EB integr.~,~ .. .. I ... ---······ ---· .. ,. ...... . ' .. ······ ~ .............. •········ .. . -.• SARTORI EDUCATION CENTER A PORTION OF THE NE 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SEC. 17, TWN. 23 N., RGE. 05 E. W.M. LEGAL DESCRIPTION CINI.I' ON( or TMt US1U1 n1U lllPOIITS CONT....-;D lWE ASSOOA10I SIJIPOJIT OOQJlil[NTS. DUl ro TMIS. NOT 111.1.. uso1ons "'"" • !llfC*I ..P[III FRST ANlNC#I n,u; llftUflMCI: COIi'""" <JIIJ[lt NO. NCS-700&U-WAI 0A1ED IIO\IOe[III l. 20!' LOT 11, 9..00( 1. ll[Nt1JN I'-Pl.Al, ~ fO 1WE Pl.AT ft€111EOF IICCOolO£O .. Wl.\M 10 O!' Pl.An. PACI( 9', IIIEC:O.,S O!' -CO.Wt'f', -· [XC[PT '""' PIIOIIUITY O!' SMO """"1ln OttOUI 10 IMC orr O!' IICNtlJN l'OJI IIIGIH Of" W4T tJICJ8II DEED 1lltCCIIIOm ,Al€ 7. 199' IMJtll ~ NO. IOOI075n -PEA F'IAST AMERICM llllE lll!IUlllfta: ta,#'#IT O'IIJDII NO. NCS-?005le-WAI OA1ED NOl8IIER 15, 2014 1lf[ 1.:Sl 50 F'El:T or IMC £AST Z2S1ff mT OI' LOT'S 11 ANO 11, ILOCM J. SNITtllll$\IU.L ACC01110NO TO ™ Pl.AT ~ llltCOlal) .. VO..\M I or Pl.At$. PN:;E 7, .. Kie COUNTl', Wlt,Slo!N.ttft. -P£R fRST -,.cM mu: INSUIIIINa: r;IJ/lllll'MT O'IIJDII NO. IIC$-100531-W"I OAtm M0"°8EII t, :ZOU 1WE EAST 7$ FttT O!' LOT'S 11 MO 12. 8l00( 3, Sllt'IUAl5"U.£, ACCORCJl'tC" n, 1H PUil TH[lllECI' II[~ IN Wl.tME a or P\.Af'S, P.ta: 7, IN -G COUNTY, -~ -PElt FRST ~ lllU llftUfl"'"a: CO....,..Y OflO[III NO. "ICS-~18-WAI OATEO NO\OeEll 5, 10!4 LOlS I ll4IIOJGl1 I IN0.JJS'o£. 9UlCII 7. ll[Nt1JN f-Pl.Al, ACCOROftG TO ntE Pl.AT MAEOF' AEC0R0E0 IN YCUIWE IO or PLATS, PACE 17, IN KINC CO.WTY. WA9f9'1GTQN. -fltlll FWST M1011CAN lltU: IMSUftMIC( COW'#IY CJR0tJt NO. NCS-700!,JCJ-W.1 D ... IED NO\'Ell8Efl f,, 21)14 fltE IIUT 50 ftET OF lME EAST 1~ FttT or LOTS 11 ANO 12. 111,.00( l. SMT'Olll$W1.E. ACCOROIN<l ro lM Pl.AT THP!Eor ..:COIIOEO IN \ICl.\1111[ a a, Pl.Al'$. P...at 7, IN l(lf<4G co.wrr, IIASHNCTCN. -FIJIST MIElllColH mu: 11<19.m,INCE CCll,IP#IY <JIIJ[lt l«J. NCS-10052~WAI DA1ED ~ J. 20!4 LOl IJ. ll.OCIC 7, ll(NTO!t F-Pl.AT, ACCOIIOING TO lME Pl.AT ~or 11,COIIOEII tN VIJI..\M 10 or ,un. PAGC 97, RCC0R0S or KNC COJNlT, W"'9411tGTON. EIICG"T lMAT PIIIOl'£lllT 0, SAICI fllltWl!El O[£lJaJ TO 1Mt gr, 0, ROITON nJI -T 0, ..,.y UNOtfl oao IICCOIIOED JUI,![ 7, 11114 I.IUII lltCOIIIIINC NO. l-757S. ..fl'El'I ..-.ST N«ll!CAN TITLE '"5UIIAN« COMPANY ~ NO. NCS-700$29-W,l,1 0Alm N0"°"8ER I. 20H nit 'CST ,0 f"EET 0, TME EAST 125 f"EET r,, LOTS 11 ANO 12, a..oCJI JS.UIITOIHS'AU.[. ,t,CCOIIOltlG TO lH PUiT ne£0, N:COROED IN Yll.lNIE I r,, !'I.ATS. tt,t,GE 7, IN ICING COUNTY. WA!HfrlGTOt. -P£II ..-.ST .wtlllCN4 TITLE INSUlll,,.a: CC*PNfY ~ NO. NCS-700511-VU.1 Q,t,T(O NO'oOIBE!t :t. 201t LOT 7, .. 00( 7. "ENTON ,_ l"\.AT, ~ TO "IME !'I.AT IM[R[ty: l'IECOlltltO IN Yll.VI« 10 0, PUTS, PAGE 17, ll[CQIIOS o, IClt(C COJNlT. W,t,SHN()TQN. -4'PI f'lll!ST MIEftlCM tnu: INW!IAN!;t Q;IMPANY OltOOt NO. MC$-70052t--l D,t,181 NO'tOa'.fl I, 201t LOT 1:1., IILOCIC 7. ll(NTON ,_ Pl.AT, ,t,CCOIIDIJtC TO lM[ l"\.AT ftEll[r,, tlff:COIIIOEO IN YQ..Ulil( 10 or PI.Af"S. PAGE 17. MCQIIOS o, Ila«: COUNlT. W,l,SleMCTON EIICCf'T lMt ,w.o-c D[9Clll(D l'Ollll!Jt. K-G AT lM[ S0JTMll['$T ~ 0, $Ml I.OT 12. 1MCNC1: -I'll OlnS'OT EAST ALONC lME ET LINE Of" SMI tOT, A OISTAIICt 0, M.M ,ttt TO THE NQltTl-1 UN( or SlilO LOT; 1HDICE $0UTM llt"'Ol'lll" UST ALCNC SMI -™ UNI: A OSTANGt 0, I.OZ ,U:T; lM[NC( 50UlM Ool'43°55" ET • O,UHC( Of" ,s.oa FU:f TO lME '!OJ"IH lK 0, $AID I.OT; MNCt: -™ 1!11-0.'U" 11['$f ALONG $AID SOUTM LINE, A OISTMC:t 0, 3.02 ,U:T TO tM1: -T 0, .-_ -f'Ut FlllST MIOIICAN Tl1U: -..,..,.Ct: CO.ANY (RJ[III NO. NC$-71I077--I OAlm nM.IMY 11, 2011 LOni I lHROJQI 10. INCUISl"lt. lltOO< :t. SMl'OIIINUL ,t,C(XIIIJINCl TO fk( ,u.t MRtor ll(COIIJED IN 'IQ.UlilE I or ,U.TS, PAGE 7. IIECORDS 0, -C COJNTY. -TON ZONING (A-Q:ll,N[IIOAI. M"IUIIAL (7U000-0l20. 722--0IIS, 7Uo!OO-Ol10) Cll--coMIIEIICIAI. ~ (7Z2olOD-OtOO, 712.ao--G51G. 7U400-05IO) "8-IIIE!IIIOln11t.-1 IJI.J/AC (751060-0lll. 75','80-011..J. 7M--0182, 7'11'1G-011') ll!Q-flC90[!C11AL 10 PJ/~ (7!111--0170) UTILITY NOTES 1. SURf'Aa: UTUTY FACIIJTI[S N11E 5H091 ICll(ON P0t FlElJ) LOCATED -..51111.E ~ 11€11£ M•Y 8E UTU11ES TMAT [lll$T ON lltl$ SITE Ol!O TMM tMOS[ Gll-..cAU. Y Ot:P9CTtl) !«MON. 2. UIIOCIIClllOUNJ (91.11181) Ufll,n'IU 910'#0 .-ON All[ IIA,nl ON C0181NA1la<IS 0, -..sa..£ WIIF"ACE EWXNCL UQJTY LOC:At"OR 111-IN<iS #«) IIECOM) DAU (!l.l01 AS AS-9UII.T CII ururv D£,C11 OftA"a'IGS). AU. Utt0£-..o UQJTIIES 9'0'#'I IClltON All[ -·It ANO, IN SOC GUE"S. N11E ~ AS SlRAICtlf tM5 8ETflttl4 FIEI.D LOCAlm 51.M'ACE UllJTY OOU11ES. I.NOEJtCJICUNO U1'Jl'IES MAY HA'it IDtlS. CUR'ofl OJI ~CllONS MIICH AR£ NOT 9«JWol. l. Al,Tli(IUOI LOCAIIONS OF" ~ UflJTIES IAstO OH UQJTY LOCAtoR Ill~ AND R[COIIO DATA (SUOt AS AS-BUILT Oft unuTY IICilCN IJRA-.CS) N11E Dro,IEII ~Alll.E, ...._ INC. ASSIJMES HO ~TY f'OII Tl1[ ACCUIIACY OF" SM1 OATA. •. C,U. ,-eoo-,2---IIUOIIE N'IY COl'IST1'l)CnON. RELIANCE NOTE "!HIS SUll'KT WAS PMPNIIED AT Tl1[ FEO.DT 0, RICK SIHCK[ nJI Tit[ SCU ollC) OQ.USl""f: tJSt: 0, IIENTON SQiOO. OSTIIICT NO. '<13. 111Q-t1'S TO RELY uP0N ANO. OJI US[ "!HIS SU'IYEY 00 H(lt [XTENO TO ANY OIHEl'I PMTY [)ICEPT -OI.IGH Elf>RESS =nnc,.nQH BY fH[ PRa'£SSIONAL LANO SUIIYE'l'OII -.fD'5E STAMP <'ND SIGNATURE APPEAi! 1€11CQN. EQUIPMENT USED 3• TOTAi. STATIOH urull'«: STANOAIIO FlElJ) lTIA\OtSE V[lHOOS FOR COl'tlTIO. ""° STAKINC. SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE I, OA\110 C. FQJ.ANMI[[, A PflOFEDOHAI. LANO SIJIIIIE'l'OR IN Tl1[ 5TAlE C: =~ li'rJY3"~~~T~h~".:~t'S 201f., AT ~lltQU£'S 'F'4 ll!SWCT HO. .<OJ. ,., ·---., ,.,,;..,t-·7 I --·-_, l L -· OVU/IOI' ~ C. f'Ol.l.MISBtt. PI.S 40161 ,..i< .. ~ N (!) --L.t. T ,•.40,uy ·= CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. J "" ~ NO .··5v .. ..,.. r .. -~ RTH 4TH STREET D """,. "'-oSK WfH PI.INQI • DIS!( •lH PUII04 """ -----------Slll'Ollo.):__ """ U!l.15" ---------- ~ :r1 -ll1' N tii w :c (I) i ~" .,. .. iii •!I ::,; l!' "l:...J.. J Ii ,.--, I t ··-·~ ------------------ o·ooa CJOCO , ---face-----H---------b----J ---------1-- " j I i!: I~ I~ J' Ci i~::,; •-.: I "' ii ·-,~ I ~ tii w ~ I p ' I +.--·· " , ----S-- ----j---t I 1'1 I IIAIL AN0--:-...1:i N, 1I07tUtr10 [:!l021lll.7'00 EUY:37.'2 ____ _j al.~, n::: I ,I a r....,_,,or, NM; . .io,,tJ W,,,,.r.JI 'l;l!JC!'?~.~·2 (,ll<!;l'JC!.!..!>2U l:U:""J'.4 ~..1·· FOUND 2" lll'IASS 0511 •fH Pl.INCH •m• ~·--·· ·--.......... • -~·~.---· ... ------- NORTH3RD STREET ......._ 1101 NAil AND WA!lt[II Jllcll(MI0.8'09 [:ll0"'5.71t2 D.£Y:JI.J5 I ~ I --------•FCN.INO 2· lll'IASS OSI( ...... PUN01 . ~" '°""'o r 111•ss 1)19( ·"" ptJJll()t IN CASl SURVEYOR'S NOTES 1. 1'[111'99 ~TAL l,ID,IOIINOM DATtD F'tBRUMY 1, ;zoie. lt!:AflNC OIL~ STOIIIACI: T-S MAY ttOTtNTIAU.Y unT AT THE FOU.a.tG PIIOPOll"IB -1206 N 3111D S1Tl(l!:l. IIOIIOII • ..., -UOI N 3111D SIM[T. ROIIOII. WA -1210/1212 N 3111D STllttT. ROITON. U 2. Tta.E A 11[111 •-OIIOSS LAND MEA•215.D011 SF" ('.I' AC) l. Tta.E A 11[111 t..P-...C-90 STNIOAII0/2 NANOICAI' ,. TABl.£ A 11[111 11-1'[11 Mt OTY or lltllTCN 201S-202D SIX 1'CM mAN5POIITATION ~J PUN. nt[II( Alli[ NO PIIQPOS[D ~ts ro fHE P(Jl1IOlfS or p-AYENIJE HOIITM. eAIIOEN A-.out -™, NOlllM 3111D S1Tla:T ANO-™ •?ll ,lllttr A(IUtTIJIIC fHE PIIO,l:Cl Sl"Tt. 5. TAIL[ A 11[111 11-NO C85EIII\U:I £111DOt(:t or Slit US( AS A SOLID W,oS1t -. -OIi SNUMIIY LNCIFIU FLOOD HAZARD DETERMINATION PUi1 Uf'II' lit:Rw::tS. U.C. IMC. 1-50t-J27-NJ4 91E LIES flTl4N -COMMUNITY !IIJMll[II 5JOOM. PANO. Nl/llllllffl 5JOOJCOl71'f" IWJ uts IN n.ooo ZONE .... LAS! 11[','iS[O 5/te/11115. lM[ SITE DOC !«IT UE •fHIN ,t, 5PtCIAL 'l.000 HAV,111(1 #IEA. VERTICAL DATUM NA\O Ill CITY Of" -TON ~ITCIII. 8ENOtll-50I LUO N-1!1 TAO< IN PIPE AT NOIITM iTl-1 ANO GAIIO[N A\IL MORll-tERL'f or TWO NONUMENni " INTDISECTIO'+. EU:V::».lll3" BASIS OF BEARING ""° '3/11 WASHll«:TON STATE PLANE ~A"IE Sl51Dil. NOltflt i:oNE CITY OT ll(NTON HOIIIZONTAL CQNlll!I. HCl.OltC CITY MONUMENT NllllllOtS 1121 ANO 1179 . PONT NO. 1121 N•111200.IU E•ll01411.111 Ba.t WITH X AT 1Mt "TEllSE:CllCIN OF" HOIITM •fH 5TMV W/ 1lnLS AYENJC NOllllL l'OINT NO. 117' N•ll11to."5 [•1301N1.701 111•ss !'I.UC AT NI: NlUIKCTION OF" -™ •fH STAtCt W/ P-A'IIENUE-TM. A t.Nt BtfllttN fHE TWO F"OUNO IIOJ«JlltNt'S 8EMS SOUTM MW2D" EAST. LEGEND • FOUND -.iw[NT AS NOlm ~ SET N/111. #Cl *HIii --·--A ,c,,, AS NOlUI rn ~ ... VAIJl.f 0 S-TANY SCIIElt CUANOUT 0 SNHANY SCIIElt MANHCU 0 SlOIIMCUMOUT a SftJlol CAT01 BASIN 0 -·-• ,MO OIi""" • _,,_ • ""' """ a --m CAS VAi.iii[ =-nurimc SIGMAL ,a,t "" M""' ,-, l1il """"'M-,_ """""" ~ U11UTY ~ ,a,[ "' ..IJNCTION IOX ie POIIIEll NAIHll.t • ..... . .,.. m POIIIEll VAULT " --"' «-uNICA1IOlfS MAMHOU: • fUEPHONE AIS£11 q:i m.EPHONE YAUI.T 81.0W or, VIII.Iii[ 'Cf f1IIIE QUIMl'M[NT CONNtCTION A FIIIEH'l'OIWrlT • """" a li!RICATION CON"IIIQ. Y""-llt • .. Ttll METtll • H"l[R IIANHO.I: t POST IICIICATOR YAl.llt D4 IIA"IETI YAtlll[ (!:] IIATtll VAi.LT ~ C-aDM, ,-F-11. H-N[lill.OCK (5 U-UNICNO ... -----0-SlOIIMtM -----D-STORl,llJNIE:"[IIIIECOIIOCIIA- -----S-SE'M:11 UN[ -----W-WATtlltlNE -----W-WATtll UNI! 1'[11 lll[COIIID ORA-.CC -----G-CASLM -----P-CL.tcffllCAt lK -----T-~TICl'tl.K -----OHP -IMRN'EAO UQJIIES -·-·-·-•-l'tHCt: ~-----~ "'""' """"" !iil;l~~li -,1:a, ~--m TACOMA· SEATTlE • SP01<NE · lJU..CITlES 2215 Ptb1t, 30lh Sllwt, Sun 300 TIIClll!M. w,-, 11&4<1 253.383.2-122 TR 253.383.2512 l'AX -.allll.alll YoB """'1.lili£ """' SARTORI EDUCATION CENTER RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT NO, 403 7112 SOUTH 124TH 9n1EET IIEAfTL.E, WA .. 17MQO """'""""' EXECIJTM DIRECTOR FACI.ITEI I OP(RATlONI ........ J11011• 50 ~~ FJ;QRIJAAY N. 2014 _. ... ,, / , '"'~""c:_,... , OW"UhOI• ~~ I E;i:f.:-!:-~! :J:.'t-i:1:T.~J#"Z J & ______ _ b. ______ _ e, ______ _ !±, ______ _ -......,.... BOUNDARY& TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY Pnisnlllh ~ ~ TI> .. ........... 1 of 3 9'ute ---- SARTORI EDUCATION CENTER A PORTION OF THE NE 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SEC. 17, TWN. 23 N., RGE. 05 E. W.M. 1 a Cl~~; RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. 11:. :_ 1;?. :·:: I • J'!if, r r "" ..•••. a e1-1 ··-=11•1t-,u• ~,',__._.l..J:. •-' -.__ J I r '-f>7 STQI H7 --M.411 COJl,.II IIOT OPEN GIi.OU[ 'lttl(l[fl .1" n.nu,_ sooc "" I Jl!il!tl,bJ!, -,-c, I I• ~ I<-----,-, T --6 I 11 Iii i i1 J ----·Je.OI -I STall 172 111111•3$.15 e· coi.c £ IE•JZ.8' I" CO<IC WIE:•32.11& •. ---------- ... __,, I I I ~ 1171 I ~-------;,s 22· CQNC; [-W ~ raJICI ~ 91.1.sstj• 1 I 1 ~·£ ..;_9e.73 '; 3'!fEll OiNKL•2l.f6 I f ~DISK-"'~~ 1 • :~ s..e:-,i,2J • PVC s IE-2&.lll l a ,_ ---s-----~---s--I I .,J;,ll;J«il?E"!!' 36 I Jo: NORTH4THSTREET I ,: ~...._.,I O . 0 I .. icc,,,cNClt"•Jl-27 ~ ... J. 1 , .JS~ --1 ~ oe· 19"(_ ~ ,: I l I I" CtN. s IC•lt.o ~ I I i~ :1t•:M1..''." _y: .. !"'.C0:S 11 ":::-: I ·«us· -1---<---~ ----5--.:_ = mrl L I l"Cll'ICw1t-J1ll ~~ ,I., ---D-4---1,1 -f~t_-it-nn.. '.·.cc,,icwc•lll.l'G ui .. · I .. ·.· .. I ,: m5w !IOI I -I -."15 ..... ----S------I • I ;---~ r-~-----o ..... I I ...... i, !3JIIICl.1111ASS I + I ---i--".l.--t-1--e.'1-t.i---•-~---•-----•-I---•-----"'---• -, -~ I J -, ·---l!ffllji'(\, 1 --._..~°*'~_.,,t.,--_....;;t.,_.._..j,_.,,r,;.~_.._.,,t,;_..,.-_.._.,,t,.:;.:;._;.~.;:_;_;::=_ :_-;:=-:::-;~~;=~--~~-=~;_~;.:-;.=~;_..-:_;--..:~L"-c=-•-';-~--~- '" I -• .,~ 'c"' •::::::~~ ,, I .,... ·-' I ' , , • DECK 1 ·1· -, -' , --' ,,,,,,,,,,,,,_,,_,, ' i• ' Jj' ,-111;_,f---if,. Sft"8 1104 -;r-: ~ I .li !!' --I s-Ill' --u.» IT Cll"P Nl[•21.4.J 12· Cll"P S l[•Zl.0 """". Sl'C8 222~ --~17 If" CPI' N IC•Jl.,7 12" CP9 E IC-31.47 12" Cll"P S IC•lU7 ·•-• ~---~ I •-I ::... ~-l"CWNEI[• --A',(:N I• ~ ------I " "" • ----0 H ~ f"F•l7.l1 I ---- 1 I : ; . 1100, ... z.n z ___ --~ I I ii j ! -· ~-· -I 1 :J\·; j i-;::..------, -··~ -•---: I S I I '•-· •-•-• I -----l ,o'eAA"''° Ii!: .I ' i ' • ' ,. ' , l I ,a !i!:' i/"" -· =t ,_ -" ' ~~ :; '1 I /// ~..,_ I -------i !;;? I / I ---~ --il&i ii I ' -' ----:::,; -I -""~""'" -------I 1 11 I I 0 ,.~, .,,_,, / __ ··-_ l,q; "1 //.ti • ... I """"-"'--,,.-. . 1"""~'l';;,» ,~, ti .,,.. ~ • I, I ; ' -•.C.• ,,,.,_ ,Q- -I • _r·•••·''" , , "" ·' . '. ; '···----•.. ,. ' ' ' ' ' • ' -··------<"--., . ' ' ' . ·------' ' . ' 0.:' I I I Y '' ----D-;, ' ---I . \ . . -·--------------- < 1(\ ·1' I I I 'I' I I • I I 'j' I I I I I • I I 11 ··11 al 1 1 \ "/ 1 g;;,:;:, . --•-----• ::---o• :. 1 1 I / / P-----P------o . ' ' ' ' , ____ ---..... ' ' I I • •-•-I I I ---a ---: I --T--f•;lf-: -·oo • 7..;;;, I f-----~ ---: ---' D ' ,. --.. ' ' • . --· I ··--. -· ' ., .... ., ' ' --' . • =--I ' ! ' •ODD -_____ 1 • I I 111 / ... I I DI --W•"'"' . ,.. J I ... I ~ Lti __ lm. """.'"'Dl_ ___ * 1 ·~·· 1 . , ·-... .., ~ ·-·-·1 I_ W-- / I •'""''" .. n., ------. I -I ' •;;-,·• -ono ---·· '--· ., ' . ' ,-, ------C D -' ' ' ', I , _____ -. -' 0, !· OM-•0<~ 0 . ,.., __ , ____ . -•----•, -.. --' ---' I I ______ ,_ ' ,, ------. . ·--' . ' ,. ' ---· ' ' ' .. _ --' . ' . -' . ' . ' ,,_,__ ' . ' ,, ----' ---··' ' ' ~r'. I_ -'I,, o,·;oo'N' 0 ,,. . _ -,'-... .. ··. ,, ',r 'oy,-,.-.c~~. __ ~'--I I I • 1111 I I I 111 I -~-f •--j ~-----"--.>--. .... ',, I '""' __ ,, ----•' o I / -,,L~-·-----. -.;; 11 --, .. , ............. ,.. I 'l«lf .... «I --OM-•O<M / I I -• •. . •• , ---_ --r ,,, s~11100,.. , I J ------:-I .... All#'ET•84.tl ~[DU~-""Ol'I I '· -----....... ,..~ ~ \_ / CCNfEI! I I I ---'+ __,,.__ ' ...... ,,,,, -·"" ·~ V 0 ------'-. ...._ ...._ I 1 ~ r!) I t rJ_--~-™' I ------s ___ .J __ , I I ~. I I I I ,, ~ NOi SUf''<{\1:0 .lf'N 722400-059~ 330 PARK A\o[ N f, . ~-., ---•.. ,'' . I < I us=-"'"--= -SfC8 IMI --311.IJ SlQII Jf78 ..... u.22 I" CONC • lt•»S7 S1tlRt,I 1[[ POI R-3.fMM l""' ··*< N (l) -·-'I ·~·. ! . . I I 1z• CPP W 1[•32.21 " '~ ··-' " ' ~ . ' ,, "' . -' ' ' --.... ' . J ' ' ' •• I ---I • .. '11 ll00f"'*4IUZ ---r--IIOICH I iii ~ e~· ~='::'.;,~-;,;.--··1 I -------I . (Tn>l u l·· -~ ' . ' ---' -I ~:· • --I • 1- -----~ I I I I b,U ~-, S1'C8Z21 ... -Je.2I -:----01 12" CPP ,... l[-32.II ,2· Cll"P C IC-Jz.2l I ; ... ,. I ·,1;;:: I ~·.. ~- ' ·. I 'L I I I --·~ --1--~~--+-- I • n"•ll.51 ltOCF•k.H --"" •-, i ---.... -.. "''IEN 1 ·::. • -·---,,· ... -·----r i J --------.. ' ~::., '""""·" --. --. -. -,-, r . ·--· i :I. S"ES~ET3=._ ·----·--·-VI c .. -!:.--j' ! ro21ifffT ~ I A TAC<lMA • SEATilE • SPOKNE • "fRI.CITES 2215 Nor1h 30th ser.., Sulla 300 Tacoma. WA 9840 253.383.2-W Ta t53.313.2572 ,o1.11 -..u.-Mll ~ """' SARTORI EDUCATION CENTER RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 403 7112 SOt/fl-112411-f STREET SEAT11.£.WAN17MUO """ """"" EXECUTIVE OIAE.CTOR FACIJTES & OPERATIONS ....... 2,..,, .• ~~ /' / F'J;9R\!AA'I' .N. ~ o./.1,1/IOH ' ~~ iJ ==·---"' !~ 1.::::,: ...... :. .......... ..:... ? A------- h,, ______ _ h, ______ _ ,t ______ _ lwimlli. """'-""" BOUNDARY& TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY ~~~ TI> .. _...... 2 2 of 3 Sh"t• ! I ' af "w l ii I 11 I I I " '• s I I • a~~ !!i ;a C) !:j r'li ~ :Ii, "< "ll ~ ;!: ~ C'j \ \ ! ,~ ... !> I), l ~.ll'li l • ' .e•,I • I ~ ; ffl=l:j ! 1;1,& ~ • i ~ II • I • ... 1 • s I ~~ IEJ ~ "' r f i • n ., :,: :; 0 i i= 0 113 t ~f I r C") c:: i iL ~ Q~ S! n ~ ~~ .~ u ,~ =,,i:. a •• I ;!!o .~ • Qz si::1~ . ;I z i-I! I . 9 I .. 0 i ... d ~ ./ffi SCALE: 1••20'-0" u ,u ,u 40' ~ '·i .\ I ::I\ ---~---~----4------- t""'' "----·""'-·;,.,-". . , .......... ;,~~-----""'-· . -·· ·----~--=-:~---'· -~--,";'·""--::;·-'''·~---· ----~-----~ ... "" ,, .. .. , .. , ,._ .,/\'\ ----~ '-1 --:::::::1·1 ) . l i :5 ··oi·· ~~ z w tl w 'w Q ffi9a.. ····~~g .. -!,,.o :lea..~~ r • + r =-B-;; H~ CHAINLINK --"I -· ··?l- .t;; ~~ .. " ;, _. T~--.. , -~ Ce •• ···--------0,, BUS LOAD / UNLOAD ~ f!: GARDEN AVENUE NORTH 14 TOTAL BUS PARKING SPACES ~ ,_ (11 ruu-sizc 81.JSCS ANO J SHORT BUSES/VANS) :r ~ . . . ,~~ !~ -.---1 ---J iul 11 I I l I I I I I 1 I I I l/liPtjt,~~-HT. 22 PARKING STAf..l.S ~ J~. r, I /-1~" I rl I I I J -P~\"i;~~ ."/ I tle:w ,o· FIERIM{l£ff ' PARKING LOT LAND$CAPE Ni;w 8' SlDfWALK NEW II~ WIDE ;TREET FfjONTACE I-~: I-~ u,I i!: I "'& i!:~ a: ~ DOST PUBLIC TRAHSlT STOPS I I I / .I \ I I I "''" fi[U) I 140· * 2so· 1 I I I \ I · / L.J '-+/ I I I I I I r--J """'"''f" ;co,ss L __________ _L __ _ I I . I I I I I L --1 I I I I L __ 1 -_ _J I ···-1 . 3-STORY ELEMEl'ffARY , SCHOOLBUILOING l9.9J3 ·'Sf·"'iii-iG rOO#R1R1·· 79,000 rqTAL Sf ALL f\OOffS; ~~±~~-=:;,~;;~~+;._;±r~~-~:~~i I ~ ~-~=:-~.)~ .. iJ:.l._ •. \J.'..' I '-,..~ \ : /'.'"T~ '· .. J".._._._..r:_._.---1:~------~--'7~"TV'tf:•> , __ .... , __ .... , __ .... " , ..... _ .... PARK AVENUE NORTH ~ w ~~ ~~~ :I: • l:11--i!,~ ····---~~~ zv; ~"'~ z 1 r-... ---"'··-c.l(..___.,,,,,,.,,, .... =--... , ,,,,,,___ '"" ,.,_£) ,., 1 1 r<''... . .. · ;'.l' ... .. , . .. ,,.....,.,.,...-···· i ~ A , SITE PLAN_ 10' HT SCREEN WAU __ ,.. ~i i -:;;.x,26' J®YQ.'E.l ·R£rusc ARU fliTH e· H"(?'Sdie:ltN Aftl_D..).!)"--a.t ... ,.RtiOF )jt . 'J...--211· ·······+·l·::·26'·.:..;,~ " ~ i t-tc;~ •.•.•.·.J·--~ ·..;., f EXIST PUBLIC ....... IB~SI! ~.!«?:':' ... f\·· ,j} -!~: ~--,,s ~-···: ... , ----··-· . ·:-\. · .. -,J r;; r I: It~ :,: w . 1-l : . a: ' ~ ·1 ~ ,l,~,1 0 SlR~T FRON "1 .. NE'f{ 8' t sioqwALk j JJ" NEW 10' '0£ PERIMETER tOT ~AHOSC, ~= .! / I ·1 : . j :; ; !j l 1' 1 fl~ I'·<. ~-···- ,,._ 1~f-1Sffft ~· ... 20/M! ... '" '" '" "' ,,.. '" .. , 2stofies 2"*>11l"S 36~et """ 2• f~et "" "' LOT COVERAGE ANAL Y.$15 TOTAL SITE LOT COYERAG£: TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACES: 229,1196.1! Sf 139,357 Sf MAIN BULlDING CO\-£RAG£; 1ST FL: 2ND fl.: JJ,9JJ SF 23,626 Sf JRO FL: 21,382 SF TOTAL 78,941 SF OUTDOOR ST0AAG£ CO-.t:AAGE: 120 Sf LA_NDSCAPE ANALYSIS 9107 TOTAL LANQSCAPE OFT-SITE: TOTAL LANDSCAPE ON-SITI:: 75,277 TOTAL PARKING LOT LANOSCAP£: 11.645 INTERIOR: 4.782 PERIMETER: 6,863 PARKING ANALYSIS PARl<ING STALLS REOO BY COOE: (I PER £t.lPLO'l'IT) TOTAL PARKING STALLS PRO'JIDCD: STANOARO (9'X20.) COMPACT (9'X16') Ca.lPACT (8.5X16') ADA (9')(20') LEGEND omJJ PEDESTRIAN WALJ(WAVS r~ FIRE ACCESS ~ LANDSCAPE AREAS = CJ GflASS 60 " " ' " • \./>.:_::\ SOFT SURFACE PLAY AREAS EIIJ CONCRETE S10£WALJ( -<> SIT£ / BUILDING ACCESS ANO TRAFf"IC FLOW ;:i j; * t. OUEUl~G LOCATIONS __,..... 6' HT CHAIN UNI< FENCE -----D£~CAT10N LINE Sf Sf Sf Sf Sf ,..,,;,.;,. -------EXISTING PROPERTY LINE ••· Smc.£T C£NTERUNE r::. 1 , /-..... , I + I ,...__/ [)(!STING TREES TO 8E SAVED ANO PROTECTED PUD Submittal ~ ~ ~ ~ en~ ::J~ :i..... ~ ~ 0) (]) ....., ~ 0, ~l 0:: ' \.:J t; i 0 0 0 .c ~ C s C ~ z "' I:;:,, vi u l!LJl z <( ti 0 0 .c u (I) ~ f ~ E ~ iii ·c ~ c'1 -· Job No.: ~-~ .. ~.!'f: .. - .. .. ,; 1: .,; ,. j' ":~ r .. ,. " ;: " ,. •• !: !: i:; ::: i l I z !I i ·~ I ... :;; &12Wll!~~ 21807.00 ~ .. NH ····:· o.· ····--_o.i.i.i:_~-.--- Site Plan L100 "l ED z lo " ':\C: , ,; : :rn jdv:>SoN~ 101··· 'N\)ll:IV4 1:1~3Nlij]d f++?Ht-/ _jJ\ ~Out.; ,Ol}AJN: l fl ' .(". J:t::~l~' f : t i >nV~30IS 1' ':i 30W .P> M3N dnOl:l9N915:l0Nv'V'lS13M LSOB6 lfM UO!Ul'll 'N lnutAlf UlfUV!) S~t 1004:is i<Jeiuewe13 µo~es P!JJS!O 1004:,g UOJU8H C: ~ ., a. l'l .. .,, ~ ... a ~ ...J u e < North Renton Neighborhood Association PO Box 326 Renton, WA 98057 Angie Laulainen 314 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 9805/ 7 Debbie Natelson 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit B Renton, WA 98057 Jessica Roach 132 Pelly Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Mike O'Donin 423 Pelly Ave N Renton, WA 98055 Neil Sheesley 809 N 2nd St Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Sandy Smith 336 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Shelby Smith 524 Burnett Ave N Renton. WA 98057 / Akane Yamaguchi 1008 N Riverside Dr Renton, WA 98057 Beth Palmer 114 Wells Ave S Renton, WA 98057 Dolores Haves 326 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Kathleen Booher 809 N 2nd St Renton, WA 9805 7 Renton. WA 98057 Pamela Thomas 341 Meadow Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Rick Stracke / I Renton School District No. 403 7812 S 124th St Seattle. WA 98178 Sarah & Tim Bishop 222 Burnett Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Wvman Dobson 821 N 1st St Renton, WA 98057 Alison Monges 221 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057-5612 BRIAN & MARY TWIDT 234 GARDEN AVE N RENTON, WA 98057 Genie Chase 227 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 9805 7 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30th St, 300 ~ Tacoma. WA C/ S;' G/ 0 ~ Renton, WA 98057 Paul Rolinger 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit B Renton, WA 9805 7 Rochelle Krebs 121 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Scott Rice 345 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 ~ ' (J LAND USE HEARING SIGN-IN SHEET Sartori Elementary School/LUAlG-000692, CUP-H, PPUD I NAME \ r r {{\ Gv11l!~ ~ /?t ()) )lJ0111)A) IJ\(({ I-:°_ 1>:±a~\ fv 6-A 1c:,Y Iv .ntJA-h4r) ' November 8, 2016, 11:00 AM PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY ADDRESS Phone # with area code (including City & Zip) (optional) (~O/L Jo·-, h1Ji JJt/J;,. l!e.1: ~v I ' '60L, N V\\Jt(SI~<'. R-e<1:tQ\ ~~s-f-fi'°t>Jnl.(.) fA;c _ . IV; . -I Email (optional) \ • ·~ tJ Sartori Elementary School Party of Record Request North Renton Neighborhood Association September 15, 2016 Carpenter's Hall Name G--t+· i l Vc1-/ V\11-{ r -AkJ\-N f_ Yh-M+t-G L) CH L . M a_.r_l,j \ w 1 & l Address I I y l,U k'. il s A-v r s ~v\+CI\J wA --{xos7 l CO '3 N R.1 Ve, std€. Dr Re:,1t)V\ Vvf!r.-qso ,;;7 2 > y C..-0-.~ ct c "\ 14111:. _,v i)'( -t'. 0.·t C •, CU;'t S' l ------Renton 0 Email blpc1 /rnfl c_' (1>,r<'t ra<f. v;f o~k.Al/\E'.. ~(ct,.,":_J4c hi i C::) °J ·'" ,,. i ( 0 i/\,'j t t;..._5 \:'\ ~\ L) ct~ oc; 8 f VV\ 5 '1 r L C••I '> i 'De: lon2:::s l{c::c{ f:' s <~ Z:(p 6ct.rtl1't1-/1-J(:' ,U q}1~>-? cJQJ 1.2..,V)c:i_~ e.S ~ I ~ W).S/1, Cd)i'Y\.. ,l Sl. I( lt~L I ~:)Cd 1·~/, ', .L ~\ \~c:, 1 V• s-tt_ '~'"' rJ c, "'' >r{, ,;_("· ( ( ~ L-(l{ (\Cl ('~ fi l ·p ( ,', \(,, ~--·~')c.)( r ,f ' /..Arif O'f /J!'/fi'! tft 5 ,1v, 'J../1 -(' ~ 'L, .)LJ ri .S-f.·r.·-+ __ J v<(i7'~y· . 1>--ic.lln·.r,,,.1e _ f", A .. 'i'.JO.fft ('C.-ri/u,, Sei,k)!r, l).l z Ill 3 Cl) )> a. a. ~ Cl) Ill Ill m 3 Ill -· - z 0, 3 11) )> a. a. ""' 11) Ill Ill m 3 0, -· - z Q.I 3 ti) )> a. a. -, ti) VI VI m 3 Q.I -· - Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC January 25, 2017 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30 1h St, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Subject: Hearing Examiner's Final Decision upon Reconsideration RE: Sartori Elementary School (LUA-16-000692) Dear Ms. Klein: Enclosed please find the Hearing Examiner's Final Decision upon Reconsideration dated January 24, 2017. I can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, ~ ,µ; Jas n A. Seth, CMC City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Jennifer Cisneros, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov i ,# I· \ .,.e , 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: Sartori Elementary School Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Conditional Use ) ) ) FINAL DECISION UPON ) RECONSIDERATION ) ) ) LUA 16-000692, PPUD, CU-H ) --------------~) A request for reconsideration was filed by Angela Laulainen on December 12, 2016. Reconsideration is granted in part by modification of Conditions No. 3 and 26 of the Final Decision in the above- captioned matter. As noted at the end of this decision, Condition No. 3 is revised to provide that the covered play area shall be set back a minimum of 43 feet from the property line as proposed by the applicant in Ex. 30. As further noted at the end of this decision, Condition No. 26 is revised to provide that the monitoring plan and monitoring plan results for off-site queuing and parking be subject to public review and comment prior to any final decisions made by City staff on monitoring and mitigation adequacy. R-1. R-2. R-3. R-4. R-5. R-6. R-7. R-8. Reconsideration Exhibits Email Request for Reconsideration from Angela Laulainen dated December 12, 2016. December 19, 2016 Order on Reconsideration Request Applicant response dated December 28, 2016. City response dated December 22, 2016 .. Nancy Monahan response dated December 29, 2016. Akane Yamaguchi response dated December 30, 2016. Email string ending January 3, 2017 where examiner grants extension for response/reply to January 10, 2017 Email reply from Angela Laulainen dated January 9, 2017 PUD and CU Recon Decision -I , 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 In its response, the Applicant referenced a transportation report dated October, 2016 on the basis that the report was referenced in the SEPA checklist. The reference is not sufficient to serve as admission into the administrative record. Since the Applicant did not submit the October, 2016 version of the traffic report prior to the close of the hearing, it and any references to its content in Recon Ex. 3 are stricken from the record. Similarly, any comments made by Ms. Laulainen based upon her experience with the noise levels of ball walls and covered play areas in her exhibits are also stricken because they constitute new evidence submitted after the close of the hearing. Findings of Fact Procedural: I. Chronology. A Final Decision in the above captioned matter was issued by the Hearing Examiner on November 27, 2016 and mailed out by the City of Renton on November 29, 2016. Angela Laulainen submitted a Request for Reconsideration on December 12, 2016. A prehearing order setting response and reply deadlines was issued on December 19, 2016. The response/reply deadlines were extended to January 10, 2017 by email order dated January 3, 2017 in response to a request for extension by a party of record who did not receive notice of Ms. Laulainen' s request for reconsideration. The record was closed as of January I 0, 2017. 2. Reconsideration Request. Ms. Laulainen's requested reconsideration on two points: (I) she wanted traffic monitoring required by Condition No. 26 of the Final Decision to be conducted by an independent third party such as the City of Renton as opposed to the applicant's traffic consultant; and (2) she wanted the location of a proposed ball wall to be changed in order to prevent noise impacts to her residence. Substantive: 3. Heffron Transportation. In her reconsideration request, Ms. Laulainen asserts errors in the initial traffic study done by Heffron Transportation for the proposal. These errors include assigning an inaccurate speed limit to neighboring streets, improperly designating one street as a through street and allegedly using inappropriate trip generation estimates. These errors clearly should not have occurred, but they do not rise to the level of disqualifying Heffron Transportation from doing a traffic monitoring report. However, in order to add an added layer of accuracy and to provide for neighborhood peace of mind, Condition No. 26 will be revised to require staff to submit Heffron's proposed traffic monitoring plan to concerned neighbors for input and also to provide the results of the study to neighbors for input. 4. Ball Wall. Ms. Laulainen's ball wall concerns are a problem because she didn't bring them to the examiner's attention until after the close of the hearing. Apparently some comments were made via the environmental review process, but those concerns were not submitted into the administrative record of the subject permit applications. The hearing examiner doesn't have enough information to require the relocation of the ball wall as suggested by Ms. Laulainen PUD and CU Recon Decision -2 , 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 because the impacts of such a relocation are unknown. Moving the covered play area to the west side of the playfield could block most of the light from getting to the adjoining class room windows. Moving the covered play area anywhere else on the site could impair the effectiveness and efficiency of on-site parking and circulation. Further, there is no evidence admitted into the record that establishes that noise from the ball wall would be significantly adverse, especially with the added separation proposed by the Applicant in its power point presentation admitted as Ex. 30. It is arguably reasonable to conclude that a covered play area with a ball wall could potentially create significant adverse noise impacts, even with the 43-foot setback currently proposed by the Applicant. Had this issue been raised during the hearing or in a letter admitted into the administrative record, the examiner could have required further information from the Applicant and perhaps required a noise monitoring plan that establishes compliance with City decibel levels. However, at this point the record is closed 1 and it would not be legally defensible to require a noise monitoring plan or any other significant mitigation without giving the Applicant the opportunity to submit evidence that such mitigation is unnecessary. However, the conditions of approval will be revised to make clear that the 43-foot setback proposed by the Applicant in Ex. 30 will be the minimum setback required for the covered play area. Conclusions of Law I. Consideration of SEPA Issues. In its response. the City asserts that ball wall impacts cannot be addressed because they were addressed in SEPA review. This position is contrary to case law. Impacts addressed by SEPA review can be independently addressed in the application of permit review criteria if those impacts are relevant to addressing those permitting criteria. See Quality Products, Inc. v. Thurston County, 139 Wn. App. 125 (2007). Ball wall noise impacts are still pertinent to the subject permit review as numerous perrnit criteria requJre a determination that the proposal will not adversely affect neighboring properties. 2. Reconsideration Approved. Ms. Laulainen has successfully demonstrated that the Hearing Examiner erred in failing to require the added mitigation identified in Finding of Fact No. 3 and 4 of this reconsideration decision. The added reliability imposed in the revisions added by Finding of Fact No. 3 and the added ball wall separation proposed by the Applicant as identified in Finding of Fact No. 4 are necessary to reasonably ensure that the proposal will not create significant adverse noise and traffic impacts on neighboring properties. As noted in several Conclusions of Law in the Final Decision, a finding of no significant adverse impacts, 1 State law strictly prohibits new evidence from being considered after the close ofa hearing. RCW 36.70B.050(2) 23 provides that city and county land use permit review procedures can only authorize one open record hearing per project permit application or consolidated project pennit application. An open record hearing is defined as the 24 exhibits and testimony presented to address a permit application. See RCW 36.70B.020(3). The purpose of this requirement is to provide for a more efficient permitting system by preventing decision makers from holding one 25 new hearing after another ad infinitum as new factual issues occur and to prevent public confusion about when to participate in an on-going series of public hearings. See RC\V 36.70B.010. For these reasons, once a hearing is 26 closed, any new evidence would be considered a prohibited second hearing. PUD and CU Recon Decision -3 , 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 which includes noise and traffic impacts, is necessary to the conclusion that the proposal complies with all applicable permitting criteria. Decision The Final Decision of the above-captioned matter is supplemented with the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law of this decision. To the extent that there is any conflict between the findings and conclusions of this Decision Upon Reconsideration and the Final Decision, the findings and conclusions of this decision shall prevail. In addition, Conditions No. 3 and 26 of the Final Decision are revised as follows: 3. The applicant shall submit revised site plans that locate the covered play area structure in an area compliant with the 15-foot minimum rear setback. The plans shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. The setback shall be a minimum of 43 feet from the property line as proposed by the Applicant in Ex. 30. 26. The queuing and parking demand components of the transportation management plan required by Condition No. 20 of the project MONS shall be subject to City staff approval prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The queuing and parking demand components shall be subject to one school year monitoring plans scheduled for the first school year with compliance objectives of no off-site queuing and no off-site parking except for facilities owned by the District or subject to a shared or leased parking agreement. The parking monitoring plan shall include at a minimum monitoring of the three evening events planned for the school year that are expected to draw the largest after-school audiences. The queuing monitoring plan shall include a minimum of five school days ( each a different day of the week) during afternoon pick-up. The results of the monitoring plan shall be submitted to the City within 30 days of completion of monitoring plan implementation. The City may require additional parking and queuing mitigation as necessary to mitigate any off-site queuing or parking (outside of applicant owned or leased/shared parking facilities) identified from the required monitoring. The monitoring plan required bv this condition shall be subject to review and comment by persons who have requested notice of the monitoring plan prior to approval by the City. The results of the monitoring plan shall also be subject to review and comment by persons who have requested notice of the monitoring plan. All persons who would like notice of the monitoring plan shall submit a written request with Mathew Herrera, project planner. within ten days of the mailing of this decision. PUD and CU Recon Decision -4 ' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 DA TED this 24th day of January, 2017. City of Renton Hearing Examiner Appeal Right and Valuation Notices RMC 4-8-0SO(G) provides that the final decision of the Hearing Examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-l 10(E)(l4) requires appeals of the Hearing Examiner's decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the Hearing Examiner's decision. No additional rights of reconsideration are authorized as reconsideration requests have already been considered. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -7th floor, (425) 430-6510. Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program ofrevaluation. PUD and CU Recon Decision -5 January 25, 2017 STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING CERTIFICATE OF MAILING ) ) § ) JASON A. SETH, City Clerk for the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that he is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter. That on the 25th day of January, 2017, at the hour of 4:30 p.m. your affiant duly mailed and placed in the United States Post Office at Renton, King County, Washington, by first class mail Hearing Examiner's Final Decision Upon Reconsideration dated January 24, 2017, RE: Sartori Elementary School -LUA-16-000692 to the attached parties of record. --. ,,,.,,,,~,::-~•11 Nor Renton Neighbor d Angie Laulainen 314 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98055 77 ~t~kf)l-~R11!:iW:1kH&tt~lllt1~] Debbie Natelson 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit B Renton, WA 98057 Genie Chase 227 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30th St, 300 Tacoma, WA CJ 'l,l-\0.> Nancv Monahan 325 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 -ilf'~l£1li&li!liOO!!iMi'll)'.-!i,l ~4,q&~-,Wf®~~'Afr¥1,/¥@Jr~~%;tm t II Paul Rolinger 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit B Renton. WA 98057 Rochelle Krebs 121 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057 !Ill! Scott Rice 345 Meadow Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Akane Yamaguchi 1008 N Riverside Dr Renton. WA 98057 ~~--Jffl~\tIY81hfi~"5faftf;4:~ Beth Palmer 114 Wells Ave S Renton. WA 98057 Diane Dobson. 806 N Riverside Dr Renton. WA 98057 Jessica Roach 132 Pelly Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Mike O'Donin 423 Pelly Ave N Renton, WA 98055 Neil Sheesley 809 N 2nd St Renton. WA 98057 il!!-,•1 1m-~l<lfwii\!~-~Gj,! ~Wti!Hh~"" ill~.$.f~iFfflL,.b .. }!t.':SB.ftJ,-1 Randy Matheson 300 SW 7th St Renton. WA 98057 '1'1Wtt.-Jll'l)!ifu'.H~liffi'.W,1l>lf!W•Yol' •'!lilfrt!·•W·'i'Jia&-e %2'£~m:ili**~~"fit:It~t¥>~llis?Jx~t Sandv Smith 336 Meadow Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Shelbv Smith 524 Burnett Ave N Renton. WA 98057 ~·B.1i:-i,f0ttf~t~~i~~ Alison Monges 221 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057-5612 r::11~~1;flttJ1l~?JJ%1fw~1~m111trifltitf:~1fJ£ BRIAN & MARYTWIDT 234 GARDEN AVE N RENTON. WA 98057 Dolores Haves 326 Garden Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Kathleen Booher 809 N 2nd St Renton, WA 98057 Mr. & Mrs. Poquette 328 Garden Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Pamela Thomas 341 Meadow Ave N Renton. WA 98057 11:%{1\!ill!!'.&._iiJl-Rl)W %)t'f\.iA'mW!IWitl~t'MSr~~i'is:f: Rick Stracke Renton School District No. 403 7812 S 124th St Seattle. WA 98178 Sarah & Tim Bishop 222 Burnett Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Wvman Dobson 821 N 1st St Renton. WA 98057 January 10, 2017 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30th St, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Subject: Laulainen's Response to Comments Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC RE: Sartori Elementary School (LUA-16-000692) Dear Ms. Klein: Enclosed please find Laulainen's Response to Comments dated January 9, 2017. I can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, ,,,__....../{. {tw Jason A. Seth, CMC City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning 1 Planning Director Vanessa D0lbee 1 Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Jennifer Cisneros, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, (425) 430-6510 I Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov Cynthia Moya From: Sent: To: Subject: January 9, 2017 Enkeli <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Monday, January 09, 2017 7:25 PM Cynthia Moya; Jason Seth Response to Comment Regarding New Sartori Elementary School (LUA 16-000692, PPUD, CU-H) Mr. Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 SUBJECT: Response to Comments submitted following the Request for Reconsideration New Sartori Elementary School (LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H) Dear Hearing Examiner: I am writing this letter in response to comments received regarding my Request for Reconsideration of your recent decision for the New Sartori Elementary School. I have organized my responses into two sections: first to address comments regarding the traffic study and second to respond to comments related to location of the covered play area and the ball wall. I have included the specific comments in bold/italic to which my responses are referring. The source of each comment is also noted after each quotation. My responses follow each quote in a regular type font. Comments Regarding Traffic Monitoring "The applicant's transportation report (Exhibit 11) was prepared by a Washington State licensed civil engineer, thereby meeting the qualified professional criterion for a traffic study set forth in Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-8-120D.20." Matthew Herrera, City of Renton It is evident in the responses by the City of Renton and Renton School District to my letter of Reconsideration that the traffic study was sufficient and acceptable for the stated requirements of this project. I further acknowledge that this traffic study met the qualified professional criterion for a traffic study set forth in Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-8-120D.20. "The Reconsideration letter cites several "errors" in the Draft Transportation Report. These comments are very similar as those provided during the SEPA comment period and prior to the Transportation Report revisions." Matt F eldmeyer, Renton School District These errors were cited in the Reconsideration letter as examples of the lack of first hand knowledge of the neighborhood. I acknowledge that these errors have been corrected in the final report and recognize that the final report did not include the vehicular counts from existing uses. "It [the traffic report] recommended mitigation measures to address these potential impacts and determined that, with these measures, the project would not result in significant adverse impacts. The roadway network 1 can accommodate the project an. · ~Id continue to operate at levels that t the City's operational standards." Matt Feldmeyer, Re, .. v .. School District Some potential impacts are not improved by these mitigation measures. For example, adding curb bulbs at Garden may improve pedestrian safety, but further complicates the traffic problems that occur at the intersection of Garden and North 4th Street. The mitigation measure of adding curb bulbs onto Garden A VEN at North 4th street will make it impossible for buses to handle the corner. The Renton School District bus which currently transports students home from Hazelwood Elementary and drops them off on Garden A VEN already has difficulty making this turn. This bus moves out to the second lane on North 4th street prior to making this turn. I am uncertain how the New Sartori Elementary School buses will be able to make this corner if there are additional curb bulbs in place without disrupting the parent drivers who are also going through the intersection and who are moving over into the far left lane to prepare to enter the vehicle drop off loop. It is this type of oversight of actual traffic patterns that raised concerns about the traffic study. "Further, Condition #26 requires the City of Renton to review and approve the monitoring report, and in our opinion this requirement provides sufficient oversight." Matt Feldmeyer, Renton School District I agree that Condition #26 of the Hearing Examiner's decision is very appropriate and begins to address the broader perspective of traffic concerns that were brought forward. In order to further address this broader perspective, I will take the broader perspective of traffic concerns to the City of Renton Transportation Division for additional consideration. Comments Regarding the Location of the Ball Wall "The modified location was presented at the hearing in the applicant's presentation (Exhibit 30), although the specific distances were not called out in the presentation or site plan." Matt Feldmeyer, Renton School District Since this modified location was first presented at the Hearing (Exhibit 30) its new location should be open for reconsideration. The fact that Exhibit #30 was new evidence, including specific distances which had not been called out in the site plan, and presented at the Hearing should open the door to reconsideration of the modified location. Because this was presented as a part of this Hearing, this location is a valid point for which I am asking for reconsideration. "The play area is purposely located adjacent to the existing residences on Garden A VEN so that lower scale elements are near residences ... " Matt Feldmeyer, Renton School District This covered play structure IS a higher element and it IS located across from the residences on Garden A VE N. The large area to the west of the play field (between the playfield and the school building) is designated as the soft surface play area. There is another area between the covered play area and the school designated as the hard surface play area. The covered play area with the ball wall, which contains a physical building structure and is a higher scale element, could be moved to the current location of the soft surface play area, between the school and the play field; and the soft surface play area, which is a lower scale element, could be relocated adjacent to the existing residences on Garden A VEN in the current location of the covered play area. Or as another option, the covered play area could be located furthest west abutting the school building swapping places with the hard surface play area which could be placed closer to Garden AVE N. To move either the soft surface play area or the hard surface play area adjacent to Garden A VEN would more accurately align with the school districts statement that "lower scale elements are near residences". 2 .,; The School District has not presen a different location. As I noted, th use as a play area. ny evidence or reason why the cover re several locations on the site alread. ay area could not be moved to signaled for the same type of "The field location orients the more open/green areas of the school near the residences". Matt Feldmeyer, Renton School District The location of the play field is not in question. The current location of the covered play structure including the ball wall does not provide a "more open/green area" near the residences, but in fact places a higher scale element without green areas near residences and without sufficient landscaping buffer. "The district responded by moving the play area further ... " and "The modified location was presented at the hearing in the applicant's presentation (Exhibit 30), although the specific distances were not called out in the presentation or site plan." Matt Feldmeyer, Renton School District The modified location shows that only a portion of the ball wall was moved, the majority of the ball wall is in the same location. It was not relocated, but shifted only 25 feet further than required by City setback standards. In addition, there is still insufficient landscaping barrier between the covered play area and the residences on Garden which leaves an open corridor for sound to travel. "These residences have been across from this school for decades, and the original play area and field did not present a problem for them. However, the new playground design submitted by the Renton School District will substantially change the character of the neighborhood." Nancy Monahan, Party of Record in attendance at the Hearing At the old Sartori School, the hard surface area where the basketball hoop was located was behind the school with the school building providing a buffer between that area and the residences on Garden AVE N. "The District believes that the noises generated by the ball wall and playground are typical of any school use and determined that it didn't qualify as an adverse impact ... " Matt Feldmeyer, Renton School District Renton School District states a belief but has not provided any facts or evidence to substantiate their belief that the noise from the ball wall is typical of any school use. As a school teacher of students in 4th through 8th grade, I have first hand knowledge of play yards and personal experience around schools and children at play. My experience is that a ball wall is the loudest part of a playground and is not "typical" playground n01se. I am not adverse to hearing children at play but am very familiar with what the noise is like from a ball wall. "The development and ongoing operation of the school will be required to comply with the City's noise level regulations set forth in RMC 8-7-3." Matthew Herrera, City of Renton Noise from a ball wall is louder than typical playground noise and would qualify as a public disturbance under RMC 8-7-3 Section F. The noise is a loud and raucous sound that is frequent, repetitive and continuously emanating from the covered play structure. This ordinance in Renton City Code refers to the nature of the noise rather than just the decibel level. RMC 8-7-3 prohibits "unreasonable noise that disturbs another". Under RMC 8-7-3 Section A, neighbors may call to report a dog barking incessantly as a public nuisance. The sounds 3 from a ball wall in this location wi as loud if not louder than a barking , · n this same location and also would constitute a public disturban~~. RMC 8-7-3: City of Renton Ordinance 8-7-3 PUBLIC DISTURBANCE, NOISES: It is unlawful for any person knowingly to cause or make, or for any person in possession of property knowingly to allow to originate from the property, unreasonable noise that disturbs another. Noises constituting a public nuisance shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following sounds or combinations of sounds: (Ord. 5196, 2-13-06) F. The creation by use of a musical instrument, whistle, sound amplifier, record player, stereo, or other device capable of producing or reproducing sound of loud or raucous sounds which emanate frequently, repetitively, or continuously from any building, structure or property located within a rural or residential district, such as sounds originating from a band session, social gathering, stereo. It is stated that a public nuisance shall include but not be limited to the devices listed in the ordinance. A ball wall with repetitive bouncing balls is capable of producing and reproducing loud and raucous sounds which emanate frequently, repetitively, and continuously from the structure of the covered play area during the elementary recesses which are the social gathering times for the elementary students. The sounds from a ball wall will be as loud if not louder than a barking dog and also would constitute a public disturbance. I assert that the school district by placing the ball wall in this location knowingly will cause unreasonable noise to originate from their property which will be disturbing to residents on Garden A VEN. It would be much easier to move the location of the ball wall at this time rather than to make changes after the school opens in order to comply with the City's noise level regulations. "An appeal of the SEPA Determination was not filed." Matt Feldmeyer, Renton School District The MDNS stated at the end of the document "There is no agency appeal of this MDNS ". It is now apparent I misunderstood this statement. I had submitted many comments to Renton School District for their SEPA and I did not believe I needed to resend comments for the MDNS. Based on the presentations by City and School District officials at the North Renton Neighborhood meeting on September 15th when both processes were presented, I believed that after all comment periods ended, the upcoming Hearing was the appropriate forum to state any further concerns or to ask for any changes. Many neighbors did not understand the process and also thought the Hearing was the next step. This is echoed in Nancy Monahan's comment "I hope that through the Hearing Examiner, my voice, and the voices of my neighbors, can finally be heard." There was no appeal to the SEPA Determination filed because I misunderstood the process. Thank you for the taking the time to consider all comments and concerns. Sincerely, Angela Laulainen, Party of Record 314 Garden A VEN Renton, WA 98057 4 January 10, 2017 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 3Q'h St, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Subject: Laulainen's Response to Comments Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC RE: Sartori Elementary School (LUA-16-000692) Dear Ms. Klein: Enclosed please find Laulainen's Response to Comments dated January 9, 2017. I can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, '{t;(;J Jason A. Seth, CMC City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Jennifer Cisneros, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • (425) 430-6510 I Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov Cynthia Moya From: Sent: To: Subject: January 9, 2017 Enkeli <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Monday, January 09, 2017 7:25 PM Cynthia Moya; Jason Seth Response to Comment Regarding New Sartori Elementary School (LUA 16-000692, PPUD, CU-H) Mr. Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 SUBJECT: Response to Comments submitted following the Request for Reconsideration New Sartori Elementary School (LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H) Dear Hearing Examiner: I am writing this letter in response to comments received regarding my Request for Reconsideration of your recent decision for the New Sartori Elementary School. I have organized my responses into two sections: first to address comments regarding the traffic study and second to respond to comments related to location of the covered play area and the ball wall. I have included the specific comments in bold/italic to which my responses are referring. The source of each comment is also noted after each quotation. My responses follow each quote in a regular type font. Comments Regarding Traffic Monitoring "The applicant's transportation report (Exhibit 11) was prepared by a Washington State licensed civil engineer, thereby meeting the qualified professional criterion for a traffic study set forth in Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-8-120D.20." Matthew Herrera, City of Renton It is evident in the responses by the City of Renton and Renton School District to my letter of Reconsideration that the traffic study was sufficient and acceptable for the stated requirements of this project. I further acknowledge that this traffic study met the qualified professional criterion for a traffic study set forth in Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-8-120D.20. "The Reconsideration letter cites several "errors" in the Draft Transportation Report. These comments are very similar as those provided during the SEPA comment period and prior to the Transportation Report revisions." Matt Feldmeyer, Renton School District These errors were cited in the Reconsideration letter as examples of the lack of first hand knowledge of the neighborhood. I acknowledge that these errors have been corrected in the final report and recognize that the final report did not include the vehicular counts from existing uses. "It [the traffic report] recommended mitigation measures to address these potential impacts and determined that, with these measures, the project would not result in significant adverse impacts. The roadway network 1 can accommodate the project an uld continue to operate at levels that it the City's operational standards." Matt Feldmeyer, Re ... _n School District Some potential impacts are not improved by these mitigation measures. For example, adding curb bulbs at Garden may improve pedestrian safety, but further complicates the traffic problems that occur at the intersection of Garden and North 4th Street. The mitigation measure of adding curb bulbs onto Garden AVE Nat North 4th street will make it impossible for buses to handle the corner. The Renton School District bus which currently transports students home from Hazelwood Elementary and drops them off on Garden A VEN already has difficulty making this turn. This bus moves out to the second lane on North 4th street prior to making this turn. I am uncertain how the New Sartori Elementary School buses will be able to make this comer if there are additional curb bulbs in place without disrupting the parent drivers who are also going through the intersection and who are moving over into the far left lane to prepare to enter the vehicle drop off loop. It is this type of oversight of actual traffic patterns that raised concerns about the traffic study. "Further, Condition #26 requires the City of Renton to review and approve the monitoring report, and in our opinion this requirement provides sufficient oversight." Matt Feldmeyer, Renton School District I agree that Condition #26 of the Hearing Examiner's decision is very appropriate and begins to address the broader perspective of traffic concerns that were brought forward. In order to further address this broader perspective, I will take the broader perspective of traffic concerns to the City of Renton Transportation Division for additional consideration. Comments Regarding the Location of the Ball Wall "The modified location was presented at the hearing in the applicant's presentation (Exhibit 30), although the specific distances were not called out in the presentation or site plan." Matt Feldmeyer, Renton School District Since this modified location was first presented at the Hearing (Exhibit 30) its new location should be open for reconsideration. The fact that Exhibit #30 was new evidence, including specific distances which had not been called out in the site plan, and presented at the Hearing should open the door to reconsideration of the modified location. Because this was presented as a part of this Hearing, this location is a valid point for which I am asking for reconsideration. "The play area is purposely located adjacent to the existing residences on Garden A VEN so that lower scale elements are near residences ... " Matt F eldmeyer, Renton School District This covered play structure IS a higher element and it IS located across from the residences on Garden A VE N. The large area to the west of the play field (between the playfield and the school building) is designated as the soft surface play area. There is another area between the covered play area and the school designated as the hard surface play area. The covered play area with the ball wall, which contains a physical building structure and is a higher scale element, could be moved to the current location of the soft surface play area, between the school and the play field; and the soft surface play area, which is a lower scale element, could be relocated adjacent to the existing residences on Garden A VE N in the current location of the covered play area. Or as another option, the covered play area could be located furthest west abutting the school building swapping places with the hard surface play area which could be placed closer to Garden A VEN. To move either the soft surface play area or the hard surface play area adjacent to Garden A VEN would more accurately align with the school districts statement that "lower scale elements are near residences". 2 , The School District has not present a different location. As I noted, th, use as a play area. ny evidence or reason why the covert> re several locations on the site already ay area could not be moved to . ignated for the same type of "The field location orients the more open/green areas of the school near the residences". Matt Feldmeyer, Renton School District The location of the play field is not in question. The current location of the covered play structure including the ball wall does not provide a "more open/green area" near the residences, but in fact places a higher scale element without green areas near residences and without sufficient landscaping buffer. "The district responded by moving the play area further ... " and "The modified location was presented at the hearing in the applicant's presentation (Exhibit 30), although the specific distances were not called out in the presentation or site plan." Matt Feldmeyer, Renton School District The modified location shows that only a portion of the ball wall was moved, the majority of the ball wall is in the same location. It was not relocated, but shifted only 25 feet further than required by City setback standards. In addition, there is still insufficient landscaping barrier between the covered play area and the residences on Garden which leaves an open corridor for sound to travel. "These residences have been across from this school for decades, and the original play area and field did not present a problem for them. However, the new playground design submitted by the Renton School District will substantially change the character of the neighborhood." Nancy 1l1onahan, Party of Record in attendance at the Hearing At the old Sartori School, the hard surface area where the basketball hoop was located was behind the school with the school building providing a buffer between that area and the residences on Garden AVE N. "The District believes that the noises generated by the ball wall and playground are typical of any school use and determined that it didn't qualify as an adverse impact ... " Matt F eldmeyer, Renton School District Renton School District states a belief but has not provided any facts or evidence to substantiate their belief that the noise from the ball wall is typical of any school use. As a school teacher of students in 4th through 8th grade, I have first hand knowledge of play yards and personal experience around schools and children at play. My experience is that a ball wall is the loudest part of a playground and is not "typical" playground noise. I am not adverse to hearing children at play but am very familiar with what the noise is like from a ball wall. "The development and ongoing operation of the school will be required to comply with the City's noise level regulations set forth in RMC 8-7-3." Matthew Herrera, City of Renton Noise from a ball wall is louder than typical playground noise and would qualify as a public disturbance under RMC 8-7-3 Section F. The noise is a loud and raucous sound that is frequent, repetitive and continuously emanating from the covered play structure. This ordinance in Renton City Code refers to the nature of the noise rather than just the decibel level. RMC 8-7-3 prohibits "unreasonable noise that disturbs another". Under RMC 8-7-3 Section A, neighbors may call to report a dog barking incessantly as a public nuisance. The sounds 3 from a ball wall in this location w· : as loud if not louder than a barking in this same location and also would constitute a public disturbanw. RMC 8-7-3: City of Renton Ordinance 8-7-3 PUBLIC DISTURBANCE, NOISES: It is unlawful for any person knowingly to cause or make, or for any person in possession of property knowingly to allow to originate from the property, unreasonable noise that disturbs another. Noises constituting a public nuisance shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following sounds or combinations of sounds: (Ord. 5196, 2-13-06) F. The creation by use of a musical instrument, whistle, sound amplifier, record player, stereo, or other device capable of producing or reproducing sound of loud or raucous sounds which emanate frequently, repetitively, or continuously from any building, structure or property located within a rural or residential district, such as sounds originating from a band session, social gathering, stereo. It is stated that a public nuisance shall include but not be limited to the devices listed in the ordinance. A ball wall with repetitive bouncing balls is capable of producing and reproducing loud and raucous sounds which emanate frequently, repetitively, and continuously from the structure of the covered play area during the elementary recesses which are the social gathering times for the elementary students. The sounds from a ball wall will be as loud if not louder than a barking dog and also would constitute a public disturbance. I assert that the school district by placing the ball wall in this location knowingly will cause unreasonable noise to originate from their property which will be disturbing to residents on Garden AVE N. It would be much easier to move the location of the ball wall at this time rather than to make changes after the school opens in order to comply with the City's noise level regulations. "An appeal of the SEPA Determination was not filed." Matt Feldmeyer, Renton School District The MDNS stated at the end of the document "There is no agency appeal of this MDNS". It is now apparent I misunderstood this statement. I had submitted many comments to Renton School District for their SEPA and I did not believe I needed to resend comments for the MDNS. Based on the presentations by City and School District officials at the North Renton Neighborhood meeting on September 15th when both processes were presented, I believed that after all comment periods ended, the upcoming Hearing was the appropriate forum to state any further concerns or to ask for any changes. Many neighbors did not understand the process and also thought the Hearing was the next step. This is echoed in Nancy Monahan's comment "I hope that through the Hearing Examiner, my voice, and the voices ofmy neighbors, can finally be heard." There was no appeal to the SEPA Determination filed because I misunderstood the process. Thank you for the taking the time to consider all comments and concerns. Sincerely, Angela Laulainen, Party of Record 314 Garden AVE N Renton, WA 98057 4 ' January 10, 2017 STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING CERTIFICATE OF MAILING ) ) § ) Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC JASON A. SETH, City Clerk for the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that he is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter. That on the 10th day of January, 2017, at the hour of 4:30 p.m. your affiant duly mailed and placed in the United States Post Office at Renton, King County, Washington, by first class mail Laulainen's Repsonse to Comments dated January 9, 2017, RE: Sartori Elementary School -LUA- 16-000692 to the attached parties of record. -,.--;; . J, \ JL· SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this 10th day of January, 2017. Cynthia R. ya Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing in Renton My Commission expires: 8/27/2018 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov North Renton ~'.,bo'.~ od.-- Association r~: ___ I PO Box 6 ?l\.y:\ I Ul Re n, WA 98057 \ Angie Laulainen 314 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98055 Debbie Natelson 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit B Renton, WA 98057 Genie Chase 227 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30th St, 300 Tacoma. WA 9 l:\ LIO 3 Nancy Monahan 325 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Paul Rolinger 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit 8 Renton, WA 98057 Rochelle Krebs 121 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Scott Rice 345 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Akane Yamaguchi 1008 N Riverside Dr Renton. WA 98057 Beth Palmer 114 Wells Ave 5 Renton, WA 98057 Diane Dobson. 806 N Riverside Dr Renton, WA 98057 Jessica Roach 132 Pelly Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Mike O'Donin 423 Pelly Ave N Renton, WA 98055 Neil Sheesley 809 N 2nd St Renton, WA 98057 Randv Matheson 300 SW 7th St Renton, WA 98057 Sandv Smith 336 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Shelby Smith 524 Burnett Ave N Renton, WA 98057 \--'_O,K Alison Monges 221 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057-5612 BRIAN & MARYTWIDT 234 GARDEN AVE N RENTON, WA 9805 7 Dolores Haves 326 Garden Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Kathleen Booher 809 N 2nd St Renton, WA 98057 Mr. & Mrs. Poquette 328 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Pamela Thomas 341 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Rick Stracke Renton School District No. 7812 S 124th St Seattle, WA 98178 Sarah & Tim Bishop 222 Burnett Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Wyman Dobson 821 N 1st St Renton. WA 98057 403 Alison Monges 221 Wells Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Renton. WA 98057-5612 ·, ( k' e ncvlW-0-,\:...~e ·'/"""°'-,:!'-'<-''~'.:\ ~J,~ Angie Laulainen 314 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98055 e ~ ·. e ,...kh _ \@ 'i'~'v,,w.,v-. ~ Debbie Natelson 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit B Renton, WA 98057 Beth Palmer 114 Wells Ave S Renton, WA 98057 Diane Dobson. 806 N Riverside Dr Renton. WA 98057 BRIAN & MARY TWIDT 234 GARDEN AVE N RENTON, WA 98057 Dolores Haves 326 Garden Ave N Renton. WA 98057 e~ 0.1"<01$;:;l-1 ~l,,,_,,\. [u"' Genie Chase 227 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Jessica Roach 132 Pelly Ave N Renton, WA 98057 j-~~~ Kathleen Booher 809 N 2nd St Renton, WA 98057 Lisa Klein AHBL E!l\1'!111Ni1'91!r'11 .-a-W11'FWTii Mike O'Donin Mr. & Mrs. Poquette 423 Pelly Ave N 328 Garden Ave N Renton. WA 98055 Renton. WA 98057 7 Nancv Monahan Neil Sheesley 325 Meadow Ave N 809 N 2nd St Renton, WA 98057 Renton. WA 98057 -f{"'·" I e:\ . r,-io.--,,'~,. ,·, '->~ @l,,J,,-,.A:,\.,"-""' Paul Rolinger Randy Matheson 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit B 300 SW 7th St Renton. WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Rochelle Krebs 121 Wells Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Scott Rice 345 Meadow Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Sandy Smith 336 Meadow Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Shelbv Smith 524 Burnett Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Pamela Thomas 341 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Rick Stracke Renton School District No. 403 7812 S 124th St Seattle. WA 98178 Sarah & Tim Bishop 222 Burnett Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Wvman Dobson 821 N 1st St Renton. WA 98057 January 9, 2017 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30th St, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Subject: Additional Responses Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC RE: Sartori Elementary School (LUA-16-000692) Dear Ms. Klein: Enclosed please find the written comments from Nancy Monahan & Akane Yamaguchi in response to the request for reconsideration submitted by Ms. Laulainen. I can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, &ifi/2 City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Jennifer Cisneros, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov Cynthia Moya From: Sent: To: Subject: Jason Seth Friday, December 30, 2016 8:18 AM Cynthia Moya FW: Sartori School comments for Hearing Examiner Additional comments for the Sartori Request for reconsideration. Please forward to the Hearing Examiner and parties of record. -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 jseth@rentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). -----Original Message----- From: Nancy Monahan [mailto:monahan55@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 8:51 PM To: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: Melissa Hart <MHart@Rentonwa.gov>; Angie Laulainen <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Subject: Sartori School comments for Hearing Examiner I am one of the parties of record present at the recent hearing, and wish to comment further on the Sartori School project. Throughout this entire process, the Renton School District has not been responsive to neighborhood concerns. Also, some people that have previously testified at hearings have mysteriously fallen off the list of parties of record, and are no longer receiving mailings. I hope that through the Hearing Examiner, my voice, and the voices of my neighbors, can finally be heard. 1) Location of the ball wall: I concur with the comments made by Angie Laulainen in her email to the Hearing Examiner dated December 12, 2016. Bringing this level of noise so close to established residences is unacceptable. These residences have been across from this school for decades, and the original play area and field did not present a problem for them. However, the new playground design submitted by the Renton School District will substantially change the character of the neighborhood. A ball wall is a significant noise-generator, and a typical recess schedule will result in a sustained disturbance for neighbors for several hours of the day. Simple design changes could accommodate the neighbors' request to move this feature this to another area that does not create a perpetual noise nuisance. I request that this be made a requirement that the Renton School District revisits their design to come up with something more acceptable to the neighbors who will be impacted the most. 2) Traffic study: I am hoping that the final determination will include a recommendation that traffic patterns be monitored and reviewed for a year, and that an independent, impartial agency, not previously connected with the Renton School District (e.g., 1 not Heffron Transportation) be ap1 id to do that monitoring and reporting. 1ld like to further request that it be stipulated that if such a review and report indicates that neighbors' concerns a boy, traffic patterns around the school are founded, and that congestion and safety problems are noted, that the Renton School District will make the necessary adjustments to mitigate those problems. These two issues have the greatest impact on the livability and property values of our immediate neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration of these concerns. Sincerely, Nancy Monahan 325 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 425-235-2889 2 Cynthia Moya From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Greetings! Akane Yamaguchi <akane.yamaguchii@gmail.com> Friday, December 30, 2016 10:29 AM Cynthia Moya; Jason Seth enkeliJ@yahoo.com Story Elementary School/ LUAlG-000692, CU-H, PUD My name is Akane Yamaguchi and I live on 1008 N Riverside Drive in Renton. I am one of the Party of Record on this above mentioned project and have received a packet/letter regarding Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request. I read a copy of the email written by my neighbor, Ms. Angela Laulainen included in the packet/letter. I agree with all of the points Ms. Laulainen made in the email and I request the Hearing Examiner on this project to consider these points. Could someone please explain why on the document with titled, " BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER OF CITY OF RENTON", in the first paragraph, it's stated that, "Ms. Laulainen's reconsideration request is not admitted and will not be considered by the hearing examiner"? It is because Ms. Laulainen's points are not based upon evidence that is already in the record? The Hearing Examiner requested the Renton School District to do traffic studies for the first year of the operation of the school. Ms. Laulainen is requesting this traffic studies to be conducted by a non-affiliated company with RSD. I think this is a valid suggestion and no evidence should be required to make this point. Ms. Laulainen is also asking the location of the ball wall to be re-considered or the ball wall completely removed from the school premise due to noise concern in the neighbohood. Ms. Laulainen is not in position to be able to prove evidence on this point because the ball wall has not been constructed yet and I imagine it will cause an extreme hardship on Ms. Laulainen because this type of study will require access to professional skills and equipments. Thank you for reading this email. Sincerely, Akane Yamaguchi 1 January 9, 2017 STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING CERTIFICATE OF MAILING ) ) § ) Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC JASON A. SETH, City Clerk for the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that he is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter. That on the 9th day of January, 2017, at the hour of 4:30 p.m. your affiant duly mailed and placed in the United States Post Office at Renton, King County, Washington, by first class mail the written comments from Nancy Monahan & Akane Yamaguchi in response to the request for reconsideration submitted by Ms. Laulainen, RE: Sartori Elementary School -LUA-16-000692 to the attached parties of record. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this gth day of January, 2017. '\ C - \' I Cynth1 R. Mc'l,ya -- Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing in Renton My Commission expires: 8/27/2018 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 , (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 , rentonwa.gov January 9, 2017 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30'h St, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Subject: Additional Responses Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC RE: Sartori Elementary School {LUA-16-000692) Dear Ms. Klein: Enclosed please find the written comments from Nancy Monahan & Akane Yamaguchi in response to the request for reconsideration submitted by Ms. Laulainen. I can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, !! /? f;/) E.~-Seth, CMC City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Jennifer Cisneros 1 Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov · Cynthia Moya From: Sent: To: Subject: Jason Seth Friday, December 30, 2016 8:18 AM Cynthia Moya FW: Sartori School comments for Hearing Examiner Additional comments for the Sartori Request for reconsideration. Please forward to the Hearing Examiner and parties of record. -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 jseth@rentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). -----Original Message----- From: Nancy Monahan [mailto:monahan55@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 8:Sl PM To: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: Melissa Hart <MHart@Rentonwa.gov>; Angie Laulainen <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Subject: Sartori School comments for Hearing Examiner I am one of the parties of record present at the recent hearing, and wish to comment further on the Sartori School project. Throughout this entire process, the Renton School District has not been responsive to neighborhood concerns. Also, some people that have previously testified at hearings have mysteriously fallen off the list of parties of record, and are no longer receiving mailings. I hope that through the Hearing Examiner, my voice, and the voices of my neighbors, can finally be heard. 1) Location of the ball wall: I concur with the comments made by Angie Laulainen in her email to the Hearing Examiner dated December 12, 2016. Bringing this level of noise so close to established residences is unacceptable. These residences have been across from this school for decades, and the original play area and field did not present a problem for them. However, the new playground design submitted by the Renton School District will substantially change the character of the neighborhood. A ball wall is a significant noise-generator, and a typical recess schedule will result in a sustained disturbance for neighbors for several hours of the day. Simple design changes could accommodate the neighbors' request to move this feature this to another area that does not create a perpetual noise nuisance. I request that this be made a requirement that the Renton School District revisits their design to come up with something more acceptable to the neighbors who will be impacted the most. 2) Traffic study: I am hoping that the final determination will include a recommendation that traffic patterns be monitored and reviewed for a year, and that an independent, impartial agency, not previously connected with the Renton School District (e.g., 1 not Heffron Transportation) be app !d to do that monitoring and reporting. I 1ld like to further request that it be stipulated that if such a review and _ rt indicates that neighbors' concerns ab raffic patterns around the school are founded, and that congestion and safety problems are noted, that the Renton School District will make the necessary adjustments to mitigate those problems. These two issues have the greatest impact on the livability and property values of our immediate neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration of these concerns. Sincerely, Nancy Monahan 325 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 425-235-2889 2 Cynthia Moya From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Greetings! Akane Yamaguchi <akane.yamaguchii@gmail.com> Friday, December 30, 2016 10:29 AM Cynthia Moya; Jason Seth enkeli_I@yahoo.com Story Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD My name is Akane Yamaguchi and I live on 1008 N Riverside Drive in Renton. I am one of the Party of Record on this above mentioned project and have received a packet/letter regarding Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request. I read a copy of the email written by my neighbor, Ms. Angela Laulainen included in the packet/letter. I agree with all of the points Ms. Laulainen made in the email and I request the Hearing Examiner on this project to consider these points. Could someone please explain why on the document with titled, "BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER OF CITY OF RENTON", in the first paragraph, it's stated that, "Ms. Laulainen's reconsideration request is not admitted and will not be considered by the hearing examiner"? It is because Ms. Laulainen's points are not based upon evidence that is already in the record? The Hearing Examiner reqL1ested the Renton School District to do traffic studies for the first year of the operation of the school. Ms. Laulainen is requesting this traffic studies to be conducted by a non-affiliated company with RSD. I think this is a valid suggestion and no evidence should be required to make this point. Ms. Laulainen is also asking the location of the ball wall to be re-considered or the ball wall completely removed from the school premise due to noise concern in the neighbohood. Ms. Laulainen is not in position to be able to prove evidence on this point because the ball wall has not been constructed yet and I imagine it will cause an extreme hardship on Ms. Laulainen because this type of study will require access to professional skills and equipments. Thank you for reading this email. Sincerely, Akane Yamaguchi 1 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Enkeli <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Monday, December 12, 2016 10:53 PM Jason Seth Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD Recess Schedule Lakeridge.pdf Honorable Hearing Examiner, I am writing to ask for reconsideration on two aspects of the New Sartori Elementary School project/LUA 16-000692, CU-H, PUD. The two aspects of the decision are with respect to 1) traffic monitoring and 2) the location of the ball wall. First, regarding the aspect of traffic, thank you for including a stipulation that the queuing and parking elements of the proposal be monitored for one year. This monitoring will collect valuable information to help mitigate any problems that will arise from the current plan. I request that it also be stipulated that the one-year monitoring be done by an outside organization, one that is not connected in any way with Renton School District. The traffic report which was ordered by Renton School District and done by Heffron Transportation appeared to be biased in favor of Renton School District's fast track agenda to push their plans through and also reflected a general lack of knowledge of the North Renton Neighborhood. A lack of knowledge was apparent in several errors in the traffic report which did not come to the traffic experts' attention until pointed out in SEPA comments submitted by neighbors. For example, during the initial draft of the SEPA review, traffic experts wrongly quoted speed limits surrounding the site as all currently at 20 miles per hour. The traffic pattern at the intersection of N. 4th and Garden was also misrepresented as a through street (both described as a through street in the SEPA review and illustrated on the map of the school as a through street). The updated report submitted for the City of Renton Land Use Application included inflated counts of vehicular trips to the school, taken from a manual representing counts to a fully functioning elementary school. This again demonstrated the lack of knowledge of our neighborhood since Sartori has not been in use as an elementary school for decades. I request a non-biased organization be required to monitor the parking and queuing at the school. The City of Renton is more in touch with the North Renton Neighborhood and could be one choice to facilitate this monitoring. If not the City of Renton, it would be best to stipulate it is an organization other than Heffron Transportation, one that can be impartial, and one that will visit the site to gather the data for the report. The second aspect of the New Sartori Elementary School project which I request changes is the location of the ball wall in the covered play area at the south end of the block. This location is still too close to the street and to the residences on Garden Avenue North. The school district stated at the hearing that they pulled this area further to the west, however just a fifteen foot setback is not enough to offset the noise from the ball wall. This is not just typical playground noise that will emanate for a brief amount of time, but the ball wall is the most popular part of the playground where students line 1 up to play "wall ball" and take s for the entire recess to bounce against this wall. The fact that it is a covered structure means that the sound of the balls will be greatly amplified. Usually also located near the ball wall is four square which will add even more ball bouncing noise. The fact that it is a cement area with a cement wall makes the balls even louder. And it is not just a small window of time but the majority of each day we will hear constant ball bouncing. Elementary school recesses are spread out over the course of the day, so the bouncing ball noise will occur practically all day in order for all students to have access to the playground. I have attached the recess schedule for Lakeridge Elementary School as an example of a typical recess schedule. The homes on Garden are older homes that are located close to the street. The construction of our homes is such that the walls do not block out a lot of noise. We hear sirens from several blocks away, planes, buses, trains, helicopters, and when Boeing tests their jet engines, we hear the rumble till it stops and the windows rattle like crazy. Our homes are not expensive sound proof homes tucked away in a culdesac far from the activity of the city, but are situated close to the street. My porch steps are just fifteen feet away from the sidewalk. We hear all the noise inside the house from activity in the neighborhood and on the street. There will be no way to relax or take an afternoon nap with the constant noise of balls bouncing so close by. I ask that more attention be given to my concern of this play area too close to my home. In addition to having this amplified noise from the ball wall area, Garden Avenue residents will be dealing with the noise of school buses pulling through in the morning and after school. To place both the ball wall and the bus lane in this location will generate a consistency of noise throughout the day. It is too much noise for one location. I request that the school district move the ball wall to help lessen the noise. The ball wall could be moved to the hard surface play area where there is already a wall next to the school, or it could be moved entirely to another new location. They could otherwise get rid of the ball wall altogether and opt to keep the covered area in place with support pillars only and without any walls. Keeping the ball wall in its current location will result in substantial and undue adverse effects on adjacent properties on Garden Avenue North. Renton School District stated that they will plant trees on the east side of this structure, but the renderings submitted to the Hearing Examiner only show one tree and otherwise a wide pathway which does not block any sound from this play area. Most of this play area is connected to the walkway which goes from the school to the street, so it does not show any opportunity there for a landscape buffer. However, in my opinion, even a few trees planted near the structure will not be sufficient to block the sound, especially according to the renderings of their plan. It is for all of these reasons that the placement of the ball wall is contrary to "RMC 4-9-030(C)(3): Effect on Adjacent Properties" and indeed the proposed use at the proposed location does result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. The City of Renton Comprehensive plan also promotes improving the livability of Renton's neighborhoods. Unless changes are made, the ball wall will affect the quality of life and the livability in my home. I again respectfully request that the school district relocate the ball wall or remove it altogether. Thank you for taking the time to consider my comments and requests. Most Sincerely, Angela Laulainen 314 Garden AVE N 2 Renton, WA 98057 3 Text SELECT A SCHOOL V SIGN IN llilllllllll -A LAKERIDGE ELEMENTARY ResOI.D'c:es l\londay-Thursday Schedule Bell Schedule Event • Bell Schedule Timae . \:::~- . :: ~ ~. ·,,-- 12 40p...-" 1.0::::;.:,T II& Staff Directory f I Menus .c.; SJ<yward ..,, Family Access IMMDl··r::'-:Aliti#W:'§i·~i l'riday Schedule Eve1,t Fi";:;t be:! .s:.-~jer,w ,:.a,. e.:-:te~ t'l,;: bc.1:cfr1g ac;::· g,::i .:o :-'le: r da~::-oo,~,s -''= -: ~ ... - I_,-,:~ Time ::.--~-. 3 1-'.)o:-.,,.., Jason Seth From: Cynthia Moya Sent: To: Tuesday, December 13, 2016 9:08 AM Phil Olbrechts Cc: Matthew Herrera; Jennifer T. Henning; Vanessa Dolbee; Brianne Bannwarth; Craig Burnell; Julia Medzegian; Jason Seth Subject: FW: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Attachments: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD Recess Schedule Lakeridge.pdf I have attached the Request for Reconsideration from Angela Laulainen. I will be mailing this out to all parties of record later today. Thank you, Cindy Moya, Records Management Specialist City of Renton -Administrative Services/City Clerk Division cmoya@rentonwa.gov 425-430-6513 -r~-.. -,--;,., --.!~DIUll {1 From: Jason Seth Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2016 8:27 AM To: Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov> Subject: FW: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD Cindy, Please forward this to the Hearing Examiner and cc: all of the parties of record including City staff. Thanks, -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 isg_\h_@rentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: Enkeli (mailto:enkeli l(dlyahoo.com] Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 10:53 PM To: Jason Seth <J5eth@RentonWi.l£QY> Subject: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD Honorable Hearing Examiner, 1 I am writing to ask for reconsideration on two aspects of the New Sa, ,uri Elementary School project/LUA 16-000692, CU-H, PUD. The two aspects of the decision are with respect to 1) traffic monitoring and 2) the location of the ball wall. First, regarding the aspect of traffic, thank you for including a stipulation that the queuing and parking elements of the proposal be monitored for one year. This monitoring will collect valuable information to help mitigate any problems that will arise from the current plan. I request that it also be stipulated that the one-year monitoring be done by an outside organization, one that is not connected in any way with Renton School District. The traffic report which was ordered by Renton School District and done by Heffron Transportation appeared to be biased in favor of Renton School District's fast track agenda to push their plans through and also reflected a general lack of knowledge of the North Renton Neighborhood. A lack of knowledge was apparent in several errors in the traffic report which did not come to the traffic experts' attention until pointed out in SEPA comments submitted by neighbors. For example, during the initial draft of the SEPA review, traffic experts wrongly quoted speed limits surrounding the site as all currently at 20 miles per hour. The traffic pattern at the intersection of N. 4th and Garden was also misrepresented as a through street (both described as a through street in the SEPA review and illustrated on the map of the school as a through street). The updated report submitted for the City of Renton Land Use Application included inflated counts of vehicular trips to the school, taken from a manual representing counts to a fully functioning elementary school. This again demonstrated the lack of knowledge of our neighborhood since Sartori has not been in use as an elementary school for decades. I request a non-biased organization be required to monitor the parking and queuing at the school. The City of Renton is more in touch with the North Renton Neighborhood and could be one choice to facilitate this monitoring. If not the City of Renton, it would be best to stipulate it is an organization other than Heffron Transportation, one that can be impartial, and one that will visit the site to gather the data for the report. The second aspect of the New Sartori Elementary School project which I request changes is the location of the ball wall in the covered play area at the south end of the block. This location is still too close to the street and to the residences on Garden Avenue North. The school district stated at the hearing that they pulled this area further to the west, however just a fifteen foot setback is not enough to offset the noise from the ball wall. This is not just typical playground noise that will emanate for a brief amount of time, but the ball wall is the most popular part of the playground where students line up to play "wall ball" and take turns for the entire recess to bounce balls against this wall. The fact that it is a covered structure means that the sound of the balls will be greatly amplified. Usually also located near the ball wall is four square which will add even more ball bouncing noise. The fact that it is a cement area with a cement wall makes the balls even louder. And it is not just a small window of time but the majority of each day we will hear constant ball bouncing. Elementary school recesses are spread out over the course of the day, so the bouncing ball noise will occur practically all day in order for all students to have access to the playground. I have attached the recess schedule for Lakeridge Elementary School as an example of a typical recess schedule. 2 \ The homes on Garden are olde mes that are located close to the it. The construction of our homes is such that the walls do , ,ut block out a lot of noise. We hear sirens from several blocks away, planes, buses, trains, helicopters, and when Boeing tests their jet engines, we hear the rumble till it stops and the windows rattle like crazy. Our homes are not expensive sound proof homes tucked away in a culdesac far from the activity of the city, but are situated close to the street. My porch steps are just fifteen feet away from the sidewalk. We hear all the noise inside the house from activity in the neighborhood and on the street. There will be no way to relax or take an afternoon nap with the constant noise of balls bouncing so close by. I ask that more attention be given to my concern of this play area too close to my home. In addition to having this amplified noise from the ball wall area, Garden Avenue residents will be dealing with the noise of school buses pulling through in the morning and after school. To place both the ball wall and the bus lane in this location will generate a consistency of noise throughout the day. It is too much noise for one location. I request that the school district move the ball wall to help lessen the noise. The ball wall could be moved to the hard surface play area where there is already a wall next to the school, or it could be moved entirely to another new location. They could otherwise get rid of the ball wall altogether and opt to keep the covered area in place with support pillars only and without any walls. Keeping the ball wall in its current location will result in substantial and undue adverse effects on adjacent properties on Garden Avenue North. Renton School District stated that they will plant trees on the east side of this structure, but the renderings submitted to the Hearing Examiner only show one tree and otherwise a wide pathway which does not block any sound from this play area. Most of this play area is connected to the walkway which goes from the school to the street, so it does not show any opportunity there for a landscape buffer. However, in my opinion, even a few trees planted near the structure will not be sufficient to block the sound, especially according to the renderings of their plan. It is for all of these reasons that the placement of the ball wall is contrary to "AMC 4-9-030(C)(3): Effect on Adjacent Properties" and indeed the proposed use at the proposed location does result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. The City of Renton Comprehensive plan also promotes improving the livability of Renton's neighborhoods. Unless changes are made, the ball wall will affect the quality of life and the livability in my home. I again respectfully request that the school district relocate the ball wall or remove it altogether. Thank you for taking the time to consider my comments and requests. Most Sincerely, Angela Laulainen 314 Garden AVE N Renton, WA 98057 3 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Nancy Monahan <monahan55@hotmail.com> Thursday, December 29, 2016 8:51 PM Jason Seth Melissa Hart; Angie Laulainen Sartori School comments for Hearing Examiner I am one of the parties of record present at the recent hearing, and wish to comment further on the Sartori School project. Throughout this entire process, the Renton School District has not been responsive to neighborhood concerns. Also, some people that have previously testified at hearings have mysteriously fallen off the list of parties of record, and are no longer receiving mailings. I hope that through the Hearing Examiner, my voice, and the voices of my neighbors, can finally be heard. 1) Location of the ball wall: I concur with the comments made by Angie Laulainen in her email to the Hearing Examiner dated December 12, 2016. Bringing this level of noise so close to established residences is unacceptable. These residences have been across from this school for decades, and the original play area and field did not present a problem for them. However, the new playground design submitted by the Renton School District will substantially change the character of the neighborhood. A ball wall is a significant noise-generator, and a typical recess schedule will result in a sustained disturbance for neighbors for several hours of the day. Simple design changes could accommodate the neighbors' request to move this feature this to another area that does not create a perpetual noise nuisance. I request that this be made a requirement that the Renton School District revisits their design to come up with something more acceptable to the neighbors who will be impacted the most. 2) Traffic study: I am hoping that the final determination will include a recommendation that traffic patterns be monitored and reviewed for a year, and that an independent, impartial agency, not previously connected with the Renton School District (e.g., not Heffron Transportation) be appointed to do that monitoring and reporting. I would like to further request that it be stipulated that if such a review and report indicates that neighbors' concerns about traffic patterns around the school are founded, and that congestion and safety problems are noted, that the Renton School District will make the necessary adjustments to mitigate those problems. These two issues have the greatest impact on the livability and property values of our immediate neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration of these concerns. Sincerely, Nancy Monahan 325 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 425-235-2889 1 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Greetings' Akane Yamaguchi <akane.yamaguchii@gmail.com> Friday, December 30, 2016 10:29 AM Cynthia Moya; Jason Seth enkeli_I@yahoo.com Story Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD My name is Akane Yamaguchi and I live on 1008 N Riverside Drive in Renton. I am one of the Party of Record on this above mentioned project and have received a packet/letter regarding Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request. I read a copy of the email written by my neighbor, Ms. Angela Laulainen included in the packet/letter. I agree with all of the points Ms. Laulaincn made in the email and I request the Hearing Examiner on this project to consider these points. Could someone please explain why on the document with titled, " BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER OF CITY OF RENTON", in the first paragraph, it's stated that, "Ms. Laulainen's reconsideration request is not admitted and will not be considered by the hearing examiner"? It is because Ms. Laulainen's points are not based upon evidence that is already in the record? The Hearing Examiner requested the Renton School District to do traffic studies for the first year of the operation of the school. Ms. Laulainen is requesting this traffic studies to be conducted by a non-affiliated company with RSD. I think this is a valid suggestion and no evidence should be required to make this point. Ms. Laulainen is also asking the location of the ball wall to be re-considered or the ball wall completely removed from the school premise due to noise concern in the neighbohood. Ms. Laulainen is not in position to be able to prove evidence on this point because the ball wall has not been constructed yet and I imagine it will cause an extreme hardship on Ms. Laulainen because this type of study will require access to professional skills and equipments. Thank you for reading this email. Sincerely, Akane Yamaguchi 1 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Phil, Cynthia Moya Friday, December 30, 2016 10:54 AM Phil Olbrechts Brianne Bannwarth; Chip Vincent; Matthew Herrera; Craig Burnell; Jason Seth; Jennifer T. Henning; Julia Medzegian; Larry Warren; Phil Olbrechts; Sabrina Mirante; Vanessa Dolbee Renton -Sartori School comments for Hearing Examiner (Monahan) This is the Comment from Nancy Monahan. Which I will be mailing out to all parties of record with all of the comments later today. Thank you, Cindy Moya, Records Management Specialist City of Renton -Administrative Services/City Clerk Division cmoya@rentonwa.gov 425-430-6513 -----Original Message----- From: Jason Seth Sent: Friday, December 30, 2016 8:18 AM To: Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov> Subject: FW: Sartori School comments for Hearing Examiner Additional comments for the Sartori Request for reconsideration. Please forward to the Hearing Examiner and parties of record. -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 jseth@rentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). -----Original Message----- From: Nancy Monahan [mailto:monahan55@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 8:51 PM To: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: Melissa Hart <MHart@Rentonwa.gov>; Angie Laulainen <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Subject: Sartori School comments for Hearing Examiner 1 I am one of the parties of record p ,tat the recent hearing, and wish to con ,t further on the Sartori School project. Throughout this entire process, the Renton School District has not been responsive to neighborhood concerns. Also, some people that have previously testified at hearings have mysteriously fallen off the list of parties of record, and are no longer receiving mailings. I hope that through the Hearing Examiner, my voice, and the voices of my neighbors, can finally be heard. 1) Location of the ball wall: I concur with the comments made by Angie Laulainen in her email to the Hearing Examiner dated December 12, 2016. Bringing this level of noise so close to established residences is unacceptable. These residences have been across from this school for decades, and the original play area and field did not present a problem for them. However, the new playground design submitted by the Renton School District will substantially change the character of the neighborhood. A ball wall is a significant noise-generator, and a typical recess schedule will result in a sustained disturbance for neighbors for several hours of the day. Simple design changes could accommodate the neighbors' request to move this feature this to another area that does not create a perpetual noise nuisance. I request that this be made a requirement that the Renton School District revisits their design to come up with something more acceptable to the neighbors who will be impacted the most. 2) Traffic study: I am hoping that the final determination will include a recommendation that traffic patterns be monitored and reviewed for a year, and that an independent, impartial agency, not previously connected with the Renton School District (e.g., not Heffron Transportation) be appointed to do that monitoring and reporting. I would like to further request that it be stipulated that if such a review and report indicates that neighbors' concerns about traffic patterns around the school are founded, and that congestion and safety problems are noted, that the Renton School District will make the necessary adjustments to mitigate those problems. These two issues have the greatest impact on the livability and property values of our immediate neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration of these concerns. Sincerely, Nancy Monahan 325 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 425-235-2889 2 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Phil, Cynthia Moya Friday, December 30, 2016 10:56 AM Phil Olbrechts Brianne Bannwarth; Chip Vincent; Matthew Herrera; Craig Burnell; Jason Seth; Jennifer T. Henning; Julia Medzegian; Larry Warren; Phil Olbrechts; Sabrina Mirante; Vanessa Dolbee Renton -Sartori School Comments for HEX -Akane Yamaguchi This is the Comment from Akane Yamaguchi. Which I will be mailing out to all parties of record with all of the comments later today. Thank you, Cindy Moya, Records Management Specialist City of Renton -Administrative Services/City Clerk Division cmoya@rentonwa.gov 425-430-6513 -r-----.. -, --~ -~ tt!ltUll ~) From: Akane Yamaguchi [mailto:akane.yamaguchii@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, December 30, 2016 10:29 AM To: Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov>; Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: enkeli_l@yahoo.com Subject: Story Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD Greetings! My name is Akane Yamaguchi and I live on 1008 N Riverside Drive in Renton. I am one of the Party of Record on this above mentioned project and have received a packet/letter regarding Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request. I read a copy of the email written by my neighbor, Ms. Angela Laulainen included in the packet/letter. I agree with all of the points Ms. Laulainen made in the email and I request the Hearing Examiner on this project to consider these points. Could someone please explain why on the document with titled, "BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER OF CITY OF RENTON", in the first paragraph, it's stated that, "Ms. Laulainen's reconsideration request is not admitted and will not be considered by the hearing examiner"? It is because Ms. Laulainen's points are not based upon evidence that is already in the record 1 The Hearing Examiner requested the Renton School District to do traffic studies for the first year of the operation of the school. Ms. Laulainen is requesting this traffic studies to be conducted by a non-affiliated company with RSD. I think this is a valid suggestion and no evidence should be required to make this point. Ms. Laulainen is also asking the location of the ball wall to be re-considered or the u~II wall completely removed from the school premise due to noise concern in the neighbohood. Ms. Laulainen is not in position to be able to prove evidence on this point because the ball wall has not been constructed yet and I imagine it will cause an extreme hardship on Ms. Laulainen because this type of study will require access to professional skills and equipments. Thank you for reading this email. Sincerely, Akane Yamaguchi 2 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Mr Seth dmd82l@aol.com Friday, December 30, 2016 11:59 AM Jason Seth; Cynthia Moya Denis Law; Jennifer T. Henning; Matthew Herrera; Vanessa Dolbee; Julia Medzegian; enkeli_l@yahoo.com; north.renton@gmail.com; matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us; Alex Tuttle Re: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request For further clarification for the City ..... . I had to research since my stint with the North Renton Neighborhood Association began in 2016. I checked with the post office. The PO Box the City has for the North Renton Neighborhood Association was closed by the association on July 29, 2011. There has been no PO Box since that date. It is also my understanding, from a neighbor who reviewed the City files yesterday, all of the mailings for the NRNA have been returned to the City and sit, in tact, in the City file listing "no PO Box" as the cause for return. So it would seem, if the City felt they were sending me mail as the representative for the NRNA, they had an awareness that mail was being returned and the address was indeed invalid. Diane Dobson -----Original Message----- From: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> To: 'dmd821@aol.com' <dmd821@aol.com>; Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw@Rentonwa.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhenning@Rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <MHerrera@Rentonwa.gov>: Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov>: Julia Medzegian <Jmedzegian@Rentonwa.gov>: enkeli_l <enkeli_l@yahoo.com>; north.renton <north.renton@gmail.com>; matthew.feldmeyer <matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us>; Alex Tuttle <ATuttle@Rentonwa.gov> Sent: Thu, Dec 29, 2016 12:27 pm Subject: RE: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Thank you for providing clarification. I will ensure that the system is updated to reflect your correct address. -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 jseth@rentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). 1 From: dmd82l@aol.com [mailto:d l@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 l!:49 AM To: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov>; Cynthia Moya <CMov.e._~ntonwa.gov> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw@Rentonwa.gov>; Jennifer T.Henning<Jhen.ning@Rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <M_Herrera@Rentonwa.gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee@Rentonwa,gQ_~>; Julia Medzegian <Jmedzegian@_Rentonwa.gov>; enkeli l@yahoo.com; north.renton@gmail.com; matthew.feldmeyer@r.E".nJQo.schools.us; Alex Tuttle <ATuttle@Rentonwa.gov> Subject: Re: NRNA-Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Mr Seth I was a party of record personally. Not only via email to the various planners and School District, but when I signed in for the hearing at the Public Hearing Process. I never signed in utilizing the North Renton Neighborhood contact information, but rather my own personal information through every step of this process -quite frankly, I was not aware the North Renton Neighborhood Association has a PO Box. As I have never represented this PO Box (Box 326) to be my address, I advise this address is NOT correct and completely erroneous. The North Renton Neighborhood Association does not have any legal governing standing over any component of our neighborhood and membership with the NRNA is not a requirement of living in the North Renton neighborhood. The Association is a tool only. This is the second time the City has failed to recognize that (the first time being when it was required of the residents of North Renton to make a request for a public meeting outside of City Offices with the CED Representatives relating to the City Center Plan, through the NRNA). If the City is dismissing citizens -based upon the auspices of a governing neighborhood association serving as their voice and representation -we have a problem bigger than just a failure to properly notify parties of record. Diane Dobson -----Original Message----- From: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> To: 'drnd82 l (if aol.corn' <dmd82 l@;aol.com>; Cynthia Moya <Ci'vloya (c1 Rcntonwa.2ov> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw(<j Rcntonwa.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhcnning<if Rcntonwa.2ov>; Matthew Herrera <Ml-lcrrcra<ii Rcntonwa.gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee(d Rentonwa.2ov>; Julia Medzegian <.lmecLi'.coian Ci!' Rcntonw a.,wv>; enkeli_l <cnkcli I (ct vahoo.com>; north.renton <n.Qrth,Lc'.I_)_t_qn(g'_fill.l'fil.<:om>; matthew.feldmeyer <mill I hew. felgn~ycr(a) ren.tonschools. us>; Alex Tuttle <AT uttlc 0·, Rcntunwa. gov> Sent: Thu, Dec 29, 2016 11:30 am Subject: RE: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Hello Ms. Dobson, We had you listed as a party of record as the North Renton Neighborhood Association representative, at P.O. Box 326, Renton, WA 98057. We will add your personal address of 806 N. Riverside, Renton, WA 98057 too. Please confirm that both addresses are correct. Thank you, -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 lset~.!.@Je.ntonwa ,g_ov 2 This communication may be subject to ~Jblic disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: dmd821@.;i_qJ.som [rnailto:dmd82 I (a'aol.rnm] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 9:51 AM To: Cynthia Moya <C:Vlova(a'RcnlDnwa.um> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw0' R,11tOQ\\·.a,goy>; Jennifer T. Henning <JhcnningW Rcntonwa.gm>; Matthew Herrera <.M Herrera Cd' Rcnlonwa. gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <V DDlhcc@Rcntonwa. g(1v>; Julia Medzegian <] mcdz~i~_tn_~·-l{cJltOn\va.gov>~ enkcl i I (ii: vahoo.corn~ north .rcnlon <st !l1nail ._corJ1; rnal thew. fclclmcycr0• rcm1in~cho11l~.ll~; Jason Seth <)Seth (d Rc111on" a.rmv> Subject: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Greetings I have become aware of correspondence dated December 20, 2016, addressed to Lisa Klein, that was cc to 25 parties of record on this matter. The Order on Reconsideration Request clearly states, lines 15 -17, "Since the reconsideration request affects parties of record and the interests of the City, the parties of record (including applicant) who testified at the hearing and City staff will be given an opportunity to respond to the request for reconsideration before a decision on the reconsideration request is issued." I did not receive a copy of such correspondence from the City nor the School District. I testified at the Public Hearing on November 8, 2016, held at Renton City Hall (I have confirmed the accuracy of the report and the minutes on the City of Renton web page to confirm my name and testimony is included in such records). City representatives indicated at multiple neighborhood meetings and at various points in the process, anyone who sent in comments along the way or sent their contact information on to the various planners, would be included as Parties of Record from that point forward. I hereby ask for clarification of a list of the 25 Parties of Record that received the copy of this December 20th Notice -and a list of the all inclusive Parties of Record who have submitted their names at any point in this process -as it was represented by multiple City Representatives, as well as School District Representatives. I request any names from the process who have not yet received this December 20th Notice, also be notified of the same. I have checked with Jason Seth, City Clerk, and he indicates I am not listed as a party of record. He indicates he only sends the notices out and the list of the Parties of Record comes from CED at the City of Renton. He said "if you are calling me about this, then you have received notice." I quickly clarified I was calling based upon my father -who has never testified and is not a party of record, but rather an adjacent property owner -showing me a copy of the notice he received on December 24th. This notice is not proper, nor is it timely. I hereby notify the City and the Hearings Examiner of the improper procedure on this matter and the violation of process with the failure to properly notify all parties of record and provide them adequate time for review and response. This matter has been "fast tracked" by the Renton School District and while we as a neighborhood are generally supportive of this school and build, the process itself has been full of failures and short comings. Improper notice was provided, which resulted in a 2nd mailing, when the school district erroneously mailed notices out with wrong postal codes ..... parties of record were dropped and contact information was lost when the file transitioned in-house at the City between Rocale Timmons and Matthew Herrera (Rocale Timmons -who, when representatives from the Planning Department was asked about her later, couldn't even remember her as an employee -let alone a Senior Planner) ...... the City of Renton failed to include proper Exhibit at the November Public Hearing (yet nothing was done to address or correct the same -other than a side comment by RSD employee confirming the error) ....... the Transportation Study was submitted with erroneous information (citing the deli as a "supermarket", the walk-in burrito stand as a "restaurant" and the adult learning center as a "functioning & operational elementary school" ....... confusion and chaos has surrounded 3 this whole process and it has been mging for neighbors to be involved in th, 1e (this doesn't even begin to address the complete and total misre.,,esentations made by Randy Matheson to ... , neighborhoods of a "walkable only" elementary school (that now will be having students bussed in from all over Renton -not just walking from North Renton), neighbors not being displaced who didn't want to move (then the threat of eminent domain being waived over their head), neighbors having 2-3 years for moving (and then receiving eviction paperwork) plus the rude and demeaning behavior which resulted in an entire neighborhood association requesting alternate point of contact because of the lies he told and the way he treated neighbors). This list could go on and on. I am extremely disappointed in the Renton School District for allowing this all to transpire in this fashion. They had an opportunity to work with a neighborhood on a new elementary school and make it an enjoyable public process of building a community from the ground up through our children -instead there were lies and deceit and have left neighbors with a bad feeling and distrust of representations being made by the City and School District -not a great feeling in going forward as we face unavoidable growth within our City. I am even more disappointed in the City of Renton for allowing this to take place. Neighbors approached the City and asked for help with this confusing process and instead of the help we thought we might receive, the City only proved to drop the ball further and add more confusion to the process. All parties of record need to be notified of this process -as required -with adequate time provided for response. Diane Dobson North Renton Neighborhood Association 425.890.9176 4 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: dmd82l@aol.com Friday, December 30, 2016 4:30 PM Jason Seth; Cynthia Moya Denis Law; Jennifer T. Henning; Matthew Herrera; Vanessa Dolbee; Julia Medzegian; enkeli_l@yahoo.com; north.renton@gmail.com; matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us; Alex Tuttle Re: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Pursuant to suggestion of Jennifer Henning, City of Renton, I make specific request for additional time to respond due to the failure to send proper notice to all parties of record. Thank you Diane Dobson Sent from AOL Mobile Mail -----Original Message----- From: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> To: 'dmd82 l@aol.com' <dmd82 l@aol.com>; Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw@Rentonwa.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhenning@Rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <MHerrera@Rentonwa.gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov>; Julia Medzegian <Jmedzegian@Rentonwa.gov>; enkeli_l <enkeli_l@yahoo.com>; north.renton <north.renton@gmail.com>; matthew .feldmeyer <matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us>; Alex Tuttle <A Tuttle@Rentonwa.gov> Sent: Thu, Dec 29, 2016 12:27 PM Subject: RE: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Thank you for providing clarification. I will ensure that the system is updated to reflect your correct address. -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 i_eeth@rentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: dmd82l@aol.com [mailto:dmd82l@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 11:49 AM To: Jason Seth <j5_~~h@Rentonwa.gov>; Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw@Rentonwa.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhenning@Rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <MHerrera@Rentonwa.gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov>; Julia Medzegian <J medzegia n@Re ntonwa .gov>; en ke_li_l@ya hoo .com; north .rento n@gmaii.co m; 1 matthew.fe_l_grneyer@rentonschool Alex Tuttle <ATuttle@f1entonwa.gov> Subject: Re: NRNA-Sartori Parties or Kecord and Order on Reconsideration Reque>< Mr Seth I was a party of record personally. Not only via email to the various planners and School District, but when I signed in for the hearing at the Public Hearing Process. I never signed in utilizing the North Renton Neighborhood contact information, but rather my own personal information through every step of this process -quite frankly, I was not aware the North Renton Neighborhood Association has a PO Box. As I have never represented this PO Box (Box 326) to be my address, I advise this address is NOT correct and completely erroneous. The North Renton Neighborhood Association does not have any legal governing standing over any component of our neighborhood and membership with the NRNA is not a requirement of living in the North Renton neighborhood. The Association is a tool only. This is the second time the City has failed to recognize that (the first time being when it was required of the residents of North Renton to make a request for a public meeting outside of City Offices with the CED Representatives relating to the City Center Plan, through the NRNA). If the City is dismissing citizens -based upon the auspices of a governing neighborhood association serving as their voice and representation -we have a problem bigger than just a failure to properly notify parties of record. Diane Dobson -----Original Message----- F rom: Jason Seth <J8eth@l3s3ntonwa.gov> To: '~1_m_d_~_2 l (Ii: aol.co111' <drnd82 I@g9J.com>; Cynthia Moya <Ct\'\(iy_q CQ'• Rcntonwa.;:ov> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw(a'·ReptQQWa.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhcnning@Rentonwa.g9y>; Matthew Herrera <MHerrera@Rcnto11\\·,t,gQy>; Vanessa Dolbee <_'1/Qq)hcc (11' Rcntorrn a.2:m >; Julia Medzegian <J mcdzcgian 0 (s_Q[l_tonwa. :zov>; enkeli_l <enl.;_,li_l_@vahoo.co rn>; north.renton <north.renton (ci "Ill ail .cpm>; matthew.feldmeyer <mat thew. feldmev_,r_{<j 1_rcntonschool s. us>; Alex Tuttle <AT uttk@Rcntonwag_o_y> Sent: Thu, Dec 29, 2016 11:30 am Subject: RE: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Hello Ms. Dobson, We had you listed as a party of record as the North Renton Neighborhood Association representative, at P.O. Box 326, Renton, WA 98057. We will add your personal address of 806 N. Riverside, Renton, WA 98057 too. Please confirm that both addresses are correct. Thank you, -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 jsetb_@rentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: Q_flJ d82l@aol.com [ rnai I to:dmd8?L<!!'_aol .cum] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 9:51 AM 2 ' To: Cynthia Moya <CMovariiRcr va.gO\> Cc: Denis Law <DLa)y({L'.R<:ntonw;1.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <JhcnninQ<ifR<:11IcJmYa,_g(1v>; Matthew Herrera <MHerrer;1@Rcnton wa. gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <Y Dolbee (ii• Rcntonw;1.;wv>; Julia Medzegian <J mcdzcgian 0' Renton wa. gm>· cnkel i I(!'• vahoo.coni-nonli.rcnton (g• gmail .,·01n-___ . ____ ·····----------' ' __________ ,, ___ ,,,,,,.,, -----""'"""" _, mall hew .kldmcvcrG:i· rcnton.scJ1\'0)s,\1s; Jason Seth <J Seth (if, Ren I on wa. gov> Subject: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Greetings I have become aware of correspondence dated December 20, 2016, addressed to Lisa Klein, that was cc to 25 parties of record on this matter. The Order on Reconsideration Request clearly states, lines 15 -17, "Since the reconsideration request affects parties of record and the interests of the City, the parties of record (including applicant) who testified at the hearing and City staff will be given an opportunity to respond to the request for reconsideration before a decision on the reconsideration request is issued.11 I did not receive a copy of such correspondence from the City nor the School District. I testified at the Public Hearing on November 8, 2016, held at Renton City Hall (I have confirmed the accuracy of the report and the minutes on the City of Renton web page to confirm my name and testimony is included in such records). City representatives indicated at multiple neighborhood meetings and at various points in the process, anyone who sent in comments along the way or sent their contact information on to the various planners, would be included as Parties of Record from that point forward. I hereby ask for clarification of a list of the 25 Parties of Record that received the copy of this December 20th Notice -and a list of the all inclusive Parties of Record who have submitted their names at any point in this process -as it was represented by multiple City Representatives, as well as School District Representatives. I request any names from the process who have not yet received this December 20th Notice, also be notified of the same. I have checked with Jason Seth, City Clerk, and he indicates I am not listed as a party of record. He indicates he only sends the notices out and the list of the Parties of Record comes from CED at the City of Renton. He said "if you are calling me about this, then you have received notice." I quickly clarified I was calling based upon my father -who has never testified and is not a party of record, but rather an adjacent property owner -showing me a copy of the notice he received on December 24th. This notice is not proper, nor is it timely. I hereby notify the City and the Hearings Examiner of the improper procedure on this matter and the violation of process with the failure to properly notify all parties of record and provide them adequate time for review and response. This matter has been "fast tracked" by the Renton School District and while we as a neighborhood are generally supportive of this school and build, the process itself has been full of failures and short comings. Improper notice was provided, which resulted in a 2nd mailing, when the school district erroneously mailed notices out with wrong postal codes ..... parties of record were dropped and contact information was lost when the file transitioned in-house at the City between Rocale Timmons and Matthew Herrera (Rocale Timmons -who, when representatives from the Planning Department was asked about her later, couldn't even remember her as an employee -let alone a Senior Planner) ...... the City of Renton failed to include proper Exhibit at the November Public Hearing (yet nothing was done to address or correct the same -other than a side comment by RSD employee confirming the error) ....... the Transportation Study was submitted with erroneous information (citing the deli as a "supermarket", the walk-in burrito stand as a "restaurant" and the adult learning center as a "functioning & operational elementary school" ....... confusion and chaos has surrounded this whole process and it has been challenging for neighbors to be involved in the same (this doesn't even begin to address the complete and total misrepresentations made by Randy Matheson to the neighborhoods of a "walkable only" elementary school (that now will be having students bussed in from all over Renton -not just walking from North Renton), neighbors not being displaced who didn't want to move (then the threat of eminent domain being waived over their head), neighbors having 2-3 years for moving (and then receiving eviction paperwork) plus the rude and demeaning behavior which resulted in an entire neighborhood association requesting alternate point of contact because of the lies he told and the way he treated neighbors). This list could go on and on. 3 t I am extremely disappointed in the Re, non School District for allowing this all to tra .. ,~ire in this fashion. They had an opportunity to work with a neighborhood on a new elementary school and make it an enjoyable public process of building a community from the ground up through our children -instead there were lies and deceit and have left neighbors with a bad feeling and distrust of representations being made by the City and School District -not a great feeling in going forward as we face unavoidable growth within our City. I am even more disappointed in the City of Renton for allowing this to take place. Neighbors approached the City and asked for help with this confusing process and instead of the help we thought we might receive, the City only proved to drop the ball further and add more confusion to the process. All parties of record need to be notified of this process -as required -with adequate time provided for response. Diane Dobson North Renton Neighborhood Association 425.890.9176 4 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Jason Seth Friday, December 30, 2016 4:34 PM 'dmd82l@aol.com'; Cynthia Moya Denis Law; Jennifer T. Henning; Matthew Herrera; Vanessa Dolbee; Julia Medzegian; enkeli_l@yahoo.com; north.renton@gmail.com; matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us; Alex Tuttle RE: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request I have sent your request to the Hearing Examiner. I will send you a copy of his response when I receive it. Thank you, -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 jseth@rentonwacE_QY This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: dmd821@aol.com [mailto:dmd821@aol.com] Sent: Friday, December 30, 2016 4:30 PM To: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov>; Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw@Rentonwa.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhenning@Rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <MHerrera@Rentonwa.gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov>; Julia Medzegian <Jmedzegian@Rentonwa.gov>; enkeli_l@yahoo.com; north.renton@gmail.com; matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us; Alex Tuttle <ATuttle@Rentonwa.gov> Subject: Re: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Pursuant to suggestion of Jennifer Henning, City of Renton, I make specific request for additional time to respond due to the failure to send proper notice to all parties of record. Thank you Diane Dobson Sent from AOL Mobile Mail -----Original Message----- From: Jason Seth <.fScthWRentonwa.,:ov> To: 'dmd82l@aol.com' <clmcl82 l (8··,lOl.com>; Cynthia Moya <C\1ova(a1 Rentonwayov·> Cc: Denis Law <DLawCeiRcntonwa.g,v_>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jlic1111i!)g(</1 8,,t:_JJtQ_nvya,gQv>; Matthew Herrera <'>'1 Herrera Ca· Ren Jonw,1. gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolhcc (i, Rcntonwa. gov>; Julia Medzegian <J mcgz~gi,_m_C<1~_Rcntonwa.uov>; enkeli_l <enkeli I (ct v,1hoo.com>; north.renton <nmt b.rcn Ion Ci_i" umai I .mm>; matthew .feldmeyer <n1aJ1l1c_\_v.fcl~1mc_ycrca,rf n tllnschm1ls.t1,>; Alex Tuttle <1\J . .u..tt)c (<1l_Renton»11.g,1v> Sent: Thu, Dec 29, 2016 12:27 PM Subject: RE: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request 1 Thank you for providing clarificatio -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 iseth (al rento nwa .gov ill ensure that the system is updated to :t your correct address. This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: dmd82l@aol.com [mailto:dmd82l@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 11:49 AM To: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov>; Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: Denis Law <121_aw@Rentonwa.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhenning@Rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <MHerrera@Rentonwa.go_v>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov>; Julia Medzegian <Jmedzegia n(w Rentonwa .gov>; enkeli !@yahoo.com; north.renton@g_[nail.com; matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us; Alex Tuttle <ATuttle@Rentonwa.gov> Subject: Re: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Mr Seth I was a party of record personally. Not only via email to the various planners and School District, but when I signed in for the hearing at the Public Hearing Process. I never signed in utilizing the North Renton Neighborhood contact information, but rather my own personal information through every step of this process -quite frankly, I was not aware the North Renton Neighborhood Association has a PO Box. As I have never represented this PO Box (Box 326) to be my address, I advise this address is NOT correct and completely erroneous. The North Renton Neighborhood Association does not have any legal governing standing over any component of our neighborhood and membership with the NRNA is not a requirement of living in the North Renton neighborhood. The Association is a tool only. This is the second time the City has failed to recognize that (the first time being when it was required of the residents of North Renton to make a request for a public meeting outside of City Offices with the CED Representatives relating to the City Center Plan, through the NRNA). If the City is dismissing citizens -based upon the auspices of a governing neighborhood association serving as their voice and representation -we have a problem bigger than just a failure to properly notify parties of record. Diane Dobson -----Original Message----- From: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> To: 'drnd82 l G_i'aol.com' <dmd82 l (i{aol.corn>; Cynthia Moya <CMova@Renlonwa.uov> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw<!i·Rentonwa.~ov>; Jennifer T. Henning <.lhennim:(i1'Rcnlonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <Ml-lerrera(ai Rentonwa.gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolhee(il', Rcntonwa.gov>; Julia Medzegian <.I rncdzcgian@Renton wa,g,w>; enkeli_l <cnkcli I c,;, vahoo.corn>; north.renton <north.rcnton (a: gmai I .com>; matthew.feldmeyer <rnalthcw.feldmcvcr@rentonschools.th>; Alex Tuttle <ATutlle~tRentonwa.gov> Sent: Thu, Dec 29, 2016 11:30 am Subject: RE: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request 2 Hello Ms. Dobson, We had you listed as a party of recoru oS the North Renton Neighborhood Association representative, at P.O. Box 326, Renton, WA 98057. We will add your personal address of 806 N. Riverside, Renton, WA 98057 too. Please confirm that both addresses are correct. Thank you, -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 jseth@rentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: d m d 8 21 @;,9J,cgr_11_ [ rn _,1 iJtcl: liJl]d_~:2J(<:['_a,i_L,g rn] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 9:51 AM To: Cynthia Moya <(j'v1gya(Q'Rcntil[l\\a,g,,y> Cc: Denis Law <DLawQ,·Rcntonw,1.~ov>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhcnninr<i'Rrntornrn.;wv>; Matthew Herrera <Ml-lcrrcra Qt Rentonwa."ov>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbec0 Rcntonw,,.;!m>; Julia Medzegian <J.n.lG_!-l{~:g_tlm_~LfsG_n t_~)_n ~Yn:£.QY>; c nk,\~Jj_1 (G:y ;1h~Y~~-~D.m; D_QrJ.11.:xc.ntQD .\~ _guJ ;tLL'.'.D.rn; matt hew. lddrncvcr<ii rcntonschuols.us; Jason Seth <.!Seth Qi Rcntonw,1.gov> Subject: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Greetings I have become aware of correspondence dated December 20, 2016, addressed to Lisa Klein, that was cc to 25 parties of record on this matter. The Order on Reconsideration Request clearly states, lines 15 -17, "Since the reconsideration request affects parties of record and the interests of the City, the parties of record (including applicant) who testified at the hearing and City staff will be given an opportunity to respond to the request for reconsideration before a decision on the reconsideration request is issued." I did not receive a copy of such correspondence from the City nor the School District. I testified at the Public Hearing on November 8, 2016, held at Renton City Hall (I have confirmed the accuracy of the report and the minutes on the City of Renton web page to confirm my name and testimony is included in such records). City representatives indicated at multiple neighborhood meetings and at various points in the process, anyone who sent in comments along the way or sent their contact information on to the various planners, would be included as Parties of Record from that point foiward. I hereby ask for clarification of a list of the 25 Parties of Record that received the copy of this December 20th Notice -and a list of the all inclusive Parties of Record who have submitted their names at any point in this process -as it was represented by multiple City Representatives, as well as School District Representatives. I request any names from the process who have not yet received this December 20th Notice, also be notified of the same. I have checked with Jason Seth, City Clerk, and he indicates I am not listed as a party of record. He indicates he only sends the notices out and the list of the Parties of Record comes from CED at the City of Renton. He said "if you are calling me about this, then you have received notice." I quickly clarified I was calling based upon my father -who has never testified and is not a party of record, but rather an adjacent property owner -showing me a copy of the notice he received on December 24th. This notice is not proper, nor is it timely. 3 I hereby notify the City and Hearings Examiner of the impn procedure on this matter and the violation of process with the failure to properly notify a11 parties of record and provide them adequate time for review and response. This matter has been "fast tracked" by the Renton School District and while we as a neighborhood are generally supportive of this school and build, the process itself has been full of failures and short comings. Improper notice was provided, which resulted in a 2nd mailing, when the school district erroneously mailed notices out with wrong postal codes ..... parties of record were dropped and contact information was lost when the file transitioned in-house at the City between Rocale Timmons and Matthew Herrera (Rocale Timmons -who, when representatives from the Planning Department was asked about her later, couldn't even remember her as an employee -let alone a Senior Planner) ...... the City of Renton failed to include proper Exhibit at the November Public Hearing (yet nothing was done to address or correct the same -other than a side comment by RSD employee confirming the error) ....... the Transportation Study was submitted with erroneous information (citing the deli as a "supermarket", the walk-in burrito stand as a "restaurant" and the adult learning center as a "functioning & operational elementary school" ....... confusion and chaos has surrounded this whole process and it has been challenging for neighbors to be involved in the same (this doesn't even begin to address the complete and total misrepresentations made by Randy Matheson to the neighborhoods of a "walkable only" elementary school (that now will be having students bussed in from all over Renton -not just walking from North Renton), neighbors not being displaced who didn't want to move (then the threat of eminent domain being waived over their head), neighbors having 2-3 years for moving (and then receiving eviction paperwork) plus the rude and demeaning behavior which resulted in an entire neighborhood association requesting alternate point of contact because of the lies he told and the way he treated neighbors). This list could go on and on. I am extremely disappointed in the Renton School District for allowing this all to transpire in this fashion. They had an opportunity to work with a neighborhood on a new elementary school and make it an enjoyable public process of building a community from the ground up through our children -instead there were lies and deceit and have left neighbors with a bad feeling and distrust of representations being made by the City and School District -not a great feeling in going forward as we face unavoidable growth within our City. I am even more disappointed in the City of Renton for allowing this to take place. Neighbors approached the City and asked for help with this confusing process and instead of the help we thought we might receive, the City only proved to drop the ball further and add more confusion to the process. All parties of record need to be notified of this process • as required -with adequate time provided for response. Diane Dobson North Renton Neighborhood Association 425.890.9176 4 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Subject: Hi Phil, Jason Seth Friday, December 30, 2016 4:32 PM 'Phil Olbrechts' FW: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Ms. Dobson has requested additional time to respond to the Order on the request for reconsideration. -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425A30-6502 ise.th ITTentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: dmd821@aol.com [mailto:dmd821@aol.com] Sent: Friday, December 30, 2016 4:30 PM To: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov>; Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw@Rentonwa.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhenning@Rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <MHerrera@Rentonwa.gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov>; Julia Medzegian <Jmedzegian@Rentonwa.gov>; enkeli_l@yahoo.com; north.renton@gmail.com; matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us; Alex Tuttle <ATuttle@Rentonwa.gov> Subject: Re: NRNA-Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Pursuant to suggestion of Jennifer Henning, City of Renton, I make specific request for additional time to respond due to the failure to send proper notice to all parties of record. Thank you Diane Dobson Sent from AOL Mobile Mail -----Original Message----- From: Jason Seth <.I Seth (re Rcntonwa.nov> To: 'dmd82l@aol.com' <drnd82 l 01c1,1l.com>; Cynthia Moya <CMoya(g Rcntonw,L~ov> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw0'Rcntonwa.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhcnnin~(,f Rcntonw,1.~m>; Matthew Herrera <\1Hcrrcra@Rcntonwa. gllv>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDol bee Cg• Rcntonw a. :cov>; Julia Medzegian <J rncd1.c"ian@Rcntunwa. "Ov>; enkeli_l <cnkel i 10', vahoo.com>; north.renton <nonb.rcnton@ £ngi_lc:1it1_1>; matthew .feldmeyer <rn.s1tJhc\.\c_,_feldn1c_y,,1~(~'I~t1lon:i,b9t'b.t15>; Alex Tuttle </;_Iutt lc@Rcntonwa. ~ov> Sent: Thu, Dec 29, 2016 12:27 PM Subject: RE: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Thank you for providing clarification. I will ensure that the system is updated to reflect your correct address. 1 -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City_f:lerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 iseth@re nto nwa .gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: dmd821@aol.com [mai1to:dmd821@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 11:49 AM To: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov>; Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw@Rentonwa.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhenning@Rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <MHerrera@Rentonwa.gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov>; Julia Medzegian <Jmedzegian@Rentonwa.gov>; enkeli l@yahoo.com; north.renton@gmail.com; matthew. feldmeyer@rentonschools.us; Alex Tuttle <ATuttle@Rentonwa.gov> Subject: Re: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Mr Seth I was a party of record personally. Not only via email to the various planners and School District, but when I signed in for the hearing at the Public Hearing Process. I never signed in utilizing the North Renton Neighborhood contact information, but rather my own personal information through every step of this process -quite frankly, I was not aware the North Renton Neighborhood Association has a PO Box. As I have never represented this PO Box (Box 326) to be my address, I advise this address is NOT correct and completely erroneous. The North Renton Neighborhood Association does not have any legal governing standing over any component of our neighborhood and membership with the NRNA is not a requirement of living in the North Renton neighborhood. The Association is a tool only. This is the second time the City has failed to recognize that (the first time being when it was required of the residents of North Renton to make a request for a public meeting outside of City Offices with the CED Representatives relating to the City Center Plan, through the NRNA). If the City is dismissing citizens -based upon the auspices of a governing neighborhood association serving as their voice and representation -we have a problem bigger than just a failure to properly notify parties of record. Diane Dobson -----Original Message----- From: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> To: 'dmd82 L (a\ml.corn' <drnd82 l (a• aol.corn>; Cynthia Moya <CM ova (a' Rentonwa. aov> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw_C{LRf_t]J_Ol]_\Vil,_g_Q_':'>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhe1111i_t1g(g)_R,;_nr_911,,,:,\,_grl\'>; Matthew Herrera <MHcrrcra01Rcntonwa.gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <YDolbcc0'•Rcntonwa.gm>; Julia Medzegian <J med/egian@Rentonw,t.~ov>; enkeli_l <cnkcl i l@vahoo.com>; north.renton <north.rcntun@;:rnail.com>; matthew.feldmeyer <matt hew.l'eldrncvcr@'renlonschools.us>; Alex Tuttle <A Tull le (it Rcn\onwa.uov> Sent: Thu, Dec 29, 2016 11:30 am Subject: RE: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Hello Ms. Dobson, 2 We had you listed as a party of reco the North Renton Neighborhood Assoc 1 representative, at P.O. Box 326, Renton, WA 98057. We will add your personal address of 806 N. Riverside, Renton, WA 98057 too. Please confirm that both addresses are correct. Thank you, -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 iseth@re nto nw_;,_,fil>Y'. This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: dmd821@aol.com [mailto:d,ndS2I_Cg aol.com] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 9:51 AM To: Cynthia Moya <('_:VJ9_ya(Q'Rentonw,1.<>ov> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw(ii,Rcntonwa.s.:_Q\_>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhcnninu(ci·Rcnto1rn,i.um>; Matthew Herrera <f'v1!Jerrcn1C,{Ji,_11ton\\'a. um>; Vanessa Dolbee <YDolhcc (n' Rcntnnw,1._g_oy>; Julia Medzegian <1111cJJ'.cQian@-' RcntO[l~\1 1.gQ.:v>~ G!Jk-s:;U_L~t,Lahoo.com; nort 11.rcnton (ct un1ai I .corn; matthcw. feldmcvcrG1• rcnton,chollis.u,; Jason Seth <J Scth@Rcntonw_a. uov> Subject: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Greetings I have become aware of correspondence dated December 20, 2016, addressed to Lisa Klein, that was cc to 25 parties of record on this matter. The Order on Reconsideration Request clearly states, lines 15 -17, "Since the reconsideration request affects parties of record and the interests of the City, the parties of record (including applicant) who testified at the hearing and City staff will be given an opportunity to respond to the request for reconsideration before a decision on the reconsideration request is issued." I did not receive a copy of such correspondence from the City nor the School District. I testified at the Public Hearing on November 8, 2016, held at Renton City Hall (I have confirmed the accuracy of the report and the minutes on the City of Renton web page to confirm my name and testimony is included in such records). City representatives indicated at multiple neighborhood meetings and at various points in the process, anyone who sent in comments along the way or sent their contact information on to the various planners, would be included as Parties of Record from that point forward. I hereby ask for clarification of a list of the 25 Parties of Record that received the copy of this December 20th Notice -and a list of the all inclusive Parties of Record who have submitted their names at any point in this process -as it was represented by multiple City Representatives, as well as School District Representatives. I request any names from the process who have not yet received this December 20th Notice, also be notified of the same. I have checked with Jason Seth, City Clerk, and he indicates I am not listed as a party of record. He indicates he only sends the notices out and the list of the Parties of Record comes from CED at the City of Renton. He said "if you are calling me about this, then you have received notice." I quickly clarified I was calling based upon my father -who has never testified and is not a party of record, but rather an adjacent property owner -showing me a copy of the notice he received on December 24th. This notice is not proper, nor is ii timely. 3 I hereby notify the City and learings Examiner of the imprc procedure on this matter and the violation of process with the failure to properly notify ah parties of record and provide them adequate time for review and response. This matter has been "fast tracked" by the Renton School District and while we as a neighborhood are generally supportive of this school and build, the process itself has been full of failures and short comings. Improper notice was provided, which resulted in a 2nd mailing, when the school district erroneously mailed notices out with wrong postal codes ..... parties of record were dropped and contact information was lost when the file transitioned in-house at the City between Rocale Timmons and Matthew Herrera (Rocale Timmons -who, when representatives from the Planning Department was asked about her later, couldn't even remember her as an employee -let alone a Senior Planner) ...... the City of Renton failed to include proper Exhibit at the November Public Hearing (yet nothing was done to address or correct the same -other than a side comment by RSD employee confirming the error) ....... the Transportation Study was submitted with erroneous information (citing the deli as a "supermarket", the walk-in burrito stand as a "restaurant" and the adult learning center as a "functioning & operational elementary school" ....... confusion and chaos has surrounded this whole process and it has been challenging for neighbors to be involved in the same (this doesn't even begin to address the complete and total misrepresentations made by Randy Matheson to the neighborhoods of a "walkable only" elementary school (that now will be having students bussed in from all over Renton -not just walking from North Renton), neighbors not being displaced who didn't want to move (then the threat of eminent domain being waived over their head), neighbors having 2-3 years for moving (and then receiving eviction paperwork) plus the rude and demeaning behavior which resulted in an entire neighborhood association requesting alternate point of contact because of the lies he told and the way he treated neighbors). This list could go on and on. I am extremely disappointed in the Renton School District for allowing this all to transpire in this fashion. They had an opportunity to work with a neighborhood on a new elementary school and make it an enjoyable public process of building a community from the ground up through our children -instead there were lies and deceit and have left neighbors with a bad feeling and distrust of representations being made by the City and School District -not a great feeling in going forward as we face unavoidable growth within our City. I am even more disappointed in the City of Renton for allowing this to take place. Neighbors approached the City and asked for help with this confusing process and instead of the help we thought we might receive, the City only proved to drop the ball further and add more confusion to the process. All parties of record need to be notified of this process -as required -with adequate time provided for response. Diane Dobson North Renton Neighborhood Association 425.890.9176 4 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Good Morning, Enkeli <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Monday, January 02, 2017 10:56 AM Jason Seth; Cynthia Moya Jennifer T. Henning; Vanessa Dolbee; Matthew Herrera; North Renton Neighborhood Association; Diane Dobson; Denis Law Fw: Thank you and Additional Comments for SEPA Review Sartori Elementary NEW revised proposed layout architects rendering 7 _2016jpg I have noticed that one of my emails with comments regarding the Sartori SEPA review was left out of the exhibits. I would like to request that the email below with additional SEPA comments sent to Renton School District and carbon copied to Matthew Herrera be included as part of the record. All of my other comments sent to Renton School District regarding the SEPA review were included in the record in Exhibit 14 titled "Email Comments from Angie Laulainen". I believe that this email is particularly pertinent to my request for reconsideration and should not have been omitted from the record. I have also included the reply by Matthew Feldmeyer confirming receipt of this email and a PDF of the proposed layout which was at that time posted on the Renton School District website and was referenced in my email. All of my other comments regarding the SEPA review were included in the record in Exhibit 14. Since Exhibit 14 is titled "Email Comments from Angie Laulainen" it should be inclusive of all of my comments for the SEPA review. In addition, I noticed that in Exhibit 15, a letter from Matthew Herrera dated October 11 to myself, he noted "I have also added you as a Party of Record for the land use application". It was confirmed to me in an email from Rocale Timmons, Senior Project Manager for City of Renton, on September 14 the date of application, that I was at that time a Party of Record, so it is confusing why I would be added to the list in October. I was also not included as a Party of Record in the Report to the Hearing Examiner Exhibit 26. My address is included on that list as a surrounding property owner (so I did receive the mailing) however my address was listed under my husband's name not my own name. Please note that I have been involved in the process throughout. I was a Party of Record at the time of application and have been following the process since it's beginning, attending the first presentation available to the public last June. I did not only get involved in October and would like it noted that I was a part of this process from the beginning and a Party of Record at the time of application. I will be sending my response to the comments regarding my reconsideration request separately. Thank you for your assistance and for answering so many of my questions last week over email and in person. Sincerely, Angie Laulainen 314 Garden AVE N Renton, WA 98057 1 -----Forwarded Message ----- From: Matthew Feldmeyer <matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us> To: Enkeli <enkeli_l@yahoo.com>; Richard (Rick) Stracke <richard.stracke@rentonschools.us> Cc: "north.renton@gmail.com" <north.renton@gmail.com>; "geosaldaniel@wwdb.org" <geosaldaniel@wwdb.org>; Diane Dobson <dmd821@aol.com>; "lklein@ahbl.com" <lklein@ahbl.com>; Randy Matheson <randy.matheson@rentonschools.us>; Nancy Monahan <monahan55@hotmail.com>; Jennifer T. Henning <jhenning@rentonwa.gov>; Gloria Hodge <Gloria.Hodge@rentonschools.us>; Al Talley <al.talley@rentonschools.us>; Todd Franceschina <todd.franceschina@rentonschools.us>; Lynn Desmarais <lynn.desmarais@rentonschools.us>; Pam Teal <Pam.Teal@rentonschools.us>; Arthur (Art) Jarvis <Arthur.Jarvis@rentonschools.us>; Gregg Zimmerman <gzimmerman@rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <mherrera@rentonwa.gov>; Kizzie Funkhouser <kizmarie@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 2:08 PM Subject: RE: Thank you and Additional Comments for SEPA Review Angie, We are glad to hear that the neighbors enjoyed the opportunity to reclaim the plants, and that the plants have new homes within the neighborhood. Your comment has been received and will be reviewed with the other SEPA comments. Thank you. Matt Feldmeyer, Architect Facilities Project Manager Renton School District No. 403 7812 South 124'" Street Seattle, WA 98178-4830 Office: 425.204.4475 Mobile: 206.482.5253 From: Enkeli [mailto:enkeli_l@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 11 :37 PM To: Richard (Rick) Stracke <richard.stracke@rentonschools.us> Cc: Matthew Feldmeyer <matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us>; north.renton@gmail.com; geosaldaniel@wwdb.org; Diane Dobson <dmd821@aol.com>; lklein@ahbl.com; Randy Matheson <randy.matheson@rentonschools.us>; Nancy Monahan <monahan55@hotmail.com>; Jennifer T. Henning <jhenning@rentonwa.gov>; Gloria Hodge <Gloria.Hodge@rentonschools.us>; Al Talley <al.talley@rentonschools.us>; Todd Franceschina <todd.franceschina@rentonschools.us>; Lynn Desmarais <lynn.desmarais@rentonschools.us>; Pam Teal <Pam.Teal@rentonschools.us> Arthur (Art) Jarvis <Arthur.Jarvis@rentonschools.us>; Gregg Zimmerman <gzimmerman@rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <mherrera@rentonwa.gov>; Kizzie Funkhouser <kizmarie@gmail.com> Subject: Thank you and Additional Comments for SEPA Review Mr. Stracke, First, I would like to express my gratitude to the school district for allowing neighbors to remove plants from Sartori last week. Several of the neighbors immediately across the ,;treet on Garden were able to transplant many of the smaller plants. There were azaleas, vanilla plar ts, lavender and other smaller plants that have now found new homes. This was a very nice ges :ure by the school district and we do appreciate that, thank you! 2 Secondly, I have another comm¥, ,t which I would like to be included in the SEPA review. This comment relates to Section 7 Environmental Health. B Noise. The play area will have a great impact of long term noise created by this project if placed in the location shown in the latest renderings. This noise will occur in the same location that the school buses will be coming through on Garden AVE North. It is too much noise to be placed in one location on the block. At the neighborhood meeting when the latest plans for the new elementary school were presented, there had been some changes made to the covered play area. The new design moved the placement of the play area to be adjacent to the sidewalk on Garden AVE with no landscaping buffer between the play area and the street. It is located next to the sidewalk on Garden, with no trees or set back. This play area includes a ball wall which will be in use for recesses throughout the day. The ball wall will create a lot of additional noise because elementary age children use this for games which require constantly bouncing balls against the wall, and this will happen at several recesses. Elementary schools usually spread recesses out over the course of the day so that different age groups can have recess at separate times, and schools will often have two or three lunch recesses. The placement of the play area and ball wall will not just add noise during a couple of 15 minutes recesses but rather will add noise over a large portion of the school day. I request that this covered play area be placed further in towards the middle of the block. One location would be as is currently shown on the school website page which shows the "New Sartori Elementary School Updates". http://www.rentonschools.us/Page/2718 On this webpage, the design of the school shows the covered play area further in, with six trees between the play area and the street. Another option would be to place the covered play area close to the parent drop off loop, between the parent drop off loop and the soft surface play area. I read in one of the Sartori documents posted on the RSD website, that in the land use pre-application meeting between the City and the school district, that regarding on-site landscaping the City of Renton stated, "a landscape buffer shall be provided between the field and the public sidewalk." I would ask that the ball wall & covered play area also honor this statement by the City of Renton. The covered play area and ball wall should be placed away from the neighborhood street and should have a significant landscape buffer. Safety is another consideration. Having a covered area right next to the street has the potential to provide a convenient location for drug traffic. Drug traffic has been a constant problem on the corner of 3rd and Garden for years. We hope that the new Elementary school will drive away this traffic, rather than provide a convenient location for it, so this is another reason to keep the covered area further in, away from the street. Please acknowledge receipt of my comments for the SEPA Review. Thank you for your consideration, Angie Laulainen 3 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Hello, Enkeli <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Monday, January 02, 2017 1:45 PM Jason Seth; Cynthia Moya Jennifer T. Henning; Vanessa Dolbee; Matthew Herrera; North Renton Neighborhood Association; Diane Dobson; Denis Law Sartori Elementary School LUA-16-000692 -Clarification for Earlier Message Sartori Elementary NEW revised proposed layout architects rendering 7 _2016jpg I realize that I did not name the project in my email earlier this morning. My earlier email (Fw: Thank you and Additional Comments for SEPA Review) which is also included in this message is in reference to Sartori Elementary School LUA-16-000692. Thank you, Angie Laulainen 314 Garden AVE N Renton, WA 98057 From: Enkeli <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> To: Jason Seth <jseth@rentonwa.gov>; Cynthia Moya <cmoya@rentonwa.gov> Cc: JenniferT. Henning <jhenning@rentonwa.gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <vdolbee@rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <mherrera@rentonwa.gov>; North Renton Neighborhood Association <north.renton@gmail.com>; Diane Dobson <dmd821@aol.com>; Denis Law <dlaw@rentonwa.gov> Sent: Monday, January 2, 2017 10:55 AM Subject: Fw: Thank you and Additional Comments for SEPA Review Good Morning, I have noticed that one of my emails with comments regarding the Sartori SEPA review was left out of the exhibits. I would like to request that the email below with additional SEPA comments sent to Renton School District and carbon copied to Matthew Herrera be included as part of the record. All of my other comments sent to Renton School District regarding the SEPA review were included in the record in Exhibit 14 titled "Email Comments from Angie Laulainen". I believe that this email is particularly pertinent to my request for reconsideration and should not have been omitted from the record. I have also included the reply by Matthew Feldmeyer confirming receipt of this email and a PDF of the proposed layout which was at that tirne posted on the Renton School District website and was referenced in my email. All of my other comments regarding the SEPA review were included in the record in Exhibit 14. Since Exhibit 14 is titled "Email Comments from Angie Laulainen" it should be inclusive of all of my comments for the SEPA review. In addition, I noticed that in Exhibit 15, a letter from Matthew Herrera dated October 11 to myself, he noted "/ have also added you as a Party of Record for the land use application". It was confirmed to me in an email from Rocale Timmons, Senior Project Manager for City of Renton, on September 14 the date of application, that I was at that time a Party of Record, so it is confusing why I would be added to the list in October. I was also not included as a Party of Record in the Report to the Hearing 1 Examiner Exhibit 26. My addre ., included on that list as a surrou1 J property owner (so I did receive the mailing) however my address was listed under my husbanu s name not my own name. Please note that I have been involved in the process throughout. I was a Party of Record at the time of application and have been following the process since it's beginning, attending the first presentation available to the public last June. I did not only get involved in October and would like it noted that I was a part of this process from the beginning and a Party of Record at the time of application. I will be sending my response to the comments regarding my reconsideration request separately. Thank you for your assistance and for answering so many of my questions last week over email and in person. Sincerely, Angie Laulainen 314 Garden AVE N Renton, WA 98057 -----Forwarded Message ----- From: Matthew Feldmeyer <matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us> To: Enkeli <enkeli_l@yahoo.com>; Richard (Rick) Stracke <richard.stracke@rentonschools.us> Cc: "north.renton@gmail.com" <north.renton@gmail.com>; "geosaldaniel@wwdb.org" <geosaldaniel@wwdb.org>; Diane Dobson <dmd821@aol.com>; "lklein@ahbl.com" <lklein@ahbl.com>; Randy Matheson <randy.matheson@rentonschools.us>; Nancy Monahan <monahan55@hotmail.com>; Jennifer T. Henning <jhenning@rentonwa.gov>; Gloria Hodge <Gloria.Hodge@rentonschools.us>; Al Talley <al.talley@rentonschools.us>; Todd Franceschina <todd.franceschina@rentonschools.us>; Lynn Desmarais <lynn.desmarais@rentonschools.us>; Pam Teal <Pam.Teal@rentonschools.us>; Arthur (Art) Jarvis <Arthur.Jarvis@rentonschools.us>; Gregg Zimmerman <gzimmerman@rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <mherrera@rentonwa.gov>; Kizzie Funkhouser <kizmarie@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 2:08 PM Subject: RE: Thank you and Additional Comments for SEPA Review Angie, We are glad to hear that the neighbors enjoyed the opportunity to reclaim the plants, and that the plants have new homes within the neighborhood. Your comment has been received and will be reviewed with the other SEPA comments. Thank you. Matt Feldmeyer, Architect Facilities Project Manager Renton School District No. 403 7812 South 1241h Street Seattle, WA 98178-4830 Office: 425.204.4475 Mobile: 206.482.5253 2 From: Enkeli [mailto:enkeli_l@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 11 :37 PM To: Richard (Rick) Stracke <richard.stracke@rentonschools.us> Cc: Matthew Feldmeyer <matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us>; north.renton@gmail.com; geosaldaniel@wwdb.org; Diane Dobson <dmd821@aol.com>; lklein@ahbl.com; Randy Matheson <randy.matheson@rentonschools.us>; Nancy Monahan <monahan55@hotmail.com>; Jennifer T. Henning <jhenning@rentonwa.gov>; Gloria Hodge <Gloria.Hodge@rentonschools.us>; Al Talley <al.talley@rentonschools.us>; Todd Franceschina <todd.franceschina@rentonschools.us>; Lynn Desmarais <lynn.desmarais@rentonschools.us>; Pam Teal <Pam.Teal@rentonschools.us>; Arthur (Art) Jarvis <Arthur.Jarvis@rentonschools.us>; Gregg Zimmerman <gzimmerman@rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <mherrera@rentonwa.gov>; Kizzie Funkhouser <kizmarie@gmail.com> Subject: Thank you and Additional Comments for SEPA Review Mr. Stracke, First, I would like to express my gratitude to the school district for allowing neighbors to remove plants from Sartori last week. Several of the neighbors immediately across the street on Garden were able to transplant many of the smaller plants. There were azaleas, vanilla plants, lavender and other smaller plants that have now found new homes. This was a very nice gesture by the school district and we do appreciate that, thank you! Secondly, I have another comment which I would like to be included in the SEPA review. This comment relates to Section 7 Environmental Health. B Noise. The play area will have a great impact of long term noise created by this project if placed in the location shown in the latest renderings. This noise will occur in the same location that the school buses will be coming through on Garden AVE North. It is too much noise to be placed in one location on the block. At the neighborhood meeting when the latest plans for the new elementary school were presented, there had been some changes made to the covered play area. The new design moved the placement of the play area to be adjacent to the sidewalk on Garden AVE with no landscaping buffer between the play area and the street. It is located next to the sidewalk on Garden, with no trees or set back. This play area includes a ball wall which will be in use for recesses throughout the day. The ball wall will create a lot of additional noise because elementary age children use this for games which require constantly bouncing balls against the wall, and this will happen at several recesses. Elementary schools usually spread recesses out over the course of the day so that different age groups can have recess at separate times, and schools will often have two or three lunch recesses. The placement of the play area and ball wall will not just add noise during a couple of 15 minutes recesses but rather will add noise over a large portion of the school day. I request that this covered play area be placed further in towards the middle of the block. One location would be as is currently shown on the school website page which shows the "New Sartori Elementary School Updates". http://www.rentonschools.us/Paqe/2718 On this webpage, the design of the school shows the covered play area further in, with six trees between the play area and the street. Another option would be to place the covered play area close to the parent drop off loop, between the parent drop off loop and the soft surface play area. I read in one of the Sartori documents posted on the RSD website, that in the land use pre-application meeting between the City and the school district, that regarding on-site landscaping the City of Renton stated, "a landscape buffer shall be provided between the field and the public sidewalk." would ask that the ball wall & covered play area also honor this statement by the City of Renton. The 3 covered play area and ball wall a significant landscape buffer. ,uld be placed away from the nei! rhood street and should have Safety is another consideration. Having a covered area right next to the street has the potential to provide a convenient location for drug traffic. Drug traffic has been a constant problem on the corner of 3rd and Garden for years. We hope that the new Elementary school will drive away this traffic, rather than provide a convenient location for it, so this is another reason to keep the covered area further in, away from the street. Please acknowledge receipt of my comments for the SEPA Review. Thank you for your consideration, Angie Laulainen 4 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Phil Olbrechts <olbrechtslaw@gmail.com> Tuesday, January 03, 2017 1:42 AM Jason Seth Subject: Re: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Please advise Ms. Dobson s he has until 5:00 pm 1/6/17 to respond and Ms. Laulainen that her deadline for reply has been extended to 5:00 pm l/I0/l7 due to Ms. Dobson' deadline extension. Sent from my iPhone On Dec 30, 2016, at 4:31 PM , Jason Seth <JScth(ci Rcntonwa.gov > wrote: Hi Phil, Ms. Dobson has requested additional time to respond to the Order on the request for reconsideration . -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 jseth (a) renton w a .gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: dmd82l@aol.com [mailto:dmd821@aol.com] Sent: Friday, December 30, 2016 4:30 PM To: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov >; Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov > Cc: Denis Law <_D Law@Rentonwa.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhenning@Rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <MHerrera@Rentonwa.gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov>; Julia Medzegian <Jmedzegian@Rentonwa.gov>; enkeli !@yahoo.com; north.renton @gmail.com; matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us; Alex Tuttle <ATuttle@Rentonwa .gov> Subject: Re: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Reque st Purs uant to suggestion of Jennifer Henning, City of Renton, I m ake s pec ific request for additional time to respond due to the failure to send proper notice to all parties of record. Thank you Diane Dobson Sent from AOL Mobile Mail -----Original Message----- From: Jason Seth <JScth(g Rcntonw,u!t1v > To: 'drnd82 l ((l'anl.com ' <drnd82 I (~hwl.com >; Cynthia Moya <C:\foya ca-Rcnt unwa .i!\)\ > Cc: Deni s Law <DLm Ci:i'•Rc11tom\"1.2.~)\>; Jennifer T. Hennin g <Jhcnnin2.({! Rc nton\va .2.ov >; 1 Matthew H errera <M Herr 'Rentomva.g c)\>; Vanessa Dolbe e < l bee C~!' Rent o mva. QU\>; Julia Medzegian <J medzeg(;inS:.1 RL'nt onwa. ~o\·>; enkeli_l <enkeli_J_~·yahoo.n)m >; north.renton <north. renton_(fgn1ail .com>; matthew .feldmeyer <111at thC\\~.[~_ldmQycrG! rcntonschc lols.u ~>; Alex Tuttle </\Tuttle ({r Rcnton,-va.gcl\> S e nt: Thu, Dec 29, 2016 12:27 PM Subject: RE: NRNA -Sartori P a rt ies of Record and Orde r on Reconsideration Request Th ank you fo r providing clarification . I will ensure that the system is updated t o refl ect your correct address. -J ason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk Ci ty of Renton 425-430-6 502 jseth@rentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public d isc losure la ws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: dmd821@aol.com [mai1to:dmd821@aol.com] Sent: Thursd ay, Dece mber 29 , 2016 11 :49 AM To : Ja so n Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov>; Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: De nis Law <DLaw@Rentonwa .gov>; Jennife r T. He nning <Jhenn in g@Rentonwa.gov >; Matthew He rrera <MHerrera@Rentonwa.gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov>; Julia Medzegian <Jmedzeg ian@Rento nwa.gov>; enke l i l@yahoo.com.; n ort h.renton@gmail.com; matthew. feldmeyer@rentonschools.us; Alex Tuttle <A T u tt le@Rentonwa.gov> Subject: Re: NRNA -Sartori Partie s of Record and Order on Re co nsidera t ion Request Mr Seth I was a p a rty of re co rd personally. Not on ly via e mail to th e various planners a nd School Di st ri ct, but when I sign ed in for th e hearing at the Public Hea r ing Process . I never s igned in utili zi ng th e North Renton Neighborhood contact information, but rather my ow n personal in fo rm ation through every step of this process -quite frankly, I was not awa re th e North R enton Neighborh ood Association has a PO Box. As I have never represented this PO Box (Box 326) to be m y address, I advise this address is NOT co rr ect and co mpletely erroneou s. Th e N orth Renton Neig hborhood Association does not ha ve any lega l gove rning standing over any compo nent o f o ur neig hb o rh oo d and membership with the NRNA is not a require ment of li ving in the North R e nton neighbo rhood. T he Ass oc iatio n is a t ool on ly. Thi s is th e second tim e th e City has failed to recog nize th a t (t he first time being when it was requ ired of th e resid e nts of North Renton to make a request f o r a public meeting outside of C ity Offices with the CED Representatives relat ing to the City Center Plan, thro ugh the NRNA). If the City is di smiss ing citizens -based upon the ausp ices of a governing neighborhood association serving as their voice and r eprese ntation -we have a prob lem bigger than just a failure to properly notify parties of record. 2 Diane Dobson -----Original Message----- From: Jason Seth <JSeth@ Rentonwa.qov> To: 'drndfQ I (iiaol.com' <~lmd82Ll)faQISQni>; Cynthia Moya <CMova Cd Rcntonwa.gtw> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw~!'Rcntonw,t.em>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhcnninf!<il·Rcntonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <\1Ilerrcra Cd· Rcntonwa.>!ov>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolhcc(a, Rcntonwa.~m>; Julia Medzegian <J 111cd1.cgian 0· Rcntonwa. eov>; enkeli_l <cnkcl i I0' vahoo,corn>; north.renton <11grth,r~11_to_1_1_ (ii ;!111ail.co111>; matthew .feldmeyer <1 nalthcw. fc ldmcvcr0' re nton,chools. us>; Alex Tuttle <A Tuttle (a, R_cp~Jnvv,1,gov> Sent: Thu, Dec 29, 2016 11 :30 am Subject: RE: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Hello Ms. Dobson, We had you listed as a party of record as the North Renton Neighborhood Association representative, at P.O. Box 326, Renton, WA 98057. We will add your personal address of 806 N. Riverside, Renton, WA 98057 too. Please confirm that both addresses are correct. Thank you, -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 42 5-430-6502 iseth(dl rentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: drnd821@aol.com [mailto:drnd82 I (ii;aol.com] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 9:51 AM To: Cynthia Moya <CVlova@Rcntonwa.gov> Cc: Denis Law <.QL.aw(g'>Rcnto1ma.£()V>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhcnning@RrntonwaYov>; Matthew Herrera <\11-lcrrcra0• Rcntonwa.Qov>; Vanessa Dolbee <YDoll,<:c (g'_l{sntonw~>; Julia Medzegian <J 111cd1cgian@Rcntonwa.gm>; cnkc Ii I (ci'> vahno.coni; QcJr·t]1.rc:11jo0_(it_grnajl ,co111; .1n,1ttJ1c\v. [,_ltimcy,_r_Co1,nton,,h,.Jo_l.s ,.t.1.s; Jason Seth <JScth ~" Rent, ,nwa. gov> Subject: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Greetings I have become aware of correspondence dated December 20, 2016, addressed to Lisa Klein, that was cc to 25 parties of record on this matter. The Order on Reconsideration Request clearly states, lines 15 -17, "Since the reconsideration request affects parties of record and the interests of the City, the parties of record (including applicant) who testified at the hearing and City staff will be given an opportunity to respond to the request for reconsideration before a decision on the reconsideration request is issued." I did not receive a copy of such correspondence from the City nor the School District_ 3 I testified at the Public Heari November 8, 2016, held at Renton City {I have confirmed the accuracy of the report and the ... inutes on the City of Renton web page to,_ .. irm my name and testimony is included in such records). City representatives indicated at multiple neighborhood meetings and at various points in the process, anyone who sent in comments along the way or sent their contact information on to the various planners, would be included as Parties of Record from that point forward. I hereby ask for clarification of a list of the 25 Parties of Record that received the copy of this December 20th Notice -and a list of the all inclusive Parties of Record who have submitted their names at any point in this process -as it was represented by multiple City Representatives, as well as School District Representatives. I request any names from the process who have not yet received this December 20th Notice, also be notified of the same. I have checked with Jason Seth, City Clerk, and he indicates I am not listed as a party of record. He indicates he only sends the notices out and the list of the Parties of Record comes from CED at the City of Renton. He said "if you are calling me about this, then you have received notice." I quickly clarified I was calling based upon my father -who has never testified and is not a party of record, but rather an adjacent property owner -showing me a copy of the notice he received on December 24th. This notice is not proper, nor is it timely. I hereby notify the City and the Hearings Examiner of the improper procedure on this matter and the violation of process with the failure to properly notify all parties of record and provide them adequate time for review and response. This matter has been "fast tracked" by the Renton School District and while we as a neighborhood are generally supportive of this school and build, the process itself has been full of failures and short comings. Improper notice was provided, which resulted in a 2nd mailing, when the school district erroneously mailed notices out with wrong postal codes ..... parties of record were dropped and contact information was lost when the file transitioned in-house at the City between Rocale Timmons and Matthew Herrera (Rocale Timmons -who, when representatives from the Planning Department was asked about her later, couldn't even remember her as an employee -let alone a Senior Planner) ...... the City of Renton failed to include proper Exhibit at the November Public Hearing (yet nothing was done to address or correct the same -other than a side comment by RSD employee confirming the error) ....... the Transportation Study was submitted with erroneous information (citing the deli as a "supermarket", the walk-in burrito stand as a "restaurant" and the adult learning center as a "functioning & operational elementary school" ....... confusion and chaos has surrounded this whole process and it has been challenging for neighbors to be involved in the same (this doesn't even begin to address the complete and total misrepresentations made by Randy Matheson to the neighborhoods of a "walkable only" elementary school (that now will be having students bussed in from all over Renton -not just walking from North Renton), neighbors not being displaced who didn't want to move (then the threat of eminent domain being waived over their head), neighbors having 2-3 years for moving (and then receiving eviction paperwork) plus the rude and demeaning behavior which resulted in an entire neighborhood association requesting alternate point of contact because of the lies he told and the way he treated neighbors). This list could go on and on. I am extremely disappointed in the Renton School District for allowing this all to transpire in this fashion. They had an opportunity to work with a neighborhood on a new elementary school and make it an enjoyable public process of building a community from the ground up through our children -instead there were lies and deceit and have left neighbors with a bad feeling and distrust of representations being made by the City and School District -not a great feeling in going forward as we face unavoidable growth within our City. I am even more disappointed in the City of Renton for allowing this to take place. Neighbors approached the City and asked for help with this confusing process and instead of the help we thought we might receive, the City only proved to drop the ball further and add more confusion to the process. All parties of record need to be notified of this process -as required -with adequate time provided for response. 4 Diane Dobson North Renton Neighborhood Association 425.890.9176 5 Jason Seth From: Jason Seth Sent: To: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 8:27 AM dmd821@aol.com; enkeli_l@yahoo.com Cc: Vanessa Dolbee; Jennifer T. Henning; Cynthia Moya Subject: RE: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Dear Ms. Dobson and Ms. Laulainen, Ms. Dobson, on 1/3/2017, the Hearing Examiner notified me that he has extended the deadline period to comment on the Laulainen Request for Reconsideration until 1/6/2017 at 5 p.m. Ms. Laulainen, please be advised that the Hearing Examiner has extended your deadline to reply to the comments received regarding the Request for Reconsideration until 1/10/2017 at 5 p.m. due to him granting an extension to Ms. Dobson. After the 1/6/2017 deadline, the Clerk's office will mail copies of all of the comments to all parties of record. Thank you, -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 jseth@rentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: Jennifer T. Henning Sent: Friday, December 30, 2016 5:38 PM To: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov> Subject: FW: NRNA-Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Jason, As this is a timely request, please contact the Hearing Examiner to request an extension. Thank you. Jennifer Henning From: dmd821@aol.com [rnailto:dmd821:a)aol.com] Sent: Friday, December 30, 2016 4:30 PM To: Jason Seth; Cynthia Moya Cc: Denis Law; Jennifer T. Henning; Matthew Herrera; Vanessa Dolbee; Julia Medzegian; enkeli l(ci)yahoo.corn; north.renton@gmaU,c:mn; mill:t.bel&'.JelcJm<eY'-'r@rentonschools.us; Alex Tuttle Subject: Re: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Pursuant to suggestion of Jennifer Henning, City of Renton, I make specific request for additional time to respond due to the failure to send proper notice to all parties of record. 1 Thank you Diane Dobson Sent from AOL Mobile Mail -----Original Message----- From: Jason Seth <JScthtci•Rcntonwa.gcn> To: 'dmd82 l@aol.com' <drm182 I @aol .com>; Cynthia Moya <CMoya (,D Rcntonwa.gov> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw@·Rcntonwa.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhennin,r@Rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <i\-1 Herrera (g: Renton wa. gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <V[.)g!l:>Q<c_CQ' Renton wa. gov>; Julia Medzegian <Jll_l_(;lizQg_i_:i_[l_{'!_ Renton wa. "'" >; enkeli_l <enkcl i I@vahoo.mm>; north.renton <1wrtJ_1_,renton f.[,' 2mai I .corn>; matthew.feldmeyer <111,1t.t_h(;\Y_,JQ!gmever(a: rentonschoob.us>; Alex Tuttle </\ Tuttle <.!J) Renton wa.gci_v> Sent: Thu, Dec 29, 2016 12:27 PM Subject: RE: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Thank you for providing clarification. I will ensure that the system is updated to reflect your correct address. -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 j set b._@_rgr_1to.r1 w a .gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: dmd821@aol.com [mai1to:dmd8.21_@_aol.com] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 11:49 AM To: Jason Seth <J_$_~th@Rentonwa.gov>; Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Renton)'ljl"gg_.','> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw@Rentonwa.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhenning@Rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <MHerrera@Rentonwa.gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov>; Julia Medzegian <Jmedzegian@Rentonwa.gov>; enkeli l@yahoo.com; north.renton@gmail.com; matthe,yJ~Jdmeyer@rentonschools.us; Alex Tuttle <ATuttle@Rento.nwa.gov> Subject: Re: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Mr Seth I was a party of record personally. Not only via email to the various planners and School District, but when I signed in for the hearing at the Public Hearing Process. I never signed in utilizing the North Renton Neighborhood contact information, but rather my own personal information through every step of this process -quite frankly, I was not aware the North Renton Neighborhood Association has a PO Box. As I have never represented this PO Box (Box 326) to be my address, I advise this address is NOT correct and completely erroneous. The North Renton Neighborhood Association does not have any legal governing standing over any component of our neighborhood and membership with the NRNA is not a requirement of living in the North Renton neighborhood. The Association is a tool only. This is the second time the City has failed to recognize that (the first time being when it was required of the residents of North Renton to make a request for a public meeting outside of City Offices with the CED Representatives relating to the City Center Plan, through the NRNA). 2 If the City is dismissing citizens -bas--.ipon the auspices of a governing neighbor. ,-ad association serving as their voice and representation -we have a problem bigger than just a failure to properly notify parties of record. Diane Dobson -----Original Message----- From: Jason Seth <,JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> To: 'drnd82 I (ii' aol.com' <dmd82 ]([i aol.co1n>; Cynthia Moya <CMoya (ii Renton wa. gm> Cc: Denis Law <DL.aw0:!-RcrJllrnwa.'.!ov>; Jennifer T. Henning <1)1ennirigCtRcn10nwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <Mlfrrrcra(ri' Rcntomva, g,n>; Vanessa Dolbee <V f)pJ hcc W Rcntrnrn ,,. gov>; Julia Medzegian <J n1cd1cgian !ii Rcntonwa. gov>; enkeli_l <,nb:_cl_i_lC,)'y,1h,,,,,\:2rn>; north.renton <north.rcnton (i,• g111ai I.com>; matthew.feldmeyer <n 1atthcw. fcldrncv crC<i rcntonschools.us>; Alex Tuttle <.A,·ru_ttl, C{fseritcmv,;,1_g_o_v> Sent: Thu, Dec 29, 2016 11:30 am Subject: RE: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Hello Ms. Dobson, We had you listed as a party of record as the North Renton Neighborhood Association representative, at P.O. Box 326, Renton, WA 98057. We will add your personal address of 806 N. Riverside, Renton, WA 98057 too. Please confirm that both addresses are correct. Thank you, -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 jseth@rentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: dmd821@aol.com [rnaUt_,,i;cl_mclt,~J0µg1,rntnJ Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 9:51 AM To: Cynthia Moya <C:Vlc1ya0R,mg111:v_a,gov> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw(ri Rcntonwa.nm>; Jennifer T. Henning <.JhcnninzG0 'Rcntonwa.Qov>; Matthew Herrera <tvJl_lg_r1,n1Cfl<,r11_)o!)vy;1.gQ_vc>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbcc0''Rcntonwa. uov>; Julia Medzegian <J mcd1.cgian <!i' Renton w a. 2nv>; Q_t1k1...J_i__LGI._yahQ_g-5om; !l.Qfth. rc_11t_QJJ'{t'1 g_nmJ '~s:(! __ p1_; malt hew. leldrncvcrCci' rcnton,chool ,. m; Jason Seth <.I Set h@Rcnton wa. gov> Subject: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Greetings I have become aware of correspondence dated December 20, 2016, addressed to Lisa Klein, that was cc to 25 parties of record on this matter. The Order on Reconsideration Request clearly states, lines 15 -17, "Since the reconsideration request affects parties of record and the interests of the City, the parties of record (including applicant) who testified at the hearing and City staff will be given an opportunity to respond to the request for reconsideration before a decision on the reconsideration request is issued.11 I did not receive a copy of such correspondence from the City nor the School District. 3 I testified at the Public Hearing on No ,er 8, 2016, held at Renton City Hall (I h ,onfirmed the accuracy of the report and the minutes on the City of m,nton web page to confirm my name and te~, .... any is included in such records). City representatives indicated at multiple neighborhood meetings and at various points in the process, anyone who sent in comments along the way or sent their contact information on to the various planners, would be included as Parties of Record from that point forward. I hereby ask for clarification of a list of the 25 Parties of Record that received the copy of this December 20th Notice -and a list of the all inclusive Parties of Record who have submitted their names at any point in this process -as it was represented by multiple City Representatives, as well as School District Representatives. I request any names from the process who have not yet received this December 20th Notice, also be notified of the same. I have checked with Jason Seth, City Clerk, and he indicates I am not listed as a party of record. He indicates he only sends the notices out and the list of the Parties of Record comes from CED at the City of Renton. He said "if you are calling me about this, then you have received notice." I quickly clarified I was calling based upon my father -who has never testified and is not a party of record, but rather an adjacent property owner -showing me a copy of the notice he received on December 24th. This notice is not proper, nor is it timely. I hereby notify the City and the Hearings Examiner of the improper procedure on this matter and the violation of process with the failure to properly notify all parties of record and provide them adequate time for review and response. This matter has been "fast tracked" by the Renton School District and while we as a neighborhood are generally supportive of this school and build, the process itself has been full of failures and short comings. Improper notice was provided, which resulted in a 2nd mailing, when the school district erroneously mailed notices out with wrong postal codes ..... parties of record were dropped and contact information was lost when the file transitioned in-house at the City between Rocale Timmons and Matthew Herrera (Rocale Timmons -who, when representatives from the Planning Department was asked about her later, couldn't even remember her as an employee -let alone a Senior Planner) ...... the City of Renton failed to include proper Exhibit at the November Public Hearing (yet nothing was done to address or correct the same -other than a side comment by RSD employee confirming the error) ....... the Transportation Study was submitted with erroneous information (citing the deli as a "supermarket", the walk-in burrito stand as a "restaurant" and the adult learning center as a "functioning & operational elementary school" ....... confusion and chaos has surrounded this whole process and it has been challenging for neighbors to be involved in the same (this doesn't even begin to address the complete and total misrepresentations made by Randy Matheson to the neighborhoods of a "walkable only" elementary school (that now will be having students bussed in from all over Renton -not just walking from North Renton), neighbors not being displaced who didn't want to move (then the threat of eminent domain being waived over their head), neighbors having 2-3 years for moving (and then receiving eviction paperwork) plus the rude and demeaning behavior which resulted in an entire neighborhood association requesting alternate point of contact because of the lies he told and the way he treated neighbors). This list could go on and on. I am extremely disappointed in the Renton School District for allowing this all to transpire in this fashion. They had an opportunity to work with a neighborhood on a new elementary school and make it an enjoyable public process of building a community from the ground up through our children -instead there were lies and deceit and have left neighbors with a bad feeling and distrust of representations being made by the City and School District -not a great feeling in going forward as we face unavoidable growth within our City. I am even more disappointed in the City of Renton for allowing this to take place. Neighbors approached the City and asked for help with this confusing process and instead of the help we thought we might receive, the City only proved to drop the ball further and add more confusion to the process. All parties of record need to be notified of this process -as required -with adequate time provided for response. Diane Dobson North Renton Neighborhood Association 425.890.9176 4 Cynthia Moya From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Phil, Cynthia Moya Friday, December 30, 2016 10:56 AM Phil Olbrechts Brianne Bannwarth; Chip Vincent; Matthew Herrera; Craig Burnell; Jason Seth; Jennifer T. Henning; Julia Medzegian; Larry Warren; Phil Olbrechts; Sabrina Mirante; Vanessa Dolbee Renton -Sartori School Comments for HEX -Akane Yamaguchi This is the Comment from Akane Yamaguchi. Which I will be mailing out to all parties of record with all of the comments later today. Thank you, Cindy Moya, Records Management Specialist City of Renton -Administrative Services/City Clerk Division cmoya@rentonwa.gov 42S-430-6513 -r.-.;-;--;,c. --i~!l!Ull t: From: Akane Yamaguchi [mailto:akane.yamaguchii@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, December 30, 2016 10:29 AM To: Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov>; Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: enkeli_l@yahoo.com Subject: Story Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD Greetings' My name is Akane Yamaguchi and I live on 1008 N Riverside Drive in Renton. I am one of the Party of Record on this above mentioned project and have received a packet/letter regarding Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request. I read a copy of the email written by my neighbor, Ms. Angela Laulainen included in the packet/letter. I agree with all of the points Ms. Laulainen made in the email and I request the Hearing Examiner on this project to consider these points. Could someone please explain why on the document with titled, " BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER OF CITY OF RENTON", in the first paragraph, it's stated that, "Ms. Laulainen's reconsideration request is not admitted and will not be considered by the hearing examiner"? It is because Ms. Laulainen's points are not based upon evidence that is already in the record1 The Hearing Examiner requested the Renton School District to do traffic studies for the first year of the operation of the school. Ms. Laulainen is requesting this traffic studies to be conducted by a non-affiliated company with RSD. I think this is a valid suggestion and no evidence should be required to make this point. 1 Ms. Laulainen is also asking the location of the ball wall to be re-considered or the uall wall completely removed from the school premise due to noise concern in the neighbohood. Ms. Laulainen is not in position to be able to prove evidence on this point because the ball wall has not been constructed yet and I imagine it will cause an extreme hardship on Ms. Laulainen because this type of study will require access to professional skills and equipments. Thank you for reading this email. Sincerely, Akane Yamaguchi 2 Cynthia Moya From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Phil, Cynthia Moya Friday, December 30, 2016 10:54 AM Phil Olbrechts Brianne Bannwarth; Chip Vincent; Matthew Herrera; Craig Burnell; Jason Seth; Jennifer T. Henning; Julia Medzegian; Larry Warren: Phil Olbrechts: Sabrina Mirante; Vanessa Dolbee Renton -Sartori School comments for Hearing Examiner (Monahan) This is the Comment from Nancy Monahan. Which I will be mailing out to all parties of record with all of the comments later today. Thank you, Cindy Moya, Records Management Specialist City of Renton -Administrative Services/City Clerk Division cmoya@rentonwa.gov 425-430-6513 -----Original Message----- From: Jason Seth Sent: Friday, December 30, 2016 8:18 AM To: Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov> Subject: FW: Sartori School comments for Hearing Examiner Additional comments for the Sartori Request for reconsideration. Please forward to the Hearing Examiner and parties of record. -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 jseth@rentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). -----Original Message----- From: Nancy Monahan [mailto:monahan55@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 8:51 PM To: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: Melissa Hart <MHart@Rentonwa.gov>; Angie Laulainen <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Subject: Sartori School comments for Hearing Examiner 1 I am one of the parties of record pr, at the recent hearing, and wish to com further on the Sartori School project. Throughout this entire process, the Renton School District has not been responsive to neighborhood concerns. Also, some people that have previously testified at hearings have mysteriously fallen off the list of parties of record, and are no longer receiving mailings. I hope that through the Hearing Examiner, my voice, and the voices of my neighbors, can finally be heard. 1) Location of the ball wall: I concur with the comments made by Angie Laulainen in her email to the Hearing Examiner dated December 12, 2016. Bringing this level of noise so close to established residences is unacceptable. These residences have been across from this school for decades, and the original play area and field did not present a problem for them. However, the new playground design submitted by the Renton School District will substantially change the character of the neighborhood. A ball wall is a significant noise-generator, and a typical recess schedule will result in a sustained disturbance for neighbors for several hours ofthe day. Simple design changes could accommodate the neighbors' request to move this feature this to another area that does not create a perpetual noise nuisance. I request that this be made a requirement that the Renton School District revisits their design to come up with something more acceptable to the neighbors who will be impacted the most. 2) Traffic study: I am hoping that the final determination will include a recommendation that traffic patterns be monitored and reviewed for a year, and that an independent, impartial agency, not previously connected with the Renton School District (e.g., not Heffron Transportation) be appointed to do that monitoring and reporting. I would like to further request that it be stipulated that if such a review and report indicates that neighbors' concerns about traffic patterns around the school are founded, and that congestion and safety problems are noted, that the Renton School District will make the necessary adjustments to mitigate those problems. These two issues have the greatest impact on the livability and property values of our immediate neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration of these concerns. Sincerely, Nancy Monahan 325 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 425-235-2889 2 Office of the City Clerk 1055 South Grady Way Renton WA 98057-3232 o~~~@m)E) ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED "-: :-· .. 1.. 'l"',t-;.-;-\ .... ;:.---4:~-... -""-··:-.:..\. ::...., 'ffi .d. i::.'I ~··' ;c:REif~f6i~ip '> ?l~;~;;; North Renton Neighborhood Association PO Box 326 Renton, WA 9805 7 fl:i 'B !il(IIHRi!li! . Fifilil!f,,.,N r·:r1-y (;f REr~T(\f\ ·y·1·· ' ' --01· ~~tj0d!.Jt ;_,f:~_:\/fC-:~·r,ws ::·2a::.:~1:_: _ ·:1' -~ 0 -~ 2..:,,;::i.0 1;:> ;.:, l .'. ,' L · :1_ b a-· ,. ,.__ . :°' ~ T -~ +., TO S:: !'~ C,·'.=:_ -::.: . -·-·· "-. ~--..... ; -· ~, -' -' . -· N~:: __ 9SOS73 3255 ~~ ' ._, ' ., ....... ' "· '"' <j ""! .~ t':'Qf:Vi-;'/,f:D ~l695-05147-Z7-25 , I ... , . /]l :il!:11;1\ 1·\!l:11llJi!1 1 1(:!fr·:!t1~'1'. dlu·:\i;ir; December 20, 2016 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30 1h St, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request RE: Sartori Elementary School (LUA-16-000692) Dear Ms. Klein: Enclosed please find the City of Renton's Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request dated December 19, 2016, along with the Request for Reconsideration from Angela Laulainen dated December 12, 2016. Jason Seth, City Clerk, can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, i /· \J nv 0. s~ /,--cf~!t'-'t +-- Melissa Hart Public Records Analyst cc: Hearing Examiner Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Jennifer Cisneros 1 Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 , rentonwa.gov I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: Sartori Elementary School Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Conditional Use LUAl6-000692, PPUD, CU-H ) ) ) ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION ) REQUEST ) ) ) ) By email dated December 12, 2016, Angela Laulainen has requested reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's decision on the above-captioned matter. Since the reconsideration request affects parties of record and the interests of the City, the parties of record (including applicant) who testified at the hearing and City staff will be given an opportunity to respond to the request for reconsideration before a decision on the reconsideration request is issued. Any responses must be based upon evidence that is already in the record. No evidence that has not been recorded at the hearing or entered as an exhibit at the hearing will be considered in the reconsideration request. To this end, the recess schedule appended to Ms. Laulainen's reconsideration request is not admitted and will not be considered by the hearing examiner. Similarly, Ms. Laulainen's comments about what she can hear in her home arc also not admitted and not considered. ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION 22 I. 23 Persons who testified at the hearing on the above-captioned matter or had \Vritten comment admitted into the record shall have until 4:00 pm, December 30, 2016 to provide written comments in response to the request for reconsideration submitted by Ms. Laulainen. The City Clerk shall promptly forward all responses to Ms. Laulainen to the email address she used to file her request for reconsideration. 24 25 26 Ms. Laulainen shall have until January 6, 2017 at 4:00 pm to provide a written reply to the responses authorized in the preceding paragraph. PUD and CU -1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 0 ~-All written comments authorized above may be emailed to the City Clerk's Office at C \lo, a"d rcntonwa.go\. In the alternative wTitten comments may be mailed or delivered to Cynthia Moya, City of Renton Records Management Specialist, Administrative Services/City Clerk Division, at 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Mailed or delivered comments must be received by the City by the deadlines specified in this Order. DA TED this 19 1h day of December, 2016. City of Renton Hearing Examiner PUD and CU -2 Cynthia Moya Subject: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD From: Enkeli <enkeli l@vahoo.com> To: "iseth@rentonwa.gov" <1.§eth@ rentomi11a.qov> Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 10:53 PM Subject: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School I LUA 16-000692, CU-H, PUD Honorable Hearing Examiner, I am writing to ask for reconsideration on two aspects of the New Sartori Elementary School project/LUA 16-000692, CU-H, PUD. The two aspects of the decision are with respect to 1) traffic monitoring and 2) the location of the ball wall. First, regarding the aspect of traffic, thank you for including a stipulation that the queuing and parking elements of the proposal be monitored for one year. This monitoring will collect valuable information to help mitigate any problems that will arise from the current plan. I request that it also be stipulated that the one-year monitoring be done by an outside organization, one that is not connected in any way with Renton School District. The traffic report which was ordered by Renton School District and done by Heffron Transportation appeared to be biased in favor of Renton School District's fast track agenda to push their plans through and also reflected a general lack of knowledge of the North Renton Neighborhood. A lack of knowledge was apparent in several errors in the traffic report which did not come to the traffic experts' attention until pointed out in SEPA comments submitted by neighbors. For example, during the initial draft of the SEPA review, traffic experts wrongly quoted speed limits surrounding the site as all currently at 20 miles per hour. The traffic pattern at the intersection of N. 4th and Garden was also misrepresented as a through street (both described as a through street in the SEPA review and illustrated on the map of the school as a through street). The updated report submitted for the City of Renton Land Use Application included inflated counts of vehicular trips to the school, taken from a manual representing counts to a fully functioning elementary school. This again demonstrated the lack of knowledge of our neighborhood since Sartori has not been in use as an elementary school for decades. I request a non-biased organization be required to monitor the parking and queuing at the school. The City of Renton is more in touch with the North Renton Neighborhood and could be one choice to facilitate this monitoring. If not the City of Renton, it would be best to stipulate it is an organization other than Heffron Transportation, one that can be impartial, and one that will visit the site to gather the data for the report. The second aspect of the New Sartori Elementary School project which I request changes is the location of the ball wall in the covered play area at the south end of the block. This location is still too close to the street and to the residences on Garden Avenue North. The school district stated at the hearing that they pulled this area further to the west, however just a fifteen foot setback is not enough to offset the noise from the ball wall. This is not just typical playground noise that will emanate for a brief amount of time, but the ball wall is the most popular part of the playground where students line up to play ''wall ball" and take turns for the entire recess to bounce balls against this wall. The fact 1 that it is a covered structure me-~s that the sound of the balls will be rreatly amplified. Usually also located near the ball wall is fou 1are which will add even more bal mcing noise. The fact that it is a cement area with a cement wall makes the balls even louder. And it is not just a small window of time but the majority of each day we will hear constant ball bouncing. Elementary school recesses are spread out over the course of the day, so the bouncing ball noise will occur practically all day in order for all students to have access to the playground. I have attached the recess schedule for Lakeridge Elementary School as an example of a typical recess schedule. The homes on Garden are older homes that are located close to the street. The construction of our homes is such that the walls do not block out a lot of noise. We hear sirens from several blocks away, planes, buses, trains, helicopters, and when Boeing tests their jet engines, we hear the rumble till it stops and the windows rattle like crazy. Our homes are not expensive sound proof homes tucked away in a culdesac far from the activity of the city, but are situated close to the street. My porch steps are just fifteen feet away from the sidewalk. We hear all the noise inside the house from activity in the neighborhood and on the street. There will be no way to relax or take an afternoon nap with the constant noise of balls bouncing so close by. I ask that more attention be given to my concern of this play area too close to my home. In addition to having this amplified noise from the ball wall area, Garden Avenue residents will be dealing with the noise of school buses pulling through in the morning and after school. To place both the ball wall and the bus lane in this location will generate a consistency of noise throughout the day. It is too much noise for one location. I request that the school district move the ball wall to help lessen the noise. The ball wall could be moved to the hard surface play area where there is already a wall next to the school, or it could be moved entirely to another new location. They could otherwise get rid of the ball wall altogether and opt to keep the covered area in place with support pillars only and without any walls. Keeping the ball wall in its current location will result in substantial and undue adverse effects on adjacent properties on Garden Avenue North. Renton School District stated that they will plant trees on the east side of this structure, but the renderings submitted to the Hearing Examiner only show one tree and otherwise a wide pathway which does not block any sound from this play area. Most of this play area is connected to the walkway which goes from the school to the street, so it does not show any opportunity there for a landscape buffer. However, in my opinion, even a few trees planted near the structure will not be sufficient to block the sound, especially according to the renderings of their plan. It is for all of these reasons that the placement of the ball wall is contrary to "RMC 4-9-030(C)(3): Effect on Adjacent Properties" and indeed the proposed use at the proposed location does result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. The City of Renton Comprehensive plan also promotes improving the livability of Renton's neighborhoods. Unless changes are made, the ball wall will affect the quality of life and the livability in my home. I again respectfully request that the school district relocate the ball wall or remove it altogether. Thank you for taking the time to consider my comments and requests. Most Sincerely, Angela Laulainen 314 Garden AVE N Renton, WA 98057 2 Cynthia Moya From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Mr Seth dmd821@aol.com Thursday, December 29, 2016 11:49 AM Jason Seth; Cynthia Moya Denis Law; Jennifer T. Henning; Matthew Herrera; Vanessa Dolbee; Julia Medzegian; enkeli_l@yahoo.com; north.renton@gmail.com; matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us; Alex Tuttle Re: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request I was a party of record personally. Not only via email to the various planners and School District, but when I signed in for the hearing at the Public Hearing Process. I never signed in utilizing the North Renton Neighborhood contact information, but rather my own personal information through every step of this process -quite frankly, I was not aware the North Renton Neighborhood Association has a PO Box. As I have never represented this PO Box (Box 326) to be my address, I advise this address is NOT correct and completely erroneous. The North Renton Neighborhood Association does not have any legal governing standing over any component of our neighborhood and membership with the NRNA is not a requirement of living in the North Renton neighborhood. The Association is a tool only. This is the second time the City has failed to recognize that (the first time being when it was required of the residents of North Renton to make a request for a public meeting outside of City Offices with the CED Representatives relating to the City Center Plan, through the NRNA). If the City is dismissing citizens -based upon the auspices of a governing neighborhood association serving as their voice and representation -we have a problem bigger than just a failure to properly notify parties of record. Diane Dobson -----Original Message----- From: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> To: 'dmd821@aol.com' <dmd821@aol.com>; Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw@Rentonwa.gov>; JenniferT. Henning <Jhenning@Rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <MHerrera@Rentonwa.gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov>; Julia Medzegian <Jmedzegian@Rentonwa.gov>; enkeli_l <enke1U@yahoo.com>; north.renton <north.renton@gmail.com>; matthew.feldmeyer <matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us>; Alex Tuttle <ATuttle@Rentonwa.gov> Sent: Thu, Dec 29, 2016 11 :30 am Subject: RE: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Hello Ms. Dobson, We had you listed as a party of record as the North Renton Neighborhood Association representative, at P.O. Box 326, Renton, WA 98057. We will add your personal address of 806 N. Riverside, Renton, WA 98057 too. Please confirm that both addresses are correct. Thank you, -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 1 425-430-6502 jseth@rentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: dmd821@aol.com [mai1to:dmd82l@aol.com) Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 9:51 AM To: Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: Denis Law <DLaw@Rentonwa.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhenning@Rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <MHerrera@Rentonwa.gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov>; Julia Medzegian <Jmedzegian@Rentonwa.g_ov>; enkeli !@yahoo.com; north.renton@gmail.com; matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us; Jason Seth <JSet.b..@.Bentonwa.gov> Subject: NRNA-Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Greetings I have become aware of correspondence dated December 20, 2016, addressed to Lisa Klein, that was cc to 25 parties of record on this matter. The Order on Reconsideration Request clearly states, lines 15 -17, "Since the reconsideration request affects parties of record and the interests of the City, the parties of record (including applicant) who testified at the hearing and City staff will be given an opportunity to respond to the request for reconsideration before a decision on the reconsideration request is issued." I did not receive a copy of such correspondence from the City nor the School District. I testified at the Public Hearing on November 8, 2016, held at Renton City Hall (I have confirmed the accuracy of the report and the minutes on the City of Renton web page to confirm my name and testimony is included in such records). City representatives indicated at multiple neighborhood meetings and at various points in the process, anyone who sent in comments along the way or sent their contact information on to the various planners, would be included as Parties of Record from that point forward. I hereby ask for clarification of a list of the 25 Parties of Record that received the copy of this December 20th Notice· and a list of the all inclusive Parties of Record who have submitted their names at any point in this process· as it was represented by multiple City Representatives, as well as School District Representatives. I request any names from the process who have not yet received this December 20th Notice, also be notified of the same. I have checked with Jason Seth, City Clerk, and he indicates I am not listed as a party of record. He indicates he only sends the notices out and the list of the Parties of Record comes from CED at the City of Renton. He said "if you are calling me about this, then you have received notice." I quickly clarified I was calling based upon my father· who has never testified and is not a party of record, but rather an adjacent property owner -showing me a copy of the notice he received on December 24th. This notice is not proper, nor is it timely. I hereby notify the City and the Hearings Examiner of the improper procedure on this matter and the violation of process with the failure to properly notify all parties of record and provide them adequate time for review and response. This matter has been "fast tracked" by the Renton School District and while we as a neighborhood are generally supportive of this school and build, the process itself has been full of failures and short comings. Improper notice was provided, which resulted in a 2nd mailing, when the school district erroneously mailed notices out with wrong postal codes ..... parties of record were dropped and contact information was lost when the file transitioned in-house at the City between Rocale Timmons and Matthew Herrera (Rocale Timmons -who, when representatives from the Planning Department was asked about her later, couldn't even remember her as an employee -let alone a Senior Planner) ...... the City of Renton failed to include proper Exhibit at the November Public Hearing (yet nothing was done to address or correct the same -other than a side comment by RSD employee confirming the error) ....... the Transportation Study was 2 submitted with erroneous information (ci he deli as a "supermarket", the walk-in b , stand as a "restaurant" and the adult learning center as a "functioning & operational elementary school" ....... confLlsion and chaos has surrounded this whole process and it has been challenging for neighbors to be involved in the same (this doesn't even begin to address the complete and total misrepresentations made by Randy Matheson to the neighborhoods of a "walkable only" elementary school (that now will be having students bussed in from all over Renton -not just walking from North Renton), neighbors not being displaced who didn't want to move (then the threat of eminent domain being waived over their head), neighbors having 2-3 years for moving (and then receiving eviction paperwork) plus the rude and demeaning behavior which resulted in an entire neighborhood association requesting alternate point of contact because of the lies he told and the way he treated neighbors). This list could go on and on. I am extremely disappointed in the Renton School District for allowing this all to transpire in this fashion. They had an opportunity to work with a neighborhood on a new elementary school and make it an enjoyable public process of building a community from the ground up through our children -instead there were lies and deceit and have left neighbors with a bad feeling and distrust of representations being made by the City and School District -not a great feeling in going forward as we face unavoidable growth within our City. I am even more disappointed in the City of Renton for allowing this to take place. Neighbors approached the City and asked for help with this confusing process and instead of the help we thought we might receive, the City only proved to drop the ball further and add more confusion to the process. All parties of record need to be notified of this process -as required -with adequate time provided for response. Diane Dobson North Renton Neighborhood Association 425.890.9176 3 ; December 28, 2016 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30'h St, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: City of Renton's Response & Renton School District Response RE: Sartori Elementary School (LUA-16-000692} Dear Ms. Klein: Enclosed please find the City of Renton's Response to the Request for Reconsideration dated December 22, 2016, as well as the Renton School District's Response to Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request dated December 28, 2016. I can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, lasoa ,.'s!i:t;,, cc: Hearing Examiner Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Jennifer Cisneros, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator December 22, 2016 Mr. Phil Olbrechts Hearing Examiner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 SUBJECT: City Response to Request for Reconsideration New Sartori Elementary School, 315 Garden Ave. N., LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Dear Mr. Examiner: As the Project Manager for the New Sartori Elementary School Preliminary Planned Unit Development and Conditional Use Permit land use application, please accept the following response to Ms. Angie Laulainen's timely request for reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's decision on the aforementioned application. The request for reconsideration is based on two separate matters. The first related to the one-year monitoring requirement (Hearing Examiner decision condition #26) for the parking and queuing plans that were identified as mitigation measures in the State Environmental Pa/icy Act (SEPA) threshold determination (Exhibit 7). The second related to the location of the "ball wall" (Hearing Examiner decision condition #3) and the claim of substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property caused by noise emanating from the wall. Monitoring of Parking and Queuing Plans Ms. Laulainen requests in her reconsideration that the Hearing Examiner's decision condition #26 be amended to require a " .. non-biased organization be required to monitor the parking and queuing at the school." A request is also made to consider the City of Renton to be the organization that conducts the monitoring. The City has no objection in the applicant's use of another qualified professional transportation consultant to carry out the Hearing Examiner condition to monitor parking and queuing plans for one-year as stipulated in the condition. The City does object to being the responsible organization to carry out the monitoring duties as reflected in the condition. As a regulatory agency, the City's duty is to confirm compliance of the Hearing Examiner's decision, not perform consultant type services for the applicant. 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov Hearing Examiner Olbrechts Page 2 of2 December 22, 2016 As is typical in land use applications, an applicant prepares the required submittal materials that identify compliance with the jurisdiction's development regulations. Those submittal materials are required to be prepared by qualified professionals such as registered architects and landscape architects, licensed geotechnical engineers, and in the case of transportation reports -licensed civil engineers. The applicant's transportation report (Exhibit 11) was prepared by a Washington State licensed civil engineer, thereby meeting the qualified professional criterion for a traffic study set forth in Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-8-120D.20. The burden to comply with land use permit conditions falls upon the applicant and therefore the applicant should prepare the monitoring reports, via a qualified professional, and the City's duty is to review the monitoring to confirm the reports meet the intent of the Hearing Examiner's condition. While the City would not object to another qualified professional preparing the monitoring reports, no evidence is provided in the request for reconsideration that the applicant's transportation consultant is unqualified to comply with the Hearing Examiner's decision. Location of the "ball wall" The request for reconsideration also claims the location of a ball wall, or covered play area as indicated on the application's site plan (Exhibit 2), is too close to Garden Ave N and the residences across this street. Noise impacts are a SEPA issue, which the applicant (Renton School District) was the Lead Agency for review. Any mitigation associated with the SEPA review has been made a condition of project approval (condition #1) of the Hearing Examiner's decision. The development and ongoing operation of the school will be required to comply with the City's noise level regulations set forth in RMC 8-7-3. Staff requests the Hearing Examiner uphold the original decision issued on November 27, 2016. Sipcerely;; '1-.. ) \./J?.:,_=k ./ 7--!:..r,r.;:.-;r~ -- / Matthew Herrera, AICP Senior Planner cc: Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Sannworth, Development Engineering Manager Cynthia Mova, City Clerk Specialist Ian Fitz~Jamest Civil Eoglneer II December 28, 2016 Phil A. Olbrechts City of Renton Hearing Examiner c/o Cynthia Moya FACILITIES, OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE CENTER CAPITAL PROJECTS OFFICE 7812 S 124'h Street, Seattle, WA 98178-4830 425-204-4403, Fax 425-204-4476 City of Renton Records Management Specialist Administrative Services/City Clerk Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 RE: Applicant Response to Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request Sartori Elementary School (LUA-16-000692) Dear Mr. Olbrechts: We are in receipt of the Reconsideration Request dated December 12, 2016 and your Response dated December 19, 2016. Your response allowed for written comments to be submitted by December 30, 2016 from those persons who testified at the hearing. l spoke at the hearing as a representative for the applicant, the Renton School District, and this letter provides my comment. This letter is organized by each topic listed on the Reconsideration request letter. Traffic Monitoring Ms. Laulainen requested that the one year monitoring of the queuing and parking impacts be done by an outside organization, one that is not connected in any way with Renton School District. She cites several reasons for not trusting the District's traffic consultant and references information found in the Draft Transportation Report dated August 26, 2016 (Exhibit 10). The referenced draft report was reviewed and commented on by the City and neighbors during the informal 37-day SEPA Notice of Consultation comment period. The information and comments obtained during that timeframe was useful in preparing both the Final Transportation Report dated October 2016 and the Mitigated Determination of Non-significance issued on October 21, 20 l 6 (Exhibit 7). While not specifically an Exhibit listed with the Staff Report, the Final Transportation Report was listed as an environmental document in the SEPA Checklist and its recommended mitigation measures were included within the MONS, therefore it should be admissible as it is not new information. A copy of the Final Transportation Report can be provided upon request. Launching Leaming to Last a Lifetime 7812 S 124" Street, Seattle Washington 981781 p.425.204.44031 f425.204.4476 www.rentonschools.us The Reconsideration letter cites several "errors" in the Draft Transportation Report. These comments are very similar as those provided during the SEPA comment period and prior to the Transportation Report revisions. The changes made between the draft and final report are summarized as follows: • The District acknowledged that the current speeds in the vicinity range from 25-30 mph. Travel speeds were reflected correctly in the draft Transportation Technical Report; they were stated incorrectly in the Draft SEPA Checklist and corrected in the final SEPA checklist. The report and checklist anticipated that a school zone with 20 mph limits will be implemented around the site as part of the project. • The traffic pattern at the intersection ofN. 4th and Garden was correctly analyzed and took into consideration the island and the intersection tum restrictions. The description of the direction of traffic was revised in the Final Transportation Report to provide better clarity in an attempt to alleviate the confusion. • The claim that the traffic study included inflated counts of vehicular trips to the school is untrue. The Report and related operational analyses assumed no credit (or reduction) for the removal of the existing use of the Sartori Education Center. Section 3.2.2 of the Draft report stated: "Typically, traffic impact analyses accountjOr the removal of existing uses to determine the net increase in traffic associated with a new development. In those cases, traffic from existing uses to be removed would be subtracted before the new development's traffic is added Hou·ever, since some of the buildings on the site i,i,·ere vacant at the time that traffic counts were taken at study area intersection, no vehicle trip credit/or the removal of these uses was applied to the 2018 "with project" trajjic volume forecasts or operational analysis. The estimate of traffic generation by existing uses and the net changes expected due to the project are provided as a matter of disclosure. __ 1 ' To eliminate any potential confusion, the above paragraph and the presentation of the estimated net change in trips \:vas removed from the Final report. The Transportation Report was prepared in accordance with standard traffic engineering practice as outlined by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (!TE) in its Transportation Impact Analyses for Site Development -An !TE Recommended Practice (!TE, 2005). The analyses and report were also prepared consistent with the City of Renton's Traffic Impact Analysis Policy Guidelines for New Development (Rev. January 2016). The report stated that the project would result in increased traffic that would add delay to the study area. It also noted the potential for event-related parking impacts and possible queue spill over during peak altemoon dismissal periods. It recommended mitigation measures to address these potential impacts and determined that, with these measures, the project would not result in significant adverse impacts. The roadway network can accommodate the project and would continue to operate at levels that meet the City's operational standards. The District stands behind the Transportation Report prepared by Heffron Transportation, Inc. and reminds the Hearing Examiner that Ms. Laulainen did not present expert testimony to contradict the findings and did not appeal the SEPA Determination. The District does not know at this time if Heffron or another transportation engineering consultant will be utilized for the required monitoring, but will ensure that the selected contractor follow the industry professional standards. Further, Condition #26 requires the City of Renton to review and approve the monitoring report, and in our opinion this requirement provides sufficient oversight. Launching Learning to Last a Lifetime 7812 S 124'" Street, Seattle Washington 981781 p.425.204.44031 f425.204.4476 www.rentonschools.us Location of the Ball \Vall The Reconsideration letter cites concern for noise associated with the ball wall that is presumed to be located fifteen feet from the school property line. The ball wall is actually located more than 43 feet from the property line and at least 100 feet from Ms. Laulinen's property line. The ball wall was originally closer to the property line (as shown in the City's presentation, Exhibit 28) and the City had recommended in the staff report Condition #3 that the ball wall be located outside the 15-foot setback. The District responded by moving the ball wall further. The modified location was presented at the hearing in the applicant's presentation (Exhibit 30), although the specific distances were not called out in the presentation or site plan. GARDEN AVENUE NORTH Site Plan in Exhibit 28 Site Plan in Exhibit 30 Launching Learning to Last a Lifetime 7812 S 124" Street, Seattle Washington 98178 J p.425.2044403 J (425.204.4476 wv•1w. rentonschools. us --RENTON I" :, • i ...} II <D I (.Q lJ ~2 .. :."' !, Ill ; ~~,,, ' i '.. ! \ \..____ m [I] _!_ ~ ------, -=---~--· -----I' Measurements added to Site Plan in Exhibit 30 The play area is purposely located adjacent to the existing residences on Garden Ave N so that lower scale elements are near residences and the school building is oriented in anticipation of future growth of a civic boulevard along Park Ave N, a commercial arterial street. Additionally, the field location orients the more open/green areas of the school near the residences and provides easy access for resident use. The District believes that the noises generated by the ball wall and playground are typical of any school use and determined that it didn't qualify as an adverse impact when it issued the SEPA MONS. As noted above, noise issues are largely SEPA-related and an appeal of the SEPA Determination was not filed. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. We respectfully request an expedited decision in this matter. Sincerely, Matt Feldmeyer, Architect Facilities Project Manager Cc: Rick Stracke, Executive Director of Facilities Planning, Renton School District Facilities, Maintenance, and Operations -Capital Projects Office Launching Learning to Last a Lifetime 7812 S 124" Street, Seattle Washington 98178 / p.425.204.44031 f.425.204.4476 www rentonschoo/s. us --~ RENTON December 28, 2016 STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING CERTIFICATE OF MAILING ) ) § ) Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC JASON A. SETH, City Clerk for the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that he is a citizen of the United States and a resident ofthe State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter. That on the 28th day of December, 2016, at the hour of 4:30 p.m. your affiant duly mailed and placed in the United States Post Office at Renton, King County, Washington, by first class mail the City of Renton's Response to the Request for Reconsideration dated December 22, 2016, as well as the Renton School District's Response to Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request dated December 28, 2016, RE: Sartori Elementary School -LUA-16-000692 to the attached parties of record. Jason SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this 4l!,_tJMl_ay of December, 2016 . . ,: ' \ ' . Cynth a R. ~oya '--- Notary Publi~ in and for the State of Washington, residing in Renton My Commission expires: 8/27/2018 I l '• \ -•. ,·.,.~- 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov North Renton Neighborhood Association PO Box 326 Renton, WA 98057 Akane Yamaguchi 1008 N Riverside Dr Renton. WA 98057 Alison Monges 221 Wells Ave N Renton. WA 98057-5612 !lll\4-tltiliffi!lt-'\Wl~'i!~)l\\1\l\Y-.; -Cil,1!1l/t"1<';""0""'3j!/l!\\ll!i'1~,\lll~SS>5~~)i1 f,l';\)~il-'1,1;-,Xf/"ilfC:-~~-¥1••j[ill:\i"" t~~~-~~&'f.iff~ ~~i\i."HiJi~i~~~&J~JFfltAaiL:& wg-:""~~IM!i,t1'liiS£hBtri&tit.~tWim%if~11-1fll!§.'.1m,m,s.~~ Angie Laulainen Beth Palmer BRIAN & MARY TWIDT 314 Garden Ave N 114 Wells Ave S 234 GARDEN AVE N Renton, WA 980¥ 7 Renton, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98057 Debbie Natelson 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit B Renton, WA 98057 Jessica Roach 132 Pelly Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Mike O'Donin 423 Pelly Ave N Renton, WA 98055 Neil Sheesley 809 N 2nd St Renton. WA 98057 Randy Matheson 300 SW 7th St Renton. WA 98057 Sandy Smith 336 Meadow Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Shelby Smith 524 Burnett Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Dolores Haves 326 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Genie Chase 227 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Kathleen Booher Lisa Klein 809 N 2nd St AHBL Renton, WA 98057 2215 N 30th St, 300 Tacoma, WA Cf <i<; G/ Q -~ -!ilt~tt~~~lll!'~:~~i~~!~ ~~~i:lt~lli~!l\\tB:~71/1 Mr. & Mrs. Poquette 328 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98057 t-'fflf,lti>_Jll ··8l!l<•·, 9:&):'~("1'"":K.l!!l",'.;1!.1§~1!';/>~-,m,; !t~~:-·. ·"<. ti~~¥clWt{mit1'~\:Bi'~~.2fflY Pamela Thomas 341 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Rick Stracke Renton School District No. 403 7812 S 124th St Seattle. WA 98178 Sarah & Tim Bishop 222 Burnett Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Wyman Dobson 821 N 1st St Renton. WA 98057 Nancy Monahan 325 Meadow Ave N Renton. WA 98057 [4~$4'i"l~\11\\i,>~..11&-i-tl2ili(ll'liii,/ll~sllt''!'ll>2~'-'"i Nl,..•t~uaf}~~~--~t~t;'~, Paul Rolinger 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit B Renton. WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Scott Rice 345 Meadow Ave N Renton. WA 98057 December 28, 2016 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30'h St, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: City of Renton's Response & Renton School District Response RE: Sartori Elementary School (LUA-16-000692) Dear Ms. Klein: Enclosed please find the City of Renton's Response to the Request for Reconsideration dated December 22, 2016, as well as the Renton School District's Response to Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request dated December 28, 2016. I can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, '"'" ,,Ji!!" cc: Hearing Examiner Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Jennifer Cisneros, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 , (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent. Administrator December 22, 2016 Mr. Phil Olbrechts Hearing Examiner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 SUBJECT: City Response to Request for Reconsideration New Sartori Elementary School, 315 Garden Ave. N., LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Dear Mr. Examiner: As the Project Manager for the New Sartori Elementary School Preliminary Planned Unit Development and Conditional Use Permit land use application, please accept the following response to Ms. Angie laulainen's timely request for reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's decision on the aforementioned application. The request for reconsideration is based on two separate matters. The first related to the one-year monitoring requirement (Hearing Examiner decision condition #26) for the parking and queuing plans that were identified as mitigation measures in the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) threshold determination (Exhibit 7). The second related to the location of the "ball wall" {Hearing Examiner decision condition #3) and the claim of substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property caused by noise emanating from the wall. Monitoring of Parking and Queuing Plans Ms. laulainen requests in her reconsideration that the Hearing Examiner's decision condition #26 be amended to require a " .. non-biased organization be required to monitor the parking and queuing at the school." A request is also made to consider the City of Renton to be the organization that conducts the monitoring. The City has no objection in the applicant's use of another qualified professional transportation consultant to carry out the Hearing Examiner condition to monitor parking and queuing plans for one-year as stipulated in the condition. The City does object to being the responsible organization to carry out the monitoring duties as reflected in the condition. As a regulatory agency, the City's duty is to confirm compliance of the Hearing Examiner's decision, not perform consultant type services for the applicant. 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. rentonwa.gov Hearing Examiner Olbrechts Page 2 of 2 December 22, 2016 As is typical in land use applications, an applicant prepares the required submittal materials that identify compliance with the jurisdiction's development regulations. Those submittal materials are required to be prepared by qualified professionals such as registered architects and landscape architects, licensed geotechnical engineers, and In the case of transportation reports -licensed civil engineers. The applicant's transportation report (Exhibit 11) was prepared by a Washington State licensed civil engineer, thereby meeting the qualified professional criterion for a traffic study set forth in Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-8-120D.20, The burden to comply with land use permit conditions falls upon the applicant and therefore the applicant should prepare the monitoring reports, via a qualified professional, and the City's duty is to review the monitoring to confirm the reports meet the intent of the Hearing Examiner's condition. While the City would not object to another qualified professional preparing the monitoring reports, no evidence is provided in the request for reconsideration that the applicant's transportation consultant is unqualified to comply with the Hearing Examiner's decision. Location of the "ball wall" The request for reconsideration also claims the location of a ball wall, or covered play area as indicated on the application's site plan (Exhibit 2), is too close to Garden Ave N and the residences across this street. Noise impacts are a SEPA issue, which the applicant (Renton School District) was the lead Agency for review. Any mitigation associated with the SEPA review has been made a condition of project approval (condition 111) of the Hearing Examiner's decision. The development and ongoing operation of the school will be required to comply with the City's noise level regulations set forth in RMC 8-7-3. Staff requests the Hearing Examiner uphold the original decision issued on November 27, 2016. s~efy,;,1. ) --yP~/ -- Matthe'~ Herrera, AICP Senior Planner cc; Jennifer Henning, Ptanning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannworth, Development Engineering Manager Cynthia Moya, Oty Clerk Specialist Ian Fitz-James, avi/ Engineer II December 28, 2016 Phil A. Olbrechts City of Renton Hearing Examiner c/o Cynthia Moya FACILITIES, OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE CENTER CAPITAL PROJECTS OFFICE 7812 S 124'" Street, Seattle, WA 98178-4830 425-204-4403, Fax 425-204-4476 City of Renton Records Management Specialist Administrative Services/City Clerk Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 RE: Applicant Response to Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request Sartori Elementary School (LUA-16-000692) Dear Mr. Olbrechts: We are in receipt of the Reconsideration Request dated December 12, 2016 and your Response dated December 19, 2016. Your response allowed for written comments to be submitted by December 30, 2016 from those persons who testified at the hearing. I spoke at the hearing as a representative for the applicant, the Renton School District, and this letter provides my comment. This letter is organized by each topic listed on the Reconsideration request letter. Traffic Monitoring Ms. Laulainen requested that the one year monitoring of the queuing and parking impacts be done by an outside organization, one that is not connected in any way with Renton School District. She cites several reasons for not trusting the District's traffic consultant and references information found in the Draft Transportation Report dated August 26, 2016 (Exhibit I 0). The referenced draft report was reviewed and commented on by the City and neighbors during the informal 37-day SEPA Notice of Consultation comment period. The information and comments obtained during that timeframe was useful in preparing both the Final Transportation Report dated October 2016 and the Mitigated Determination of Non-significance issued on October 21, 2016 (Exhibit 7). While not specifically an Exhibit listed with the Staff Report, the Final Transportation Report was listed as an environmental document in the SEPA Checklist and its recommended mitigation measures were included within the MONS, therefore it should be admissible as it is not new information. A copy of the Final Transportation Report can be provided upon request. Launching Learning to Last a Lifetime 7812 S 124" Street. Seattle Washington 981781 p.425.204.44031 /425204.4476 v1ww. rentonschools. us The Reconsideration letter cites several "errors" in the Draft Transportation Report. These comments are very similar as those provided during the SEPA comment period and prior to the Transportation Report revisions. The changes made between the draft and final report are summarized as follows: • The District acknowledged that the current speeds in the vicinity range from 25-30 mph. Travel speeds were reflected correctly in the draft Transportation Technical Report; they were stated incorrectly in the Draft SEPA Checklist and corrected in the final SEPA checklist. The report and checklist anticipated that a school zone with 20 mph limits will be implemented around the site as part of the project. • The traffic pattern at the intersection ofN_ 4th and Garden was correctly analyzed and took into consideration the island and the intersection rum restrictions. The description of the direction of traffic was revised in the Final Transportation Report to provide better clarity in an attempt to alleviate the confusion. • The claim that the traffic study included inflated counts of vehicular trips to the school is untrue. The Report and related operational analyses assumed no credit (or reduction) for the removal of the existing use of the Sartori Education Center. Section 3.2.2 of the Draft report stated: 1'Typically, traffic impact analyses account/or the removal of existing uses to determine the net increase in trqffic associated with a ne1-v development. in those cases, traffic from existing uses to be removed would be subtracted before the ne1-v development's traffic is added. Hov,,.ever, since some of the buildings on the site were vacant at the time that trqffic counts were taken at sJudy area intersection, no vehicle trip credit/or the removal of these uses ·was applied to the 2018 "with project" traffic volume forecasts or operational analysis. The estimate of traffic generation by existing uses and the net changes expected due to the project are provided as a matter of disclosure.. " To eliminate any potential confusion, the above paragraph and the presentation of the estimated net change in trips was removed from the Final report. The Transportation Report was prepared in accordance with standard traffic engineering practice as outlined by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITT) in its Transportation Impact Analyses for Site Development -An !TE Recommended Practice (!TE, 2005). The analyses and report were also prepared consistent with the City of Renton's Traffic Impact Analysis Policy Guidelines for New Development (Rev. January 2016). The report stated that the project would result in increased traffic that would add delay to the study area. It also noted the potential for event-related parking impacts and possible queue spill over during peak a~ernoon dismissal periods. It recommended mitigation measures to address these potential impacts and determined that, with these measures, the project would not result in significant adverse impacts. The roadway network can accommodate the project and would continue to operate at levels that meet the City's operational standards. The District stands behind the Transportation Report prepared by Heffron Transportation, Inc. and reminds the Hearing Examiner that Ms. Laulainen did not present expert testimony to contradict the findings and did not appeal the SEPA Determination. The District does not know at this time if Heffron or another transportation engineering consultant will be utilized for the required monitoring, but will ensure that the selected contractor follow the industry professional standards. Further, Condition #26 requires the City of Renton to review and approve the monitoring report, and in our opinion this requirement provides sufficient oversight. Launching Learning to Last a Lifetime 7812 S 124" Street, Seattle Washington 98178 f p.425.204.4403 [ f425.204.4476 www.rentonschools.us Location of the Ball Wall The Reconsideration letter cites concern for noise associated with the ball wall that is presumed to be located fifteen feet from the school property line. The ball wall is actually located more than 43 feet from the property line and at least 100 feet from Ms. Laulinen's property line. The ball wall was originally closer to the property line (as shown in the City's presentation, Exhibit 28) and the City had recommended in the staff report Condition #3 that the ball wall be located outside the 15-foot setback. The District responded by moving the ball wall further. The modified location was presented at the hearing in the applicant's presentation (Exhibit 30), although the specific distances were not called out in the presentation or site plan. GARDEN AVENUE NORTH Site Plan in Exhibit 28 Site Plan in Exhibit 30 Launching Learning to Last a Lifetime 7812 S 124" Street. Seattle Washington 981781 p.425.204.44031 f425.204.4476 wv1w rentonschoo/s. us -RENTON •:j•I I ~ '.. ! ' j-1- I ~ -i!-c _J_ __ _ --'=----_[__, ---1_ Measurements added to Site Plan in Exhibit 30 The play area is purposely located adjacent to the existing residences on Garden Ave N so that lower scale elements are near residences and the school building is oriented in anticipation of future growth of a civic boulevard along Park Ave N, a commercial arterial street. Additionally, the field location orients the more open/green areas of the school near the residences and provides easy access for resident use. The District believes that the noises generated by the ball wall and playground are typical of any school use and determined that it didn't qualify as an adverse impact when it issued the SEPA MDNS. As noted above, noise issues are largely SEPA-related and an appeal of the SEPA Determination was not filed. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. We respectfully request an expedited decision in this matter. Sincerely, Matt Feldmeyer, Architect Facilities Project Manager Cc: Rick Stracke, Executive Director of Facilities Planning, Renton School District Facilities, Maintenance, and Operations -Capital Projects Office Launching Learning to Last a Lifetime 7812 S 124'" Street, Seattle Washington 98178 j p.425.204.4403 j f425.204.4476 www. rentonschoof s. us --------------RENTON Cynthia Moya From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Cynthia, Matthew Feldmeyer <matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us> Wednesday, December 28, 2016 1:27 PM Cynthia Moya Matthew Herrera; Vanessa Dolbee; Richard (Rick) Stracke; Lisa Klein Hearing Examiner's Order on the Reconsideration Request -Sartori Elementary HEX Recon Response 16-1228.pdf See the attached response to the Hearing Examiner's Reconsideration Request, dated 12/12/16. Please forward this document to the Hearing Examiner for review. Please acknowledge receipt ofthis email. Thank you. Matt Feldmeyer, Architect Facilities Project Manager Renton School District No. 403 7812 South 1241h Street Seattle, WA 98178-4830 Office: 425.204.4475 Mobile: 206.482.5253 1 FACILITIES, OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE CENTER CAPITAL PROJECTS OFFICE 7812 S 124'" Street, Seattle, WA 98178-4830 425-204-4403, Fax 425-204-4476 December 28, 2016 Phil A. Olbrechts City of Renton Hearing Examiner c/o Cynthia Moya City of Renton Records Management Specialist Administrative Services/City Clerk Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 RE: Applicant Response to Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request Sartori Elementary School (LUA-16-000692) Dear Mr. Olbrechts: We are in receipt of the Reconsideration Request dated December 12, 2016 and your Response dated December 19, 2016. Your response allowed for written comments to be submitted by December 30, 2016 from those persons who testified at the hearing. I spoke at the hearing as a representative for the applicant, the Renton School District, and this letter provides my comment. This letter is organized by each topic listed on the Reconsideration request letter. Traffic Monitoring Ms. Laulainen requested that the one year monitoring of the queuing and parking impacts be done by an outside organization, one that is not connected in any way with Renton School District. She cites several reasons for not trusting the District's traffic consultant and references information found in the Draft Transportation Report dated August 26, 2016 (Exhibit 10). The referenced draft report was reviewed and commented on by the City and neighbors during the informal 37-day SEPA Notice of Consultation comment period. The information and comments obtained during that timeframc was useful in preparing both the Final Transportation Report dated October 2016 and the Mitigated Determination of Non-significance issued on October 21, 2016 (Exhibit 7). While not specifically an Exhibit listed with the Staff Report, the Final Transportation Report was listed as an environmental document in the SEP A Checklist and its recommended mitigation measures were included within the MONS, therefore it should be admissible as it is not new information. A copy of the Final Transportation Report can be provided upon request. Launching Learning to Last a Lifetime 7812 S 124" Street, Seattle Washington 981781 p.425.204.44031 f425.204.4476 vvww.re11tonschools. us ·-RENTON The Reconsideration letter cites several "errors" in the Draft Transportation Report. These comments are very similar as those provided during the SEP A comment period and prior to the Transportation Report revisions. The changes made between the draft and final report are summarized as follows: • The District acknowledged that the current speeds in the vicinity range from 25-30 mph. Travel speeds were reflected correctly in the draft Transportation Technical Report; they were stated incorrectly in the Draft SEPA Checklist and corrected in the final SEPA checklist. The report and checklist anticipated that a school zone with 20 mph limits will be implemented around the site as part of the project. • The traffic pattern at the intersection ofN. 4•h and Garden was correctly analyzed and took into consideration the island and the intersection turn restrictions. The description of the direction of traffic was revised in the Final Transportation Report to provide better clarity in an attempt to alleviate the confusion. • The claim that the traffic study included inflated counts of vehicular trips to the school is untrue. The Report and related operational analyses assumed no credit (or reduction) for the removal of the existing use of the Sartori Education Center. Section 3.2.2 of the Draft report stated: "Typically, trajjic impact analyses account for the removal of existing uses to determine the net increase in traffic associated with a new development. In those cases, traffic from existing uses to be removed »'ould be subtracted before the new development's traffic is added. However, since some of the buildings on the site were vacant at the time that traffic counts were taken at study area intersection, no vehicle trip credit for the removal of these uses was applied to the 2018 "with project" traffic volume forecasts or operational analysis. The estimate of traffic generation by existing uses and the net changes expected due to the prQfect are provided as a matter of disclosure .... '1 To eliminate any potential confusion, the above paragraph and the presentation of the estimated net change in trips was removed from the Final report. The Transportation Report was prepared in accordance with standard traffic engineering practice as outlined by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (!TE) in its Transportation Impact Analyses for Site Development -An !TE Recommended Practice (!TE, 2005). The analyses and report were also prepared consistent with the City of Renton's Traffic Impact Analysis Policy Guidelines for New Development (Rev. January 2016). The report stated that the project would result in increased traffic that would add delay to the study area. It also noted the potential for event-related parking impacts and possible queue spill over during peak afternoon dismissal periods. It recommended mitigation measures to address these potential impacts and determined that, with these measures, the project would not result in significant adverse impacts. The roadway network can accommodate the project and would continue to operate at levels that meet the City's operational standards. The District stands behind the Transportation Report prepared by Heffron Transportation, Inc. and reminds the Hearing Examiner that Ms. Laulainen did not present expert testimony to contradict the findings and did not appeal the SEPA Determination. The District does not know at this time if Heffron or another transportation engineering consultant will be utilized for the required monitoring, but will ensure that the selected contractor follow the industry professional standards. Further, Condition #26 requires the City of Renton to review and approve the monitoring report, and in our opinion this requirement provides sufficient oversight. Launching Leaming to Last a Lifetime 7812 S 124'' Street, Seattle Washington 981781 p.425.204.44031 f.425.204.4476 www.rentonschoofs.us ·-RENTON Location of the Ball Wall The Reconsideration letter cites concern for noise associated with the ball wall that is presumed to be located fifteen feet from the school property line. The ball wall is actually located more than 43 feet from the property line and at least 100 feet from Ms. Laulinen's property line. The ball wall was originally closer to the property line (as shown in the City's presentation, Exhibit 28) and the City had recommended in the staff report Condition #3 that the ball wall be located outside the 15-foot setback. The District responded by moving the ball wall further. The modified location was presented at the hearing in the applicant's presentation (Exhibit 30), although the specific distances were not called out in the presentation or site plan. GARDEN AVENUE NORTH I-~ · lf":o~:; JI u, !· L . ··1 ,- _., .. J4'i,i _ .>'*'=....; -~;w4,-.t·. +-l""""'~ I PROPOSED 3·STORY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BIJILDIHG ,·· : i""'"l:t", .... ,to ...-;u,~-- Launching Leaming to Last a Lifetime 7812 S 124th Street, Seattle Washington 98178 I p.425.204.44031 f.425.204.4476 wvvvv. rentonschools. us ------..... RENTON n I ' m I i g ,ii I ~ s ! i 0 !lll! • . ' I ~ ·~ -•~s I n-1-. \ i \ 'I \ '------- I _,_,_ \-------!----I·-------- Measurements added to Site Plan in Exhibit 30 The play area is purposely located adjacent to the existing residences on Garden Ave N so that lower scale elements are near residences and the school building is oriented in anticipation of future growth of a civic bculevard along Park Ave N, a commercial arterial street. Additionally, the field location orients the more open/green areas of the school near the residences and provides easy access for resident use. The District believes that the noises generated by the ball wall and playground are typical of any school use and determined that it didn't qualify as an adverse impact when it issued the SEPA MDNS. As noted above, noise issues are largely SEPA·related and an appeal of the SEPA Determination was not filed. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. We respectfully request an expedited decision in this matter. Sincerely, Matt Feldmeyer, Architect Facilities Project Manager Cc: Rick Stracke, Executive Director of Facilities Planning, Renton School District Facilities, Maintenance, and Operations -Capital Projects Office Launching Leaming to Last a Lifetime 7812 S 124" Street, Seattle Washington 981781 p.425.204.44031 f.425.204.4476 www.rentonschoo/s us • Denis Law Mayor Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator December 22, 2016 Mr. Phil Olbrechts Hearing Examiner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 SUBJECT: City Response to Request for Reconsideration New Sartori Elementary School, 315 Garden Ave. N., LUAlG-000692, PPUD, CU-H Dear Mr. Examiner: As the Project Manager for the New Sartori Elementary School Preliminary Planned Unit Development and Conditional Use Permit land use application, please accept the following response to Ms. Angie Laulainen's timely request for reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's decision on the aforementioned application. The request for reconsideration is based on two separate matters. The first related to the one-year monitoring requirement (Hearing Examiner decision condition #26) for the parking and queuing plans that were identified as mitigation measures in the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) threshold determination (Exhibit 7). The second related to the location of the "ball wall" (Hearing Examiner decision condition #3) and the claim of substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property caused by noise emanating from the wall. Monitoring of Parking and Queuing Plans Ms. Laulainen requests in her reconsideration that the Hearing Examiner's decision condition #26 be amended to require a " .. non-biased organization be required to monitor the parking and queuing at the school." A request is also made to consider the City of Renton to be the organization that conducts the monitoring. The City has no objection in the applicant's use of another qualified professional transportation consultant to carry out the Hearing Examiner condition to monitor parking and queuing plans for one-year as stipulated in the condition. The City does object to being the responsible organization to carry out the monitoring duties as reflected in the condition. As a regulatory agency, the City's duty is to confirm compliance of the Hearing Examiner's decision, not perform consultant type services for the applicant. 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov Hearing Examiner Olbrechts r Page 2 of 2 December 22, 2016 As is typical in land use applications, an applicant prepares the required submittal materials that identify compliance with the jurisdiction's development regulations. Those submittal materials are required to be prepared by qualified professionals such as registered architects and landscape architects, licensed geotechnical engineers, and in the case of transportation reports -licensed civil engineers. The applicant's transportation report (Exhibit 11) was prepared by a Washington State licensed civil engineer, thereby meeting the qualified professional criterion for a traffic study set forth in Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-8-1200.20. The burden to comply with land use permit conditions falls upon the applicant and therefore the applicant should prepare the monitoring reports, via a qualified professional, and the City's duty is to review the monitoring to confirm the reports meet the intent of the Hearing Examiner's condition. While the City would not object to another qualified professional preparing the monitoring reports, no evidence is provided in the request for reconsideration that the applicant's transportation consultant is unqualified to comply with the Hearing Examiner's decision. Location of the "ball wall" The request for reconsideration also claims the location of a ball wall, or covered play area as indicated on the application's site plan (Exhibit 2), is too close to Garden Ave N and the residences across this street. Noise impacts are a SEPA issue, which the applicant (Renton School District) was the Lead Agency for review. Any mitigation associated with the SEPA review has been made a condition of project approval (condition #1) of the Hearing Examiner's decision. The development and ongoing operation of the school will be required to comply with the City's noise level regulations set forth in RMC 8-7-3. Staff requests the Hearing Examiner uphold the original decision issued on November 27, 2016. Si~~?.···, / 7--~t''J-~ /.· '" / ,. ------- Matthew Herrera, AICP Senior Planner cc: Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannworth, Development Engineering Manager Cynthia Moya, City Clerk Specialist Ian Fitz-James, Civil Engineer II Denis Law Mayor Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent. Administrator December 22, 2016 Mr. Phil Olbrechts Hearing Examiner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 SUBJECT: City Response to Request for Reconsideration New Sartori Elementary School, 315 Garden Ave. N., LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Dear Mr. Examiner: As the Project Manager for the New Sartori Elementary School Preliminary Planned Unit Development and Conditional Use Permit land use application, please accept the following response to Ms. Angie Laulainen's timely request for reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's decision on the aforementioned application. The request for reconsideration is based on two separate matters. The first related to the one-year monitoring requirement (Hearing Examiner decision condition #26) for the parking and queuing plans that were identified as mitigation measures in the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) threshold determination (Exhibit 7). The second related to the location of the "ball wall" (Hearing Examiner decision condition #3) and the claim of substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property caused by noise emanating from the wall. Monitoring of Parking and Queuing Plans Ms. Laulainen requests in her reconsideration that the Hearing Examiner's decision condition #26 be amended to require a " .. non-biased organization be required to monitor the parking and queuing at the school." A request is also made to consider the City of Renton to be the organization that conducts the monitoring. The City has no objection in the applicant's use of another qualified professional transportation consultant to carry out the Hearing Examiner condition to monitor parking and queuing plans for one-year as stipulated in the condition. The City does object to being the responsible organization to carry out the monitoring duties as reflected in the condition. As a regulatory agency, the City's duty is to confirm compliance of the Hearing Examiner's decision, not perform consultant type services for the applicant. 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov Hearing Examiner Olbrechts Page 2 of 2 December 22, 2016 As is typical in land use applications, an applicant prepares the required submittal materials that identify compliance with the jurisdiction's development regulations. Those submittal materials are required to be prepared by qualified professionals such as registered architects and landscape architects, licensed geotechnical engineers, and in the case of transportation reports -licensed civil engineers. The applicant's transportation report (Exhibit 11) was prepared by a Washington State licensed civil engineer, thereby meeting the qualified professional criterion for a traffic study set forth in Renton Municipal Cade (RMC) 4-8-1200.20. The burden to comply with land use permit conditions falls upon the applicant and therefore the applicant should prepare the monitoring reports, via a qualified professional, and the City's duty is to review the monitoring to confirm the reports meet the Intent of the Hearing Examiner's condition. While the City would not object to another qualified professional preparing the monitoring reports, no evidence is provided in the request for reconsideration that the applicant's transportation consultant ls unqualified to comply with the Hearing Examiner's decision. Location of the "ball wall" The request for reconsideration also claims the location of a ball wall, or covered play area as indicated on the application's site plan (Exhibit 2), is too close to Garden Ave N and the residences across this street. Noise Impacts are a SEPA issue, which the applicant (Renton School District) was the Lead Agency for review. Any mitigation associated with the SEPA review has been made a condition of project approval (condition #1) of the Hearing Examiner's decision. The development and ongoing operation of the school will be required to comply with the City's noise level regulations set forth in RMC 8-7-3. Staff requests the Hearing Examiner uphold the original decision issued on November 27, 2016. Sipcerely, ; '1 / · J • ./J;;/ _ J!.<7 / 7 ':: ~-\-,L_.,_____ -- i Matthew Herrera, AICP Senior Planner cc: Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannworth, Development Engineering Manager Cynthia Moya, City Clerk Specialist Ian Fitz-James, Civil Engineer II December 20, 2016 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30'h St, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request RE: Sartori Elementary School (LUA-16-000692} Dear Ms. Klein: Enclosed please find the City of Renton's Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request dated December 19, 2016, along with the Request for Reconsideration from Angela laulainen dated December 12, 2016. Jason Seth, City Clerk, can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, v/ · . I J'rv l{ SC:,, 1--C/--fA\ +- Melissa Hart Public Records Analyst cc: Hearing Examiner Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Jennifer Cisneros, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: Sartori Elementary School Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Conditional Use ) ) ) ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION ) REQUEST ) ) ) LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H ) ________________ ) By email dated December 12, 2016, Angela Laulainen has requested reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's decision on the above-captioned matter. Since the reconsideration request affects parties of record and the interests of the City, the parties of record (including applicant) who testified at the hearing and City staff will be given an opportunity to respond to the request for reconsideration before a decision on the reconsideration request is issued. Any responses must be based upon evidence that is already in the record. No evidence that has not been recorded at the hearing or entered as an exhibit at the hearing will be considered in the reconsideration request. To this end, the recess schedule appended to Ms. Laulainen's reconsideration request is not admitted and will not be considered by the hearing examiner. Similarly, Ms. Laulainen's comments about what she can hear in her home are also not admitted and not considered. ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION 22 I. Persons who testified at the hearing on the above-captioned matter or had written comment admitted into the record shall have until 4:00 pm, December 30, 2016 to provide written comments in response to the request for reconsideration submitted by Ms. Laulainen. The City Clerk shall promptly forward all responses to Ms. Laulainen to the email address she used to file her request for reconsideration. 23 24 25 26 Ms. Laulaincn shall have until January 6, 2017 at 4:00 pm to provide a written reply to the responses authorized in the preceding paragraph. PUD and CU -1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 3. All written comments authorized above may be emailed to the City Clerk's Office at C \ lo, a·'?i rcnlorrn a.um. In the alternative v.Titten comments may be mailed or delivered to Cynthia Moya, City of Renton Records Management Specialist, Administrative Services/City Clerk Division, at 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Mailed or delivered comments must be received by the City by the deadlines specified in this Order. DATED this 19th day of December, 2016. City of Renton Hearing Examiner PUD and CU -2 Cynthia Moya Subject: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD From: Enkeli <enkeli I@yahoo.com> To: "jseth@rentonwa.gov" <!seth@renton1na.gov> Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 10:53 PM Subject: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD Honorable Hearing Examiner, I am writing to ask for reconsideration on two aspects of the New Sartori Elementary School projecVLUA 16-000692, CU-H, PUD. The two aspects of the decision are with respect to 1) traffic monitoring and 2) the location of the ball wall. First, regarding the aspect of traffic, thank you for including a stipulation that the queuing and parking elements of the proposal be monitored for one year. This monitoring will collect valuable information to help mitigate any problems that will arise from the current plan. I request that it also be stipulated that the one-year monitoring be done by an outside organization, one that is not connected in any way with Renton School District. The traffic report which was ordered by Renton School District and done by Heffron Transportation appeared to be biased in favor of Renton School District's fast track agenda to push their plans through and also reflected a general lack of knowledge of the North Renton Neighborhood. A lack of knowledge was apparent in several errors in the traffic report which did not come to the traffic experts' attention until pointed out in SEPA comments submitted by neighbors. For example, during the initial draft of the SEPA review, traffic experts wrongly quoted speed limits surrounding the site as all currently at 20 miles per hour. The traffic pattern at the intersection of N. 4th and Garden was also misrepresented as a through street (both described as a through street in the SEPA review and illustrated on the map of the school as a through street). The updated report submitted for the City of Renton Land Use Application included inflated counts of vehicular trips to the school, taken from a manual representing counts to a fully functioning elementary school. This again demonstrated the lack of knowledge of our neighborhood since Sartori has not been in use as an elementary school for decades. I request a non-biased organization be required to monitor the parking and queuing at the school. The City of Renton is more in touch with the North Renton Neighborhood and could be one choice to facilitate this monitoring. If not the City of Renton, it would be best to stipulate it is an organization other than Heffron Transportation, one that can be impartial, and one that will visit the site to gather the data for the report. The second aspect of the New Sartori Elementary School project which I request changes is the location of the ball wall in the covered play area at the south end of the block. This location is still too close to the street and to the residences on Garden Avenue North. The school district stated at the hearing that they pulled this area further to the west, however just a fifteen foot setback is not enough to offset the noise from the ball wall. This is not just typical playground noise that will emanate for a brief amount of time, but the ball wall is the most popular part of the playground where students line up to play "wall ball" and take turns for the entire recess to bounce balls against this wall. The fact 1 that it is a covered structure means that the sound of the balls will be nreatly amplified. Usually also located near the ball wall is fou uare which will add even more ba uncing noise. The fact that it is a cement area with a cement wall makes the balls even louder. And it is not just a small window of time but the majority of each day we will hear constant ball bouncing. Elementary school recesses are spread out over the course of the day, so the bouncing ball noise will occur practically all day in order for all students to have access to the playground. I have attached the recess schedule for Lakeridge Elementary School as an example of a typical recess schedule. The homes on Garden are older homes that are located close to the street. The construction of our homes is such that the walls do not block out a lot of noise. We hear sirens from several blocks away, planes, buses, trains, helicopters, and when Boeing tests their jet engines, we hear the rumble till it stops and the windows rattle like crazy. Our homes are not expensive sound proof homes tucked away in a culdesac far from the activity of the city, but are situated close to the street. My porch steps are just fifteen feet away from the sidewalk. We hear all the noise inside the house from activity in the neighborhood and on the street. There will be no way to relax or take an afternoon nap with the constant noise of balls bouncing so close by. I ask that more attention be given to my concern of this play area too close to my home. In addition to having this amplified noise from the ball wall area, Garden Avenue residents will be dealing with the noise of school buses pulling through in the morning and after school. To place both the ball wall and the bus lane in this location will generate a consistency of noise throughout the day. It is too much noise for one location. I request that the school district move the ball wall to help lessen the noise. The ball wall could be moved to the hard surface play area where there is already a wall next to the school, or it could be moved entirely to another new location. They could otherwise get rid of the ball wall altogether and opt to keep the covered area in place with support pillars only and without any walls. Keeping the ball wall in its current location will result in substantial and undue adverse effects on adjacent properties on Garden Avenue North. Renton School District stated that they will plant trees on the east side of this structure, but the renderings submitted to the Hearing Examiner only show one tree and otherwise a wide pathway which does not block any sound from this play area. Most of this play area is connected to the walkway which goes from the school to the street, so it does not show any opportunity there for a landscape buffer. However, in my opinion, even a few trees planted near the structure will not be sufficient to block the sound, especially according to the renderings of their plan. It is for all of these reasons that the placement of the ball wall is contrary to "RMC 4-9-030(C)(3): Effect on Adjacent Properties" and indeed the proposed use at the proposed location does result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. The City of Renton Comprehensive plan also promotes improving the livability of Renton's neighborhoods. Unless changes are made, the ball wall will affect the quality of life and the livability in my home. I again respectfully request that the school district relocate the ball wall or remove it altogether. Thank you for taking the time to consider my comments and requests. Most Sincerely, Angela Laulainen 314 Garden AVE N Renton, WA 98057 2 December 20, 2016 STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING CERTIFICATE OF MAILING ) ) § ) Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC MELISSA HART, Public Records Analyst, for the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that she is a citizen of the United States and a resident ofthe State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter. That on the 20th day of December, 2016, at the hour of 4:30 p.m. your affiant duly mailed and placed in the United States Post Office at Renton, King County, Washington, by first class mail the Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request & Laulainen's Request for Reconsideration RE: Sartori Elementary School -LUA-16-000692 to the attached parties of record. -. f , ,. • I . ., '11 Ct -~~;'-_ c... -/-,/t.._,',·-/r- Melissa Hart, Public Records Analyst SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this 20th day of December, 2016. \_ Cyn ia fl. Moya , Notary P1ublic in and for the State of Washington, residing in Renton My Commission expires: 8/27/2018 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov ·"""''"""'8''~"'~1llo,,,\\\~\l«;'lill\\i,!lfrWl:&:!'1,"'·'''I«"', · l~.;;)!i?,1/qu,~.l\tIR+h'ffl)~~l~~iiWli/l~~~fJI'fi North Renton Neighborhood Association PO Box 326 Renton, WA 98057 Angie Laulainen 314 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98055 Debbie Natelson 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit B Renton, WA 98057 Jessica Roach 132 Pelly Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Mike O'Donin 423 Pelly Ave N Renton, WA 98055 Neil Sheesley 809 N 2nd St Renton, WA 98057 iii~~~~-~~-~ Randy Matheson 300 SW 7th St Renton, WA 98057 Sandy Smith 336 Meadow Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Shelby Smith 524 Burnett Ave N Renton. WA 98057 ''1-fa\l!!lC'''io!i,AlfS 1;.;,-''Jii'"' ';.'AV ':~·V'.•'Sl•I·'~. ,•. 'l'!<N' -~>n&;,.tlli-¥~~1&:~Zf!'.t&{S:~q::t)§\l}!t:~{:trti:'A~ Akane Yamaguchi 1008 N Riverside Dr Renton, WA 98057 Beth Palmer 114 Wells Ave S Renton, WA 98057 Dolores Haves 326 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Kathleen Booher 809 N 2nd St Renton, WA 98057 Mr. & Mrs. Poquette 328 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Pamela Thomas 341 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Seattle. WA 98178 /\lk?J'Jl§'i!lllliillllil• ·~;;;;;;,,, ,,,. '~i>°i;•~·'' C;,(;\\,ill;lf,'1(\i' ;,,•;; ~J1M".;~:[?1J:tiJl~i;~1~\~1':~:11i~:P:lts?iw!;;~\f:1J:·, Sarah & Tim Bishop 222 Burnett Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Wvman Dobson 821 N 1st St Renton, WA 98057 '''''i~f<'!l,il•fr,lll;li'1!!Yc~1¥<1'•lii!i!,lit~>v,ii,Wj)"".l;.i>il•cJ41; ~!~~~\~1:ffiWnJ]hT:Ir,iiYiafJ;,~e:t~J11/l.~.5~i;~1 Alison Monges 221 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057-5612 BRIAN & MARY TWIDT 234 GARDEN AVE N RENTON, WA 98057 Genie Chase 227 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30th St, 300 Tacoma, WA Nancy Monahan 325 Meadow Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Paul Rolinger 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit B Renton. WA 98057 Rochelle Krebs 121 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Scott Rice 345 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 December 20, 2016 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30th St, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request RE: Sartori Elementary School (LUA-16-000692) Dear Ms. Klein: Enclosed please find the City of Renton's Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request dated December 19, 2016, along with the Request for Reconsideration from Angela Laulainen dated December 12, 2016. Jason Seth, City Clerk, can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, / \_/ lhJ-C( ss 1--"f-1,, \-1-- M elissa Hart Public Records Analyst cc: Hearing Examiner Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Jennifer Cisneros, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: Sartori Elementary School Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Conditional Use LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H ) ) ) ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION ) REQUEST ) ) ) ) By email dated December 12, 2016, Angela Laulainen has requested reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's decision on the above-captioned matter. Since the reconsideration request affects parties of record and the interests of the City, the parties of record (including applicant) who testified at the hearing and City staff will be given an opportunity to respond to the request for reconsideration before a decision on the reconsideration request is issued. Any responses must be based upon evidence that is already in the record. No evidence that has not been recorded at the hearing or entered as an exhibit at the hearing will be considered in the reconsideration request. To this end, the recess schedule appended to Ms. Laulainen's reconsideration request is not admitted and will not be considered by the hearing examiner. Similarly, Ms. Laulainen's comments about what she can hear in her home are also not admitted and not considered. ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION 22 1. Persons who testified at the hearing on the above-captioned matter or had written comment admitted into the record shall have until 4:00 pm, December 30, 2016 to provide written comments in response to the request for reconsideration submitted by Ms. Laulainen. The City Clerk shall promptly forward all responses to Ms. Laulainen to the email address she used to file her request for reconsideration. 23 24 25 26 Ms. Laulainen shall have until January 6, 2017 at 4:00 pm to provide a written reply to the responses authorized in the preceding paragraph. PUD and CU -1 I 3. All written comments authorized above may be emailed to the City Clerk's Office at 2 CMo\'a'drcntom,a.clov. In the alternative written comments may be mailed or delivered to 3 Cynthia Moya, City of Renton Records Management Specialist, Administrative Services/City Clerk Division, at 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Mailed or delivered comments 4 must be received by the City by the deadlines specified in this Order. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 DATED this 19th day of December, 2016. City of Renton Hearing Examiner PUD and CU -2 Cynthia Moya Subject: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD From: Enkeli <enkeli !@yahoo.com> To: "iseth@rentonwa.gov" <ise!h@rentonwa.gov> Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 10:53 PM Subject: Request lo the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA 16-000692, CU-H, PUD Honorable Hearing Examiner, I am writing to ask for reconsideration on two aspects of the New Sartori Elementary School project/LUA 16-000692, CU-H, PUD. The two aspects of the decision are with respect to 1) traffic monitoring and 2) the location of the ball wall. First, regarding the aspect of traffic, thank you for including a stipulation that the queuing and parking elements of the proposal be monitored for one year. This monitoring will collect valuable information to help mitigate any problems that will arise from the current plan. I request that it also be stipulated that the one-year monitoring be done by an outside organization, one that is not connected in any way with Renton School District. The traffic report which was ordered by Renton School District and done by Heffron Transportation appeared to be biased in favor of Renton School District's fast track agenda to push their plans through and also reflected a general lack of knowledge of the North Renton Neighborhood. A lack of knowledge was apparent in several errors in the traffic report which did not come to the traffic experts' attention until pointed out in SEPA comments submitted by neighbors. For example, during the initial draft of the SEPA review, traffic experts wrongly quoted speed limits surrounding the site as all currently at 20 miles per hour. The traffic pattern at the intersection of N. 4th and Garden was also misrepresented as a through street (both described as a through street in the SEPA review and illustrated on the map of the school as a through street). The updated report submitted for the City of Renton Land Use Application included inflated counts of vehicular trips to the school, taken from a manual representing counts to a fully functioning elementary school. This again demonstrated the lack of knowledge of our neighborhood since Sartori has not been in use as an elementary school for decades. I request a non-biased organization be required to monitor the parking and queuing at the school. The City of Renton is more in touch with the North Renton Neighborhood and could be one choice to facilitate this monitoring. If not the City of Renton, it would be best to stipulate it is an organization other than Heffron Transportation, one that can be impartial, and one that will visit the site to gather the data for the report. The second aspect of the New Sartori Elementary School project which I request changes is the location of the ball wall in the covered play area at the south end of the block. This location is still too close to the street and to the residences on Garden Avenue North. The school district stated at the hearing that they pulled this area further to the west, however just a fifteen foot setback is not enough to offset the noise from the ball wall. This is not just typical playground noise that will emanate for a brief amount of time, but the ball wall is the most popular part of the playground where students line up to play "wall ball" and take turns for the entire recess to bounce balls against this wall. The fact that it is a covered structure me'"ns that the sound of the balls will b,_ ~ eatly amplified. Usually also located near the ball wall is four square which will add even more ball bouncing noise. The fact that it is a cement area with a cement wall makes the balls even louder. And it is not just a small window of time but the majority of each day we will hear constant ball bouncing. Elementary school recesses are spread out over the course of the day, so the bouncing ball noise will occur practically all day in order for all students to have access to the playground. I have attached the recess schedule for Lakeridge Elementary School as an example of a typical recess schedule. The homes on Garden are older homes that are located close to the street. The construction of our homes is such that the walls do not block out a lot of noise. We hear sirens from several blocks away, planes, buses, trains, helicopters, and when Boeing tests their jet engines, we hear the rumble till it stops and the windows rattle like crazy. Our homes are not expensive sound proof homes tucked away in a culdesac far from the activity of the city, but are situated close to the street. My porch steps are just fifteen feet away from the sidewalk. We hear all the noise inside the house from activity in the neighborhood and on the street. There will be no way to relax or take an afternoon nap with the constant noise of balls bouncing so close by. I ask that more attention be given to my concern of this play area too close to my home. In addition to having this amplified noise from the ball wall area, Garden Avenue residents will be dealing with the noise of school buses pulling through in the morning and after school. To place both the ball wall and the bus lane in this location will generate a consistency of noise throughout the day. It is too much noise for one location. I request that the school district move the ball wall to help lessen the noise. The ball wall could be moved to the hard surface play area where there is already a wall next to the school, or it could be moved entirely to another new location. They could otherwise get rid of the ball wall altogether and opt to keep the covered area in place with support pillars only and without any walls. Keeping the ball wall in its current location will result in substantial and undue adverse effects on adjacent properties on Garden Avenue North. Renton School District stated that they will plant trees on the east side of this structure, but the renderings submitted to the Hearing Examiner only show one tree and otherwise a wide pathway which does not block any sound from this play area. Most of this play area is connected to the walkway which goes from the school to the street, so it does not show any opportunity there for a landscape buffer. However, in my opinion, even a few trees planted near the structure will not be sufficient to block the sound, especially according to the renderings of their plan. 1t is for all of these reasons that the placement of the ball wall is contrary to "RMC 4-9-030(C)(3): Effect on Adjacent Properties" and indeed the proposed use at the proposed location does result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. The City of Renton Comprehensive plan also promotes improving the livability of Renton's neighborhoods. Unless changes are rnade, the ball wall will affect the quality of life and the livability in my home. I again respectfully request that the school district relocate the ball wall or remove it altogether. Thank you for taking the time to consider my comments and requests. Most Sincerely, Angela Laulainen 314 Garden AVE N Renton, WA 98057 2 Cynthia Moya From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Cindy, Jason Seth Tuesday, December 13, 2016 8:27 AM Cynthia Moya FW: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD Recess Schedule Lakeridge.pdf Please forward this to the Hearing Examiner and cc: all of the parties of record including City staff. Thanks, -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 iseth@Jrgptgnwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: Enkeli [mailto:enkeli_l@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 10:53 PM To: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> Subject: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD Honorable Hearing Examiner, I am writing to ask for reconsideration on two aspects of the New Sartori Elementary School project/LUA 16-000692, CU-H, PUD. The two aspects of the decision are with respect to 1) traffic monitoring and 2) the location of the ball wall. First, regarding the aspect of traffic, thank you for including a stipulation that the queuing and parking elements of the proposal be monitored for one year. This monitoring will collect valuable information to help mitigate any problems that will arise from the current plan. I request that it also be stipulated that the one-year monitoring be done by an outside organization, one that is not connected in any way with Renton School District. The traffic report which was ordered by Renton School District and done by Heffron Transportation appeared to be biased in favor of Renton School District's fast track agenda to push their plans through and also reflected a general lack of knowledge of the North Renton Neighborhood. A lack of knowledge was apparent in several errors in the traffic report which did not come to the traffic experts' attention until pointed out in SEPA comments submitted by neighbors. For example, during the initial draft of the SEPA review, traffic experts wrongly quoted speed limits surrounding the site as all currently at 20 miles per hour. The traffic pattern at the intersection of N. 4th and Garden was also 1 misrepresented as a through i t (both described as a through str ·n the SEPA review and illustrated on the map of the school as a through street). The updatea report submitted for the City of Renton Land Use Application included inflated counts of vehicular trips to the school, taken from a manual representing counts to a fully functioning elementary school. This again demonstrated the lack of knowledge of our neighborhood since Sartori has not been in use as an elementary school for decades. I request a non-biased organization be required to monitor the parking and queuing at the school. The City of Renton is more in touch with the North Renton Neighborhood and could be one choice to facilitate this monitoring. If not the City of Renton, it would be best to stipulate it is an organization other than Heffron Transportation, one that can be impartial, and one that will visit the site to gather the data for the report. The second aspect of the New Sartori Elementary School project which I request changes is the location of the ball wall in the covered play area at the south end of the block. This location is still too close to the street and to the residences on Garden Avenue North. The school district stated at the hearing that they pulled this area further to the west, however just a fifteen foot setback is not enough to offset the noise from the ball wall. This is not just typical playground noise that will emanate for a brief amount of time, but the ball wall is the most popular part of the playground where students line up to play "wall ball" and take turns for the entire recess to bounce balls against this wall. The fact that it is a covered structure means that the sound of the balls will be greatly amplified. Usually also located near the ball wall is four square which will add even more ball bouncing noise. The fact that it is a cement area with a cement wall makes the balls even louder. And it is not just a small window of time but the majority of each day we will hear constant ball bouncing. Elementary school recesses are spread out over the course of the day, so the bouncing ball noise will occur practically all day in order for all students to have access to the playground. I have attached the recess schedule for Lakeridge Elementary School as an example of a typical recess schedule. The homes on Garden are older homes that are located close to the street. The construction of our homes is such that the walls do not block out a lot of noise. We hear sirens from several blocks away, planes, buses, trains, helicopters, and when Boeing tests their jet engines, we hear the rumble till it stops and the windows rattle like crazy. Our homes are not expensive sound proof homes tucked away in a culdesac far from the activity of the city, but are situated close to the street. My porch steps are just fifteen feet away from the sidewalk. We hear all the noise inside the house from activity in the neighborhood and on the street. There will be no way to relax or take an afternoon nap with the constant noise of balls bouncing so close by. I ask that more attention be given to my concern of this play area too close to my home. In addition to having this amplified noise from the ball wall area, Garden Avenue residents will be dealing with the noise of school buses pulling through in the morning and after school. To place both the ball wall and the bus lane in this location will generate a consistency of noise throughout the day. It is too much noise for one location. I request that the school district move the ball wall to help lessen the noise. The ball wall could be moved to the hard surface play area where there is already a wall next to the school, or it could be moved entirely to another new location. They could otherwise get rid of the ball wall altogether and opt to keep the covered area in place with support pillars only and without any walls. Keeping the ball wall in its current location will result in substantial and undue adverse effects on adjacent properties on Garden Avenue North. 2 Renton School District stated t hey will plant trees on the east si, this structure, but the renderings submitted to the Hea11ng Examiner only show one tree ana otherwise a wide pathway which does not block any sound from this play area. Most of this play area is connected to the walkway which goes from the school to the street, so it does not show any opportunity there for a landscape buffer. However, in my opinion, even a few trees planted near the structure will not be sufficient to block the sound, especially according to the renderings of their plan. It is for all of these reasons that the placement of the ball wall is contrary to "AMC 4-9-030(C)(3): Effect on Adjacent Properties" and indeed the proposed use at the proposed location does result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. The City of Renton Comprehensive plan also promotes improving the livability of Renton's neighborhoods. Unless changes are made, the ball wall will affect the quality of life and the livability in my home. I again respectfully request that the school district relocate the ball wall or remove it altogether. Thank you for taking the time to consider my comments and requests. Most Sincerely, Angela Laulainen 314 Garden AVE N Renton, WA 98057 3 SELECT A SCHOOL V SIGN IN LAKERIDGE ELEMENTARY I Rnoun:.elii Text Language; ,.- l\landily-Thursday Schedule Bell Schedule Ev,,-:_.nt • Be!l Schedule ] 8 30aT- .:. ;::,.:! ·,-_ _:._.,_.:,·· I' .,;,T- '2 ... ::.ov'"l- , .OC·.:;T • Staff Directory 11 Menus Q .C, 51<),wacd ~ .. , Family Access IM@IPG· u:: 11 ,",il@#W·W·~f Friday Schedule ~ -.·'-.: ~-- '':5S~"1-· ·12 ~Se,,r1· i 2:.::.i)prr,- Hon:e LAKERIDGE ELEMENTARY Resources Bell schedule Monday-Thursday Schedule Event First bell; students can enter th,e building aOO go to their dassroorns Sec-:Jnd teil Tarcly bell; school begins 1 :;: ar-d 2rsd Grace rece:;~ Kindergarten recess Kit-dergarten h.Jrch/recess 1st Grade recess/lunch 2nd Grade recess/hJnch Sth Grs:ide. re,;:ess!'lt..nc'l 3rd Grade recess/lunch School end::.. Time 8:27am 8:35am 10·30a'TI- 10:30am- 10:45am 1 ~.45a'T'- 12 OOpr-s 11:S5am- 12.:15pm 12:30a-r- 12·SOor-1 11:45am- 1.L"'05pm 12-COpm- 12:40pm- 1:00pm 2:308 'T- 2:45:J'T' 3:10pm es-Directory fl Men~s Q ,C S.-,W.rd rn( Family Access IFl::ifii~S Pl I+:: ulllii:i IMM++& Friday Schedule Event First bell; students can enter the buifding and go to their classrooms Second t-ell Tardy bell; school begms 1st Grade rece<"...s/lun<:.h 2nd Grade recess/lunch 3rd Grade r~c.ess/lunch 1st and 2nd Grade recess Sctx:rol ends nme 9:57am 10:COarn 10:05..am 12.00prr 11 :45.am- 12:0Spm 12·30arn- 12:50prn 11 :55.am- 12:15pm '12:~Sprr,- '12.3~,prr, 12:40pm- 1:00pm 2·20pn1- 2·35pn1 2:0.5pm- 2::20pm 1 :S(lwn- 2:0Spm 3:10pm December 20, 2016 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30th St, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request RE: Sartori Elementary School (LUA-16-000692) Dear Ms. Klein: Enclosed please find the City of Renton's Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request dated December 19, 2016, along with the Request for Reconsideration from Angela Laulainen dated December 12, 2016. Jason Seth, City Clerk, can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, v/ . I nv l{ ss I--"f-ef-:r~ \ +- Melissa Hart Public Records Analyst cc: Hearing Examiner Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Jennifer Cisneros, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • (425) 430-6510 I Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: Sartori Elementary School Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Conditional Use LUA 16-000692, PPUD, CU-H ) ) ) ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION ) REQUEST ) ) ) ) By email dated December 12, 2016, Angela Laulainen has requested reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's decision on the above-captioned matter. Since the reconsideration request affects parties of record and the interests of the City, the parties of record (including applicant) who testified at the hearing and City staff will be given an opportunity to respond to the request for reconsideration before a decision on the reconsideration request is issued. Any responses must be based upon evidence that is already in the record. No evidence that has not been recorded at the hearing or entered as an exhibit at the hearing will be considered in the reconsideration request. To this end, the recess schedule appended to Ms. Laulainen's reconsideration request is not admitted and will not be considered by the hearing examiner. Similarly, Ms. Laulainen's comments about what she can hear in her home are also not admitted and not considered. ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION 22 1. Persons who testified at the hearing on the above-captioned matter or had written comment admitted into the record shall have until 4:00 pm, December 30, 2016 to provide written comments in response to the request for reconsideration submitted by Ms. Laulainen. The City Clerk shall promptly forward all responses to Ms. Laulainen to the email address she used to file her request for reconsideration. 23 24 25 26 Ms. Laulainen shall have until January 6, 2017 at 4:00 pm to provide a written reply to the responses authorized in the preceding paragraph. PUD and CU -1 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 3. All wTitten comments authorized above may be emailed to the City Clerk's Office at C\hn aurent,1n11a.uo1. In the alternative written comments may be mailed or delivered to Cynthia Moya, City of Renton Records Management Specialist, Administrative Services/City Clerk Division, at I 055 South Grady Way. Renton, WA 98057. Mailed or delivered comments must be received by the City by the deadlines specified in this Order. DATED this 19th day of December, 2016. City of Renton Hearing Examiner PUD and CU-2 Cynthia Moya • Subject: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD From: Enkeli <enkeli I@ yahoo.corn> To: "1seth@ rentonwa.qov" <iseth 0:· rentonwa.gov> Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 10:53 PM Subject: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA 16-000692, CU-H, PUD Honorable Hearing Examiner, I am writing to ask for reconsideration on two aspects of the New Sartori Elementary School project/LUA 16-000692, CU-H, PUD. The two aspects of the decision are with respect to 1) traffic monitoring and 2) the location of the ball wall. First, regarding the aspect of traffic, thank you for including a stipulation that the queuing and parking elements of the proposal be monitored for one year. This monitoring will collect valuable information to help mitigate any problems that will arise from the current plan. I request that it also be stipulated that the one-year monitoring be done by an outside organization, one that is not connected in any way with Renton School District. The traffic report which was ordered by Renton School District and done by Heffron Transportation appeared to be biased in favor of Renton School District's fast track agenda to push their plans through and also reflected a general lack of knowledge of the North Renton Neighborhood. A lack of knowledge was apparent in several errors in the traffic report which did not come to the traffic experts' attention until pointed out in SEPA comments submitted by neighbors. For example, during the initial draft of the SEPA review, traffic experts wrongly quoted speed limits surrounding the site as all currently at 20 miles per hour. The traffic pattern at the intersection of N. 4th and Garden was also misrepresented as a through street (both described as a through street in the SEPA review and illustrated on the map of the school as a through street). The updated report submitted for the City of Renton Land Use Application included inflated counts of vehicular trips to the school, taken from a manual representing counts to a fully functioning elementary school. This again demonstrated the lack of knowledge of our neighborhood since Sartori has not been in use as an elementary school for decades. I request a non-biased organization be required to monitor the parking and queuing at the school. The City of Renton is more in touch with the North Renton Neighborhood and could be one choice to facilitate this monitoring. If not the City of Renton, it would be best to stipulate it is an organization other than Heffron Transportation, one that can be impartial, and one that will visit the site to gather the data for the report. The second aspect of the New Sartori Elementary School project which I request changes is the location of the ball wall in the covered play area at the south end of the block. This location is still too close to the street and to the residences on Garden Avenue North. The school district stated at the hearing that they pulled this area further to the west, however just a fifteen foot setback is not enough to offset the noise from the ball wall. This is not just typical playground noise that will emanate for a brief amount of time, but the ball wall is the most popular part of the playground where students line up to play "wall ball" and take turns for the entire recess to bounce balls against this wall. The fact 1 that it is a covered structure m s that the sound of the balls will b, 1atly amplified. Usually also located near the ball wall is fou ,uare which will add even more ba .. _ouncing noise. The fact that it is a cement area with a cement wall makes the balls even louder. And it is not just a small window of time but the majority of each day we will hear constant ball bouncing. Elementary school recesses are spread out over the course of the day, so the bouncing ball noise will occur practically all day in order for all students to have access to the playground. I have attached the recess schedule for Lakeridge Elementary School as an example of a typical recess schedule. The homes on Garden are older homes that are located close to the street. The construction of our homes is such that the walls do not block out a lot of noise. We hear sirens from several blocks away, planes, buses, trains, helicopters, and when Boeing tests their jet engines, we hear the rumble till it stops and the windows rattle like crazy. Our homes are not expensive sound proof homes tucked away in a culdesac far from the activity of the city, but are situated close to the street. My porch steps are just fifteen feet away from the sidewalk. We hear all the noise inside the house from activity in the neighborhood and on the street. There will be no way to relax or take an afternoon nap with the constant noise of balls bouncing so close by. I ask that more attention be given to my concern of this play area too close to my home. In addition to having this amplified noise from the ball wall area, Garden Avenue residents will be dealing with the noise of school buses pulling through in the morning and after school. To place both the ball wall and the bus lane in this location will generate a consistency of noise throughout the day. It is too much noise for one location. I request that the school district move the ball wall to help lessen the noise. The ball wall could be moved to the hard surface play area where there is already a wall next to the school, or it could be moved entirely to another new location. They could otherwise get rid of the ball wall altogether and opt to keep the covered area in place with support pillars only and without any walls. Keeping the ball wall in its current location will result in substantial and undue adverse effects on adjacent properties on Garden Avenue North. Renton School District stated that they will plant trees on the east side of this structure, but the renderings submitted to the Hearing Examiner only show one tree and otherwise a wide pathway which does not block any sound from this play area. Most of this play area is connected to the walkway which goes from the school to the street, so it does not show any opportunity there for a landscape buffer. However, in my opinion, even a few trees planted near the structure will not be sufficient to block the sound, especially according to the renderings of their plan. It is for all of these reasons that the placement of the ball wall is contrary to "RMC 4-9-030(C)(3): Effect on Adjacent Properties" and indeed the proposed use at the proposed location does result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. The City of Renton Comprehensive plan also promotes improving the livability of Renton's neighborhoods. Unless changes are made, the ball wall will affect the quality of life and the livability in my home. I again respectfully request that the school district relocate the ball wall or remove it altogether. Thank you for taking the time to consider my comments and requests. Most Sincerely, Angela Laulainen 314 Garden AVE N Renton, WA 98057 2 December 20, 2016 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30th St, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request RE: Sartori Elementary School (LUA-16-000692} Dear Ms. Klein: Enclosed please find the City of Renton's Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request dated December 19, 2016, along with the Request for Reconsideration from Angela Laulainen dated December 12, 2016. Jason Seth, City Clerk, can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, l,/ -. I f1v W_ S '-',, 1-----c/--:/A 'i -t--- M e Ii ssa Hart Public Records Analyst cc: Hearing Examiner Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee 1 Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth 1 Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Jennifer Cisneros, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: Sartori Elementary School Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Conditional Use LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H ) ) ) ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION ) REQUEST ) ) ) ) By email dated December 12, 2016, Angela Laulainen has requested reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's decision on the above-captioned matter. Since the reconsideration request affects parties of record and the interests of the City, the parties of record (including applicant) who testified at the hearing and City staff will be given an opportunity to respond to the request for reconsideration before a decision on the reconsideration request is issued. Any responses must be based upon evidence that is already in the record. No evidence that has not been recorded at the hearing or entered as an exhibit at the hearing will be considered in the reconsideration request. To this end, the recess schedule appended to Ms. Laulainen's reconsideration request is not admitted and will not be considered by the hearing examiner. Similarly, Ms. Laulainen's comments about what she can hear in her home are also not admitted and not considered. ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION 22 I. 23 Persons who testified at the hearing on the above-captioned matter or had written comment admitted into the record shall have until 4:00 pm, December 30, 2016 to provide written comments in response to the request for reconsideration submitted by Ms. Laulainen. The City Clerk shall promptly forward all responses to Ms. Laulaincn to the email address she used to file her request for reconsideration. 24 25 26 Ms. Laulainen shall have until January 6, 2017 at 4:00 pm to provide a wTitten reply to the responses authorized in the preceding paragraph. PUD and CU -I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 1 .) . All written comments authorized above may be emailed to the City Clerk's Office at C\Ju,a',i rentom,a.uo\. In the alternative written comments may be mailed or delivered to Cynthia Moya, City of Renton Records Management Specialist, Administrative Services/City Clerk Division, at 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Mailed or delivered comments must be received by the City by the deadlines specified in this Order. DATED this 19 1h day of December, 2016. City of Renton Hearing Examiner PUD and CU -2 · Cynthia Moya Subject: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD From: Enkeli <enkeli l@yahoo.com> To: "jseth@rentom·va.gov" <iseth ©; rentonwa.gov> Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 10:53 PM Subject: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School I LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD Honorable Hearing Examiner, I am writing to ask for reconsideration on two aspects of the New Sartori Elementary School projecVLUA 16-000692, CU-H, PUD. The two aspects of the decision are with respect to 1) traffic monitoring and 2) the location of the ball wall. First, regarding the aspect of traffic, thank you for including a stipulation that the queuing and parking elements of the proposal be monitored for one year. This monitoring will collect valuable information to help mitigate any problems that will arise from the current plan. I request that it also be stipulated that the one-year monitoring be done by an outside organization, one that is not connected in any way with Renton School District. The traffic report which was ordered by Renton School District and done by Heffron Transportation appeared to be biased in favor of Renton School District's fast track agenda to push their plans through and also reflected a general lack of knowledge of the North Renton Neighborhood. A lack of knowledge was apparent in several errors in the traffic report which did not come to the traffic experts' attention until pointed out in SEPA comments submitted by neighbors. For example, during the initial draft of the SEPA review, traffic experts wrongly quoted speed limits surrounding the site as all currently at 20 miles per hour. The traffic pattern at the intersection of N. 4th and Garden was also misrepresented as a through street (both described as a through street in the SEPA review and illustrated on the map of the school as a through street). The updated report submitted for the City of Renton Land Use Application included inflated counts of vehicular trips to the school, taken from a manual representing counts to a fully functioning elementary school. This again demonstrated the lack of knowledge of our neighborhood since Sartori has not been in use as an elementary school for decades. I request a non-biased organization be required to monitor the parking and queuing at the school. The City of Renton is more in touch with the North Renton Neighborhood and could be one choice to facilitate this monitoring. If not the City of Renton, it would be best to stipulate it is an organization other than Heffron Transportation, one that can be impartial, and one that will visit the site to gather the data for the report. The second aspect of the New Sartori Elementary School project which I request changes is the location of the ball wall in the covered play area at the south end of the block. This location is still too close to the street and to the residences on Garden Avenue North. The school district stated at the hearing that they pulled this area further to the west, however just a fifteen foot setback is not enough to offset the noise from the ball wall. This is not just typical playground noise that will emanate for a brief amount of time, but the ball wall is the most popular part of the playground where students line up to play "wall ball" and take turns for the entire recess to bounce balls against this wall. The fact 1 that it is a covered structure me~1s that the sound of the balls will be nreatly amplified. Usually also located near the ball wall is fo1 uare which will add even more ba uncing noise. The fact that it is a cement area with a cement wall makes the balls even louder. And it is not just a small window of time but the majority of each day we will hear constant ball bouncing. Elementary school recesses are spread out over the course of the day, so the bouncing ball noise will occur practically all day in order for all students to have access to the playground. I have attached the recess schedule for Lakeridge Elementary School as an example of a typical recess schedule. The homes on Garden are older homes that are located close to the street. The construction of our homes is such that the walls do not block out a lot of noise. We hear sirens from several blocks away, planes, buses, trains, helicopters, and when Boeing tests their jet engines, we hear the rumble till it stops and the windows rattle like crazy. Our homes are not expensive sound proof homes tucked away in a culdesac far from the activity of the city, but are situated close to the street. My porch steps are just fifteen feet away from the sidewalk. We hear all the noise inside the house from activity in the neighborhood and on the street. There will be no way to relax or take an afternoon nap with the constant noise of balls bouncing so close by. I ask that more attention be given to my concern of this play area too close to my home. In addition to having this amplified noise from the ball wall area, Garden Avenue residents will be dealing with the noise of school buses pulling through in the morning and after school. To place both the ball wall and the bus lane in this location will generate a consistency of noise throughout the day. It is too much noise for one location. I request that the school district move the ball wall to help lessen the noise. The ball wall could be moved to the hard surface play area where there is already a wall next to the school, or it could be moved entirely to another new location. They could otherwise get rid of the ball wall altogether and opt to keep the covered area in place with support pillars only and without any walls. Keeping the ball wall in its current location will result in substantial and undue adverse effects on adjacent properties on Garden Avenue North. Renton School District stated that they will plant trees on the east side of this structure, but the renderings submitted to the Hearing Examiner only show one tree and otherwise a wide pathway which does not block any sound from this play area. Most of this play area is connected to the walkway which goes from the school to the street, so it does not show any opportunity there for a landscape buffer. However, in my opinion, even a few trees planted near the structure will not be sufficient to block the sound, especially according to the renderings of their plan. It is for all of these reasons that the placement of the ball wall is contrary to "RMC 4-9-030(C)(3): Effect on Adjacent Properties" and indeed the proposed use at the proposed location does result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. The City of Renton Comprehensive plan also promotes improving the livability of Renton's neighborhoods. Unless changes are made, the ball wall will affect the quality of life and the livability in my home. I again respectfully request that the school district relocate the ball wall or remove it altogether. Thank you for taking the time to consider my comments and requests. Most Sincerely, Angela Laulainen 314 Garden AVE N Renton, WA 98057 2 November 29, 2016 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30th St, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Subject: Hearing Examiner's Final Decision Denis Law Mayor City Clerk· Jason A. Seth, CMC RE: Sartori Elementary School (LUA-16-000692) Dear Ms. Klein: The City of Renton's Hearing Examiner has issued a Final Decision dated November 27, 2016. This document is immediately available: • Electronically online at the City of Renton City Clerk Division website at www.rentonwa.gov/cityclerk. Click the "Hearing Examiner Decisions" link on the right side of the screen located under the section titled, "Helpful Links." The Hearing Examiner Decisions are filed by year and then alphabetical order by project name. • To be viewed at the City Clerk's office on the 7th floor or Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, between 8 am and 4 pm. Ask for the project file by the above project number; and • For purchase at a copying charge of $0.15 per page. The estimated cost for the Hearing Examiner Documents is $3.90, plus a handling and postage cost (this cost is subject to change if documents are added). APPEAL DEADLINE: RMC 4-8-080 provides that the final decision of the Hearing Examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-110(E)(l4) requires appeals of the Hearing Examiner's decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov date of the hearing examiner's decision. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee to the City Council, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -7th Floor, (425) 430-6510. RECONSIDERATION: A request for reconsideration to the Hearing Examiner may also be filed within this 14 day appeal period as identified in RMC 4-8-110(E)(13) and RMC 4-8- 100(G)(9). Reconsiderations must be filed in writing to the Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Additional information regarding the reconsideration process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall - 7th Floor, (425) 430-6510. A new fourteen (14) day appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of a reconsideration decision. I can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, ,f~ ason A. Seth, CMC cc: Hearing Examiner Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Sabrina Mirante, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) November 29, 2016 STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING CERTIFICATE OF MAILING ) ) § ) JASON A. SETH, City Clerk for the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that he is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter. That on the 29th day of November, 2016, at the hour of 4:30 p.m. your affiant duly mailed and placed in the United States Post Office at Renton, King County, Washington, by first class mail the Hearing Examiner's Final Decision RE: Sartori Elementary School -LUA-16-000692 to the attached parties of record. Jason SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this 29th day of November, 2016. / \ Cyn ia . Mcya Notary Public~ and for the S Washington, residing in Renton My Commission expires: 8/27/2018 ;!!11ili'.'.<lfi,1iiill'-'1\"'"""'~"""'"''"'.1'llii?lil!,l<i!\iil~i>'l'~-' i!i,llir.i.:'1:it!i}it:.:mfG:lll~';~l~1t1f!~t~'it:P;,°W~~~~ North Renton Neighborhood Association PO Box 326 Renton, WA 98057 Angie Laulainen 314 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98055 ifr'il!!'-,;,,llfi1~-ii1¢d!l~;.,;;>1\iif\J~i!lJi;i;~:,i!lJ,,, !a".lllfiffi.1%ffl.~~ffi;g;e'_.t~'ffl&t'..~t'i¥tt1~.w,,,:•,r:,.~wo1'®:'.1:>i.~!i« Debbie Natelson 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit B Renton, WA 98057 5l!I~t~lf~l,i~~.t'.:il!J~~~1il!:Iiff'l Jessica Roach 132 Pelly Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Mike O'Donin 423 Pelly Ave N Renton, WA 98055 1·;,-.,;i;1Jlti,l,Sii,4'rik:·,i!,•··•·.•••{,;;,.;,il,·.'l;'.l<;N/k(§~.l;1~ Si\O~~zJf't'ltli~~f!,;,!g'.fj;li:..:?;:l~~.@'.~;J!:1fJI~ Neil Sheeslev 809 N 2nd St Renton, WA 98057 -t:-Jil~ii'~Jlfii\11, Akane Yamaguchi 1008 N Riverside Dr Renton, WA 98057 ~tffiRIUBll1:il1~~1$~fi~i\ZrJJ~i Beth Palmer 114 Wells Ave S Renton, WA 98057 t£?1~Bl!l:llliiigfi~i1f:!7:ru~·f4JR~l':f~i Dolores Haves 326 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98057 ,.,.,,.,,., __ "'c:-,:;;;,;lfw1''"";1ii;;l;""~,.,!'.,,;,r;'.>li~MJ r:r 1-.-~r;:15-~~··~f,«tJ}it'.:rJ·-~'t'!a'fL.iS~i:-'.:lll.~"~':!:-;;;"'\:;J Kathleen Booher 809 N 2nd St Renton, WA 98057 ~tff~11~~~::Wi~~r~~~~i::~r~1~12~r~':is Mr. & Mrs. Poquette 328 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98057 ~fPWt',,i~~i~~fi~~~@z~~ Pamela Thomas 341 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 &,!!------~ -ii!~·~~~;,~~ r;~;' Randy Matheson 300 SW 7th St Renton, WA 98057 Rick Stracke Renton School District No. 403 7812 S 124th St Seattle. WA 98178 Alison Monges 221 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057-5612 "";,IF ' -.~' 'lt"R''"'il11,l,'ffi ii,,;v-., ... .,. "'"''lf,•''t'i'1!<;;-~;!ll f~-&ti{,iz'.IS'~1t~~~~-~lt':~~i:;'~~k~~;,~~~ BRIAN & MARYTWIDT 234 GARDEN AVE N RENTON, WA 98057 i;~tfJli;jj,~-,:mi~~\~~~~:'ll Genie Chase 227 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057 ~3:.f.~f.lltlfft:il~tt!fi:~tJir,~~~~t~ Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30th St, 300 Tacoma, WA "Vil Y 03 Nancy Monahan 325 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 f,{;{ff~~~-~;~,trf=&~if.ftt~ti Paul Rolinger 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit B Renton, WA 98057 Rochelle Krebs 121 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057 ~11>-.-''licii<~ij\i~IIIi,ti>\\',\7i;v:,.1!i;~; f~\~~.!~t1'it.">/i~,,,;.c_io,,,}~-l.\~t?lt',\.,?i.~t~Rm1% ~'~'HM/!!ll'l!'l'll,l~-::~~1,t1t4e !fik~c1:._,,~..._11lf1~'-~~'if! Sandv Smith 336 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Sarah & Tim Bishop Scott Rice 222 Burnett Ave N 345 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 ~~-~ 1/IIIJ?FSi tiHfi~~i\\'~ Shelby Smith Wvman Dobson 524 Burnett Ave N 821 N 1st St Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: Sartori Elementary School Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Conditional Use ) ) ) FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF ) LAW AND FINAL DECISION ) ) ) LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H ) _________________ ) SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development ("PUD") and conditional use permit approval for the construction of a three story, 79,000 square foot elementary school at 315 Garden Ave North. The applications are approved subject to conditions. The staff recommended conditions of approval have been revised to require City approval of the parking and queuing elements of the transportation management plan required by the applications mitigated determination of nonsignificance. The queuing and parking elements are required to include a one-year monitoring plan to ensure that the proposal doesn't create any off-site queuing or parking outside of applicant owned/leased/shared parking facilities. TESTIMONY [The following summary of testimony is provided solely for the convenience of the reader. Nothing in this summary should be construed as a finding of fact or conclusion al law. The summary does not signify what the examiner found to be important and no assurances are made as to accuracy. A recording of !he hearing is available at City Hall for those wishing an accurate rendition of hearing testimony. The Findings al Fact of this decision commence at Page 5.] Matthew Herrera, City of Renton Senior Planner, summarized the staff report. Mr. Herrera requested PUD and CU -I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 to amend staff recommended condition No. 2 to require compliance with a lot combination by issuance of certificate of occupancy instead of building permit approval. In response to examiner questions, Mr. Herrera clarified that the SEPA MONS didn't require a revised queuing analysis, but staff would like to see some operational plan that identifies how the applicant will deal with queuing. The queuing plan was left open to the school district and is intended to be an open plan that is flexible enough to address changing circumstances. The SEPA MONS includes a transportation management plan that addresses queuing. The City doesn't have any standards related to queuing. Ian Fitz-James, Renton Public Works, testified that the City doesn't have any queuing standards beyond meeting level of service standards. The traffic report concluded that it would meet level of service standards. Public works worked with the applicant to ensure there was enough stacking space on-site to minimize queuing overflow onto the adjoining road. Public Works sees no additional need for stacking space on-site. Trip generation impacts are determined by comparing traffic at affected intersections with and without the school in 2018. The operational plan required for queuing management is required in the school district's MONS. Matt Feldmeyer, facilities Manager of Renton School District testified that the Sartori School was first established in 1907 with modifications made through the 1950s. In the 1970s the school was changed from an elementary school to an adult education center. The school is currently in poor physical shape. The Renton School District eventually concluded that a new elementary school was necessary to serve its population and that the Sartori site was ideally suited to serve this function. The 2016 levy has funding for the school, which will serve up to 650 students kindergarten through 5th grade. The new school will incorporate building clements from the existing school. The building is designed for 50-100 years of use. The building includes commons and gymnasium space for community events as well as a class room sized community room with a kitchen for community programs such as adult education. There will be a makers space for education and fabrication for students to use a variety of tools such as 30 printers for creative endeavors. The public plaza will provide meeting and display space as well as many other types of uses. There will be an accessible outdoor play space available for local community and recreational groups. Landscaping and design is geared towards creating compatibility with surrounding uses. The MONS public comment and review process was recently completed and no additional comments were received beyond the comments identified by Mr. Herrera. Rebecca Baibak, lntegrus Architecture, addressed how the site plan has developed and how the building has developed through dialogue with the school district and the City. The architect has continued to develop the public plaza. Benches and green space are being integrated into the plaza. The plaza is being designed to be a flexible space that can be used for art events, markets, outdoor plays and the like. The gymnasium fronts the plaza so that large gymnasium gatherings have direct access through the plaza. The main entrance to the school building is off the plaza as well so that the plaza can serve as the heart of the city block. Moving east there are 23 parking stalls that are available with a pedestrian pathway that connects directly to the front door. Along Garden A venue the curb line has been adjusted as requested by the City to accommodate the bus pull-out area. The covered play area has also been pulled further to the west to allow for trees on the east side of the covered play area. The covered area gives some weather protection to persons watching events on the PUD and CU -2 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 fields. Cars queuing off-site would be on 4th avenue adjacent to the school site. The on-site queuing area provides for maximum on-site stacking. The materials of the building have gone from an orangish to a mahogany red tone in response to feedback. The amount of glazing on park avenue has also been increased for the two-story library space. The two-story library and gymnasium space both have a Jot of glazing. There is a covered walkway that extends to the parking area to the east. The applicant is looking at several ways to integrate art into the building design. There is a covered waiting area along the north side of the building for students waiting for their rides. The applicant is looking at ways to integrate building elements from the existing building into the plaza area. Tod McBryan, Heffron Transportation Inc., noted that a queuing analysis had been conducted and reviewed by the city. After city comments, the study was finalized. No reduction credits were taken for the trip generation analysis. There is more on the site than just the school that's being removed. There's a supermarket, a restaurant, and eleven residential units. The combination of all these uses creates more traffic than that anticipated for the proposed school. Elementary schools don't generate much traffic during the commuter peak hour. In response to examiner questions regarding Renton School District policies requiring students to be dropped off 15 minutes before school start and how that affects queuing, Mr. McBryan noted that the proposed school hasn't developed any policies yet. The queuing analysis in the traffic report was based upon observations of other schools, such as a school in the Bellevue School District. Those observations were used to estimate ques for the project site. The morning drop-off doesn't create long qucs because parents leave the area right after dropping off their children. The queuing is longer in the afternoon when parents show up early and then wait to pick up their children. The applicant has worked with the City to maximize the on-site que line while also meeting requirements for open space and parking. The transportation management plan recommended for the proposal works best once a principal has been selected for the school so that at that point policies can be adopted that further manage que lines. Diane Dobson, neighbor from the North Renton Neighborhood Association, testified that the Association is very excited about the proposed new school. Their biggest challenge and concern is the traffic impact on the neighborhood. She noted that the proposed elementary school will generate significantly more traffic than the currently existing adult education facility. She noted that the draft traffic report didn't accurately identify the current use of the school property and she hasn't seen any revision to accurately reflects the limited use of the school property. She doesn't know how it's possible to conclude that the proposed school will generate less trips than the uses currently on the school property. The restaurant on-site is a walk-in burrito stand and the supermarket is a deli that is by no means a grocery store or supermarket. The barista stand has moved across the street and has baristas with minimal clothing that is not appropriately located next to an elementary school. The SEPA review hasn't adequately addressed traffic or pedestrian safety. There is also a concern with the bulk of the building being placed on Park Avenue. It is understood that this placement focuses the bulk of the building on the commercial as opposed to residential side of the building, but there are still residences located on the commercial side. It is hoped that there will be more emphasis placed on design and landscaping to provide for more compatibility. The policy requiring drop off less than 15 minutes prior to school start time is a district-wide policy, not an individual school policy. The queuing comparisons should have been based on other Renton elementary schools as opposed to a PUD and CU -3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 school in Bellevue. The Neighborhood Association is very concerned about the traffic impacts. Nancy Monahan, neighbor, testified that as a resident of the North Renton neighborhood, her concern is traffic. There's a lot of traffic that comes from Boeing and Kenworth as well as traffic associated with the Landing. There's a lot of bus traffic as well because the buses don't want to have to use Factory Avenue to get back to the bus barn. She wanted to know if the City or applicant has checked whether the speed limits are being followed. She believes that the traffic going down the residential streets is going 30-40 mph. She wanted to know if there has been consideration on how the proposal will affect parking on surrounding streets when public events will be held at the school. She wanted to know if parking permits could be given to residents along Garden Avenue instead of two-hour parking. Some people along Garden don't have driveways so they need the street parking. It's also her understanding that further development will occur along Park Avenue and she wanted to know if the cumulative parking and traffic impacts of that additional development has been considered. Matt Herrera, in rebuttal, noted that the draft traffic study was prepared pursuant to direction by City staff. Staff required the study to address the four abutting intersections. Once it was determined that there was no impact to the four abutting intersections found no reason to expand the study further outward. Trip estimates from current use were based upon the !TE trip generation manual. In regards to pedestrian safety, staff required the addition of school flashing signage, a 20-mph speed limit, radar detector signage, intersection bulb-outs that reduce intersection crossing distance and tratlic calming measures to slow down traffic. With the bulk of the building along Park Avenue North, it is acknowledged that there are some residences in that area, but the area is zoned commercial arterial and neighborhood commercial as well so the building in that area is reflective of the zoning for that area. Off-site parking was looked at by staff, which is why staff encouraged parking beyond the minimum required by code. Parking will be available in the que line. There are also additional opportunities to park in the bus load/unload area as well as the school transportation center across the street. The city is looking forward to the applicant's transportation management plan to further address off-site parking. The plan will address special event parking and was required as an MONS condition in response to concerns about special event parking during the SEPA review process. In response to examiner questions, the transportation management plan will evaluate how much parking will be needed for special events and how that demand can be met by on and off-site parking. Limited parking permits are available for residents along Garden Avenue. In response to examiner questions, Mr. Fitz-James noted that the applicant took traffic counts to determine current trip generation of the project site and then applied a 2.5% compound yearly growth rate (based on WSDOT forecasts) to determine future traffic. In rebuttal, the applicant testified that using the queuing zone, the bus zone and the 98 spaces at the transfer station directly north of the site, there is space for up to 226 vehicles, which is far more than what would be necessary for special events at the school. That amount of parking is far in excess of parking available for other schools with similar enrollment numbers and the parking in other schools has been sufficient to accommodate special events. Large events are usually scheduled two or three times per year. PUD and CU -4 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EXHIBITS Exhibits l-27, identified at page 2 of the staff report, were admitted during the hearing. In addition, the following exhibits were admitted during the hearing: 28. 29. 30. Staff power point presentation. City of Renton Maps on City of Renton website Applicant power point. 9 FINDINGS OF FACT Io Procedural: l l 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2I 22 23 24 25 26 l. Applicant. Renton School District. 2. Hearing. A hearing on the applications was held on November 8, 2016 in the City of Renton Council Chambers. Substantive: 3. Project Description. The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development ("PUD") and conditional use permit approval for the construction of a three story, 79,000 square foot elementary school at 315 Garden Ave North. The proposed school has capacity to serve 650 students. The subject property consists of 14 contiguous parcels ( city block) that are bound by Park Ave N ., Garden Ave N., N 4th St., and N 3rd St. The project site is currently occupied by a 39,284-square foot adult education facility, 11 residential units, an otlice and 7,100 square feet of commercial space. All existing structures are in the process of being removed. Vehicle access to the subject property is proposed on N. 3rd St. and N. 4th St. The proposal includes 83 parking stalls, l 4 bus loading spaces, and 14 covered bicycle parking spaces. The 5.28-acre subject property is an entire block located within the Residcntial-8 (R-8), R-10, Commercial Neighborhood (CN), and Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning designations. In order to develop across these multiple zoning districts, the Planned Urban Development application requests to comply with CA development and corresponding Urban Design Overlay 'D' standards for the entire property as an alternative to attempting to comply with the four underlying zones. Other modifications are requested as well. The modifications are specifically requested as follows: RMC Code Citation Required Standard Requested Modification PUD and CU -5 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 RMC 4-2-100 Zoning Standards Tables RMC 4-2-lZOA Development Standards for Commercial Zoning Designations RMC 4-6-060F Street Standards RMC 4-3-100 Urban Design Standards RMC 4-3-100 Urban Design Standards RMC 4-3-100 Urban Design Standards RMC 4-4-070 Landscaping RMC 4-4-0BOF, Parking, Loading, and Driveway Regulations RMC 4-4-0BOF, Parking, Loading, and Driveway Regulations PUD and CU -6 There are four (4) separate tables dealing with the various land use categories and zones which contain the minimum and, in some cases, maximum requirements of the zone. 20-foot maximum side yard along a street setbacks Residential Access Street Standards for Garden Ave N. Plaza located at Park Ave N. and N. 4th St. Any facade visible to the public shall be comprised of at least fifty percent (50%) transparent windows and/or doors for at least the portion of the ground floor facade that is between four feet ( 4') and eight feet (8') above ground (as measured on the true elevation). Parking shall be located so that no surface parking is located between a building and the front property line; and/or a building and the side property line (when on a corner lot). Ten-feet of on-site landscaping is required along all public street frontages, with the exception of areas for required walkways and driveways or those projects with reduced setbacks. Based on the proposed number of employees, a minimum and maximum of 60 parking spaces would be required/allowed in order to meet code. 1 off-street parking space for each bus of a size sufficient to park each bus The application of a single zoning classification (CA) and corresponding Design District 'D' for the entire site for the purposes of review. Exceed maximum side yard along N. 3,ct St. to provide a 72-foot setback and N. 4th St. to provide a 135-foot setback. A 52-foot and 115-foot modification, respectively. Relocation of curb-line westward, 10-foot sidewalks, and bulb-outs Relocate plaza to front pf building at Park Ave N and N. 3,ct St. Frosted glass in areas along the south facade Eight parking spaces are proposed between the building and side property line along N. 3,ct St. No street frontage landscaping in areas between the public plaza and street. The applicant proposed a total of 83 spaces within surface parking areas. The proposal exceeds the maximum parking stall requirements by 23 spaces. Bus Parking is proposed on Garden Ave N. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 RMC 4-4-0801, The width of any driveway shall not Driveway width on N. 3,, St. Parking, Loading, and exceed thirty feet (30') exclusive of proposed at 52-feet. Driveway Driveway the radii of the returns or the taper exceeds standards by 22-feet to Regulations section, the measurement being accommodate delivery truck. made parallel to the centerline of the street roadway. RMC 4-4-090, Refuse The gate opening for any separate Proposed enclosure that provides and Recyclables building or other roofed structure a vertical clearance of9.5-feet. Standards used primarily as a refuse or recyclables deposit area/collection point shall have a vertical clearance ofat least fifteen feet (15'). 4. Neighborhood Characteristics. A mix of residential, commercial. and public uses surround the project site. Across North 4th Street to the north is the Renton School District Transportation Facility (bus barn}. To the east is single-family development zoned R-8. To the south is single- family and multi-family development. To the west is commercial and single-family and multi-family residential development zoned CA and CN. 5. Adverse Impacts. There are no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposal. Pertinent impacts are more specifically addressed as follows: A. Trip Generation. One of the issues that drew the greatest neighborhood concern was traffic. Neighbors were skeptical of the applicant's traffic study, which concluded that the proposed foci lity would not lower level of service standards for affected intersections and would generate less traffic than the current uses on the property. The findings of the applicant's traffic engineer are found sufficiently compelling as they are based upon the work of a traffic engineer that was reviewed and found acceptably by the City's public works department. There was no expert testimony or similarly detailed traffic analysis that reasonably undermined the credibility of the applicant's traffic analysis. Table 6 of the applicant's traffic study does come to the debatable conclusion that the proposal will result in a reduction in trip generation based upon Institute of Traffic Engineer trip generation estimates. However, even using current traffic counts with some of the project site buildings already vacant (Table 2), the 2018 traffic estimates still show no significant increase in traffic generated by the proposal. Level of service for the proposal with or without the project, based on either current traffic counts or ITE trip generation estimates, shows no lowering of level of service. All affected intersections will continue to operate at level of service C or better. The City's adopted level of service is D. The City's level of service, as adopted in its comprehensive plan, sets the standard for acceptable traffic congestion in the City of Renton. Since the project is consistent with the adopted level of service and the analysis supporting that conclusion is based upon expert traffic analysis found acceptable to the City's traffic PUD and CU -7 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 engineers and there is no credible expert traffic analysis to the contrary, it is detennined that the proposal will not create significant adverse traffic impacts. B. Queuing. Neighbors were also concerned about queuing during student drop-off and pick up. Queuing during morning student drop off is very likely not a problem. The applicant's traffic engineer prepared a queuing analysis, Ex. 11, p. 22-23, that showed that the project site has ample space to accommodate any queuing generated by morning drop-off. The morning queuing analysis was based upon a morning drop-off period of 20 minutes prior to school opening and neighbors pointed out that the school district may have a policy that compresses the drop-off period to 15 minutes. However, even if such a policy does limit drop-offto!S minutes, it is unlikely this will result in any off-site ques. As shown in the analysis, in a 20- minute drop-off period a 95'" percentile queue would he composed of four vehicles and the on-site load/unload loop has capacity for up to 30 vehicles. As acknowledged in the report, however, there may not be sufficient capacity to accommodate afternoon queuing, since many parents will be arriving early and then waiting to pick up their children. The traffic report acknowledges an excess parking/queuing demand of up to 23 vehicles. Afternoon queuing is nominally addressed in the MONS issued by the school district, which requires a transportation management plan that should "define clear procedures and travel routes for family vehicles and instruct family drivers not to block or partially block travel lanes with queued or waiting vehicles." Of course, such plans can he easily ignored and there is nothing in the conditions of approval that compels any further action from the school district. A condition of approval is added by this decision that requires afternoon queuing monitoring and remedial action as necessary to fully mitigate any queuing impacts. C. Parking. Another traffic issue of concern expressed by the neighbors was parking. The proposal has 83 on-site parking spaces, which exceeds the peak parking demand of74 parking spaces ( excluding afternoon student pick-up, addressed in the queuing analysis above) as detennined in the applicant's traffic report, Ex. 11, p. 24. The greater neighborhood concern is special event parking. The issue is not adequately addressed in the applicant's traffic study. The traffic study identifies that a total of 226 parking spaces are available for special events via on-site parking spaces and the load/unload zone along with the spaces on the adjacent bus barn. See Ex. 11, p. 24-25. The traffic report notes that this amount of parking is sufficient for events drawing 675-790 people. However, the report doesn't identify how many people will attend the school's special events. The MONS requires a transportation management plan that addresses parking for special events, but as with afternoon queuing there is scant provision for accountability or enforcement. The conditions of approval for this decision will require monitoring and remedial measures as necessary to fully mitigate adverse parking impacts created by special events. PUO and CU -8 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 D. Speeding. A final traffic issue raised by neighbors was speeding. Excess speed is an enforcement issue that must be addressed by the police department. The speed limit around the school will be reduced to 20 mph. The MDNS contains several conditions that facilitate the enforcement of the reduced speed limit. including flashing lights and a speed radar sign. E. Compatibility. Concerns were also raised about compatibility with residential uses located to the west of the project along Park Avenue. The bulk of the school building is located along the west side in part to avoid compatibility problems with the residential uses on the east side of the project site. The residences located on the west side are in areas zoned for commercial use. As such, commercial sized buildings such as the proposed school building are considered compatible with the uses located in that district. In addition, the conditions of approval require the addition of articulation and/or modulation features on the north and south ends of Park Avenue as well as additional artwork and glazing to further enhance compatibility with adjoining uses. The open space and landscaping serve as adequate aesthetic buffering to the residentially zoned residential uses to the east. The project is fully compatible with the bus barn to the north and landscaping and open space provide adequate buffering to the residential uses to the south. As conditioned, the proposal is found to be adequately compatible with surrounding uses. F. Critical Areas. The project site is located within two critical areas -High Seismic Area and wellhead protection area. The City's COR mapping database identifies the property to be within a High Seismic Hazard Arca. The applicant submitted a geotechnical report (Exhibit 13) prepared by Associated Earth Sciences Incorporated. Potential for liquefaction was analyzed and determined that the estimated amount of liquefaction-induced settlement ranges from about 5-8 inches and is the result of a very large and rare seismic event. The report provided design recommendations for pile foundations that would reduce both consolidation settlement and seismically induced structure settlement to tolerable levels for new construction. The project MDNS requires the applicant to comply with the recommendations of the geotechnical report. Further, building code standards contain compliance measures and design requirements for sites with potential seismic hazard conditions, which include the adherence to recommendations from geotechnical reports. The geotechnical report demonstrates the proposal can be safely accommodated on the site and identified no impacts to other properties or critical areas. The City's COR mapping database identifies the property to be within a Wellhead Protect Area Zone I. Areas within the Zone I designation are lands situated between a well or well- field owned by the City and the 365-day groundwater travel time contour. No hazardous material storage, handling, treating, use, or production is anticipated with the proposed elementary school. The applicant has indicated that approximately 4,000 cubic yards of fill will be brought to the subject property for construction purposes. Therefore, a condition of approval requires the applicant to submit a source statement certified by a professional engineer or geologist licensed in the State of Washington that the fill meets the requirements PUD and CU -9 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 of RMC 4-4-060N.4 or provide documentation that fill will be obtained from a Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) approved source as allowed by RMC 4-4- 060N.4.g. G. Noise, light and glare. As conditioned, the proposal does not create any significant noise, light or glare impacts. There will be temporary noise impacts associated with the construction of the school and long term noise associated with the operation of the school. The applicant has stated noise impacts consist of typical construction activity such as heavy machinery, vehicles arriving and leaving the site, and contractor tool-use. Most notably, the construction of the building's pile foundation system will occur over the course of a 6-8-week period. The applicant will utilize an alternative to pile driving for installing the foundation via an auger cast method. A hoolow stem auger drills to the design depth of approximately 50-feet and when removed the pile grout is injected into the hole. This method is less impactful than driving piles and does not cause ground vibrations. The applicant proposes the following additional methods of controlling noise impacts: locating stationary equipment away from neighboring properties, erecting portable noise barriers around loud stationary equipment, turning off idling construction equipment, require contractors to rigorously maintain all equipment, and train construction crews to avoid unnecessarily loud action near noise sensitive areas. These methods are included as mitigation measures in the school district's MDNS (Exhibit 7). Long terrn noise impacts associated with the school include vehicle traffic noise during pick- up/drop-off, bus loading/unloading, truck delivery, and noise associated with large groups of children. These impacts will be predominately during the weekday throughout the school year. Daily school noise is not anticipated to exceed the levels set by the City's noise standards so no mitigation is necessary. As required in the MDNS, school bus operators will be instructed to turn off engines and not idle during loading and unloading. The school building, parking lot, and grounds will be lit after dusk each evening for safety purposes. The school district's MDNS has included mitigation measures that include: minimizing exterior lighting to only what is required for life safety and security, 25-foot maximum height for pole-mounted fixtures, direct light away from site perimeter, and the use of cut-off light fixtures. Further, RMC 4-4-075 provides standards that limit light trespass such as parking lot pole height limitations of25-feet with cut-off type luminaire and building lights directed onto itself or the ground immediately abutting it. A lighting plan was not submitted identifying compliance with City lighting standards. Consequently, a condition of approval requires that the applicant provide a lighting plan that provides for public safety without casting excessive glare on adjacent properties at the time of building permit review. Pedestrian scale and downlighting shall be used in all cases to assure PUD and CU -I 0 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 safe pedestrian and vehicular movement, unless alternative pedestrian scale lighting has been approved administratively or is specifically listed as exempt from provisions located in RMC 4-4-075 Lighting, Exterior On-Site. Ornamental lighting fixtures would help create more visual interest for the structure in the pedestrian public realm. Therefore, as condition of approval, the applicant is required to submit revised elevations depicting ornamental lighting fixtures. The revised elevations shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. If all conditions of approval are met the proposal would satisfy the intent of this standard. 6. Superiority in Design. The development of this site as a PUD results in a superior design than what would result by the strict application of the Development Standards for the following reasons: public facilities, overall design, and building and site design. The public facility provides a choice educational program and new neighborhood school within the City Center Planning Arca. The school is needed to respond to continued growth in the City and school district capital facilities program. The proposal will provide a public plaza and playfield that would not otherwise be required under code. The overall design corresponds to the neighborhood by locating much of the building along the commercial frontage of Park Ave N. and stepping down as it transitions to the residential area to the east. The compact building footprint provides 79,000 square feet of floor area while providing the remaining areas with active recreation areas, landscaping. and parking. The building provides large expanses of glazing, weather protection, and articulation and compliments the cohesive design throughout the site. The applicant's efficient and creative use of limited parking space is particularly noteworthy. The north parking area is dual-functional as it provides parking and the primary student pick- up/drop-off area. The design of the parking area is focused on a clockwise drive aisle that surrounds two rows of angled parking separated by landscaping. This parking area design is intended to provide adequate queuing capacity onsite. The south parking area provides 90- degree parking spaces with rows that are broken up by internal lot landscaping. Additional perimeter landscaping provides a visual buffer to the surface parking. Pedestrian pathways are provided to the building entrance and plaza. A flex parking area of eight (8) parking spaces is provided adjacent to the public plaza on the south side of the property. This area is provided as temporary parking near the entrance or overflow parking. The surface is treated like the plaza area so it can also be used for pedestrian only events. The PUD provides flexibility in locating a public facility in a multiple zoned commercial and residential designations. The requested code modifications would not be detrimental to surrounding properties as the design orients the elementary school toward the commercial frontage and transitions to a lower scale and open space areas toward the residential zone. PUD and CU -11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 7. Public Benefit. The school will be the first elementary school in Renton School District that is close to the downtown core and is being developed as a civic and community asset to the City Center. The school will provide a neighborhood elementary but also a choice educational program for students district wide. The school will provide public amenities such as gathering and recreation areas and new streetscape improvements along all frontages. A large public plaza is proposed along the N. 3rd and Park Ave. N. frontage. The 10,000+ square foot plaza is an amenity that will be open for public use and not otherwise required under existing code. Opportunities within the plaza for programming, art, gathering, and other civic uses will be an asset to the neighborhood and overall community. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Procedural: 9 I. Authoritv. RMC 4-9-l 50(F)(8) authorizes the Examiner to conduct hearings and make final 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 decisions on PUD applications. RMC 4-9-030(C)(l) authorizes hearing examiner review for hearing examiner conditional use permit applications. Substantive: 2. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Designations. The project site is zoned Residential-8 (R-8), R- I 0, Commercial Neighborhood (CN), and Commercial Arterial (CA). The comprehensive plan map land use designation for the property is Residential Medium Density, Residential High Density and Commercial Mixed Use. 3. Review Criteria. A hearing examiner conditional use permit is required for elementary schools in all the zoning districts that apply to the project site. Conditional use criteria are governed by RMC 4-9-030(0). RMC 4-9-150 governs PUD criteria. Applicable standards are quoted below in italics and applied through corresponding conclusions of law. PUD RMC 4-9-lSO(B): 2. Code Provisions That May Be Modified: a. In approving a planned urban development, the City may modifj,· any of the standards of chapter 4-2 RlvlC, chapter 4-4 RMC, RMC 4-6-060 and chapter 4-7 RMC, except as listed in subsection BJ of this Section. All modifications shall be considered simultaneously as part of the planned urban development. b. An applicant may request additional modifications from the requirements of this Title, except those listed in subsection BJ a/this Section. All modifications shall be considered simultaneously as part of the planned urban development. PUD and CU -12 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 3. Code Provisions Restricted.from Modification e. Specific Limitations: The City may not modify any provision of RMC f,_J_,115/J_, Critical Areas Regulations, 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, 4-4-130, Tree Cutting and Land Clearing, 4-4-060, Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations, chapter -1-5 RMC, or RA1C ./-6- ()/0 to ./-6-050 and ./-6-IY-O through ./-n-1 JO related to utilities and concurrency, except that provisions may be altered for these codes by alternates, modification, conditional use, or variance as specifically allowed in the referenced Chapter or Section. Such alternates, modification, conditional use, or variance applications may be merged with the consideration ofa planned urban development per RMC ./-9-!50H. 4. As shown in Finding of Fact No. 3, the requested revisions are limited to the regulations identified in the regulation quoted above. 10 RMC 4-9-150(0): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 11 12 13 1. Demonstration of Compliance and Superiority Required: Applicant must demonstrate that a proposed development is in compliance with the purposes of this Section and with the Comprehensive Plan, that the proposed development will be superior to that which would result without a planned urban development, and that the development will not be unduly detrimental to surrounding 14 properties. 15 5. The pertinent purposes of the PUD regulations, as outlined in RMC 4-9-150(A), are to 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 preserve and protect the natural features of the land and to encourage innovation and creativity in development of residential, business, manufacturing, and mixed uses. There are no significant natural features associated with the project site, however the extensive open space that exceeds applicable standards provides many of the benefits associated with protecting natural features. The public open space, art work and exemplary architectural design provide a highly innovative and creative way to benefit the public with educational services and the benefits associated with the open spaces available to the community at the project site. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 6, the proposed design is superior to that which would required outside of the PUD process. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not create any significant adverse impacts so it will not be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties. For the reasons outlined in Finding of Fact No. 22 of the staff report, the proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan. RMC 4-9-150(0): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 24 following requirements are met. 25 26 PUD and CU -13 2 3 2. Public Benefit Required: In addition, Applicant shall demonstrate that a proposed development will provide specifically identified benefits that clearly outweigh any adverse impacts or undesirable effects of the proposed planned urban development, particularly those adverse and undesirable impacts to surrounding properties, and that the proposed development will provide one or more of the following benefits than would result from the development oft he subject site without the proposed 4 planned urban development: 5 6 7 8 9 10 a. Critical Areas: Protects critical areas that would not be protected otherwise to the same degree as without a planned urhan development; or b. Natural Features: Preserves, enhances, or rehabilitates naturalfeatures of the subject property, such as significant woodlands, native vegetation, topography, or noncritical area wildlife hahitats, not otherwise required by other City regulations; or ... e. Overall Design: Provides a planned urban development design that is superior to the design that would result from development of"the suhject property without a planned urban development. A superior design may include the following: ... 11 6. As determined in FOF No. 7, the proposal provides for public benefits in its overall design 12 13 14 and amenities that exceed what would be required of a proposal outside PUD requirements. Further, as determined in FOF No. 5 there are no significant adverse impact associated with the proposal. The criterion is met. RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if'itfinds that the 15 following requirements are met .... 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of'the ji,llowing criteria: a. Building and Site Design: i. Perimeter: Size, scale, mass, character and architectural design along the planned urban development perimeter provide a suilahle transition to adjacent or abulling lower density/intensity zones. Materials shall reduce the potential ji,r light and glare. 7. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(E) and 6, the proposal has been designed in size, scale, mass, building material and design for compatibility with adjoining uses. The conditions of approval require the applicant to submit a materials board with materials that reduce the potential for light and glare. 24 RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 25 following requirements are me/. 26 PUD and CU -14 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 l l 12 13 14 15 16 17 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed.for consistency with all of the.following criteria: a. Building and Site Design: ii. Interior Design: Promotes a coordinated site and building design. Buildings in groups should be related by coordinated materials and roof styles, but contrast should be provided throughout a site by the use of varied materials, architectural detailing, building orientation or housing type; e.g., single family, townhouses, flats, etc. 8. The mass of the building is oriented to the commercial uses of Park Ave N. The building then transitions with the height and mass stepping down toward the neighboring residential zones. The outdoor recreation areas are shielded from the commercial zone by the building and connected to the residential area with pedestrian pathways to the street frontage. Accessory structures such as the covered play area and trash enclosure provide consistency with the buildings architecture by utilizing similar materials and colors. RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the .following requirements are met. 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the .following criteria b. Circulation: i. Provides sufficient streets and pedestrian facilities. The planned urban development shall have sufficient pedestrian and vehicle access commensurate with the location, size and density of the 19 proposed development. All public and private streets shall accommodate emergency vehicle access and the trafjic demand created by the development as documented in a traffic and circulation report approved by the City. Vehicle access shall not be unduly detrimental to adjacent areas. 18 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 9. The criterion is met. Adequate streets serve the proposal as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(A) and (B). Pedestrian access is adequately provided by sidewalks along all frontage streets, which ultimately connect to interior pedestrian pathways and open spaces. Pedestrian safety is assured through a reduction in speed limit and associated speed enforcement measures as outlined in Finding of Fact No. 5(0). RMC 4-9-1 SO(D): Ihe City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. PUD and CU -15 2 3 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria 4 b. Circulation: 5 6 7 8 9 10 II ii. Promotes safety through sufficient sight distance, separation of vehicles.from pedestrians, limited driveways on busy streets, avoidance of dilficult turning patterns, and minimization of steep gradients. l 0. The City public works department has reviewed the proposed circulation for safety and found it to be acceptable. The applicant's traffic report found no sight distance problems with the proposed circulation plan. The 20-mph speed limit with associated enforcement measures and the sidewalks and pathways of the project site should provide for adequately safe pedestrian conditions. 12 RMC 4-9-150(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria b. Circulation: iii. Provision of a system of walkways which tie residential areas to recreational areas, transit, public walkways, schools, and commercial activities. 11. As previously noted, the project site is surrounded on all sides with sidewalks, which are connected to the extensive sidewalk system of the downtown area and associated amenities such as transit, recreational areas and commercial activities. 22 RMC 4-9-150(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 23 following requirements are met. 24 25 26 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria PUD and CU -16 2 3 b. Circulation: 4 ,v. Provides safe, efficient access fi,r emergency vehicles. 5 6 12. The project site abuts four major downtown city streets. Emergency access should not be a problem. 7 RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 8 9 10 l l 12 13 14 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewedfor consistency with all of the following criteria c. Infrastructure and Services: Provides utility services, emergency services, and other improvements, existing and proposed, which are sufficient to serve the development. 13. The proposal is served by adequate public services and infrastructure as outlined in Finding of Fact No. 27 ofthc staff report, adopted by this reference as if set forth in full. RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it find, that the 15 following requirements are met. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all uf"the following criteria d. Clusters or Building Groups and Open Space: An appearance of" openness created hy clustering, separation of building groups, and through the use of well-designed open space and landscaping, or a reduction in amount of impervious surfaces not otherwise required. 14. As determined in Finding of Fact No.5(E) and 6, the building and open space of the project site have been optimally configured to provide appropriate transitions to adjoining uses while also shielding play areas from adjoining commercial use. 25 RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 26 PUD and CU -17 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the ji,llowing criteria e. Privacy and Building Separation: Provides internal privacy between dwelling units, and external privacy for adjacent dwelling units. Each residential or mixed use development shall provide visual and acoustical privacy for dwelling units and surrounding properties. Fences, insulation, walks, barriers, and landscaping are used, as appropriate, for the protection and aesthetic enhancement of the property, the privacy of site occupants and surrounding properties, and.for screening of storage, mechanical or other appropriate areas, and.for the reduction of noise. Windows are placed at such a height or location or screened to provide sufficient privacy. Sufficient light and air are provided to each dwelling unit. l O 15. N/A. 11 RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it.finds that the 12 following requirements are met. 13 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria 14 15 16 f Building Orientation: Provides buildings oriented to enhance viewsfrom within the site by taking advantage of topography, building location and style. 17 18 16. The building is oriented to provide views of the active recreation areas and pedestrian plaza. No other natural views available to the proposal are evident from the record. 19 RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it.finds that the 20 .following requirements are met. 21 22 23 24 25 26 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewedfi,r consistency with all of the following criteria g. Parking Area Design: Provides parking areas that are complemented by landscaping and no/ designed in long rows. The size a/parking areas is minimized in comparison to typical designs, and PUD and CU -l 8 2 3 4 5 each area related to the group of buildings served. The design provides for efficient use of parking, and shared parking facilities where appropriate. 17. As shown in the site plans, Ex. 3, the proposed parking is located in different parts of the project site and is complimented by an extensive amount of landscaping. The applicant's parking design is particularly efficient and creative, as determined in Finding of Fact No. 6. 6 RMC 4-9-150(D)( 4): Each planned urban development shall demonstrate compliance with the 7 8 9 IO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 development standards contained in subsection E of this Section, the underlying zone, and any overlay districts; unless a modification for a specific development standard has been requested pursuant to subsection B2 of this Section. 18. As discussed below, the proposal complies with all development standards imposed by RMC 4-9-150(E). All requested development standard modifications requested through the PUD process identified in FOF No. 3 are approved by this decision. Except as waived through the PUD process, the proposal complies with all applicable zoning district and Design District "D" overlay standards as outlined in Findings No. 23 and 29 of the staff report, adopted by this reference as if set forth in full. RMC 4-9-150(E)(l): Common Open Space Standard: Open space shall be concentrated in large usable areas and may be designed to provide either active or passive recreation. Requirements for residential, mixed use, commercial, and industrial developments are described below. c. The.fi,llowing subsections specify common open .,pace requirements applicable to nonresidential portions o_fmixed use developments or to single use commercial or industrial developments: i. All buildings and developments with over thirty thousand (30.000) square feet of nonresidential uses (excludes parking garage.floorpla/e areas) shall provide pedestrian-oriented space according to 1hefi,llowing.fi,rmula: /% ofrhe lot area+ 1% o/'lhe building area~ .Minimum amount of'pedestrian- oriented space ii. To qualify as pedestrian-oriented ,,pace, thefi,llowing must be included: (a) Visual and pedestrian access (including barrier,fi-ee accessj lo the abulling structures from the public right-of way or a cour(yard not subject to vehicular traffic. (b) Paved H·alking surfiices of'eilher concrete or approved unit paving, (c) On-site or building-mounled lighting providing at /eas/fimr (-l;fi,ot-candles (average) on the ground, and (cl} At least lhree (3)./eet of'seating area (bench. ledge, etc.) or one individual seat per sixty (60) square/eel of'plaza area or open space. PUD and CU -19 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19. iii. Thefi,1/owingfeatures are encouraged in pedestrian-oriented .1pace and mai-be required hy the Hearing Examiner. (aj f'edestrian-oriemed uses at the huildingfi1cadefacing the pedestrian-oriented space. (h) Spaces should he positioned in areas with significant pedestrian traffic to provide interest and security -such as adjacent to a building enl1y. (c) f'edestrian-orientedfi1cades on some or oil buildingsfi1cing the space consistent with Figure ./. (d) Public seating that is durable or easily replaceable. maintainable, and accessible. iv. lhe fi,llmring are prohibited within pedestrian-oriented space: (a) Adjacent unscreened parking lots. (b) Adjacent chain linkfcnccs, /c) Adjacent blank wall.\ (d) Adjacent dumpsters or service areas, and (e) Outdoor storage (1·hopping carts, polling soil bags, .firewood. etc.) that do not contribute to the pedestrian environment. The standard quoted above is met as outlined in Finding No. 28 of the staff report. RMC 4-9-150(E)(2): Private Open Space.· Each residential unit in a planned urban development 14 shall have usable private open space (in addition to parking, storage .1pace. lobbies. and corridors) 15 for the exclusive use of the occupants of that unit. Each ground floor unit, whether attached or 16 17 18 19 20 2l 22 23 24 25 26 detached, shall have private open space which is contiguous to the unit. The private open space shall be well demarcated and at least fifleen feet (15') in every dimension (dech on upper floors can substitute for the required private open space). For dwelling units which are exclusively upper story units, there shall be deck areas totaling at least sixty (60) square feet in size with no dimension less than five feet (5 '). 20. NIA. RMC 4-9-150(E)(3): Installation and Maintenance of Common Open Space: a. Installation: All common area and open ;pace shall be landscaped in accordance with the landscaping plan submitted by the Applicant and approved by the City; provided, that common open space containing natural features worthy of preservation may be left unimproved. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit, the developer shall furnish a security device to the City in an amount equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060. Landscaping shall be planted within one year of the date of final approval of the planned urban development, and maintained for a period of two (2) years thereafter prior to the release of the security device. A security device for providing maintenance of landscaping may be waived ifa landscaping maintenance contract with a reputable PUD and CU -20 2 3 landscaping firm licensed to do business in the City of Renton is executed and kept active for a two (2) year period. A copy of such contract shall be kept on file with the Development Services Division. b. Maintenance: Landscaping shall be maintained pursuant to requirements of RMC 4-4-070. 4 21. As Conditioned. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 RMC 4-9-150(E)(4): Installation and Maintenance of Common Facilities: a. Installation: Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits, all common facilities, including but not limited to utilities, storm drainage, streets, recreation facilities, etc., shall be completed by the developer or, if deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee, assured through a security device to the City equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060 ... 22. As Conditioned. RMC 4-9-150(E)(4): Installation and Maintenance of Common Facilities: h. Maintenance: All common facilities not dedicated to the City shall be permanently maintained by the planned urban development owner, if there is only one owner, or by the property owners· association, or the agent(s) thereof in the event that such facilities are not maintained in a responsible manner, as determined by the City, the City shall have the right to provide for the maintenance thereof and bill the owner or property owners' association accordingly. Such bill, 1f unpaid, shall become a lien against each individual property. 17 23. 18 As conditioned. Conditional Use 19 The Administrator or designee or the Hearing Examiner shall consider, as applicable, the following 20 factors for all applications: 21 RMC 4-9-030(C)(l): Consistency with Plans and Regulations: The proposed use shall be compatible with the general goals, objectives, policies and standards of the Comprehensive Plan, the 22 zoning regulations and any other plans, programs, maps or ordinances of the City of Renton. 23 24 24. As concluded elsewhere in this decision, the proposal is consistent with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and development standards. 25 RMC 4-9-030(C)(2): Appropriate Location: 1he proposed location shall not result in the detrimental overconcentration of a particular use within the City or within the immediate area of the 26 proposed use. The proposed location shall be suited for the proposed use. PUD and CU -21 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 25. The proposed school is the only elementary school within the City Center Community Planning Area. It would be the first school that is close to the downtown and The Landing. The proposed location was previously used for educational purposes and therefore is already suited for the proposed elementary school. RMC 4-9-030(C)(3): Effect on Adjacent Properties: The proposed use at the proposed location shall not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. 26. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, as conditioned, there are no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposal, so it will not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. RMC 4-9-030(C)(4): Compatibility: The proposed use shall be compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood. 27. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(E), the proposed use is compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood. RMC 4-9-030(C)(S): Parking: Adequate parking is, or will he made, available. 28. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(C), the proposal includes adequate parking. RMC 4-9-030(C)(6): Traffic: The use shall ensure safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians and shall mitigate potential effects on the surrounding area. 29. The criterion is met. City staff have determined that the proposal will provide for safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians. The applicant provided a transportation study that provided analysis for abutting intersections. No failures were found by adding the proposed elementary school trips to the City's transportation system. The applicant will provide frontage improvements and pedestrian enhancements. The applicant has proposed to prepare a transportation management plan that will assist student pick-up and drop-off procedures with the intent of making the process smooth and efficient thereby resulting in minimal impacts two times per day. 20 RMC 4-9-030(C)(7): Noise, Light and Glare: Potential noise, light and glare impacts from the proposed use shall be evaluated and mitigated. 21 22 23 24 25 30. As conditioned, as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(G), the proposal will not result in any adverse light, noise or glare impacts. RMC 4-9-030(C)(8): Landscaping: Landscaping shall be provided in all areas not occupied hy buildings, paving, or critical areas. Additional landscaping may be required to buffer adjacent properties.from potentially adverse effects of the proposed use. 31. As shown in the site plans for the proposal, all undeveloped portions of the site are 26 landscaped. PUD and CU -22 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 DECISION The proposed preliminary PUD and conditional use permit applications as identified in the application materials admitted as exhibits and described in this decision are Approved, subject to the conditions below: 1. The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures issued as part of the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance issued by the Renton School District on October 21, 2016 2. The applicant shall record a formal Lot Combination in order to ensure the proposed buildings are not built across property lines. The instrument shall be recorded prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. 3. The applicant shall submit revised site plans that locate the covered play area structure in an area compliant with the 15-foot minimum rear setback. The plans shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 4. The applicant shall submit a detailed landscape plan that provides specific detail for the number or types of trees and shrubbery to the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval complying with applicable sections of RMC 4-4-070. 5. The applicant shall submit a detailed plan set identifying the location and screening provided for roof mounted equipment. The revised plan set shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to building permit approval. 6. The applicant shall provide an updated arborist report that provides analysis for the potential to retain trees 29, 30, and 31 on the tree retention plan with the new Garden Ave N. cross section. The trees shall be retained if viable; otherwise replacement at the required 6: I caliper inch ration will be required for any of the three (3) trees that cannot be retained. The arborist report shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 7. The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan that identifies the replacement trees meeting the replacement requirements of RMC 4-4-130. The landscape plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 8. The applicant shall submit a source statement certified by a professional engineer or geologist licensed in the State of Washington meeting the requirements of RMC 4-4- 060N .4 or provide documentation that fill will be obtained from a Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) approved source as allowed by RMC 4-4- 060N .4.g. The source statement or WSDOT documentation shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. PUD and CU -23 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 9. The applicant shall submit a truck loading diagram that attempts to narrow the proposed 52-foot wide driveway and curb radii to the minimum width needed to accommodate the delivery truck. If the driveway cannot be narrowed, then the applicant shall provide a design that includes a pedestrian refuge area in the middle of the driveway that shortens the crossing distance. The diagram and/or plan shall be submitted to the Current Planning Project Manager prior to issuing the construction permit. 10. The applicant shall submit revised site and utility plans for Garden Ave. N. that provide the curb-line maintained in its existing location, 12-foot sidewalks, street trees in tree grates, and curb-bulbs meeting city standards at the intersections of N. 4th St. and N. 3rd St. The plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager and Engineering Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit approval. 11. The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan that replaces all five trees shown to be retained on Park Ave N. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 12. The applicant shall submit revised site and utility plans for N. 3rd St. that provides curb- bulbs meeting the City's standard on the property's frontage at Park Ave N and Garden Ave N. thereby creating a row of on-street parking along the north side ofN. 3rd St. The plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 13. The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan that provides the new street frontage section along N. 3cd St. and either the retention of the four (4) trees if possible or the replacement of the trees due to the modified street frontage. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 14. The applicant shall create a public outreach sign in coordination with City of Renton to communicate with road users, the general public, area residences and businesses, and appropriate public entities about project information; road conditions in the work zone area; and the safety and mobility effects of the work zone. The sign shall be placed on site prior to construction commencement. 15. The applicant shall submit a detailed plaza plan that identifies compliance with lighting levels of four ( 4) foot candles on the ground, minimum seating areas, and other applicable pedestrian ---oriented space qualifiers in RMC 4-9-l 50lc. The detailed plaza plan shall also include detail cut sheets of the bench, planter boxes, and any other streetscape elements that will be provided. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior lo construction permit approval. 16. The applicant shall provide a revised refuse and recycling enclosure plan that provides a detail cut-sheet of the self-closing door mechanism. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. PUD and CU -24 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 17. The applicant shall submit a revised site plan that provides the proposed material for the pedestrian pathway in the south parking lot. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 18. The applicant shall provide detailed specifications for all site furniture and art, in order to ensure durable, vandal-and weather-resistant materials are used. The specifications shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior building permit approval. 19. The applicant shall provide additional articulation and/or modulation features on the north and south end of Park Ave N. fa,ade and the west side of the N. 4th St. facade. Staff has suggested the applicant wrap the curtain wall around the comer along the south end of the Park Ave N. fa,ade. Artwork, additional glazing, and modulation are suggested on the north end of the Park Ave N fa,ade and west side of the N. 4th St. fa9ade. A revised elevation plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 20. The applicant shall submit revised elevations that provide increased height or the perception of increased height on the ground floor. The plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 21. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan that adequately provides for public safety without casting excessive glare on adjacent properties; provides ornamental lighting fixtures; and otherwise complies with exterior lighting requirements of RMC 4-4-075. 22. The applicant shall submit a materials board subject to the approval of the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. The board shall include color and materials for the fa9ade treatments, raised planters, siding, windows/frames, and canopies. The materials shall reduce the potential for reflection of light and glare. 23. All common area and open space shall be landscaped in accordance with the landscaping plan submitted by the Applicant and approved by the City. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit, the developer shall furnish a security device to the City in an amount equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060. Landscaping shall be planted within one year of the date of final approval of the planned urban development, and maintained for a period of two (2) years thereafter prior to the release of the security device. A security device for providing maintenance of landscaping may be waived if a landscaping maintenance contract with a reputable landscaping firm licensed to do business in the City of Renton is executed and kept active for a two (2) year period. A copy of such contract shall be kept on file with the Development Services Division. 24. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits, all common facilities, including but not limited to utilities, storm drainage, streets, recreation facilities, etc., shall be completed by the developer or, if deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee, assured through a security device to the City equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060. PUD and CU -25 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 25. The plaza shall be permanently maintained by the planned urban development owner. In the event that such facilities are not maintained in a responsible manner, as determined by the City, the City shall have the right to provide for the maintenance thereof and bill the owner. Such bill, if unpaid, shall become a lien against each individual property. 26. The queuing and parking demand components of the transportation management plan required by Condition No. 20 of the project MONS shall be subject to City staff approval prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The queuing and parking demand components shall be subject to one school year monitoring plans scheduled for the first school year with compliance objectives of no oft~site queuing and no off-site parking except for facilities owned by the District or subject to a shared or leased parking agreement. The parking monitoring plan shall include at a minimum monitoring of the three evening events planned for the school year that are expected to draw the largest after-school audiences. The queuing monitoring plan shall include a minimum of five school days (each a different day of the week) during afternoon pick-up. The City may require additional parking and queuing mitigation as necessary to mitigate any off-site queuing or parking (outside of applicant owned or leased/shared parking facilities) identified from the required monitoring. DATED this 27th day ofNovember, 2016. City of Renton Hearing Examiner Appeal Right and Valuation Notices RMC 4-8-080(G) provides that the final decision of the hearing examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-l lO(E)(l4) requires appeals of the hearing examiner's decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner's decision. A request for reconsideration to the hearing examiner may also be filed within this 14-day appeal period as identified in RMC 4-8-IOO(G)(9). A new fourteen (14) day appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of the reconsideration. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -7th floor, ( 425) 430-6510. Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation. PUD and CU -26 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: Sartori Elementary School Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Conditional Use LUAl6-000692, PPUD, CU-H ) ) ) FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF ) LAW AND FINAL DECISION ) ) ) ) SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development ("PUD") and conditional use permit approval for the construction of a three story, 79,000 square foot elementary school at 315 Garden Ave North. The applications are approved subject to conditions. The staff recommended conditions of approval have been revised to require City approval of the parking and queuing elements of the transportation management plan required by the applications mitigated determination of nonsignificance. The queuing and parking elements are required to include a one-year monitoring plan to ensure that the proposal doesn't create any off-site queuing or parking outside of applicant owned/leased/shared parking facilities. TESTIMONY [The following summary of testimony is provided solely for the convenience of the reader. Nothing in this summary should be construed as a finding of fact or conclusion of law. The summary does not signify what the examiner found to be important and no assurances are made as to accuracy. A recording of the hearing is available at City Hall for those wishing an accurate rendition of hearing testimony. The Findings of Fact of this decision commence at Page 5.] Matthew Herrera, City of Renton Senior Planner, summarized the staff report. Mr. Herrera requested PUD and CU -I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ft-lJ 10 f'\4"11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 to amend staff recommended condition No. 2 to require compliance with a lot combination by issuance of certificate of occupancy instead of building permit approval. In response to examiner questions, Mr. Herrera clarified that the SEPA MDNS didn't require a revised queuing analysis, but staff would like to see some operational plan that identifies how the applicant will deal with queuing. The queuing plan was left open to the school district and is intended to be an open plan that is flexible enough to address changing circumstances. The SEPA MDNS includes a transportation management plan that addresses queuing. The City doesn't have any standards related to queuing. Ian Fitz-James, Renton Public Works, testified that the City doesn't have any queuing standards beyond meeting level of service standards. The traffic report concluded that it would meet level of service standards. Public works worked with the applicant to ensure there was enough stacking space on-site to minimize queuing overflow onto the adjoining road. Public Works sees no additional need for stacking space on-site. Trip generation impacts are determined by comparing traffic at affected intersections with and without the school in 2018. The operational plan required for queuing management is required in the school district's MDNS. Matt Feldmire, Facilities Manager of Renton School District, testified that the Sartori School was first established in 1907 with modifications made through the 1950s. In the 1970s the school was changed from an elementary school to an adult education center. The school is currently in poor physical shape. The Renton School District eventually concluded that a new elementary school was necessary to serve its population and that the Sartori site was ideally suited to serve this function. The 2016 levy has funding for the school, which will serve up to 650 students kindergarten through 5th grade. The new school will incorporate building elements from the existing school. The building is designed for 50-100 years of use. The building includes commons and gymnasium space for community events as well as a class room sized community room with a kitchen for community programs such as adult education. There will be a makers space for education and fabrication for students to use a variety of tools such as 3D printers for creative endeavors. The public plaza will provide meeting and display space as well as many other types of uses. There will be an accessible outdoor play space available for local community and recreational groups. Landscaping and design is geared towards creating compatibility with surrounding uses. The MONS public comment and review process was recently completed and no additional comments were received beyond the comments identified by Mr. Herrera. Rebecca Baibak, Integrus Architecture, addressed how the site plan has developed and how the building has developed through dialogue with the school district and the City. The architect has continued to develop the public plaza. Benches and green space are being integrated into the plaza. The plaza is being designed to be a flexible space that can be used for art events, markets, outdoor plays and the like. The gymnasium fronts the plaza so that large gymnasium gatherings have direct access through the plaza. The main entrance to the school building is off the plaza as well so that the plaza can serve as the heart of the city block. Moving east there are 23 parking stalls that are available with a pedestrian pathway that connects directly to the front door. Along Garden A venue the curb line has been adjusted as requested by the City to accommodate the bus pull-out area. The covered play area has also been pulled further to the west to allow for trees on the east side of the covered area. The covered area gives some weather protection to persons watching events on the PUDandCU 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 fields. Cars queuing off-site would be on 4th avenue adjacent to the school site. The on-site queuing area provides for maximum on-site stacking. The materials of the building have gone from an orangish to a mahogany red tone in response to feedback. The amount of glazing on park avenue has also been increased for the two-story library space. The two-story library and gymnasium space both have a lot of glazing. There is a covered walkway that extends to the parking area to the east. The applicant is looking at several ways to integrate art into the building design. There is a covered waiting area along the north side of the building for students waiting for their rides. The applicant is looking at ways to integrate building elements from the existing building into the plaza area. Tod McBryan, Heffron Transportation Inc., noted that a queuing analysis had been conducted and reviewed by the city. After city comments, the study was finalized. No reduction credits were taken for the trip generation analysis. There is more on the site than just the school that's being removed. There's a supermarket, a restaurant, and eleven residential units. The combination of all these uses creates more traffic than that anticipated for the proposed school. Elementary schools don't generate much traffic during the commuter peak hour. In response to examiner questions regarding Renton School District policies requiring students to be dropped off 15 minutes before school start and how that affects queuing, Mr. McBryan noted that the proposed school hasn't developed any policies yet. The queuing analysis in the traffic report was based upon observations of other schools, such as a school in the Bellevue School District. Those observations were used to estimate ques for the project site. The morning drop-off doesn't create long ques because parents leave the area right after dropping off their children. The queuing is longer in the afternoon when parents show up early and then wait to pick up their children. The applicant has worked with the City to maximize the on-site que line while also meeting requirements for open space and parking. The transportation management plan recommended for the proposal works best once a principal has been selected for the school so that at that point policies can be adopted that further manage que lines. Diane Dobson, neighbor from the North Renton Neighborhood Association, testified that the Association is very excited about the proposed new school. Their biggest challenge and concern is the traffic impact on the neighborhood. She noted that the proposed elementary school will generate significantly more traffic than the currently existing adult education facility. She noted that the draft traffic report didn't accurately identify the current use of the school property and she hasn't seen any revision to accurately reflects the limited use of the school property. She doesn't know how it's possible to conclude that the proposed school will generate less trips than the uses currently on the school property. The restaurant on-site is a walk-in burrito stand and the supermarket is a deli that is by no means a grocery store or supermarket. The barista stand has moved across the street and has baristas with minimal clothing that is not appropriately located next to an elementary school. The SEPA review hasn't adequately addressed traffic or pedestrian safety. There is also a concern with the bulk of the building being placed on Park Avenue. It is understood that this placement focuses the bulk of the building on the commercial as opposed to residential side of the building, but there are still residences located on the commercial side. It is hoped that there will be more emphasis placed on design and landscaping to provide for more compatibility. The policy requiring drop off less than 15 minutes prior to school start time is a district-wide policy, not an individual school policy. The queuing comparisons should have been based on other Renton elementary schools as opposed to a PUDandCU -3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 school in Bellevue. The Neighborhood Association is very concerned about the traffic impacts. Nancy Monahan, neighbor, testified that as a resident of the North Renton neighborhood, her concern is traffic. There's a lot of traffic that comes from Boeing and Kenworth as well as traffic associated with the Landing. There's a lot of bus traffic as well because the buses don't want to have to use Factory Avenue to get back to the bus barn. She wanted to know if the City or applicant has checked whether the speed limits are being followed. She believes that the traffic going down the residential streets is going 30-40 mph. She wanted to know if there has been consideration on how the proposal will affect parking on surrounding streets when public events will be held at the school. She wanted to know if parking permits could be given to residents along Garden Avenue instead of two-hour parking. Some people along Garden don't have driveways so they need the street parking. It's also her understanding that further development will occur along Park Avenue and she wanted to know if the cumulative parking and traffic impacts of that additional development has been considered. Matt Herrera, in rebuttal, noted that the draft traffic study was prepared pursuant to direction by City staff. Staff required the study to address the four abutting intersections. Once it was determined that there was no impact to the four abutting intersections found no reason to expand the study further outward. Trip estimates from current use were based upon the ITE trip generation manual. In regards to pedestrian safety, staff required the addition of school flashing signage, a 20-mph speed limit, radar detector signage, intersection bulb-outs that reduce intersection crossing distance and traffic calming measures to slow down traffic. With the bulk of the building along Park Avenue North, it is acknowledged that there are some residences in that area, but the area is zoned commercial arterial and neighborhood commercial as well so the building in that area is reflective of the zoning for that area. Off-site parking was looked at by staff, which is why staff encouraged parking beyond the minimum required by code. Parking will be available in the que line. There are also additional opportunities to park in the bus load/unload area as well as the school transportation center across the street. The city is looking forward to the applicant's transportation management plan to further address off-site parking. The plan will address special event parking and was required as an MDNS condition in response to concerns about special event parking during the SEP A review process. In response to examiner questions, the transportation management plan will evaluate how much parking will be needed for special events and how that demand can be met by on and off-site parking. Limited parking permits are available for residents along Garden Avenue. In response to examiner questions, Mr. Fitz-James noted that the applicant took traffic counts to determine current trip generation of the project site and then applied a 2.5% compound yearly growth rate (based on WSDOT forecasts) to determine future traffic. In rebuttal, the applicant testified that using the queuing zone, the bus zone and the 98 spaces at the transfer station directly north of the site, there is space for up to 226 vehicles, which is far more than what would be necessary for special events at the school. That amount of parking is far in excess of parking available for other schools with similar enrollment numbers and the parking in other schools has been sufficient to accommodate special events. Large events are usually scheduled two or three times per year. PUDandCU-4 1 2 3 EXHIBITS 4 Exhibits 1-27, identified at page 2 of the staff report, were admitted during the hearing. In addition, the following exhibits were admitted during the hearing: 5 6 7 8 28. 29. 30. Staff power point presentation. City of Renton Maps on City of Renton website Applicant power point. 9 FINDINGS OF FACT 1 o Procedural: 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 1. Applicant. Renton School District. 2. Hearing. A hearing on the applications was held on November 8, 2016 in the City of Renton Council Chambers. Substantive: 3. Project Description. The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development ("PUD") and conditional use permit approval for the construction of a three story, 79,000 square foot elementary school at 315 Garden Ave North. The proposed school has capacity to serve 650 students. The subject property consists of 14 contiguous parcels (city block) that are bound by Park Ave N., Garden Ave N., N 4th St., and N 3rd St. The project site is currently occupied by a 39,284-square foot adult education facility, 11 residential units, an office and 7,100 square feet of commercial space. All existing structures are in the process of being removed. Vehicle access to the subject property is proposed on N. 3rd St. and N. 4th St. The proposal includes 83 parking stalls, 14 bus loading spaces, and 14 covered bicycle parking spaces. The 5.28-acre subject property is an entire block located within the Residential-8 (R-8), R-10, Commercial Neighborhood (CN), and Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning designations. In order to develop across these multiple zoning districts, the Planned Urban Development application requests to comply with CA development and corresponding Urban Design Overlay 'D' standards for the entire property as an alternative to attempting to comply with the four underlying zones. Other modifications are requested as well. The modifications are specifically requested as follows: RMC Code Citation Required Standard Requested Modification PUD and CU -5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 RMC 4-2-100 Zoning Standards Tables RMC 4-2-120A Development Standards for Commercial Zoning Designations RMC 4-6-060F Street Standards RMC 4-3-100 Urban Design Standards RMC 4-3-100 Urban Design Standards RMC 4-3-100 Urban Design Standards RMC 4-4-070 Landscaping RMC 4-4-080F, Parking, Loading, and Driveway Regulations RMC 4-4-080F, Parking, Loading, and Driveway Regulations PUDandCU-6 There are four (4) separate tables dealing with the various land use categories and zones which contain the minimum and, in some cases, maximum requirements of the zone. 20-foot maximum side yard along a street setbacks Residential Access Street Standards for Garden Ave N. Plaza located at Park Ave N. and N. 4th St Any facade visible to the public shall be comprised of at least fifty percent (50%) transparent windows and/or doors for at least the portion of the ground floor facade that is between four feet ( 4') and eight feet (8') above ground ( as measured on the true elevation). Parking shall be located so that no surface parking is located between a building and the front property line; and/or a building and the side property line (when on a corner lot). Ten-feet of on-site landscaping is required along all public street frontages, with the exception of areas for required walkways and driveways or those projects with reduced setbacks. Based on the proposed number of employees, .. and a mm1mum maximum of 60 parking spaces would be required/allowed in order to meet code. 1 off-street parking space for each bus of a size sufficient to park each bus The application of a single zoning classification (CA) and corresponding Design District 'D' for the entire site for the purposes ofreview. Exceed maximum side yard along N. 3,a St to provide a 72-foot setback and N. 4th St. to provide a 135-foot setback A 52-foot and 115-foot modification, respectively. Relocation of curb-line westward, 10-foot sidewalks, and bulb-outs Relocate plaza to front pf building at Park Ave N and N. 3,a St Frosted glass in areas along the south facade Eight parking spaces are proposed between the building and side property line along N. 3,a St No street frontage landscaping in areas between the public plaza and street. The applicant proposed a total of 83 spaces within surface parking areas. The proposal exceeds the maximum parking stall requirements by 23 spaces. Bus Parking is proposed on Garden Ave N. I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 RMC 4-4-080(, The width of any driveway shall not Driveway width on N. 3,d St. Parking, Loading, and exceed thirty feet (30') exclusive of proposed at 52-feet. Driveway Driveway the radii of the returns or the taper exceeds standards by 22-feet to Regulations section, the measurement being accommodate delivery truck. made parallel to the centerline of the street roadway. RMC 4-4-090, Refuse The gate opening for any separate Proposed enclosure that provides and Recyclables building or other roofed structure a vertical clearance of 9.5-feet. Standards used primarily as a refuse or recyclables deposit area/collection point shall have a vertical clearance of at least fifteen feet (15'). 4. Neighborhood Characteristics. A mix of residential, commercial, and public uses surround the project site. Across North 4th Street to the north is the Renton School District Transportation Facility (bus barn). To the east is single-family development zoned R-8. To the south is single- family and multi-family development. To the west is commercial and single-family and multi-family residential development zoned CA and CN. 5. Adverse Impacts. There are no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposal. Pertinent impacts are more specifically addressed as follows: A. Trip Generation. One of the issues that drew the greatest neighborhood concern was traffic. Neighbors were skeptical of the applicant's traffic study, which concluded that the proposed facility would not lower level of service standards for affected intersections and would generate less traffic than the current uses on the property. The findings of the applicant's traffic engineer are found sufficiently compelling as they are based upon the work of a traffic engineer that was reviewed and found acceptably by the City's public works department. There was no expert testimony or similarly detailed traffic analysis that reasonably undermined the credibility of the applicant's traffic analysis. Table 6 of the applicant's traffic study does come to the debatable conclusion that the proposal will result in a reduction in trip generation based upon Institute of Traffic Engineer trip generation estimates. However, even using current traflic counts with some of the project site buildings already vacant (Table 2), the 2018 traffic estimates still show no significant increase in traffic generated by the proposal. Level of service for the proposal with or without the project, based on either current traffic counts or ITE trip generation estimates, shows no lowering of level of service. All affected intersections will continue to operate at level of service C or better. The City's adopted level of service is D. The City's level of service, as adopted in its comprehensive plan, sets the standard for acceptable traffic congestion in the City of Renton. Since the project is consistent with the adopted level of service and the analysis supporting that conclusion is based upon expert traffic analysis found acceptable to the City's traffic PUDandCU-7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 engineers and there is no credible expert traffic analysis to the contrary, it is determined that the proposal will not create significant adverse traffic impacts. B. Queuing. Neighbors were also concerned about queuing during student drop-off and pick up. Queuing during morning student drop off is very likely not a problem. The applicant's traffic engineer prepared a queuing analysis, Ex. 11, p. 22-23, that showed that the project site has ample space to accommodate any queuing generated by morning drop-off. The morning queuing analysis was based upon a morning drop-off period of 20 minutes prior to school opening and neighbors pointed out that the school district may have a policy that compresses the drop-off period to 15 minutes. However, even if such a policy does limit drop-off tol5 minutes, it is unlikely this will result in any off-site ques. As shown in the analysis, in a 20- minute drop-off period a 95th percentile queue would be composed of four vehicles and the on-site load/unload loop has capacity for up to 30 vehicles. As acknowledged in the report, however, there may not be sufficient capacity to accommodate afternoon queuing, since many parents will be arriving early and then waiting to pick up their children. The traffic report acknowledges an excess parking/queuing demand of up to 23 vehicles. Afternoon queuing is nominally addressed in the MDNS issued by the school district, which requires a transportation management plan that should "define clear procedures and travel routes for family vehicles and instruct family drivers not to block or partially block travel lanes with queued or waiting vehicles." Of course, such plans can be easily ignored and there is nothing in the conditions of approval that compels any further action from the school district. A condition of approval is added by this decision that requires afternoon queuing monitoring and remedial action as necessary to fully mitigate any queuing impacts. C. Parking. Another traffic issue of concern expressed by the neighbors was parking. The proposal has 83 on-site parking spaces, which exceeds the peak parking demand of 74 parking spaces (excluding afternoon student pick-up, addressed in the queuing analysis above) as determined in the applicant's traffic report, Ex. 11, p. 24. The greater neighborhood concern is special event parking. The issue is not adequately addressed in the applicant's traffic study. The traffic study identifies that a total of 226 parking spaces are available for special events via on-site parking spaces and the load/unload zone along with the spaces on the adjacent bus barn. See Ex. 11, p. 24-25. The traffic report notes that this amount of parking is sufficient for events drawing 675-790 people. However, the report doesn't identify how many people will attend the school's special events. The MONS requires a transportation management plan that addresses parking for special events, but as with afternoon queuing there is scant provision for accountability or enforcement. The conditions of approval for this decision will require monitoring and remedial measures as necessary to fully mitigate adverse parking impacts created by special events. PUDandCU -8 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 D. Speeding. A final traffic issue raised by neighbors was speeding. Excess speed is an enforcement issue that must be addressed by the police department. The speed limit around the school will be reduced to 20 mph. The MONS contains several conditions that facilitate the enforcement of the reduced speed limit, including flashing lights and a speed radar sign. E. Compatibility. Concerns were also raised about compatibility with residential uses located to the west of the project along Park Avenue. The bulk of the school building is located along the west side in part to avoid compatibility problems with the residential uses on the east side of the project site. The residences located on the west side are in areas zoned for commercial use. As such, commercial sized buildings such as the proposed school building are considered compatible with the uses located in that district. In addition, the conditions of approval require the addition of articulation and/or modulation features on the north and south ends of Park Avenue as well as additional artwork and glazing to further enhance compatibility with adjoining uses. The open space and landscaping serve as adequate aesthetic buffering to the residentially zoned residential uses to the east. The project is fully compatible with the bus barn to the north and landscaping and open space provide adequate buffering to the residential uses to the south. As conditioned, the proposal is found to be adequately compatible with surrounding uses. F. Critical Areas. The project site is located within two critical areas -High Seismic Area and wellhead protection area. The City's COR mapping database identifies the property to be within a High Seismic Hazard Area. The applicant submitted a geotechnical report (Exhibit 13) prepared by Associated Earth Sciences Incorporated. Potential for liquefaction was analyzed and determined that the estimated amount of liquefaction-induced settlement ranges from about 5-8 inches and is the result of a very large and rare seismic event. The report provided design recommendations for pile foundations that would reduce both consolidation settlement and seismically induced structure settlement to tolerable levels for new construction. The project MONS requires the applicant to comply with the recommendations of the geotechnical report. Further, building code standards contain compliance measures and design requirements for sites with potential seismic hazard conditions, which include the adherence to recommendations from gcotechnical reports. The geotechnical report demonstrates the proposal can be safely accommodated on the site and identified no impacts to other properties or critical areas. The City's COR mapping database identifies the property to be within a Wellhead Protect Area Zone 1. Areas within the Zone l designation are lands situated between a well or well- field owned by the City and the 365-day groundwater travel time contour. No hazardous material storage, handling, treating, use, or production is anticipated with the proposed elementary school. The applicant has indicated that approximately 4,000 cubic yards of fill will be brought to the subject property for construction purposes. Therefore, a condition of approval requires the applicant to submit a source statement certified by a professional engineer or geologist licensed in the State of Washington that the fill meets the requirements PUDandCU · 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 of RMC 4-4-060N.4 or provide documentation that fill will be obtained from a Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) approved source as allowed by RMC 4-4- 060N.4.g. G. Noise, light and glare. As conditioned, the proposal does not create any significant noise, light or glare impacts. There will be temporary noise impacts associated with the construction of the school and long term noise associated with the operation of the school. The applicant has stated noise impacts consist of typical construction activity such as heavy machinery, vehicles arriving and leaving the site, and contractor tool-use. Most notably, the construction of the building's pile foundation system will occur over the course of a 6-8-week period. The applicant will utilize an alternative to pile driving for installing the foundation via an auger cast method. A hoolow stem auger drills to the design depth of approximately 50-feet and when removed the pile grout is injected into the hole. This method is less impactful than driving piles and does not cause ground vibrations. The applicant proposes the following additional methods of controlling noise impacts: locating stationary equipment away from neighboring properties, erecting portable noise barriers around loud stationary equipment, turning off idling construction equipment, require contractors to rigorously maintain all equipment, and train construction crews to avoid unnecessarily loud action near noise sensitive areas. These methods are included as mitigation measures in the school district's MDNS (Exhibit 7). Long term noise impacts associated with the school include vehicle traffic noise during pick- up/drop-off, bus loading/unloading, truck delivery, and noise associated with large groups of children. These impacts will be predominately during the weekday throughout the school year. Daily school noise is not anticipated to exceed the levels set by the City's noise standards so no mitigation is necessary. As required in the MDNS, school bus operators will be instructed to turn off engines and not idle during loading and unloading. The school building, parking lot, and grounds will be lit after dusk each evening for safety purposes. The school district's MONS has included mitigation measures that include: minimizing exterior lighting to only what is required for life safety and security, 25-foot maximum height for pole-mounted fixtures, direct light away from site perimeter, and the use of cut-off light fixtures. Further, RMC 4-4-075 provides standards that limit light trespass such as parking lot pole height limitations of 25-feet with cut-off type luminaire and building lights directed onto itself or the ground immediately abutting it. A lighting plan was not submitted identifying compliance with City lighting standards. Consequently, a condition of approval requires that the applicant provide a lighting plan that provides for public safety without casting excessive glare on adjacent properties at the time of building permit review. Pedestrian scale and downlighting shall be used in all cases to assure PUD and CU -10 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 safe pedestrian and vehicular movement, unless alternative pedestrian scale lighting has been approved administratively or is specifically listed as exempt from provisions located in RMC 4-4-075 Lighting, Exterior On-Site. Ornamental lighting fixtures would help create more visual interest for the structure in the pedestrian public realm. Therefore, as condition of approval, the applicant is required to submit revised elevations depicting ornamental lighting fixtures. The revised elevations shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. If all conditions of approval are met the proposal would satisfy the intent of this standard. 6. Superiority in Design. The development of this site as a PUD results in a superior design than what would result by the strict application of the Development Standards for the following reasons: public facilities, overall design, and building and site design. The public facility provides a choice educational program and new neighborhood school within the City Center Planning Area. The school is needed to respond to continued growth in the City and school district capital facilities program. The proposal will provide a public plaza and playfield that would not otherwise be required under code. The overall design corresponds to the neighborhood by locating much of the building along the commercial frontage of Park Ave N. and stepping down as it transitions to the residential area to the east. The compact building footprint provides 79,000 square feet of floor area while providing the remaining areas with active recreation areas, landscaping, and parking. The building provides large expanses of glazing, weather protection, and articulation and compliments the cohesive design throughout the site. The applicant's efficient and creative use of limited parking space is particularly noteworthy. The north parking area is dual-functional as it provides parking and the primary student pick- up/drop-off area. The design of the parking area is focused on a clockwise drive aisle that surrounds two rows of angled parking separated by landscaping. This parking area design is intended to provide adequate queuing capacity onsite. The south parking area provides 90- degree parking spaces with rows that are broken up by internal lot landscaping. Additional perimeter landscaping provides a visual buffer to the surface parking. Pedestrian pathways are provided to the building entrance and plaza. A flex parking area of eight (8) parking spaces is provided adjacent to the public plaza on the south side of the property. This area is provided as temporary parking near the entrance or overflow parking. The surface is treated like the plaza area so it can also be used for pedestrian only events. The PUD provides flexibility in locating a public facility in a multiple zoned commercial and residential designations. The requested code modifications would not be detrimental to surrounding properties as the design orients the elementary school toward the commercial frontage and transitions to a lower scale and open space areas toward the residential zone. PUD and CU -11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 7. Public Benefit. The school will be the first elementary school in Renton School District that is close to the downtown core and is being developed as a civic and community asset to the City Center. The school will provide a neighborhood elementary but also a choice educational program for students district wide. The school will provide public amenities such as gathering and recreation areas and new streetscape improvements along all frontages. A large public plaza is proposed along the N. 3rd and Park Ave. N. frontage. The 10,000+ square foot plaza is an amenity that will be open for public use and not otherwise required under existing code. Opportunities within the plaza for programming, art, gathering, and other civic uses will be an asset to the neighborhood and overall community. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Procedural: 9 1. Authority. RMC 4-9-150(F)(8) authorizes the Examiner to conduct hearings and make final 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 decisions on PUD applications. RMC 4-9-030(C)(l) authorizes hearing examiner review for hearing examiner conditional use permit applications. Substantive: 2. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Designations. The project site is zoned Residential-8 (R-8), R- I 0, Commercial Neighborhood (CN), and Commercial Arterial (CA). The comprehensive plan map land use designation for the property is Residential Medium Density, Residential High Density and Commercial Mixed Use. 3. Review Criteria. A hearing examiner conditional use permit is required for elementary schools in all the zoning districts that apply to the project site. Conditional use criteria are governed by RMC 4-9-030(D). RMC 4-9-150 governs PUD criteria. Applicable standards are quoted below in italics and applied through corresponding conclusions of law. PUD RMC 4-9-150(8): 2. Code Provisions That May Be Modified: a. In approving a planned urban development. the City may modify any of the standards of chapter 4-2 RMC, chapter 4-4 RMC, RMC 4-6-060 and chapter 4-7 RMC, except as listed in subsection B3 of this Section. All modifications shall be considered simultaneously as part of the planned urban development. b. An applicant may request additional modifications from the requirements of this Title, except those listed in subsection B3 of this Section. All modifications shall be considered simultaneously as part of the planned urban development. PUD and CU -12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 3. Code Provisions Restricted from Modification e. Specific Limitations: The City may not modify any provision of RMC 4-3-050 Critical Areas Regulations, 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, 4-4-130, Tree Cutting and Land Clearing, 4-4-060, Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations, chapter 4-5 RMC, or RMC 4-6- 010 to 4-6-050 and 4-6-070 through 4-6-1 JO related to utilities and concurrency, except that provisions may be altered for these codes by alternates, modification, conditional use, or variance as specifically allowed in the referenced Chapter or Section. Such alternates, modification, conditional use, or variance applications may be merged with the consideration of a planned urban development per RMC 4-9-J 50H. 4. As shown in Finding of Fact No. 3, the requested revisions are limited to the regulations identified in the regulation quoted above. 10 RMC 4-9-150(0): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 11 1. Demonstration of Compliance and Superiority Required: Applicant must demonstrate that a 12 proposed development is in compliance with the purposes of this Section and with the Comprehensive Plan, that the proposed development will be superior to that which would result without a planned urban development, and that the development will not be unduly detrimental to surrounding 13 14 properties. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 5. The pertinent purposes of the PUD regulations, as outlined in RMC 4-9-150(A), are to preserve and protect the natural features of the land and to encourage innovation and creativity in development of residential, business, manufacturing, and mixed uses. There are no significant natural features associated with the project site, however the extensive open space that exceeds applicable standards provides many of the benefits associated with protecting natural features. The public open space, art work and exemplary architectural design provide a highly innovative and creative way to benefit the public with educational services and the benefits associated with the open spaces available to the community at the project site. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 6, the proposed design is superior to that which would required outside of the PUD process. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not create any significant adverse impacts so it will not be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties. For the reasons outlined in Finding of Fact No. 22 of the staff report, the proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan. RMC 4-9-150(0): The City may approve a planned urban development only if ii finds that the 24 following requirements are met. 25 26 PUD and CU -13 1 2 3 2. Public Benefit Required: In addition, Applicant shall demonstrate that a proposed development will provide specifically identified benefits that clearly outweigh any adverse impacts or undesirable effects of the proposed planned urban development, particularly those adverse and undesirable impacts to surrounding properties, and that the proposed development will provide one or more of the following benefits than would result from the development of the subject site without the proposed 4 planned urban development: 5 6 7 8 9 10 a. Critical Areas: Protects critical areas that would not be protected otherwise to the same degree as without a planned urban development; or b. Natural Features: Preserves, enhances, or rehabilitates natural features of the subject property, such as significant woodlands, native vegetation, topography, or noncritical area wildlife habitats, not otherwise required by other City regulations; or ... e. Overall Design: Provides a planned urban development design that is superior to the design that would result from development of the subject property without a planned urban development. A superior design may include the following: ... 11 6. As determined in FOF No. 7, the proposal provides for public benefits in its overall design 12 13 14 and amenities that exceed what would be required of a proposal outside PUD requirements. Further, as determined in FOF No. 5 there are no significant adverse impact associated with the proposal. The criterion is met. RMC 4-9-150(0): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 15 following requirements are met .... 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria: a. Building and Site Design: i. Perimeter: Size, scale, mass, character and architectural design along the planned urban development perimeter provide a suitable transition to adjacent or abutting lower density/intensity zones. Materials shall reduce the potential for light and glare. 7. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(E) and 6, the proposal has been designed in size, scale, mass, building material and design for compatibility with adjoining uses. The conditions of approval require the applicant to submit a materials board with materials that reduce the potential for light and glare. 24 RMC 4-9-150(0): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 25 following requirements are met. 26 PUD and CU -14 1 2 3 4 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria: a. Building and Site Design: ii. Interior Design: Promotes a coordinated site and building design. Buildings in groups should be related by coordinated materials and roof styles, but contrast should be provided throughout a site by 6 the use of varied materials, architectural detailing, building orientation or housing type; e.g., single family, townhouses, flats, etc. 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 8. The mass of the building is oriented to the commercial uses of Park Ave N. The building then transitions with the height and mass stepping down toward the neighboring residential zones. The outdoor recreation areas are shielded from the commercial zone by the building and connected to the residential area with pedestrian pathways to the street frontage. Accessory structures such as the covered play area and trash enclosure provide consistency with the buildings architecture by utilizing similar materials and colors. RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria b. Circulation: i. Provides sufficient streets and pedestrian facilities. The planned urban development shall have sufficient pedestrian and vehicle access commensurate with the location, size and density of the 19 proposed development. All public and private streets shall accommodate emergency vehicle access and the traffic demand created by the development as documented in a traffic and circulation report approved by the City. Vehicle access shall not be unduly detrimental to adjacent areas. 18 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 9. The criterion is met. Adequate streets serve the proposal as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(A) and (B). Pedestrian access is adequately provided by sidewalks along all frontage streets, which ultimately connect to interior pedestrian pathways and open spaces. Pedestrian safety is assured through a reduction in speed limit and associated speed enforcement measures as outlined in Finding ofFaet No. 5(D). RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. PUD and CU -15 1 2 3 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria 4 b. Circulation: 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ii. Promotes safety through sufficient sight distance, separation of vehicles from pedestrians, limited driveways on busy streets, avoidance of difficult turning patterns, and minimization of steep gradients. 10. The City public works department has reviewed the proposed circulation for safety and found it to be acceptable. The applicant's traffic report found no sight distance problems with the proposed circulation plan. The 20-mph speed limit with associated enforcement measures and the sidewalks and pathways of the project site should provide for adequately safe pedestrian conditions. 12 RMC 4-9-150(0): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria b. Circulation: iii. Provision of a system of walkways which tie residential areas to recreational areas, transit, public walkways, schools, and commercial activities. 11. As previously noted, the project site is surrounded on all sides with sidewalks, which are connected to the extensive sidewalk system of the downtown area and associated amenities such as transit, recreational areas and commercial activities. RMC 4-9-150(0): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 23 following requirements are met. 24 25 26 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria PUD and CU -16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 b. Circulation: iv. Provides safe, efficient access for emergency vehicles. 12. The project site abuts four major downtown city streets. Emergency access should not be a problem. RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria c. Infrastructure and Services: Provides utility services, emergency services, and other improvements, existing and proposed, which are sufficient to serve the development. 13. The proposal is served by adequate public services and infrastructure as outlined in Finding of Fact No. 27 of the staff report, adopted by this reference as if set forth in full. RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 15 following requirements are met. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria d. Clusters or Building Groups and Open Space: An appearance of openness created by clustering, separation of building groups, and through the use of well-designed open space and landscaping, or a reduction in amount of impervious surfaces not otherwise required. 14. As determined in Finding of Fact No.S(E) and 6, the building and open space of the project site have been optimally configured to provide appropriate transitions to adjoining uses while also shielding play areas from adjoining commercial use. 25 RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 26 PUD and CU -17 I 2 3 4 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria e. Privacy and Building Separation: Provides internal privacy between dwelling units, and external 5 privacy for adjacent dwelling units. Each residential or mixed use development shall provide visual and acoustical privacy for dwelling units and surrounding properties. Fences, insulation, walks, barriers, and landscaping are used, as appropriate, for the protection and aesthetic enhancement of the property, the privacy of site occupants and surrounding properties, and for screening of storage, mechanical or other appropriate areas, and for the reduction of noise. Windows are placed at such a height or location or screened to provide sufficient privacy. Sufficient light and air are provided to each dwelling unit. 6 7 8 9 JO 15. NIA. 11 RMC 4-9-ISO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 12 13 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria 14 15 16 f Building Orientation: Provides buildings oriented to enhance views from within the site by taking advantage of topography, building location and style. 17 18 16. The building is oriented to provide views of the active recreation areas and pedestrian plaza. No other natural views available to the proposal are evident from the record. 19 RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 20 following requirements are met. 21 22 23 24 25 26 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria g. Parking Area Design: Provides parking areas that are complemented by landscaping and not designed in long rows. The size of parking areas is minimized in comparison to typical designs, and PUD and CU -18 1 2 3 4 5 each area related to the group of buildings served. The design provides for efficient use of parking, and shared parking facilities where appropriate. 17. As shown in the site plans, Ex. 3, the proposed parking is located in different parts of the project site and is complimented by an extensive amount of landscaping. The applicant's parking design is particularly efficient and creative, as determined in Finding of Fact No. 6. 6 RMC 4-9-150(0)(4): Each planned urban development shall demonstrate compliance with the 7 development standards contained in subsection E of this Section, the underlying zone, and any overlay districts; unless a modification for a specific development standard has been requested 8 pursuant to subsection B2 of this Section. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 18. As discussed below, the proposal complies with all development standards imposed by RMC 4-9-150(E). All requested development standard modifications requested through the PUD process identified in FOF No. 3 are approved by this decision. Except as waived through the PUD process, the proposal complies with all applicable zoning district and Design District "D" overlay standards as outlined in Findings No. 23 and 29 of the staff report, adopted by this reference as if set forth in full. RMC 4-9-lSO(E)(l): Common Open Space Standard: Open space shall be concentrated in large usable areas and may be designed to provide either active or passive recreation. Requirements for residential, mixed use, commercial, and industrial developments are described below. c. Theji1llowing subsections specify common open space requirements applicable to nonresidential portions o{mixed use developments or to single use commercial or industrial developments: i. All buildings and developments with over thirty thousand (30,000) square feet 1~/ nonresidential uses (excludes parking garagejloorplate areas) shall provide pedestrian-orienled space according to the jbl/owingformula: 1°{i of the lot area+ 1% of the building area= Minimum amount o(pedestrian- oriented space ii. To qualify as pedestrian-oriented space, the/bl/owing must he included: (a) Visual and pedestrian access (including harrier~/ree access) to the a/JU/ling struc/ares.fi·om the public right-of way or a courtvard not subject to vehicular traffic, (h) Paved walking surfaces o(either concrete or approved unit paving, (c) On-site or building-mounted lighling providing at least four (4)/bot-candles ( average) on the ground, and (d) At leas/ three (3) feel o{seating area (bench, ledge, etc.) or one individual seal per sixly (60) square.feet ofplaza area or open space. PUD and CU -19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 19. iii. The jol/owing.feotures are encouraged in pedestrian-oriented space and may he required by the Hearing Examiner. (a) Pedestrian-oriented uses at the huildingfacade.facing the pedestrian-oriented space. (h) Spaces should be positioned in areas with significant pedestrian traffic to provide interest and security -such as adjacent to a building entry. (c) Pedestrian-oriented.facades on some or all buildings.facing the space consistent with Figure 4. (d) Public seating that is durable or easily replaceable, maintainable, and accessible. iv. The following are prohibited within pedestrian-oriented space: (a) Adjacent unscreened parking lots, (b) Adjacent chain link.fences, (c) Adjacent blank walls, (d) Adjacent dumpsters or service areas, and (e) Outdoor storage (shopping carts, potting soil bags, firewood, etc.) that do not contribute to the pedestrian environment. The standard quoted above is met as outlined in Finding No. 28 of the staff report. RMC 4-9-150(E)(2): Private Open Space: Each residential unit in a planned urban development 14 shall have usable private open space (in addition to parking, storage space, lobbies, and corridors) 15 for the exclusive use of the occupants of that unit. Each ground floor unit, whether attached or 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 detached, shall have private open space which is contiguous to the unit. The private open space shall be well demarcated and at least fifteen feet (15') in every dimension (decks on upper floors can substitute for the required private open space). For dwelling units which are exclusively upper story units, there shall be deck areas totaling at least sixty (60) square feet in size with no dimension less than five feet (5'). 20. NIA. RMC 4-9-150(E)(3): Installation and Maintenance of Common Open Space: a. Installation: All common area and open space shall be landscaped in accordance with the landscaping plan submitted by the Applicant and approved by the City; provided, that common open space containing natural features worthy of preservation may be left unimproved. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit, the developer shall furnish a security device to the City in an amount equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060. Landscaping shall be planted within one year of the date of final approval of the planned urban development, and maintained for a period of two (2) years thereafter prior to the release of the security device. A security device for providing maintenance of landscaping may be waived if a landscaping maintenance contract with a reputable PUD and CU -20 1 2 3 landscaping firm licensed to do business in the City of Renton is executed and kept active for a two (2) year period. A copy of such contract shall be kept on file with the Development Services Division. b. Maintenance: Landscaping shall be maintained pursuant to requirements of RMC 4-4-070. 4 21. As Conditioned. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 RMC 4-9-150(E)(4): Installation and Maintenance of Common Facilities: a. Installation: Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits, all common facilities, including but not limited to utilities, storm drainage, streets, recreation facilities, etc., shall be completed by the developer or, if deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee, assured through a security device to the City equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060 ... 22. As Conditioned. RMC 4-9-150(E)(4): Installation and Maintenance of Common Facilities: b. Maintenance: All common facilities not dedicated to the City shall be permanently maintained by the planned urban development owner, if there is only one owner, or by the property owners' association, or the agent(s) thereof In the event that such facilities are not maintained in a responsible manner, as determined by the City, the City shall have the right to provide for the maintenance thereof and bill the owner or property owners ' association accordingly. Such bill, if unpaid, shall become a lien against each individual property. 17 23. 18 As conditioned. Conditional Use 19 The Administrator or designee or the Hearing Examiner shall consider, as applicable, the following 20 factors for all applications: 21 22 23 24 RMC 4-9-030(C)(l): Consistency with Plans and Regulations: The proposed use shall be compatible with the general goals, objectives, policies and standards of the Comprehensive Plan, the zoning regulations and any other plans, programs, maps or ordinances of the City of Renton. 24. As concluded elsewhere in this decision, the proposal is consistent with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and development standards. 25 RMC 4-9-030(C)(2): Appropriate Location: The proposed location shall not result in the detrimental overconcentration of a particular use within the City or within the immediate area of the 26 proposed use. The proposed location shall be suited for the proposed use. PUD and CU -21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25. The proposed school is the only elementary school within the City Center Community Planning Area. It would be the first school that is close to the downtown and The Landing. The proposed location was previously used for educational purposes and therefore is already suited for the proposed elementary school. RMC 4-9-030(C)(3): Effect on Adjacent Properties: The proposed use at the proposed location shall not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. 26. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, as conditioned, there are no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposal, so it will not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. RMC 4-9-030(C)(4): Compatibility: The proposed use shall be compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood. 27. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(E), the proposed use is compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood. RMC 4-9-030(C)(5): Parking: Adequate parking is, or will be made, available. 28. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(C), the proposal includes adequate parking. RMC 4-9-030(C)(6): Traffic: The use shall ensure safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians and shall mitigate potential effects on the surrounding area. 29. The criterion is met. City staff have determined that the proposal will provide for safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians. The applicant provided a transportation study that provided analysis for abutting intersections. No failures were found by adding the proposed elementary school trips to the City's transportation system. The applicant will provide frontage improvements and pedestrian enhancements. The applicant has proposed to prepare a transportation management plan that will assist student pick-up and drop-off procedures with the intent of making the process smooth and efficient thereby resulting in minimal impacts two times per day. RMC 4-9-030(C)(7): Noise, Light and Glare: Potential noise, light and glare impacts from the proposed use shall be evaluated and mitigated. 30. As conditioned, as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(G), the proposal will not result in any adverse light, noise or glare impacts. RMC 4-9-030(C)(8): Landscaping: Landscaping shall be provided in all areas not occupied by buildings, paving, or critical areas. Additional landscaping may be required lo buffer adjacent properties from potentially adverse effects of the proposed use. 31. As shown in the site plans for the proposal, all undeveloped portions of the site are 26 landscaped. PUD and CU -22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 DECISION The proposed preliminary PUD and conditional use permit applications as identified in the application materials admitted as exhibits and described in this decision are Approved, subject to the conditions below: 1. The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures issued as part of the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance issued by the Renton School District on October 21, 2016 2. The applicant shall record a formal Lot Combination in order to ensure the proposed buildings are not built across property lines. The instrument shall be recorded prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. 3. The applicant shall submit revised site plans that locate the covered play area structure in an area compliant with the 15-foot minimum rear setback. The plans shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 4. The applicant shall submit a detailed landscape plan that provides specific detail for the number or types of trees and shrubbery to the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval complying with applicable sections ofRMC 4-4-070. 5. The applicant shall submit a detailed plan set identifying the location and screening provided for roof mounted equipment. The revised plan set shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to building permit approval. 6. The applicant shall provide an updated arborist report that provides analysis for the potential to retain trees 29, 30, and 31 on the tree retention plan with the new Garden Ave N. cross section. The trees shall be retained if viable; otherwise replacement at the required 6:1 caliper inch ration will be required for any of the three (3) trees that cannot be retained. The arborist report shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 7. The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan that identifies the replacement trees meeting the replacement requirements of RMC 4-4-130. The landscape plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 8. The applicant shall submit a source statement certified by a professional engineer or geologist licensed in the State of Washington meeting the requirements of RMC 4-4- 060N.4 or provide documentation that fill will be obtained from a Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) approved source as allowed by RMC 4-4- 060N.4.g. The source statement or WSDOT documentation shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. PUD and CU -23 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 9. The applicant shall submit a truck loading diagram that attempts to narrow the proposed 52-foot wide driveway and curb radii to the minimum width needed to accommodate the delivery truck. If the driveway cannot be narrowed, then the applicant shall provide a design that includes a pedestrian refuge area in the middle of the driveway that shortens the crossing distance. The diagram and/or plan shall be submitted to the Current Planning Project Manager prior to issuing the construction permit. 10. The applicant shall submit revised site and utility plans for Garden Ave. N. that provide the curb-line maintained in its existing location, 12-foot sidewalks, street trees in tree grates, and curb-bulbs meeting city standards at the intersections of N. 4th St. and N. 3rd St. The plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager and Engineering Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit approval. 11. The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan that replaces all five trees shown to be retained on Park Ave N. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 12. The applicant shall submit revised site and utility plans for N. 3rd St. that provides curb- bulbs meeting the City's standard on the property's frontage at Park Ave N and Garden Ave N. thereby creating a row of on-street parking along the north side ofN. 3rd St. The plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 13. The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan that provides the new street frontage section along N. 3rd St. and either the retention of the four ( 4) trees if possible or the replacement of the trees due to the modified street frontage. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 14. The applicant shall create a public outreach sign in coordination with City of Renton to communicate with road users, the general public, area residences and businesses, and appropriate public entities about project information; road conditions in the work zone area; and the safety and mobility effects of the work zone. The sign shall be placed on site prior to construction commencement. 15. The applicant shall submit a detailed plaza plan that identifies compliance with lighting levels of four (4) foot candles on the ground, minimum seating areas, and other applicable pedestrian --oriented space qualifiers in RMC 4-9-150lc. The detailed plaza plan shall also include detail cut sheets of the bench, planter boxes, and any other streetscape elements that will be provided. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 16. The applicant shall provide a revised refuse and recycling enclosure plan that provides a detail cut-sheet of the self-closing door mechanism. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. PUD and CU -24 I 2 3 4 s 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 17. The applicant shall submit a revised site plan that provides the proposed material for the pedestrian pathway in the south parking lot. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 18. The applicant shall provide detailed specifications for all site furniture and art, in order to ensure durable, vandal-and weather-resistant materials are used. The specifications shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Plarming Project Manager prior building permit approval. 19. The applicant shall provide additional articulation and/or modulation features on the north and south end of Park Ave N. fm;;ade and the west side of the N. 4th St. facade. Staff has suggested the applicant wrap the curtain wall around the corner along the south end of the Park Ave N. fa9ade. Artwork, additional glazing, and modulation are suggested on the north end of the Park Ave N fa9ade and west side of the N. 4th St. fa9ade. A revised elevation plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 20. The applicant shall submit revised elevations that provide increased height or the perception of increased height on the ground floor. The plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 21. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan that adequately provides for public safety without casting excessive glare on adjacent properties; provides ornamental lighting fixtures; and otherwise complies with exterior lighting requirements of RMC 4-4-075. 22. The applicant shall submit a materials board subject to the approval of the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. The board shall include color and materials for the fa9ade treatments, raised planters, siding, windows/frames, and canopies. The materials shall reduce the potential for reflection of light and glare. 23. All common area and open space shall be landscaped in accordance with the landscaping plan submitted by the Applicant and approved by the City. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit, the developer shall furnish a security device to the City in an amount equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060. Landscaping shall be planted within one year of the date of final approval of the planned urban development, and maintained for a period of two (2) years thereafter prior to the release of the security device. A security device for providing maintenance of landscaping may be waived if a landscaping maintenance contract with a reputable landscaping firm licensed to do business in the City of Renton is executed and kept active for a two (2) year period. A copy of such contract shall be kept on file with the Development Services Division. 24. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits, all common facilities, including but not limited to utilities, storm drainage, streets, recreation facilities, etc., shall be completed by the developer or, if deferred by the Planning;Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee, assured through a security device to the City equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060. PUD and CU -25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25. The plaza shall be permanently maintained by the planned urban development owner. In the event that such facilities are not maintained in a responsible manner, as determined by the City, the City shall have the right to provide for the maintenance thereof and bill the owner. Such bill, if unpaid, shall become a lien against each individual property. 26. The queuing and parking demand components of the transportation management plan required by Condition No. 20 of the project MDNS shall be subject to City staff approval prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The queuing and parking demand components shall be subject to one school year monitoring plans scheduled for the first school year with compliance objectives of no off-site queuing and no off-site parking except for facilities owned by the District or subject to a shared or leased parking agreement. The parking monitoring plan shall include at a minimum monitoring of the three evening events planned for the school year that are expected to draw the largest after-school audiences. The queuing monitoring plan shall include a minimum of five school days ( each a different day of the week) during afternoon pick-up. The City may require additional parking and queuing mitigation as necessary to mitigate any off-site queuing or parking ( outside of applicant owned or leased/shared parking facilities) identified from the required monitoring. DATED this 27th day of December, 2016. ·· ... · r·· Pi,ffA: -< Hh~'-'d\i'~ City of Renton Hearing Examiner Appeal Right and Valuation Notices RMC 4-8-080(G) provides that the final decision of the hearing examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-110(E)(l4) requires appeals of the hearing examiner's decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner's decision. A request for reconsideration to the hearing examiner may also be filed within this 14-day appeal period as identified in RMC 4-8-100(G)(9). A new fourteen (14) day appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of the reconsideration. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -7th floor, (425) 430-6510. 25 Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes 26 notwithstanding any program of revaluation. PUD and CU -26 Project Name: New Sartori Elementary School Date of Hearing November 8, 2016 Staff Contact Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HEARING EXAMINER DECISION, EXHIBITS Project Number: LUA16-000692,PPUD,CU-H Project Contact/Applicant Lisa Klein, AHBL Project Location 315 Garden Ave N The following exhibits were admitted during the hearing: Exhibits 1-27: Hearing Examiner Staff Report and Exhibits Exhibit 28: Powerpoint Presentation Exhibit 29: COR Maps http://rentonwa.gov/government/default.aspx"/id=29886 Exhibit 30: Renton School District Presentation -----------Ren tOll ) ~fun Site Plan - integr.\.:!.~ .... Sart o ri El e mentary School ,,,; OJ C -· -Q_ (/) :J 0 g l (Q m , (i)' m 3 I X <D ::J ~ o l (D ~ -< (/) ~ 0 -· :::;-0 0 0 ~ B,..-/~ ~rr~OlQD integr.~.~ .... Building Exterior Sartori Elementary Schoo l 3 ,-+ (D (.Q . ...., Jc :U> (/) 0 4 , 0 I :::::. m ([) 3 I ([) ::J 0 -< (/) 0 ::y I 0 0 OJ C -· -Q_ -· :J I (Q m X -+ (I) ~ -· 0 ~ l'lefi!~!J Building Exterior integr.~.~ .... Sartori El ementary Schoo l ______ ..........-~R~. e---n--::to=-y n--=@ 1 1111!1 I n -· = I I u, -· • 3-story 79,000sf structure • 83 parking spaces • 14 bus parking spaces on Garden Ave N • 10,000+ sf public plaza • Grass field, covered play area, and other active play spaces. • Street frontage improvements • Stormwater improvements • Perimeter landscaping NORTH 4TH STREET .. ~--, ,.. ~ A -· -I (j) )> A'.) I ! • I I CJ m z ~ m z C: m z 0 r--,i! ~1 ~iK \~ '-:c ~ -ii! • s l ,____, L ---t · ~n~~J=~n .. -.... (a"1'11'U 1l ® -- z '"O C 0 C" ~ n 00 :c ... (t) N QJ 0 ~-~ ::, °' OQ Rent • • lf1C11CIDa de Analvsis • Comprehensive Plan Compliance • Zoning Compliance • Infrastructure • Design Review • Conditional Use Permit Criteria • Planned Urban Development Compliance ,e N '!' 0 "' -0 .. z I. Wells Av e N ~ 00 • "' 00 ~ 00 0 z 0 z "' (I) Garoen A ve N ::0 00 "' 00 Me ado w Ave N "' 00 "' 00 . ::0 00 • ~ 00 Pelly Ave N ::0 00 • 0 z Park Ave N 0 z n, Q.. ~ z ::0 g Cl) ~CJ ~ 00 0 .... :, -0 a. () :::! Cl', Cl> :, .... ~ 00 ~ 00 ::0 00 ::0 00 ~nt l()()H~ >JIYJ..NJl813 ~1S"t 0 3SOdO~ Wells Ave N ~ 0 '!' -0 Pell y Ave N "' -0 11111 '!' ... 0 Garden A ve N ~ .... 0 "' . 0 Meadow Av e N ~ -0 ~ 0 F-a c t ory A ve N ~· ... ~~ .• ®-·- I I 'i -, I • I ~' O'.MIIOCOI o--.1 I ,._ I I "' ~ .:. 0 00 ~ "' -0 00 Pell "' ::0 .:. 0 00 Gard ... ..... ' • 11 .J , 16 r· . ·c l • Building Height • Setbacks • Parking • Access f f,ffif!Af,ff()J,, .. fA( \'"'"'0" ... ,cw,,,:)!, t-w w a:: t- U) i g • ~ II ~ ; .. • ::c: !sgl ~~P. 0 ill z l I • An ! SIS C O'\(~J:Pl'.!tt.l """Q >[IJf,, r~~ ..... lfO 1.f'I-" '°',c CU::1MiWNI C,tWHr., f'R(r.-T(t>M~(ll!\'(_, GARDEN AVENUE NORTH z+ PARK AVENUE NORTH ® • 30 trees onsite • 11 street trees • Potentially save 3 onsite and 4 street trees • Replacement at residential zone rate. • Replace 12 caliper inches per tree removed NOR Ht 4 I H STR(E l J. t~ ,---~:=- ! z ~ ~ ! :t N t ® t Analvsis-St • Circulation • 12' sidewalks Park & Garden • 8' sidewalks N. 3rd & N. 4th • 8' Planter strips/ Tree wells on Garden Ave N • Curb-bulbs • On-street Parking N. 3rd • Flashing School Zone Signals • Radar signs N t i.£'-= l!. ~ :::0 1 · ;;::i:;:: I ~ :Jj~ m ,. i" z ··+ C: t ml z · o ! :::o I ~I :r: I I I I I NORTH 4TH STREET ~ ONtWAT I?! ;I ;mli :,; l: ~I ! I i G) )> :::0 0 m z ~ m z C: m z 0 :::0 ~ :r: __. NORTH ',3R0STREET ·;;;:.,_ ® • • en ... 0 ~ 3 ~ Q) ... CD ~ ..... ,.. t . I I I en I C - ® na1ysis -Conditional Use • erm1 1. Consistency with Plans and Regulations 2. Appropriate Location 3. Effect on Adjacent Properties 4. Compatibility 5. Parking 6. Traffic 7. Noise, Light and Glare 8. Landscaping ® Comments related to the SEPA Environmental Checklist • Aesthetics • Fa~ade along Park Ave N. • Transportation • Capacity related improvements to N 4th St. and Garden Ave N. • Queuing onto N 4th St. during pick-up/drop-off • Staff provided written responses (Exhibit 15) i • ! . I \ \· . \ \ Hl~ON 3nN3J\'v' N3a~v~ I i ! 0 DEPARTMENT OF co~... UNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -----~ItentOil ® A. REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER HEARING DATE: Project Name: Owners: Contact: File Number: Project Manager: Project Summary: Site Area: Project Location: November 8, 2016 New Sartori Elementary School Rick St rake; Renton School District; 7812 S 124th St; Seattle, WA 98178 Lisa Klein; AHBL; 2215 N 301h Street, #300; Tacoma, WA 98043 LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner The Renton School District has submitted applications for Hearing Examiner Planned Urban Development and Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit approvals for the construction of a new 3-story 79,000 square foot Sartori Elementary School. The subject property consists of 14 contiguous parcels (city block) that are bound by Park Ave N., Garden Ave N., N 4th St., and N 3rd St. The 5.28 acre subject property is an entire block located within the Residential-8 (R-8), R-10, Commercial Neighborhood (CN), and Commercial Arterial (CA) zo_ning designations. All existing structures are in the process of being removed. Vehicle access to the subject property is proposed on N. 3rd St. and N. 4th St. The proposal includes 83 parking stalls, 14 bus loading spaces, and 14 covered bicycle parking spaces. The Planned Urban Development application requests to comply with CA development and corresponding Urban Design Overlay 'D' standards for the entire property as an alternative to attempting to comply with the four underlying zones. Additional requested PUD modifications includes setbacks, parking, landscaping, refuse/recycling, and street standard s. The applicant has proposed public benefits including a public facility, public plaza, large play field and other programmed play areas, and enhanced landscaping. The subject property is within the Wellhead Protection Zone 1 and potential seismic hazard area . 229,996 SF (5.28 ac) Total Building Area GSF: 79,000 SF 315 Garden Ave N. Project Location Map Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Rep o rt City of Renton Department of l ,unity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 2 of 47 I 8. EXHIBITS: Exhibit 1: 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: HEX Report, dated November 1, 2016 Site Plan Landscape Plan Neighborhood Detail Map Notice of SEPA Consultation Prepared by Renton School District City SEPA Comment Letter to District Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance issued by the Renton School District Elevations Tree Retention Plan StormwaterTechnical Information Report (TIR) prepared by AHBL, dated August 2016 Transportation Report prepared by Heffron Transportation, dated August 26, 2016 Arborist Report prepared by Washington Forestry Consultants, dated August 23, 2016 Geotechnical Report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences Incorporated, dated August 4, 2016. Email Comments from Angie Laulainen City Staff Response to Angie Laulainen Carbon Copy Email Comments Tree Retention Worksheet Completed by Applicant Screening Details (Garbage Enclosure) Concurrency Memo Prepared by Brianne Bannworth Development Engineering Manager, dated October 31, 2016 Civil Grading and Drainage Plan Civil Utility and Surfacing Plan Boundary and Topographic Survey Floor Plans Perspective Views (Architectural Renderings) Advisory Notes to Applicant Affidavit of Posting and Mailing Revised Architectural Renderings Sartori f5_16-000692_HfX Staff Report City of Renton Department of c~~-nunity & Economic Development Hear;ng Examiner Recommendation WA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 I C. GENERAL INFORMA T/ON: 1. Owner{s) of Record: 2. Zoning Classification: 3. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: 4. Existing Site Use: 5. Neighborhood Characteristics: Renton School District 7812 S 124th St Seattle, WA 98178 Page 3 of 47 Residential-8 (R-8); Residential -10 (R-10), Commercial Neighborhood (CN); and Commercial Arterial (CA) Residential High Density (HD); Residential Medium Density (MD); and Commercial Mixed Use (CMU) The existing Sartori Education Center and surrounding residential and commercial structures which have been and/or will be demolished a. b. North: East: Renton School District Transportation Facility (IL and CA Zones) Single Family Residential (R-8 Zone) c. South: d. West: 6. Site Area: Single Family and Multi-Family Residential (CN and R-8 Zones) Commercial, Single Family, and Multi-Family Residential (CA and CN Zones) 229,996 SF (5.28 ac) I D. HISTORICAL/BACKGROUND: Action Comprehensive Plan Zoning Annexation I E. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Existing Utilities Land Use File No. N/A N/A N/A Ordinance No. 5758 5758 156 06/22/2015 06/22/2015 05/23/1909 a. Water: Water service is provided by the City of Renton. The site is in the Valley service area in the 196' hydrologic pressure zone. There are existing mains between 6 and 16 inches in diameter in each abutting street right-of-way. b. Sewer: Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. There is an existing 22-ich concrete sewer main within the N. 4th Street right-of-way. c. Surface/Storm Water: There are existing 12-inch stormwater mains within the Park Ave N and N. 4th St. right-of-ways and a 10-inch stormwater main with the N 3'' St. right-of-way. 2. Streets: The site is bounded by Park Ave N., Garden Ave N., N 4th St., and N. 3" St. Each street contains curb, gutters, and sidewalks. N. 3'' St. and Garden Ave N. contain planter strips. 3. Fire Protection: Renton Fire Authority Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of c--71unity & Economic Development Report of November 1, 2016 F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE: 1. Chapter Z Land Use Districts a. Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts b. Section 4-2-070: Zoning Use Table c. Section 4-2-110: Residential Development Standards d. Section 4-2-120: Commercial Development Standards Z. Chapter 3 Environmental Regulations a. Section 4-3-050: Critical Area Regulations b. Section 4-3-100: Urban Design Regulations 3. Chapter 4 Property Development Standards 4. Chapter 6 Streets and Utility Standards a. Section 4-6-060: Street Standards 5. Chapter 9 Permits -Specific a. Section 4-9-030: Conditional Use Permits b. Section 4-9-150: Planned Urban Development Regulations 6. Chapter 11 Definitions G. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 1. Land Use Element 2. Capital Facilities Element I H. FINDINGS OF FACT {FOF}: Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Page 4 of 47 1. The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development (PPUD) and a Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a new 3-story 79,000 square foot Sartori Elementary School (Exhibit 2). Z. The subject site contains the existing Sartori Education Center and surrounding residential and commercial structures which have been and/or will be demolished. 3. The new school would be developed as a choice school to house specialized programs and is anticipated to serve a maximum of 650 students from kindergarten to 5th grade. 4. Additional improvements proposed by the applicant as shown on the landscape plan (Exhibit 3) include a 35,000 square foot grass field, various soft and hard surface play areas, 4,400 square foot covered play area, public plaza, landscaping, street frontage improvements, and drainage infrastructure. 5. The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for review on September 2, 2016 and determined the application complete on September 14, 2016. The project complies with the 120-day review period. 6. The subject property consists of 14 contiguous parcels that are bound by Park Ave N., Garden Ave N., N 4th St., and N 3rd St. (Exhibit 4). The site is rectangular in shape and totals 229,996 square feet in area (5.28 acres). 7. The 5.28 acre subject property is an entire block and contains four differing zoning classifications: Residential-8 (R-8), Residential-10 (R-10), Commercial Neighborhood (CN), and Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning designations. The site correspondingly is located within the following Comprehensive Plan Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of c,-71unity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 5 of 47 Land Use designations: Residential High Density (HD); Residential Medium Density (MD); and Commercial Mixed Use (CMU). 8. Vehicle access to the subject property is proposed on N. 3rd St. and N. 4th St. 9. The proposal includes 83 parking stalls within three parking areas. One parking lot is accessed off N. 4th St. and also allows for parent drop-off/pick-up. The second parking area and service delivery is accessed from N. 3rd St. The proposal includes space for 14 school buses which would park along the west side of Garden Ave N for loading and unloading. Additional 14 covered bicycle parking spaces are provided on site. 10. The Renton School District took lead agency for the Environmental 'SEPA' Review for this project. A Notice of SEPA Consultation (Exhibit 5) was issued by the school district on August 24, 2016 with a comment period originally ending on September 23, 2016 and was further extended to September 30, 2016. 11. The City of Renton provided timely comments to the Renton School District (Exhibit 6) concerning the SEPA consultation and provided the following recommendations for mitigation measures: a. Installation of school flasher speed limit signage. The location of the signage would be determined during the City's Construction/Utility Permit review process. b. Installation of radar sign(s) that provide vehicle speed. The location of the signage would be determined during the City's Construction/Utility Permit review process. c. Installation of curb bulbs on Garden Ave N. at N. 3'' St. and N. 4th St. to reduce pedestrian crossing width. d. Preparation of a plan to be distributed to students and families that identifies safe walking routes to school and crossing guard locations. e. Preparation of an operational plan that provides preventative measures for offsite queuing onto N. 4th St. during pick-up and drop-off. f. Preparation of a parking plan for special events that may require more parking than is available onsite. 12. On October 21, 2016 the Renton School District issued a Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance (MDNS) for the New Sartori Elementary School (Exhibit 7). The MDNS included 23 mitigation measures. A 14-day comment and appeal period commenced on October 21, 2016 and will end on November 4, 2016. No appeals of the threshold determination have been filed as of the date of this report. 13. The tallest point of the proposed school building would be approximately 48-feet from the average grade plane to the top of parapet along the Park Ave N. elevation. The proposed building materials would be a combination of masonry, metal siding, composite panel and glazing. Accent materials would include pre-finished metal panel, pre-finished metal trim, and canopies (Exhibit 8). 14. Requested Modifications from RMC through the PUD: The site comprises of multiple residential and commercial zoning designations that have development standards which vary significantly. It is not possible to develop the proposed elementary school on the property without deviating from many of the standards. Therefore, a PUD is being requested to allow for flexibility in order to construct the public facility that meets the educational needs of the School District, but also is complimentary to the site and neighborhood in which it is located. When approving a PUD, the City may modify those standards listed in RMC 4-2, 4-4, 4-7, and RMC 4-6-060 Street Standards, except as listed in RMC 4-9- lSOB.3. All of the following modifications are required to be considered simultaneously as part of the planned urban development: Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of c----,unity & Economic Development Report of November 1, 2016 RMC Code Citation Required Standard RMC 4-2-100 Zoning There are four (4) separate tables Standards Tables dealing with the various land use categories and zones which contain the minimum and, in some cases, maximum requirements of the zone. RMC 4-2-120A 20-foot maximum side yard along a Development street setbacks Standards for Commercial Zoning Designations RMC 4-6-0GOF Street Residential Access Street Standards Standards for Garden Ave N. RMC 4-3-100 Urban Plaza located at Park Ave N. and N. 4th Design Standards St. RMC 4-3-100 Urban Any facade visible to the public shall Design Standards be comprised of at least fifty percent (50%) transparent windows and/or doors for at least the portion of the ground floor facade that is between four feet (4') and eight feet (8') above ground (as measured on the true elevation). RMC 4-3-100 Urban Parking shall be located so that no Design Standards surface parking is located between a building and the front property line; and/or a building and the side property line (when on a corner lot). RMC 4-4-070 Ten-feet of on-site landscaping is Landscaping required along all public street frontages, with the exception of areas for required walkways and driveways or those projects with reduced setbacks. RMC 4-4-080F, Based on the proposed number of Parking, Loading, and employees, a minimum and maximum Driveway Regulations of 60 parking spaces would be required/allowed in order to meet code. RMC 4-4-080F, 1 off-street parking space for each bus Parking, Loading, and of a size sufficient to park each bus Driveway Regulations RMC 4-4-080J, The width of any driveway shall not Parking, Loading, and exceed thirty feet (30') exclusive of Driveway Regulations the radii of the returns or the taper Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Page 6 of 47 Requested Modification The application of a single zoning classification (CA) and corresponding Design District 'D' for the entire site for the purposes of review. Exceed maximum side yard along N. 3'' St. to provide a 72-foot setback and N. 4th St. to provide a 135-foot setback. A 52-foot and 115-foot modification, respectively. Relocation of curb-line westward, 10-foot sidewalks, and bulb-outs Relocate plaza to front pf building at Park Ave N and N. 3'' St. Frosted glass in areas along the south facade Eight parking spaces are proposed between the building and side property line along N. 3'' St. No street frontage landscaping in areas between the public plaza and street. The applicant proposed a total of 83 spaces within surface parking areas. The proposal exceeds the maximum parking stall requirements by 23 spaces. Bus Parking is proposed on Garden Ave N. Driveway width on N. 3'' St. proposed at 52-feet. Driveway exceeds standards by 22-feet to City of Renton Deportment of c---,,unity & Economic Development Report of November 1, 2016 section, the measurement being made parallel to the centerline of the street roadway. RMC 4-4-090, Refuse The gate opening for any separate and Recyclables building or other roofed structure Standards used primarily as a refuse or recyclables deposit area/collection point shall have a vertical clearance of at least fifteen feet (15'). Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Page 7 of 47 accommodate delivery truck. Proposed enclosure that provides a vertical clearance of 9.5-feet. 15. There are a total of 30 trees on the subject property and 11 located in adjacent right-of-way frontage. The applicant proposes to retain 9 street streets and remove all trees on the subject property as shown on the tree retention plan (Exhibit 9). 16. The City's COR mapping database shows the subject property is within a Wellhead Protection Area Zone 1 and High Seismic Hazard Area. 17. The subject property is generally flat. Preliminary earthwork for the proposal to accommodate the removal of utilities and installation of stormwater improvements is approximately 2,000 cubic yards of cut and 4,000 yards of fill. 18. Construction is anticipated to begin April 2017 and end August 2018. in Summer of 2016 with substantial completion scheduled for Summer of 2017. 19. Studies provided by the applicant include a stormwater report (Exhibit 10), traffic study (Exhibit 11), arborist report (Exhibit 12), and geotechnical report (Exhibit 13). 20. Staff received comments related to the items within the environmental checklist (Exhibit 14) and was carbon copied on emails between the school district, City Council, and Mayor's Office. Staff responded to comments addressed to the project manager (Exhibit 15). The concerns referenced items in the environmental checklist and responses were provided as they related to city code. Emails that were carbon copies are added to the record (Exhibit 16), but were not directly responded to as they related to relations between the school district and neighbors. 21. Representatives from various city departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and address issues raised by the proposed development. These comments are contained in the official file, and the essence of the comments has been incorporated into the appropriate sections of this report and the Departmental Recommendation at the end of this report. 22. Comprehensive Plan Compliance: The site is located within the Residential High Density (HD); Residential Medium Density (MD); and Commercial Mixed Use (CMU) land use designations. The applicant is unable to modify the application of the land use designations through the PUD. The proposal is compliant with the following Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies if~ conditions of approval are met: Compliance Comprehensive Plan Analysis Policy L-2: Support compact urban development to improve health outcomes, support ,r transit use, maximize land use efficiency, and maximize public investment in infrastructure and services. ,r Goal L-BB: Maintain a high quality of life as Renton grows by ensuring that new development is designed to be functional and attractive. Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of c---,unity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LU Al 6-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 8 of 47 ,/ Goal L-FF: Strengthen the visual identity of Renton and its Community Planning Areas and neighborhoods through quality design and development. Policy L-50: Maintain existing, and encourage the creation of additional places and ,/ events throughout the community where people can gather and interact. Allow for flexibility in public gathering places to encourage place-making efforts and activities. Policy L-51: Respond to specific site conditions such as topography, natural features, ,/ and solar access to encourage energy savings and recognize the unique features of the site through the design of subdivisions and new buildings. Policy L-52: Include human-scale features such as pedestrian pathways, quality ,/ landscaping, and public spaces that have discernible edges, entries, and borders to create a distinctive sense of place in neighborhoods, commercial areas, and centers. ,/ Policy L-53: Orient buildings in developments toward the street or a common area, rather than toward parking lots. Policy L-57: Complement the built environment with landscaping using native, ,/ naturalized, and ornamental plantings that are appropriate for the situation and circumstance and which provide for respite, recreation, and sun/shade. ,/ Policy L-61: Improve the appearance of parking lots through landscaping and screening. Policy CF-10: Coordinate with federal, state, regional and local jurisdictions, private ,/ industry, businesses and citizens in the planning, design and development of facilities serving and affecting the community. 23. Zoning Development Standard Compliance: Pursuant to RMC 4-9-lSOD.4, each planned urban development shall demonstrate compliance with the underlying zoning standards; unless a modification for a specific development standard has been requested using the PUD process. The site is located within the Residential-8 (R-8); Residential -10 (R-10), Commercial Neighborhood (CN); and Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning designations. Through the PUD, the applicant is requesting the development standards of the CA designation and Urban Design District 'D' standards be applied for the entire project given strict adherence to the development standards would result in multiple site design features that would be incompatible with the proposed elementary school use (FOF 14: Requested Modifications from RMC through the PUD). The CA zoning designation was recommended by City staff given the urban presence of the building located along Park Ave N, which allows integration into future commercial development and anticipated growth along that arterial. Staff is in support of the requested modification/application of the single land use designation (with the exception of tree retention standards) if all conditions of approval are complied with (see FOF 26 PUD Decision Criteria and Analysis). The following table contains project elements intended to comply with the underlying zoning standards of the Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning classification, as outlined in RMC 4-2-120A: Compliance CA Zone Develop Standards and Analysis See FOF30: Use: Pursuant to RMC 4-2-060, A K-12 educational institution (public or private) Conditional requires a Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit. Use Permit Staff_ Comment: See FOF 30: Canditianal Use Permit. N/A Density: 60 dwelling units per net acre in the City Center and Highlands Community Planning Areas. ,/ Lot Dimensions: Per RMC 4-2-120A the minimum lot size, in the CA zone, is 5,000 square feet. Sartori E5_16-000692_HEX Stoff Report City of Renton Deportment of C · munity & Economic Development Hear;ng Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 9 of 47 Requested to be modified through the PUD- Compliant if conditions of approval are metandPUD is approved Staff Comment: Following the completion of the lot combination process and dedicatian of right-of-way, the subject property will be approximately 212,381 square feet or 4.88 acres. Lot Caverage: Per RMC 4-2-120A the allowed lot coverage is 65 percent or 75% if parking is provided within the building or within an on-site parking garage for proposals within the CA classification. Staff Comment: The lot coverage is approximately 18.8%. Setbacks: Per RMC 4-2-120A the CA zoning classification requires a minimum front yard of setback of 15 feet which may be reduced to zero feet during the site plan development review process, provided blank walls are not located within the reduced setback. There is a maximum front yard setback of 20 feet. There is a minimum side yard along street setback of 15-feet and a maximum side yard along a street setback of the 20-feet. The CA zone has no rear or side yard setback except 15 feet if lot abuts or is adjacent to a residential zone. Staff Comment: The project is proposed to be built across a portion of the common boundary between existing property lines. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval the applicant be required to record o formal Lot Combination in order to ensure the proposed buildings are not built across property lines. The instrument shall be recorded prior to building permit approval. Building setbacks would be measured from the property lines established following the Lot Combination recording, which would be the exterior lines adjacent to the four street frontages. The proposed building would have a front yard setback of 20 feet from the front property line (Park Ave N.) which meets the maximum front yard setback. As the site improvements are within an entire city block, the side yards along the street are N. 3'd St and N. 4th St. property lines. The building exceeds the 20-foot maximum side yard along these frontages. The building is setback 72-feet from the rear property line however the proposed covered play area accessory structure is within the 15-foot minimum rear yard setback as the property is adjacent to residential zoned lots. The city block size property limits the ability to comply with maximum side yard along street setbacks. The building is approximately 380 feet long and is located 72-feet from the N. 3'd St. property line and 135-feet from the N. 4th St. property line. The side yards would provide pedestrian amenities and landscaping. Staff supports the PUD modification to exceed the maximum side yard along street standard. However, the proposed play area accessory structure is adjacent to a residential zone and due to potential noise impacts the structure should meet the minimum 15-feet rear yard setback. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval, the applicant submit revised site plans that locate the covered play area structure in an area compliant with the 15-foot minimum rear setback. The plans shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. Height: Per RMC 4-2-120A building height is restricted to 50 feet except 60 feet for mixed use (commercial and residential) in the same building. Staff Comment: The tallest point of the structure would be approximately 48 feet from overage grade to the top of parapet along the southwest portion of the building. A majority of the building, minus the parapet, is 44-feet 4-inches along the Park Ave N. frontage. Eastern portions of the building step down to heights of 37-feet 4-inches ond Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of c--munity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 10 of 47 N/A Requested to be Modified Through the PUD Compliant if Conditions of Approval is Met Compliant if Conditions of Approval is Met 31-feet 4-inches. The accessory play area structure is 16-feet from average to top of structure. It should be noted that the play structure that is located near the existing single family development is compliant with the maximum height of the residential zone. Vehicular: A connection shall be provided for site-to-site vehicle access ways, where topographically feasible, to allow a smooth flow of traffic across abutting CA lots without the need to use a street. Access may comprise the aisle between rows of parking stalls, but is not allowed between a building and a public street. Staff Comment: Not applicable. Following the Lot Combination there will not be an abutting CA lot as the subject property will be an entire city block. Landscaping: Per RMC 4-4-070 ten feet of on-site landscaping is required along all public street frontages, with the exception of areas for required walkways and driveways or those projects with reduced setbacks. Staff Comment: The applicant has proposed landscaping along the frontages of the site. The applicant has also incorporated planter boxes in pedestrian areas. Perimeter parking lot landscaping is provided and interior parking lot landscaping is also shown. Street frontage landscaping is not provided along portions of the public plaza. Staff is in support of the absence of street frontage landscaping along the entire plaza edge as it results in barrier free pedestrian access from the sidewalk to this enhanced entry feature to the school and it provides additional programming opportunities. The proposed planter boxes will provide vegetation and human-scaled elements within the plaza to mitigate the lack of street frontage landscaping. A conceptual landscape pion was submitted with the project application (Exhibit 3}. The landscape plan includes a planting plan which contains several different tree and shrub species but does not provide specific detail for the number or types of trees and shrubbery. Additionally, landscaping plan does not appear to be scaled correctly, so while it details appropriate widths, staff is unable to verify for compliance. Therefore, staff recommends, as a condition of approval, the applicant be required to submit a detailed landscape plan to the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval complying with applicable sections of RMC 4-4-070. Screening: All mechanical equipment and outdoor service and storage areas shall be screened to reduce visibility, noise, and related impacts while allowing accessibility for providers and users. Staff Comment: The applicant did not provide details of roof mounted equipment and/or screening identified for such equipment with the land use application. Therefore, staff recommends, as a condition of approval, thot the applicant provide a detailed pion set identifying the location and screening provided for roof mounted equipment. The revised plan set shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to building permit approval. Tree Retention: The City's adopted Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations require the retention of at least 30 percent of trees of the site's significant trees for institutional development in R-8 zones, 20 percent in R-10 zones, and at least 10 percent in other zones. Significant trees shall be retained in the following priority order: Priority One: Landmark trees; significant trees that form a continuous canopy; Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Deportment of c----,unity & Economic Development Report of November 1, 2016 Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Page 11 of 47 significant trees on slopes greater than twenty percent (20%); Significant trees adjacent to critical areas and their associated buffers; and Significant trees over sixty feet (60') in height or greater than eighteen inches ( 18") caliper. Priority Two: Healthy tree groupings whose associated undergrowth can be preserved; other significant native evergreen or deciduous trees; and Other significant non-native trees. Priority Three: Alders and cottonwoods shall be retained when all other trees have been evaluated for retention and are not able to be retained, unless the alders and/ or cottonwoods are used as part of an approved enhancement project within a critical area or its buffer. Staff Comment: The applicant submitted an arborist report (Exhibit 12) prepared by Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. August 23, 2016. The arborist report identified 41 trees {30 trees onsite and 11 street trees within ROW} and determined that five (5) of the onsite trees were in poor condition and not suitable for retention. This results in a total of 25 onsite significant trees for the subject property. The applicant is requesting a PUD for the proposed site improvements as many of the development regulations differ between the four (4) different zones encompassing the subject property. However, tree retention standards meeting the residential requirements are not deemed a significant hindrance in developing the site with a new school and therefore staff recommends that residential tree retention standords apply as a majority of the site is zoned residential. The applicant submitted a tree retention worksheet (Exhibit 17} that identifies the site utilizing the R-8 or 30-percent retention standards. Initially, the applicant proposed the removal of all significant trees on the subject property as existing significant trees were located in the proposed building footprint, parking areas, and sports field. The tree retention worksheet identified a 96-inch caliper replacement resulting in a total of 48 new trees to be planted to compensate for the removal the subject property's existing significant trees. However, due ta the revised street section along Garden Ave. N. (See FOF 27 Streets} that would maintain the existing curb line and no /anger necessitate the need ta construct the new sidewalk in its location shown on the site plan, there is a potential to retain three (3) significant trees identified as 29, 30, and 31 on the tree retention plan (Exhibit 9}. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval, the applicant provide an updated arbarist report that provides analysis for the potential to retain trees 29, 30, and 31 on the tree retention plan with the new Garden Ave N. cross section. The trees shall be retained if viable, otherwise replacement at the required 6: 1 caliper inch ration will be required for any of the three (3) trees that cannot be retained. The arborist report shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. The conceptual landscape plan (Exhibit 3) identifies six (6) new varieties of trees proposed to be planted on the subject property. However, the number of trees needed to comply with the replacement requirements of RMC 4-4-130 is not identified on the plan. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval, a revised landscape plan is submitted that identifies the replacement trees meeting the replacement requirements of RMC 4-4-130. The landscape plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. Sartori fS_16-000692_HfX Staff Report City of Renton Department of C ,unity & Economic Development Hear;ng Examiner Recommendation WA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 12 of 47 Requested to be Modified Through the PUD Parking: The parking regulations, RMC 4-4-080, require a specific number of off- street parking stalls be provided based on the number of employees and number of busses to be parked onsite. Staff Comment: The fallowing ratios would be applicable to the site: Elementary Schoof A minimum and maximum of 1 per employee and 1 oft-street parking space for each bus of a size sufficient to park each bus. Required Spaces 60 Based on the applicant's PUD modification request, the tatal number of employees for the proposed school is 60 and 14 school busses (11 full size and 3 small) will load/unload each schaaf day. A minimum and maximum of 60 regular parking spaces and 14 bus spaces waufd be required in arder to meet cade. The applicant is praposing a total of 83 regular spaces and 14 school bus spaces alang the Garden Avenue N frontage. The proposal exceeds the maximum requirements by 23 stalls. The applicant's justification for the increased need for parking spaces is the demand anticipated in the transportation report (Exhibit 11) that is due to the choice school element and evening events would necessitate the need for additional parking than what is permitted. The report anticipates a peak parking demand of 74 vehicles during a typical school midday, however, staff supports the increased parking request as it will provide additional capacity during special events and provide flex parking (adjacent to plaza) for temporary parking near the main entry. The school bus load and unload area is located along Garden Ave N. The applicant has requested to provide bus load/unload on-street instead of oft-street as the busses are not kept onsite. On-street load/unload also reduces the amount of needed impervious surfaces to provide parking on the subject property and would also result in the loss of pragramming space. Additionally, bus ingress/egress out of the site results in potential pedestrian conflicts at driveways. On-street load/ unload is more efficient as bus drivers can reduce turning movements and driveway crossings. At staff suggestion, the applicant will provide bus loading/unloading within the existing right- of-way instead of the originally proposed Garden Ave N widening (see FOF 26 Circulation: Street Improvements). The originally proposed load unlaad area would have resulted in a 211oot wide travel lane along Garden Ave N., which would not meet the street standards or intent of a residential street. Instead, by keeping the load/unload in the existing street cross-section, curb-bulbs can be added to the street's intersection and the street's cross-section can remain a campliant residential access street without the need for channeling guides or diverters. Staff is in support of bus load/unload area to be within the existing right-of-way. The parking conforms to the minimum requirements for drive aisle, parking stall, dimensions and the provision af ADA accessible parking stalls. Per RMC 4-4-0BOF.11 the number of bicycle parking spaces shall be at least equal to 10 percent of the number of required oft-street vehicle parking spaces. The applicant is proposing 14 covered bicycle parking spaces, exceeding the minimum requirement, and proposes to locate the parking near the building's main entry in the public plaza. The applicant will be required to demonstrate spaces meet the requirements of RMC 4-4-0BOF.11.b as part of building permit applications. Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of c---7lUnity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA16-000691, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 13 of 47 Requested to be Modified Through the PUD Refuse and Recyclables: Per RMC 4-4-090, office, educational and institutional developments require a minimum of 2 square feet per every one thousand (1,000) square feet of building gross floor area be provided for recyclables deposit areas and a minimum of four (4) square feet per one thousand (1,000) square feet of building gross floor area shall be provided for refuse deposit areas. A total minimum area of one hundred (100) square feet shall be provided for recycling and refuse deposit areas. Outdoor refuse and recyclables deposit areas and collection points shall not be located within fifty feet (50') of a lot zoned residential, except by approval through the site development plan review process, or through the modification process if exempt from site development plan review. The gate opening for any separate building or other roofed structure used primarily as a refuse or recyclables deposit area/collection point shall have a vertical clearance of at least fifteen feet (15'). Staff Comment: Based on the proposal for a total 79,000sf of gross floor area, 474 square feet of refuse and recycle area is required to be provided. The proposal includes a 650 square foot area dedicated to refuse and recycle which complies with the area dedication requirements. The enclosure is located adjacent to the southeast side from the building and complies with the 50-foot separation from residential lats. Through the PUD the applicant is requesting a modification in order to provide an enclosure that provides a vertical clearance of 9.5-feet (Exhibit 18}. The proposed enclosure design is consistent with the overall building and accessory covered area architecture. The reduced vertical clearance maintains the solid waste hauler to access the refuse and recycling containers. Staff supports this PUD modification as it provides o better aesthetic outcome than the standard fifteen foot clearance See additional discussion be/aw in FOF 29: Design District Review, Service Element Design and Location. Fences and Retaining Walls: For commercial, industrial, and nonresidential uses, a maximum of eight feet (8') anywhere on the lot provided the fence, retaining wall or hedge does not stand in or in front of any required landscaping or pose a traffic vision hazard. Stoff Comment: The applicant has proposed a chain-link fence six feet in height that will surround the grass field and play area with sliding gates as the fence connects to the school building on the north and south sides. 24. Critical Areas: Project sites which contain critical areas are required to comply with the Critical Areas Regulations (RMC 4-3-050). The proposal is consistent with the Critical Areas Regulations, if all conditions of approval are complied with: Geologically Hazardous Areas: Based upon the results of a geotechnical report and/or independent review, conditions of approval for developments may include buffers and/or setbacks from buffers. A standard 15-foot building setback is required for all structures from Protected Slope areas. A SO-foot buffer and 15-foot building setback are required from Very High Landslide Hazard Areas. Staff Comment: The City's COR mapping database identifies the property to be within a High Seismic Hazard Area. The applicant submitted a geotechnical report (Exhibit 13) prepared by Associated Earth Sciences Incorporated with the project application. The report identified conditions that are representative of recent alluvium deposits in Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of ~ --munity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 14 of 47 Compliant if condition of approval is met former channels of the Cedar River and extended beyond the depths of the deepest exp/oration of 91.5 feet. The findings of the exploration were identified to be in agreement with the Geologic Map of the Renton Quadrangle which indicates the site is underlain by modified land with fill and recent alluvium associated with the nearby Cedar River. Potential for liquefaction was analyzed and determined that the estimated amount of liquefaction-induced settlement ranges from about 5-8 inches and is considered to be the result of a very large and rare seismic event. The report provided design recommendations for pile foundations that would reduce both consolidation settlement and seismically induced structure settlement to tolerable levels for new construction. The geotechnical report demonstrates the proposal can be safely accommodated on the site and identified no impacts to other properties or critical areas. Building code standards contain compliance measures and design requirements for sites with potential seismic hazard conditions, which include the adherence to recommendations from geotechnical reports. For purposes of the PUD no further conditions are recommend. Wellhead Protection Areas: Staff Comment: The City's COR mapping database identifies the property to be within a Wellhead Protect Area Zone 1. Areas within the Zone 1 designation are lands situated between a well or well field owned by the City and the 365-day groundwater travel time contour. No hazardous material storage, handling, treating, use, or production is anticipated with the proposed elementary school. The applicant has indicated that approximately 4,000 cubic yards of fill will be brought to the subject property for construction purposes. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval, the applicant submit a source statement certified by a professional engineer or geologist licensed in the State of Washington shall be provided by the applicant meeting the requirements of RMC 4-4-060N.4 or provide documentation that fill will be obtained from a Washington State Department of Transportation {WSDOT) approved source as allowed by RMC 4-4-060N.4.g. The source statement or WSDOT documentation shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 25. PUD Applicability Standards: Pursuant to RMC 4-9-150B, any applicant seeking to permit development which is not limited by the strict application of the City's zoning, parking, street, and subdivision regulations in a comprehensive manner shall be subject to applicability standards. The following table contains project elements intended to comply with applicability standards, as outlined in RMC 4-9- lSOB: Compliance PUD Applicability Criteria and Analysis In approving a planned urban development, the City may modify any of the standards of RMC 4-2, RMC 4-3-100, RMC 4-4, RMC 4-6-060, and RMC 4-7. All modifications .,,. shall be considered simultaneously as part of the planned urban development . Staff Comment: The applicant is requesting to review the project under the CA zoning designation and corresponding Design District 'D'. Additional modification requests are noted in FOF 14. Compliant if An applicant may request additional modifications from the requirements of the Conditions of Renton Municipal Code. Approval for modifications other than those specifically Approval are described in subsection RMC 4-9-150B.2.a shall be approved prior to submittal of a Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of c---munity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUAl6-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 15 of47 Met preliminary planned urban development plan. Staff Comment: All requested modifications are outlined above under FOF 14: Requested Modifications from RMC through the PUD. Staff is in support or modified support the requested modifications provided the applicant complies with all conditions of approval. A planned urban development may not authorize uses that are inconsistent with those uses allowed by the underlying zone, or overlay district, or other location restriction in RMC Title 4, including, but not limited to: RMC 4-2-010 to 4-2-080, 4-3- .r 010 to 4-3-040, 4-3-090, 4-3-095, and 4-4-010 . Staff Comment: RMC 4-2-060 allows K-12 educationol institutions in the R-8, R-10, CN, and CA zones with a Conditional Use Permit. See FOF 30 for Conditional Use Permit analysis. - The number of dwelling units shall not exceed the density allowances of the N/A applicable base or overlay zone or bonus criteria in chapter 4-2 or 4-9 RMC; however, averaging density across a site with multiple zoning classifications may be allowed if approved by the Community and Economic Development Administrator. 26. PUD Decision Criteria Analysis: Pursuant to RMC 4-9-1500, each planned urban development shall demonstrate compliance with the Planned Urban Development decision criteria. The following table contains project elements intended to comply with the Planned Urban Development decision criteria, as outlined in RMC 4-9-lSOD: Compliance PUD Decision Criteria and Analysis Demonstration of Compliance and Superiority Required: Applicants must demonstrate that a proposed development is in compliance with the purposes of this Section and with the Comprehensive Plan, that the proposed development will be superior to that which would result without a planned urban development, and that the development will not be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties. Staff Comment: If the conditions of approval are met, the applicant will have demonstrated complionce with the PUD regulations and the Comprehensive Pion. The applicant will have demonstrated that the development is superior to that which would result without a PUD and requested modifications will not be detrimental to surrounding properties. The development of this site os a PUD results in a superior design than what would result by the strict application of the Development Standards for the following reasons: public facilities, overall design, and building and site design. The public facility provides a choice educational program and new neighborhood school within the City Center Planning Area. The school is needed to respond to continued growth in the City and school district capital facilities program. The proposal will provide a public plaza and playfield that would not otherwise be required under code. The overall design corresponds to the neighborhood by locating much of the building along the commercial frontage of Park Ave N. and stepping down as it transitions to the residential area to the east. The compact building footprint provides 79,000 square feet of floor area while providing the remaining areas with active recreation areas, landscaping, and parking. The building provides large expanses of glazing, weather protection, and articulation and compliments the cohesive design throughout the site. Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of C--munity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 16 of 47 The PUD provides flexibility in locating a public facility in a multiple zoned commercial and residential designations. The requested code modifications would not be detrimental to surrounding properties as the design orients the elementary school toward the commercial frontage and transitions to a lower scale and open space areas toward the residential zone. The site is located within the Residential High Density (HD); Residential Medium Density (MD); and Commercial Mixed Use (CMU) land use designations on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. See Comprehensive Plan analysis under FOF 22: Comprehensive Plan Analysis. Public Benefit Required: Applicants shall demonstrate that a proposed development will provide specifically identified benefits that clearly outweigh any adverse impacts or undesirable effects of the proposed planned urban development, particularly those adverse and undesirable impacts to surrounding properties, and that the proposed development will provide one or more of the following benefits than would result from the development of the subject site without the proposed planned urban development: a. Critical Areas: Protects critical areas that would not be protected otherwise to the N/A same degree as without a planned urban development. Sta(t_ Comment: Not opplicoble b. Natural Features: Preserves, enhances, or rehabilitates natural features of the subject property, such as significant woodlands, native vegetation, topography, N/A or noncritical area wildlife habitats, not otherwise required by other City regulations. Sto(t_ Comment: Not applicable c. Public Facilities: Provides public facilities that could not be required by the City for development of the subject property without a planned urban development. Sto(t_ Comment: The school will be the first elementary school in Renton School District that is in close proximity to the downtown core and is being developed as a civic and community asset to the City Center. The school will provide a neighborhood ,;" elementary but also a choice educational program for students district wide. The school will provide public amenities such as gathering and recreation areas and new streetscape improvements along all frontages. A large public plaza is proposed along the N. 3'" and Park Ave. N. frontage. The 10,000+ square foot plaza is an amenity that will be open for public use and not otherwise required under existing code. Opportunities within the plaza for programming, art, gathering, and other civic uses will be an asset to the neighborhood and overall community. d. Use of Sustainable Development Techniques: Design which results in a N/A sustainable development; such as LEED certification, energy efficiency, use of alternative energy resources, low impact development techniques, etc. e. Overall Design: Provides a planned urban development design that is superior to Compliant if the design that would result from development of the subject property without a Conditions of planned urban development. A superior design may include the following: Approval are i. Ogen SgaceLRecreation: Met (a) Provides increased open space or recreational facilities beyond standard code requirements and considered equivalent to features that would offset park mitigation Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of c--· 71Unity & Economic Development Report of November 1, 2016 fees in Resolution 3082; and Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Page 17 of 47 (b) Provides a quality environment through either passive or active recreation facilities and attractive common areas, including accessibility to buildings from parking areas and public walkways; or Staff Comment: The applicant has provided o variety of recreation opportunities and open spaces throughout the development that ore not required code. The proposed site plan provides a hardscape play area, play equipment, and gross play field that will be open for community use. The applicant has designed the areas to accommodate Elementary Educational curriculum and be an asset to the surrounding community for after hour use. The gross field and open space area measures 35,000 square feet. The landscape identifies the area also striped as a soccer field. West of the gross field there are three (3) soft surface play areas with two of the areas partially surrounded by a concrete seat wall. Additional seat walls are provided along the east elevation of the school building. A hard surface play area extends around the gross field along west and south sides with a 4,400 square foot area containing weather protection. The open space areos are connected via pedestrian paths to the building, adjacent street frontages, and parking area. ii. Circulation/Screening: Provides superior circulation patterns or location or screening of parking facilities; or Staff Comment: The proposal provides o superior circulation pattern and parking lot location as it limits vehicle driveways on the site, places parking areas on the ends af property thereby preserving the interior and majority of the site far pedestrian oriented activities, and locates bus load/unload along Garden Ave N. which reduces additional turning movements and potential pedestrian conflicts. All driveways will be removed along Pork Ave N and six (6) driveways along N. 3'd St will be reduced to one (1). The surface parking oreas provide clear pedestrian pathways close to building entries and minimize pedestrian crossing drive aisles. While the subject property is a city block, there are only two vehicle entry points located on N. 3,d St. and N. 4<• St. The limitation of driveways reduces potential vehicle and pedestrian conflicts. Additionally, bus loading and unloading will occur within a curb cut-out along Garden Ave. N. that will preserve the residential street cross section and result in the reduction in turning movements and driveway conflicts that would occur if the parking lot were expanded to provide bus laad/unload. Parking areas will be screened with a 10-foot wide perimeter landscaping screen. The revised landscape plan will be reviewed by the project manager as conditioned in FOF 23: Landscaping ta confirm appropriate tree and shrub spacing for adequate screening as required by RMC 4-4-070. iii. Landscaping/Screening: Provides superior landscaping, buffering, or screening in or around the proposed planned urban development. Staff Comment: Conceptually, the proposed landscape plan for the entire site is superior to what would be required by Renton's Municipal Code (Exhibit 3). Internal parking lot landscaping is greater than the 25 square foot per space requirement. A 20-faot wide street frontage landscaping strip is provided along the building on the Park Ave N. frontage, which is double the required width. The plaza area and larger Sartori f5_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of co-· -,unity & Economic Development Report of November 1, 2016 Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Page 18 of 47 pedestrian pathway areas cantain planter baxes to soften the hardscape surfaces. The proposed landscape pion (Exhibit 3) includes diverse candidate planting list: greenspire linden, european hornbeam, maidenhair, autumn blaze pear, snowbell, and autumn brilliance serviceberry. The proposed shrub planting list includes nine (9) shrub varieties. The applicant would be required to provide a detailed landscaping plan prior to construction permit approval with specific plant details. The building and parking lot landscaping hos been designed to meet several objectives including: reductions in the overall scale of the building; breaking up of large areas of parking lot pavement with interior and perimeter landscaping; perimeter landscape buffer and screening; help define circulation routes and frame or enhance views; provide environmental benefits such as shade, improved air quality, natural starmwater treatment, and wildlife habitat. A permanent built-in irrigation system with an automatic contraller is required to be installed and maintained for all landscaped areas. The irrigation system is required to provide full water caverage of the planted areas specified on the plan. iv. Site and Building Design: Provides superior architectural design, placement, relationship or orientation of structures, or use of solar energy. Stoff Comment: The PUD modification from R-8, R-10, and CN zaning to CA zoning would result in the project being subject to Urban Design District 'D' standards in its entirety instead of only the portion of the building located in the CA zone. Superior design requirements would result for a building of this size in a design district overlay then within the residential design and open space standards and the absence of a design overlay district for the CN zone. The placement af the building allows for natural lighting opportunities, and is respectful of the neighboring residential-scaled neighboring properties through the use of step-down roof forms ond open spaces/landscaping between the building ond residential area. The building provides high quality materials, large areas of glazing, and overhangs/canopies. The design provides a unique outdoor classroom area on the upper floors that also provides architectural interest to the for;ade. All visible building materials would follow a cohesive color scheme. A variety of materials and colors are being proposed as part of the color palette for the building design aesthetic. Materials would hove a variety of patterns and textures. The material palette includes phenolic panels, brick, metal canopy, curtain wall glazing, perforated metal vertical sunshade, ond corrugated metal. The western frontage (Pork Ave N.) contains the majority of the moss and bulk of the structure. It greatest height is olang this frontage and it's the building's longest far;ode (386-feet). The design attempts to mitigate this bulk by a 20-foot setback from the sidewalk with ground-level landscaping. A first floor overhang and upper level outdoor classrooms provide vertical ond horizontal modulation. However, the amount of modulation does commensurate with the length and height of the structure. Additionally, there ore blank walls that require articulation or additional glazing. Opportunities exist to enhance the building design in order to provide o superior presence along the corner of N. 3'd St. ond Pork Ave. N and along the far;ode front Park Ave. N. As such, staff recommends a condition of approval requiring additional far;ode and ground level treatments (see discussion under FOF 29: Design District Review). Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of c~-munity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation WAl6-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 19 of 47 Compliant if Condition of Approval is Met Building and Site Design: i. Perimeter: Size, scale, mass, character and architectural design along the planned urban development perimeter provide a suitable transition to adjacent or abutting lower density/intensity zones. Materials shall reduce the potential for light and glare. Staff Comment: The proposal includes ample buffers between the proposed school building and neighboring residential areas by locating the mass of the structure along the Park Ave. N. frontage. Roof step-downs and increased rear yard setback along Garden Ave N provides a significant buffer and allows for greater solar exposure over much of the open spaces. Landscaping has been incorporated along the perimeters of parking areas. The new development is anticipated to fit into the existing developed fabric of the neighborhood. The building transitions from its highest point along Park Ave N., which is a principal arterial, and steps down toward the residential area to the south and east. The building's location also provides a buffer between adjacent residential areas with the plaza and grass field providing separation. Additionally, the building's location will result in the absence of shadows being cast on neighboring residential areas. Staff will be recommending, as a condition of approval, the applicant provide a materials board to the satisfaction of the Current Planning Project Manager (see discussion in FOF 29: Design District Review). The materials board would also be used to confirm that siding materials are non-reflective which would reduce glare. Windows could slightly reflect light from the building but not to an extent beyond any typical institutional development. The applicant has indicated that the proposal would not result in excessive glare onto adjacent properties. However, a lighting plan was not submitted with the application package, as such, staff recommends a condition of approval that requires the applicant to provide a lighting plan that adequately provides for public safety without casting excessive glare on adjacent properties; at the time of construction permit review. Pedestrian scale and downlighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicular movement, unless alternative pedestrian scale lighting has been approved administratively or is specifically listed as exempt from provisions located in RMC 4-4-075 Lighting, Exterior On-Site. ii. Interior Design: Promotes a coordinated site and building design. Buildings in groups should be related by coordinated materials and roof styles, but contrast should be provided throughout a site by the use of varied materials, architectural detailing, building orientation or housing type; e.g., single family, townhouses, flats, etc. Staff Comment: The proposed improvements include a single elementary school building on the subject property. As mentioned previously, the mass of the building is oriented to Park Ave N. and the commercial side and surrounding area. The building then transitions with the height and mass stepping down toward the neighboring residential zones. The outdoor recreation areas are shielded from the commercial zone by the building and connected to the residential area with pedestrian pathways to the street frontage. Accessory structures such as the covered play area and trash enclosure provide consistency with the buildings architecture by utilizing similar materials and colors. Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of Ca-munity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA16-000692, PPIID, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 20 of 47 Compliant if Conditions of Approval are Met Circulation: i. Provides sufficient streets and pedestrian facilities. The planned urban development shall have sufficient pedestrian and vehicle access commensurate with the location, size and density of the proposed development. All public and private streets shall accommodate emergency vehicle access and the traffic demand created by the development as documented in a traffic and circulation report approved by the City. Vehicle access shall not be unduly detrimental to adjacent areas. ii. Promotes safety through sufficient sight distance, separation of vehicles from pedestrians, limited driveways on busy streets, avoidance of difficult turning patterns, and minimization of steep gradients. iii. Provision of a system of walkways which tie residential areas to recreational areas, transit, public walkways, schools, and commercial activities. iv. Provides safe, efficient access for emergency vehicles. Staff Comment: The applicant submitted o transportation technical report prepared by Heffron Tronsportation, Inc., doted August 26, 2016 (Exhibit 11). The report included a Traffic Impact Analysis that was found to meet the intent of the TIA guidelines and is Traffic related comments emails hove been received by the public. The comments raise concerns regarding the amount of trips the school would generate compared to the existing conditions, potential queue issues with parent pick-up and drop off on the N. 4th Street driveway, and improvements needed to the N. 4th St. and Garden Ave N. intersection to accommodate additional trips generated by the school. Stoff provided responses to comments as they related to city code (Exhibit 15). As mentioned previously, the Renton School District was the lead Agency for the SEPA review. The City responded to the district's consultation period with recommendations for mitigation (see FOF 11). The TIA and the City's review of the TIA found no failures caused by the new trips generated by the proposed school. No capacity related improvements are warranted at any abutting intersection. The City did recommend and the district provided as mitigation, safety measures related to vehicle speed and pedestrian crossing widths. The district o/so proposed to prepare an operational pion that includes methods to mitigate any queuing that may occur on N. 4th Street during pick-up and drop-off times. See FOF 2 7 for additional street and pedestrian facility analysis. Clusters or Building Groups and Open Space: An appearance of openness created by clustering, separation of building groups, and through the use of well-designed open space and landscaping, or a reduction in amount of impervious surfaces not otherwise required. Stoff Comment: While there is only one building located on the site, the amount of open space and landscaping onsite provides o balance to the 79,000 square foot building. As mentioned previously, the 35,000 square foot grass field and active recreation areas provide o transition from the school building to the neighboring residences. Perimeter and internal lot landscaping softens the visual effects of surface parking. Additionally, planter boxes are provided in the pedestrian plaza and larger pedestrian corridors add interest in the hardscape. The multiple open spaces throughout the site ore well designed and provide o variety of recreational opportunities bath passive and active. Onsite impervious surfaces and additional vehicle circulation patterns are reduced Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of Co-munity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 21 of 47 N/A N/A onsite with the location of the bus food/unload zone along the Garden Ave N. frontage. This results in a pedestrian oriented site pion with limited areas of pedestrian/vehicle conflict. Privacy and Building Separation: Provides internal privacy between dwelling units, and external privacy for adjacent and abutting dwelling units. Each residential or mixed use development shall provide visual and acoustical privacy for dwelling units and surrounding properties. Fences, insulation, walks, barriers, and landscaping are used, as appropriate, for the protection and aesthetic enhancement of the property, the privacy of site occupants and surrounding properties, and for screening of storage, mechanical or other appropriate areas, and for the reduction of noise. Windows are placed at such a height or location or screened to provide sufficient privacy. Sufficient light and air are provided to each dwelling unit. Building Orientation: Provides buildings oriented to enhance views from within the site by taking advantage of topography, building location and style. Staff Comment: The building is oriented to provide views of the active recreation areas and pedestrian plaza. Parking Area Design: Provides parking areas that are complemented by landscaping and not designed in long rows. The size of parking areas is minimized in comparison to typical designs, and each area related to the group of buildings served. The design provides for efficient use of parking, and shared parking facilities where appropriate. Staff Comment: Onsite parking is provided in the north and south perimeters of the subject property. The surface parking design provides maximum use of parking area and provides clear, safe vehicular circulation that promotes visibility. The north parking area is dual-functional as it provides parking and the primary student pick-up/drop-off area. The design of the parking area is focused on a clockwise drive aisle that surrounds two rows of angled parking separated by landscaping. This parking area design is intended to provide adequate queuing capacity onsite. The area is complemented by perimeter and interno/ /andscoping. The south parking area provides 90-degree parking spaces with rows that are broken up by internal lot landscaping. Additional perimeter landscaping provides a visual buffer to the surface parking. Pedestrian pathways are provided to the building entrance and plaza. A flex parking area of eight (8) parking spaces is provided adjacent to the public plaza on the south side af the property. This area is provided as temporary parking near the entrance or overflow parking. The surface is treated similar to the plaza area so it con also be used for pedestrian only events. Bus load/unload on Garden Ave N. will allow for reduced turning movements for bus drivers and result in the need for additional bus circulation areas onsite. Phasing: Each phase of the proposed development contains the required parking spaces, open space, recreation spaces, landscaping and utilities necessary for creating and sustaining a desirable and stable environment, so that each phase, together with previous phases, can stand alone. 27. Infrastructure and Services: Provides utility services, emergency services, and other improvements, existing and proposed, which are sufficient to serve the development. The proposal is compliant with the following development standards if all conditions of approval are met: Sartori E5_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of C--imunity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUAl6-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 22 of 47 Compliance Infrastructure and Services Analysis Police and Fire: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicated that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development; if the applicant provides Code required improvements and fees. The preliminary fire flow requirements for this project, as proposed, are 2,000 gpm. A minimum of two (2) fire hydrants are required. One (1) within 150-feet and one within 300-feet of the building. The building shall also meet maximum hydrant spacing of 300-feet on center. One (1) fire hydrant shall be within SO-feet of the fire department connection for the fire sprinkler and standpipe systems. Any existing hydrants used to satisfy the requirements shall meet current fire code including 5-inch storz fittings. A Fire Impact Fee at a rate of $0.45 per square foot of increased building area is required in order to mitigate the proposal's potential impacts to City emergency services. The applicant would be required to pay an appropriate Fire Impact Fee payable to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of building permit application. Storm Water: An adequate drainage system shall be provided for the proper drainage of all surface water. Staff Comment: The subject property is located within the lower Cedar River Drainage Basin. The property contains three (3) sub-basins or threshold discharge areas (TDA)s. The north and central basin (TDA 1) drains to the public conveyance system that drains north along Park Ave N. and west along N. 4th St. and eventually discharges to the Cedar River. The south basin (TDA 2) drains to the public conveyance system that drains west along N. 3'd St. and discharging ta the Cedar River. The northeastern basin (TDA 3} discharges to the northeast at the intersection of Garden Ave N. and N. 4th St. and drains north along Garden Ave N. eventually discharging to the Cedar River. This project is required to comply with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the City of Renton Amendments ta the KCSWM. To maintain vesting of the 2009 KCSWDM and current city amendments, the applicant is required to submit a construction permit application within six (6) months of the complete application date of the Conditional Use Permit application pursuant to RMC 4-1-045E.2.b Based on the City's flaw control map, this site falls within a Peak Rate Flow Control Standard (Existing Site Canditians). The project is subject to full drainage review as it results in more than 7,000 square feet of land disturbing activity and more than 2,000 square feet if new and/or replaced impervious surface.=. The applicant submitted a Preliminary Drainage Report prepared by AHBL, dated August 2016 (Exhibit 10). The report also includes a detailed summary of the pre and past developed conditions. The preliminary grading and drainage plan (Exhibit 20) details flow control is to be provided within detention pipes in each sub-basin. Water quality treatment would be provided utilizing Filterra stormwater filtration systems. Flow control BMPs, ponds, stormwater wetlands, and infiltration facilities are prohibited as the site is located within a Wellhead Protection Area Zone 1. The development would be subject to storm water system development charges. Water and Sanitary Sewer: Staff Comment: Water service will be provided by the City of Renton. The site is in the Valley service area in the 196-foot hydraulic pressure zone. The approximate static Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of Co--nunity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 23 of 47 Requested to be modified through the PUD- Compliant if condition of approval is met water pressure is 68 psi at a ground elevation of 33-feet. The water improvements shall be designed in accordance with Appendix J of the City's Water System Plan. The applicant has submitted a preliminary utility plan (Exhibit 21) that provides connection to the existing main in Park Ave N. The development is subject to applicable water system development charges and meter installation fees. Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. An existing 22-inch concrete sewer is located in N. 4'" St. The applicant hos submitted a preliminary utility plan (Exhibit 21) that provides a new 6-inch side sewer connection near the east side of the proposed school. The development is subject to applicable sewer system development charges. Compliance review with sewer ond water construction standards will occur with the utility permit. Streets: The applicant is proposing two points of vehicular ingress and egress into the site, which is needed for parking, pick-up, and drop-off, but also to comply with Fire Department requirements for access. The applicant has proposed one entrance off N. 3"' St. that will accommodate a smaller parking areo and also the delivery orea. Due to the delivery access requirements (semi-tractor trailer) the driveway exceeds the 30- foot wide limitation and contains o 52-foot cut with curb radii to accommodate the truck's turning movement. As it is understood that delivery activities require the use of a larger truck due to multiple stops within the district, it should also be recognized that a wide driveway results in a long pedestrian crossing distance that increases the potential for pedestrian and vehicle conflicts. Therefore, staff recommends, as a condition of approval, the applicant prepare a truck loading diagram that attempts to narrow the proposed 52-foot wide driveway and curb radii to minimum width needed to accommodate the delivery truck. If the driveway cannot be narrowed, then the applicant shall provide a design that includes a pedestrian refuge area in the middle of the driveway that shortens the crossing distance. The diagram and/or plan shall be submitted ta the Current Planning Project Manager prior to issuing the construction permit. The second vehicular access point is on N. 4'" St. and provides a dual function of parking and the primary parent drop-off and pick-up area. In order to reduce confusion and expedite the student drop-off and pick-up a curb return is located between two 20-foot one-way driveways. Additionally, the driveways contain curb radii in an effort to expedite pick-up and drop-off and mitigate any queuing that could occur on N. 4" Street. More than 330-feet of street frontage serves the subject property and therefore the applicant may have an additional driveway on N. 4'"· The curb return provided exceeds the 18-foot minimum width. Level of Service: It is anticipated that the proposed development would generate 1,220 vehicle trips per day that would include 415 AM peak-hour trips and 250 PM peak-hour trips. The provided transportation report analyzed the following four (4) intersection locations (Exhibit 11): Intersection 1: N. 4'" St./ Park Ave. N. Intersection 2: N. 4'" St./ Garden Ave. N. Intersection 3: N. 3'd St./ Park Ave. N. Intersection 4: N. 3"' St./ Garden Ave. N. Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of c--munity & Economic Development Report of November 1, 2016 Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Page 24 of 47 The provided analysis notes that all intersections will operote at an acceptable level of service with the proposed development. Therefore, the proposal would not be required to mitigate at any intersection. Additionally, operations analyses of the proposed access driveways indicate that all movements would operate at Level of Service B or better during all times of the day. Increased traffic created by the development would be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied. The fee shall be payable to the City at the time of building permit issuance. Site Distance: The TIA indicated no sight distance issues or problems with the proposed driveway locations. Street Improvements: Garden Ave N -Garden Ave N is a residential access street along the project's east property line. The existing road contains curb, gutter, and sidewalk on both sides of the street. A narrow planter strip is located along the project's frontage only. Per code, frontage improvements including 0.5 feet wide curb and gutter, an 8-foot wide landscaped planter, and 5-foot wide sidewalk, improvements are required on residential access streets. The applicant is proposing to move the existing curb-line west approximately 8-feet and provide a bus porking lane with curb-bulb located at the N. 4th St. and N. 3,d St. intersections. Additionally, the applicant is proposing to provide a 10-foot wide sidewalk and landscoping interior to the project (street frontage londscaping) ond no street trees. Staff supports a modification to the residential access street standards with further modification. The proposed relocation of the existing curb line west approximately 8- feet would result in a southbound lone width of approximately 21 jeet. Such o lane width would likely result in driver confusion requiring the need for channeling markers or devices or the increased width could induce speeding. Instead, in conversations with the applicant, staff has suggested the applicant maintain the existing curb line and provide the bus load/unload in the existing ROW. This would maintain the appropriate street width and allow for the applicant to provide a 12-foot sidewalk and the ability to provide additional landscaping and tree retention on the Garden Ave N frontage. As mentioned previously, staff recommended SEPA mitigation measures along the intersections of Garden Ave N at N. 4th St. and N. 3'd street to provide curb-bulbs to shorten pedestrian crossing widths and provide traffic calming to the street. These measures were included in the Renton School District issued MONS (Exhibit 7) and incorporated into recommended conditions of approval for the PUD application. Staff is in support of expanded 12-foot sidewalks to facilitate loading and unloading of the students ond provide an enhanced pedestrian experience. Staff also supports the applicant not provide an 8-foot planter strip along the street as it will conflict with the load/unload area, but as an alternative provide street trees in tree grates. Therefore, staff recommends, as a condition of approval, the applicant resubmit revised site and utility plans for Garden Ave N that provide the curb-line maintained in its existing location, 12-foot sidewalks, street trees in tree grates, and curb-bulbs meeting city standards at the intersections of N. 4" St. and N. 3'd St. The plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager and Engineering Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit approval. Sartori f5_16-00069l_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of co----unity & Economic Development Report of November 1, 2016 Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Page 25 of 47 Park Ave N. -Park Ave N is a principal arterial alang the praject's west property line. Existing improvements include curb, gutter, and sidewalk. Per code, frontage improvements including 0.5 feet wide curb and gutter, an 8-foot wide landscaped planter, and 8-foot wide sidewalk improvements are required on principal arterials. The applicant proposes a 0.5-foot wide curb and gutter, on 8-foot wide landscaped planter, and 12-foot wide sidewalks. Staff supports this modification as it enhances the pedestrian area olong on important arterial connection in the City Center. The applicant has proposed to retain five (5) street trees along the Park Ave N frontage. Following consultation with the City's Arborist, staff recommends the trees be removed and replanted. The existing trees ore currently constrained within tree wells and growing into the overhead power lines. Establishing new trees in a planter strip that would provide an adequate area for root development and trees that do not need modification due to overhead utility conflicts will provide a better long term result with regard to aesthetics and maintenance. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval, the applicant resubmit a revised landscape plan that replaces all five trees shown to be retained on Park Ave N. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Praject Manager prior to construction permit approval. The Park Ave N. frontage contains four (4) overhead power poles that will conflict with required frontage improvements. RMC 4-6-090 requires the utilities be located underground with the redevelopment of the property. The applicant will be required to submit utility plans that identify the utilities underground or obtain variance appraval as provided by RMC 4-6-0906. N. 4th St. -N. 4rh St. is a principal arterial along the project's north property line. Existing improvements include curb, gutter, and sidewalk. Per code, frontage improvements including 0.5 feet wide curb and gutter, an 8-foot wide landscaped planter, and 8-foot wide sidewalk improvements are required on principal arterials. The applicant praposes to provide the code standard. N. 3'd St. -N. 3'd St is a principal arterial along the praject's south property line. Existing improvements include curb, gutter, planter strip, and sidewalk. Per code, frontage improvements including 0.5 feet wide curb and gutter, an 8-foot wide landscaped planter, and 8-foot wide sidewalk improvements are required on principal arterials. The applicant proposes to provide the code standard, however after review staff finds a modified frontage that provides on-street parking and curb bulbs is viable. This street section would provide additional parking for the school near the entrance, which would also alleviate the need to provide auxiliary parking in the plaza area. Also, the curb bulbs would reduce the crossing distance for pedestrians along the N. 3'd St. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval, the applicant resubmit revised site and utility plans for N. 3'd St. that provides curb-bulbs meeting the City's standard on the praperty's frontage at Park Ave N and Garden Ave N. thereby creating a raw of on-street parking along the north side of N. 3"' St. The plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Praject Manager prior to construction permit approval. The applicant has also proposed to retain four street trees along the N. 3"' St. frontage. As the street frontage section is recommended by staff to be altered and include bulbs, it is unknown whether the trees would conflict with the new street section. Therefore, staff recommends the applicant attempt to keep the four (4) trees as shown, but if the curb-bulbs and new frontage layout conflict with the existing Sartori ES_16-00069l_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of c---munity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-00069Z, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 26 of 47 trees, the trees shall be removed and replaced per the City's street tree standard. Staff recommends, as a condition of approval, a revised landscape plan that provides the new street frontage section and either the retention of the four (4) trees if possible or the replacement af the trees meeting City street tree standards. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. Temporary Impacts: Given the concentration of development to occur in the immediate vicinity of the project site, staff anticipates that the proposed project would contribute to short term impacts to the City's street system. Therefore, staff is recommending a condition of approval requiring the applicant create a public outreach sign in coordination with City of Renton to communicate with road users, the general public, area residences and businesses, and appropriate public entities about project information; road conditions in the work zone area; and the safety and mobility effects of the work zone. The sign shall be placed on site priar to construction commencement. Concurrency -Staff recommends a transportation concurrency approval based upon a 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 (Exhibit 19). 28. PUD Development Standards: Pursuant to RMC 4-9-lSOD.4, each planned urban development shall demonstrate compliance with the development standards for the Planned Urban Development regulations. The following table contains project elements intended to comply with the development standards of the Planned Urban Development regulations, as outlined in RMC 4-9-lSOE: Compliance PUD Development Standard Analysis 1. COMMON OPEN SPACE STANDARD: Open space shall be concentrated in large usable areas and may be designed to provide either active or passive recreation. Requirements for residential, mixed use, commercial, and industrial developments are described below. Standard: Mixed use residential and attached housing developments of ten {10) or more dwelling units shall provide a minimum area of common space or recreation area equal to fifty {SO) square feet per unit. The common space area shall be N/A aggregated to provide usable area(s) for residents. The location, layout, and proposed type of common space or recreation area shall be subject to approval by the Hearing Examiner. The required common open space shall be satisfied with one or more of the elements listed below. -· Standard: All buildings and developments with over thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of nonresidential uses (excludes parking garage floorplate areas) shall provide pedestrian-oriented space according to the following formula: Compliant if 1% of the lot area + 1% of the building area = Minimum amount of pedestrian- Conditions of oriented space. Approval are Staff Comment: The applicant's minimum requirement for pedestrian oriented spaces Met is 2,913 square feet (212,381sf lot area I 79,000sf building area). The applicant has provided a 10,300 square foot public plaza that wraps the corner of the building at the intersection of the N. 3'd St. and Park Ave N. As shown on the preliminary landscape plan (Exhibit 3) the plaza will be will be surfaced with scored concrete and provide benches for seating. Planter boxes and flag poles provide edge features that Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of co-· -·unity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUAl6-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 27 of 47 demarcate the plaza. The flexible parking area containing eight (8) parking stalls and plaza surface treatment provides an additional 4,000 square feet. Edge planting along this area softens the hardscape and provides additional edges to the plaza. No pedestrian level lighting is shown in the plaza and while bench seating is provided, it does not appear to meet the minimum requirement of three {3) feet per 60-feet of plaza area. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval, the applicant submit a detailed plaza pion that identifies compliance with lighting levels of four (4) foot candles on the ground, minimum seating areas, and other applicable pedestrian - oriented space qualifiers in RMC 4-9-150lc. The detailed plaza plan shall also include detail cut sheets of the bench, planter boxes, and any other streetscape elements that will be provided. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. Standard: The location of public open space shall be considered in relation to building orientation, sun and light exposure, and local micro-climatic conditions. ,, Staff Comment: The public plaza area is located and a component of the main entry to the proposed school building. The plaza is also located along the south and southwest portions of the site, which will provide the maximum amount of solar exposure. Standard: Common space areas in mixed use residential and attached residential N/A projects should be centrally located so they are near a majority of dwelling units, accessible and usable to residents, and visible from surrounding units. Standard: In mixed use residential and attached residential projects children's play N/A space should be centrally located, visible from the dwellings, and away from hazardous areas like garbage dumpsters, drainage facilities, streets, and parking areas. 29. Design District Review: Pursuant to RMC 4-9-lSOD.4, each planned urban development shall demonstrate compliance with any overlay district associated with the subject property; unless a modification for a specific development standard has been requested. The subject property is located within Design District 'D' and the R-8 and R-10 zoning areas are to Residential Design and Open Space Standards. Through the PUD, the applicant is requesting that a single designation be applied for the entire project given strict adherence to the differing design standards would result in multiple site design features that would be incompatible with the proposed elementary school use (FOF 14: Requested Modifications from RMC through the PUD). Design District 'D' standards was recommended by City staff given the main presence of the building is located along Park Ave N, which allows integration into future commercial development and anticipated growth along that arterial. Staff is in support of the requested modification/application of the single Design District provided the applicant complies with all conditions of approval. The following table contains project elements intended to comply with the standards of the Design District 'D' Standards and guidelines, as outlined in RMC 4-3-100.E: Compliance I Design District Guideline and Standard Analysis 1. SITE DESIGN AND BUILDING LOCATION: Intent: To ensure that buildings are located in relation to streets and other buildings so that the Vision of the City of Renton can be realized for a high-density urban environment; so that businesses enjoy visibility from public rights-of-way; and to encourage pedestrian activity. a. Building Location and Orientation: Intent: To ensure visibility of businesses and to establish active, lively uses along sidewalks and Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of Co · ·· unity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November l, 2016 Page 28 of 47 pedestrian pathways. To organize buildings for pedestrian use and so that natural light is available to other structures and open space. To ensure an appropriate transition between buildings, parking areas, and other land uses; and increase privacy for residential uses. Guidelines: Developments shall enhance the mutual relationship of buildings with each other, as well as with the roads, open space, and pedestrian amenities while working to create a pedestrian oriented environment. Lots shall be configured to encourage variety and so that natural light is available to buildings and open space. The privacy of individuals in residential uses shall be provided for. Standard: The availability of natural light (both direct and reflected) and direct sun exposure to nearby buildings and open space (except parking areas) shall be ,/ considered when siting structures. Staff Comment: The building is oriented north/south along the western portion of the property. This orientation maximizes solar exposure on the public plaza and open spaces along the east portion of the property. Standard: Buildings shall be oriented to the street with clear connections to the sidewalk. ,/ Staff Comment: The building is oriented to Park Ave N and N 3"' St. Clear connections are provided via the pedestrian plaza and main public entrance. Standard: The front entry of a building shall be oriented to the street or a landscaped ,/ pedestrian-only courtyard. Staff Comment: The front entry is oriented to the Park Ave N and N 3'd St. Standard: Buildings with residential uses located at the street level shall be: a. Set back from the sidewalk a minimum of ten feet (10') and feature N/A substantial landscaping between the sidewalk and the building; or b. Have the ground floor residential uses raised above street level for residents' privacy. b. Building Entries: Intent: To make building entrances convenient to locate and easy to access, and ensure that building entries further the pedestrian nature of the fronting sidewalk and the urban character of the district. Guidelines: Primary entries shall face the street, serve as a focal point, and allow space for social interaction. All entries shall include features that make them easily identifiable while reflecting the architectural character of the building. The primary entry shall be the most visually prominent entry. Pedestrian access to the building from the sidewalk, parking lots, and/or other areas shall be provided and shall enhance the overall quality of the pedestrian experience on the site. Standard: A primary entrance of each building shall be located on the facade facing a street, shall be prominent, visible from the street, connected by a walkway to the ,/ public sidewalk, and include human-scale elements. Stoff Comment: The primary entrance is located on the earner of Park Ave N and N. 3"' St. The entrance is connected to the sidewalk via a pedestrian plaza that includes seating, planters, and bicycle parking. Standard: A primary entrance of each building shall be made visibly prominent by ,/ incorporating architectural features such as a facade overhang, trellis, large entry doors, and/or ornamental lighting. Sartori fS_16-000692_HfX Staff Report City of Renton Department of c--munity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 29 of 47 Staff Comment: The primary entry is made visibly prominent by a building overhang and canopy. Large doors and expansive glazing also provide distinction. Standard Building entries from a street shall be clearly marked with canopies, architectural elements, ornamental lighting, or landscaping and include weather protection at least four and one-half feet (4-1/2') wide. Buildings that are taller than thirty feet (30') in height shall also ensure that the weather protection is proportional ./ to the distance above ground level. Staff Comment: The building entry is marked with canopies extending approximately 13-feet and overhangs extending approximately 15-feet. Coverages are approximately 10'8" above grade to provide adequate weather protection. Standard: Building entries from a parking lot shall be subordinate to those related to the street. ,/ Staff Comment: The main entry ot the corner of Pork Ave N ond N 3"' St the most architecturally prominent as detailed above. Other entries from the parking lat will have simple overhang and/or canopies for weather protection. Standard: Features such as entries, lobbies, and display windows shall be oriented to a street or pedestrian-oriented space; otherwise, screening or decorative features ,/ should be incorporated. Staff Comment: The main entry and lobby/reception area are oriented to the pedestrian plaza at the corner of Park Ave N and N 3'd St. Standard: Multiple buildings on the same site shall direct views to building entries by N/A providing a continuous network of pedestrian paths and open spaces that incorporate landscaping. Standard: Ground floor residential units that are directly accessible from the street N/A shall include entries from front yards to provide transition space from the street or entries from an open space such as a courtyard or garden that is accessible from the street. c. Transition to Surrounding Development: Intent: To shape redevelopment projects so that the character and value of Renton's long- established, existing neighborhoods are preserved. Guidelines: Careful siting and design treatment shall be used to achieve a compatible transition where new buildings differ from surrounding development in terms of building height, bulk and scale. Standard: At least one of the following design elements shall be used to promote a transition to surrounding uses: 1. Building proportions, including step-backs on upper levels in accordance with the surrounding planned and existing land use forms; or ,/ 2. Building articulation to divide a larger architectural element into smaller increments; or 3. Roof lines, roof pitches, and roof shapes designed to reduce apparent bulk and transition with existing development. Additionally, the Administrator may require increased setbacks at the side or rear of a building in order to reduce the bulk and scale of larger buildings and/or so that Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of co----unity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 30 of 47 sunlight reaches adjacent and/or abutting yards. Stoff Comment: The building contains design elements that incorporate all three of the above referenced standards in varying levels. The east and west elevations provide o step-back on portions of the second and third floors that accommodates outdoor learning opportunities. This step back acts more as an upper level building modulation as it breaks the plane af the long far;ode assists in dividing it into smaller increments. The south and east far;ades provides material and height variations also divide architectural elements and reduce the bulk of the structure thereby providing transition ta the adjacent residential areas. d. Service Element Location and Design: Intent: To reduce the potential negative impacts of service elements (i.e., waste receptacles, loading docks) by locating service and loading areas away from high-volume pedestrian areas, and screening them from view in high visibility areas. Guidelines: Service elements shall be concentrated and located so that impacts to pedestrians and other abutting uses are minimized. The impacts of service elements shall be mitigated with landscaping and an enclosure with fencing that is made of quality materials. Standard: Service elements shall be located and designed to minimize the impacts on the pedestrian environment and adjacent uses. Service elements shall be concentrated and located where they are accessible to service vehicles and ,/ convenient for tenant use. Staff Comment: A consolidated service area is located along the southeastern portion of the building adjacent to the kitchen. It is separated from the pedestrian areas by landscaping, refuse/recycling enclosure, and the 10-foot high ball wall. Standard: In addition to standard enclosure requirements, garbage, recycling collection, and utility areas shall be enclosed on all sides, including the roof and screened around their perimeter by a wall or fence and have self-closing doors. Compliant if Staff Comment: The refuse and recycling enclosure plan (Exhibit 18) is enclosed on condition of three sides with an 8-foot masonry wall, roof structure, and two (2) ten-foot wide approval is metal gates. A landscaping screen is provided along the south wall elevation. No met details were provided with the gate hardware. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval, the applicant provide a revised refuse and recycling enclosure pion that provides a detail cut-sheet of the self-closing door mechanism. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. Standard: Service enclosures shall be made of masonry, ornamental metal or wood, ,/ or some combination of the three (3). Stat[ Comment: The enclosure is made of masonry. Standard: If the service area is adjacent to a street, pathway, or pedestrian-oriented space, a landscaped planting strip, minimum 3 feet wide, shall be located on 3 sides ,/ of such facility. Staff Comment: The service area is adjacent to a pedestrian connection between the building and parking lot. A 9-faot wide landscaping screen is shown on the site plan. e. Gateways: Intent: To distinguish gateways as primary entrances to districts or to the City, special design features Sartori f5_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of co--,unity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 31 of47 and architectural elements at gateways should be provided. While gateways should be distinctive within the context of the district, they should also be compatible with the district in form and scale. Guidelines: Development that occurs at gateways shall be distinguished with features that visually indicate to both pedestrians and vehicular traffic the uniqueness and prominence of their locations in the City. Examples of these types of features include monuments, public art, and public plazas. N/A N/A N/A Standard: Developments located at district gateways shall be marked with visually prominent features. Standard: Gateway elements shall be oriented toward and scaled for both pedestrians and vehicles. Standard: Visual prominence shall be distinguished by two (2) or more of the following: Public art; Special landscape treatment; Open space/plaza; Landmark building form; Special paving, unique pedestrian scale lighting, or bollards; Prominent architectural features (trellis, arbor, pergola, or gazebo); Neighborhood or district entry identification (commercial signs do not qualify). 2. PARKING AND VEHICULAR ACCESS: Intent: To provide safe, convenient access; incorporate various modes of transportation, including public mass transit, in order to reduce traffic volumes and other impacts from vehicles; ensure sufficient parking is provided, while encouraging creativity in reducing the impacts of parking areas; allow an active pedestrian environment by maintaining contiguous street frontages, without parking lot siting along sidewalks and building facades; minimize the visual impact of parking lots; and use access streets and parking to maintain an urban edge to the district. a. Surface Parking: Intent: To maintain active pedestrian environments along streets by placing parking lots primarily in back of buildings. Guidelines: Surface parking shall be located and designed so as to reduce the visual impact of the parking area and associated vehicles. Large areas of surface parking shall also be designed to accommodate future infill development. Requested to be Modified Through the PUD Standard: Parking shall be located so that no surface parking is located between: (a) A building and the front property line; and/or (b) A building and the side property line (when on a corner lot). Staff Comment: No surface parking is located between the building and front property line of Park Ave N. The submitted site plan (Exhibit 2) identifies eight (8/ parking spaces between the building and the N. 3'" St. side property line that would provide a flexible parking area to serve as temporary parking near the building entrance or overflow parking for special events. The surface is treated similarly to the adjacent plaza and is intended to act as a flex space that could also be used to enlarge the plaza far pedestrian oriented events. As the amount of parking is nominal and only represents a small area of the building and property line relative to the size of building and subject property, staff is in support of this modification. The perimeter landscaping and surface treatment provide appropriate mitigation of the flexible parking area. Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of C munity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-00069Z, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 32 of 47 Standard: Parking shall be located so that it is screened from surrounding streets by .,, buildings, landscaping, and/or gateway features as dictated by location . Staff Comment: Perimeter landscaping is provided around the surface parking areas as identified in the landscape plan (Exhibit 3). b. Structured Parking Garages: Intent: To promote more efficient use of land needed for vehicle parking; encourage the use of structured parking; physically and visually integrate parking garages with other uses; and reduce the overall impact of parking garages. Guidelines: Parking garages shall not dominate the streetscape; they shall be designed to be complementary with adjacent and abutting buildings. They shall be sited to complement, not subordinate, pedestrian entries. Similar forms, materials, and/or details to the primary building(s) should be used to enhance garages. Standard: Parking structures shall provide space for ground floor commercial uses N/A along street frontages at a minimum of seventy five percent (75%) of the building frontage width. Standard: The entire facade must feature a pedestrian-oriented facade. The Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development may approve parking structures that do not feature a pedestrian orientation in limited N/A circumstances. If allowed, the structure shall be set back at least six feet (6') from the sidewalk and feature substantial landscaping. This landscaping shall include a combination of evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs, and ground cover. This setback shall be increased to ten feet (10') when abutting a primary arterial and/or minor arterial. N/A Standard: Public facing facades shall be articulated by arches, lintels, masonry trim, or other architectural elements and/or materials. N/A Standard: The entry to the parking garage shall be located away from the primary street, to either the side or rear of the building. Standard: Parking garages at grade shall include screening or be enclosed from view N/A with treatment such as walls, decorative grilles, trellis with landscaping, or a combination of treatments. Standard: The Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee may allow a reduced setback where the applicant can successfully demonstrate that the landscaped area and/or other design treatment meets the intent of these standards and guidelines. Possible treatments to reduce the setback include landscaping components plus one or more of the following integrated with the architectural design of the building: N/A (a) Ornamental grillwork (other than vertical bars); (b) Decorative artwork; (c) Display windows; (d) Brick, tile, or stone; (e) Pre-cast decorative panels; (f) Vine-covered trellis; Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of Co ---unity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 33 of 47 (g) Raised landscaping beds with decorative materials; or (h)Other treatments that meet the intent of this standard ... c. Vehicular Access: Intent: To maintain a contiguous and uninterrupted sidewalk by minimizing, consolidating, and/or eliminating vehicular access off streets. Guidelines: Vehicular access to parking garages and parking lots shall not impede or interrupt pedestrian mobility. The impacts of curb cuts to pedestrian access on sidewalks shall be minimized. Standard: Access to parking lots and garages shall be from alleys, when available. If not available, access shall occur at side streets. ,/ Staff Comment: No alleys are ovailable for access. With the exception of Garden Ave N. the surrounding streets are Principal Arterials. Access is provided on N. 3•d St and N. 4'' St. Standard: The number of driveways and curb cuts shall be minimized, so that pedestrian circulation along the sidewalk is minimally impeded. ,/ Staff Comment: While the subject property is an entire city block, only two entrances are provided. Driveways ore limited with na curb cuts located on Park Ave N and Garden Ave N. 3. PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT: Intent: To enhance the urban character of development in the Urban Center and the Center Village by creating pedestrian networks and by providing strong links from streets and drives to building entrances; make the pedestrian environment safer and more convenient, comfortable, and pleasant to walk between businesses, on sidewalks, to and from access points, and through parking lots; and promote the use of multi-modal and public transportation systems in order to reduce other vehicular traffic. a. Pedestrian Circulation: Intent: To create a network of linkages for pedestrians to improve safety and convenience and enhance the pedestrian environment. Guidelines: The pedestrian environment shall be given priority and importance in the design of projects. Sidewalks and/or pathways shall be provided and shall provide safe access to buildings from parking areas. Providing pedestrian connections to abutting properties is an important aspect of connectivity and encourages pedestrian activity and shall be considered. Pathways shall be easily identifiable to pedestrians and drivers. Standard: A pedestrian circulation system of pathways that are clearly delineated and connect buildings, open space, and parking areas with the sidewalk system and abutting properties shall be provided. (a) Pathways shall be located so that there are clear sight lines, to increase safety. ,/ (b) Pathways shall be an all-weather or permeable walking surface, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed surface is appropriate for the anticipated number of users and complementary to the design of the development. Staff comment: Pedestrian pothwoys and plaza area contain clear site lines and are concrete. Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of C --munity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-00069Z, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 34 of 47 Compliant if Condition of Approval is Met. ,/ N/A Standard: Pathways within parking areas shall be provided and differentiated by material or texture (i.e., raised walkway, stamped concrete, or pavers) from abutting paving materials. Permeable materials are encouraged. The pathways shall be perpendicular to the applicable building facade and no greater than one hundred fifty feet (150') apart. Staff Comment: The applicant has provided pathways delineated pathways in the two parking areas. The south parking lot contains a path providing connection to the plaza and main entrance. The north parking lot contains pedestrian areas surrounding the pick-up/drop-off area that connects students ta the active recreation areas, student entrance, and public sidewalks. It appears pedestrian pathways are raised via curb on the site plan however no material identifier is provided in the south parking lot pathway. Therefore, as a condition of approval, staff recommends the applicant submit a revised site plan that provides the proposed material for the pedestrian pathway in the south parking lot. The plan shall be submitted, to and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. Standard: Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of buildings shall be of sufficient width to accommodate anticipated numbers of users. Specifically: (a) Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of mixed use and retail buildings 100 or more feet in width (measured along the facade) shall provide sidewalks at least 12 feet in width. The walkway shall include an 8 foot minimum unobstructed walking surface. (b) Interior pathways shall be provided and shall vary in width to establish a hierarchy. The widths shall be based on the intended number of users; to be no smaller than five feet (S') and no greater than twelve feet (12'). (c) For all other interior pathways, the proposed walkway shall be of sufficient width to accommodate the anticipated number of users. Staff Comment: Pathways from parking areas to the interior of the project are generally S-feet in width which is sufficient to accommodate the anticipated number of users. Sidewalks along the public frontages would be 12-feet and 8-feet which is anticipated to be sufficient width to accommodate the pedestrian traffic school bus drop aft. Standard: Mid-block connections between buildings shall be provided. b. Pedestrian Amenities: Intent: To create attractive spaces that unify the building and street environments and are inviting and comfortable for pedestrians; and provide publicly accessible areas that function for a variety of year-round activities, under typical seasonal weather conditions. Guidelines: The pedestrian environment shall be given priority and importance in the design of projects. Amenities that encourage pedestrian use and enhance the pedestrian experience shall be included. ,/ Standard: Architectural elements that incorporate plants, particularly at building entrances, in publicly accessible spaces and at facades along streets, shall be provided. Staff Comment: The landscape plan /Exhibit 3} provides planter boxes ta accommodate trees and shrubs in the pedestrian plaza area near the building's main Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Deportment of C 'nUnity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LU Al 6-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 35 of47 entrance and along the student drop-off/pick-up area. Standard: Amenities such as outdoor group seating, benches, transit shelters, fountains, and public art shall be provided. (a) Site furniture shall be made of durable, vandal-and weather-resistant materials that do not retain rainwater and can be reasonably maintained over an extended period of time. Compliant if (b) Site furniture and amenities shall not impede or block pedestrian access to Condition of public spaces or building entrances. Approval is Staff Comment: The pedestrian plaza will provide seating and places to gather. The Met. proposal did not include specifications for proposed pedestrian amenities. Therefore stoff was unable to verify the whether site furniture is compliant with the standard. As such, staff recommends a condition of approval requiring the applicant provide detailed specifications for all site furniture, and art, in order to ensure durable, vandal- and weather-resistant materials are used. The specifications shall be submitted ta, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior building permit approval. Standard: Pedestrian overhead weather protection in the form of awnings, marquees, canopies, or building overhangs shall be provided. These elements shall be a minimum of four and one-half feet (4-1/2') wide along at least seventy five percent (75%) of the length of the building facade facing the street, a maximum height of ,,,. fifteen feet (15') above the ground elevation, and no lower than eight feet (8') above ground level. Staff Comment: Building overhangs and canopies are provided along 75 percent of the N.3'd St. fa,ade. The height of the weather protection is approximately 11-feet above grade level. Overhangs ore provides along the entirety of the Park Ave N. frontage. 4. RECREATION AREAS AND COMMON OPEN SPACE: Intent: To ensure that areas for both passive and active recreation are available to residents, workers, and visitors and that these areas are of sufficient size for the intended activity and in convenient locations. To create usable and inviting open space that is accessible to the public; and to promote pedestrian activity on streets particularly at street corners. Guidelines: Developments located at street intersections should provide pedestrian-oriented space at the street corner to emphasize pedestrian activity (illustration below). Recreation and common open space areas are integral aspects of quality development that encourage pedestrians and users. These areas shall be provided in an amount that is adequate to be functional and usable; they shall also be landscaped and located so that they are appealing to users and pedestrians N/A Standard: All mixed use residential and attached housing developments of ten (10) or more dwelling units shall provide common open space and/or recreation areas. Standard: All buildings and developments with over thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of nonresidential uses (excludes parking garage floorplate areas) shall provide See FOFZB pedestrian-oriented space Staff Comment: See FOF 28 PUD Development Standards. Standard: The pedestrian-oriented space shall be provided according to the following See FOFZB formula: 1% of the site area + 1% of the gross building area, at minimum. The pedestrian-oriented space shall include all of the following: Sartori E5_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Deportment of Co unity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 36 of 47 SeeFDf 28 Requested to be Modified Through the PUD 1. Visual and pedestrian access (including barrier-free access) to the abutting structures from the public right-of-way or a nonvehicular courtyard; and 2. Paved walking surfaces of either concrete or approved unit paving; and 3. On-site or building-mounted lighting providing at least four (4) foot-candles (average) on the ground; and 4. At least three (3) lineal feet of seating area (bench, ledge, etc.) or one individual seat per sixty {60) square feet of plaza area or open space. Staff Comment: See FOF 28 PUD Development Standards Standard: The following areas shall not count as pedestrian-oriented space: 1. The minimum required walkway. However, where walkways are widened or enhanced beyond minimum requirements, the area may count as pedestrian- oriented space if the Administrator determines such space meets the definition of pedestrian-oriented space. 2. Areas that abut landscaped parking Jots, chain link fences, blank walls, and/or dumpsters or service areas. Staff Comment: See FOF 28 PUD Development Standards Standard: Public plazas shall be provided at intersections identified in the Commercial Arterial Zone Public Plaza Locations Map and as listed below. The public plaza must be landscaped consistent with RMC 4-4-070 including at minimum street trees, decorative paving, pedestrian-scaled lighting, and seating. Stoff Comment: RMC 4-3-100E4 identifies the intersection of Pork Ave N. and N. 4th St. as on orea that requires o public plazo measuring no less than 1,000 square feet ond a minimum dimension of 20-feet abutting the sidewalk. Additionally, the plaza is required to contain landscaping, decorative paving, pedestrian scaled lighting, and seating. The applicant has requested to modify this requirement and relocate the plaza one block south to the corner of Park Ave N. and N. 3'd St. as this corner is the main entry to the school. Staff recommends approval to relocate the plaza to N. 3'd St. Providing the plaza ot the entrance of the building and separated from vehicle oriented areas, such as the N. 4th St. intersection, will result in a greater pedestrian experience and likely greater utilized plazo. The applicant proposes a plaza at Park Ave N. and N. 3'd St. at 10-times the size of the code requirement. The plaza will be landscaped, contain seating, have o buffer of on-street parking along N. 3"' St., and as conditioned have pedestrian scaled lighting. A smaller plaza type area is provided near the intersection af the Park Ave N. and N. 4th St. abutting the north end of the school building. A covered waiting area measuring 1,056 square feet is provided for students awaiting pick-up. S. BUILDING ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN: Intent: To encourage building design that is unique and urban in character, comfortable on a human scale, and uses appropriate building materials that are suitable for the Pacific Northwest climate. To discourage franchise retail architecture. a. Building Character and Massing: Sartori ES_16-000692 _ HEX Stoff Report City of Renton Department of c--,munity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 37 of 47 Intent: To ensure that buildings are not bland and visually appear to be at a human scale; and ensure that all sides of a building, that can be seen by the public, are visually interesting. Guidelines: Building facades shall be modulated and/or articulated to reduce the apparent size of buildings, break up long blank walls, add visual interest, and enhance the character of the neighborhood. Articulation, modulation, and their intervals should create a sense of scale important to residential buildings. Compliant if condition of approval is met. Compliant if condition of approval is met. Standard: All building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than forty feet (40'). Stoff Comment: Modulations on the building facades shown on the elevation plan (Exhibit 8) is provided vertically (e.g. roof step-downs and overhangs) and horizontally (e.g. building footprint along the east far;ade and outdoor classroom areas an the second and third floors). Articulation of the facades includes expanses of curtain wall glazing, sunshades, canopies, and windows. These intervals are generally at no more than 40-feet with the exception of the north and south ends of the Park Ave N. far;ade (west elevation) and the west side of the N. 4th St. far;ade (north elevation). Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval, the applicant provide additional articulation or modulation features in these areas. Staff has suggested the applicant wrap the curtain wall around the corner along the south end of the Park Ave N. far;ade. Artwork, additional glazing, and modulation are suggested on the north end of the Park Ave N far;ade and west side of the N. 4th St. far;ade. A revised elevation plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. Standard: Modulations shall be a minimum of two feet (2') in depth sixteen feet (16') in height, and eight feet (8') in width. Staff Comment: Horizontal modulations shown on the site plan and elevation plan exceed these minimum requirements. Standard: Buildings greater than one hundred sixty feet (160') in length shall provide a variety of modulations and articulations to reduce the apparent bulk and scale of the facade; or provide an additional special feature such as a clock tower, courtyard, fountain, or public gathering area. Staff Comment: As mentioned previously, the facades are provided a number of modulations and articulation along the building. However, the Pork Ave N. far;ode (west elevation) is has significant length (approximately 386-feet}, is located 20-feet from the Pork Ave N. ROW, and relative to the other facades, appears to contain the least amount of modulation and articulation. Staff has recommended conditions above for articulation treatments, but additional methods are needed to mitigate the appearance of bulk along the Park Ave N far;ade (west elevation). As currently depicted, the ground floor height does not provide an adequate base to the building. The cantilever and upper two stories appear to be hulking aver the ground floor. This results in a squat-like base that is out of proportion with the upper two stories. This length of far;ade and amount of bulk along Park Ave N. is not human scale as intended by the design regulations. Staff has been in communication with the applicant regarding this issue and the applicant has provided informal conceptual renderings (Exhibit 27) in response. Further refinement with formal elevations is needed ta confirm compliance with this standard. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval, the applicant submit revised Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of c--munity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 38 of 47 elevations that provide increased height ar the perception of increased height on the ground floor. The plans shall be submitted for review and appravol by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. b. Ground-Level Details: Intent: To ensure that buildings are visually interesting and reinforce the intended human-scale character of the pedestrian environment; and ensure that all sides of a building within near or distant public view have visual interest. Guidelines: The use of material variations such as colors, brick, shingles, stucco, and horizontal wood siding is encouraged. The primary building entrance should be made visibly prominent by incorporating architectural features such as a facade overhang, trellis, large entry doors, and/or ornamental lighting (illustration below). Detail features should also be used, to include things such as decorative entry paving, street furniture (benches, etc.), and/or public art. Standard: Human-scaled elements such as a lighting fixture, trellis, or other landscape feature shall be provided along the facade's ground floor. Staff. Comment: The applicant has proposed human scale elements including landscape features, large window, and varied material patterns ot the primary ,/ entrances. Window patterns vary based on interior layout, but all facades feature a variety of window types. Wall areas visible from public streets and sidewalks are treated with canopies or overhangs at pedestrian entries and landscaping. Architectural detailing elements including entrance detailing/weather protection and contrasting materials bring the proposal into compliance with the intent of this standard to create human-scale character in the pedestrian environment. Standard: On any facade visible to the public, transparent windows and/or doors are required to comprise at least 50 percent of the portion of the ground floor facade Requested to that is between 4 feet and 8 feet above ground (as measured on the true elevation). be Modified Staff. Comment: Glazing and doors ore provided at least SO-percent along the ground Through the floor however some areas adjacent to the N. 3'd St. fm;ade are proposed to be frosted PUD and not transparent. The applicant proposed non-transparent glass along this frontage to provide privacy for the students and reduce potential distractions. Staff recommends approval of this modification for safety and welfare of the students. Standard: Upper portions of building facades shall have clear windows with visibility into and out of the building. However, screening may be applied to provide shade and energy efficiency. The minimum amount of light transmittance for windows shall be ,/ 50 percent. Staff. Comment: Glazing on upper floors is proposed to be clear and there will be sunshades provided to provide shade and articulation. N/A Standard: Display windows shall be designed for frequent change of merchandise, rather than permanent displays. Standard: Where windows or storefronts occur, they must principally contain clear N/A glazing. Stafl. Comment: ,/ Standard: Tinted and dark glass, highly reflective (mirror-type) glass and film are prohibited. Sortari ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of c----,unity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 39 of 47 Staff Comment: No tinted, dark, or reflective glass is proposed. ~------+---------------------------------11 Compliant if condition of approval is met. Compliant if condition of approval is met. Standard: Untreated blank walls visible from public streets, sidewalks, or interior pedestrian pathways are prohibited. A wall (including building facades and retaining walls) is considered a blank wall if: (a) It is a ground floor wall or portion of a ground floor wall over 6 feet in height, has a horizontal length greater than 15 feet, and does not include a window, door, building modulation or other architectural detailing; or (b) Any portion of a ground floor wall has a surface area of 400 square feet or greater and does not include a window, door, building modulation or other architectural detailing. Staff Comment: See recommended conditions of approval above in Building Character and Massing regarding modulation and articulation. Standard: If blank walls are required or unavoidable, blank walls shall be treated with one or more of the following: (a) A planting bed at least five feet in width containing trees, shrubs, evergreen ground cover, or vines adjacent to the blank wall; (b) Trellis or other vine supports with evergreen climbing vines; (c) Architectural detailing such as reveals, contrasting materials, or other special detailing that meets the intent of this standard; (d) Artwork, such as bas-relief sculpture, mural, or similar; or (e) Seating area with special paving and seasonal planting. Staff Comment: See recommended conditions of approval above in Building Character and Massing regarding modulation and articulation. d. Building Roof Lines: Intent: To ensure that roof forms provide distinctive profiles and interest consistent with an urban project and contribute to the visual continuity of the district. Guidelines: Building roof lines shall be varied and include architectural elements to add visual interest to the building. ,/ Standard: Buildings shall use at least one of the following elements to create varied and interesting roof profiles: (a) Extended parapets; (b) Feature elements projecting above parapets; (c) Projected cornices; (d) Pitched or sloped roofs (e) Buildings containing predominantly residential uses shall have pitched roofs with a minimum slope of one to four (1:4) and shall have dormers or interesting roof forms that break up the massiveness of an uninterrupted sloping roof. Staff Comment: The elevation pion provides extended parapets and roof step downs on the narth, west, and east facades. A projected cornice extends on the south fa,;ade. Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of c--munity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 40 of 47 These treatments provide varied roof profiles consistent with intent and guidelines. d. Building Materials: Intent: To ensure high standards of quality and effective maintenance over time; encourage the use of materials that reduce the visual bulk of large buildings; and encourage the use of materials that add visual interest to the neighborhood. Guidelines: Building materials are an important and integral part of the architectural design of a building that is attractive and of high quality. Material variation shall be used to create visual appeal and eliminate monotony of facades. This shall occur on all facades in a consistent manner. High quality materials shall be used. If materials like concrete or block walls are used they shall be enhanced to create variation and enhance their visual appeal. Standard: All sides of buildings visible from a street, pathway, parking area, or open ,, space shall be finished on all sides with the same building materials, detailing, and color scheme, or if different, with materials of the same quality. Staff_ Comment: All materials continue on all sides and include consistent detailing. Standard: All buildings shall use material variations such as colors, brick or metal banding, patterns or textural changes. ,, Staff_ Comment: The building contains a combination of masonry, metal siding, composite panel, and glazing. Accent materials include pre-finished metal panel, pre- finished metal trim and canopies. ,, Standard: Materials, individually or in combination, shall have texture, pattern, and be detailed on all visible facades. Standard: Materials shall be durable, high quality, and consistent with more Compliant if traditional urban development, such as brick, integrally colored concrete masonry, Condition of pre-finished metal, stone, steel, glass and cast-in-place concrete. Approval is Staff Comment: In order to ensure that quality materials are used staff recommends Met the applicant submit a materials board subject to the approval of the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. N/A Standard: If concrete is used, walls shall be enhanced by techniques such as texturing, reveals, and/or coloring with a concrete coating or admixture. Standard: If concrete block walls are used, they shall be enhanced with integral color, N/A textured blocks and colored mortar, decorative bond pattern and/or shall incorporate other masonry materials. Standard: All buildings shall use material variations such as colors, brick or metal ,, banding, patterns, or textural changes. Staff Comment: The building contains material variations such as the use of masonry, panels, and glass. 6. LIGHTING: Intent: To ensure safety and security; provide adequate lighting levels in pedestrian areas such as plazas, pedestrian walkways, parking areas, building entries, and other public places; and increase the visual attractiveness of the area at all times of the day and night. Guidelines: Lighting that improves pedestrian safety and also that creates visual interest in the building and site during the evening hours shall be provided. Sartori ES_ 16-000692 _HEX Staff Report City of Renton Deportment of C ,unity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 41 of 47 Compliant if Condition of Approval Complied With Compliant if Condition of Approval Complied With Compliant if Condition of Approval Complied With Standard: Pedestrian-scale lighting shall be provided at primary and secondary building entrances. Examples include sconces on building facades, awnings with down-lighting and decorative street lighting. Staff Comment: A lighting plan was not submitted identifying compliance with these standards, as such staff recommends a condition of approval that the applicant be required to provide a lighting plan that adequately provides far public safety without casting excessive glare on adjacent properties; at the time of building permit review. Pedestrian scale and dawnlighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicular movement, unless alternative pedestrian scale lighting has been approved administratively or is specifically listed as exempt from provisions located in RMC 4-4-075 Lighting, Exterior On-Site. If this condition of approval is met the proposal would satisfy this standard. Standard: Accent lighting shall also be provided on building facades (such as sconces) and/or to illuminate other key elements of the site such as gateways, specimen trees, other significant landscaping, water features, and/or artwork. Staff Comment: Ornamental lighting fixtures would help create more visual interest for the structure in the pedestrian public realm. There/are staff recommends, as a condition of approval, the applicant be required to submit revised elevations depicting ornamental lighting fixtures. The revised elevations shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. If all conditions of approval are met the proposal would satisfy the intent of this standard. Standard: Downlighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicular movement, unless alternative pedestrian scale lighting has been approved administratively or is specifically listed as exempt from provisions located in RMC 4-4- 075. Lighting, Exterior On-Site (i.e., signage, governmental flags, temporary holiday or decorative lighting, right-of-way-lighting, etc.). Staff Comment: See Condition above. 30. Conditional Use Permit: K-12 educational institutions require a Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit to locate in a R-8, R-10, CN, and CA zones. The following table contains project elements intended to comply with Conditional Use Permit decision criteria as related to the request to establish the use, as outlined in RMC 4-9-030.D: Compliance Conditional Use Permit Criteria and Analysis a. Consistency with Plans and Regulations: The proposed use shall be compatible with the general goals, objectives, policies and standards of the Comprehensive ,/ Plan, the zoning regulations and any other plans, programs, maps or ordinances of the City of Renton. Staff Comment: See FOF 22: Comprehensive Plan Compliance, FOF 23: Zoning Development Standard Compliance, and FOF 26: PUD Decision Criteria. b. Appropriate Location: The proposed location shall not result in the detrimental overconcentration of a particular use within the City or within the immediate area ,/ of the proposed use. The proposed location shall be suited for the proposed use. Staff Comment: The proposed school is the only elementary school within the City Center Community Planning Area. It would be the first school that is within close Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of C munity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Report of November 1, 2016 Page 42 of 47 y' y' y' proximity to the downtown ond The Londing. The proposed location was previously used for educational purposes and therefore is already suited for the proposed elementary school. c. Effect on Adjacent Properties: The proposed use at the proposed location shall not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. Stoff Comment: The proposed elementary school would not result in substontiol or undue odverse effects on adjacent property. As noted in zoning and development standard compliance ond PUD decisional criteria above, the applicant will be required to improve public frontages, provide off-street parking, provide stormwoter flow control and treatment, and install street frontage landscaping. Additionally, as referenced in the Design District D review (FDF 29} the building and site pion provide on aesthetically pleasing and pedestrian oriented development that will improve the existing conditions of the subject property. The new school is anticipated to result in an influx in pedestrian and vehicular traffic during school AM and PM peak hours. Hawever, this change in traffic is not anticipated to result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent properties as no level of service failures have been identified. d. Compatibility: The proposed use shall be compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood. Staff Comment: The proposed elementary school is compatible with the scole and character of the neighborhood. The building moin presence is locoted along Park Ave N. or the commercial side of the subject property. The building steps down ond reduces its overoll scale as it transitions east toword the residential area. By constructing a 3-story building, the programming results in a smaller overall building footprint that can be consolidated to the west side of the property. A buffer areo of landscaping and the gross field provides odditionol transition to the residential areo. e. Parking: Adequate parking is, or will be made, available. Stoff Comment: Adequate parking is provided. The applicant's transportation report identifies a peak demand of 74 parking spaces. The proposal will provide 83 parking spaces onsite and new on-street parking along N. 3'd Street. Bus loading and unloading is proposed along Garden Ave N. Additionally, for special events, more parking capacity is available within the drop-off/pick-up queue, bus pull out, and offsite parking can be provided at the school district's transportation facility located north of the subject property. f. Traffic: The use shall ensure safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians and shall mitigate potential effects on the surrounding area. Staff Comment: Safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians will be provided. The applicant provided a transportation study that provided analysis for abutting intersections. Na failures were found by adding the proposed elementary school trips to the City's transportation system. The applicant will provide frontage improvements and pedestrian enhancements. The applicant has proposed to prepare a transportation management plan that will assist student pick-up and drop-off procedures with the intent of making the process smooth and efficient thereby resulting in minimal impacts two times per day. See further discussion under FOF 26: PUO Decision Criteria -Circulation. Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of C munity & Economic Development Report of November 1, 2016 Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Page 43 of 47 g. Noise, Light and Glare: Potential noise, light and glare impacts from the proposed use shall be evaluated and mitigated. Staff Comment: There will be temporary noise impacts associated with the construction of the school and long term noise associated with the operation of the school. The applicant has stated noise impacts consist of typical construction activity such as heavy machinery, vehicles arriving and leaving the site, and contractor too/- use. Most notably, the construction of the building's pile foundation system will occur over the course of a 6-8 week period. The applicant will utilize an alternative to pile driving method of installing the foundation via on auger cast method. A hoolow stem auger drills to the design depth of approximately 50-feet and when removed the pile grout is injected into the hole. This method is less impactful than driving piles and does not cause ground vibrations. The applicant proposes the following additional methods of controlling noise impacts: locating stationary equipment away from neighboring properties, erecting portable noise barriers around loud stationary equipment, turning off idling construction equipment, require contractors to rigorously maintain all equipment, and train construction crews to ovoid unnecessarily loud action near noise sensitive areas. These methods are included as mitigation measures in the school district's MONS (Exhibit 7) and recommended to be adopted in full as conditions of approval. Long term noise impacts associated with the school include vehicle traffic noise during pick-up/drop-off, bus loading/unloading, truck delivery, and noise associated with large groups of children. These impacts will be predominately during the weekday throughout the school year. Additionally, school bus operators will be instructed to turn off engines and not idle during loading ond unloading. These two mitigation measures are included in the school district's MONS and recommended to be adopted in full as conditions of approval. Truck delivery noise impacts should be minimal. Delivery access will be limited to the N. 3'd St. driveway and south portion of the subject site. School children playing outside will be an impact limited during the school day. The school building, parking lot, and grounds will be lit after dusk each evening for safety purposes. The school district's MONS hos included mitigation measures that include: minimizing exterior lighting to only what is required for life safety and security, 25-foot maximum height for pole-mounted fixtures, direct light away from site perimeter, and the use of cut-off light fixtures. Further, RMC 4-4-075 provides standards that limit light trespass such os parking lot pole height limitations of 25-feet with cut-off type luminoire and building lights directed onto itself or the ground immediately abutting it. As mentioned previously in FOF 26-Building and site design and FOF 29 Lighting, staff has recommended as a condition of approval a lighting plan be submitted for review with the building permit application. Standards for design review and compliance with exterior lighting standards will be reviewed with the building permit submittal. h. Landscaping: Landscaping shall be provided in all areas not occupied by buildings, paving, or critical areas. Additional landscaping may be required to buffer adjacent properties from potentially adverse effects of the proposed use. Staff Comment: The applicant has proposed street frontage landscaping along the perimeter of the subject property with the exception of the plaza area at Park Ave N. and N. 3'd St., driveways, and pedestrian connections. Additionally landscaping is Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Stoff Report City of Renton Deportment of C nunity & Economic Development Report of November 1, 2016 Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Page 44 of 47 provided within the interior of the surface parking area, a large grass play area located on the east portion of the property, and within planter boxes proposed in the plaza and pedestrian walkway adjacent to the parent pick-up/drop-off zone. See FOF 23 -Landscaping and FOF 26 Overall Design-Landscape/Screening. I 1, CONCLUSIONS: 1. The subject site is located in the Residential Medium Density (MD), Residential High Density (HD), and Commercial Mixed Use (CMU) Comprehensive Plan designations and complies with the goals and policies established within these designations if all conditions of approval are met, see FOF 22. 2. The subject site is located in the Residential-8 (R-8), Residential-10 (R-10), Commercial Neighborhood (CN), and Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning designations. Through the PUD the applicant requests application of the CA zoning designation for the entire property. The proposal complies with the CA zoning and development standards established with this designation provided the applicant complies with City Code and conditions of approval, see FOF 23. 3. The proposal complies with the Critical Area Regulations provided the applicant complies with City Code and conditions of approval, see FOF 24. 4. The proposal complies with the Planned Urban Development provided the applicant complies with City Code and conditions of approval, see FOF 25, 26, and 28. 5. There are adequate public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed development, see FOF 27. 6. The proposal complies with the Design District D overlay regulations provided the applicant complies with City Code and conditions of approval, see FOF 29. 7. The proposal complies with Conditional Use Permit decisional criteria provided the applicant complies with City Code and conditions of approval, see FOF 30. 8. Key features, which are integral to this project include the following PUD modification recommendations: RMC Code Citation Required Standard Recommended Modification RMC 4-2-100 Zoning There are four (4) separate tables The application of a single zoning Standards Tables dealing with the various land use classification (CA) and categories and zones which contain corresponding Design District 'D' for the minimum and, in some cases, the entire site for the purposes of maximum requirements of the zone. review. RMC 4-2-120A 20-foot maximum side yard along a Exceed maximum side yard along N. Development street setbacks 3'' St. to provide a 72-foot setback Standards for and N. 4th St. to provide a 135-foot Commercial Zoning setback. A 52-foot and 115-foot Designations modification, respectively. RMC 4-6-0GOF Street Residential Access Street Standards Staff Recommended Alteration - Standards for Garden Ave N. Maintain existing curb-line, 12-foot sidewalks, street trees in tree wells, and bulb-outs. Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of -munity & Economic Development Report of November 1, 2016 - RMC 4-6-060F Street Principal Arterial Street Standards for Standards -Staff N. 3'' St. Recommended RMC 4-3-100 Urban Parking shall be located so that no Design Standards surface parking is located between a building and the front property line; and/or a building and the side property line (when on a corner lot). RMC 4-3-100 Urban Plaza located at Park Ave N. and N. 4th Design Standards St. RMC 4-3-100 Urban Any facade visible to the public shall Design Standards be comprised of at least fifty percent (50%) transparent windows and/or doors for at least the portion of the ground floor facade that is between four feet (4') and eight feet (8') above ground (as measured on the true elevation). RMC 4-4-070 Ten-feet of on-site landscaping is Landscaping required along all public street frontages, with the exception of areas for required walkways and driveways or those projects with reduced setbacks. RMC 4-4-080F, Based on the proposed number of Parking, Loading, and employees, a minimum and maximum Driveway Regulations of 60 parking spaces would be required/allowed in order to meet code. RMC 4-4-080F, 1 off-street parking space for each bus Parking, Loading, and of a size sufficient to park each bus Driveway Regulations RMC 4-4-080!, The width of any driveway shall not Parking, Loading, and exceed thirty feet {30') exclusive of Driveway Regulations the radii of the returns or the taper section, the measurement being made parallel to the centerline of the street roadway. RMC 4-4-090, Refuse The gate opening for any separate and Recyclables building or other roofed structure Standards used primarily as a refuse or recyclables deposit area/collection point shall have a vertical clearance of at least fifteen feet (15'). Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Page 45 of 47 Curb-bulbs and on-street parking along the north side of N. 3'' St. Eight parking spaces are proposed between the building and side property line along N. 3'' St. Relocate plaza to front pf building at Park Ave N and N. 3'' St. Frosted glass in areas along the south far;ade. No street frontage landscaping in areas between the public plaza and street. The applicant proposed a total of 83 spaces within surface parking areas. The proposal exceeds the maximum parking stall requirements by 23 spaces. Bus Parking is proposed on Garden Ave N. Driveway width on N. 3'' St. proposed at 52-feet. Driveway exceeds standards by 22-feet to accommodate delivery truck. Proposed enclosure that provides a vertical clearance of 9.5-feet. City of Renton Department of C munity & Economic Development Report of November 1, 2016 I }. RECOMMENDATION: Hearing Examiner Recommendation WAl6-000692, PPUD, CU-H Page 46 of 47 Staff recommends approval of the New Sartori Elementary School File No. LUA16-000692, as depicted in Exhibit 2, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures issued as part of the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance issued by the Renton School District on October 21, 2016 2. The applicant shall record a formal Lot Combination in order to ensure the proposed buildings are not built across property lines. The instrument shall be recorded prior to building permit approval. 3. The applicant shall submit revised site plans that locate the covered play area structure in an area compliant with the 15-foot minimum rear setback. The plans shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 4. The applicant shall submit a detailed landscape plan that provides specific detail for the number or types of trees and shrubbery to the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval complying with applicable sections of RMC 4-4-070. 5. The applicant shall submit a detailed plan set identifying the location and screening provided for roof mounted equipment. The revised plan set shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to building permit approval. 6. The applicant shall provide an updated arborist report that provides analysis for the potential to retain trees 29, 30, and 31 on the tree retention plan with the new Garden Ave N. cross section. The trees shall be retained if viable; otherwise replacement at the required 6:1 caliper inch ration will be required for any of the three (3) trees that cannot be retained. The arborist report shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 7. The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan that identifies the replacement trees meeting the replacement requirements of RMC 4-4-130. The landscape plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 8. The applicant shall submit a source statement certified by a professional engineer or geologist licensed in the State of Washington meeting the requirements of RMC 4-4-060N.4 or provide documentation that fill will be obtained from a Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) approved source as allowed by RMC 4-4-060N.4.g. The source statement or WSDOT documentation shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 9. The applicant shall submit a truck loading diagram that attempts to narrow the proposed 52-foot wide driveway and curb radii to the minimum width needed to accommodate the delivery truck. If the driveway cannot be narrowed, then the applicant shall provide a design that includes a pedestrian refuge area in the middle of the driveway that shortens the crossing distance. The diagram and/or plan shall be submitted to the Current Planning Project Manager prior to issuing the construction permit. 10. The applicant shall submit revised site and utility plans for Garden Ave. N. that provide the curb-line maintained in its existing location, 12-foot sidewalks, street trees in tree grates, and curb-bulbs meeting city standards at the intersections of N. 4th St. and N. 3rd St. The plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager and Engineering Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit approval. 11. The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan that replaces all five trees shown to be retained on Park Ave N. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. Sartori ES_ 16-000692 _ HEX Staff Report City of Renton Department of -munity & Economic Development Report of November 1, 2016 Hearing Examiner Recommendation WA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Page 47 of 47 12. The applicant shall submit revised site and utility plans for N. 3rd St. that provides curb-bulbs meeting the City's standard on the property's frontage at Park Ave N and Garden Ave N. thereby creating a row of on-street parking along the north side of N. 3rd St. The plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 13. The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan that provides the new street frontage section along N. 3rd St. and either the retention of the four (4) trees if possible or the replacement of the trees due to the modified street frontage. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 14. The applicant shall create a public outreach sign in coordination with City of Renton to communicate with road users, the general public, area residences and businesses, and appropriate public entities about project information; road conditions in the work zone area; and the safety and mobility effects of the work zone. The sign shall be placed on site prior to construction commencement. 15. The applicant shall submit a detailed plaza plan that identifies compliance with lighting levels of four (4) foot candles on the ground, minimum seating areas, and other applicable pedestrian -oriented space qualifiers in RMC 4-9-lSOlc. The detailed plaza plan shall also include detail cut sheets of the bench, planter boxes, and any other streetscape elements that will be provided. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 16. The applicant shall provide a revised refuse and recycling enclosure plan that provides a detail cut- sheet of the self-closing door mechanism. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 17. The applicant shall submit a revised site plan that provides the proposed material for the pedestrian pathway in the south parking lot. The plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 18. The applicant shall provide detailed specifications for all site furniture and art, in order to ensure durable, vandal-and weather-resistant materials are used. The specifications shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior building permit approval. 19. The applicant shall provide additional articulation and/or modulation features on the north and south end of Park Ave N. fa,ade and the west side of the N. 4th St. facade. Staff has suggested the applicant wrap the curtain wall around the corner along the south end of the Park Ave N. fa,ade. Artwork, additional glazing, and modulation are suggested on the north end of the Park Ave N fa,ade and west side of the N. 4th St. fa,ade. A revised elevation plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 20. The applicant shall submit revised elevations that provide increased height or the perception of increased height on the ground floor. The plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 21. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan that adequately provides for public safety without casting excessive glare on adjacent properties; provides ornamental lighting fixtures; and otherwise complies with exterior lighting requirements of RMC 4-4-075. 22. The applicant shall submit a materials board subject to the approval of the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. The board shall include color and materials for the fa,ade treatments, raised planters, siding, windows/frames, and canopies. Sartori ES_16-000692_HEX Staff Report ® EXHIBITS Project Name: Project Number: New Sartori Elementary School LUA16-000692,PPUD,CUP-H Date of Hearing Staff Contact Project Contact/Applicant Project Location November 8, 2016 Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner Lisa Klein, AHBL, 2215 N. 3Qth St., 315 Garden Ave N. #300, Tacoma, WA 98043 The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit 1: HEX Report, dated November 1, 2016 Exhibit 2: Site Plan Exhibit 3: Landscape Plan Exhibit 4: Neighborhood Detail Map Exhibit 5: Notice of SEPA Consultation Prepared by Renton School District Exhibit 6: City SEPA Comment Letter to District Exhibit 7: Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance issued by the Renton School District Exhibit 8: Elevations Exhibit 9: Tree Retention Plan Exhibit 10: Stormwater Technical Information Report (TIR) prepared by AHBL, dated August 2016 Exhibit 11: Transportation Report prepared by Heffron Transportation, dated August 26, 2016 Exhibit 12: Arborist Report prepared by Washington Forestry Consultants, dated August 23, 2016 Exhibit 13: Geotechnical Report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences Incorporated, dated August 4, 2016. Exhibit 14: Email Comments from Angie Laulainen Exhibit 15: City Staff Response to Angie Laulainen Exhibit 16: Carbon Copy Email Comments Exhibit 17: Tree Retention Worksheet Completed by Applicant Exhibit 18: Screening Details (Garbage Enclosure) Exhibit 19: Concurrency Memo Prepared by Brianne Bannworth Development Engineering Manager, dated October 31, 2016 Exhibit 20: Civil Grading and Drainage Plan Exhibit 21: Civil Utility and Surfacing Plan Exhibit 22: Boundary and Topographic Survey Exhibit 23: Floor Plans Exhibit 24: Perspective Views (Architectural Renderings) Exhibit 25: Advisory Notes to Applicant Exhibit 26: Affidavit of Posting and Mailing Exhibit 27: Revised Architectural Renderings ------~RentOil ® ,......,.,.., I ....._ .......... 111i1t1t CNiCA ........... ....... ~ ' Dlalrl9I ~ .,..... LIUD SCALE; 1"=20'-0' ,/ttJ O' 10' 20' 40' ~ ,2,,, e.~ 18,0, 7'!t, 100'll, -:::PUC ,o~-,,., ,30'7-..0! j 1D88.,..., 103'1'""" ('.N-l '") ~~ e:-=' --. = iJ. _ _)) 1,t,n•i;:t"'"' \ NiA M,A 151001 1Sle!;!t 2Dfeat (PM-1111 -·-Y.-.1 Hi A WA 20 feel 20 feel 20 fBat (Plft-10 -·------------- --" ----1 ) w i~-- b• ~~ z ~ ~~ :t:_a __ _ b~ ;ti ~~ - w " 00::0"-' J:j::...J~ . w-c,u o~z111 ;~~~ u.1~<::i z • f \!:lg ---GARDEN-AVENUE NORTH •• ---0-- ~ e: .c ~~ N -• ~ W< Ce •• " .... Q. BUS LOAD / UNLOAD ~ e:: 1-4 TOTAL BUS PARKING SPACES ~ ,- (11 FULL-SIZE BUSES A.ND J st,ORT BUSES/VANS) .!!:i • !/1"1 ' T I 6 FT HT CHAINUNK f fff#}tiM:@\W/\'i!i:Mi:l 1,,,,, , ,;,; ::,;i,,ii&:j;,;;";;J,l!\s~,,S ,,, s0J!i}', I -I I I ! I I I~ 1 Ii' 1' ,I,,·~ I \.i· . 22· t·; -~~ '~ ~-- "\ EW 10' l'!ERIMETER~% i···t PARKlti(, LOT ,. , L..AND~CAPE '· • • SIDEWALK ,•.• .' ,,. ,· 1r1·-. ,;,., NEW 8'· WOE '•~•' !STREET ~ONTAGE I~ "'I ~8 i~ a: ' ~· \il i g li I -m,"I I r, I I I I I I L I I r-- L -<>i -<> ._ 24'x«· lcoVERED I I I I I I I I I I I / ---j ~" / I \ I GRASS Fl[L~ / 140' * 250 \ I / "---J------ 1 I OPEN SP ... fE / GRASS _L -- "-----" -r -::;--;,.RD-~UR~CE-/ '--~- , : PLAY ARU -<> \8" H'r. CONC. --_/_;F;:~~Aµ._ --r 3-STORY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BUILDING J9,9J::! Sf BLDG FOO'IPRINT 79,000 TOTAL SF" ALL FLO~S 1 I I I _j I I I _J I APPROX. 1 8' HT. COVERED 22 PARKING STALLS ~ I PLAY AREA 4-0' X 110' I I ,o· Mr SCREEN ""'- 10" HT SCREEN wm -<>: 25'X26' RECYCLE:/ REFUSE AREA 'MTH 8' HT. SCIIEEN AND. 10' HT, ROOF r·-1·· --~(' -e-~ .~T~-·~· ! I i .. FLAG~ ..,..:.-~~~~ES .... f 'i ~-71 ~~;~ ;: : .. .! - I ec,W,rffl· , · · PLAZ~ ! WAITING -1 AREA -<> -k .. , ...... .,._ . .,_.,,.:..:,•"""'''''' ·.,.,..'.,.,. ..... _ . ....,_iif.•-'-'-'-'-'-'±l £±ii£· ·---·~·fl---~"-.._...._ !....a..•--!..•-t.,$-'--t !-~ ·~::t!,.·:r.:!'.:.. ... ~~""'·"'·:·1.~Aa ... _~~. ~ . . . . . . . • . • -..... f10,31s'sh ' ! -, : . -: :PLANTERS/ ~-~-BENCHES ~ , .... _.,, \_ ~ ~ ' 7 w:w NORTH ON pAffit N AND \4£W TO AIRPORT FRCM UPP£R lHU. EXIST PUBLIC ~ /'~ ''\( "'{\ ~·; {:::'.::.::'.J'.:.:.:.:.:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:,:;:::::::::::;::::•/m•m:;·;~.......-............. ~----:..,---.,....,---r-T""L" '--~i· .-• -m ',',',',',,. • t,, !·;} '~~ ;} , ,•,' '-'¥f·' ;.;.;.; ;.; ;.; ;.; ,, ,-,-.-.-.· -·-·.• ~ .. ~ \:: PARK AVENUE NORTH -.~ ~~ •• w< -~~ ~"'e: E)UST PUBLIC ._TRANSIT STOP_ -~~ . ' ' -I ''1' ,0 / ...... 11•ti: •• ',Ji.·'\ ,::,. I if./ :.· I j ' ' . -~ ) ,i{i / .. k;;J .... '\: ·::: tu w a: ...__ 187111111 vn-.i, !flal!-A¥olll ~N.. 151ee! 1Steet 15!eel 1~1lltll ~N'::,'lSII "''°'nN3'~ nleat -1 · ---------+-------------------0--c'cr·"·'-..._s-I 11711et v ... -.. ' """"'_,...1111 ~II. WA WA I 20fwl 20-~~ N,...i,.7' nfNI -I +----_,11:r"Sll ~ ·~ :::::. 50,0, WAo 65% 6$% i::::=) --··----=-&5._ 70'!i, NIA NIA 65.N ~ C•l9»11'l =-: 251Ct'JM 2-lSIMI 50-311Dr1NI t11onn I ttag111 SO INI -------··--· ------· ";_--:;:' 24fMI 2,4fe,ef N.'A N!A 45fllt LOlCOVERAGE ANALYSIS TOTAL SITE LOT COVERAGE TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURF"-CES: MAIN BUILDING COVERAGE:. 1ST FL 2ND FL: 3RD FL TOTAL DU1!l00R STORAGE COVERAGE, 229.996.8 SF 1J9.J57 SF JJ.9JJ Sf" 2J,626 SF 21.J82 SF 78.941 SF 120 SF tiif ~. .., I I LANDSCAPE ANALYSIS TOTAL LANDSCAPE OFT-SITE:: TOTAL LANOSCAPE ON-SITE TOTAL P"-RKING LOT LANDSCAPE. 9107 SF 75.277 SF ~l a: 0 z INTERIOR PERIMETER PARKING ANALYSIS P"-RKING ST"-LLS REQO BY CODE, (1 PER EMPLOYfE) TOTAL PARKING STAUS PROVIDED: STANDARD (9'X20") COMP"-CT {9'X16') COMPACT {8.5X16") ADA {9"X20"} 11,645 Sf" 4.782 Sf" 6.863 SF 60 " " ' " • 'ill NEW 8" SIDEWAL.K LEGEND lliEw 10' IOE PERIMETER LOT LANDSC, ' ' I I / f"' I l1 I i j I I~ t mm PEDESTRIAN WALKWAYS wa FIRE ACCESS 1:::::::::::::1 CJ CJ CJ -<> LANDSCAPE AREAS GRASS son SURFACE PLAY AREAS CONCRETE SIDEWALK SITE / BUILDING ACCESS ANO Tll:AFFIC FLOW QUEUING LOC"-TIONS -6" HT CHAlN LINK FENCE -----DEDICATION LINE -·---~ EXISTING PROPERTY LINE ,,-.... , I + I ,...__I' STREET CENTERLINE EXISTING TREES TO BE SAYED "NO PROTECTED 11 rr· ~ s,·-~~-~, c,, [ m J (F .--------, Exhibit 2 ~~ ~~ A 1SITE PLAN PUD Submittal i ~ .- ~ .-,: : 1: Cl)':. :\:. ::J~ •· :..~ =-= !i.....: ;· ,. 0) ,. •• ,. (1) ;; ,. .. +-' ,. ,. & 0 ,. a: ;~ "-:i ::, 0 c,:: l? z C, ii ;;; ... ii Q z <{ ~ II V, i:u ~ -- 0 I.; -0 u .. .c ... ·c: ... -u 11\i Ill U) c ~ C 0 1: 0 CV ~ -0 C z .c cu ! u E U) C cu .. C iii ~ 0 C 'C: .. -1:? C 0 .. cu t: "' IX CV ~ U) "' Date: 8/29/2016 Jab No 21807.00 o,_e., "' CheekeG by· "" RIN1.ion1 """ Dellc'1pllon Site Plan L100 SCALE: 1.._20'-0" BO'NEI) O' 10' 20' 40' ·~ . ..; ~ ~:=;-..._ ·~·· ~ r -~-='~~ .. ··.-.... -. --.. ~~ .... ~. -··-: .. -:-J;:-fP-.... --~o;·~ -~~ ·: .. ',$,-: .J{) --. ·1··1' ' l js .. . .,. --·· ' ' ' ~~· &-' , .. , -/. --,-- .... @,-· -.-·-"¥ ,r-.~-1>,' . .,_."'·'' "' ' .' '. i ;J i ---,,.~---,,. --~;-" " ...,...,..,..._--~,; :11.:m'~ ·'" --~ ~i LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE SYMBOi.. BOTANICAL/COMMON NAME [TREET TREES -MIN. 2" CAL TIUA COROATA 'GREENSAM:" '""",..,.. - CMPINUS 8£T\JlUS T ASTlQA TA' PYRAMIDAi.. EUROPEAN HORNBEAM CINl(O BIi.OBA 'AUl\JMN COLO' MAINDENHAlft TffEE PYRUS CALERYANA 'AUl\JtilN 8l..Al[" AUT\JMN 9LAZE PEAR ST"YRAX OBASSIA fAAGRANT SNOYteElL I ,_ , I: 3 ·o D:: c D:: < ..., gQJ , $ ~ '. 20·-·· ~--"9',_ "'~-~~li i .. j . _ i.""'~ ,· , .(. ·· A.,..,,..,,. · .• ~ ;~ Sfil , ~DEN AVENUE NORTH -.-, -.-:,;l:!:S .. I~ ~ ~ ·~ .. ~:.~i. ·--, --~---·-; · , --· -.. -.-~t;-· ~~ '• Jy C ,, -. ~. _ 20· f " ,... -~· .:.:; I :svs I.O~ / Uf.L0,-\0 .• -.. --4 --... , Cl.EM'"VI..........,. ;,~ •. TOTACS!JS PARKING SPACES .. -, . _., AREA "':'""'j " ' !>' ·m· .,, ® DECIDUOUS TRCES -MIIN. 7' HT. "1TH J-muN<S AMELAHCHIER X 'AUllJMN BRl.UANCE' SER'Aa:BERftY --,~ ; r.rt.r1T:1\ I f .. ;f1 ~ "'l . ~ ~,, (11 f"ULL7"SJZE'· BUSES AND J SH~~jB-~~S~t:~\~t! aet• T7J"T"'.....Tii.\ SHRUBS MIN. 2 CAL CCJrHAINER """'·-- '\ { ... . > u ' ,., ' i?,g::u,., '.·: t.· ;r'll q { ·~ I t· • i '/.I), td i~ tr, 1j, 1. Ii lit 'It '!I: • ;P;NEW 10' PERIM£ '}~· PARKING LOT ,ft LANDtCAPE )~ N~ !I' • S1D¢WALK NEW sl WIDE STREET ~ONTAG.irlr)t:,.._U I-•/", w, w. ;~,; U) ~ i!: I ... ,, ~~ 0:: ~ I. en H,: ~AINLINK ~--' I I I I I I I · 1 y-.,_.j___ i--~ f ' • ~-~~.',!-.: I 1/!<,1. ! c1 I '"1'"' ."' . \ . · · . . . l· · I I . 140-'rl( 25.0' ; . ,. : -I; ,...., . . I I I [' -'",: \ , I .· / J''. ·.I·.. I 1. I I · ·. I L l , .I' I . I_ ~l,,J --------~~ c:~9 ' ------.-~-- • :2A i ' ~\I, ' -,--i~ ' 2s·x2s· RECYCLE/ REFUSE AREA W,Tl1 !I" HT. SCREEr. AND 10' 1-!T. ROCJI' ~ -.·.;.: ~: '.::: :-: ::: . ' ..• ; .... :::::. : . ::: ::=: .':," ... ; ' ........... :. ::::: ~~~<.; '.·;. :· ~. :-. • ., ''i' l '-/i i .1; . I ·, 1 EX "~' f"'" '"' TO R Al ' .r I ,, 1000 Su:IMETER \ I l •· '-': :, r::~k' i I ' . >/ .~">(_;EX'-11" :. NASH 'fr ' JslfiEE :' ,,_ ,;ro,aet I ,';,w•, 1·~· ! ,; ' . .'W ,., J f i '! '.'!1, \ • 1::f.~l-·-'t'. f .. ;-....1,'1,. ' ,l, .,•0::1 !•'I r.f:'Q'"' ·· . ::1 ,:,: I : , ·h::l ·r·i, -,0: t d ·z • ( ·tJ l ·. '' ' .. )!90 s,,, p..iMM(TER '~ARKll'j 11* ',,I.ANOS PE< '!I-< ':I .,..,,., ' 11· ,..,,., , ' I · ' .?\,tw 1' . i WlfilE P~RIMETE .~ : Loj LAN ""f. KING NEW 6' if... TRUT FR Tat r,_·,...--..--·4 ~--·~! E'IE:RCREEN -WIN. 5Q,i; OF SHRIJBS MAHONIA ,t,QUlfa.JUM TAU. OM:GON CRAPE M'tfftCA CAUfORNICA PACIAC WAX M~n.E VACCINIUII OVAl\lM E'IE:RCA[[N HUCKLEBERRY ARBUTIJS UNEOO 'COMPACTA' OWARf" STRAWBERRY TREE LDNICOtA Pll£ATA PRIVET HON[VSUO(l£ DCCIOUOUS -MAX 5Q,i; OF SHRUBS CORNUS SERICEA 'ICELSE'l1' KELSEY DOGWOOD SYUPH<>RtCAAP0S At.SUS COMMON SNO'M:IEffftY ~AEA 8[T\Jt.lf0UA "TOR' ""'" Rfl!ES.....,_IM RED FLOVl£RINC CURRANT CROI.JNOCOWRS -MIN. MAHCHA REPDIS CR[[PlffC MAHONIA MAHONIA NE:RVOSA LOW ORE:GON MAHDNIA GAULTHERIA SHAU.ON SAW. POL YSTICHUM MUNITVM SWORD f£RN Bl..ECHNUM SPICNH DCEN F£RN AACHTOSTN'HYLOS UVA~URSI l(INNIIC...CX FRACARIA CHILOENSIS BEACH STRAWBERRY 4" PQTS CJ SEEDED LAWN /'--..., EXISTlNC lRffS TO BE I + I SAYED AND PROT£CT£D \ / ,_ I 'C 1 _ 01·. LEGEND ·"''''" ... ' " :. ,.,-. • ·-,~. mm PEDESTRIAN WAUCWAYS .. ,,, . . ' = ' ••0 '1 -~M, ' ,,,, = •--•- -' ,s., ----="+--' -I'' '''' ----,t:t--.... ~-~~ -----"---------: 1.$: k;::~:d r=~~()T PERIMETER <.: J<,,. ,ii)· . . , --···-J ' 'ff1 ~ §§!it] AREAS l. ~AR-, ~N ~· 0 • • '\_, ii ~: 0 "~:=: PARICIHC LOT INTERIOR --•, . ~ ( v--"" . = -- EX 9"f::.ALLERt Pt;;AR .J;iv.i: . . .1,. ···71', ' ' ,•••. ' -= ·---I I O ,.,.. -•f S · . ,• -' ' CJ (ma:s. SHRUBS. GROUNOCOVER l · j O Rl!:M~N, "'b Q' ,x 7" :f '-~ , I • ""' """ ) . .i. t! -ffi~ """''"' ,, oa"c;A'R'!'./p .1-= ~-...,.~ '1 t Aa.PLAYAREAS 3-STORY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BUILDING ' J9,9Jl..$F BLDG FOOT?RINT 79,000ITQTAL SF ALL FLOOR.S q 24'X4~' c0\.£RED WAITING "" ·-·· .. ··-·-···-zt§ .•. T.O ~£MAIN .'. TO REMAIN E_,, ,}-. EX __ e· c~RY PEA.Fl . • ' ' •• --- ... ., .• '' ... '., I . ,ii"' 1'EE ' EX.8' CA<ij' RY·f>t:.AR \ STORM WATER F£A1URES " ' •'-•,· •-•• • • ... • ,,.... -~,).-.. ' ( ARE,-,::; . . • -' '""' '°" ' • ---· ·1 ,e •~·" _.,. ~ ' -• • --.. ~c,.!.c1~:.: 1 c'...:c --i: , , -'! · --,.1·~ ' / · -... 1. '' · ,. .I, -• · " , , A~,, ,oo~ ""• . -• 1 •• ~"'-----DEDICATION LINE • """"""' "-'" ·----">----. ' ~ ' ' --·--,--,J.-.......-.~----·-·"' -"'"':° 7,'' -• .,,~, '~·;'~ .. ;'.~~ ,' .··.1 .. --·~· ' . ' I Exhibit 3 1' .~k:,:~c~oo ~r·" "" N:;'~~~ ~~A·;tu ,<;~N PUD Submittal ' ~ .. ~ ,· ,; ~ 1: (/)~ :-::; ,. ::J~ :f! =~ "-: • ,. O> ,. •• ,• .• .. (]) " , . .. +-' j~ .• f;;. !: a: !:'. "- !l :::> 0 0::: l!) z C1 I! iii "' ·, Q !, z <{ ::? i II -- 0 t:; ts 0 .. .c .. ·;: ... -u l .!! u, 0 r!" C 0 1: 0 Ill ~ -0 C z .c G) !I u E u, C G) 1 C iii 0 C -·;: '2 C 0 .. G) t: " 0:: "' Ill -u, .., °"" """'" Job No 21607.00 DrawnB1 NL CMec:l«ld by NH Revtllkln• ,.. C>ee,;~ptlcn Landscape Plan L-201 • Pil/"'' ·H~DOtLQD -q• .,.~ ,~--' ~~ '=s<l,','"'"*'--~ --'·""="-""'="' ~·• " •'""'"'" ~,,_.,,..,,,.,,,,..~.,.,.~·-,'--"<,_,~"""~===--=w-· .,.,_,-.,,,,•»,=,.__,_,....,___,,~,~,·-~,-,-..,.--»---,-~,..-~A-," ,, ,e •• "s" ··•, •,,._,, ••• , ~-""'"'-'"""'-""-=->Wf1,,.,..,,,.,...?W-"C"'ffl< •-<'<'••""'-'-·W"""C ,,,,,,-~~>'V">'o/C, ,·•·=·,,,•w,• ,,,,·,.,>,so ""''"''" •»' ,. ~,,._,,,,,••,,>, ,,_ '-«' ..... 0. c,> ~,\ce"~'°''"'""'"' '"'""""'"'~C' fntegr.~r~rURf Legend ..11111111. = = Proposed Lot Line & Outer Boundary -ttlllllt-' D Parcels N 0 200 400 Feet A Exhibit 4 SARTORI ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 315 N GARDEN AVE, RENTON, WA 98057 FACILITIES, OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE CENTER CAPITAL PROJECTS OFFICE 7812 S 124th Street, Seattle, WA 98178-4830 425-204-4403, Fax 425-204-4476 NOTICE OF SEPA CONSULTATION The Renton School District has issued a SEPA Checklist and associated documents for comment prior to issuing a threshold determination for the construction of Sartori Elementary School. Project Name: Sartori Elcmcnt<lry School Name of Applicant: Renton School Oistric1 No. 403, Facilities Department Notice of SEPA Consultation Posted: August 24, 2016 Site Location: The school will be located at 315 Garden Ave N, Renton. WA. It is comprised of tax parcel numbers: 756460-0170, - 0180, -0181, -IJ 182, -0183, -0184. and 722400-0620, -0615, -0610, -0600. -0590. -0580. -0595. -0605. It is located in Section O 17 Township 23 Range 5E Project Description: The new Sartori Elementary School (SES) will he located on the site of Renton School District':-. Sartori Education Center (SEC) at 315 Garden Ave Nin Renton. Washington. The site is a full block bounded by Park Ave N to the west. Garden Ave N to the east, N 4th St to the north. and N Jrd St to the south. The new school is heing developed as a choice school to house a specialized prng.ram and is anticipated tu serve a maximum of 650 students from kindergarten to 5th grade. The school will be the first elementary school in Renton School District that is in close proximity to the downtown core and is heing developed as a civic and community asset to the city center where it is located. The choice program will have a neighborhood boundary and also draw students from the whole school district. The new three story building will he approximately 76,000 square feet in size and located fronting the western/Park Avenue side of the block. In addition to classrooms. the school will contain a gymnasium and library. The grounds will indudc a hardscape play area. play equipment on soft surface. and a grass play field that are designed for shared use with the community. A public plaza is located at the main entry at the corner of Park Ave N and N 3rd St. A total of approximately 80 vehicle parking spaces will he provided in three parking areas. One parking lot is accessed off N 4th SL and also allows for convenient parent drop-off/pick-up. Two visitor parking areas arc accessed from N 3rd St. School buses will park along the west side of Garden Ave N for loading and unloading. Requested Approvals: City of Renton Permits/Approvals: Preliminary and Hnal Planned Unit Development: Conditional Use Permit: Site Phm Review: Clearing. Grading & Site Development Permit; Building Permit; Fire System Permit; Electrical Permit Other Agency Permits/Approvals: SEPA determination by the Renton School District; National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) by the Washington State Department of Ecology Identification of Existing Environmental Documents: The Construction Stormwalcr General Notice of Intent was published in the Seattle Times on April 25, 2016 and May 2. 2016: PBS Engineering and Environmental is preparing the necessary environmental documentation that is required for the site demolition permits; Geotcchnical Rcporl prepared by Associated Earth Scicnn.-s. August, 2016: Arborist Report prepared by Washington Forestry Cnnsultants August 2016: Survey. prepared by AHBL, Inc. Febrnary 24. 2016: Tree Retention Worksheet and Plan prepared by Weisman Associates August 2016: Transportation Technical Report prepared by Heffron Transportation. Inc. August 2016: Drainage Report prepared by AHHL August 2016: Light Spill Analysis to he prepared. Copies of the documents pcr1aining to this SEPA consultation are a\·ailahle for review during regular husiness hours al the Renton School District Facilities Department at the address listed below. School District Contact: Rick Stracke. Executive Director of Facilities. Mc1incenancc. Operations. Safety. and Security Designated SEPA Responsible Official Renton School OistricL 7812 South I 24th Street Scallle. WA 98178-4830 Please submit your written comments by 5:00 pm, September 2J, 2016 to Rick Stracke at the address abmie. Launching Learning to Last a Lifetime 7812 S 124" Street, Seattle Washington 98178 / p.425.204.4403 / 1.425.204.4476 www.rentonschools.us ------------RENTON Exhibit 5 Denis Law Mayor September30,2016 Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Rick Stracke, Executive Director of Facilities, Maintenance, Operations, Safety, and Security Designated SEPA Responsible Official Renton School District 7812 South 124th Street Seattle, WA 98178-4830 VIA Email: richard.stracke@rentonschools.us SUBJECT: SEPA Comments for Sartori School Dear Mr. Stracke, Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Checklist for the proposed Sartori Elementary School project. The Renton School District is acting as the Lead Agency for the SEPA process as allowed per WAC 197-11-050. City of Renton will be processing the land use permits necessary for the proposal. We have reviewed the Final SEPA Checklist and offer the following comments: Project Description. The description of the proposal in the final SEPA Checklist indicates the proposed school building as 76,000 square feet (sf), while the land use application submitted to City of Renton identifies the building as 79,000 sf. Critical Areas. The City's COR mapping database shows the subject property is within a High Seismic area. We request that this Critical Area be noted in the SEPA Checklist. Transportation/Pedestrian Safety. The proposal will result in an increase in pedestrians in the vicinity of the school. Therefore, the City requests mitigation for potential impacts to pedestrians and to increase pedestrian safety. Further, we request that the mitigation measures listed below be included in the SEPA Threshold Determination and be subject to City of Renton review and approval prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. • Installation of school flasher speed limit signage. The location of the signage would be determined during the City's Construction/Utility Permit review process. • Installation of radar sign(s) that provide vehicle speed. The location of the signage would be determined during the City's Construction/Utility Permit review process. • Installation of curb bulbs on Garden Ave N. at N. 3'' St. and N. 41 " St. to reduce pedestrian crossing width. • Preparation of a plan to be distributed to students and families that identifies safe walking routes to school and crossing guard locations. Transportation/Off-Site Impacts. The proposal would potentially result in vehicle queuing onto North 4•h Street at the beginning and end of the school day. In addition, off-site parking impacts to the .-----.. Exhibit 6 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov Rick Stracke September 30, 2016 Page 2 surrounding neighborhood may occur during special school events. The City requests the following mitigation measures to address these concerns. The mitigation measures listed below should be subject to the review and approval of the City of Renton prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. • Preparation of an operational plan that provides preventive measures for of/site queuing onto N. 4th Street during pick-up and drop-off. • Preparation of a parking plan for special events that may require more parking than is available onsite. If you have any questions regarding the City's comments, please contact me at jhenning@rentonwa.gov or Matt Herrera, Senior Planner, at mherrera@rentonwa.gov. Sincerely, JcwtJ Cr0 U {VU d/ Jennifer T. Henning, AICP Planning Director Cc: C.E. 'Chip' Vincent, CED Administrator Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Administrator Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Matt Herrera, Senior Planner Ian Fitz-James, Development Engineer Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Jim Seitz, Transportation Director ,. On the 25th day of October, 2016, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Notice of Public Hearing documents. This information was sent to: Rick Stracke Owner Lisa Klein Contact Parties of Record See Attached '"'"""'" ofS..odec}, ~ ~ STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Sabrina Mirante ,,,,''~111111 111 11 signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for t~~t;~ 0 f.it~l,-,11 mentioned in the instrument. -. = Ci ~,·./-:,<:,\ · ":-1:0}.,1 ~ \ ~ ?~ 01A9 ~~ / \ ;: :§ "-, -~ ~~ z i Dated: Sartori Elementary School LUA16-000692 template -affidavit of service by mailing ------~Itent0Il ® OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner on November 8, 2016 at 11 :00 AM, in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington, to consider the following petitions: SARTORI ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FILE NO. LUA16-000692, Location: 1200 N 3rd St Description: The Renton School District (applicant) has submitted applications for Hearing Examiner Planned Urban Development, Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit, and Lot Combination approvals for the construction of a new 3-story 79,000 square foot Sartori Elementary School. The subject property consists of 14 contiguous parcels that are bound by Park Ave N., Garden Ave N., N 4th St., and N 3rd St. The 5.28 acre subject property is an entire block located within the Residential-8 (R-8), R- 10, Commercial Neighborhood (CN), and Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning designations. The existing Sartori Education Center and surrounding residential and commercial structures have been or will be demolished. The Renton School District is the lead agency for State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Review. For a copy of the Preliminary Staff Report to the Hearing Examiner go to w_ww.rentonwa.gov/business/de_f.;:lult.aspx?id=5458 and locate the project by the above referenced LUA Number; a link will be available to download the report. If you have any questions, please call 4ZS-430-6578. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ON THE SCHEDULED HEARING, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER'S OFFICE AT 425-430-6510 DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification. North Renton Neighborhood Association PO Box 326 Renton. WA 98057 Angie Laulainen 314 Garden Ave N Renton. WA 98055 Debbie Natelson 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit B Renton, WA 98057 Jessica Roach 132 Pelly Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Mr. & Mrs. Poquette 328 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Pamela Thomas 341 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Rick Stracke Renton School District No. 403 7812 5 124th St Seattle, WA 98178 Sarah & Tim Bishop 222 Burnett Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Wyman Dobson 821 N 1st St Renton, WA 98057 Akane Yamaguchi 1008 N Riverside Dr Renton. WA 98057 Beth Palmer 114 Wells Ave S Renton, WA 98057 Dolores Haves 326 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Kathleen Booher 809 N 2nd St Renton, WA 98057 Nancy Monahan 325 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Paul Rolinger 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit B Renton. WA 98057 Rochelle Krebs 121 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Scott Rice 345 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Alison Monges 221 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057-5612 BRIAN & MARY TWIDT 234 GARDEN AVE N RENTON, WA 98057 Genie Chase 227 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30th St, 300 Tacoma, WA Neil Sheesley 809 N 2nd St Renton, WA 98057 Randv Matheson 300 SW 7th St Renton, WA 98057 Sandy Smith 336 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Shelby Smith 524 Burnett Ave N Renton, WA 98057 FACILITIES, OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE CENTER CAPITAL PROJECTS OFFICE 7812 S 1241• Street, Seattle, WA 98178·4830 425-204·4403, Fax 425-204-4476 MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Sartori Elementary School DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The new Sartori Elementary School will be located on the site of Renton School District's Sartori Education Center at 315 Garden Ave Nin Renton, Washington. The site is a full block bounded by Park Ave N to the west, Garden Ave N to the east, N 4th St to the north, and N 3rd St to the south. The new school is being developed as a choice school to house a specialized program and is anticipated to serve a maximum of 650 students from kindergarten to 5th grade. The school will be the first elementary school in Renton School District that is in close proximity to the downtown core and is being developed as a civic and community asset to the city center where it is located. The choice program will have a neighborhood boundary and also draw students from the entire school district. The new three-story building will be approximately 79,000 square feet in size and located fronting the western/Park Avenue side of the block. In addition to classrooms, the school will contain a gymnasium and library. The grounds will include a hardscape play area, play equipment on soft surface, and a grass play field that are designed for shared use with the community. A public plaza is located at the main entry at the corner of Park Ave N and N 3rd St. A total of approximately 83 vehicle parking spaces will be provided in three parking areas. One parking lot is accessed off N 4th St and also allows for convenient parent drop- off/pick-up. Two visitor parking areas are accessed from N 3rd St. School buses will park along the west side of Garden Ave N for loading and unloading. Proponent and Lead Agency: Renton School District No. 403 Location of Proposal: Responsible Official: Facilities, Maintenance, and Operations Capital Projects Office The school will be located at 315 Garden Ave N, Renton, Washington. It comprises Tax Parcel Nos. 756460-0170, -0180, -0181, -0182, -0183, and -0184, and 722400-0620, -0615, -0610, -0600, -0590, -0580, -0595, and -0605. It is located in Section 017, Township 23, Range 5E. Rick Stracke, Executive Director of Facilities Planning Designated SEPA Responsible Official Renton School District No. 403 7812 South 124th Street Seattle, WA 98178-4830 richard.stracke@rentonschools.us Launching Learning to Last a Lifetime ----Renton@ Entire Document Available Upon Request 7812 S 124" Street, Seattle Washington 98178 / p.425.204.4403 / 1.425.204.4476 www.rentonschools.us Exhibit 7 ... r11/~· •n~OJ_QD integ r.~r~crURC PE;a;oR.ATIDt.nAJ \'ERIICAt..SI..NiKtrDE -----MHOJC PAAS. flfl!CX.Cl.ADOM NORTH 3RD STREET (S O UTH) ELE VAT ION 1116 ·=1·-o· ----f!fEfllO< CtADC!NG B --------f"HE"°JC 'ANEl ~TA.~ WALL GLA.li~G 1 --BffCK C'tADQ),'G 1 --COH.Ual.ITO ~El-'l SID~ -ICentone NORTH 4TH STREET (NORTH) ELEVATI ON 1/16';;;1'-0" Entire Document Available Upon Re quest SARTOR I ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 315 N GARDEN AVE, RENTON, WA 98057 120~ED SCAL E: 1 '=30'-0" 15' 30' 60' O' --o~ 1-w ~ Cl) ~ • ~ 0 z 11 0 i I L I l 1 1 i 1- j ! -t GARDEN AVENUE NORT H 'I ! j ! j l I j, j, I I j I ! i __. 0 =----,·-----/ LC:: .,,.. ~ ~-• ,~,--',A. i . '-.._ ' • ,,..... -~ '"+""" ,,;~-.. : j C-r \_ >< ; ' ---~";; 7,;i\16 : : ' " -----'I J2r~ X:-:--, I r\'( \2~~;.-, r-71 71/-r-11~1- f ~ \ _-,, ' -/ ! ' --~ ' I I "\') ' ' ' 'Cl ' / "..,;: ! I / '-' J ' I · 0 1 ' . ' : -1 ; ( ),( \ 22 PAAKING ' j -: -' ! ,7 ' "'~ ., , '" ~ ~ o · I i 34 Y _,, I ,, I ' ~r-,..._ I • Y' : ; 1 I i I I l . g '\ I I ' ' ' ' ' -' c-1 I i ------\•--_, -I ' I J ' I i ;!l ' . -, ' ~ , I ' ~-._ -I , cl O ' -: -' ' ! / V J ' \-----, I I j i -~1 ~~ ~.;: i ~M, ' ; I ' " :-'.. ,m I / ./1!! I [_; . ' ~-'. o ~ -L -:.J }a/ ,' ·;_; \-.6 I /) !C ---' , r-' -'c-1'rn ~ :_: '., '-, I-•-r '-..l:l/. / J -' ' '"1 ' ' '-, ., \ / /J I I .. , ' , .. ---.. . -, : ; _ _,.1 C' ~ ! ; _! ,;;:iI-)S~~"- 0 &¥H°'*'-' -, ;---; --':.":..'£'/@--.... _0 ° 1 t. / /: l; j o ;p.::;J.:;::B~ ,f,:'.tJ::JJj:j:'.:'.~, -· ----' , ! I Ll~V _-T_ I /J .L j :,~_:::;:~~~~~ . . • 1p-:--:-:-:--'-'-..;~~\. ..-----·-<' • i ·.· . .. 'I~ » + ,-; ! • .. ~ 'il1'"~~nill-f;,::c:::;.;-,c:":\,,//'; ;: : U PARKING ~ > ' , ! 'a>O · ' , "" • . ' " · -, "-•':-0,""''"':'f-' ' ~ ~~, , , . . ta:':'JCC':"CC" :· ' ;,,c;c, ; .::=:..., ..,.;:::, -, -' -. .l I ' ' ";;::-~-~~--I ' r.~.wi -\ I _:------------.., --~ " .._------,-,-...--.....-, R;=--------' -' , ___ , ' 0 ...._:_··...:;.--'....-,-'. . ~.,..,._;:1 . : ~--+-----:-'-----+-- --, ,,· " f '-.. , __ J.. •" OPEN SPAC t i l'l t £1*" i tt C> L I. . . ·-~~--~?::-:f-~~1 ~ -'-~:~;"';_ , -----b-t-_..----1 -,-'' t : ~ -, i ~ ~AAO ·SURFAZ: ----1,~·~ ' -""-" > ,, ----t+:~,-------"'~-±:-~~~.....: ~J-~:._.,,_:; ___ .. - 1-,;-i , _, i r-···'=-t ,r; , I I ~ I IE • l µ -! I ( \ / -- ~' : \ ;: . ) 20~ 3-STORY X E LEMENTARY ..--SCHOOL BU IL DIN G /0 1 ;-·;1 .7·1 ·1 :· fl ' "' 21~ l \_ / I .!LI _,_~ ~' .... F'1 +----. A ' ; ·-:--·:. --·-:-ti' --1= ----~u,,, o o-----rl'J z;,= ;;: I ~ ' ' . . -, -----~ ...... IT.IF.~ -elj ' -H -· ic-! '. I T'~ • ' -~ ~ ~, fflf-' I ; I I i ! s ' -~----L-. CONSTRUCTION '--.. ACT1"1T1ES 'tllLL OCCIJR IMTHIN DR IPUNES ......... \ \ '-' I i j ! i CONSTRUCTION ACT1"1T1ES \MLL OCCUR 'tlllHIN DRIPUNES r\ \ _./ / -..___ PARK AVENUE NORTH " -......... ( \ I \ J \ I .. L ; /\ \. / -. -, , --,-·-;,f:1' i ' 'l] . • '! ' ·.~· ~1 :11:s,~.l ~: ·· -I I .s.t -.:-0 . ---'-./'-22 ,..-, \ ) ~ ,....-" ( I '- 0 T REE RETENTION / INVENTORY PLAN !ij w a:: I- C/) 0 a:: ,..-" "': l I • ' I ~" _,, 0 z .,.-' I ' ' \ / '-...-- CONS1RUCT10N ACT1"1Tl(S \MLL OCCUR \MlHIN OR IPUNES .,.-"' ( \ \ I ~/ ,,-'\ \ _..) TREE RETENTION NOT ES: 1. lHE TREE RETENTION / IN'IENTORY PLAN IS BASED ON lHE ARBORIST REl'OR T PREPARED BY WASH ING TON ,ORESTRY CONSULTANTS, INC., OATED JJLY 28, 2016. 2. PER 1liE ARBORISTS REPOR T, ( 41) EXISTING SIGNll'ICANT TREES WI THIN THE PROJECT Ut,IITS INCLUDE: 0 LANDMARK TREES 11 SIGNIFICANT TREES WITHIN THE ROW J O SI GNlrlCANT 1REES ON-SI TE J. SEE AABORIST S EXISTING TREE IN'IENTOR Y ANO ASSESSMEN T TABLE. 4 . ALL TREE RETENTION, PROTEC TION AND CL.EAA ING ACT1 "1T1ES SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE 'tllll, RENTON MUNICI PAL COO E (RWC) 4-4-130 TREE RETENTION ANO LANO Cl.EARING REGULATIONS . LEGEND ~ OTY DESCRIPTION EB g R.O.W. SIGNIFI CANT TREE TO BE RETl<INEO + 6 R.O. W. S1GN1f1CANT TREE TO BE REMO'IED X 2 6 ON-SITE SIGNIFICANT TREE TO BE REM O'IED ---1REE PROTECTION FENCE I \ DRIP LINE PER SURVE Y ( j BY AHBL, DATED FEB . 2016 ' -PROPERTY BOUNOAA Y Exhib it 9 I a· ... ·= .. .. ::, ... ,: er,~ :;; .. .. !. ::,~ i. ~ . .. I '-: ~= 0) ·~ .. .. •• Q) -· •• u & i: .i-J -0 .. ~ ,~ :. a. ~I :::> 0 ci::: :1 I.,'.) z ~ ·- "' u w .. Q §~ z <l'. ~ ii ~ w ~ ---0 t; -0 u .c : ·c: en -u I .!!! U) C ~ C s 0 ca C • -a: 0 C z .c a» !l u E U) C a» • C iii ~ 0 C -·c: f C 0 ~ a» t:: rx II) ca ... U) "' Datt,: ll2l/201f Job No.: 21II0 7 DO O-By: NL ~by: NH -°"" - Tree Retention / Invento ry Plan • North L400 Technical Information Report PREPARED FOR: lntegrus Architecture 117 South Main Street, Suite 100 Seattle, WA 98104-3496 PROJECT: New Sartori Elementary School 315 Garden Avenue North Renton, WA 98057 Project No. 2160339.10 PREPARED BY: Greg Tauscheck, PE Project Engineer REVIEWED BY: William J. Fierst, PE Project Manager Sean M. Comfort, PE Principal .----------- ~--Renton0 DATE: August 2016 Entire Document Available Upon Request Exhibit 10 Civil Engineers • Structural Engineers • Landscape Architects • Community Planners • Land Surveyors • Neighbors DRAFT TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL REPORT for Sartori Elementary School PREPARED FOR: Renton School District PREPARED BY: heffron t r a n s o rt a t , o n I n c. 6544 NE 61st Street Seattle WA 98115 ph (206) 523-3939 + fx (206) 523-49~9 August26,2016 --Renton® Entire Document Available Upon Request Exhibit 11 WASHINGTON FORESTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. FORESTRY AND VEGETATION MANAGEMENT SPECIALISTS w F C I 360/943-1723 FAX 360/943-4128 1919 Yelm Hwy SE, Suite C Olympia, WA 98501 August 23, 2016 Lisa Klein AHBL, Inc. 2215 North 30th Street, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 RE: Arborist's Report -Sartori Elementary School -Renton, WA Dear Ms. Klein: The Renton School District is planning to construct the new Sartori Elementary School at the site of the old Sartori Education Center at North 3rd Street and Park Ave. North in Renton, WA. Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. was asked to inspect all of the trees on the site to determine their condition and potential to be saved in the new project. The inspection included all mapped trees that are 6 inches DBH and larger. A Level 2 inspection was completed on July 21, 2016. At the time of the site visit some demolition had occurred, but all trees had been retained. Findings I found 41 trees of 17 species. The trees ranged from 4 to 28 inches in DBH (DBH=diameter measured 4.5 ft. above the groundline). They included 10 street trees of which 6 (Callery pear) were in grates along Park Ave. North, and 4 (Green ash) were in a curblawn zone along North 3rd Street. The street and landscape area trees health ranged from 'Poor' to 'Very Good'. Only 4 trees were classified 'Poor' and would not be good long-term trees if protected (the 5th Poor rated tree was a street tree). The table below provides a summary of the tree inventory. A complete list of trees is provided in Attachment #4 and maps of tree locations are provided in Attachments 2 and 3. ----Renton 0 Entire Document Available Upon Request Exhibit 12 URBAN/RURAL FORESTRY • TREE APPRAISAL • HAZARD TREE ANALYSIS RIGHT-OF-WAYS• VEGETATION MANAGEMENT• ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES• CONTRACT FORESTERS Member of International Society of Arboriculture and Society of American Foresters assoc ated earth sciences incorporated Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazard, and Geotechnical Engineering Report SARTORI EDUCATION CENTER Renton, Washington Prepared For: RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT Project No. KE150719A August 4, 2016 ~-::-::--------Ifenton 0 Entire Document Available Upon Request Exhibit 13 Matthew Herrera From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Mr. Herrera, Enkeli <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Thursday, September 15, 2016 9:36 PM Matthew Herrera Fw: Official Comments for SEPA Review of Sartori Elementary School Comments SEPA Final.pd! Thank you for coming to the Neighborhood meeting tonight and helping us to try and understand the process better. Attached are my first comments to the school district for the SEPA review. The notice that we received for the SEPA review tell us to direct comments to a physical address for Rick Stracke. Earlier emails I sent to Mr. Stracke were bouncing back, so I complained and now they seem to be getting through to him. I will forward another message following this one. Thank you, Angie Laulainen -----Forwarded Message----- From: Enkeli <enkeli l@yahoo.com> To: Richard (Rick) Stracke <richard.stracke@rentonschools.us> Cc: Matthew Feldmeyer <matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us>; "north.renton@gmail.com" <north.renton@qmail.com>; "geosaldaniel@wwdb.org" <qeosaldaniel@wwdb.org>; Diane Dobson <dmd821@aol.com>; "lklein@ahbl.com" <lklein@ahbl.com>; Randy Matheson <randy.matheson@rentonschools.us>; Nancy Monahan <monahan55@hotmail.com>; Jennifer T. Henning <ihenning@rentonwa.gov>; Rocale Timmons <rtimmons@rentonwa.gov>; "gloria.hodge@rentonschools.us" <gloria.hodge@rentonschools.us>; Al Talley <al.talley@rentonschools.us>; Todd Franceschina <todd.franceschina@rentonschools.us>; Lynn Desmarais <lynn.desmarais@rentonschools.us>; Pam Teal <pam .teal@rentonschools.us>; "Arthur.Jarvis@rentonschools.us" <Arthur.Jarvis@rentonschools.us>; Gregg Zimmerman <gzimmerman@rentonwa.gov> Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2016 1 :59 PM Subject: Official Comments for SEPA Review of Sartori Elementary School Mr. Stracke, I am sending in the attached PDF file official comments for the SEPA Review of Sartori Elementary School. Please acknowledge receipt of these comments as you are the designated school district contact for the SEPA consultation. It would be helpful if you can inform me if any changes are made to these items. Thank you. Sincerely, Angie Laulainen 1 Exhibit 14 September 11, 2016 Mr. Stracke, I am submitting the following comments for the current SEPA Review for the construction of Sartori Elementary School. For your convenience, I have listed them in the same order as the categories appear in the SEPA checklist. They are all related to section 8, environmental impacts. Thank you, Angie Laulainen Section 8 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. EARTH d. & f. Regarding soil stability and erosion - The SEPA checklist states there is "no history of instability in the area". There is history of instability on Garden AVE N. at the south end of the street. There was a sink hole which opened on the east side of the street and went under the pavement under the street to the west side of the street and reappeared several years later. The City filled the hole each time, but there is currently a visible dip in the pavement all across the road where this is located as well as fissures in the road which is across the road in front of 310 Garden AVE N. It was believed this originally was caused by water left underground after a break in the Seattle water main which happened about 15 years ago. This main runs north/south under Garden AVE. There is also a history of instability in the soil in neighborhood yards. The soil which was previously part of Lake Washington and the Black River, is constantly shifting. During the Sartori Grant project, the North Renton Neighborhood Association (NRNA) added soil in order to raise the beds along the south fence of the Sartori school front field by about a foot before planting trees. So much soil had eroded or shifted away that the base of the fence posts were showing. NRNA distributed two truck loads of soil, 30 yards of top soil, in front of the fence on the south end of the front of the school, as well as 150 bags of mulch because so much soil had eroded away. I suggest that additional measures be taken to determine the stability of the soil on the site, as well as at the sink hole site where construction vehicles and school buses will be driving regularly, and action be taken as needed. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. Regarding kinds of energy used at the school The SEPA Checklist states that the school will "utilize electric power and natural gas" energy. There is no mention of solar panels. I recommend that solar panels, as well as other green energy and conservation methods be included in the design of the school. c. Regarding types of energy conservation features The SEPA Checklist states that the school will use "high-efficiency heat pump system with heat recovery, LED lighting with occupancy and daylighting controls, high- performance building envelope system, low-e glazing, and inclusion of weather vestibules at main entries". I am unsure if these are similar to the features that were included when Secondary Learning Center (SLC) was built but would like to see similar sustainable features included in Sartori Elementary as were included in Secondary Learning Center. I read in a Renton Reporter article, dated 4/24/2012 written by Tracy Compton, that at Secondary Learning Center 'The building has meters and lights that alert occupants to the current state of efficiency in electricity, water and gas use. The building has solar panels, lots of natural light, rainwater collection from the roofline to flush the toilets and rain gardens to capture surface water from the parking lots." http://www.rentonreporter.com/news/167240015.html Renton School District could follow it's own example set during the design and construction of Secondary Learning Center to include many energy conservations to the new Sartori Elementary School. This SLC building is described on the NAC Architecture website as as sustainable prototype for Renton School District, a statement which implies future buildings in the district will also have similar features: "As a sustainable prototype for the District, the SLC implements multiple sustainable strategies to reduce resource use, including geothermal, displacement ventilation and rainwater collection." http://www.nacarchitecture.com/portfolio/RentonSLC. html Similar emphasis on environmental design is not apparent in the SEPA checklist for Sartori Elementary. I recommend that the new school follow in the footsteps of Secondary Learning Center with an emphasis on sustainable strategies and design that is environmentally conscious. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH b. 1. Regarding off-site noise The SEPA Checklist states there is no offsite noise which affects this proposal and that the primary source of noise in the area is generated from vehicular traffic. I ask that you note, there is an abundance of noise in the area due to Boeing engine tests, airplanes from the Renton Airport (flying directly over Garden AVE), Helicopters also from the Renton Airport, Emergency vehicles using Park & N 3rd regularly, and trains traveling to Boeing using their whistles at local intersections. Noise is a problem which is recognized by neighbors to the point that is has been a topic of discussion at NRNA meetings. The SEPA checklist states that speed limits adjacent to the street are all 20 miles per hour and that will help with the noise. This statement is completely false. There are no streets in the neighborhood which are 20 miles per hour. The speed limits are 30 mph on Park and N. 4th, and 25 mph on Garden and N. 3rd. The noise from the construction will have a big impact and more measures should be taken to lessen it. The statement that current speed limits of 20 mph surrounding the site is not offering any solution. b. 2. Regarding types of noise and operating hours Although City ordinance allows work to begin at 7 AM, due to the close proximity to residences (directly across the street on Park AVE N and on Garden AVE N), these hours of operation should be adjusted. I request a delay of work to begin at 8 AM during the weekdays. This delay should be in place at least for the loud equipment such as pile drivers. The homes in North Renton are old homes, they do not block noise well, so accommodations for that and the close proximity to the construction are necessary. 10. AESTHETICS c. Regarding Measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts Consideration should be given to the appearance of the back side of the building which will be along Park AVE N. which in the design plans appears to be a brick wall with some windows. I suggest the design include art work in the form of patterns in the brick, a mural, a community project, or some other visually pleasing appearance to the back side of the building. 12. RECREATION c. Regarding the play field The SEPA Checklist states that a portion of the playfield will be left open for public use. I request that portion continue to be located along the Garden AVE side of the site which is completely residential. Also, workers on the site, and truck drivers/companies who will be accessing the site, should be made aware that the Garden side of the block is residential, and kids are used to playing at the school and crossing the street throughout the day. They should be encouraged to exercise caution while driving along this street given the knowledge that there are 15 school aged children living on Garden AVE N between N. 3rd and N. 4th street. The children appreciate the plan to keep part of the playf ield open for their use. 13. HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION b. Regarding historical features of the school It is noted in the SEPA Checklist that the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Historic Inventory Report were reviewed to assess the presence of historical features to the site. The Renton History Museum is not listed as having been consulted about the historical significance of Sartori and should also be consulted. 14. TRANSPORTATION The SEPA Checklist here gives reference to a detailed Transportation Technical Report (Heffron Transportation, Inc., August 2016). There is a major error and omission in this Transportation report on page 4, section 2.1.1 which describes the existing roadway network. The report describes Garden AVE N. as "a two-way; north-south roadway that provides connection between Bronson Way N to the south and N Park Drive to the north". Garden AVE does not connect from Bronson Way N to N Park Drive. This statement is inaccurate and implies that Garden AVE is a through street. There is no mention in the report of the traffic barrier which is in place at that location and there is no mention that there is no through access at the intersection of Garden and N 4th Street. The SEPA Checklist also does not mention any consultation with the City of Renton Traffic division regarding traffic citations on the surrounding streets. The report gives reverence to the number of collisions, but does not reference any knowledge of citations given or problems over time at adjacent intersections. I recommend that the City of Renton Police Department be consulted to gain a better understanding of issues at the surrounding intersections. d. Regarding new or improvements to existing roads. There needs to be improvements to the intersection of N 4th and Garden AVE N. Without any changes to the street, all traffic must approach the location in the left lane along N 4th Street and Garden. Additional traffic includes Boeing employees who utilize Meadow in the morning to cut through the neighborhood and go around to Garden north off N. 4th street, and also compounded by the Boeing employees in the afternoon leaving their parking lot and turning onto N 4th Street and into that same left lane that the parent pick up lane will spill onto. The current street system cannot accommodate the proposed additional traffic for this school. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control traffic impacts The Transportation Technical Report states that "Based on these results, the project is expected to have a negligible impact to traffic operations at study area intersections". The current street system cannot accommodate the proposed additional traffic, all approaching the school in the left lane of N 4th Street. I again suggest the school district acknowledge this problem and meet with the City of Renton Transportation Department and North Renton neighbors to find solutions. I suggest the barrier not be removed, but possibly moved to a location to the north, changed to allow for school buses to travel across the street but closed to southbound traffic and possibly closed to northbound traffic. In order to help control the impact of truck traffic during construction as well as after the school is open, the established Truck Routes map for the City of Renton should be distributed to all companies who will access the school, as was done during the construction of the new bus barn. The truck companies also should be explained that the City of Renton requires trucks to use the most direct route off the truck route to and from the site. This means the trucks should be approaching off of Park AVE N., then taking the closest route back to Park AVE N. to exit the site. It is inevitable that some trucks will need to travel on N 3rd, N 4th, and Garden AVE N, but they should not be traveling on other neighborhood streets such as driving on N 4th street all the way to Logan AVE. I recommend that if necessary the school district work with the City of Renton Police Department to contact these companies. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Regarding the need for additional public services The SEPA Checklist states there will not be a need for any additional public services. However, if no improvements are made to the intersection of N. 4th and Garden, this location will not be able to handle the added vehicular trips to this location. Two Renton Police Department officers will be required daily, for at least one hour in the morning, and one hour in the afternoon, to direct traffic approaching the school. The proposed access for parent vehicles during drop off and pick up times is not appropriate for the surrounding street system without making any improvements to the street system. Matthew Herrera From: Sent: To: Enkeli <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Thursday, September 15, 2016 9:38 PM Matthew Herrera Subject: Fw: Additional Comments for SEPA Review of Sartori Elementary School Mr. Herrera, Below are some additional comments I sent to Mr. Stracke for the SEPA review. Thank you for your interest m our concerns. Angie Laulainen -----Forwarded Message----- From: Enkeli <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> To: Richard (Rick) Stracke <richard.stracke@rentonschools.us> Cc: Matthew Feldmeyer <matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us>; "north.renton@gmail.com" <north.renton@gmail.com>; "geosaldaniel@wwdb.org" <geosaldaniel@wwdb.org>; Diane Dobson <dmd821@aol.com>; "lklein@ahbl.com" <lklein@ahbl.com>; Randy Matheson <randy.matheson@rentonschools.us>; Nancy Monahan <monahan55@hotmail.com>; Jennifer T. Henning <jhenning@rentonwa.gov>; Rocale Timmons <rtimmons@rentonwa.gov>; Gloria Hodge <Gloria.Hodge@rentonschools.us>; Al Talley <al.talley@rentonschools.us>; Todd Franceschina <todd.franceschina@rentonschools.us>; Lynn Desmarais <lynn.desmarais@rentonschools.us>; Pam Teal <Pam.Teal@rentonschools.us>; Arthur (Art) Jarvis <Arthur.Jarvis@rentonschools.us>; Gregg Zimmerman <gzimmem,an@rentonwa.gov> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 10:32 PM Subject: Additional Comments for SEPA Review of Sartori Elementary School September 14, 2016 Mr. Stracke, Please review and confirm receipt of these additional comments included in this message for the current SEPA Review for the construction of Sartori Elementary School. They are all related to section B, Environmental Impacts. Thank you again for your consideration, Angie Laulainen ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: Section B ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 14. TRANSPORTATION d. Regarding new or improvements to existing roads. 1 In addition to the traffic previou nentioned on N 4th Street (school bu 1pproaching Sartori to go into the bus lane, parent drivers approaching the parent loop for Sartori, Boeing commuters utilizing Meadow in the morning to cut through the neighborhood and go around to Garden north off N. 4th street, Boeing employees in the afternoon leaving their parking lot and turning onto N 4th Street), there are also Renton School District buses exiting the bus barn from a driveway directly across from the proposed entrance to the parent drop off loop. Many of these RSD buses which serve schools throughout the district will also be changing lanes immediately to go over to the left lane ofN 4th street in order to turn left onto Park AVE. In order to alleviate the impact these buses will have on access for parents to the new school, Renton School District should make an additional entrance to the bus barn on the North side of the bus barn. An entrance should be added so that Renton School Buses could enter and exit the bus barn off of N 5th Street. This would help alleviate the impact of more school district traffic on N. 4th street. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control traffic impacts There needs to be consideration given to additional measures to reduce or control traffic impacts. The proposal routes all traffic for this school through a very problematic intersection, in fact, from May 1st to September 6th this year, the Renton Police Department issued 44 traffic citations, all for "failue to comply with restrictive signs". These citations are only a small portion of the violators at this intersection, and do not reflect the volume and complexity of the problem. I again suggest the school district acknowledge the need to address the issues at this intersection. The City of Renton Transportation Department and North Renton neighbors who are familiar with the intersection should be included in trying to find solutions rather than routing all the parents and buses through this intersection without responsible planning. From: Richard (Rick) Stracke <richard.stracke@rentonschools.us> To: Enkeli <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 10:00 AM Subject: RE: Official Comments for SEPA Review of Sartori Elementary School Received Rick Stracke Executive Director Facilities Planning 425-204-4403 From: Enkeli [mailto:enkeli_l@yahoo.com] Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2016 2:00 PM To: Richard (Rick) Stracke <richard.stracke@rentonschools.us> Cc: Matthew Feldmeyer <matthew.feldmcyer@rcntonschools.us>; north.renton@gmail.com; geosaldaniel@wwdb.org; Diane Dobson <dmd82 l@aol.com>; lklein@ahbl.com; Randy Matheson <randy.matheson@rentonschools.us>; Nancy Monahan <monahan55@hotmail.com>; Jennifer T. Henning <jhenning@renlonwa.gov>; Rocalc Timmons <rtimmons@rentonwa.gov>; Gloria Hodge <Gloria.Hodge@rcntonschools.us>; Al Talley <al.talley@rentonschools.us>; Todd Franceschina <todd.franceschina@rentonschools.us>; Lynn Desmarais <lynn.desmarais@rentonschools.us>; Pam Teal <Pam.Teal@rentonschools.us>; Arthur (Art) Jarvis <Arthur.Jarvis@rentonschools.us>; Gregg Zimmerman <gzimmerman@rentonwa.gov> Subject: Official Comments for SEPA Review of Sartori Elementary School Mr. Stracke, 2 I am sending in the attached P ile official comments for the SEPA · ew of Sartori Elementary School. Please acknowledge receipt of these comments as you are the designated school district contact for the SEPA consultation. It would be helpful if you can inform me if any changes are made to these items. Thank you. Sincerely, Angie Laulainen 3 Matthew Herrera From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Enkeli <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Sunday, September 18, 2016 9:00 PM Matthew Feldmeyer; Richard (Rick) Stracke; Matthew Herrera north.renton@gmail.com; geosaldaniel@wwdb.org; Diane Dobson; lklein@ahbl.com; Randy Matheson; Nancy Monahan; Jennifer T. Henning; Gloria Hodge; Arthur (Art) Jarvis; Gregg A. Zimmerman Request for New Traffic Study Table 6 Transportation Report.png Mr. Stracke, Mr. Feldmeyer, and Mr. Hererra, I am sending these comments to be considered for both the SEPA review and the Land Use Application. Due to several inaccuracies of the recent traffic study done by Heffron Transportation for the SEP A review for Renton School District, I request that a new, non-biased and more thorough study be done of the Sartori site for traffic impacts. The current study asserts that the impact of the traffic to the site is "negligible" meaning there will be no impact of the new traffic to the neighborhood from the new elementary school traffic. One reason the study has reached this conclusion is because existing trips to the school are calculated based on the square footage of the school. Using these calculations, it is stated that the new school will be twice the size of the current school. Table 6 in the report (see attached) shows 610 current trips to the existing building based on its square footage (there is nowhere near that number of trips to the school). This number is offset against 1220 trips to the proposed school which is twice the square footage of the existing Sartori. When current trips of 61 O are added in with an estimated 660 current trips to the deli on Park A VE, as well as any current trips to the homes on the block, the traffic study concludes that there will actually be 200 LESS trips per day to the site than current use. It seems obvious that a school with 650 students is not double the size of the current school (a handful of Adult Transition students), and there is no way that a new elementary school will generate LESS traffic. In addition, the study states that "In the mornings, school drop-off activities usually occur with limited queues or delay. This is because arrivals tend to be spread out over the 20 to 30 minutes before school start time. During this period, family drivers generally arrive, drop off students, and then immediately leave the site. In the afternoons, many family drivers arrive early and wait in the queue lane(s) or parking spaces for the students to be dismissed, and longer vehicle queues can develop." This statement is misleading to suggest the parent queue will not spill over onto N. 4th Street. Current RSD procedure is that no students are to be dropped off more than 10 to 15 minutes early. For example, the schools currently serving this area are Hazelwood which does not permit drop off more than 15 minutes before start time, and Highlands and Bryn Mawr Elementaries which do not allow drop off earlier than 10 minutes prior to start time. For a more accurate result, the study needs to recognize what the impact will be of current traffic in the commercial zone (along Park AVE) being relocated into the residential zone (specifically along 4th and Garden). Traffic to the deli which occurs over the course of a day, will have significant impact when routed through the opposite intersection, which is on the residential side of the block. The study also needs to consider the fact that the proposal channels all traffic through one lane approaching the school. The stretch of N. 4th between Garden and Park needs to be studied as it has the potential for the parent queue to extend onto that location. 1 It may also benefit all parties in 'ed to include neighbors in the discus which could improve the plan without making major changes to the site. Respectfully, Angie Laulainen 2 . Neighbors have several ideas Denis Law Mayor October 11, 2016 Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Angie Laulainen 314 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98055 Email to enkeli_l@yahoo.com SUBJECT: Response to Public Comments Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692 Dear Ms. laulainen: Thank you for your comments regarding the proposed Sartori Elementary School (LUA16· 000692) located at 315 Garden Ave N. The City of Ren ton's Department of Community and Economic Development is reviewing the Planned Urban Development land use application and will provide a recommendation to the Hearing Examiner at an upcoming public hearing. The Renton School District is the lead Agency for the review required by the State Environmental Pa/icy Act (SEPA) and it will issue a threshold determination prior to the public hearing. Many of the comments you submitted to the City during the land use application commenting period of September 14-28, 2016 were comments associated with the environmental checklist for the SEPA review. While the school district is the Lead Agency for the SEPA review, I have provided responses as they relate to city code. I have also added you as a Party of Record for the land use application. I've paraphrased your comments and provided a response (bulleted and italicized} to each of them below: Environmental Checklist Comments received via email September 15. 2016: 1. Earth History of instability on Garden Ave N specifically a sinkhole at the south end of the street. • I have forwarded this concern to Mike Stenhouse in the City's Public Works Maintenance Division. Instability related to historic Lake Washington and Black River basins. • The subject property is within a High Seismic Hazard area as identified on the City's mapping database. This is due to soils that are associated with former channels of the Cedar River. A geotechnical report was prepared for the proposed new building and associated improvements. The City's adopted building code will require the school district to design the building to withstand the effects of seismic events. 1055 South Grady Way. Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov Exhibit 15 6. Energy and Natural Resources Recommend the use of solar panels and other sustainable strategies and design similar to the Secondary Learning Center. • The City supports the school district in efforts to utilize sustainable strategies and design for the Sartori Elementary School. The City's Comprehensive Plan contains policies that encourage LEED construction and efforts ta reduce greenhouse gases. 7. Environmental Health No mention of offsite noise that would affect the proposal. Off-site noise identified from Boeing, Renton Airport, emergency vehicles, and trains. • Modern building practices and the City's adapted building code requires exterior materials and insulation that should help mitigate same of the off-site noise impacts you have cited. Checklist refers to speeds adjacent to school at 20 mph that will mitigate noise. Speed limits posted at 30 mph in neighborhood. • Streets adjacent to schools are limited to 20 mph. The City has provided recommendotions for SEPA mitigotian measures that include installation of flashing school zone signs and radar detecting school zone signs. Permitted construction hours within the City begin at 7am. There should be a delay to begin at 8am for loud equipment such as pile drivers. • The school district has proposed a method of pile construction called augercast. As an alternative ta traditional pile driving, piles are farmed by drilling and then grout is pumped down within a hollow stem. The school district has indicated noise impacts from this system of foundation construction are analogous to normol construction activities. 10. Aesthetics Concern with appearance of Park Ave N. side of building. Suggest art or other visually pleasing articulation on west elevation. • The design af the building is required to meet urban design standards set forth in the City's Development Regulations. Applicants are able to choose from a menu of options that meet the standards outright and/or suggest alternative methods of design that meet the intent of the guidelines. City staff will provide a recommendation, with consideration of your comments, to the Hearing Examiner on design aspects of the proposal. 12. Recreation School district has indication a portion of the playfield will remain open during construction. Available portion should be along Garden Ave N. side of property. Contractors should be made I:\_ aware of children using playfield and crossing Garden Ave N. ~ 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov • This comment is outside the scope of the City's review of the land use application. However any portion of the field that remains open during school construction will need to be adequately fenced and separated from construction activities. 13. Historical and Cultural Preservation Renton History Museum was not listed as being consulted regarding historical significance of Sartori. • The school district did contact the Renton History Museum related to ony building fixtures the museum would like to retain for their collection. No fixtures were identified by the museum curator os much of the furnishings hod been already been removed. The curator did request a brick from the building following demolition. 14. Transportation Transportation report describes inaccurate description of Garden Ave N. and does not identify barrier on N. 4<h. • The City concurs and is aware of the limitations of Garden Ave N. The finalized report should provide clarification of Garden Ave N limitations including the barrier. No consultation was mentioned with the City regarding traffic citations on surrounding streets. • A Traffic Impact Analysis does not typically include oreo traffic citations. The analysis is intended to determine whether new vehicle trips will cause failures to the City's transportation network and potential traffic safety hazards. The City hos recommended several pedestrian safety measures near the school such flashing pedestrian signoge and radar signs. Improvements are needed to the intersection of N. 4th and Garden Ave N. The current street system cannot accommodate the additional traffic caused by the school. • The Traffic Impact Analysis hos modeled the new trips added to the intersection associated with the school and determined those trips and existing traffic will not cause o failure to the intersection. The City has recommended improvements to the intersection that include curb-bulbs that will reduce the crossing distance for pedestrians and provide a traffic calming measure for vehicle traffic on Garden Ave. N. Additionally, the City has recommended that the school district prepare on operational pion that would address any potential queuing extending onto N. 4•• St. Suggest the barrier on N. 4'" and Garden Ave N. be relocated to allow school busses to access Garden Ave N. from bus facility. • The City of Renton Police Department currently and will continue to provide patrol and presence in the area of the cut-through barrier located at N. 4'" Street and Gorden Ave N. during Boeing shift changes. The barrier was placed at its current location to direct vehicles to the N. 4<• Street arterial. The removal or relocation of the barrier could result 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 -rentonwa.gov in additional school bus (other than Sartori busses) and cut-through traffic along Garden Ave N. At this time, the City is nat recommending the removal ar relocation a/ the barrier due to the potential increase of vehicle traffic on Gorden Ave N. between N. 3•• and N. 4th Avenues. Truck route maps should be distributed to all contractors during construction. The school district has been made aware of the designated truck routes in the City. Also, prior to construction of the school, a pre-construction meeting will be required with the school district and their construction superintendent where truck routes will be further discussed. 15. Public Services Two Renton Police Department offices will be required for pick-up and drop-off to direct traffic if no improvements are made to the intersection of N. 4" St. and Garden Ave N. • As mentioned previously, the Troffic Impact Analysis has modeled the new trips added to the intersection that are associated with the school and those trips along with existing traffic volumes will not cause a failure to the intersection. The City has recommended that the school district prepare an operotionol pion that would address any potential queuing extending onto N. 4th St. Additional Environmental Checklist Comments received via email September 15, 2016 14. Transportation Buses leaving the school district bus barn will be exiting from a driveway directly across the Sartori pick-up and drop-off driveway. Susses will be changing lanes immediately to the far left lanes to turn onto Park Ave N. School district should make an additional entrance on the north side of bus barn to alleviate district traffic on N. 4•h Street. • As mentioned previously, the Troffic Impact Analysis found no failures on the abutting intersections, which accounted for existing bus traffic and proposed trips to the new school. Additional ingress/egress to the school district bus facility is not warranted at this time. Comments received via email September 16. 2016 Concern regarding response from Randy Matheson about a statement that the school district does not make improvement to traffic patterns or road improvements. Traffic report prepared by the school district refers to impacts created by the new school as negligible. • As part of the SE PA review, the school district and the City will review area intersections to identify any Level of Service failures caused by the new trips for the proposed elementary school. Any Level of Service failures would need to be corrected via improvements to the transportation system or reducing the scope of the project. While no Level of Service failures were identified, the City has recommended that the school district provide pedestrian safety measures and prepare operational plans for potentiol queuing during pick-up/drop-off and overflow parking during special events. 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov Comments received via email September 19, 2016 Request a new non-biased and more thorough traffic report be prepared for the project. Report identifies traffic impact to proposed school as negligible. Report identifies 200 fewer trips per day to the site than the current use. • The school district has indicated a finalized transportatian report will be issued with the SEPA threshold determination. According to Section 3.2.2 af the report, the trip generation rotes for existing uses ond net change that resulted in 200 fewer trips per day was an analysis the transportation engineer prepared for disclosure purposes that could be used in determining mitigation requirements and impact fees. The analysis assumed the school was fully functional, which is why the analysis resulted in 200 fewer trips. This specific analysis did not determine whether the new school would cause failures to the abutting intersections. The City hos informally recommended that this specific analysis either be removed from the final report or better clarified. Morning drop-off times identified as 20 to 30 minutes prior to start time are not in line with the district's policy of not allowing drop off more than 10 to 15 minutes prior to start time. Study should look at impact of current traffic along Park Ave N being relocated into residential zone, specifically N. 4'" and Garden Ave N. The stretch of N. 4•• between Garden Ave N and Park Ave N should be studied for potential queue impacts. • The City has recommended the school district prepare an operational plan to address any potential queue impacts onto N. 4'' Street during pick-up and drop-off time. Closing Again, thank you for providing comments regarding the proposed Sartori Elementary School. You are Party of Record for the land use application. Your comments are now part of the official file and will be considered prior to the Hearing Examiner issuing a decision. Please feel free to contact me at 42S.430.6593 or matt.herrera@rentonwa.gov if you have any questions regarding the project proposal. Sincerely, Matthew Herrera, AICP Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 , rentonwa.gov Matthew Herrera From: Sent: To: Cc: Enkeli <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Friday, September 16, 2016 7:50 AM Matthew Herrera Diane Dobson; North Renton Neighborhood Association Subject: Attachments: Fw: Sartori School: SEPA request; next steps with North Renton Neighborhood Assoc 20160823_Final SEPA Checklist_2160359.pdf Mr. Herrera, I am forwarding to you this strain of messages between myself and Renton School District, most importantly, because in this last response from Randy Matheson, he states that the school district doesn't make any improvements to traffic patterns or road improvements. This is also what they said at the meeting last night, but also they refuse to make any suggestions for road improvements or even acknowledge there is a problem. The traffic report calls the impact on our neighborhood "negligible". If the school district refuses to acknowledge the impact of traffic in the SEPA review, how can we address this problem? Also, in the messages below, you can see that it took a full week of messages from me to the school district before they disclosed the SEP A checklist. After I went to the school district to ask for the traffic report, their project manager, Matt Feldmeyer, has offered to disclose any documents I request, but the school district has made the process very difficult. Regarding the traffic report, they call it a "draft" and don't want us to refer to it, but they submitted the draft to you so it appears to be official. Angie Laulainen -----Forwarded Message ----- From: Randy Matheson <randy.matheson@rentonschools.us> To: Enkeli <enkeli_l@yahoo.com>; Matthew Feldmeyer <matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us>; Brad Medrud <bmedrud@ahbl.com> Cc: North Renton Neighborhood Association <north.renton@gmail.com>; Diane Dobson <dmd821@aol.com>; George and Sally <geosaldaniel@wwdb.org>; Rocale Timmons <rtimmons@rentonwa.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <jhenning@rentonwa.gov>; Nancy Monahan <monahan55@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, September 2, 2016 8:07 AM Subject: RE: Sartori School: SEPA request; next steps with North Renton Neighborhood Assoc Sorry for the confusion. Attached is the SEPA Checklist for the Sartori Elementary School project. In regards to your question about work on the cross streets North 4th Street and Garden Ave North: The school district docs not make any changes to traffic patterns or street improvements as part of its school construction projects. We do include some work to improve sidewalks and gutters along streets that adjoin the property; but, not specifically to traffic patterns or road improvements. Randy Matheson, Executive Director, Community Relations Renton School District I 300 SW 7th Street, Renton WA 98057 I 425.204.2345 I randy.matheson@rentonschools.us I www.rcntonschools.us 11] t1 .. Renton 1 Exhibit 16 From: Enkeli [mailto:enkeli_l@ya ,.com] Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2016 12:44 AM To: Randy Matheson <randy.matheson@rentonschools.us>; Matthew Feldmeyer <matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us>; Brad Medrud <bmedrud@ahbl.com> Cc: North Renton Neighborhood Association <north.renton@gmail.com>; Diane Dobson <dmd82l@aol.com>; George and Sally <geosaldaniel@wwdb.org>; Rocale Timmons <rtimmons@rentonwa.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <jhenning@rentonwa.gov>; Nancy Monahan <monahan55@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: Sartori School: SEPA request; next steps with North Renton Neighborhood Assoc Mr. Matheson, The document I am requesting is the SEPA checklist (not requesting all the documents and studies included in the report). Previously when I requested this during the demolition, Brad Medrud sent me a copy and also said there would be an expanded SEPA checklist done for the construction phase of the school. Since the recent notification letter I received started out with "Renton School District has issued a SEPA checklist and associated documents for comment ... ", I assumed that would be in the form of another PDF file. Is it not a PDF? If it the SEPA checklist is too large to email, then yes, please print a copy for myself and neighbors to review. However, if a PDF of the checklist only is small enough to email, without all the other documents in the report, then please send as a PDF. I have emailed him again to ask for the current SEPA checklist but he is out of the office at the moment. I will CC him on this message. Thank you for your reassurances about the project. I do not doubt the school will be state of the art as I have first hand knowledge as a teacher in a school that was recently an AHBL project, as well as another school that was designed by Integrus Architecture. However, as a neighbor to this project, I have great concern about the push to get this done on the fast track without taking the time to consider our concerns and comments especially with regard to traffic. I have specifically been asking about the plans for the intersection ofN. 4th and Garden for several months, and have not gotten a response about what those plans are. I know that any proposed changes to traffic will be noted in the checklist, and also that at this time our comments are usually encouraged. If you can send the checklist, it would be very helpful to answer some of these questions and give myself and my neighbors the opportunity to partake in the process. Thank you, Angie Laulainen From: Randy Matheson <@ndy.mathcson(ll)rcntonscho9ls.us> To: Enkeli <cnkcli l@yahoo.com>; Matthew Feldmeyer <ma_tthcw.fcldmcycr1'a)rcntonsc_h90ls.us> Cc: North Renton Neighborhood Association <north.rcnton(aigmail.com>; Diane Dobson <4mdfi_2 l@aol.com>; George and Sally <g:_osah;ianicl(a)wwdb.org>; Rocalc Timmons <rtimmons(a)rcntonwa.go_y>; Jennifer T. Henning <jhcnning(U::rcntonwa.gov>; Nancy Monahan <monahan55@hotmail.com>; Matthew Feldmeyer <matthc_w.fcldmcycr@rcntonschool~,us> Sent: Monday, August 29,2016 5:43 PM Subject: Sartori School: SEPA request; next steps with North Renton Neighborhood Assoc Ms. Enkeli, The contractor hired by the district to create the SEPA report for the Sartori Elementary School project recently finished the SEPA work and simultaneously notified the district and neighbors near Sartori of the completed work. Although they hadn't actually provided access to the report to the district. It's a very big document that cannot be emailed; so the district's facilities department was just given access today to download the document from the contractor's website. We'd 2 be happy to print a copy of the fil, J make it available to you. If that's what d like, please let me know and we'll start printing it. I'll let you know when it's ready to pick up. I want to ensure you and all the other North Renton Neighborhood Association members on this email thread that the district is working to build a beautiful facility in your neighborhood that you can be proud of and that will serve your children, your grandchildren, and others in the district for many decades. We'd love to have your input, ideas and involvement. As you know, we want to have this project built expertly, but in a shorter timeline than other schools in the district. The need for this elementary school is urgent as it is being built for children in the district right now. To that end, the architects and designers are well into the building design phase as well as a general layout of where the school will fit on the site. While some of this work must first be approved by the City of Renton, the work to complete the general design and placement is complete. However, there's still a lot of work to be done before building the new school begins. The district and Integrus Architecture recently presented the school board with new schematic designs for the Sartori Elementary project (see the uresentation here), and I'm working on placing the new information on the district's website. We'd be happy to come to another North Renton Neighborhood meeting to present the new information. Please let me know if your group would like that presentation. Randy Matheson, Executive Director, Community Relations Renton School District 1300 SW 7th Street, Renton WA 980571425.204.2345 I randy.math~son(ffirentonschools.us I ww:_w.n::ri!om.chools.us 11[] C-) "'------· •n~nton From: Enkeli [mailto:enkeli l(cilyahoo.com] Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2016 12:43 AM To: Randy Matheson <@ndy.matheson(cilrcntonschools.us>; Matthew Feldmeyer <matthcw.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us> Cc: North Renton Neighborhood Association <north.renton(dgmail.com>; Diane Dobson <dmd82 I (a),aol.com>; George and Sally <geosaldanicl(dwwdb._Qrg>; Rocale Timmons <rtimmons@rentonwa.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <jhenning@rcntonwa.go_v>; Nancy Monahan <monahan55@.hotmail.com> Subject: Re: Undeliverable: SEPA Checklist Request Mr. Matheson and Mr. Feldmeyer, Myself and neighbors got the attached letter on Thursday which came from the school district, announcing "Notice of SEPA Consultation", and detailing documents available for the public to review. I do not understand why I would receive a letter stating these documents are available to the public, if they are not. I also see that the SEPA Checklist for this project is on the SEPA Register on the Department of Ecology website as (see attached screen shot). This website states to contact the Lead Agency (RSD) for actual copies of the SEPA documents. It is also posted in the Northwest Classifieds that these documents are available for review. http://nwsource.kaango.com/ag-rcnton-schoo l-district/24 7 503_94 We appreciate the ability to comment on the plans, and have a lot of good ideas and input that could be very beneficial. I request timely and transparent access to the information that was offered for public review. Please provide copies of the SEPA Checklist, record #201604604 on the SEPA register, as was also declared to be available in the letter I received from Renton School District yesterday (also attached), for myself and my neighbors to review. I have CCd several neighbors who are also interested in this information. Thank you, Angie Laulainen 3 From: Randy Matheson <randy.matheson(a)rentgnschools.us> To: Enkeli <enkeli l@yal10o.com> Cc: Matthew Feldmeyer <matthcw.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us> Sent: Friday, August 26, 2016 l l :44 AM Subject: RE: Undeliverable: SEPA Checklist Request Ms. Laulainen , Thank you for your request and continued interest on the Sartori Elementary School construction project. Renton School District is finalizing the SEP A environmental checklist for the Sartori Elementary School project. We hope to submit the documents to the City of Renton by the end of August. The City of Renton will include the documents in other items and have all documents available for public review soon after the district submits them. Randy Matheson, Executive Director, Community Relations Renton School District 1300 SW 7th Street, Renton WA 98057 I 425.204.23451 mailto:randy.ma1hcson@rentonschools.us I \VWw.rentonschools.us 11] (J • flenton From: Enkeli [mailto:enkeli !@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 4:29 PM To: Matthew Feldmeyer <matthcw.feldmeyer@rentons_chools.us>; Randy Matheson <rand y.matheson@rentonschoo ls. us> Subject: Fw: Undeliverable: SEP A Checklist Request Mr. Feldmeyer & Mr. Matheson, I would like to request a copy of the Environmental Checklist for the upcoming construction of Sartori Elementary School. I have tried to contact Mr. Stracke who is listed as the district contact for this information, but the message has bounced back twice. Can you please provide the checklist to me? Please email a copy to this address. Thank you, Angie Laulainen -----Forwarded Message ----- From: 11 postmastcr(d1rcntons_chopls.us" <postmaster@)rcntonschools.us> To: cnkcli l@vahoo.com Sent: Thursday, August 25, 20 I 6 4: 14 PM Subject: Undeliverable: SEPA Checklist Request -----Forwarded Message ----- Delivery has failed to these recipients or distribution lists: Richard (Rick) Stracke The recipient's e-mail address was not found in the recipient's e-mail system. Microsoft Exchange will not try to redeliver this message for you. Please check the e-mail address and try resending this message, or provide the following diagnostic text to your system administrator. ···-··-·-----Sent by Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 4 Diagnostic information for a, 1istrators: Generating server: 403 .edu rick.strackc@rentonschools.us #550 5.1.1 RESOLVER.ADR.RecipNotFound; not found## Original message headers: Received: from NAM02-BL2-obc.outbound.protection.outlook.com (207.46.163 .86) by Kecexc-02.403.edu (10.1.7.72) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.389.2; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 16:14:25 -0700 Received: from BY2PR02CAOO l 9.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (10.242.32.19) by SN1PR02MB2079.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (10.165.227.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version-TLSl_O, cipheFTLS_ECDHE RSA_ WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA_P384) id 15.1.587.9; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 23:14:22 +0000 Received: from BL2NAM02FT004.eop-nam02.prod.protection.outlook.com (2a01 :111 :f400:7e46::209) by BY2PR02CA0019.outlook.office365.com (2a01 :111 :e400:2c2a:: 19) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version~TLS l_ O, cipheFTLS_ECDHE_RSA_ WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA_P384) id 15.1.557.21 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 23:14:22 +0000 Authentication-Results: spFpass (sender IP is 98.139.212.163) smtp.mailfromryahoo.com; rentonschools.us; dkim~ass (signature was verified) header.d=yahoo.com;rentonschools.us; dmarc=pass action=none header.fromryahoo.com;rentonschools.us; dkim~ass (signature was verified) header.dryahoo.com; Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of yahoo.com designates 98.139.212.163 as permitted sender) receive~rotcction.outlook.com; client-ip~98.139.212. l 63; helo=4.bullet.mail.bfl .yahoo.com; Received: from nm4.bullet.mail.bfl .yahoo.com (98.139.212.163) by BL2NAM02FT004.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152. 76.168) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version-TLS l _ 2, cipheFTLS _ ECDHE _RSA_ WITH _AES_ 256 _ CBC SHA384 J384) id 15.1.587.6 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 23:14:23 +0000 DK.IM-Signature: ~l; Frsa-sha256; c~elaxed/relaxed; dryahoo.com; s-s2048; ~1472166863; bh-j zR2Iboedhe W +eP5fDxs 1fzr9NoOckzP6HUQBC59wlk-; h-Date:From:Reply-T o:T o: Subject:References :From: Subject; b~N4KJZjFM9EMS2/bCSeD1ttdB8jykrzXpd54byDpBuogqTsc9dR04X7Cy6SdSyN5eNg1Fq3nHE12o03yLWBplOP7AkQCGff t5cywayWhcoq!XeOVXanMOVan15DDWhH7mLFG2xp/B/JRE/s2go34KoMN3TTnflz0Xzas2eCfY/CTixaeLia8vtofFmonhsd+bfHh crQ5bTcXX3PYhk0ZvQ+9cW/gvpZqsh6AlP01MxcPDiRYflB2jPICg++hSzUJPGhljJfo9i/410tMH0u+5crWOD46BBTQv6vlMpMj ZA 7ck6k3uLU6jSVSisHlb 1XzUHDmu6Vkpmmt9FlohA~ Received: from [ 66.196.81.173 J by nm4.bullet.mail.bfl .yahoo.com with NNFMP; 25 Aug 2016 23:14:23 -0000 Received: from [98.139.212.221) by tml 9 .bullet.mail.bf! .yahoo.com with NNFMP; 25 Aug 2016 23:14:23 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1) by ompl 030.mail.bfl .yahoo.com with NNFMP; 25 Aug 2016 23:14:22 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 991275.14}34.bm@omp l 030,mail.bf]yahoo_som X-YMail-OSG: 4uJVloQVMlkH6odE5Dkb3sDoVl6K47qRUmR9IpNo6DIZeEi80v6Sc9liBgxfhco duunD8PVfx6DglOJKpwRaGXklM8FozaCma14GCn2uWlWMbPPTWHiBalFgBo6q!TEn5h4TXDXwJu3 K73Hs3mYfr.sYaCdCd7dMF13hmfwu3Sj6z5JhVMLiGZvfTlb3gFv8xlsq78FD9llkQP1eErDzbud ilHDr7ICG.X7R 7NeaSVIOglGTX2t_ Dniqm3boLbNmEypJavu _ K7E9SHNcyfBQr _ edaG5BCncobfR rOXWg9WUSr _rDiNY9rtCiZkZrkgnWb Y qyBzMvtfNeqJbDVwqJ gOimBjmt7TzjV3p _ c _ hel8oH7m4 ILKSZQg9TD2ql3ZVhuHi8HF4A8ja0UzpldpzJzaC7Rf_t9VTKtbzn5T2bl_J85tLZoY9hE5B6QsE XseY6SII4tSGVWD1LmXol!OpboM9FhzZb0NmqvKRdeS4u0ytrQ_xXTMJwVoW3v8uw6qh5L9mJil5f rSDRh_TEhWsX6_qE- Reeeived: from jwsl 0603.mail.bfl.yahoo.eom by sendmailws163.mail.bfl.yahoo.com; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 23:14:22 +oOOO; 1472166862.594 Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 23:14:22 +0000 From: Enkeli <cnkcli !@yahoo.com> Reply-To: Enkcli <cnkcli l(wyahoo.corn> To: "Richard (Rick) Strackc 11 <rick.strackc(ci)rcntonschools.us> Message-ID: <1932777110.1332092.1472166862342.JavaMail.yahoo(wmail.yahoo.eom> Subject: SEPA Checklist Request 5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipartialtemative; boundary="---~ _part_ 1332091_l066695948.1472166862336" References: <1932777110.1332092.14 72166862342.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.corn> Content-Length: 123 0 Return-Path: enkcli !@yahoo.com X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0 X-EOPTenantAttributedMessage: f4944a90-5b09-48c5-9eab-09acbbbd9feb:O X-F orcfront-Antispam-Report: CIP :98.139 .212.163 ;IPV :NLI;CTR Y: US;EFV: NLI;SFV :NSPM;SFS: ( 6009001 )(8156002)(2980300002)( 438002)( 189002)( 199003 )( 4 3066003)(82202001 )(27070000 I )(34 756002)(87572001 )(7116003)( 4110100001 )(34766002)(53806999)(54356999)(345070000 I )(81 542999)( 5 0986999)( 106466001 )(3480700004 )( 11100500001)(8676002)(7 63 6002)(7 596002)( 56603 0000 I )(3 5 6003)(229853001 )(866 6005 )(7846002)(8896002)(956001 )( 110136002)(86816001)(107 886002)(84326002)( 42186005)( 1096003 )( 4300700001 )( 189998001 )( 586003 )(85 226003 )(7 6176999)(73972006)(86362001)(2860700002)(83332001 )(246002)( 626004 )(80022004 )( 450 I 0000 I)( 51287 400 2)( 5000I00001 )(7059030)( 62882003 )( 4 727 6003 )(3 727 6004 )(7 l 996002);D IR:fNB ;SFP:;SCL: 1 ;SRVR: SN I PR02MB2079 ;H:mn4. bul let.mail. bfl .yahoo.com; FPR: ;SPF:Pass;PTR:mn4. bullet.mail. bfl. yahoo.com;MX: 1 ;A: I ;LAN G:en; X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: I ;BL2NAM02FT004;1 :rvFaQT A2EzhDgx/XIXft40H7W5Lr20WK5jjSZRwpHFGIROCjX8mH++ YX8EA54JnkFVXwyWUtlcm07 qXQ93+C94 l WrCj AD P544ahAlwj EBj ZTul 3 qCKyJ s4mQZcXEOtg!Xx2Z14GleZBkr3+ Hz4 I PW 4 7113hpRHOogt60i Y ZAJwlbimkpa YQHI6aKDjPWtVW143iZr2bWcfQZiBWjlgqFCS7pLZmbhJu8lhXcV4WLlbnFqQFDuVmY5a39hTfFPDpx8HvY4v3q7MmEUiLy XhMPatue/j92/KFC7cxUrlAEHynzJwqN2+XSwywA7y4plKLW5hnd9qVVFiq0jrj0fxMw01TIYILG8DypvL5YgpetigE87YiQnaql NPOeA5zrTztMjNcflDC7D0BgVP/aExuklcNflzE+ShqEL6LEOvoU3CxUvsAEOjX+ITSSKMLVOzX9tflQCH4VpqCp5bkXCZHM1 B9YwU47.J4S+POPTIHym41KH4/8HZji8ZvqYHaY+F301Ck1Gw3s+G6LCh00gjRDGFdzubJbNdIBQQm6o0zVea5Fd0HjErjgywUYF wbuUeUWS+BcM82+GOqZORYhrhB5Q2w=c= X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 4cf7 fa 70-4 fc2-4c77 -71 ea-08d3cd3d8d43 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1 ;SN I PR02MB2079;2 :H CpsiJQ9rguJhw E85+eL88yNCFHE3cERZq DyfliobT szs9pu0uSMZ66kZ + ZAiUEdj FTnkpRBAsdwS3onR2 Q DlRJ 5 3 zs09 3 Y wvQQ++6eN7TR TkluckUZXOzwBJaQc Vw 19 5LhSFDi8t3ZESqarQ70Vw99qckNHN81LzxQxtoR IE +Kxh6fkOS I vf tOYMIEt7!59;3:qXOLDCSeJ7gps6LWHXvoHRVt2YFRKRmPYikcNCBBE43ULNFch7E7qKOOSIGGFM3tShp6581dakYD7fzQrfl vOGOyOCM QI e/JBAZy4 IQ V gS3rZMA yrrugPHrlN 5oanrcggpnBqBbSjbsc3 STDu4bM y26d64eljwMf2 8ATvbpEyLZgvl 7 /xh+ AW sxr b0yXEYTcZzcoSi2+0k+/GHOn2x+bhz0kYxxpz!Zf29wW4gHocGl2KBVC4noNUt8nrUgZ/5Mthc5tRigjjMFAlalLKnEjVODeK9Y pU8zWbf+YfCawXjxjrSEAPVa5slxl8ZOZvlmLHioDZy+FXv!QG8leBMeCZJRPkgNj9e05v8Xf6blAKSU~ X-DkimResult-Test: Passed X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;BCL:O;PCL:O;RULEID:(8251501002)(3001016)(30I0002)(71701004)(71702002);SRVR:SNI PR02MB2079; X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: I; SN 1 PR02MB2079 ;25 :w JkqgxNGgPi8xMDWFlkrl8ieDTR whbXP2L8 fwQ LfbU eo/R3/8 fqBEGwJX5 Se 13 L ylh VO yo VW oXhmRhfs dsAxjMRnL+7DMyCsm3j53GW3WfTwtCltEln44GWnq23ipDlsmk5XSZmLrd3nvV18dte5qlkwWbcu4KRliDKD/LYTN7jc+cBVR Oa5RAliiONeW7h+2s29TFf2cH7tioV8SiGdwpBXED20Uv/IsjNijWPtkgtge3uCTWguWxiHNbWzVpoiM9VX05k25SoZYQFLw8p VayhxOdmmPzwnb YPkyfuz5tA6D90lkbDmzLO SJ4lbfXHmaD2 VXPTIZI wkHI1Q3t/6jHcwN Q3 Y obywrp Y2COa4 M 1 GtaNXTGPOiO 5r6a9hKL T 1 Puko8L6iz04 mdnU m2 fl< v AdEuv6D3 DPUMfOpsaLg8dH7xsDo TEGuNulzL6EkowYUBZ3 FpJ D KGGj66v XX w/U9PF CqPFrUS6WxfPp8TrSw1Kzc9KQijt7VnLL4MtUbYrQEnRY2NouOUbGOT8iD780r+jRjiHUJBVlfTZWymolcAOSbZ7LvGjVKfVop QuWKunu0lj3uZLTvlVuLAzbitrtffjYOlnF2nYl5zEqToCLKLqMTTLaY7F3bsleghwAKJN5KmZuETL2ikRPnXJZap/L7mvgCobOI gUSyWMcfljhm/E3Dehh5kil!xXmvSLySs+ JbC8+04ddutlavdqDeKp7unByY1 VpC6Ap22ER6/u7tql3kScWAifyUEbZ/kYkPDDNby + 1 Bg9EEbE3+uUlpRz3ompmLAHV62ywMFolmR Y zV glKMwmu5aXWTUY +oXR7LLAahSOjhTHHcHRXjkCEMBH7/valhvapJE p U3 nK vYlzHd4oyCrOC5XAESRj I ET oFpOHERQ ! Qqib8Dqa l /mGnQ YI GTPrana+kK5qx8cCvRhLh V 1 kOp WiLfzfPp 1 WK0i9VU CC tmw X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1 ;SN 1 PR02MB2079;3 l :pzid8NqRZVMCzW AJDsrY 42+uGCcbfx4shGVjQORcGWGPKFa0flGb6MD9ZwY sfflomXWN3ih+ 7dldcq bkU4aM4dzYMousKSVOMoHsuAKv58Lz7FzaqCmKJqsxBpS5 l tC357butD9rquP/r17WyA4eNEUYZgtTq3B50rWuzhulfUOSEw1U 1MpA19je0vewSzZVOdASPP7GBgl4icvhcusXcn4anGS/akyn50cKJCDYkBGA~;20:kVvHX3rGFg0h5wRJ2LxQA+NxX2DVPf46i2 nNl-ltSbDtFlmbOG9JRWemncpESRAI/ AvBeD1MsaMEAt0Yn821 y6DQG 1 u I SMZ/ A3yteJXyn/Z8BrRiwj lxoWXr4xtZS5oHrGUFD ol88Va+lmXIJigKKAen03/6F6Jc7vEyRCYtEZmMlkXb7p4aGFepM5cpxGOUUUAuAHB40wmuZ3SLE07GoU1XoQHbHk2a2x4 v7x+oN8zv3i+m/GuNhN+i3uHiKhoORZhLAnWEaRj1GJqNoNhx053CCaK4YcQ9h70wDddQsJVIFy80n81j6fmxtllcNUnr4BQg4 rz8ylZGTXajjRilnsfkyUb3Fkd6LuFYnyCE5ElZZqnzrpRZ6loSKXx44FBMJHSoJXqcNcd4mlJdNs9810tl2vGsiH3urx3ejH5POpY6a kHl33RLF500rYVF2MRqACbd+UMe59FlruX721 TDYiORHxhdeHA 7ClHrs5VipzhCzBQYVG+urU lqp7q+qQuXb3y X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-T est: UriScan:; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CF A-Test: BCL:O;PCL:O;RULEID:(9101531078)(60 I 004)(2401047)(13023025)(13024025)( 13018025)( 130 l 6025)(8121501046)(10201501046) (3002001) ;SRVR: SN 1 PR02MB2079 ;BCL:O; PCL:O; RU LEID:; SR VR: SN 1 PR02MB2079; 6 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: I ;SN I PR02MB2079;4 :iOgi Y 2Im/CdYuLB9HZujKL5 AjyS 1 EO Vli2wa8urV oLu87Q5 3 j 1u3 EdKbLpsun8lk Y mDkGRbRuDvEPD54 W hcklls753tlmDE+8uHsU g6ovvM4bwW lk+ JJglEtvfBL YaqbbnMCPWuLf40IcBTI Mff2Y mkh5JkoXOJ60yhM4KNW dhqhRmZ+4o HctKgWB4Mcd3 liJRlS9/kgwM9fBMkKbuU+sPZuixtgB3gV A5yYxNUIWPefDgnK7 l wljWeb+He/KQzhsGdtW5HxLiNvnXOOV5+ RXFDCmyCiKkSDflwH/kzzuiOqT l9Cl+8wPQ1eAd6DfH4xS VF7 iNFlqc93 l OT 5lz4wVigaAEpfBOS Tlrb HX GqD E W gtTv+ Zr XfY2t XTvyzOV q lyCtDSOA/ZMiriTmmvv4Pluiral W9R3q lc!FovUN041q63BwfqNAD3q0R YX6mNZEzVul bzhmomCgp7Wl 1 pACKxww X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: ~?us- ascii?Q? 1; SN 1 PR02MB2079;23 :Zm WoMR WSpoQ 1 DXR4s8zkrQcKPW 3 Y w7xpmu I xfUjZu?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?VzlapltfcB8CKKSMhs0pMqMLRtBqjsLtlgk4DssuaQkEJnoj0uvWNA61NggI?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?buH4q U4a W l 4aFvP8b I Qz++pQDyPPkq l 49i3k6aivtTZrb+5pzjs+e/7HZcyz?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?9x8An YBNlckjNaK +U KCpoRbKSBITPPedXtFIFps!AiAG Y +pbfzAGaMxiCCZP?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?eBWNCB3STuEFmLiGOZI2stA6JDseJo5MRibdj2UYF3kCGnpTJJRWk7/l8+S7?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?ydzlznBOdY2a4QR/krwC6kRgVr6QY6YyA8E+Ni+KVOK +Wvm6y5LNFOwctWoM?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?2H06l7SfbCArudynExpljiMoolwXvE6pyzgBlpsPrW3DH8mKczNMStuRVPOY?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?4D3flAHcCj0LNqhSMiRAOU2QCIXLCqAF!om2N85aLdxGNhxnazqKutpBecrL?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?OrEFU4FnJ/IKWj GaqlrSg I UIXR/88qGRcNW c7mOQ20 KxEzDB SQxm VNidkrEp?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?mFzooLZYK/gci0kaNXUJ7Awl2tPXBuqxbxaEHtZ+4LbdEikbXh0FrRH5D2Rs?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?pRd04yrGf6o3jYP5hDE8qfE9wCg4APuBNUTfDOJNwphigJCE3olszyPBw06h?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?Gzf86grwt902Dr8 sfinayes9dt5 FLKZC6R5 PKzyqQdM9naC82 l Sbz8GTQ3 YhO?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?y+887ZwwnHsnXKXbVwu5/65SoDhGFe8Hklny6npdfWJwLXUlVKdvjyVBQLOc?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?FNHXxxqmmSiixP8R/z4wOZBkllAsF+KQzpSFGnURR+7yGilrPbhwg2ugXFSp?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?7KUq4t4nyrHcGmtPh2DthRk8B3vFxC5X3t+hzaN+Omw0/yho!DaSohv+HxTG?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?OikDSVcev3/IZSpnm+muSYpmaRGFwsGlhysUQgmCteyBK/3puZeXpj9iofcj?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?CLj7aZrhpZZmethkfU9Zpyrk4rhOfqRyr/sQVioSMBlQv4AMHG8kOptbWGwx?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?G4xRNHRzyhddZGo/E7mvWVSHWR7S9iofwz3UZRPihM!gFZn26Z70tp8Z54EP?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?9PoZ5 ltFbAsEsN 6+6UVKAisSLPENN8NY mosM!GtSgC95Qb34ZA W eJtrv Jtq Y?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?aFcwfwkfUEVyc84be9dorugXHJj3KibJoYaCzhafiQa5SQ7HvNHtmlPaC/Wk?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?EtVObU9o5KPaHBB KOvCy 1 NuRn WZU/p YXY yD4Jb TtbRxlsTYSbD1s0fDPQj0n?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?L I IN dwoEN 5G FbBU+ukAAAcXnO I typb7 A vi++ Z I WidHTt++wBf0Cf7p18i8p3 ?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?x2k TD949Q 86mqx5n+ 15KmZwchZQ FRuMogJDrxoP A/8Gh Y AJDX8c9to3rDbmw?~ ~?us-ascii?Q?7kUF48JzlwUJe4ytVXd+7ewgWM~3D?~ X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: I;SNIPR02MB2079;6:MAmh02l0gLOvp2kb2qtAfRqkndn0v4aFThuW9gTkbtPeNB30yb0ntlBINI8!JvwMBbnog/lUKVcw2qlqZO/k EkGoDZFRvrE3nTb9WgXmq8Fdjj6uTNifUX8n4hbuJDXoJ92QatjqkberrxNaTOSWJZ7AltjvTDzDyb1WDqh+pni+ZTQPzefijf4m4g fvUOCkBkklzV71mBrsvZp0cupvnX3TajFlz+vb/b31SsOC6srE4Q7K4zd5B88bScaBq+oYHaqvuLOxUxvl/uAH/txfhTkAmZxUK8kL GughF19+GpxEFoDnkcj4PaPiud5lidMSg;5:aVik9De0Wxb4o5Afx3L4UaHzJ7EGjMdla80Wy34i5fNNXwqXMF8JtfMBOir7Qi43r5 TAg3TJl33uvH4m/li6Me7aUAzllf83nF7Pq8z9xAOPIUe4Q8QlntlOqORV+bXclGQaCpYS7ZJUyl81IIL2tcg===;24:oFOx42559hlbbfo KTB+E+Zo9/f+hxA3w5ZOdu61szLo00YfxiDoV02Qgnc3Yfx2q2qteKNf9QYLn/GuECnQz78mpa5gG7wAsNTkdKB8Megg~;7:w UV4FWfV4gU4bm8iTConGxlh8Xldc9ARrWmvWBFG2aQp3PudPLOIX7bhM4X8gOhke+oXpGAwffLrzifxvpWlaxh0qBRBR/o7t X/S2Lq9MBLT9ecpNege8ll2iMgGim917KeMDukkc0cBKbL 7gPiEGwl qgSHtpJHVnxmKfilequ I kdswU I xj!EHTu YS9eubouoQ/Yj Bxhqy4GUjRNCyjzyjtp3Db0e8kmKqyhKBbG2clB9mFL33JnxpMPQCp0vlSDZOB+nkTw0oDkqsAk0JTFg~ SpamDiagnosticOutput: I :99 SpamDiagnosticMctadata: NSPM X-Microsoft-Exchangc-Diagnostics: l ;SN 1 PR02MB2079 ;20: 3J iapRc2M G Pq3j 8tCHE6ElldBrKMbA4SnyVRLHG8pANdD0 KH t V fgfyd VS SOW aNa/IIR 7 oQMSxsc 1 BeZ U fijQ Ez2KK I TfglzqC/fDGj m3 H3 Ekhf9q sriqxj KGq9Dvg7brDuL6fJ yj 61 +aGBP3 PL3 y+EDzhv BwZs6P802TY HaRIXQ~ X-OriginatorOrg: rcntonschools.onmicrosoft.com X-MS-Exchangc-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Aug 2016 23:14:23.4984 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTcnant-Id: f4944a90-5b09-48c5-9eab-09aebbbd9feb X-MS-Exchangc-CrossT cnant-FromEntity I leader: Internet X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossT cnantHeadersStamped: SN 1 PR02MB2079 Mr. Stracke, I would like to request a copy of the Environmental Checklist for the upcoming construction of Sartori Elementary School. Please email a copy to this address. Thank you, Angie Laulainen 7 Matthew Herrera From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Mayor and Council, Kathleen Booher-Sheesley <kbooher@gmail.com> Monday, September 19, 2016 9:23 PM Denis Law; Randy Corman; Don Persson; Armando Pavone; Ryan Mcirvin; Ed Prince; Carol Ann Witschi; Ruth Perez Diane Dobson; Neil Sheesley; Vanessa Dolbee; Matthew Herrera RSD SEPA Evaluation Thank you for the opportunity to speak this evening. My apologies for not addressing the council appropriately. I was not planning on speaking this evening, was unprepared and mis-spoke. Our neighbors only have a week to respond the the SEPA evaluation comment period. RSD is claiming a zip code error on the delayed distribution of notices. Some of our neighbors received official notification of the SEPA comment period on Thursday, 9/15/16, the day of our neighborhood meeting. The inputs are supposed to be submitted by Friday, 9/23, at 5 pm. That is not enough time for our neighbors to review all the documents and provide feedback. RSD is supposed to allow 30 days for comment. Our neighbor, in an attempt to help our community posted the information at the bottom of this email on Nextdoor yesterday. This demonstrates the difficulty we've had in dealing with Randy Matheson. Our meeting on Thursday, 9/15/16, was intended to create the space for our neighbors to understand the process, where we are currently, when we have the opportunity to engage and comment, and ask questions. It didn't go well. We need your help. City representatives were far more transparent, patient, informative and helpful. Some neighbors interpreted the information provided by the city as contrary to what RSD stated -increasing our discomfort with Randy and the perception he is misleading our community. Please inform us on how we can get the comment period extended at least 2 weeks so our neighbors can respond. The next school board meeting isn't until after the comment period ends on 9/23. We need help. Please guide us through this unknown territory with a deadline approaching. Here is what I wrote to the Interim Assistant Superintendent, Susan Leland, after Randy insulted a co-worker and neighbor. Randy's "behaviors have created significant barriers to being engaged and productive. The misrepresentations of his engagement with our community, sharing of inaccurate information, and lack of response and professionalism are driving this request. He doesn't seem to have the patience, communication skills or professionalism to be our liaison. He has become very adversarial and disrespectful to our community members. We need to be able to engage with someone from RSD that is respectful and willing to partner with this community. While we appreciate his apology last night, it is not enough. Is there any way we can partner with another RSD representative? This is an urgent request as the SEPA evaluation is happening now." And ... "Another concern is that our neighbors were not advised appropriately regarding the SEPA comment period. They were informed yesterday (9/15) and responses are due on 9/23. Community members are usually given 30 days to respond. Our neighbors have a week. They have requested a week extension so they can evaluate all the forms and provide feedback." The response was talk to Matt Feldmeyer, project manager. She did not address the SEPA comment period. Nextdoor Post: This is an urgent request as the SEP A evaluation is happening now." Contacts for Sartori Comments Angie I ,aulainen from North Renton · ld ago I If you wish to comment regardi . Jans for Sartori, the construction pha' fthe new elementary school, the time to do so is now: 1) Comments to Renton School District regarding the SEPA Review (send to both names and ask them to confirm receipt of your comments) due by Friday 9/23 5:00 PM: Rick Stracke, Designated SEPA Official for Renton School District rickstrackc@rentonschools.us Matthew Feldmeyer, Project Manager for the new Sartori Elementary matthew.feldmeyer@rcntonschools.us See the information Renton School District has posted here: http:/ /www.rentonschools.us/Page/.27 l 8 Note: the artists rendering which is showing in the slide show is not the current rendition, but you can find the updated one in the posted in the school district documents. 2) Comments to City of Renton regarding the Land Use Application, due by Friday 9/28, 5:00 PM: Matthew Herrera, Project Manager for City regarding Sartori mherrera@rentonwa.gov (425) 430-6593 See the Land Use Application and documents posted here: http://rcntonwa.gov/business/default.asp ... If you are so inclined, send copies of your comments to our Neighborhood organization North Renton Neighborhood Association north.rc.nton@gmail.com Edited Id ago · Shared with North Renton+ 14 nearby neighborhoods in General 2 Matthew Herrera From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: North Renton Neighborhood Association <north.renton@gmail.com> Monday, September 19, 2016 9:40 PM Denis Law; Randy Corman; Don Persson; Ruth Perez; Carol Ann Witschi; Armando Pavone; Ryan Mcirvin; Ed Prince Neil Sheesley; Diane Dobson; Vanessa Dolbee; Matthew Herrera Fwd: Help Needed · New RSD Representative Needed Here is the email between myself and the Interim Assistant Superintendent, Susan Leland. She directs me to the city to address the processes and timelines. We were clearly told on Thursday that the SEPA evaluation, and comment period, is being conducted by RSD. I am trying to find my way through this, but I keep getting redirected. We need help getting through this mess. We need the comment period extended. It would be great if they could get a full 30 days to respond, but were willing to accept 2 weeks. FYSA ... since my experience with Randy on Thursday, 9/15, I've heard from city commissioners and other city leaders (not council or city employees, but volunteers and leaders of other organizations) that they have had similar experiences with Randy. Imagine if I could spend my time and energy doing positive, productive, even creative things rather than chasing down information to get clarity and fighting for an extension so our community members can be engaged. RSD missed a zip code on the distribution of the notification. They need to do the right thing and extend the comment period. Please help us. It shouldn't be this hard for us to be a part of a new elementary school in our community. Kathleen, Secretary North Renton Neighborhood Association ----------Forwarded message ---------- From: Susan Leland <Susan.Leland@rentonschools.us> Date: Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 3:19 PM Subject: Re: Help Needed -New RSD Representative Needed To: North Renton Neighborhood Association <north.renton@grnail.com> Cc: Neil Sheesley <nasheesley(m,aol.com>, Diane Dobson <dmd82l@aol.com>, Tim C <tcollins@.gmail.com>, "weaveredits@grnail.com" <weaveredits@grnail.com>, Matthew Feldmeyer <matthew.feldmeyer(mrentonschools.us> Dear Kathy- Thank you so much for reaching out to me. I hope the information I am providing you will assist you in getting accurate and timely information. The Sartori project manager is Matt Feldmeyer. He is your best source of district information for the Sartori project and I have included him on the email string. I also want to direct you to the lead agencies for information and comment periods i.e., the City of Renton etc. to assist you in ensuring you are aware of these strictly defined processes and timelines. The district is not in control of these processed. I I hope this helps. Susan Smith Leland Assistant Superintendent of Finance Get Outlook for Android From: North Renton Neighborhood Association Sent: Friday, September 16, 10: 16 AM Subject: Help Needed -New RSD Representative Needed To: Susan Leland Cc: Neil Sheesley, Diane Dobson, Tim C, weaveredits@gmail.com Dear Susan, I was searching on the RSD Website and found your name. I hope that as the Interim Assistant Superintendent you can help us. I am the secretary of the North Renton Neighborhood Association (NRNA). It has become very apparent that Randy Matheson is not the right community relations representative of RSD to be engaged with our neighborhood for the Sartori School project. We are trying to understand the process and be engaged, but his behaviors have created significant barriers to being engaged and productive. The misrepresentations of his engagement with our community, sharing of inaccurate information, and lack of response and professionalism are driving this request. He doesn't seem to have the patience, communication skills or professionalism to be our liaison. He has become very adversarial and disrespectful to our community members. We need to be able to engage with someone from RSD that is respectful and willing to partner with this community. While we appreciate his apology last night, it is not enough. Is there any way we can partner with another RSD representative? This is an urgent request as the SEPA evaluation is happening now. Another concern is that our neighbors were not advised appropriately regarding the SEPA comment period. They were informed yesterday and responses are due on 9/23. Community members are usually given 30 days to respond. Our neighbors have a week. They have requested a week extension so they can evaluate all the forms and provide feedback. I think this situation is due, in part, with the discomfort our community has in their dealings with Mr. Matheson. Our neighborhood needs information and transparency on the process. We need someone we trust and is willing to be engaged. Please consider and advise. Thank you for your time and attention. Kathleen, Secretary North Renton Neighborhood Association 2 Print Form Reset Form save Form DEPARTMENT OF COMM TY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT --------•Renton E) l. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. TREE RETENTION WORKSHEET Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 I www.rentonwa.gov Total number of trees over 6" diameter1, or alder or cottonwood trees at least 8" in diameter on project site Deductions: Certain trees are excluded from the retention calculation: Trees that are dangerous 2 Trees in proposed public streets Trees in proposed private access easements/tracts Trees in critical areas 3 and buffers Total number of excluded trees: Subtract line 2 from line 1: 41 5 11 16 25 Next, to determine the number of trees that must be retained 4, multiply line 3 by: 0.3 in zones RC, R-1, R-4, R-6 or R-8 0.2 in all other residential zones 0.1 in all commercial and industrial zones 8 List the number of 6" in diameter, or alder or cottonwood trees over 8" in diameter that you are proposings to retain 4 : 0 Subtract line S from line 4 for trees to be replaced: (if line 6 is zero or less, stop here. No replacement trees are required) 8 Multiply line 6 by 12" for number of required replacement inches: 96 Proposed size of trees to meet additional planting requirement: trees trees trees trees trees trees trees trees trees trees inches (Minimum 2" cali~er trees reguired for re~lacement 1 otherwise enter O} 2 inches per tree 9. Divide line 7 by line 8 for number of replacement trees 6: (If remainder is .5 or greater, round up to the next whole number) 48 trees 1 Measured at 4.5' above grade. 2 A tree certified, in a written report, as dead, terminally diseased, damaged, or otherwise dangerous to persons or property by a licensed landscape architect, or certified arborist, and approved by the City. 3 Critical areas, such as wetlands, streams, floodplains and protected slopes, are defined in RMC 4-3-050. 4 Count only those trees to be retained outside of critical areas and buffers. 5 The City may require modification of the tree retention plan to ensure retention of the maximum number of trees per RMC 4-4-130H7a. 6 When the required number of protected trees cannot be retained, replacement trees, with at least a two-inch (2") caliper or an evergreen at least six feet (6') tall, shall be planted. See RMC 4-4-130.H. l.e.(ii) for prohibited types of replacement trees. 1 H :\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Self-Hel p Handouts\Planning\ Tree Retention Worksheet.docx Exhibit 17 08/2015 ~ ~----.. n eoJQD it\ f~' ".I..J-C ill I ~ . r~-r:::; I rnteg L\./~,. ... LOCATION OF SERVICE YARD v r--, I I o I I 6 I I - L __ ...J r---, I I I I 'I I I~ L--..l Jl ··~t 1·.o"' 20·-o· A 4 1 SCREENING PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" ~ ~ (2 N 3 NORTH ELEVATION-SCREENING SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" b bl b "' 2 4 J ----· ----ROOF STRUCTURE ~=========~~SF ~ METAL GATES / MASONRY SCREEN WALL EAST ELEVATION-SCREENING SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" -------SCHOOL BUILDING ROOF STRUCTURE ei======""'""'="::'f==""'. MASONRY SCREEt ~ SOUTH ELEVATION-SCREENING SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" WALL Exhibit 18 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: October 31, 2016 TO: Matt Herrera, Senior Planner FROM: Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager SUBJECT: Traffic Concurrency Test -Satori Elementary School; File No. LUAlG-000692 The Renton School District has submitted applications for Hearing Examiner Planned Urban Development and Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit approvals for the construction of a new 3-story 79,000 square foot Satori Elementary School. The subject property consists of 14 contiguous parcels (city block) that are bound by Park Ave N., Garden Ave N., N 4th St., and N 3rd St. The 5.28 acre subject property is an entire block located within the Residential-8 (R-8), R-10, Commercial Neighborhood (CN), and Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning designations. All existing structures are in the process of being removed. Vehicle access to the subject property is proposed on N. 3rd St. and N. 4th St. The proposal includes 83 parking stalls, 14 bus loading spaces, and 14 covered bicycle parking spaces. The proposed development would generate a reduction in approximately 200 net new average weekday daily trips. During the weekday AM peak hour, the project would generate approximately 176 net new trips (100 inbound and 76 outbound). During the weekday PM peak hour, the project would generate a reduction of approximately 26 net new trips (-19 inbound and -7 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 Exhibit 19 Transportation Concurrenc· Page 2 of 3 October 31, 2016 Evaluation of Test Criteria t-Satori Elementary School Implementation of citywide Transportation Plan: As shown on the attached citywide traffic concurrency summary, the city's investment in completion of the forecast traffic improvements are at 130% of the scheduled expenditure through 2016. 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 2016 is 79,153 trips, which provides sufficient capacity to accommodate the reduction of 200 trips from this project. A resulting 79,353 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 the project. Site specific street improvements to be completed by project: The project will be required to complete all internal and frontage street improvements for the building prior to occupancy. 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 adopted Citywide Level af Service Index and Concurrency Management System established in the Transportation Element of the Renton Comprehensive Plan, according to 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 to 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 of concurrency shall be made by the decision maker with the authority to approve the accompanying development permits required for a development activity. A written finding of concurrency shall apply only to the specific land uses, densities, intensities, and development project described in the application and development permit. 3. Failure of Test: If no reconsideration is requested, or if upon reconsideration a project fails the concurrency test, the project application shall be denied by the decision maker with the authority to approve the accompanying development activity permit application. Transportation Concurrency Page 3 of 3 October 31, 2016 -Satori Elementary School 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. ® ·-•below. eai, ...... ,... .... . --r·· -~ '""'""' .... ~ --·~· .. , ,,.J :::;.3~ "F : · .. : ., ,_,_._... ,. ,· ,.,}';:-;-:-7~1n rr1iuJri~·.-e __ ·,, -·~-· . 3 ,. -.. f''. !3-. ' ~ ,· ,.. . I , i,.'L;,:I .. ,),-,..~.,. . E°'~ V. E8 . ~~· -(~ ,.. ··-..~ "" ..,. ,..11; ":.'< ,V • '"~', .'!' 44jTO S2' .... :,::··:.;·:.:. /: u ,. ·· 1 ~ .. · ·,_,' ..!!"~~;,.,, .... ! -. , .. , ;-:,~ i: ,-., . . of1 ~; CONNECT To\' ·._: EXISTING -f CATCH BAS1N · I· IE: 30.50 : t \t ~; ., ·1 .. / ')-, ,., .,; REMOVE Nm~ - REPI.ACE t EXIST. CATct(,: ·! ~ IIASIN ANO -~ . PIPE'. f l • I '·· 1- ' ·I • '/ .,•, • ·~ ~~'-I 1 '.i-' '• :t .. ~.: 4 .,.T.::/ ... ,:·" ; ~ ~'. '~ I , '--!. 1-1~ . ,: . . J1= .. r + t ,w -.l ··-..; ~ I f' , ... o~· 1•·1 . f · 10 '4,IS~ I I I I I I ~I I I I ~· Nag· us· OJ'w v· ~, · 1-:., i} f I I I FFE=38.50 •. ·:.:1 ~ i!, l,ll,j u ~•.f, : ' '( (C-· ,.. ~ ~-,., .J•J •J.,,t ., "'·'····· -~ ~ ... , .• f '. .-J . :. ~1j ' "'I:! ~! i :! -. J _.,171.:~-> ~-·> -.. "~ .. ·! ll r :, • ~-, i I f--i t · l 1'' \, f 4 -~<; '..:. :-: ; ·" I ' _., 'i '.i~ '·~·'. l 'w; IU ,., t 1y:.,' AIIAI I I Uf> NAIL ANU WASt tlk N.180~/~.5611 1. uo,ooJ. !>,eJ I ti V:JJ.415 "· • '""' '-> ~..: E ' i •. a: I ,¥ . ' "" li' :"- 'I -::· .':)u;~ . t',,,~r, ~~< . , ·-~7-1-:• ' ,t , ·,.,: .. _;,,,.~-' ,; ,;,,.,~ ... :· : -; .. l, ·-' .. . ·. '· ~-•--r ---, , ---:::,_:;..,-. ,, L;,, i --,::r-::::. -~ _ -_ 11 . -. . -~ ... : ··:; .. ·~·*:· I 'rf ;,,-~· I t)•· o,· so·< j j 10 4.H . I I I I I J I I I I I I I ,: 1, -~ 311.41 -.-- FFE=38.50 I •. I ·-, fl -<·.:-•-:, :• --~ 00&_..... I MATCH LINE ·SEE BELOW N<Jlm/4fH.,,,.., / f,,c.c, V '-'" ',, .. c c•m ~ '-~-------- :,-. :,' -'h >: -. .,,, :r IJRAS'S ar.,.N' WUR PUNOt '' • d CASt.. \°, i' -"1(, -'--. -·-.°""...,.. ,~w ~,.,: ·T"=;,;ifriiiu..-~~ ....... .....,.~-,--~~~ ....... .,...... ........ ~.,......~-:--~;. 1 ·,~ . . -7-:;:----:::::::::=========;:;=~===::::::-----7~~; "-,: •l '1"' • ' • ._ r i..1 [ j 37 .... I~ _ -1 • :~~ g-, :. .. * -<:, -;I 1, } ~} •, 1 •. ,v ,,:,, '{-H :1:,, ~~ < ,,., "''"' -·V \ D D ( :.;.»~ 0 ,"·' 0 RIM: 311.50 RIM: 38.50 0 /· \ RIM:311.50 /JU '-----31r------_, ~N4!1: ', ~ E~:: N«J '1,,1 ' eo } ; .:~t :t~ ,:!1 .k ·; :l~ ::i i . ·_,, . "I: .f. '~ '"-' : ·11·. ·I_; . JU . . 1t !· I )_r- ~h I Ii ' -:lf': l ~1, ;, i f .111 I LL:i ,,11<:1 . ' ,1 i a~ : 'I o1... ., .. =1; _1 j ·l 'l I I : I .,f ·t , I ; ; ~ • < I.. ~ I I l '-{. 'i~ f:• l E: ·1r · ;t-: .( l l~.-1_ .. NI IAMY 5t 'M R [A.S[M(N I RE.Cf ;NO, 700810 18000J1 9 i1 f .~ ' I !!l ~· . ,t• I r.· ,); !-· t 1l KJ I ~ r~ . I Q: 4 \i I ,I, ' ~ ,~ •• : .. -~,. ... ___ --. ~""""' ----~ ,l .,;; .. : · .. 11 , .:i.; .... ·~RIFl~RAAT""'J . ~ I ... . w,-~ .J~·. ~ ~=*'""'''' -::Rf-. ·,.i· : ~~ , ,,, ·• . •.• .,.. ..... .~ . ·,_: ()--. . -·: .. -_,tit :i ~ij ~ ~ N . • .,, . / Tl' .~ . • -~" ________i -~ ... ..-,. . -·-·--.,, . ·,;,;:·<-, .. --~~,,, t JIii ~ . ~ .. ,.. =-"""'-.:· ~. -. ........ -.. ""'· " .::.::. PROPOSED LEGEND: • STORM CATCH BASIN ----D STORM LIN E ----RO ROO FDRAJN EXISTING PROPERTY LINE -------PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE ,.; J r•· . · .. , ,,., ,., .. , . :'!,.., , I . • ... . .,., : r ; . . . • <' ; •• ,,,. •• ,;~, · J/ ""'"''§~j .t ·h,s l ~:::~-7~1;:t;l~ t If hll ~· . ., .: __ c! ___ /.t· rx: .:._._ ..... _, ... ,.,,,.., . r ,_ .. ~ ,-. , ----.• -... ~N,...... • ~· ,, ;1. '·"'~.,,, .... <J. _·.· '..;. ·-~ ~n ! ' ~.,:\,.-~·r. s· <' , '' ··~oul,p .~ l!M•SS , ~ "': CONNECT TO _o.z-~:!J:-:.o:,_ ~· -J.-! EXIST ING MATCH LINE · SEE A10YE . , ,w MANHOLE ~r -~~-31 .22 EXISTIN G SITE (AU PARCELS): 5.21 AC ~~f,~~~UIAC AREA Of WORK; 1.89 AC Fill LOCATION AND ORIGIN: T1IO BY CONTRACTOR DESTINATION Of SOIL TO BE APPF\OVEO LOCA TION TBD BY REMOVED : CONT RACTOR N CD Exhibit 20 OIIAPHIC SCALE 0 15 JO l.r..~ 1• • 30 FE ET eo ! Design Development ~., (; V ....... • - :-:: .. .. ,-.. ~= :~ :;. ;: ·~ :: 0 !, :. ·-·----· r.ri:r~F.i ,:i • .:!:f:n~..:. At9..NO ·l t111131.10 0 -0 u .r:. ·c u -;; "' ·-~ C 0 ca 0 c .r:. CD u E "' CD C iii 0 ·c: -C 0 Cl) t: a:: ca "' i I C j z • ::I ! I C, "' ... .., Date· 8124118 Job No.: 211'07 00 Drawn By: F. l<ATONA Checked by: W. FIERST I., a..T ~ CIVIL GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN C1.00 ~ -., 'r· I ---'I f/ ,. " I I ,;_ , , • ., ~-=.---T ;; ;~j ;,,, ~! •0 -~ •. i ~0 ! -~ ~ 1,-;;-:1:--:""'!:'; ''A., 1 1·"" , -·--·_·· : '"t 11 ~rn l'Hfit ~ ,~. ,! .J, , -1tt~· ·I'-I. • .• F -.. .:.: .. · "· ;; :, )~: :It-~. ' ' ' ~~: ;_:\',,.::i: '.:~.~,Y .;;~·. «: .,,.. : /n :I . ~--. ;.Jl,I I :·, :--V: _ _ .,,,,Q ., /' ! : :)· I ~l I , •-,,, 'V ·'_· ' ' -_ -' __ • . I .,. •i •. , " I,' I 't, .) :,,", •j V -, 1· • '"'' ·-·-_. -?1 __ --~ ! ,I .. , j •t•) .-.,J·'1 !t e \j1 '~ I .. • D+ !I l ,t -,} //~ ' .',)1 .Jil' ::,. : ·, :f ' ,I' ..:, :J . t ' . II ,;! I 'tt·_,-_: ~ ~ ; -:ii:: . ,_ ··'''•,' ,-::-·,>-l-A !:!I :r, I ·:'~L1 ~ -~ cq ' ---. . i I • i: '1 '; '·~1 i:_• 1 'l~ ~m ·1·· EXISTING WATER O O ' , w.JN -=~-ll<W>l~<Wl so~ __ SEPIVICE , _ ~l,.- 1 . ~ ·-;;: IM>AAHT ; ,11[ : , I ASSEMBLY : _ ,• OPOSE NEWrsa ,, 1 1 : ·.e ,,, .• , ¥•" '_' , .. TAEE ,-PROPOSED T _· '_·, -.-· .,-, , -•· " f' r --TREI: f :-~· ,, :~. .. ... _ • 1SSEWER .) 1 ~ · .. , , ,., . .. " EASEMENT ~ --11' f • . --II{' -, i ' ·-NH1%~it1~J'w -'270... l '_I; f . l!IOS11NOT · 1ST FLOOR :, -I f TO IE ~CTED -l . ., • n'l ---c--FFE=38 .S0 "'1', . w •• ( 2ND FLOOR l !' ·,,,, ".Y , , 1 FFE=54.S0 I " .,. -. , r , I' · · '"· • ·1 -1 3RD FLOOR O _ 1 .. , .. , . J .it.:~ I jl ! _ 10~.,0-., id I ) :·} .'.'' ~-; ·:. i ~_l, t: I J. ;i*r':; .• .,,. ,-, .. ,, _, "1::1 . 1o •I -1 'j •:f o"' j.l IRRIGATION WATER IIETI:R ' 1u ':1! ~ i i"' -! • -I -D~& / •U DOl.4ESTIC WATER METER CONNECTM EXISTING WATER MAIN CONNECTM ! I ~-~ EXISTING WATER :'.:·-1 ~ MAIN P IV CONNECTM EXlSTINO WATER 11,WN PROPOSED <",, OPERTY • LINE XISTINO ~ ::1 ··~J ·-~-, -' ~ . '4U ·~ ;' --~tl ~~ 1 --~-,·t i,;H ,'~ '.( --1i: ti! '!t · ,•.,. r q ~1 l-.,, ,I' ,,: ·1 f t rV ,· ,,:;,',?!: \ 'j.ti; ·1i .. ' ... !·,· ,,, :: ' 'r,' • 7-':"7 lf · ,,.:,·,, ~--;; j,,I, .. --~ ... .,..-',Y-sc»' -1-·--•- ·~~-:--...;~ .,. •-·~· .... p:: •, ,r ,1 t 4.,r, -~ v-:~. ·,1< .... ·. NM'~!>ft•w I, n I . L ·1'; 'W_.,_.:,.i_. · I J 1 t' , ~ ~ o o I ~ill(_- , · · · · · < · · .: : >: : .-~'-~o~j?'}'i~/t~,,~~i /o· _-~· •:···:'·:".' . .' ·,: . ." }?<->(),./>-o~~~&.~';ik?o-O<:iO,§>}>-¢, · -· ·-;~-.:.. ..• .:........~6.,,,.(>_<>0-o'<;;;-~·~;,:,Q·,,<J ,/l?J0 ila<->-o0o' ~O/,O ·O. Q 10-0 <>~O 0 ·-C. ~-O·v 0 -0 uCl f <:fro 0-a0 o~.,,/1·0 °o \ t:>0,/'o"' ,f'-0°,.,~0 ?:>_· <>, 20.4'fl'YPJ J rf;li,~~<i.?.~O~~~i<:..~ lii,' .-..: .,li ;:11 ,: .. ~Nl ;AHY Sf fl{R (A.SI WI N T R( t.10~ 70081029000J18 '~fl~- Ii!: ., · , Q: ',i l: ' !u t ~ . ... -1~-:~i.J:'. "( 1= . I .... . 1 I .t ;-c;;';·-_,_•: -· ,.t1L SURFACING LEGEND: EXISTING/PROPOSED LAND USE l~fIB-$~ HEAVY DUTY CONCRETE PROPOSED PRDl'OSED (WITHOUT I ...... ·I CONCRETE lAND USE EXISTING (INCLUDING DED ICATION , DEDICATION) FORSEPA t><><XXX;j HEAVY DUTY ASF'HAI. T CHEa<U8n I I STANDARD DUTY ASPHALT IM?ERVIOUS 3 .11 3.IO 3.20 I I EXISTING -T PAVEMENT ?ERVIOUS 2.52 1.18 , ... MTAL 5M 5.H ._ .. ru ROW I I ,. I 12' LANDSCAPE CEMENT CONCRETE PLAHTal SIDEWALK PER CITY OF RENTON STANDARD DETAILS FOO!i SERIES ANO F001. 2'SAWCUT1 t I _ /j!', '!,/ EXISTING_/'' PAVEMENT _,,· .. "~-~ . ~,,~.r DUTTER © ~~~!EAVENUE STREET SECTION l---22" • NORTH •TH ST I 11' • NORTH 3RD ST e·---i---- I I EXISTING/ PAVEMENT GUTTER NORTH 4TH STREET AND lANDsCAPE PVM'ER ® NORTH 3RD STREET SECTIONS ROW '\. 't j ROW TYPE'D"LOW CURB I Gl/TTER , "-.. EXISTING PAVEMENT 0 GARDEN AVENUE NORTH SECTION PROPOSED LEGEND: • SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE • SAN ITARY SEWER CLEANOUT X GATE VALVE M J ... FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION • FIRE HYORANT • WATER METER e PIV I SANITARY SEWER LINE w WATER UNE r FIRE SERVICE LINE IRRIGATION SEVICE LINE EXISTING PROPERTY LINE ----PROPOSED PROPERTY L INE N <D GRAPHIC SCALE 0 15 30 L,rr--....,..j 1• • 30 FEET ao j Exhibit 21 Design Development _,, .. -. ,., .... ~ ~IP\.:::Si \t::;;r ~--~:p·-~,1~-"'"f _' .·=. ,-r-=~-'. ;..·u_ "-1.fL~u,i.:\i'tlr;._ " , I ... _ _\' -,-. : ·~t -!r...D.i.W . -: Vt,•Lr; }?···· :·;,_.\ ' \ >...-,../..:_a ~ •._,•1.J~t-~- __ --......,,.,.. _--\ .. ~~~TO~~TEC;TEl>(TYP)'. '-- 7 N~.~S7'1t~: , --• ~-~,) ··~->1· _:E .. ., ... -,., -· ~= " :: !~ ~~ .,, :; . !, =~ -·-·-----......... ---· lf;',V.Ri'.fi -·--·------~NO·?'IClll.10 1, ·c 't;; c 0 0 .c u U) C 0 c ~ 0 0 .c u U) ~ J! C Cl> E Cl> iii ·c: ~ RI U) r;; I I C j z • :::s i ~ I .. C) in ~ .., 0.,,: 1112"11 Job No.: 2180100 Cl..-By. F. KATONA Choc:Ud by • W. FIERST I., o..~~ CIVIL UTILITY AND SURFACING PLAN C2.00 SARTORI EDUCATION CENTER A PORTION OF THE NE 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SEC. 17, TWN. 23 N., RGE. 05 E. W.M. LEGAL DESCRIPTION GNLV ON(<,' 1ME USlm mu: IIIEPCltlS c:::ofTMKI> lHC A$$0CIA.ltD !ll'PCRT DOCIJWDfft. DUE. TO lHIS, NOT M.L EASIEMOl'TS MAY • SHOWN. -PDt nrtST ""1£1«:Nf mu NSutANa: OOIWNl'f GIIIDOt ND. NCS-7006U--•1 DA1D> NCJltOaEJII J. 2!0t4 lDT 11, kCOt 7 , IENlON F/IIW "-AT, MXDllll9C TO M Pl.AT lKJIIEDf fllECIRD N ¥Ol.LlilE 10 C/1 Pl.A.JS, PM;£ 970 'IEaRJS a, ICNC: a:uifTY, -· OCC(PT "IMAT flllmllUtTY CIF SM> PIIDl5l3 DIDJ(D 10 'ME aTY a, NJfflJN Ftwt IICltT OF WAY I.NJOt CUD 'IECCIIDCD ..u« 7, , ... I.NIEJI J1tCC1111tC NO. M010nn. -JIOt fltST AIEIICMI 1ffl.£ ll!IUltNla: tDll'NIY CIIDl:R NO. NCS-7ama-tM1 OAllD lilCMJriaDt 1. 20l4 lHI: 'l£ST 5D FUT C/1 1M[ €AST 225-.. f1Zl OF LO~ 11 lltlll'J 12_ aoDC J. SAalCIIWlU. ~ 10 1H P\AT 1MOl[QF M'.CCIIID(D It Y11.1MC I OF P\AlS.. PAGE 1, N DIC COUNlY, ~ -fJOI nitST MIOICM TI1l£ .........cE r::a,,pNf"t mmot HO. NCS-7'Dlnl1-WAt o,,rco NCND110t " 201• THC CAST 7!t fllT a, Ull5 11 .-a 1Z. II.DOC l, SMlOIISW.1£. MXDIIJIC TO 1H PII..A.T lHDEJr ~ IN Wl.l.M: I Df Pl.AlS. PN:E. 1, • ICINC CCUNTY, -..ClOL -flOI '111ST ~ 111\..C ~ a::J#IIMV CIIDOt • NCS-7am1a-W9't o.ma N0\08IOI 6.. 201• URS 1 "MtCIJOt I N1..IJSnil. 11.0CIC 7, flCNTOt F /ltliM PU, T. ACOalll»IC TD 1H( NAT IHDl:Dr IIE:CUIDED W WlJIII(" 10 Df Pull, ,.Nil 17, • OC COUNTY. -...otON. -#OI n1ST .....:Ml mu N!ILIIUINCE COlll'IM'f CIIXR tieO. NCI-JOCl&JO--Mt OAllD IICNIMIOI I. 20l4 H ll.fl &O F'[[l Of 1HC (AST 11& ftil Df l.Ol'S t1 1M 12, kOOC l, SM1UIISW.1£. AOIDIDNG TO 1H ,U.J rH[IIEJf ~ IN \Q.iMf. I QF PLATS,. PNIE.. 7, N ICIC aJUNfY, ~ -fllOI fll$T ~ nn.t NllJIUHCE C0/11'/J#'( CIID(JI Jrl). NCl-1'Xl&n-*1 DAU NOlll(Ml(JI l, 2014 l.Ol 1l. lllOCIC 7, MJrfJCII f"'* "-AT, AC:allJlltG TD M ,U.T nEl[Of" M:CIDIIDO 1111 ¥CUM[ 10 0/f "-ATI. P/ltl:JL 11, lilllC:GIDS OF ICINC CCIMTY. -· DaJl'T lMAT ""°"°'" OF SMO f"IIIDalES OIEOED 10 1M[ QTY a, tllOffllN flll MGMT Of WAY lNEt DEID M:CCIIDO> .&.N: 7 , IN4 \NJEJI tllCCOII09C NO. l40I071n.. -4IO ..,,, ~ fflU llll9.IIUrlNC[ CCf/lM'II('( mmot HO. te:S-1CIC&a-lM1 OAD NCNDi1101 I. JOl4 lHI: WlSl !IQ fttT OF" 1M[ (AST 1:8 f1Zl a, LOff 11 NID 12, aoo: .JSMlUIIIWll., MXXJllmC TO '" "-AT MN:Of" IIIECOIDED .. \G..UtiE a or "-ATS. PNi/L 7, .. DC <DJNTY. 1M!NNClOl -,oil ntST ~ 111\£ ~ C/11111'/IM'( QIIIOOI HQ. MCS-7'00&1 ... WA1 O.TCD ~ l. 2014 LOT 7. aoac 7. IIIOfT'CIN """' fl\AT. ACCC111WC TO 1M( fll\AT ... or ~ II *-IME to 01 PUTS, l'NII. 11 •• CXIIDS OF ate aunY, -· 4'DI f'WIST MEIIC.ltrN mu ........a: CDll>Nl't -NO. NCS--4-•t DAD IIIMlall I. :IOl4 LOT 12. IIL.DCJ( 7, ,ElllDN f"NW f"lAT. ACICDIIJlltG lO 1"C "-AT lHEREOF 'IECUIDID N '«JI..I.M: 10 Of PL.AB. P'1a.. 9 7, ~ OF UC CCJUNn. -OICIPT 1HC rou.a..c OCSCIIICD ,ornc»t 8CCNIIJfC Al 1M( IQU1Nlll[ST COllfiEt OF SM) lOT 12; lMl[NC( IIIIOltlN ~ CAST N...CJifG 1HC 1ll€$T UN[ OF SM) LOT. A. DISTANCC OF M.N ft(1 1D lHE NQlllM UN( OF SM> LDT; 'HNCE SDU1M ISOl"!ia"' EAST "LONC SM> NDlllM UJiE A. DISTANCC OF &.m nIT: 1t£Ntt 91:1.JlH 04·~· 11£.ST A OISTNCE CF 4$.08 Rn lD 1Mf. !DU1H lN: OF SM> lDT: 1HENCE: NClll1H .,.•44• WDT ALONG SMJ 9IJU1H 1.9€. A D15TMCI: (F .l.QZ F&T TO 'K. l'CINT CF IIR8eaC. -flOI f'IIST AMlM:M 1ffl.£ 9SaANCI: COIIJ/#Nff C11D01 HQ. MCS-7nC177-•1 DA 10) fOIUMY 11. 20II t.01S 1 HIOUClt 1Q. IO.JJ1IW.. aoac .1,, SMfllllNU.£. ACX:ICIIDfC TO 1ME Pl.AT 1t€IIEOf l[COIIIIO) • 'tO.l*C I OF PU.ls_ Pltllf. 7, ..ccalDS OF DC CD.91n", .,..,..,.._ ZONING Cl,-.............. (7224m-CJ1211, --.iota.---> ~~-C-..---,___) ----.... ..,,,.., {1M,41o-0,91. -... ---ota. -.. .. 8') ,.,..._ ..... 10 ..,,,.., C--0,,U) UTILITY NOTES ~~TV~ :Cu:= =:::.~~ltO ---·IIO'!Cffll-~=)=~·~~~~CJCA"="~ ~~~!::'~":'.:."===~AU =~-:.....~:::."~MA~.:=.~~ ----IIOT-.s. .ti.ntQUGH UJCA.-. CF ~ \11'.JllQ IIAIDI c». urun I..DcA10II "-,_, ll8XII) DATA (SUO< AS ....._, CII lfflUTY =TY~~~.!"IIIC,~s-, 4. CN..L 1-800-424-,000 IUClll ANY CQtftlllUCnclt. RELIANCE NOTE 1'MIS St.ll'WY WA.! P'IIIUMD> AT fHE IIICQIA:ST tY fllCK 51'11~ r QJlt THE SOU: MC> OQ..U!II~ OW tY "81110N S040CI.. m5TRICT NO. 403. MCHTS TO IIIO.Y !.M"Ott NC>. (JIit v,c M$ $1J1hif.Y 00 JrtOT U:'l'[HO TO ANY ono ,AltfY [XCV,T 1ttROUCH [otll($$ ~C[JtllnCAnaH 8Y YH[ PltOF'C$SICIIIM LNC'I """11"~ ._.,. 5TMIIP Ati1> 9CNA1\.ft UIP(Nt HOilllClt. EQUIPMENT USED .r 10f"-STAl'ICIN U1'lJllltO STIMON/fO JUD TRA.~ 111[1"CIOS r c,1 CCJtrlffQ. NC> STNattC,. SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE I. DAW, C. F'CUM!IC[, A flltOF"[590NAl l.MC) 9.ltW:YOII "I lM( STAlE Of .-,,-,amN, HOIDY cotlln' TWAT MS tilil' CONl'(C fl.. Y ..,._SE)fTS A SUlh<Y WA0t 8T W (IJt UfC>DI WY DalCT ~ .. rtMJNtV 2011. Al M llll~St,~ ~ Ol'SWIIC T MO. 403. Of,,/11 /IOlf .... N © QM.IMC acALE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. --/ .. CASE J ------.:;;~-_-~~ FtJutrilD.2• !111..,i'No-! ~ ------~ ~..-DISK ·~.r Ci.SE T NORTH 4TH STREET ~ ~ ~I ~~ ~ il :s ~- ~__J.. - ii , I[> -··· .a __ _ ,ouHO 2• MASS DISK 'llll ™ ~C>I IJ.i CA SE ·--------------------- -------------------- "'------:=il ---00 0 0 I 0 000 ---h..a--------1=---J -------------_...,_.___ ----S--- HAI.AH~~j---£:~:=~~= El.[V:37 •• 2 I I~ ,~ I ~ 3~~ fl! :s; __ I;;~ I~ 1.1.i i ~ -···---· -------··· Q FOVHO 2° 8"ASS 0151< 'III TM l"UN0-1 I,. CASE SURVEYOR'S NOTES ~::: .. ":..~~=u.~~ ....... 1HE~- :;:: = = =: :i::t t -12'0/12'2 ~ -SllHJ, -... 2. JAIU A 1Jllj ..._ UII> AIIEA-2' ..... W ("-8' N::) .J. TAIL.£ A t'RM t-f'~ to SJJMRNJID/'I KMpc.v " JAIU \':.l: ~.~ .:C-.a:.:":-:J:o YCNI ~1'SlDM-OfP_A_IPl11<,- AW,,,C lreDRlH. tpr1M ,-, S1IHT MtJ lpl1H 41H SlllECT ..,""° 1M: -..:n91l:. a. JAIU A 1Jllj 1e---, CIISOl'IO> ~ Of Silt USC AS A 9'U> 'IASll'.-.-...... ,_.__ FLOOD HAZARD DETERMINATION ~--. -------· =~=~~:---....:;~,,~~ UWCllltlf -lll .. F\.111111 -"11". LASJ ......... ,,./1_ 1HE Silt DOD '-'' UE ...... A ~-F\.111111 -NU. VERTICAL DATUM ......... an o, ~..-. 'IOmcAL .......,. !IOI ~.:::~,:.~~ ~~ ..... nN.&a!' BASIS OF BEARING == SJA1l ... -· smQI. IPITM ,_ ~ :,"Q.~:.=s~21 -1879, Pal(J ... 112' ... ,etim.1S.S (•UOl.fa.111 ICI..T ""1H X AT M IUIJll[C'lOt fE IOl'ltt 41H mtrrT '#/ tnLS•--... -· ..... -.... ,.,_.... r -1.JD1a1,101 ..US PUIG AT lHl .. ~ OT -'IN 41" SMCT W/ ·-·--.. -ll£Tllml ... ...., -~ ~ SDUffl ~ t.,\ST, LEGEND Ill A m . 0 0 0 • . D a m a::::a-- 181 ~ E- -<>- 121 ~ " m ),; (?) D cp u A • ICI --ASIIOlUI .. , __ .,.,..... ........ ....__ -AS IIDJtD ~,,,...., -·--Q£NtcuT ............... w......... .-Q£OIQIJ ..... cA .... _ S10IIW ~ ·--............. CAa.E ---GAS VN..Vf.. --PU£ --_ _...... --U..,TV ..... PCU. .&IIIC1IDII- -IWlta.£ --...... ,,,...., ......_ ...,....,..i.w,,au-............. ...-v .... , a.OIi OFF VAi.',( -....... 1\IDI, _.,_ ------~--VAi.',( ...... llt1Ut TACOMA· SEAffiE • SPOl<ANE ·TRI-CITIES 22 15 Nol1h 30th Sll'Nt. Suite 300 Tacoma. WA 9&10 !53.~2,22 m 253.)63.l5n ,.. -.ohbl.oam .,.. ~ Cllon1;. SARTORI EDUCAnON CENTER RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 403 7112 SOUTH 124TH 8TREET SEATTL!:, WA 1117M830 RICKITRACKE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FACtLITIE& I OPERATIONS ~ 21IOl7450 l11u1 Set t Pete· FEaRtJARY 14. 1016 Ol/11/IOI• . '°"" I ~::r...::t::, -------1 =-:~~\.1.:1, ! A':".:__.:-._:r..:n &, _____ _ ~------- ~------- & _______ _ 8.u!ai"'1.L • • t ... ... ~ -•IIOCA-'("'"~~~~~~~~.J......i~LIU~ :: :::, ----Itentoh-® BOUNDARY & " lil t c..-. ,_._ Entire Document TOPOGRAPHIC u--Available Upon SURVEY -----D-s10lll,I-l -----o-..-u«~f i PMiLed tav; -----s-.-...- Request llalm...bJ<.. ~ o• _______ .,.,..._ TO -----w-...... -... -= -----C-GAS --------P-~------T-........ -------OHP -CMJK.loO urullO -·-·-·-•-fl)el:I: I I-· Exhibit 22 .shHl....11,i. 1 I I,...,. of -· • ~~~· IH~DlQD integr.~.t ... ~11~11 ~ 11 :it~ D -[]£] IUIC cm:J 8ffl:i .. II~ -OH] FIRST FLOOR PLAN -[TIIJ ,--1 I o •· r ,.. u .r ~ , 116· = , . -o· -----Itentoh 0 Entire Document Available Upon Request Exhibit 23 SARTORI ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 315 N GARDEN AVE, RENTON, WA 98057 • Pi1'/~· lf1~(ttQD ------· ... ----·---·---------·- Note: These views intended to demonstrate design intent. Refer to submitted site plans for accurate site pion proposal. integ r.~r~, ... :: .. -r)t ·:~;1 __ . ' r,..... V L. \ BIRDSEYE VIEW FROM SOUTHWEST ~e En tire Document Available Upon Request Exhibit 24 VIEW FRO M VISITOR PARKIN G SARTOR I EL EMENTARY SCHOOL 315 N GARDEN AVE, REN TON, WA 98057 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 16-000692 --------Renton® Application Date: September 02, 2016 Site Address: 1212 N 3rd St Name: Sartori Elementary School Renton, WA 98057-5735 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I Police Plan Review Comments Contact: Sandra Havlik 1425-430-7519 I SHavlik@Rentonwa.gov Recommendations: POLICE RELATED COMMENTS 40 Police Calls for Service Estimated Annually CONSTRUCTION PHASE To protect materials and equipment it is recommended that all materials and tools be locked up when not in use. Toolboxes and storage containers should be secured with heavy duty padlocks and kept locked when not in use. The site will need security lighting and any construction trailer should be completely fenced in with portable chain link fencing. The fence will provide both a physical and psychological barrier to any prospective thief and will demonstrate that this area is private property. Construction trailers should be kept locked when not in use, and should also have a heavy duty deadbolt installed with no less then a 1 1/2tt throw when bolted. Any construction material that contains copper should be removed from the construction site at the end of each working day. Glass windows in the trailer should be shatter resistant. 1 also recommend the business post appropriate uNo Trespassing" signs on the property while it's under construction. This will aid police in making arrests on the property after hours if suspects are observed vandalizing or stealing building materials. The use of off duty police officers or private security guards to patrol the site during the hours of darkness is also recommended. COMPLETED BUILDING It's important to direct all foot and vehicle traffic into the main entrance of the building; this should be monitored during hours of business by placing the school office in the main lobby area. This will assist with control of the pedestrian traffic in the building's public areas. Entrance through other exterior doors should be strictly prohibited. Rules should be posted in conspicuous location, letting visitors know they are to check in at the school's office immediately upon arrival. All exterior doors should be made of solid metal or metal over wood, with heavy duty deadbolt tocks, latch guards or pry resistant cylinders around the locks, and peepholes. All strikeplates should have 2 1/2 to 3ft wood screws. If glass doors are used, they should be fitted with the hardware described above and additionally be fitted with a layer of security film. Security film can increase the strength of the glass by up to 300%, greatly reducing the likelihood of breaking glass to gain entry. It is recommended that this building, and the individual offices inside, have monitored security alarms installed. There should be a plan set in place for lockdown procedures, as well, should an emergency occur. It's not uncommon for a school building to experience theft and/or vandalism during the hours of darkness, so it would also be recommended that an auxiliary security service be used to patrol the property during those times. Any alternative employee entrances should have coded access to prevent trespassing. Exterior doors should be checked routinely to insure they are not being propped open. All areas of parking and pedestrian travel need to have adequate lighting. This will assist in the deterrent of theft from motor vehicle (one of the most common crimes in Renton) as well as provide safe pedestrian travel for students, employees and visitors. Landscaping around the exterior of the buildings should not be too dense or high. It is important to allow visibility. Too much landscaping will give the building the look of a fortress and possibly give a burglar sufficient coverage to break into the buildings, especially during the hours of darkness. Key for a school of this size is proper lighting and an abundance of signage. The public needs to be made aware at all times of what space is private and what space is public. Proper No Trespassing signs should be posted in conspicuous locations throughout the outside of the buildings (including parking areas) so enforcement action can be taken if needed. I highly recommend that the developer have a Renton Police Crime Prevention Representative conduct a security survey of the premises once construction is comolete. Engineering Review Comments Contact: Ian Fitz-James 1425-430-72881 ifitz-james@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Exhibit Ran: October 31, 2016 25 Pagelof8 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 16-000692 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I Engineering Review Comments Contact: Ian Fitz-James I 425-430-7288 I ifitz-James@rentonwa.gov M E M O R A N D U M DATE: October 14, 2016 TO: Matt Herrera, Senior Planner FROM: Ian Fitz James, Civil Plan Reviewer SUBJECT: Utility and Transportation Comments for Sartori Elementary School -315 Garden Avenue N. LUA16 000692 I have reviewed the application for Sartori Elementary School located at 315 Garden Avenue N. and have the following comments. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is approximately 5.28 acres and is rectangular in shape. The site contains the existing Sartori Education Center, a strip mall with a small grocery store and Mexican restaurant, numerous single family residences, and a few smaller commercial sites. WATER: Water service is provided by the City of Renton. The site is in the Valley service area in the 196' hydraulic pressure zone. The approximate static water pressure is 68 psi at a ground elevation of 33 feet. Below is a summary of existing water mains located in streets surrounding the site: a. 12" Water Main (320 Zone) that can provide 5,400 gallons per minute {gpm) east of the site in Garden Avenue N. Reference COR Project File WTR2701111 In COR Maps. b. 6" Water Main (196 Zone) that can provide 1,300 gpm east of the site in Garden Avenue N. Reference COR Project File WTR2701156 in COR Maps. c. 8" Water Main that can provide 1,500 gpm north of the site in N. 4th Street. Reference COR Project File WTR2701156 in COR Maps. d. 16" Water Main that can provide 9,600 gpm west of the site in Park Avenue N. Reference COR Project File WTR2702208 in COR Maps. e. 8" Water Main in N. 3rd Street that can provide 2,000 gpm south of the site in N. 3rd Street. Reference Project File WTR2701021 in CORMaps. Below is a summary of the existing fire hydrants in the vicinity of the site: a. At the NW corner of the site (COR Facility ID HYD N 00093) b. Across the street from the NE corner of the site (COR Facility ID HYD N 00092) c. Across the street from the northern project frontage (COR Facility ID HYD N 00308) d. Across the street from the SW corner of the site (COR Facility ID HYON 00094) e. Along the southern project frontage (COR Facility ID HYON 00291) f. Across the street from the SE corner of the site (COR Facility ID HYO N 00091) The existing Sartori Education Center is served by a 1.5" domestic water meter (Account Number 010240). There are also numerous small meters serving the light commercial and residential lots surrounding the existing Sartori Education Center. SEWER: Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. There is an existing 22" concrete sewer running east to west in N. 4th Street north of the site. Reference Project File WWP2700513 in COR Maps for record drawings. There is also an existing 8" PVC sewer running from east to west and then south to north through the site and connecting to the existing 22" sewer in N. 4th Street. Reference Project File WWP2700513 in COR Maps for record drawings. STORM DRAINGE: The majority of the site is the site of the existing Sartori Education Center. The Sartori site contains a two story education center with an asphalt parking lot, grass fields, and lawn areas. The site is relatively flat and contains a private on site drainage Ran: October 31, 2016 Page2of8 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 16-000692 -------Renton 0 PLAN • Planning Review · Land Use Version 1 I Engineering Review Comments Contact: Ian Fitz-James I 425-430-7288 I ifitz-james@rentonwa.gov system in the parking lot. Drainage from the site is either collected by the on site drainage system, infiltrates, or sheet flows gradually off site. Drainage that is collected by the on site conveyance system is conveyed west to the public storm drainage system in Park Avenue N. Drainage that sheet flows off site to the north is intercepted by a type 1 catch basin along the southern flowline of N. 4th Street. Drainage from this catch basin is routed west by an existing 8" storm drain. Drainage that sheet flows off site to the northeast is intercepted by a type 1 catch basin located along the flowline near the intersection of N. 4th Street and Garden Avenue N. Drainage from this catch basin is routed north by an existing 6" storm drain. There are also numerous light commercial and residential lots surrounding the existing Sartori Education Center to the west and south. These lots are also relatively flat and contain no on site drainage systems. Drainage from the existing lots west of the Sartori Education Center is intercepted by three type 1 catch basins located along the eastern flowline of Park Avenue N. Drainage from these catch basins is routed north by an existing 12n storm drain. Drainage from the existing lots south of the Satori Education Center is intercepted by two type 1 catch basins located along the flowline near the intersection of Park Avenue N. and N. 3rd Street and Garden Avenue N. and N. 3rd Street. Drainage from these catch basins is routed west by an existing 12ft/1 Off storm drain. STREETS: The site is bounded by Park Avenue N. to the west, N. 4th Street to the north. N. 3rd Street to the south, and Garden Avenue N. to the east. Park Avenue N., N 4th Street, and N. 3rd Street are classified as principal arterials. Garden Avenue N. is classified as a residential access street. N. 3rd Street and Garden Avenue N. have a current right of way width of 60' along the project frontages. Park Avenue N. and N. 4th Street have varying right of way widths of at least 60' along the project frontages. The composition of the adjacent street sections are as follows: Park Avenue N. -44' pavement width with two travel lanes in each direction (north and south). Concrete curbs and 8' sidewalks exist on each side of the street. N. 4th Street -44' pavement width with three travel lanes in the western direction and one right turn lane. Concrete curbs and 6' sidewalks exist on each side of the street. N. 3rd Street-30' pavement width with three lanes in the eastern direction. Concrete curbs and 5' sidewalks with planters exist on each side of the street. Garden Avenue N. -40' pavement width with one travel lane in each direction (north and south) and on street parking on each side of the road. Concrete curbs and 6' sidewalks with planters exist on each side of the street. WATER COMMENTS 1. Abandoned/ removed water services shall be capped at the main in accordance with City standards. 2. The two existing hydrants along the project frontage shall be replaced with new hydrants located in the planter strip. One is located along the N. 3rd Street frontage and the other is located near the northwest comer of the site near the intersection of N. 4th Street and Park Avenue N. 3. A new hydrant served by an 8" main shall be provided in the western parking island north of the proposed building. The main serving the hydrant shall have an additional valve located in the parking island before the hydrant. The new hydrant and water main shall be located in a water utility easement. 4. The area where the proposed water services and vaults are located is very crowded. A blow up detail showing the proposed configuration of the connections is required for utility pennit review. All required vaults and piping shall be shown to scale to ensure constructability. Locations of proposed water services and vaults shall also take into account the location of existing utilities. Below is a summary of the required water services for the proposed building: a. A fire sprinkler stub with a double detector check assembly (DDCVA} in an exterior underground vault per COR Standard Plan 360.2 shall be installed for backflow prevention. The DDCVA may be installed inside the building if it meets the conditions as shown on COR Standard Plan 360.5 for the installation of a DDCVA inside a building. b. A domestic water meter installation shall include a reduced pressure backflow assembly (RPBA) installed behind the meter and inside an above ground heated enclosure per COR Standard Plan 350.2. Domestic water meters larger than 3" shall be installed per COR Standard Plan 320.4. Meters larger than 3" require a 4" external bypass line with a post indicator valve per COR Standard Plan 320.4. c. A separate meter is required for landscape irrigation. A double check valve assembly (DCVA) is required downstream of the meter. For services 2ff and smaller, the DCVA shall be installed per COR Standard 340.8. A RPBA is not required for an irrigation meter. If right of way vegetation requires irrigation, a separate irrigation meter with a DCVA shall be provided. 5. Water improvements shall be designed in accordance with Appendix J of the City's 2012 Water System Plan. Adequate horizontal and Ran: October 31, 2016 Page 3 of 8 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 16-000692 ----~Renton 0 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I Engineering Review Comments Contact: Ian Fitz-James 1425-430-72881 ifitz-james@rentonwa.gov vertical separation between the new water main and other existing and proposed utilities (sewer lines, storm drains, gas lines, power and communication ducts) shall be provided for the operation and maintenance of the water main. Retaining walls, rockeries, or similar structures cannot be installed over the water main unless the water main is installed inside of a steel casing. 6. The development is subject to applicable water system development charges (SOCs) and meter installation fees based on the number and size of the meters for domestic use and fire prevention. Meters greater than 2" will be charged a $220.00 processing fee and the contractor will provide the meter and install it. A system development fee credit will be issued for any existing meters being abandoned. The full water fee schedule can be found in the City's 2016 development fees document on the City's website. SEWER COMMENTS 1. The proposed location of the school building conflicts with the location of the on site a~ sewer. The sewer and services connected to the sewer shall be removed and/or abandoned as necessary for construction of the building. 2. The site plan indicates that the new school will connect to the existing B" sewer main that is not removed for construction of the building. The connection of new main to the old main is proposed to occur at an existing manhole (COR Facility ID MH1988) in the new parking lot north of the new building. This provides an acceptable wastewater route for wastewater discharge from the new school. 3. The proposed sewer easement shall end south of the existing manhole that is serving as the point of connection for the new building sewer line (COR Facility ID MH1988). All new sewer main and side sewers shall be privately maintained. 4. Release of any existing sewer easements will be reviewed during utility permit review. 5. The development is subject to applicable sewer system development charges (SDCs) for sewer service. The SOC for sewer service is based on the size of the domestic water service. A system development fee credit will be issued for any existing sewer service being abandoned. The full sewer fee schedule can be found in the City's 2016 development fees document on the City's website. STORM DRAINAGE COMMENTS 1. Effective January 2, 2017, the City of Renton will be adopting a new stormwater manual which will be based on the 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual. All projects vested after January 2, 2017 will be subject to these new stormwater requirements. Please refer to RMC 4 1 045 for information regarding project vesting. 2. A Preliminary Drainage Plan and Technical Information Report (TIR) completed by AHBL were submitted to the City on September 2, 2016. The site drainage area including offsite areas is approximately 5.67 acres. The site drainage area under existing conditions contains approximately 3.17 acres of impervious area and the site drainage area under proposed conditions contains approximately 4.08 acres of impervious area. The site is relatively flat and has three separate discharge locations. Each discharge location is part of a separate threshold discharge area (TOA). Each discharge location will be maintained in the proposed condition. The site is located in the Lower Cedar River drainage basin and in Zone 1 of an Aquifer Protection Zone. The site is located in the City's Peak Rate Flow Control Standard (Existing Conditions). Per the preliminary TIR and KCRTS model prepared by AHBL, the project proposed to meet the flow control facility requirement using three detention pipes. There will be one detention pipe for each basin. All proposed detention pipes will be private facilities. Due to the site's flat topography and shallow existing storm system, an in depth review will be conducted of all stormwater detention facilities and conveyance systems to ensure proper function and to examine the effects of backwater on the detention facilities during utility permit review. Six Filterra stormwater filtration systems are proposed to meet the enhanced basic water quality treatment standards. Flow control BMPS, ponds, stormwater wetlands, and infiltration facilities are prohibited as the site is located in Zone 1 of an Aquifer Protection Zone. All core and special requirements are to be addressed in the final TIR. 3. The project site is located within one half mile of the Cedar River which is classified as a major receiving water. This project may qualify for the Direct Discharge Exemption from the Flow Control Facility requirement if all criteria in Section 1.2.3 of the City amended 2009 KCSWDM are met. 4. Drainage improvements along all frontages will be required to conform to the City's street standards. Catch basin spacing along all street frontages shall conform to the standards found in Section 4.2.1.1. Additional catch basins or inlets may be required to conform to these standards. 5. A geotechnical report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences Incorporated dated August 4, 2016 was submitted. 6. The development would be subject to stormwater system development charges (SDCs). The current SDCs are $0.594 per square foot Ran: October 31, 2016 Page 4 of 8 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 16-000692 ~---31•~·Renton ® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I Engineering Review Comments Contact: Ian Fitz.James 1425-430-7288 I lfitz-James@rentonwa.gov of new impervious surface area, but not less than $1.485.00. A system development fee credit will apply for the existing single family residential lots. Fees are payable at the time of permit issuance. TRANSPORTATION/STREET COMMENTS 1. The current transportation impact fee is $2.00 per square foot of building. Fees are payable at the time of permit issuance. A transportation impact fee credit will apply for the existing education facility, single family residential lots, and light commercial lots. 2. N. 3rd Street, N. 4th Street. and Park Avenue N. are classified as principal arterials. Garden Avenue N. is classified as a residential access street. City staff is recommending street sections that differ from the City's street standards found in RMC 4 6 060. A summary of the required street frontage improvements requested can be found below. a. The existing curb line shall remain in place along Park Avenue N. An 8' planter shall be located behind the curb and a 12' sidewalk shall be located behind the planter. Right of way dedication along Park Avenue N. will be required to the back of the 12' sidewalk. b. The existing curb line shall remain in place along N. 3rd Street and N. 4th Street. An 8' planter shall be located behind the curb and an 8' sidewalk shall be located behind the planter along these streets. Right of way dedication along N. 3rd Street and N. 4th Street will be required to the back of the 8' sidewalk. c. The existing curb line shall remain in place along Garden Avenue N. The proposed curb bulbs at the corners of N. 3rd Street and Garden Avenue N. and N. 4th Street and Garden Avenue N. are required with the original curb line remaining in place. The curb bulb at the comer of N. 3rd Street and Garden Avenue N. adjacent to the site shall extend for the entirety of the curb return. The addition of curb bulbs will allow for a 13' southbound travel lane on Garden Avenue N. and an 8' bus parking lane. City curb bulb design standards shall be met. The depressed curb between the bus parking lane and southbound travel lane on Garden Avenue N. shall meet the City standards for a cement concrete valley curb. A 12' sidewalk will be required directly behind the curb. Right of way dedication along Garden Avenue N. will be required to the back of the 12' sidewalk. d. Companion curb bulbs along the eastern frontage of Garden Avenue N. are required at the intersections of N. 3rd Street and N. 4th Street. These curb bulbs should only extend in the western direction to shorten the crossing distance across Garden Avenue N. No curb bulb extension north into N. 4th Street or south into N. 3rd Street is required. City curb bulb design standards shall be met. e. A curb bulb at the corner of N. 3rd Street and Park Avenue N. adjacent to the site shall extend south into N. 3rd Street. The curb bulb shall not extend west into Park Avenue N. When coupled with the required curb bulb along the entirety of the curb return at the intersection of N. 3rd Street and Garden Avenue N. (described in comment 2.c), on street parking along the northern frontage of N. 3rd Street adjacent to the site will be created. City curb bulb design standards shall be met. f. The curb radius at all intersections shall be 35'. Appropriate right of way dedication at each comer is required to accommodate the curb radius. g. Perpendicular curb ramps conforming to current ADA and WSDOT standards will be required at each corner. Curb ramps shall be perpendicular to the roadway centerline. Two curb ramps are required at each comer. The project shall comply to the City of Renton Americans with Disabilities Act Transition Plan adopted May 18, 2015. Required curb ramp improvements at each intersection will be evaluated to determine if additional improvements such as accessible pedestrian signals (APS) are required. Companion curb ramps across from the project site are required to be brought up to current ADA standards. h. The existing curb along all frontages shall be replaced with a new curb that meets City standards. i. Proposed access points to the site are acceptable. j. No on street parking will be permitted along N. 4th Street or Park Avenue N. k. Current channelization on N. 4th Street, Park Avenue N., and Garden Avenue N. shall remain. The far left lane on N. 3rd Street shall be a left turn only lane west of the intersection with Park Avenue N. Signal and sign modifications shall be made as necessary to ensure that the new traffic pattern with the far left lane being left only is correctly implemented. The proposed change in N. 3rd Street channelization will allow for on street parking on the north side of N. 3rd Street adjacent to the site. I. All existing manholes, handholes, and other utility covers within public sidewalks shall be brought up to current ADA standards. 3. A draft traffic impact analysis (TIA) prepared by Heffron Transportation was submitted for the project. The TIA evaluated traffic operations at the four intersections adjacent to the site at the request of the City plan reviewer and Transportation department. The Ran: Oclober 31. 2016 Page 5 of 8 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 16-000692 ----,,,,,,,,,,,--Renton ® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I Engineering Review Comments Contact: Ian Fitz.James I 425-430-72881 ifitz-james@rentonwa.gov intersections evaluated were N. 4th Street and Park Avenue N., N. 4th Street and Garden Avenue N., N. 3rd Street and Park Avenue N., and N. 3rd Street and Garden Avenue N. To analyze the intersections, vehicle turning movements were conducted at the four study intersections on Thursday May 19, 2016 by ldax Data Solutions. Traffic counts were taken for the morning and afternoon peak periods. Heffron use the traffic counts to forecast traffic volumes in 2018 when the project will be complete. Heffron determined that all four study intersections operate at Level of Service C or better and will continue to operate at Level of Service C or better in 2018 without the project. Heffron estimated vehicle trips generated by the project using the proposed land use from the 9th Edition of the Trip Generation Manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Level of Service at the four study intersections was evaluated using 2018 conditions without the project and 2018 conditions with the project. Heffron determined that all four study intersections will operate at the same Level of Service in 201 B with or without the project. Heffron evaluated on site queuing in the morning drop off period and the afternoon pick up period. The morning arrival queue was modeled using Poisson arrival methodologies and assumptions from queuing data collection at Bellevue School District. The report concludes that the estimated morning arrival queue will be accommodated on site. The afternoon arrival queue was modeled using data collected on March 15th and October 15th, 2015 from Cheny Crest Elementary School in Bellevue. Cherry Crest Elementary is similar in student and staff sizes to the proposed school and has a similar number of parking stalls to the proposed school. The report concludes that the afternoon queues could exceed the demand of the north parking lot/ load and unload loop. The report suggests that access management measures could be implemented to prevent queues from adversely impacting traffic flow on N. 4th Street. Heffron evaluated on site parking for both a typical school day and evening event. Typical school day parking demand was determined using data from several Seattle elementary schools and ITE employee based parking generation rates for middle schools. The ITE does not provide employee based parking generation rates for elementary schools. The report concludes that the on site parking supply can accommodate typical midday parking demand. For evening events, Heffron evaluated use of all possible on site parking, the bus parking area, on street parking within 400 feet of the site, and the Renton School District Transportation Facility which is located across N. 4th Street from the site. The report concludes that parking for an attendance of 675 to 790 persons can be accommodated by the evaluateo parking facilities. Lastly, Heffron evaluated traffic safety and non motorized transportation facilities. The report concludes that the project will not result in any significant adverse safety impacts. The report suggests additional channelization markings on N. 4th Street near the parking lot entrance may be beneficial. The report acknowledges that an increase in pedestrian traffic activity in the vicinity of the site will occur with this project. The report suggests implementing school speed zones and accompanying signage, along with a walk routes, crosswalk locations, and crossing guard locations. 4. A final signed traffic impact analysis shall be provided prior to utility permit submittal. 5. Street lighting analysis is required to be conducted by the developer along all street frontages. Required street lighting shall be to City of Renton standards. Street lighting was not included with the site plan submittal. 6. Paving and trench restoration within the City of Renton right of way shall comply with the City's Restoration and Overlay requirements. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. The SDCs listed are for 2016. The fees that are current at the time of the utility permit application will be levied. Please see the City of Renton website for current SOCs. 2. Storm drainage detention vaults and retaining walls that are 4' or taller from bottom of footing will require a separate building permit. Structural calculations and plans prepared by a licensed engineer will be required. 3. The survey and all civil plans shall conform to the current City of Renton survey and drafting standards. Current drafting standards can be found on the City of Renton website. 4. A final survey that is stamped and signed by the professional land surveyor of record will need to be provided. All existing utilities need to be surveyed and shown. Please reference COR Maps for mapping and records of existing utilities in the project vicinity. 5. Separate plan submittals will be required for construction permits for utility work and street improvements. All plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer in the State of Washington. 6. When utility plans are complete, please submit four (4) copies of the plans, two (2) copies of the drainage report, an electronic copy of each, the permit application, an itemized cost of construction estimate, and application fee to the counter on the sixth floor. Ran: October 31, 2016 Page 6of8 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 16-000692 *Renton® PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Version 1 I Technical Services Comments Contact: Amanda Askren 1425-430-7369 I aaskren@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Legals and exhibits were provided for what appears to be ROW dedications. If this is the case, the Deed of Dedication forms will need to be prepared along with the legal and exhibit and the REETA forms for the dedication areas for review. Lot Combination Form was reviewed as submitted. Form will need to be filled out for review with appropriate call outs for the provided exhibits. Building Review -Planning Comments Contact: Craig Bumell I 425-430-7290 I cbumell@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Recommendations of the Geotechnical report must be followed. Update the geotechnical report to the 2015 IBC. Planning Review Comments Contact: Matt Herrera I 425-430-6593 I mherrera@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: 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 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. 7. This permit is shall comply with the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act The permitted is responsible for adhering to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Bald Eagle ManaQement Guidelines {2007} and /or your U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service oermit Fire Review -Building Comments Contact: Corey Thomas 1425-430-70241 clhomas@rentonrfa.org Recommendations: Environmental Impact Statement: 1. Fire impact fees are currently applicable at the rate of $0.45 per square foot of increased building area. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Credit will be granted to the square footage of educational/retail buildings demolished/removed on this site. Code Related Comments: 1. The preliminary fire flow is 2,000 gpm. A minimum of two fire hydrants are required. One within 150 feet and one within 300 feet of the building. Building shall also meet maximum hydrant spacing of 300 feet on center. One hydrant shall be within 50 feet of the fire department connection for the fire sprinkler and standpipe systems. Any existing hydrants used to satisfy the requirements shall meet current fire code including 5 inch storz fittings. 2. Approved fire sprinkler, standpipe, kitchen hood and fire alarm systems are required throughout the building. Separate plans and permits required by the fire department Direct outside access is required to the fire sprinkler riser rooms. Fully addressable and full detection is required for all fire alarm systems. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required within 150 feet of all points on the building. Fire lane signage required for the on site roadway. Required turning radius are 25 feet inside and 45 feet outside. Roadways shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. Roadways shall support a minimum of a 30 ton vehicle and 75 psi point loading. 4. The building shall comply with the City of Renton Emergency Radio Coverage ordinance. Testing shall verify both incoming and outgoing minimum emergency radio signal coverage. If inadequate, the building shall be enhanced with amplification equipment in order to meet minimum coverage. Separate plans and permits are required for any proposed amplification systems. 5. Separate plans and permits for any removal of existing tanks and installation of any new tanks. Ran: October 31, 2016 Page 7 of 8 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT LUA 16-000692 PLAN -Planning Review -Land Use Engineering Review Comments --------Renton 0 Version 1 I October 31, 2016 Contact: Brianne Bannwarth 1425-430-72991 bbannwarth@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Transportation Concurrency Test has been performed and the project has passed. See Transportation Concurrency Test Memo dated October 31, 2016 in the oroiect file. Ran: October 31, 2016 Page 8of8 CiTY;QF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY,& ECONQMIC DEVELOPMENT· !'LANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF S~RVIC:E BY MAILING On the 14th day of September, 2016, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Notice of Application and Acceptance documents. This information was sent to: ' ' .. = --··---·. ------. Name. Lisa Klein, AHBL Renton School District #403 300 Surrounding Property Owners Parties of Record C.2 Signature of Sender): ®11 l: ··~. s TATE OF WASHINGTON ) I.._/ COUNTY OF KING ) ss ) .. ---- ' j' Applicant Owner See Attached See Attached ANV \/ ' • V -..} I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Sabrina Mirante ---- Representing signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and pursw,ses mentioned in the instrument. Oll~~:1,1 Dated: 4wkak:, i'f ;.iot(,, I I Notary (Print): My appointment e~pires: Pro),ect,f'iaine: ' New Sartori Elementary School .. Project Number: LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD temptate ~ affidavit of SefVice by mailing ,-~\ r -!1 ._,~'''"'''111, ,t:::,o ''1 -~----_.QµMlss,(j',,, 'l-'l. _-(., ,s. ,~ -,i:... 'l. Public in and for the State of Washiagton , .,. ~% ~ t . j ~ "ti ... -< ii~ (/) ~ ,.i~r:Pc..e ,,,~ ~ :i ~ ~ t.sc •·. - 1;11 a E :;J " d..0 /Cf, -1 "''"'""' o'i!-ff fr , ·,11 SHtNG,; ,_,$" I\\\\\\\"'''" Exhibit 26 North Renton Neighborhood Association PO Box 326 Renton, WA 98057 Jessica Roach 132 Pelly Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Nancy Monahan 325 Meadow Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Paul Rolinger 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit B Renton. WA 98057 Sarah & Tim Bishop 222 Burnett Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Debbie Natelson 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit B Renton, WA 98057 Kathleen Booher 809 N 2nd St Renton, WA 98057 Neil Sheesley 809 N 2nd St Renton. WA 98057 Rick Stracke Renton School District No. 403 7812 S 124th St Seattle. WA 98178 Scott Rice 345 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Genie Chase 227 Wells Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30th St, 300 Tacoma. WA Pamela Thomas 341 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Rochelle Krebs 121 Wells Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Wvman Dobson 821 N 1st St Renton. WA 98057 7224000470 1352300330 1352300355 337 PARK AVE LLC ANLIKER PAUL G AU LAMD 22609 SE 4TK ST 335 MEADOW AVE N 1522 E SPRUCE ST SAMMAMISH, WA 98074 RENTON, WA 98057 SEATTLE, WA 98122 1352300280 7224000280 1352300290 AUSTIN MARK+LYNN BADISSY ZINE+NAJIBA Current Resident 5401 LAKE LENGLEIS RD NE 4909 119TH PL NE 21326 5TH AVES CARNATION, WA 98014 KIRKLAND, WA 98033 DES MOINES, WA 98198 1352300370 1352300370 1352300360 Current Resident Current Resident Current Resident 1314 N 3rd St 1308 N 3rd St 311 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 1352300290 1352300365 7224000251 Current Resident Current Resident CHEN YU FAN VINCENT 300 Garden Ave N UNIT A 305 Meadow Ave N 228 PARK AVE N Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98057 1352300160 1352300310 7224000360 CHENOWETH MICHAEL C CHODYKIN JOSEPH R CHUCHILL BRETT J+JO M 243 MEADOW AVE N 347 MEADOW AVE N 18624 114TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 7224000595 7224000270 7224000280 COLEE JEFFREY J CU RENT TENANT CU RENT TENANT 330 PARK AVE N 250 Park Ave N APT 2 250 Park Ave N APT 1 RENTON, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 7224000275 1352300370 1352300290 CURE NT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 248 Park Ave N 1310 N 3rd St 1304 N 3rd St Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 1352300290 7224000455 7564600196 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 300 Garden Ave N UNIT B 329 Park Ave N 1211 N 3rd St APT A Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 7564600196 7224000545 7224000545 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 1211 N 3rd St APT B 310 Pelly Ave N 308 Pelly Ave N APT A Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 7224000545 1352300090 1352300095 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 308 Pelly Ave N APT B 246 Garden Ave N 240 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 7224000535 7224000535 7564600210 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 316 Pelly Ave N 314 Pelly Ave N 247 Garden Ave N APT 2 Renton,\NA 98057 Renton, \NA 98057 Renton, \NA 98057 7564600210 7564600210 7564600210 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 247 Garden Ave N APT 6 247 Garden Ave N APT 1 247 Garden Ave N APT 3 Renton, \NA 98057 Renton, \NA 98057 Renton,\NA 98057 7564600210 7564600210 7564600194 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 24 7 Garden Ave N APT 4 247 Garden Ave N APT 5 249 Garden Ave N Renton, \NA 98057 Renton, \NA 98057 Renton, \NA 98057 1352300350 7224000610 7224000620 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 319 Meadow Ave N 340 Park Ave N 350 Park Ave N Renton, \NA 98057 Renton,\NA 98057 Renton, \NA 98057 7224000600 7224000580 7564600182 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 300 5\N 7TH ST 314 Park Ave N UNIT B 1212 N 3rd St RENTON, \NA 98055 Renton, \NA 98057 Renton, \NA 98057 7224000590 7564600184 7564600183 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 326 Park Ave N 303 Garden Ave N 1206 N 3rd St Renton, \NA 98057 Renton, \NA 98057 Renton, \NA 98057 7224000615 7224000580 7564600183 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 346 Park Ave N 314 Park Ave N UNIT E 1206 N 3rd St APT B Renton, \NA 98057 Renton, \NA 98057 Renton, \NA 98057 7224000580 7564600181 1352300345 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 314 Park Ave N UNIT C 1204 N 3rd St 321 Meadow Ave N Renton, \NA 98057 Renton, \NA 98057 Renton, \NA 98057 7224000440 7224000425 7224000425 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 315 Park Ave N 303 Park Ave N APT B 303 Park Ave N APT P Renton, \NA 98057 Renton, \NA 98057 Renton, \NA 98057 7224000425 7224000425 7224000425 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 301 Park Ave N APT 3 301 Park Ave N APT 2 303 Park Ave N APT J Renton, \NA 98057 Renton,\NA 98057 Renton, \NA 98057 7224000425 7224000425 7224000425 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 303 Park Ave N APT I 301 Park Ave N APT 4 303 Park Ave N APT K Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 7224000425 7224000425 7224000425 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 303 Park Ave N APT L 303 Park Ave N APT G 303 Park Ave N APT M Renton, WA 98057 Renton.WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 7224000425 7224000425 7224000425 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 303 Park Ave N APT 0 303 Park Ave N APT E 303 Park Ave N APT Q Renton,WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 7224000425 7224000425 7224000425 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 303 Park Ave N APT F 301 Park Ave N APT 5 301 Park Ave N APT 1 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 7224000425 7224000425 7224000425 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 303 Park Ave N APT H 303 Park Ave N APT N 303 Park Ave N APT A Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 7224000425 7224000425 7224000425 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 303 Park Ave N APT R 303 Park Ave N APT S 303 Park Ave N APT C Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 7224000425 7224000355 1352300170 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 303 Park Ave N APT D 250 Pelly Ave N 235 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 1352300170 1352300165 7224000820 CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT CURRENT TENANT 239 Meadow Ave N 13921 56TH AVE 5 1002 N 4th St Renton, WA 98057 TUKWILA, WA 98168 Renton, WA 98057 7224000820 1352300245 7224000515 CURRENT TENANT DENG MINNING DERRY LUELLA H 1004 N 4th St 7155 SE 24TH ST 332 PELLY AVE Renton, WA 98057 MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 RENTON, WA 98057 7224000460 7224000265 1352300325 DOBSON WYMAN K DOMINGUEZ HENRY DREEWES SHERELYN PO BOX 59 PO BOX 6502 339 MEADOW AV N RENTON, WA 98057 KENT, WA 98064 RENTON, WA 98055 7224000805 1352300300 1352300155 DUNLAP LINDA M+TRAVIS J EHLKE DAWNA EHRLICH STEVEN F 412 PELLY AV N 353 MEADOW AVE N 245 MEADOW AVE N RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98057 1352300235 7564600195 1352300100 FETTEROLF DAVID W FILLEY CATHERINE+KACHUCK JO FISHER 338 GARDEN AVE N 1207 N 3RD ST 16121182ND AVE SE RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98058 1352300285 1352300085 1352300110 FUNKHOUSER KIZZIE+NATHAN FUNKHOUSER NATHAN K+KIZZIE GARCIA ARLINDA R+GUBBELS CH 304 Garden Ave N 248 GARDEN AVE N 230 GARDEN AVE N Renton, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98057 7564600197 7564600230 1352300215 GARCIA EDGAR P GENTELE WILLIAM+AMY GOETZ MATTHEW M 106 140TH PL NE 235 GARDEN AVE N 356 GARDEN AV N BELLEVUE, WA 98007 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 7224000325 7564600196 1352300220 GRAHAM CHERYL HAHNMARKW HAMMILL L NICOLE 33526 18TH AVES 4108 MIDVALE AVE N 350 GARDEN AVE N FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 SEATTLE, WA 98103 RENTON, WA 98055 1352300255 7564600240 7224000545 HAYES DOLORES M HISEY JOHN A HOVSEPIAN CONNOR 326 GARDEN AV N 231 GARDEN AVE N 4344 90TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 7224000340 7224000340 7224000330 HUANG YUNG-CHIANG & SU-LING HUANG YUNG-CHIANG & SU-LING HUANG YUNG.CHIANG & SU-LING 247 Park Ave N 249 Park Ave N 10748 15TH AVE NE Renton.WA 98057 Renton.WA 98057 SEATTLE, WA 98125 7224000695 1352300335 7564600203 J & S EVERGREEN INVESTMENT JAHN JAMES R+MARIE KING COUNTY-PROPERTY SVCS 5616 173RD AVE SE 1608 1ST AVE W 5004TH AVE BELLEVUE, WA 98006 SEATTLE, WA 98119 SEATTLE, WA 98004 7224000320 7224000320 7224000525 LAI YING-FANG LAI YING-FANG LAIGO LLOYD T 229 Park Ave N APT B 229 Park Ave N APT A 3704 5 DAKOTA ST Renton, WA 98057 Renton, WA 98057 SEATTLE, WA 98118 7224000526 1352300315 1352300275 LAIGO LLOYD T LANE STEVEN B+RICE SCOTT SH LAULAINEN FRANS A 326 Pelly Ave N 345 MEADOW AVE N 314 GARDEN AVE N Renton, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 7564600235 7564600235 7224000365 MALPHRUS THOMAS H MALPHRUS THOMAS H MITION JEREMY D 18713 102ND AVE SE 230 Park Pl N 238 PELLY AVE N RENTON, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98057 7224000450 7224000450 7224000605 MOLAVI AMIR TAGHl+KANGARLOO MOLAVI AMIR TAGHl+KANGARLOO MONACO LLC 2932 277TH TERR SE 323 Park Ave N 336 PARK AVE N SAMMAMISH, WA 98075 Renton, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98057 1352300340 1352300090 7224000490 MONAHAN NANCYMONAHAN NANCY MUDOGARYR MY DREAM LLC 325 MEADOW AVE N 18624 SE 213TH ST 24451 SE 48TH PL RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98058 ISSAQUAH, WA 98029 7224000720 7224000535 1352300295 NGUYEN PHONG THANH NGUYEN TRINH CUU NGUYEN VINH+PHAM THI MY HAN 1503 MANGRUM ST 1401 EDMONDS AVE NE 359 MEADOW AVE N PFLUGERVILLE, Tl< 78660 RENTON, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98055 7224000475 7223000010 7564600210 NORGEL LLC PACCAR INC PAPINI CARLO & ANGELA 27420 236TH PL SE PO BOX 1518 12912 SE 191ST ST MAPLE VALLEY, WA 98038 BELLEVUE, WA 98009 RENTON, WA 98058 1352300350 1352300250 7564600105 PETERSON CHARLES AARON POQUETIE ROGER L+JUDITH A RENTON SCHOOL 01ST 507 WELLS AV N 328 Garden Ave N 300SW 7TH ST RENTON, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 7564600220 1352300240 7224000550 ROSEN DYLAN SANDERS MATIHEW R+AYA SCHMULAND FAMILY IRREVOCABL 12011/2 N 3RD ST 336 GARDEN AVE N 8723 142ND AVE NE RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98057 REDMOND, WA 98052 1352300345 1352300150 1352300150 SCHULTZ NORMAN M SEDGEMORE JEFF G SEDGEMORE JEFF G 7634 S SUNNYCREST RD 251 MEADOW AVE N 251 Meadow Ave N APT B SEATILE, WA 98178 RENTON, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98057 7224000440 7224000425 7224000425 SHARAM FAMILY TRUST II SHARAM FAMILY TRUST II SHARAM FAMILY TRUST 11 PO BOX 2401 PO BOX 2401 PO BOX 2401 KIRKLAND, WA 98083 KIRKLAND, WA 98083 KIRKLAND, WA 98083 7564600180 7224000355 7224000350 SMITH GREGG SMITH JOHN F+SHARON L SMITH JOHN F+SHARON L 6208 HAZELWOOD LN 12216 164TH AVE SE 1005 N 3rd St BELLEVUE, WA 98006 RENTON, WA 98059 Renton, WA 98057 7224000350 7224000810 1352300265 SMITH JOHN F+SHARON L SPREDER GARY M ll+KURILUK L STOUDT TIMOTHY W+JENNIFER M 1007 N 3rd St 410 PELLY AV N 318 GARDEN AVE N Renton, WA 980S7 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98057 7224000260 7224000510 7224000465 TANG QUAN F+JIN E LIU TERRY TIMOTHY M & NANCY A THANH TRAN 232 PARK AV N 338 PELLY AVE N 9306 48TH AVES RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 SEATTLE, WA 98118 7224000520 1352300320 1352300105 THOMAS MARK K THOMAS PAMELA S TWIDT BRIAN O+MARY 330 PELLY AVE N 341 MEADOW AV N 234 GARDEN AVE N RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 7224000495 1352300225 7224000815 ULRICH SAMSON VAN DYKE JERRY+KELLY VANDIVER MARY ANN 346 PELLY AV N 346 GARDEN AVE N 406 PELLY AVE N RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 7224000530 1352300170 7224000505 WAKMAN LORI TAYLOR WERLE LARRY WHITE STAR INVESTMENTS LLC 322 PELLY AVE N 4212 AN KAR PARK DRIVE #146 PO BOX 6008 RENTON, WA 98057 BELLINGHAM, WA 98226 SAINT JOSEPH, MO 64506 7564600225 7224000820 WOOANITAT YANG ANDREWLA N 12906 NE 25TH PL 502 S TOBIN ST BELLEVUE, WA 98005 RENTON, WA 98057 R~ ------~ enton ~ NOTICE OF APPLICATION .............. ,..._""'--........... -tlw~.,,_.,. .. .__ 1uoi-....-.-ftlt1wa,•-n.o,-...,rllllf-lM,.,..._ ...... _ -- l'ICIICl'O~ 1'1>1'--go...,.~.._ ........... , ___ ..._ ~-11-~-....~~\I-.--.... Ld~_.....,,... .... -Iii'• -,._.,. l'IACI) ---C.-., -Tl-. MIio<>' ,._=--It II """"""'",-mloll,.t..,~1'o•.._• .. ll."-""""""~"-Olllll.,,alldNJ.'fM.TNl.ll°'"ou,jlo:I_..., lllto_.....,. __ U.-...,..l~ta.111,~,...__!Dll-~-"'- /Ull ..... -----..----e--.......-.~ .... ~-"--__ _...,.,--n,o--CbllrldlllN!.o ... ~IWlqts~~A<ltKl''I -1"-o,,(1 ........ -""__.... ............. _.,.._IMW ....... -Z-l.-.l ~--.... ~---IM ..... ,._!O.,-.,N,Jnlil-"-""'S\.'"""-l-ll,.._ .... 11 .,._,._ .... JA_....,.....,.... ___ _....,._~-· ,uco--.-""""--""""....,....,_".,.a.1....m ___ ...., .. .,.,._....._ .. --~-..... -.. -· --lirull~---... ...,.-......-~-............... .,,,., ~~---· n,,,--.... .,_..i;~.....,..--·~--1.,..,...,,..... .... ----...... --~ ""'",._~ ... -IM-..-...--~ ...... llllrc.._$0.___..,._ --· .. -~ Uf'IJ(l,lffJfaolffl'CONTu:rPPSON, U..Qo"' ,tJtlt., UUh Kl"J.<, •lOO. T-w• t11<¢1JH, .. Ul-1Ul/ -·-!'llltE......,.hlrlttt:+ttt:ttez:tlrtl I JRJIMoltlM ecrn,w11rt:rr....,.,..1111m"' .,,.._c-d(ha-. ....... llfl-.t~Qrr-. --!NI-~--"*""'"· ......... -~ ....... -,._,_._ .. i:-,1Jpl~~J.IIU'""1t,~W.,,.-W .. .-,,-.,.1J11_.,....,_a,=a, n. -" -,--. --,... • ,.... -.. -JI-.. i=i4. lUII-. c-d 0..,.-,. --··-~-11;1)$,...,,.C,-,W°',"-tr,oa .. ~\IO-. ... -....- _,._..,...,..,.OMl*lla.......,-ltwt..._Nl..,,_~tt(UJ.)&)O.ffll. ,r___.,,.tam:11 ..,...._i.._i.,""1 .. --,-....,-...,.1111,_..,,..,,.~--,...-.., lt~pn,pa,.G-N ... """C._, ~--~--..--."'-"'""""1111-o!~ ,.., ___ .,.-.,,,_...._...,.,...._t.l.ffil..,,W""'--"'IU!IIIJG.GU. ...,..... ____ ........ ~-·-"'--..... -.,.,.,4_ ~-..- u,..._,."*"''",.,...,_r,1_,,, __ ~..,"'•..-V11~__.it.. -Wnu,,m, °"l',,,;1-CUl.l'lalll*"'l°""*'10$J-C..-U,,Wrr,•-llo'~ IUIS,l. lhM-/-.C _,.._~-/1,U.1,.1141M2.0,l».l'\.IO NAMC'-----------------------WA..1"0.otl0f;W __________ em11u1ll%!P-______ _ TtUPMOttlN;tc _________ _ -R~· --.. =--~ enton ~ PL!.l.if INCIJJCE TH( PROUCT NUMJf.11 WHEN l;AWNG FOR ,RoPER FlU IOENTlnCATICN l[J"fll,QIOJ.lCU ~--~•o•-•~ol~.,,_.,.,_..,,,,._..,o,,~~-.....- "'""'""-"" o,,r,111.-.,at,._,...o-,.,,,.ui5s-llrdfw,y.-w1. 111:111 FJ,f-/Ko..: -W!CW'l°"'-""S--Juu.t'-OO)t,tf.CJ,N, rt.11 CERTIFICATION I, ~~a , hereby certify that__\_ copies of the above document posted in_\_ oo"sp;~,os plam o, o~~ Date: ~\,--\\--io,'"' ~~----- STATE OF WASHINGTON ss COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that rnaM::r.e.,, \\cccec4 signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): ___ J.Lftp"-,illf=~=--]""/Jl""io!<M~VS:4------ My appointment expires:_ --"""&J'-""1'f'f'. ,../.._s;4f_-_:J-=· c.;},_.,2,,,.· ..:0.,_/7.:... ---- ~~ ~!llQ!J _,[.:!J(:'_)::__.,.-..T1\/f \/ i:::1,s 1.. 'I. .. -\.. ·' I I ·-V -----·------·-·-----·----- ,· '! \ ,'\ r - i,.....t,.lf-\1 f",. '·~I COMMENT #5: ADDITIONAL ------. ROOF MODULATION ADDED BIRDSEYE VIEW FROM SOUTHWEST -8/24/16 VIEW FROM VISITOR PARKING -8/24/16 integ r.~'~""" COMMENT#3: ADDITIONAL MODULATION ADDEO BIRDSEYE VIEW FROM SOUTHWEST -10/21 /16 VIEW FROM V ISITOR PARK IN G -l 0/21 / 16 Nole: These views intend ed to dem onst ra te design in tent . Reter to submitted site p lans for accurate srte p la n p roposa l. _....__...., ____ ., COM ME NT #1 : SOFF ITI OVERHANG HEIGHT ADJUSTED TO 10'-8 " AT SOUTH S IDE OF PAR K AVE . FA CAD E ----RentlTn ® Entire Document Ava ilable Upon Req uest Exhibit 27 SA RTOR I ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 315 N GARDEN AVE , RENTON, WA 98057 Department of Comrr ity and Economic Development -----Ifi11tun NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A public hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington, on November 08, 2016 at 11:00 am to consider the following petitions: Sartori Elementary School LUA16-000692 Location: 1200 N 3rd St. The Renton School District (applicant) has submitted applications for Hearing Examiner Planned Urban Development, Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit, and Lot Combination approvals for the construction of a new 3-story 79,000 square foot Sartori Elementary School. The subject property consists of 14 contiguous parcels that are bound by Park Ave N., Garden Ave N., N 4th St., and N 3rd St. The 5.28 acre subject property is an entire block located within the Residential-8 (R-8). R-10, Commercial Neighborhood (CN), and Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning designations. The existing Sartori Education Center and surrounding residential and commercial structures have been or will be demolished. The Renton School District is the lead agency for State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Review. Legal descriptions of the files noted above are on file in the City Clerk's Office, Seventh Floor, City Hall, Renton. All interested persons are invited to be present at the Public Hearing to express their opinions. Questions should be directed to the Hearing Examiner at 425-430-6515. Publication Date: October 28, 2016 Denis Law Mayor October 11, 2016 Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Angie Laulainen 314 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98055 Email to enkeli_l@yahoo.com SUBJECT: Response to Public Comments Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692 Dear Ms. Laulainen: Thank you for your comments regarding the proposed Sartori Elementary School (LUA16- 000692) located at 315 Garden Ave N. The City of Renton's Department of Community and Economic Development is reviewing the Planned Urban Development land use application and will provide a recommendation to the Hearing Examiner at an upcoming public hearing. The Renton School District is the Lead Agency for the review required by the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPAi and it will issue a threshold determination prior to the public hearing. Many of the comments you submitted to the City during the land use application commenting period of September 14-28, 2016 were comments associated with the environmental checklist for the SEPA review. While the school district is the Lead Agency for the SEPA review, I have provided responses as they relate to city code. I have also added you as a Party of Record for the land use application. I've paraphrased your comments and provided a response (bulleted and italicized) to each of them below: Environmental Checklist Comments received via email September 15, 2016: 1. Earth History of instability on Garden Ave N specifically a sinkhole at the south end of the street. • I have forwarded this concern to Mike Sten house in the City's Public Works Maintenance Division. Instability related to historic Lake Washington and Black River basins. • The subject property is within a High Seismic Hazard area as identified on the City's mapping database. This is due to soils that are associated with former channels of the Cedar River. A geotechnical report was prepared for the proposed new building and associated improvements. The City's adopted building code will require the school district to design the building to withstand the effects of seismic events. 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov 6. Energy and Natural Resources Recommend the use of solar panels and other sustainable strategies and design similar to the Secondary Learning Center. • The City supports the school district in efforts to utilize sustainable strategies and design for the Sartori Elementary School. The City's Comprehensive Plan contains policies that encourage LEED construction and efforts to reduce greenhouse gases. 7. Environmental Health No mention of offsite noise that would affect the proposal. Off-site noise identified from Boeing, Renton Airport, emergency vehicles, and trains. • Modern building practices and the City's adopted building code requires exterior materials and insulation that should help mitigate some of the off-site noise impacts you have cited. Checklist refers to speeds adjacent to school at 20 mph that will mitigate noise. Speed limits posted at 30 mph in neighborhood. • Streets adjacent to schools are limited to 20 mph. The City has provided recommendations for SEPA mitigation measures that include installation of flashing school zone signs and radar detecting school zone signs. Permitted construction hours within the City begin at 7am. There should be a delay to begin at 8am for loud equipment such as pile drivers. • The school district has proposed a method of pile construction called augercast. As an alternative to traditional pile driving, piles are formed by drilling and then grout is pumped down within a hollow stem. The school district has indicated noise impacts from this system of foundation construction are analogous to normal construction activities. 10. Aesthetics Concern with appearance of Park Ave N. side of building. Suggest art or other visually pleasing articulation on west elevation. • The design of the building is required to meet urban design standards set forth in the City's Development Regulations. Applicants are able to choose from a menu of options that meet the standards outright and/or suggest alternative methods of design that meet the intent of the guidelines. City staff will provide a recommendation, with consideration of your comments, to the Hearing Examiner on design aspects of the proposal. 12. Recreation School district has indication a portion of the playfield will remain open during construction. Available portion should be along Garden Ave N. side of property. Contractors should be made aware of children using playfield and crossing Garden Ave N. 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov ® • This comment is outside the scope of the City's review of the land use application. However any portion of the field that remains open during school construction will need to be adequately fenced and separated from construction activities. 13. Historical and Cultural Preservation Renton History Museum was not listed as being consulted regarding historical significance of Sartori. • The school district did contact the Renton History Museum related to any building fixtures the museum would like ta retain for their collection. No fixtures were identified by the museum curator as much of the furnishings had been already been removed. The curator did request a brick from the building following demolition. 14. Transportation Transportation report describes inaccurate description of Garden Ave N. and does not identify barrier on N. 4th_ • The City concurs and is aware of the limitations of Garden Ave N. The finalized report should provide clarification of Garden Ave N limitations including the barrier. No consultation was mentioned with the City regarding traffic citations on surrounding streets. • A Traffic Impact Analysis does not typically include area traffic citations. The analysis is intended ta determine whether new vehicle trips will cause failures to the City's transportation network and potential traffic safety hazards. The City has recommended several pedestrian safety measures near the school such flashing pedestrian signage and radar signs. Improvements are needed to the intersection of N. 4th and Garden Ave N. The current street system cannot accommodate the additional traffic caused by the school. • The Traffic Impact Analysis has modeled the new trips added to the intersection associated with the school and determined those trips and existing traffic will not cause a failure ta the intersection. The City has recommended improvements ta the intersection that include curb-bulbs that will reduce the crossing distance for pedestrians and provide a traffic calming measure for vehicle traffic an Garden Ave. N. Additionally, the City has recommended that the school district prepare an operational plan that would address any potential queuing extending onto N. 4th St. Suggest the barrier on N. 4th and Garden Ave N. be relocated to allow school busses to access Garden Ave N. from bus facility. • The City of Renton Police Department currently and will continue to provide patrol and presence in the area of the cut-through barrier located at N. 4th Street ond Garden Ave N. during Boeing shift changes. The barrier was placed at its current location to direct vehicles to the N. 4th Street arterial. The removal or relocation of the barrier could result 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov ® in additional school bus (other than Sartori busses) and cut-through traffic along Garden Ave N. At this time, the City is not recommending the removal or relocation of the barrier due to the potential increase of vehicle traffic on Garden Ave N. between N. 3'd and N. 4th Avenues. Truck route maps should be distributed to all contractors during construction. The school district has been made aware of the designated truck routes in the City. Also, prior to construction of the school, a pre-construction meeting will be required with the school district and their construction superintendent where truck routes will be further discussed. 15. Public Services Two Renton Police Department offices will be required for pick-up and drop-off to direct traffic if no improvements are made to the intersection of N. 4th St. and Garden Ave N. • As mentioned previously, the Traffic Impact Analysis has modeled the new trips added to the intersection that are associated with the school and those trips alang with existing traffic volumes will not cause a failure to the intersection. The City has recommended that the school district prepare an operational plan that would address any potential queuing extending onto N. 4'" St. Additional Environmental Checklist Comments received via email September 15, 2016 14. Transportation Buses leaving the school district bus barn will be exiting from a driveway directly across the Sartori pick-up and drop-off driveway. Busses will be changing lanes immediately to the far left lanes to turn onto Park Ave N. School district should make an additional entrance on the north side of bus barn to alleviate district traffic on N. 4th Street. • As mentioned previously, the Traffic Impact Analysis found no failures on the abutting intersections, which accounted for existing bus traffic and proposed trips to the new school. Additional ingress/egress to the school district bus facility is not warranted at this time. Comments received via email September 16, 2016 Concern regarding response from Randy Matheson about a statement that the school district does not make improvement to traffic patterns or road improvements. Traffic report prepared by the school district refers to impacts created by the new school as negligible. • As part of the SEPA review, the school district and the City will review area intersections to identify any Level af Service failures caused by the new trips for the proposed elementary school. Any Level of Service failures would need to be corrected via improvements to the transportation system or reducing the scope of the project. While no Level of Service failures were identified, the City has recommended that the school district provide pedestrian safety measures and prepare operational plans for potential queuing during pick-up/drop-off and overflow parking during special events. 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov Comments received via email September 19, 2016 Request a new non-biased and more thorough traffic report be prepared for the project. Report identifies traffic impact to proposed school as negligible. Report identifies 200 fewer trips per day to the site than the current use. • The school district has indicated a finalized transportation re part will be issued with the SEPA threshold determination. According to Section 3.2.2 of the report, the trip generation rates for existing uses and net change that resulted in 200 fewer trips per day was an analysis the transportation engineer prepared for disclosure purposes that could be used in determining mitigation requirements and impact fees. The analysis assumed the school was fully functional, which is why the analysis resulted in 200 fewer trips. This specific analysis did not determine whether the new school would cause failures to the abutting intersections. The City has informally recommended that this specific analysis either be removed from the final report or better clarified. Morning drop-off times identified as 20 to 30 minutes prior to start time are not in line with the district's policy of not allowing drop off more than 10 to 15 minutes prior to start time. Study should look at impact of current traffic along Park Ave N being relocated into residential zone, specifically N. 4th and Garden Ave N. The stretch of N. 4th between Garden Ave N and Park Ave N should be studied for potential queue impacts. • The City has recommended the school district prepare an operational plan to address any potential queue impacts onto N. 4'° Street during pick-up and drop-off time. Closing Again, thank you for providing comments regarding the proposed Sartori Elementary School. You are Party of Record for the land use application. Your comments are now part of the official file and will be considered prior to the Hearing Examiner issuing a decision. Please feel free to contact me at 425.430.6593 or matt.herrera@rentonwa.gov if you have any questions regarding the project proposal. Sincerely, ) // / f. /,( .-";•/ !• ' ,, ~~, !> ;-..,----- {'-'--r Matthew Herrera, AICP Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov Leslie Betlach ------Renton® Plan Number: Site Address: LUA16-000692 1200 N 3RD ST Plan Review Routing Slip Name: Sartori Elementary School Description: The Renton School District (applicant) has submitted applications for Hearing Examiner Planned Urban Development, Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit, and Lot Combination approvals for the construction of a new 3-story 79,000 square foot Sartori Elementary School. The subject property consists of 14 contiguous parcels that are bound by Park Ave N ., Garden Ave N., N 4th St., and N 3rd St. The S.28 acre subject property is an entire block located within the Residential-8 (R-8), R-10, Commercial Neighborhood (CN), and Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning designations. The existing Sartori Education Center and surrounding residential and commercial structures have been or will be demolished. The Renton School District is the lead agency for State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Review. The City's mapping database has identified the subject property is within the Wellhead Protection Zone 1 and potential seismic hazard area. Vehicle access to the subject property is proposed on N. 3rd St. and N. 4th St. The proposal includes 83 parking stalls, 14 bus loading spaces, and 14 covered bicycle parking spaces. Additional improvements proposed by the applicant include a 35,000 square foot grass field, various soft and hard surface play areas, 4,400 square foot covered play area, public plaza, landscaping, street frontage improvements, and drainage infrastructure. The Planned Urban Development application requests to vary setback, impervious surface coverage, height, parking, landscaping, refuse/recycling, and street standards. The applicant has proposed public benefits including a public plaza, large play field and other programmed play areas, and enhanced landscaping. The applicant has submitted the following technical reports with the application: drainage report, geotechnical report; arborist report; and traffic study. Review Type: Date Assigned: Community Services Review-Version 1 09/14/2016 Date Due: 09/28/2016 Project Manager: Matt Herrera Environmental Impact Earth Animals Air Environ men ta I Hea I th Water Energy/Natural Resources Plants Housing Land/Shoreline Use Aesthetics Where to enter your comments: Manage My Reviews Which types of comments should be entered: Light/Glare Historic/Cul tura I Preservation Recreation Airport Environmental Uti I iti es 10,000 Feet Transportation 14,000 Feet Public Service Recommendation -Comments that impact the project including any of the Enivornmental Impacts above. Correction -Corrections to the project that need to be made before the review can be completed and /or requesting submittal of additional documentation and/or resubmittal of existing documentation. What statuses should be used: Reviewed -I have reviewed the project and have no comments. Reviewed with Comments -I have reviewed the project and and I have comments entered in Recommendations. Correction/Resubmit -I have reviewed the project and the applicant needs to submit and/or resubmit documentation and I have added corrections in Corrections. 5 1 fJ ~ JW1 '1-k-c_ CldlJ.f'le cl ..;had:) arJd m · ~~ v(}t?0c/br7 ~n«-L ~ r cl '1f #Y7 ft> !7r:J.f!. . YA-:7;~t,.;r;d:C--~ 1·~ vh,91A.-/d A__ lt:U<.at> ~ d ' __,_q_-'2-"-"!2...,_____-'4-1&"-- Signature of Oiredororuthorized Representative Date Terry Flatley ------Renton 0 Plan Review Routing Slip Plan Number: Site Address: LUA16-000692 1200 N 3RD ST Name: Sartori Elementary School Description: The Renton School District (applicant) has submitted applications for Hearing Examiner Planned Urban Development, Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit, and Lot Combination approvals for the construction of a new 3~story 79,000 square foot Sartori Elementary School. The subject property consists of 14 contiguous parcels that are bound by Park Ave N ., Garden Ave N., N 4th St., and N 3rd St. The 5.28 acre subject property is an entire block located within the Residential -8 (R-8), R-10, Commercial Neighborhood (CN), and Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning designations. The existing Sartori Education Center and surrounding residential and commercial structures have been or will be demolished. The Renton School District is the lead agency for State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Review. The City's mapping database has identified the subject property is within the Wellhead Protection Zone 1 and potential seismic hazard area. Vehicle access to the subject property is proposed on N. 3rd St. and N. 4th St. The proposal includes 83 parking stalls, 14 bus loading spaces, and 14 covered bicycle parking spaces. Additional improvements proposed by the applicant include a 35,000 square foot grass field, various soft and hard surface play areas, 4,400 square foot covered play area, public plaza, landscaping, street frontage improvements, and drainage infrastructure. The Planned Urban Development application requests to vary setback, impervious surface coverage, height, parking, landscaping, refuse/recycling, and street standards. The applicant has proposed public benefits including a public plaza, large play field and other programmed play areas, and enhanced landscaping. The applicant has submitted the following technical reports with the application: drainage report, geotechnical report; arborist report; and traffic study. Review Type: Community Services Review-Version 1 Date Assigned: Date Due: 09/14/2016 09/28/2016 Project Manager: Matt Herrera Environmental Impact Earth Air Water Plants Land/Shore! i ne Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/Natural Resources Housing Aesthetics Light/Glare Historic/Cultural Preservation Recreation Airport Envi ronmenta I Utilities 10,000 Feet Transportation 14,000 Feet Public Service Where to enter your comments: Mana~e My Reviews General Comments -the plan is sea Cd incorrectly. The scale bar is 1" = 20' which is correct but the plan itself does not scale that way. For examp1e, the planting strip shows it is supposed to be 8 feet wide hut it scales to 5 feet; this makes review somewhat problematic. Street light locations arc not indicated on the site phm or landscape plan. Parking lot islands in S\\' corner are too small, increase size to accommodate trees or _do not plant trees. Perimeter landscaping does not provide specifics on plant materials. No irrigation is shown -restore/replace irrigation system on N. 3rd; install new irrigation on Park Avenue and N. 4th, as well as Garden in new planting strip to City specifications. Street trees -remove all existing street trees on~ 3rd & Park Ave. On Park Avenue return tree grates back to the City. Create an 8' wide planting strip along t?_arden Avenue N. and use street t~ees. On N. 3rd Street-use onl)' Blue Ash (Fraxinus quadrangulata); On N 4th Street -use onl)' 'Sterling' Silver Linden (Tilia tomentosa) Trees on 3rd & 4th: Trees shall be spaced a minimum distance from intersections at 40 feet, 30 feet from street lights, 6 feet from fire hydrants, and 10 feet from driveway approaches. Tree spacing shall be a minimum of 50 feet. On Park Avenue: street trees shall be Japanese Tree Lilac 'Ivory Silk' (Syringa reticulata) spaced a minimum distance from intersections at 40 feet, 30 feet from street lights, 6 feet from fire hydrants, and 10 feet from drh'eWa)' approaches. Tree spacing shall be a minimum of 30 feet or wider. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Denis Law Mayor September 14, 2016 Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 3D'h St, #300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Subject: Notice of Complete Application New Sartori Elementary School, LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD Dear Ms. Klein: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. You will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. In addition, this matter is tentatively scheduled for a Public Hearing on November 8, 2016 at 11:00 am, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. The applicant or representative(s) ofthe applicant are required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff report will be mailed to you prior to the scheduled hearing. Please contact me at (425) 430-6593 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Matthew Herrera Senior Planner cc: Renton School District#403 / Owner(s) Rick Stracke, RSD / Applicant North Renton Neighborhood Association, Debbie Nate Ison, Genie Chase, Jessica Roach, Kathleen Booher, Nancy Monahan, Neil Sheesley, Pamela Thomas, Paul Rolinger, Rochelle Krebs, Sara & Tim Bishop, Scott Rice, Wyman Dobson/ Parties of Record 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov NOTICE OF APPLICATION A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) -Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: September 14, 2016 PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Renton School District {applicant) has submitted applications for Hearing Examiner Planned Urban Development, Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit, and lot Combination approvals for the construction of a new 3-story 79,000 square foot Sartori Elementary School. The subject property consists of 14 contiguous parcels that are bound by Park Ave N., Garden Ave N., N 4th St., and N 3rd St. The 5.28 acre subject property is an entire block located within the Residential-& (R-8), R-10, Commercial Neighborhood (CN), and Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning designations. The existing Sartori Education Center and surrounding residential and commercial structures have been or wil! be demolished. The Renton School District is the lead agency for State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Review. The City's mapping database has identified the subject property is within the Wellhead Protection Zone 1 and potential seismic hazard area. Vehicle access to the subject property is proposed on N. 3rd St. and N. 4th St. The proposal includes 83 parking stalls, 14 bus loading spaces, and 14 covered bicycle parking spaces. Additional improvements proposed by the applicant include a 35,000 square foot grass field, various soft and hard surface play areas, 4,400 square foot covered play area, public plaza, landscaping, street frontage improvements, and drainage infrastructure. The Planned Urban Development application requests to vary setback, impervious surface coverage, height, parking, landscaping, refuse/recycling, and street standards. The applicant has proposed public benefits including a public plaza, large play field and other programmed play areas, and enhanced landscaping. The applicant has submitted the following technical reports with the application: drainage report, geotechnical report; arborist report; and traffic study. PROJECT LOCATION: 315 Garden Ave N PERMITS/REVIEW REQUESTED: Conditional Use-HE, Preliminary PUD APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Lisa Klein, AHBL, 2215 N 30~ St, #300, Tacoma, WA 98403/ 253-383-2422/ lklein@ahbl.com PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing is tentatively scheduled for November 8, 2016 before the Renton Hearing Examiner at 11:QO am, in Renton Council Chambers on the 7th floor of Renton City Hall. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner, Department of Community & Economic Development, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 p.m. on September 28, 2016. This matter is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on November 8, 2016, at 11:00 am, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. If you are interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Planning Division to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled at (425) 430~6578. If comments cannot be submitted in writing by the date indicated above, you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments an the proposal before the Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional information by mail, please contact the Project Manager, Matthew Herrera at (425) 430-6593. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. If you would like ta be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED, Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. File Name/ No.: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD NAME:---------------------------------- MAILING ADDRESS: ________________ CITY/STATE/ZIP: _________ _ TELEPHONE NO.: -------------- -~ITYOF -----·,,.·-~Renton PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION DATE OF APPLICATION: SEPTEMBER 2, 2016 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: SEPTEMBER 14, 2016 lf you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED, Planning Division, 1055 South Grady-Way1 Renton, WA 98057. File Name/ No.: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD NAME:---------------------------------- MAILING ADDRESS: _______________ CllY/STATE/ZIP: _________ _ TELEPHONE NO.: -------------- Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Cynthia Moya Tuesday, December 13, 2016 9:11 AM 'Phil Olbrechts' Cc: Matthew Herrera; Jennifer T. Henning; Vanessa Dolbee; Brianne Bannwarth; Craig Burnell; Julia Medzegian; Jason Seth Subject: FW: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Attachments: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD Recess Schedule Lakeridge.pdf The Request for Reconsideration from Angela Laulainen is embedded below along with an attached Recess Schedule. will be mailing this out to all parties of record later today. Thank you, Cindy Moya, Records Management Specialist City of Renton · Administrative Services/City Clerk Division cmoya@rentonwa.gov 425-430-6513 ..-rrr::-,-. -r. --ii..!:l!!Ul! {,, From: Jason Seth Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2016 8:27 AM To: Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov> \, Subject: FW: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD Cindy, Please forward this to the Hearing Examiner and cc: all of the parties of record including City staff. Thanks, -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 jseth@rento nwa .gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: Enkeli [mailto:enkeli l@yahoo,corn] Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 10:53 PM To: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> Subject: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD Honorable Hearing Examiner, 1 I am writing to ask for reconsideration on two aspects of the New Sa, ,ori Elementary School project/LUA 16-000692, CU-H, PUD. The two aspects of the decision are with respect to 1) traffic monitoring and 2) the location of the ball wall. First, regarding the aspect of traffic, thank you for including a stipulation that the queuing and parking elements of the proposal be monitored for one year. This monitoring will collect valuable information to help mitigate any problems that will arise from the current plan. I request that it also be stipulated that the one-year monitoring be done by an outside organization, one that is not connected in any way with Renton School District. The traffic report which was ordered by Renton School District and done by Heffron Transportation appeared to be biased in favor of Renton School District's fast track agenda to push their plans through and also reflected a general lack of knowledge of the North Renton Neighborhood. A lack of knowledge was apparent in several errors in the traffic report which did not come to the traffic experts' attention until pointed out in SEPA comments submitted by neighbors. For example, during the initial draft of the SEPA review, traffic experts wrongly quoted speed limits surrounding the site as all currently at 20 miles per hour. The traffic pattern at the intersection of N. 4th and Garden was also misrepresented as a through street (both described as a through street in the SEPA review and illustrated on the map of the school as a through street). The updated report submitted for the City of Renton Land Use Application included inflated counts of vehicular trips to the school, taken from a manual representing counts to a fully functioning elementary school. This again demonstrated the lack of knowledge of our neighborhood since Sartori has not been in use as an elementary school for decades. I request a non-biased organization be required to monitor the parking and queuing at the school. The City of Renton is more in touch with the North Renton Neighborhood and could be one choice to facilitate this monitoring. If not the City of Renton, it would be best to stipulate it is an organization other than Heffron Transportation, one that can be impartial, and one that will visit the site to gather the data for the report. The second aspect of the New Sartori Elementary School project which I request changes is the location of the ball wall in the covered play area at the south end of the block. This location is still too close to the street and to the residences on Garden Avenue North. The school district stated at the hearing that they pulled this area further to the west, however just a fifteen foot setback is not enough to offset the noise from the ball wall. This is not just typical playground noise that will emanate for a brief amount of time, but the ball wall is the most popular part of the playground where students line up to play "wall ball" and take turns for the entire recess to bounce balls against this wall. The fact that it is a covered structure means that the sound of the balls will be greatly amplified. Usually also located near the ball wall is four square which will add even more ball bouncing noise. The fact that it is a cement area with a cement wall makes the balls even louder. And it is not just a small window of time but the majority of each day we will hear constant ball bouncing. Elementary school recesses are spread out over the course of the day, so the bouncing ball noise will occur practically all day in order for all students to have access to the playground. I have attached the recess schedule for Lakeridge Elementary School as an example of a typical recess schedule. 2 The homes on Garden are aide mes that are located close to the it. The construction of our homes is such that the walls do , ,vt block out a lot of noise. We hear sirens from several blocks away, planes, buses, trains, helicopters, and when Boeing tests their jet engines, we hear the rumble till it stops and the windows rattle like crazy. Our homes are not expensive sound proof homes tucked away in a culdesac far from the activity of the city, but are situated close to the street. My porch steps are just fifteen feet away from the sidewalk. We hear all the noise inside the house from activity in the neighborhood and on the street. There will be no way to relax or take an afternoon nap with the constant noise of balls bouncing so close by. I ask that more attention be given to my concern of this play area too close to my home. In addition to having this amplified noise from the ball wall area, Garden Avenue residents will be dealing with the noise of school buses pulling through in the morning and after school. To place both the ball wall and the bus lane in this location will generate a consistency of noise throughout the day. It is too much noise for one location. I request that the school district move the ball wall to help lessen the noise. The ball wall could be moved to the hard surface play area where there is already a wall next to the school, or it could be moved entirely to another new location. They could otherwise get rid of the ball wall altogether and opt to keep the covered area in place with support pillars only and without any walls. Keeping the ball wall in its current location will result in substantial and undue adverse effects on adjacent properties on Garden Avenue North. Renton School District stated that they will plant trees on the east side of this structure, but the renderings submitted to the Hearing Examiner only show one tree and otherwise a wide pathway which does not block any sound from this play area. Most of this play area is connected to the walkway which goes from the school to the street, so it does not show any opportunity there for a landscape buffer. However, in my opinion, even a few trees planted near the structure will not be sufficient to block the sound, especially according to the renderings of their plan. It is for all of these reasons that the placement of the ball wall is contrary to "RMC 4-9-030(C)(3): Effect on Adjacent Properties" and indeed the proposed use at the proposed location does result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. The City of Renton Comprehensive plan also promotes improving the livability of Renton's neighborhoods. Unless changes are made, the ball wall will affect the quality of life and the livability in my home. I again respectfully request that the school district relocate the ball wall or remove it altogether. Thank you for taking the time to consider my comments and requests. Most Sincerely, Angela Laulainen 314 Garden AVE N Renton, WA 98057 3 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Enkeli <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Thursday, December 15, 2016 1:52 PM Jason Seth Subject: Re: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD Thank you so much! From: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> To: 'Enkeli' <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Cc: Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov> Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2016 1 :50 PM Subject: RE: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA 16-000692, CU-H, PUD Hello Ms. Laulainen, I am confirming receipt of your request for reconsideration and am confirming that it was forwarded to the Hearing Examiner. -Jason Jason Seth, CMG City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 iseth@rentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: Enkeli [mailto:enkeli_l@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 201612:20 PM To: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> Subject: Re: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD Good afternoon, Can you confirm that this has been received and submitted to the Hearing Examiner?? Thank you for you assistance. Angie Laulainen From: Enkeli <enkel, !@yahoo.com> To: "iseth@rentonwa.gov" <iseth Ca) rentonwa.qov> Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 10:53 PM 1 Subject: Request to the Hearing Ex er for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAM School I LUA 16-000692, CU-H, PUD MBER: New Sartori Elementary Honorable Hearing Examiner, I am writing to ask for reconsideration on two aspects of the New Sartori Elementary School project/LUA 16-000692, CU-H, PUD. The two aspects of the decision are with respect to 1) traffic monitoring and 2) the location of the ball wall. First, regarding the aspect of traffic, thank you for including a stipulation that the queuing and parking elements of the proposal be monitored for one year. This monitoring will collect valuable information to help mitigate any problems that will arise from the current plan. I request that it also be stipulated that the one-year monitoring be done by an outside organization, one that is not connected in any way with Renton School District. The traffic report which was ordered by Renton School District and done by Heffron Transportation appeared to be biased in favor of Renton School District's fast track agenda to push their plans through and also reflected a general lack of knowledge of the North Renton Neighborhood. A lack of knowledge was apparent in several errors in the traffic report which did not come to the traffic experts' attention until pointed out in SEPA comments submitted by neighbors. For example, during the initial draft of the SEPA review, traffic experts wrongly quoted speed limits surrounding the site as all currently at 20 miles per hour. The traffic pattern at the intersection of N. 4th and Garden was also misrepresented as a through street (both described as a through street in the SEPA review and illustrated on the map of the school as a through street). The updated report submitted for the City of Renton Land Use Application included inflated counts of vehicular trips to the school, taken from a manual representing counts to a fully functioning elementary school. This again demonstrated the lack of knowledge of our neighborhood since Sartori has not been in use as an elementary school for decades. I request a non-biased organization be required to monitor the parking and queuing at the school. The City of Renton is more in touch with the North Renton Neighborhood and could be one choice to facilitate this monitoring. If not the City of Renton, it would be best to stipulate it is an organization other than Heffron Transportation, one that can be impartial, and one that will visit the site to gather the data for the report. The second aspect of the New Sartori Elementary School project which I request changes is the location of the ball wall in the covered play area at the south end of the block. This location is still too close to the street and to the residences on Garden Avenue North. The school district stated at the hearing that they pulled this area further to the west, however just a fifteen foot setback is not enough to offset the noise from the ball wall. This is not just typical playground noise that will emanate for a brief amount of time, but the ball wall is the most popular part of the playground where students line up to play "wall ball" and take turns for the entire recess to bounce balls against this wall. The fact that it is a covered structure means that the sound of the balls will be greatly amplified. Usually also located near the ball wall is four square which will add even more ball bouncing noise. The fact that it is a cement area with a cement wall makes the balls even louder. And it is not just a small window of time but the majority of each day we will hear constant ball bouncing. Elementary school recesses are spread out over the course of the day, so the bouncing ball noise will occur practically all day in order for all students to have access to the playground. I 2 have attached the recess sche recess schedule. for Lakeridge Elementary School in example of a typical The homes on Garden are older homes that are located close to the street. The construction of our homes is such that the walls do not block out a lot of noise. We hear sirens from several blocks away, planes, buses, trains, helicopters, and when Boeing tests their jet engines, we hear the rumble till it stops and the windows rattle like crazy. Our homes are not expensive sound proof homes tucked away in a culdesac far from the activity of the city, but are situated close to the street. My porch steps are just fifteen feet away from the sidewalk. We hear all the noise inside the house from activity in the neighborhood and on the street. There will be no way to relax or take an afternoon nap with the constant noise of balls bouncing so close by. I ask that more attention be given to my concern of this play area too close to my home. In addition to having this amplified noise from the ball wall area, Garden Avenue residents will be dealing with the noise of school buses pulling through in the morning and after school. To place both the ball wall and the bus lane in this location will generate a consistency of noise throughout the day. It is too much noise for one location. I request that the school district move the ball wall to help lessen the noise. The ball wall could be moved to the hard surface play area where there is already a wall next to the school, or it could be moved entirely to another new location. They could otherwise get rid of the ball wall altogether and opt to keep the covered area in place with support pillars only and without any walls. Keeping the ball wall in its current location will result in substantial and undue adverse effects on adjacent properties on Garden Avenue North. Renton School District stated that they will plant trees on the east side of this structure, but the renderings submitted to the Hearing Examiner only show one tree and otherwise a wide pathway which does not block any sound from this play area. Most of this play area is connected to the walkway which goes from the school to the street, so it does not show any opportunity there for a landscape buffer. However, in my opinion, even a few trees planted near the structure will not be sufficient to block the sound, especially according to the renderings of their plan. It is for all of these reasons that the placement of the ball wall is contrary to "RMC 4-9-030(C)(3): Effect on Adjacent Properties" and indeed the proposed use at the proposed location does result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. The City of Renton Comprehensive plan also promotes improving the livability of Renton's neighborhoods. Unless changes are made, the ball wall will affect the quality of life and the livability in my home. I again respectfully request that the school district relocate the ball wall or remove it altogether. Thank you for taking the time to consider my comments and requests. Most Sincerely, Angela Laulainen 314 Garden AVE N Renton, WA 98057 3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: Sartori Elementary School Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Conditional Use ) ) ) ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION ) REQUEST ) ) ) LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H ) _________________ ) By email dated December 12, 2016, Angela Laulainen has requested reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's decision on the above-captioned matter. Since the reconsideration request affects parties of record and the interests of the City, the parties of record (including applicant) who testified at the hearing and City staff will be given an opportunity to respond to the request for reconsideration before a decision on the reconsideration request is issued. Any responses must be based upon evidence that is already in the record. No evidence that has not been recorded at the hearing or entered as an exhibit at the hearing will be considered in the reconsideration request. To this end, the recess schedule appended to Ms. Laulainen's reconsideration request is not admitted and will not be considered by the hearing examiner. Similarly, Ms. Laulainen's comments about what she can hear in her home are also not admitted and not considered. ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION 22 I. Persons who testified at the hearing on the above-captioned matter or had written comment admitted into the record shall have until 4:00 pm, December 30, 2017 to provide written comments in response to the request for reconsideration submitted by Ms. Laulainen. The City Clerk shall promptly forward all responses to Ms. Laulainen to the email address she used to file her request for reconsideration. 23 24 25 26 Ms. Laulainen shall have until December 6, 2017 at 4:00 pm to provide a written reply to the responses authorized in the preceding paragraph. PUD and CU -I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 3. All written comments authorized above may be emailed to the City Clerk's Office at CMcl\a'(i'r~ntum1<,,g<2x. In the alternative written comments may be mailed or delivered to Cynthia Moya, City of Renton Records Management Specialist, Administrative Services/City Clerk Division, at 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Mailed or delivered comments must be received by the City by the deadlines specified in this Order. DA TED this 19th day of December, 2016. City of Renton Hearing Examiner PUD and CU -2 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: From: Phil Olbrechts Cynthia Moya Monday, December 19, 2016 9:35 AM Jason Seth FW: Sartori Order on Reconsideration Request Order on Reconsideration --Sartori.pd! Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 9:34:26 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: Cynthia Moya Subject: Sartori Order on Reconsideration Request Hi Cindy, Please distribute the attached to the parties of record. Thank you! 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: Sartori Elementary School Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Conditional Use ) ) ) ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION ) REQUEST ) ) ) LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H ) _________________ ) By email dated December 12, 2016, Angela Laulainen has requested reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's decision on the above-captioned matter. Since the reconsideration request affects parties of record and the interests of the City, the parties of record (including applicant) who testified at the hearing and City staff will be given an opportunity to respond to the request for reconsideration before a decision on the reconsideration request is issued. Any responses must be based upon evidence that is already in the record. No evidence that has not been recorded at the hearing or entered as an exhibit at the hearing will be considered in the reconsideration request. To this end, the recess schedule appended to Ms. Laulainen's reconsideration request is not admitted and will not be considered by the hearing examiner. Similarly, Ms. Laulainen's comments about what she can hear in her home are also not admitted and not considered. ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION 22 I. Persons who testified at the hearing on the above-captioned matter or had written comment admitted into the record shall have until 4:00 pm, December 30, 2016 to provide written comments in response to the request for reconsideration submitted by Ms. Laulainen. The City Clerk shall promptly forward all responses to Ms. Laulainen to the email address she used to file her request for reconsideration. 23 24 25 26 Ms. Laulainen shall have until January 6, 2017 at 4:00 pm to provide a written reply to the responses authorized in the preceding paragraph. PUD and CU -1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 3. All written comments authorized above may be emailed to the City Clerk's Office at CMo,aii,rcnlorma.uov. In the alternative written comments may be mailed or delivered to Cynthia Moya, City of Renton Records Management Specialist, Administrative Services/City Clerk Division, at I 055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Mailed or delivered comments must be received by the City by the deadlines specified in this Order. DA TED this 19 1h day of December, 2016. City of Renton Hearing Examiner PUD and CU -2 Jason Seth From: Cynthia Moya Sent: To: Monday, December 19, 2016 4:31 PM Jason Seth Subject: Attachments: FW: Sartori Order on Reconsideration Request Order on Reconsideration --Sartori.pd/ From: Phil Olbrechts Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 4:29:53 PM (ITTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: Cynthia Moya Subject: Re: Sartori Order on Reconsideration Request Thanks for noticing. Corrected dates attached. On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Cynthia Moya <(},hJya(Q•r_cot_om,,i,gll\> wrote: Phil, I noticed on Ill you have the date of December 30, 2017, and #2 says December 6, 2017. I am assuming those dates are not correct. Thank you, Cindy Moya, Records Management Specialist City of Renton -Administrative Services/City Clerk Division cmoya@rentonwa.gov 425-430-6513 From: Phil Olbrechts [mailto:olbrechtslaw@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 9:34 AM 1 To: Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rent, .gov> Subject: Sartori Order on Reconsideration Request Hi Cindy, Please distribute the attached to the parties of record. Thank you! 2 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Cynthia Moya Monday, December 19, 2016 11:46 PM Jason Seth Subject: FW: Sartori Order on Reconsideration Request From: Phil Olbrechts Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 11:45:17 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: Cynthia Moya Subject: Re: Sartori Order on Reconsideration Request Is that newly added appeal at I? It's not on Energov Sent from my iPhone On Dec 19, 2016, at 4:32 PM, Cynthia Moya <Civ10-1·,1tg;l{cnt,m1x,u;"'> wrote: THANK YOU. We will see you tomorrow at 1pm. Thank you, Cindy Moya, Records Management Specialist City of Renton -Administrative Services/City Clerk Division cmoya@rentonwa.gov 425-430-6513 <imageOOl.jpg> From: Phil Olbrechts [mailto:olbrechtslaw@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 4:30 PM To: Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov> Subject: Re: Sartori Order on Reconsideration Request Thanks for noticing. Corrected dates attached. On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Cynthia Moya <C\1o;a(<.1'rcntonw,1.~01> wrote: Phil, I noticed on #1 you have the date of December 30, 2017, and #2 says December 6, 2017. I am assuming those dates are not correct. Thank you, Cindy Moya, Records Management Specialist City of Renton -Administrative Services/City Clerk Division cmol@@rentonwa.gov 425-430-6513 1 <imageOOl.jpg> From: PhilOlbrechts[mailto:Q]brechtslaw@gmail.coml Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 9:34 AM To: Cynthia Moya <CMoya@RentO'l'!Y.ecgov> Subject: Sartori Order on Reconsideration Request Hi Cindy, Please distribute the attached to the parties of record. Thank you! 2 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Subject: Cynthia Moya Tuesday, December 20, 2016 12:22 AM Jason Seth FW: Sartori Order on Reconsideration Request From: Phil Olbrechts Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2016 12:21:09 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: Cynthia Moya Subject: Re: Sartori Order on Reconsideration Request Found it. I'll be there at 1 :00 pm. On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 11:45 PM, Phil Olbrechts «:,i_l,rcc_ht_'.,l,1w0'gn1ai[.c_c,rn> wrote: Is that newly added appeal at I? It's not on Energov Sent from my iPhone On Dec 19, 2016, at 4:32 PM, Cynthia Moya <C'Mc1y,i0J{gntc111\,Jl~> wrote: THANK YOU. We will see you tomorrow at 1pm. Thank you, Cindy Moya, Records Management Specialist City of Renton -Administrative Services/City Clerk Division cmoya@re nto nw,u;_g_y_ 425-430-6513 <imageOOl.jpg> From: Phil Olbrechts [mailto:olbrechtslaw@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 4:30 PM To: Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov> Subject: Re: Sartori Order on Reconsideration Request 1 Thanks for noticing. Corrected dates attached. On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Cynthia Moya <CIV!ova(ih"entonwa.uov> wrote: Phil, I noticed on #1 you have the date of December 30, 2017, and #2 says December 6, 2017. I am assuming those dates are not correct. Thank you, Cindy Moya, Records Management Specialist City of Renton -Administrative Services/City Clerk Division cmoya@rentonwa.gg',I 425-430-6513 <imageOOl.jpg> From: Phil Olbrechts [mailto:olbrechtslaw@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 9:34 AM To: Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonv,_a.gov> Subject: Sartori Order on Reconsideration Request Hi Cindy, Please distribute the attached to the parties of record. Thank you' 2 ·, /'· December 20, 2016 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 3Q'h St, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CM( Subject: Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request RE: Sartori Elementary School (LUA-16-000692) Dear Ms. Klein: Enclosed please find the City of Renton's Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request dated December 19, 2016, along with the Request for Reconsideration from Angela Laulainen dated December 12, 2016. Jason Seth, City Clerk, can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, </ nv. L{ ss --ct--/,, \ +- Melissa Hart Public Records Analyst cc: Hearing Examiner Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Jennifer Cisneros, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (25) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: Sartori Elementary School Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Conditional Use LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H ) ) ) ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION ) REQUEST ) ) ) ) By email dated December 12, 2016, Angela Laulainen has requested reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's decision on the above-captioned matter. Since the reconsideration request affects parties of record and the interests of the City, the parties of record (including applicant) who testified at the hearing and City staff will be given an opportunity to respond to the request for reconsideration before a decision on the reconsideration request is issued. Any responses must be based upon evidence that is already in the record. No evidence that has not been recorded at the hearing or entered as an exhibit at the hearing will be considered in the reconsideration request. To this end, the recess schedule appended to Ms. Laulainen's reconsideration request is not admitted and will not be I 9 considered by the hearing examiner. Similarly, Ms. Laulainen's comments about what she can hear in her home are also not admitted and not considered. 20 21 22 \. 23 24 25 26 ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION Persons who testified at the hearing on the above-captioned matter or had written comment admitted into the record shall have until 4:00 pm, December 30, 2016 to provide written comments in response to the request for reconsideration submitted by Ms. Laulainen. The City Clerk shall promptly forward all responses to Ms. Laulainen to the email address she used to file her request for reconsideration. Ms. Laulainen shall have until January 6, 2017 at 4:00 pm to provide a written reply to the responses authorized in the preceding paragraph. PUDand CU -l 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 3. All written comments authorized above may be emailed to the City Clerk's Office at CMo,a·,lrcntonwa.<!ov. In the alternative written comments may be mailed or delivered to Cynthia Moya, City of Renton Records Management Specialist, Administrative Services/City Clerk Division, at 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Mailed or delivered comments must be received by the City by the deadlines specified in this Order. DATED this 19th day of December, 2016. City of Renton Hearing Examiner PUD and CU -2 Cynthia Moya Subject: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD From: Enkeli <enkeli !@yahoo.com> To: 'jseth@rentonwa.gov' <jseth@rentonwa.gov> Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 10:53 PM Subject: Request to the Hearing Examiner for Reconsideration: PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: New Sartori Elementary School/ LUA 16-000692, CU-H, PUD Honorable Hearing Examiner, I am writing to ask for reconsideration on two aspects of the New Sartori Elementary School project'LUA16-000692, CU-H, PUD. The two aspects of the decision are with respect to 1) traffic monitoring and 2) the location of the ball wall. First, regarding the aspect of traffic, thank you for including a stipulation that the queuing and parking elements of the proposal be monitored for one year. This monitoring will collect valuable information to help mitigate any problems that will arise from the current plan. I request that it also be stipulated that the one-year monitoring be done by an outside organization, one that is not connected in any way with Renton School District. The traffic report which was ordered by Renton School District and done by Heffron Transportation appeared to be biased in favor of Renton School District's fast track agenda to push their plans through and also reflected a general lack of knowledge of the North Renton Neighborhood. A lack of knowledge was apparent in several errors in the traffic report which did not come to the traffic experts' attention until pointed out in SEPA comments submitted by neighbors. For example, during the initial draft of the SEPA review, traffic experts wrongly quoted speed limits surrounding the site as all currently at 20 miles per hour. The traffic pattern at the intersection of N. 4th and Garden was also misrepresented as a through street (both described as a through street in the SEPA review and illustrated on the map of the school as a through street). The updated report submitted for the City of Renton Land Use Application included inflated counts of vehicular trips to the school, taken from a manual representing counts to a fully functioning elementary school. This again demonstrated the lack of knowledge of our neighborhood since Sartori has not been in use as an elementary school for decades. I request a non-biased organization be required to monitor the parking and queuing at the school. The City of Renton is more in touch with the North Renton Neighborhood and could be one choice to facilitate this monitoring. If not the City of Renton, it would be best to stipulate it is an organization other than Heffron Transportation, one that can be impartial, and one that will visit the site to gather the data for the report. The second aspect of the New Sartori Elementary School project which I request changes is the location of the ball wall in the covered play area at the south end of the block. This location is still too close to the street and to the residences on Garden Avenue North. The school district stated at the hearing that they pulled this area further to the west, however just a fifteen foot setback is not enough to offset the noise from the ball wall. This is not just typical playground noise that will emanate for a brief amount of time, but the ball wall is the most popular part of the playground where students line up to play "wall ball" and take turns for the entire recess to bounce balls against this wall. The fact 1 that it is a covered structure r 1s that the sound of the balls will be ~ atly amplified. Usually also located near the ball wall is four square which will add even more ball bouncing noise. The fact that it is a cement area with a cement wall makes the balls even louder. And it is not just a small window of time but the majority of each day we will hear constant ball bouncing. Elementary school recesses are spread out over the course of the day, so the bouncing ball noise will occur practically all day in order for all students to have access to the playground. I have attached the recess schedule for Lakeridge Elementary School as an example of a typical recess schedule. The homes on Garden are older homes that are located close to the street. The construction of our homes is such that the walls do not block out a lot of noise. We hear sirens from several blocks away, planes, buses, trains, helicopters, and when Boeing tests their jet engines, we hear the rumble till it stops and the windows rattle like crazy. Our homes are not expensive sound proof homes tucked away in a culdesac far from the activity of the city, but are situated close to the street. My porch steps are just fifteen feet away from the sidewalk. We hear all the noise inside the house from activity in the neighborhood and on the street. There will be no way to relax or take an afternoon nap with the constant noise of balls bouncing so close by. I ask that more attention be given to my concern of this play area too close to my home. In addition to having this amplified noise from the ball wall area, Garden Avenue residents will be dealing with the noise of school buses pulling through in the morning and after school. To place both the ball wall and the bus lane in this location will generate a consistency of noise throughout the day. It is too much noise for one location. I request that the school district move the ball wall to help lessen the noise. The ball wall could be moved to the hard sutiace play area where there is already a wall next to the school, or ii could be moved entirely to another new location. They could otherwise get rid of the ball wall altogether and opt to keep the covered area in place with support pillars only and without any walls. Keeping the ball wall in its current location will result in substantial and undue adverse effects on adjacent properties on Garden Avenue North. Renton School District stated that they will plant trees on the east side of this structure, but the renderings submitted to the Hearing Examiner only show one tree and otherwise a wide pathway which does not block any sound from this play area. Most of this play area is connected to the walkway which goes from the school to the street, so it does not show any opportunity there for a landscape buffer. However, in my opinion, even a few trees planted near the structure will not be sufficient to block the sound, especially according to the renderings of their plan. It is for all of these reasons that the placement of the ball wall is contrary to "RMC 4-9-030(C)(3): Effect on Adjacent Properties" and indeed the proposed use at the proposed location does result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. The City of Renton Comprehensive plan also promotes improving the livability of Renton's neighborhoods. Unless changes are made, the ball wall will affect the quality of life and the livability in my home. I again respectfully request that the school district relocate the ball wall or remove it altogether. Thank you for taking the time to consider my comments and requests. Most Sincerely, Angela Laulainen 314 Garden AVE N Renton, WA 98057 2 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: This letter went out today. Thank you, Cynthia Moya Tuesday, December 20, 2016 3:44 PM Brianne Bannwarth; Chip Vincent; Craig Burnell; Jason Seth; Jennifer T. Henning; Julia Medzegian; Larry Warren; Phil Olbrechts; Vanessa Dolbee; Matthew Herrera Sartori Elementary School klein lt2.pdf Cindy Moya, Records Management Specialist City of Renton -Administrative Services/City Clerk Division cmoya@rentonwa.gov 425-430-6513 ----r~' -----l::!.!!Ul! t: 1 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Cynthia Moya Wednesday, December 28, 2016 4:10 PM Brianne Bannwarth; Chip Vincent; Matthew Herrera; Craig Burnell; Jason Seth; Jennifer T. Henning; Julia Medzegian; Larry Warren; Phil Olbrechts; Jennifer Cisneros; Vanessa Dolbee Sartori -Responses Klein Ltr w_responses.pdf This letter along with the responses will be mailed out today. Thank you, Cindy Moya, Records Management Specialist City of Renton · Administrative Services/City Clerk Division cmoya@rentonwa.gov 42S-430-6513 December 28, 2016 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30th St, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Denis Law Mayor City Clerk -Jason A. Seth, CMC Subject: City of Renton's Response & Renton School District Response RE: Sartori Elementary School (LUA-16-000692) Dear Ms. Klein: Enclosed please find the City of Renton's Response to the Request for Reconsideration dated December 22, 2016, as well as the Renton School District's Response to Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request dated December 28, 2016. I can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, a;oo A,Sfit!,C City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Matthew Herrera, Senior Planner Jennifer fJenning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager Craig Burnell, Building Official Jennifer Cisneros, Secretary, Planning Division Julia Medzegian, City Council Liaison Parties of Record (2S) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor , y C + it('. !;'£.. '~ ! \ .... I \-.., t' ~J 1 'l ' Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator December 22, 2016 Mr. Phil Olbrechts Hearing Examiner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 SUBJECT: City Response to Request for Reconsideration New Sartori Elementary School, 315 Garden Ave. N., LUA16-000692, PPUD, CU-H Dear Mr. Examiner: As the Project Manager for the New Sartori Elementary School Preliminary Planned Unit Development and Conditional Use Permit land use application, please accept the following response to Ms. Angie Laulalnen's timely request for reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's decision on the aforementioned application. The request for reconsideration is based on two separate matters. The first related to the one-year monitoring requirement (Hearing Examiner decision condition #26) for the parking and queuing plans that were identified as mitigation measures in the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) threshold determination (Exhibit 7). The second related to the location of the "ball wall" (Hearing Examiner decision condition #3) and the daim of substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property caused by noise emanating from the wall. Monitoring of Parking and Queuing Plans Ms. Laulalnen requests in her reconsideration that the Hearing Examiner's decision condition #26 be amended to require a " .. non-biased organization be required to monitor the parking and queuing at the school." A request Is also made to consider the City of Renton to be the organization that conducts the monitoring. The City has no objection in the applicant's use of another qualified professional transportation consultant to carry out the Hearing Examiner condition to monitor parking and queuing plans for one-year as stipulated In the condition. The City does object to being the responsible organization to carry out the monitoring duties as reflected in the condition. As a regulatory agency, the City's duty is to confirm compliance of the Hearing Examiner's decision, not perform consultant type services for the applicant. 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov Hearing Exilminer Olbrechts Page 2 of 2 December 22, 2016 As is typical in land use applications, an applicant prepares the required submittal materials that identify compliance with the jurisdiction's development regulations. Those submittal materials are required to be prepared by qualified professionals such as registered architects and landscape architects, licensed geotechnlcal engineers, and In the case of transportation reports -licensed civil engineers. The applicant's transportation report (Exhibit 11) was prepared by a Washington State licensed civil engineer, thereby meeting the qualified professional criterion for a traffic study set forth in Renton Municipal Cade (RMC) 4-8-120D.20. The burden to comply with land use permit conditions falls upon the applicant and therefore the applicant should prepare the monitoring reports, via a qualified professional, and the City's duty Is to review the monitoring to confirm the reports meet the Intent of the Hearing Examiner's condition. While the City would not object to another qualified professional preparing the monitoring reports, no evidence ls provided in the request for reconsideration that the applicant's transportation consultant Is unqualified to comply with the Hearing Examiner's decision. Location of the "ball wall" The request for reconsideration also claims the location of a ball wall, or covered play area as Indicated on the application's site plan (Exhibit 2), is too close to Garden Ave N and the residences across this street. Noise Impacts are a SEPA issue, which the applicant (Renton School District) was the Lead Agency for review. Any mitigation associated with the SEPA review has been made a condition of project approval (condition #1) of the Hearing Examiner's decision. The development and ongoing operation of the school will be required to comply with the City's noise level regulations set forth in RMC 8-7-3. Staff requests the Hearing Examiner uphold the original decision Issued on November 27, 2016. si~re1y, ,; J ·. ,;/J;;~ _ _J_-J / /'~-~~/\~-- / Matthew Herrera, AICP Senior Planner cc: Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Vanessa Dolbee, Currant Planning Manaeer Brianne Bannworth, Development Engineering Manaaer Cynthia Moya, Oty Clerk Speclall,t Ian Fitz-James, CiVII Engineer II FACILITIES, OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE CENTER CAPITAL PROJECTS OFFICE 7812 S 124'h Street, Seattle, WA 98178-4830 425-204-4403, Fax 425-204-4476 December 28, 2016 Phil A. Olbrechts City of Renton Hearing Examiner c/o Cynthia Moya City of Renton Records Management Specialist Administrative Services/City Clerk Division I 055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 RE: Applicant Response to Hearing Examiner's Order on Reconsideration Request Sartori Elementary School (LUA-16-000692) Dear Mr. Olbrechts: We are in receipt of the Reconsideration Request dated December 12, 2016 and your Response dated December 19, 2016. Your response allowed for written comments to be submitted by December 30, 2016 from those persons who testified at the hearing. I spoke at the hearing as a representative for the applicant, the Renton School District, and this letter provides my comment. This letter is organized by each topic listed on the Reconsideration request letter. Traffic Monitoring Ms. Lau la in en requested that the one year monitoring of the queuing and parking impacts be done by an outside organization, one that is not connected in any way with Renton School District. She cites several reasons for not trusting the District's traffic consultant and references information found in the Draft Transportation Report dated August 26, 2016 (Exhibit JO). The referenced draft report was reviewed and commented on by the City and neighbors during the informal 37-day SEPA Notice of Consultation comment period. The information and comments obtained during that timeframe was useful in preparing both the Final Transportation Report dated October 2016 and the Mitigated Determination of Non-significance issued on October 21, 2016 (Exhibit 7). While not specifically an Exhibit listed with the Staff Report, the Final Transportation Report was listed as an environmental document in the SEPA Checklist and its recommended mitigation measures were included within the MONS, therefore it should be admissible as it is not new information. A copy of the Final Transportation Report can be provided upon request. Launch,ng Leaming to Last a Lifetime 7812 S 124" Street, Saaff/e Washington 981781 p.425.204.44031 '425.204.4476 www.rentonschools.us ·-RENTON The Reconsideration letter cites several "errors" in the Draft Transportation Report. These comments are very similar as those provided during the SEPA comment period and prior to the Transportation Report revisions. The changes made between the draft and final report are summarized as follows: • The District acknowledged that the current speeds in the vicinity range from 25-30 mph. Travel speeds were reflected correctly in the draft Transportation Technical Report; they were stated incorrectly in the Draft SEPA Checklist and corrected in the final SEPA checklist. The report and checklist anticipated that a school zone with 20 mph limits will be implemented around the site as part of the project. • The traffic pattern at the intersection ofN. 41t, and Garden was correctly analyzed and took into consideration the island and the intersection tum restrictions. The description of the direction of traffic was revised in the Final Transportation Report to provide better clarity in an attempt to alleviate the confusion. • The claim that the traffic study included inflated counts of vehicular trips to the school is untrue. The Report and related operational analyses assumed no credit (or reduction) for the removal of the existing use of the Sartori Education Center. Section 3.2.2 of the Draft report stated: "Typically, traffic impact analyses account for the removal of existing uses to determine the net increase in traffic associated with a new development. In those cases, traffic from existing uses to be removed would be subtracted before the new development's traffic is added However, since some of the buildings on the site were vacant at the time that traffic counts were taken at swdy area intersection, no vehicle trip credit/or the removal of these uses was applied to the 2018 ''with projer.:t" tra.ffic volume forecasts or operational analysis. The estimate of traffic generation by existing uses and the net changes expected due to the project are provided as a matter of disclosure .... " To eliminate any potential confusion, the above paragraph and the presentation of the estimated net change in trips was removed from the Final report. The Transportation Report was prepared in accordance with standard traffic engineering practice as outlined by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITT) In its Transportation Impact Analyses for Site Development· An !TE Recommended Practice {!TE, 2005). The analyses and report were also prepared consistent with the City of Renton's Traffic Impact Analysis Policy Guidelines for New Development (Rev. January 2016). The report stated that the project would result in increased traffic that would add delay to the study area. It also noted the potential for event-related parking impacts and possible queue spill over during peak afternoon dismissal periods. It recommended mitigation measures to address these potential impacts and determined that, with these measures, the project would not result in significant adverse impacts. The roadway network can accommodate the project and would continue to operate at levels that meet the City's operational standards. The District stands behind the Transportation Report prepared by Heffron Transportation, Inc. and reminds the Hearing Examiner that Ms. Laulainen did not present expert testimony to contradict the findings and did not appeal the SEPA Determination. The District does not know at this time if Heffron or another transportation engineering consultant will be utilized for the required monitoring, but will ensure that the selected contractor follow the industry professional standards. Further, Condition #26 requires the City of Renton to review and approve the monitoring report, and In our opinion this requirement provides sufficient oversight. Launching Leaming to Last a Lifetime 7812 S 124" Street, Seattle Washington 98178 j p.425.204.44031 f425.204.4476 www.rentonschools.us Location of the Ball Wall The Reconsideration letter cites concern for noise associated with the ball wall that is presumed to be located fifteen feet from the school property line. The ball wall is actually located more than 43 feet from the property line and at least 100 feet from Ms. l.aulinen's property line. The ball wall was originally doser to the property line (as shown in the City's presentation, Exhibit 28) and the City had recommended in the staff report Condition #3 that the ball wall be located outside the 15-foot setback. The District responded by moving the ball wall further. The modified location was presented at the hearing in the applicant's presentation (Exhibit 30), although the specific distances were not called out in the presentation or site plan. Site Plan in Exhibit 28 Site Plan in Exhibit 30 Launching Learning to Last a Lifetime 7812 S 124" Street, Seattle Washington 981781 p.425.204.44031 f.425.204.4476 www.rentonschoofs.us l'I :3 i I CD I (0 'I 12 I• 1"' II ! " I I 1 } i •lfll I • '.. l i L ~ _. --! -· I Measurements added to Site Plan in Exhibit 30 i I I • I I: I • [ The play area is purposely located adjacent to the existing residences on Garden Ave N so that lower scale elements are near residences and the school building is oriented in anticipation of future growth of a civic boulevard along Park Ave N, a commercial arterial street. Additionally, the field location orients the more open/green areas of the school near the residences and provides easy access for resident use. The District believes that the noises generated by the ball wall and playground are typical of any school use and detenmined that it didn't qualify as an adverse impact when it issued the SEPA MDNS. As noted above, noise issues are largely SEPA·related and an appeal of the SEPA Determination was not filed. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. We respectfully request an expedited decision in this matter. Sincerely, Matt Feldmeyer, Architect Facilities Project Manager Cc: Rick Stracke, Executive Director of Facilities Planning, Renton School District Facilities, Maintenance, and Operations -Capital Projects Office Launching Learning to Last a Lifetime 7812 S 124'" Street, Seattle Washington 981781 p.425.204.4403 I f.425.204 4476 www.rentonschools.us Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Subject: Jason, Enkeli <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Thursday, December 29, 2016 9:25 AM Jason Seth Re: Sartori Parties of Record List The person is Diane Dobson. She spoke at the Hearing and her comments are included in the Hearing Examiner's report. I haven't heard back from her if she signed in or asked to be a party of record, but she thought she was. I sent her a message and will let you know, or she will contact you. Thanks for your help, Angie Laulainen From: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> To: 'Enkeli' <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2016 4:50 PM Subject: Sartori Parties of Record List Hello Ms. Laulainen, I've attached the Parties of Record list submitted to my office from the Planning Division. If your friend is not listed as a party of record, please ask which meeting they attended. We'll need to verify they signed in at the hearing and requested to be a party of record. Thank you, -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 iseth@rentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). 1 North Renton Neighborhood Association PO Box 326 Renton, WA 98057 Angie Laulainen 314 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98055 Debbie Natelson 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit B Renton, WA 98057 Jessica Roach 132 Pelly Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Mike O'Donin 423 Pelly Ave N Renton, WA 98055 Neil Sheesley 809 N 2nd St Renton, WA 98057 Randy Matheson 300 SW 7th St Renton, WA 98057 Sandy Smith 336 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Shelby Smith 524 Burnett Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Akane Yamaguchi 1008 N Riverside Dr Renton, WA 98057 Beth Palmer 114 Wells Ave S Renton. WA 98057 Dolores Haves 326 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Kathleen Booher 809 N 2nd St Renton, WA 98057 Mr. & Mrs. Poquette 328 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Pamela Thomas 341 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Rick Stracke Renton School District No. 403 7812 S 124th St Seattle, WA 98178 Sarah & Tim Bishop 222 Burnett Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Wvman Dobson 821 N 1st St Renton, WA 98057 Alison Monges 221 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057-5612 BRIAN & MARYTWIDT 234 GARDEN AVE N RENTON, WA 98057 Genie Chase 227 Wells Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 N 30th St, 300 Tacoma, WA Nancv Monahan 325 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Paul Rolinger 218 Burnett Ave N, Unit B Renton, WA 98057 Rochelle Krebs 121 Wells Ave N Renton. WA 98057 Scott Rice 345 Meadow Ave N Renton, WA 98057 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Enkeli <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Thursday, December 29, 2016 9:37 AM Jason Seth Subject: Re: Sartori Parties of Record List Okay, thank you! Also can you clarify, the order from the Hearing Examiner states "Persons who testified at the hearing on the above captioned matter or had written comment admitted into the record ..... " can comment. Yesterday I understood that meant only persons who commented at the Hearing or sent in comments for the hearing. But I would like to double check, since it says "had written comment admitted into the record" does that mean the entire record, or only at this hearing? There are some who sent comments for the Land Use application but were not at the Hearing who would like to comment. Thanks again, Angie Laulainen From: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> To: 'Enkeli' <enkeli_l@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 9:31 AM Subject: RE: Sartori Parties of Record List Thanks. She contacted me directly. I am working with our Planning Director, Jennifer Henning, to correct the issue. -Jason Jason Seth, CMG City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 iseth@rentonwa.go'! This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: Enkeli [mailto:enkeli_l@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 9:25 AM To: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> Subject: Re: Sartori Parties of Record List Jason, The person is Diane Dobson. She spoke at the Hearing and her comments are included in the Hearing Examiner's report. I haven't heard back from her if she signed in or asked to be a party of record, but she thought she was. I sent her a message and will let you know, or she will contact you. Thanks for your help, 1 Angie Laulainen ·--------------------- From: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> To: 'Enkeli' <enkeli l@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2016 4:50 PM Subject: Sartori Parties of Record List Hello Ms. Laulainen, I've attached the Parties of Record list submitted to my office from the Planning Division. If your friend is not listed as a party of record, please ask which meeting they attended. We'll need to verify they signed in at the hearing and requested to be a party of record. Thank you, -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 jseth@rentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). 2 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Greetings dmd82l@aol.com Thursday, December 29, 2016 9:51 AM Cynthia Moya Denis Law; Jennifer T. Henning; Matthew Herrera; Vanessa Dolbee; Julia Medzegian; enkeli_l@yahoo.com; north.renton@gmail.com; matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us; Jason Seth NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request I have become aware of correspondence dated December 20, 2016, addressed to Lisa Klein, that was cc to 25 parties of record on this matter. The Order on Reconsideration Request clearly states, lines 15 -17, "Since the reconsideration request affects parties of record and the interests of the City, the parties of record (including applicant) who testified at the hearing and City staff will be given an opportunity to respond to the request for reconsideration before a decision on the reconsideration request is issued.11 I did not receive a copy of such correspondence from the City nor the School District. I testified at the Public Hearing on November 8, 2016, held at Renton City Hall (I have confirmed the accuracy of the report and the minutes on the City of Renton web page to confirm my name and testimony is included in such records). City representatives indicated at multiple neighborhood meetings and at various points in the process, anyone who sent in comments along the way or sent their contact information on to the various planners, would be included as Parties of Record from that point forward. I hereby ask for clarification of a list of the 25 Parties of Record that received the copy of this December 20th Notice -and a list of the all inclusive Parties of Record who have submitted their names at any point in this process -as it was represented by multiple City Representatives, as well as School District Representatives. I request any names from the process who have not yet received this December 20th Notice, also be notified of the same. I have checked with Jason Seth, City Clerk, and he indicates I am not listed as a party of record. He indicates he only sends the notices out and the list of the Parties of Record comes from CED at the City of Renton. He said "if you are calling me about this, then you have received notice." I quickly clarified I was calling based upon my father -who has never testified and is not a party of record, but rather an adjacent property owner -showing me a copy of the notice he received on December 24th. This notice is not proper, nor is it timely. I hereby notify the City and the Hearings Examiner of the improper procedure on this matter and the violation of process with the failure to properly notify all parties of record and provide them adequate time for review and response. This matter has been "fast tracked" by the Renton School District and while we as a neighborhood are generally supportive of this school and build, the process itself has been full of failures and short comings. Improper notice was provided, which resulted in a 2nd mailing, when the school district erroneously mailed notices out with wrong postal codes ..... parties of record were dropped and contact information was lost when the file transitioned in-house at the City between Rocale Timmons and Matthew Herrera (Rocale Timmons -who, when representatives from the Planning Department was asked about her later, couldn't even remember her as an employee -let alone a Senior Planner) ...... the City of Renton failed to include proper Exhibit at the November Public Hearing (yet nothing was done to address or correct the same -other than a side comment by RSD employee confirming the error) ....... the Transportation Study was submitted with erroneous information (citing the deli as a "supermarket", the walk-in burrito stand as a "restaurant" and the adult learning center as a "functioning & operational elementary school" ....... confusion and chaos has surrounded this whole process and it has been challenging for neighbors to be involved in the same (this doesn't even begin to address the complete and total misrepresentations made by Randy Matheson to the neighborhoods of a "walkable only" 1 elementary school (that now will b ing students bussed in from all over Re, not just walking from North Renton), neighbors not being displaced who ~·~n't want to move (then the threat of emine. ,, domain being waived over their head), neighbors having 2-3 years for moving (and then receiving eviction paperwork) plus the rude and demeaning behavior which resulted in an entire neighborhood association requesting alternate point of contact because of the lies he told and the way he treated neighbors). This list could go on and on. I am extremely disappointed in the Renton School District for allowing this all to transpire in this fashion. They had an opportunity to work with a neighborhood on a new elementary school and make it an enjoyable public process of building a community from the ground up through our children -instead there were lies and deceit and have left neighbors with a bad feeling and distrust of representations being made by the City and School District -not a great feeling in going forward as we face unavoidable growth within our City. I am even more disappointed in the City of Renton for allowing this to take place. Neighbors approached the City and asked for help with this confusing process and instead of the help we thought we might receive, the City only proved to drop the ball further and add more confusion to the process. All parties of record need to be notified of this process -as required -with adequate time provided for response. Diane Dobson North Renton Neighborhood Association 425.890.9176 2 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Mr Seth dmd821@aol.com Thursday, December 29, 2016 11:49 AM Jason Seth; Cynthia Moya Denis Law; Jennifer T. Henning; Matthew Herrera; Vanessa Dolbee; Julia Medzegian; enkeli_l@yahoo.com; north.renton@gmail.com; matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us; Alex Tuttle Re: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request I was a party of record personally. Not only via email to the various planners and School District, but when I signed in for the hearing at the Public Hearing Process. I never signed in utilizing the North Renton Neighborhood contact information, but rather my own personal information through every step of this process -quite frankly, I was not aware the North Renton Neighborhood Association has a PO Box. As I have never represented this PO Box (Box 326) to be my address, I advise this address is NOT correct and completely erroneous. The North Renton Neighborhood Association does not have any legal governing standing over any component of our neighborhood and membership with the NRNA is not a requirement of living in the North Renton neighborhood. The Association is a tool only. This is the second time the City has failed to recognize that (the first time being when it was required of the residents of North Renton to make a request for a public meeting outside of City Offices with the CED Representatives relating to the City Center Plan, through the NRNA). If the City is dismissing citizens -based upon the auspices of a governing neighborhood association serving as their voice and representation -we have a problem bigger than just a failure to properly notify parties of record. Diane Dobson -----Original Message----- F rom: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> To: 'dmd821@aol.com' <dmd821@aol.com>; Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: Denis Law <Dlaw@Rentonwa.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhenning@Rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <MHerrera@Rentonwa.gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov>; Julia Medzegian <Jmedzegian@Rentonwa.gov>: enkeli_l <enkeli_l@yahoo.com>: north.renton <north.renton@gmail.com>: matthew.feldmeyer <matthew.feldmeyer@rentonschools.us>: Alex Tuttle <ATuttle@Rentonwa.gov> Sent: Thu, Dec 29, 2016 11 :30 am Subject: RE: NRNA -Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Hello Ms. Dobson, We had you listed as a party of record as the North Renton Neighborhood Association representative, at P.O. Box 326, Renton, WA 98057. We will add your personal address of 806 N. Riverside, Renton, WA 98057 too. Please confirm that both addresses are correct. Thank you, -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 1 425-430-6502 iseth@rentg_o.wa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: dmd821@aol.com [rn2 _il_tg:dmd821@aol.com1 Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 9:51 AM To: Cynthia Moya <CMoya@Rentonwa.gov> Cc: Denis Law <DLa_w@Rentonwa.gov>; Jennifer T. Henning <Jhenning@Rentonwa.gov>; Matthew Herrera <MHerrera(wRenton,,y9_.gov>; Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee@Eentonwa.gov>; Julia Medzegian <Jmedzegian(wRentonw,uig,:>; enkeli l@yahoo_com; north.rent9!_1@gmail.com; rnatthew.feldmeyer@renton_,s;!,ogls.us; Jason Seth <JSeth@Renton_w.e,@"'.> Subject: NRNA · Sartori Parties of Record and Order on Reconsideration Request Greetings I have become aware of correspondence dated December 20, 2016, addressed to Lisa Klein, that was cc to 25 parties of record on this matter. The Order on Reconsideration Request clearly states, lines 15 • 17, "Since the reconsideration request affects parties of record and the interests of the City, the parties of record (including applicant) who testified at the hearing and City staff will be given an opportunity to respond to the request for reconsideration before a decision on the reconsideration request is issued." I did not receive a copy of such correspondence from the City nor the School District. I testified at the Public Hearing on November 8, 2016, held at Renton City Hall (I have confirmed the accuracy of the report and the minutes on the City of Renton web page to confirm my name and testimony is included in such records). City representatives indicated at multiple neighborhood meetings and at various points in the process, anyone who sent in comments along the way or sent their contact information on to the various planners, would be included as Parties of Record from that point forward. I hereby ask for clarification of a list of the 25 Parties of Record that received the copy of this December 20th Notice -and a list of the all inclusive Parties of Record who have submitted their names at any point in this process -as it was represented by multiple City Representatives, as well as School District Representatives. I request any names from the process who have not yet received this December 20th Notice, also be notified of the same. I have checked with Jason Seth, City Clerk, and he indicates I am not listed as a party of record. He indicates he only sends the notices out and the list of the Parties of Record comes from CED at the City of Renton. He said "if you are calling me about this, then you have received notice." I quickly clarified I was calling based upon my father· who has never testified and is not a party of record, but rather an adjacent property owner· showing me a copy of the notice he received on December 24th. This notice is not proper, nor is it timely. I hereby notify the City and the Hearings Examiner of the improper procedure on this matter and the violation of process with the failure to properly notify all parties of record and provide them adequate time for review and response. This matter has been "fast tracked" by the Renton School District and while we as a neighborhood are generally supportive of this school and build, the process itself has been full of failures and short comings. Improper notice was provided, which resulted in a 2nd mailing, when the school district erroneously mailed notices out with wrong postal codes ..... parties of record were dropped and contact information was lost when the file transitioned in-house at the City between Rocale Timmons and Matthew Herrera (Rocale Timmons . who, when representatives from the Planning Department was asked about her later, couldn't even remember her as an employee -let alone a Senior Planner) ...... the City of Renton failed to include proper Exhibit at the November Public Hearing (yet nothing was done to address or correct the same · other than a side comment by RSD employee confirming the error) ....... the Transportation Study was 2 submitted with erroneous information J the deli as a "supermarket", the walk-ii ito stand as a "restaurant" and the adult learning center as a "function,~ & operational elementary school" _______ co .. , usion and chaos has surrounded this whole process and it has been challenging for neighbors to be involved in the same (this doesn't even begin to address the complete and total misrepresentations made by Randy Matheson to the neighborhoods of a "walkable only" elementary school (that now will be having students bussed in from all over Renton -not just walking from North Renton), neighbors not being displaced who didn't want to move (then the threat of eminent domain being waived over their head), neighbors having 2-3 years for moving (and then receiving eviction paperwork) plus the rude and demeaning behavior which resulted in an entire neighborhood association requesting alternate point of contact because of the lies he told and the way he treated neighbors)_ This list could go on and on_ I arn extremely disappointed in the Renton School District for allowing this all to transpire in this fashion_ They had an opportunity to work with a neighborhood on a new elementary school and make it an enjoyable public process of building a community from the ground up through our children -instead there were lies and deceit and have left neighbors with a bad feeling and distrust of representations being made by the City and School District -not a great feeling in going forward as we face unavoidable growth within our City_ I am even more disappointed in the City of Renton for allowing this to take place_ Neighbors approached the City and asked for help with this confusing process and instead of the help we thought we might receive, the City only proved to drop the ball further and add more confusion to the process_ All parties of record need to be notified of this process -as required -with adequate time provided for response. Diane Dobson North Renton Neighborhood Association 425_890.9176 3 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Phil Olbrechts <olbrechtslaw@gmail.com> Thursday, December 29, 2016 2:19 PM Jason Seth Subject: Re: Sartori Project That's a new one! The recon order was mailed out on 12/20 and the request for reconsideration was mailed out on 12/13. The neighbor had at least a week to respond from receipt of the order and in fact had the recon request for two weeks prior to the response due date. The one week response time is pretty standard. The response couldn't bring up any new information and was limited to the issues raised in the recon request mailed out on 12/13, so there's not a lot of work in preparing a response. The school district has already submitted it's response and in that response requested an "expedited decision," indicating that the delays of the re con process is causing problems. The recon process has to be fairly compact in order to get a final decision out in a reasonable amount of time. Does the neighbor understand that she's only addressing the 12/13 recon request and not the response submitted by the school district? Sent from my iPhone On Dec 29, 2016, at 12:29 PM, Jason Seth <JSeth(WRentonwa,gqy> wrote: Phil, We have a neighbor who was upset that she was not properly notified about the Order on the Request for Reconsideration we mailed out on the Sartori project. She knows about it now, but may complain that she was not provided enough time to properly respond to the Order. The deadline to submit responses is tomorrow. The code is ambiguous regarding timelines for responding to these types of Orders and which persons need to be notified, is this something we need to work on? I believe it may be possible that she will ask for an extension or you may not hear from her at all. -Jason Jason Seth, CMC (il.\l Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 jseth@rentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). 1 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Phil Olbrechts <olbrechtslaw@gmail.com> Thursday, December 29, 2016 3:13 PM Jason Seth Subject: Re: Sartori Project I was fixated on the lack of time part. The recon documents just have to be mailed to the parties of record, who are everyone that submitted written or verbal comment on the proposal. Persons who are not parties of record are not entitled to notice of the recon process. Sent from my iPhone On Dec 29, 2016, at 2:23 PM, Jason Seth <JSeth(cilRentonwa.gov> wrote: Yes, it is clear from your Order that responses are limited to the recon request. And, I am not sure she even wants to send a response. I believe she is more concerned with the fact that she was not properly notified, and that might somehow negate the whole process. -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 iseth@Jentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: Phil Olbrechts [mailto:olbrechtslaw@grnail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 2:19 PM To: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gg_\/> Subject: Re: Sartori Project That's a new one! The recon order was mailed out on 12/20 and the request for reconsideration was mailed out on 12/13. The neighbor had at least a week to respond from receipt of the order and in fact had the recon request for two weeks prior to the response due date. The one week response time is pretty standard. The response couldn't bring up any new information and was limited to the issues raised in the recon request mailed out on 12/13, so there's not a lot of work in preparing a response. The school district has already submitted it's response and in that response requested an "expedited decision," indicating that the delays of the recon process is causing problems. The recon process has to be fairly compact in order to get a final decision out in a reasonable amount of time. Does the neighbor understand that she's only addressing the 12/13 recon request and not the response submitted by the school district? Sent from my iPhone On Dec 29, 2016, at 12:29 PM, Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.ee0v> wrote: Phil, 1 We have a neigh 'ho was upset that she was not properly fied about the Order on the Request for Reconsideration we mailed out on the Sartor, project. She knows about it now, but may complain that she was not provided enough time to properly respond to the Order. The deadline to submit responses is tomorrow. The code is ambiguous regarding timelines for responding to these types of Orders and which persons need to be notified, is this something we need to work on? I believe it may be possible that she will ask for an extension or you may not hear from her at all. -Jason Jason Seth, CMC City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 jseth@rentonwa.gov This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). 2 Jason Seth From: Sent: To: Subject: Phil Olbrechts <olbrechtslaw@gmail.com> Thursday, December 29, 2016 8:11 PM Jason Seth Re: Sartori Project That would probably qualify as "harmless error" in a judicial challenge. But if she asks for more time I'll probably give it to her. I've worked with several dozen zoning codes over the years and I don't think I've ever seen any code specify who is entitled to notice of a reconsideration request. It's pretty clear from the case law though that at most it's just the people who submitted written or verbal testimony. Cindy usually sends out an email identifying the recipients of her mailings. She covers everything pretty well. Overall Renton does a good job in handling notice (as it does everything else!). On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Jason Seth <JSethCn',rentonwa.l!o,> wrote: Yes. She pruvicbl testimony at 1hc hearing in November. II was an owrsight 1hat she was not included on the parties of record list. Staff had included the J\orth Renton J\cighhorhoocl Association, 1 believe hccau,c they assumed she was receiving the a"ociation·s mail. Ms. Dobson now contends thal the association is not a pany of record. only she personally is. In my opinion it was just an owrsight. one that is now correck'd. l just wanted to mah.c you aware the situation and draw attention to the fact thal our code is not very specific about who should he notified when you issue anything other than an actual decisiun. -.I ason Jason Seth. C\1C Citv Cler, City of Renton 425-430-6502 ------------------- i,:"th C!t rcntunwa. !Ill\. ~-----------------------________ ...._.. ______ _ This communication may he suhjec1 to public disclosure laws or the State of Washington (RCW 42.Sfi). 1 From: Phil Olbrechts [mailto:,. chlslaw0'umail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 3:13 PM To: Jason Seth <JSeth@Rentonwa.gov> Subject: Re: Sartori Project I was fixated on the lack of time part. The recon documents just have to be mailed to the parties of record, who are everyone that submitted written or verbal comment on the proposal. Persons who are not parties of record are not entitled to notice of the recon process. Sent from my iPhone On Dec 29, 2016, at 2:23 PM, Jason Seth <.lSeth([VRentonw,1.gm> wrote: Yes. it is clear from your Order that responses arc limited to the recon request. And. I am not sure she even wants to send a response. I believe she is more conccrnccl with the fact that she was not properly notified. and that might somclmw negate the whole process. -Jason Jason Seth. C.\1C Citv Clerk City of Renton 425430-6502 This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). From: Phil Olbrechts [J11,1iJtg:9IbrG~b.tsla?;(Q'_g[11:1iLc;Qn1] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 2: 19 PM To: Jason Seth <JScthG'VRcntonwa.gov> Subject: Re: Sartori Project 2 That's a new one' The re, rder was mailed out on 12/20 and thl uest for reconsideration was mailed out on 12/13. me neighbor had at least a week to respona from receipt of the order and in fact had the recon request for two weeks prior to the response due date. The one week response time is pretty standard. The response couldn't bring up any new information and was limited to the issues raised in the recon request mailed out on 12/13, so there's not a lot of work in preparing a response. The school district has already submitted it's response and in that response requested an "expedited decision," indicating that the delays of the recon process is causing problems. The recon process has to be fairly compact in order to get a final decision out in a reasonable amount of time. Does the neighbor understand that she's only addressing the 12/13 recon request and not the response submitted by the school district? Sent from my iPhone On Dec 29, 2016, at 12:29 PM, Jason Seth <JScth(,1 Rc11tonw,1.~o,> wrote: Phil, We have a neighbor who was upset that she was not properly notified about the Order on the Request for Reconsideration we mailed out on the Sartori project. She knows about it now, but may complain that she was not provided enough time to properly respond to the Order. The deadline to submit responses is tomorrow. The code is ambiguous regarding timelines for responding to these types of Orders and which persons need to be notified, is this something we need to work on? I believe it may be possible that she will ask for an extension or you may not hear from her at all. -Jason Jason Seth, CMC Cit, Clerk City of Renton :-l.2.'i:-t:10-650' This communication may be subject to public disclosure laws of the State of Washington (RCW 42.56). 3 CITY OF RENT( DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM Date: November 2, 2016 To: City Clerk's Office From: Sabrina Mirante Subject: Land Use File Closeout Please complete the following information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City Clerk's Office Project Name: Sartori Elementary School LUA (file} Number: LUA16-000692, CU-H, PPUD Cross-References: AKA's: New Sartori Elementary School Project Manager: Matthew Herrera Acceptance Date: September 14, 2016 Applicant: Rick Stracke, Renton School District Owner: Renton School District Contact: Lisa Klein PID Number: 7224000595 7564600180 7224000620 7224000610 7564600183 7224000580 7564600181 7564600182 7224000615 7224000600 7224000590 7564600184 7564600170 7224000605 ERC Determination: Date: Anneal Period Ends: Administrative Decision: Date: A""eal Period Ends: Public Hearing Date: November 8, 2016 Date Appealed to HEX: By Whom: HEX Decision: Date: Anneal Period Ends: Date Appealed to Council: By Whom: Council Decision: Date: Mylar Recording Number: Project Description: The Renton School District (applicant) has submitted applications for Hearing Examiner Planned Urban Development, Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit, and Lot Combination approvals for the construction of a new 3-story 79,000 square foot Sartori Elementary School. The subject property consists of 14 contiguous parcels that are bound by Park Ave N., Garden Ave N., N 4th St., and N 3rd St. The 5.28 acre subject property is an entire block located within the Residential-8 (R-8), R-10, Commercial Neighborhood (CN), and Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning designations. The existing Sartori Education Center and surrounding residential and commercial structures have been or will be demolished. The Renton School District is the lead agency for State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Review. The City's mapping database has identified the subject property is within the Wellhead Protection Zone 1 and potential seismic hazard area. Vehicle access to the subiect orooertv is orooosed on N. 3rd St. and N. 4th St. The orooosal includes 83 parking s , 14 bus loading spaces, and l :overed bicycle parking spaces. Additional improvement.. proposed by the applicant include w 35,000 square foot grass field, various soft and hard surface play areas, 4,400 square foot covered play area, public plaza, landscaping, street frontage improvements, and drainage infrastructure. The Planned Urban Development application requests to vary setback, impervious surface coverage, height, parking, landscaping, refuse/recycling, and street standards. The applicant has proposed public benefits including a public plaza, large play field and other programmed play areas, and enhanced landscaping. The applicant has submitted the following technical reports with the application: drainage report, eotechnlcal re ort· arborist re · · d . Location: Comments: ERC Determination Types: DNS -Determination of Non-Significance; DNS-M -Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated; DS -Determination of Significance. . ~ 'l:;\'<·G~ DEPARTMENT OF COMM.ITV AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT --------~Renton® Planning Division LAND USE PERMIT MASTER APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) PROJECT INFORMATION NAME: Renton School District #403 PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: New Sartori Elementary School ADDRESS: 7812 S 124th Street PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: 315 Garden Ave N Renton, WA 98055 CITY: ZIP: Seattle 98178-4830 TELEPHONE NUMBER: 425-204-4403 KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): 756460-0170, -0180(-0181-';'-0182; -018Y,-0184;-- APPLICANT (if other than owner) 722400-0620('.0615(-0610;-060CY,-59(Y,-0580;'0595,- -0605r NAME: EXISTING LAND USE(S): single family, commercial, vacant land and vacant buildings Rick Stracke COMPANY (if applicable): PROPOSED LAND USE(S): elementary school Renton School District #403 EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: ADDRESS: residential medium density, residential high density and same as owner commercial mixed use PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION CITY: ZIP: (if applicable) no change TELEPHONE NUMBER: EXISTING ZONING: R-8, R-10, CN and CA same as owner CONT ACT PERSON PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): no change SITE AREA (in square feet): 229,996.8 SF NAME: (5.28 Acres) Lisa Klein SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE COMPANY (if applicable): DEDICATED: 17,524 SF AHBL ADDRESS: 2215 N 30'h Street, #300 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: n/a f-------- PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET CITY: ZIP: ACRE (if applicable) n/a Tacoma 98403 TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable) one -- 1 C:\Users\mfeldmey\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\004FOFNS\Draft Land Use Master App Form - RSD Signature.doc Rev: 08/2015 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUN IT. AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 1253-383-2422 lklein@ahbl.com -----~~enton e 2 NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): n/a C:\Users\mfeldmey\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\004FOFNS\Draft Land Use Master App Form - RSD Signature.doc Rev: 08/2015 OJ ECT INFORMAT,::.._10=---:N'---=----"( C::_:O:..:_I ____:1_::_ue..::..._d::11) _______ ~ NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): PROJECT VALUE: Three (to be demolished) $27 Million SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): n/a IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): n/a SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): 79,000 SF SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): n/a NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): n/a NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): 60 ----------- 0 AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE 0 AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA TWO D FLOOD HAZARD AREA D GEOLOGIC HAZARD D HABITAT CONSERVATION D SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES D WETLANDS LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY __ sq.ft. __ sq.ft. __ sq.ft. __ sq.ft. __ sq.ft. /Attach leaal descriotion on separate sheet with the followina information included) SITUATE IN THE NW QUARTER OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 23N, RANGE 05E, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) i,~~re under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I am (please check one) D the current owner of the property involved in this application or IZI the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authoriza_tjPA}-a that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true ~,=~ ,o,. /" :· ~(~~~ .. S z; Iv Signature of Owner/Representative Date Signature of Owner/Representative Date STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Q lj(___. S:\Y0-.<.lJL. signed this instrument and acknowledge it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. VM~t: Dated NotiTry Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): My appointment expires: -n~ t2lA.. 3 I:, C:\Users\mfeldmey\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\004FOFNS\Draft Land Use Master App Form - RSD Signature.doc Rev: 08/2015 PRO :T INFORMATION (continu __ ) 4 C:\Users\mfeldmey\AppData\local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\004FOFNS\Draft Land Use Master App Form - RSD Signature.doc Rev: 08/2015 , , Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PARCEL I: Frie No.: NCS-807610-WA! Page No. 2 EXHIBIT 'A' Lots 1 through 10, inclusive, Block 3, SARTORISVILLE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 8 of PlatsL~e 7, records of King County, Washington. PARCEL II: The West 55 feet of Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, SARTORISVILLE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volum~ 8 of Plats, page 7, records of King County, Washington. PARCEL III: The West 50 feet of the East 225 feet of Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, SARTORISVILLE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 8 of Plats, J)a_g_e_l, records of King County, Washington. PARCEL IV: The West 50 feet of the East 175 feet of Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, SARTORISVILLE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume_B of Plats, page 7, records of King County, Washington. PARCEL V: The West 50 feet of the East 125 feet of Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, SARTORISVILLE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume Bi)f Plats, page 7, records of King County, Washington. PARCEL VI: The East 75 feet of Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, SARTORISVILLE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 8 of Plats, page 7, records of King County, Washington. PARCEL VII: Lots 1 through 13, Block 7, RENTON FARM PLAT, according to the plat thereof recorded in \lolumelO of Plats, ~e 97, in King County, Washington. EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion of said Lot 11 conveyed to the City of Renton by deed recorded June 7, 1994 as Recording No. 9406070?]1- ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion of said Lot 12 conveyed to the City of Renton by deed recorded June 7, 1994 as Recording No. 'l406070576. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion of said Lot 13 conveyed to the City of Renton by deed recorded June 7, 1994 as Recording No. 2_'1Q6070_575. First American 77t!e Insurance Company DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -------Renton 0 WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 I www.rentonwa.gov LAND USE PERMIT SUBMITIAL REQUIREMENTS: WAIVED MODIFIED BY: BY: Arborist Report 4 _ Biological Assessment, Iv;/ Calculations 1 . Colored Maps for Display, . Construction Mitigation Description ,..0 , Deed of Right-of-Way Dedication 1 Density Worksheet 4 , ,, /.c..r) / • Drainage Control Plan 2 Drainage Report , Elevations, Architectural 3 AND4 . Environmental Checklist 4 Existing Covenants (Recorded Copy) 1 AND, Existing Easements (Recorded Copy) lAND< Flood Hazard Data 4 /{,J-T Floor Plans 3AND4 Geotechnical Report 2AND 3 Grading Elevations & Plan, Conceptual 2 Grading Elevations & Plan, Detailed, Habitat Data Report 4 Zl:7 Improvement Deferral , Irrigation Plan 4 r, COMMENTS: . a/A-- .· . . PROJECT NAME: __ v=·'A-:.:ct<c.:·?..,_7_.d.,K'.=/ ___________ _ DATE: ___ u,=--..J../--!::2-'=s~· !..:.:2...:..0!....Y =&? ___ _ 1 H : \CE D\Data \Forms-Templates \Self-He Ip Hand outs\ P!a n ni n g\ W a iversu bm itta I reqs. d ocx Rev: 08/2015 ' LAND USE PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: WAIVED MODIFIED COMMENTS: BY: BY: King County Assessor's Map Indicating Site 4 Landscape Plan, Conceptual, Landscape Plan, Detailed 4 I Legal Description, Letter of Understanding of Geological Risk 4 1(1() /fV/''-'' C';V.{JIQ,M/C d'4Z4r~'t) // L, Map of Existing Site Conditions, 17 ~eo~--;-1 ;J#rt:r,a.T Master Application Form 4 Monument Cards (one per monument) 1 Neighborhood Detail Map 4 Overall Plat Plan 4 [J;f Parking, Lot Coverage & Landscaping Analysis 4 I Plan Reductions (PMTs), Post Office Approval 2 - Plat Name Reservation, (J /( h; --Plat Plan, '// ·l Preapplication Meeting Summary 4 Public Works Approval letter, Rehabilitation Plan, Screening Detail, ' Shoreline Tracking Worksheet 4 Site Plan, AND, Stream or Lake Study, Standard, /?'··· 7/-1 Stream or Lake Study, Supplemental 4 17! Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan 4 / Street Profiles 2 Title Report or Plat Certificate 1AND< Topography Map, ' Traffic Study 2 Tree Cutting/Land Clearing Plan 4 ' Urban Design Regulations Analysis, Utilities Plan, Generalized 2 Wetlands Mitigation Plan, Final, ,-fl}--, Wetlands Mitigation Plan, Preliminary 4 ~ '/ 2 H :\CE D\Data \Forms-T emplates\Self-He Ip Handouts\Plan ning\ Waiversu bmittalreqs.docx Rev: 08/2015 LAND USE PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: Wetlands Report/Delineation, Wireless: Applicant Agreement Statement 2 AND 3 Inventory of Existing Sites ZAND, Lease Agreement, Draft ,ANDJ Map of Existing Site Conditions 2AND, Map of View Area 2ANJ 3 Photosimulations zAND3 This Requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services 2 Development Engineering Plan Review 3 Building 4 Planning WAIVED MODIFIED BY: BY: ;tJr-... 3 H :\CED\Data \Forms-Templates\Se!f-Help Handouts\Planning\ Wa iversu bmittal req s.docx COMMENTS: . Rev: 08/2015 PREAPPLICATION MEETING FOR SARTORI ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PRE 16-000428 CITY OF RENTON Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division June 23, 2016 Contact Information: Planner: Rocale Timmons, 425.430.7219 Public Works Plan Reviewer: Ian Fitz James, 425.430.7288 Fire Prevention Reviewer: Corey Thomas, 425.430. 7024 Building Department Reviewer: Craig Burnell, 425.430.7290 Please retain this packet throughout the course of your project as a reference. Consider giving coples of it to any engineers, archltects, and contractors who work on the project. You will need to submit a copy of this packet when you apply for land use and/or environmental permits. Pre-screening: When you have the project application ready for submittal, call and schedule an appointment with the project manager to have it pre-screened before making all of the required copies. The pre-application meeting is informal and non-binding. The comments provided on the proposal are based on the codes and policies in effect at the time of review. The applicant is cautioned that the development regulations are regularly amended and the proposal will be formally reviewed under the regulations in effect at the time of project submittal. The information contained in this summary is subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision-makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Planning Director, Development Services Director, Department of Community & Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator and City Council). FIRE & EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPAR_r_M_E_NT ___ ,,_,,..,.,,.. r__...-) "". .""c!"",,y""o.-f~. -.• --.-({: .• t:i ' '<""~;~' DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM June 23, 2016 Roca le Timmons, Senior Planner Corey Thomas, Plans Review Inspector Sartori Elementary School 1. The preliminary fire flow is 2,000 gpm. A minimum of two fire hydrants are required. One within 150-feet and one within 300-feet of the building. Building shall also meet maximum hydrant spacing of 300-feet on center. One hydrant shall be within SO-feet of the fire department connection for the fire sprinkler and standpipe systems. Any existing hydrants used to satisfy the requirements shall meet current fire code including 5-inch storz fittings. 2. Fire impact fees are currently applicable at the rate of $0.45 per square foot of increased building area. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Credit will be granted to the square footage of educational/retail buildings demolished/removed on this site. 3. Approved fire sprinkler, standpipe, kitchen hood and fire alarm systems are required throughout the building. Separate plans and permits required by the fire department. Direct outside access is required to the fire sprinkler riser rooms. Fully addressable and full detection Is required for all fire alarm systems. 4. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required within 150-feet of all points on the building. Fire lane signage required for the on site roadway. Required turning radius are 25- feet inside and 45·feet outside. Roadways shall be a minimum of 20-feet wide. Roadways shall support a minimum of a 30-ton vehicle and 75-psi point loading. Site plan as proposed does not come close to meeting these requirements. Suggest modifications to the staff/visitor parking lot to meet fire apparatus access requirements. 5. The building shall comply with the City of Renton Emergency Radio Coverage ordinance. Testing shall verify both incoming and outgoing minimum emergency radio signal coverage. If inadequate, the building shall be enhanced with amplification equipment in order to meet minimum coverage. Separate plans and permits are required for any proposed amplification systems. 6. Separate plans and permits for any removal of existing tanks and installation of any new tanks. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: June 23, 2016 TO: Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner FROM: Ian Fitz-James, Civil Plan Reviewer SUBJECT: Utility and Transportation Comments for Sartori Elementary School - 315 Garden Avenue N. PRE 16-000428 NOTE: The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary is preliminary and non- binding and may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official City decision-makers. Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. I have completed a preliminary review of the application for Sartori Elementary School located at 315 Garden Avenue N. The appli<:ant is proposing to construct a three story 75,000 square foot elementary school in place of the existing Sartori Education Center and surrounding light commercial and residential buildings. WATER COMMENTS 1. Water service is provided by the City of Renton. The site is in the Valley service area in the 196' hydraullc pressure zone. The approximate static water pressure Is 68 psi at a ground elevation of 33'. 2. Below is a summary of existing water mains located in streets surrounding the site. a. 12" Water Main (320 Zone) that can provide 5,400 gallons per minute (gpm) east of the site in Garden Avenue N. Reference COR Project File WTR2701111 In COR Maps. b. 6" Water Main (196 Zone) that can provide 1,300 gpm east of the site in Garden Avenue N. Reference COR Project File WTR2701156 in COR Maps. H:\CED\Plannlng\Current Plannlng\PREAPPS\2016 Preapp,\PRE16•000428\16·0623 PRE16·000428 Ovll Pre-App Comments,docx Sartori Elementary Sthool-PA.£16-000428 P•s• 2of 6 June 23, 2016 c. 8" Water Main that can provide 1,500 gpm north of the site in N. 4'" Street. Reference COR Project File WTR2701156 in COR Maps. d. 16" Water Main that can provide 9,600 gpm west of the site In Park Avenue N. Reference COR Project File WTR2702208 In COR Maps. e. 8" Water Main in N. 3rd Street that can provide 2,000 gpm south of the site in N. 3•d Street. Reference Project File WTR2701021 in COR Maps. 3. The existing school is served by a 1.5" domestic water meter (Account Number010240). There are also numerous small meters serving the light commercial and residential lots surrounding the existing Sartori Education Center. Abandoned services shall be capped at the main in accordance with City standards. 4. Additional on and off-site water main Improvements may be required to provide adequate water service for domestic use and fire protection per Renton Municipal Code and the City of Renton Fire Department. Fire protection requirements will be based on the final fire flow demand and the location and number of required fire hydrants. 5. Below is a summary of the existing fire hydrants in the vicinity of the site. Any fire hydrant used to meet fire department requirements will be required to meet current standards as determined by the fire department. a. At the NW corner of the site (COR Facility 10 HYO-N-00093) b. Across the street from the NE comer of the site (COR Facility 10 HYO·N-00092) c. Across the street from the northern project frontage (COR Facility ID HYD·N-00308) d. Across the street from the SW corner of the site (COR Facility 10 HYD-N-00094) e. Along the southern project frontage {COR Facility 10 HYO-N-00291) f. Across the street from the SE corner of the site (COR Facility 10 HYD·N-00091) 6. A fire sprinkler stub with a double detector check assembly (OOCVA) in an exterior underground vault per COR Standard Plan 360.2 shall be Installed for backfiow prevention. The DDCVA may be installed inside the building if it meets the conditions as shown on COR Standard Plan 360.5 for the installation of a DDCVA inside a building. 7. A domestic water meter installation shall include a reduced pressure backflow assembly (RPBA) installed behind the meter and inside an above ground heated enclosure per COR Standard Plan 350.2. 8. A separate meter Is required for landscape irrigation. A double check valve assembly (DCVA) is required downstream of the meter. H:\CED\Plannlng\Current Plannlng\PREAPPS\2016 Preapps\PREl&-000428\16-0623 PRE16·000428 Clvll Pre·App Sartori Elementary School-PRElG-000428 Page 3of 6 June 23, 2016 9. Water improvements shall be designed in accordance with Appendix J of the City's 2012 Water System Plan. Adequate horizontal and vertical sep<1ration between the new water main and other existing and proposed utilities (sewer lines, storm drains, gas lines, power and communication ducts) shall be provided for the operation and maintenance of the water main. Retaining walls, rockeries, or similar structures cannot be installed over the water main unless the water main is installed inside of a steel casing. 10. The development is subject to applicable water system development charges {SDCs) and meter installation fees based on the number and size of the meters for domestic use and fire prevention. Meters greater than 2" wlll be charged a $220.00 processing fee and the contractor will provide the meter and install it. A system development fee credit will be issued for any existing meters being abandoned. The full water fee schedule can be found In the City's 2016 development fees document on the City's website. SEWER COMMENTS 1. Sewer service Is provided by the City of Renton. There ls an existing 22" concrete sewer running east to west in N. 4"' Street north of the site. Reference Project FIie WWP2700Sl3 in COR Maps for record drawings. There is also an existing 8" PVC sewer running from east to west and then south to north through the site and connecting to the existing 22" sewer in N. 4'" Street. Reference Project File WWP2700513 in COR Maps for record drawings. 2. The proposed location of the school building conflicts with the location of the on·site s• sewer. The sewer and services connected to the sewer shall be removed and/or abandoned as necessary for construction of the building. If services are abandoned where the main will remain in place, the service shall be capped at the property line. 3. The existing 8" sewer main that is not removed for construction of the building can be used as the building sewer connection to the main In N. 4'" Street. 4. Any existing recorded sewer easements shall be shown on the survey. Release of existing easements will be reviewed during utility permit review. 5. If meal preparation will occur on site, a grease interceptor will be required for the school kitchen. The grease interceptor shall be sized based on drainage fixtures units in accordance with standards found in the latest edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC). The grease interceptor shall drain by gravity to the sewer main. The grease interceptor shall be located on site so that Is accessible for routine maintenance. 6. The development is subject to applicable sewer system development charges (SOCs} for sewer service. The SOC for sewer service is based on the size of the domestic water service. A system development fee credit will be Issued for any existing sewer service being abandoned. The full sewer fee schedule can be found In the City's 2016 development fees document on the City's website. STORM DRAINAGE COMMENTS H:\CED\Planoing\Current Planning\PREAPPS\2016 ?reapps\PflEl6-000428\16·0623 PRElG,000428 Civil Pre·App Comments.docx Sartori Elementary School-PflE16·000428 Page 4 of Ei June 23, 2016 1. The majority of the site is the site of the existing Sartori Education Center. The Sartori site contains a two story education center with an asphalt parking lot, grass fields, and lawn areas. The site is relatively flat and contains no on-site drainage system. Drainage from the site either infiltrates or sheet flows gradually off site. Drainage that sheet flows off site to the north Is intercepted by a type 1 catch basin along the southern flowline of N. 4111 Street. Drainage from this catch basin is routed west by an existing B" storm drain. Drainage that sheet flows off site to the northeast is intercepted by a type 1 catch basin located along the flowline near the intersection of N. 4"' Street and Garden Avenue N. Drainage from this catch basin Is routed north by an existing 6" storm drain. There are also numerous light commercial and residential lots surrounding the existing Sartori Education Center to the west and south. These lots are also relatively flat ,ind contain no on-site drainage systems. Drainage from the existing lots west of the Sartori Education Center is intercepted by three type 1 catch basins located along the eastern flowHne of Park Avenue N. Drainage from these catch basins is routed north by an existing 12" storm drain. Drainage from the existing lots south of the Satori Education Center is Intercepted by two type 1 catch basins located along the flowline near the intersection of Park Avenue N. and N. 3'' Street and Garden Avenue N. and N. 3'' Street. Drainage from these catch basins Is routed west by an existing 12" /10" storm drain. 2. Refer to Figure 1.1.2.A-Flow Chart to determine what type of drainage review is required for this site. The site falls within the City's Peak Rate Flow Control Standard (Existing Site Conditions). The site falls within the Lower Cedar River Drainage Basin. Drainage plans and a drainage report complying with the adopted 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) and the 2010 City of Renton amendments will be required. The site will require enhanced basic water quality treatment. • L fJi11IO-M.\.,Nl.,"'1"t£-/ ~...,_ 011,w"'W' Ponds, stormwater wetlands, and infiltration facilities are prohibited as the site is located in Zone 1 of an Aquifer Protection Zone. 3. Drainage improvements along all frontages will be required to conform to the City's street standards. 4. A geotechnical report for the site is required. Information on the water table and soil permeability, with recommendations of appropriate flow control BMP options with typical designs for the site from the geotechnlcal engineer, shall be submitted with the application. 5. The development would be subject to stormwater system development charges (SOCs). The current SOCs are $0.594 per square foot of new impervious surface area, but not less than $1,485.00. A system development fee credit wlll apply for the existing single family residential lots. Fees are payable at the time of permit issuance. TRANSPORTATION/STREET COMMENTS 1. The current transportation impact fee is $2.00 per square foot of building. Fees are payable at the time of permit issuance. A transportation impact fee credit will apply for the existing education facility, single family residential lots, and light commercial lots. H:\CED\Plonning\Current Plannlng\PREAPPS\2016 Preapps\PRE16-000428\16-0623 PRE16-00042B ClvM Pre-App Sartori Uementary School-PA£16-000428 PageSof 6 June 23, lOllli 2. N. 3'' Street, N. 4"' Street, and Park Avenue N. are classified as principal arterials. Garden Avenue N. is classified as a residential access street. City staff is recommending street sections that differ from the City's street standards found in RMC 4-6-060. A summary of the required street frontage improvements requested can be found below. A street modification will need to be submitted to approve the modified street standards. a. The existing curb line shall remain in place along Park Avenue N. and N. 3•• Street. An 8' planter shall be located behind the curb and a 12' sidewalk shall be located behind the planter along these streets. Right of way dedication along these streets will be required to the back of the 12' sidewalk. b. The existing curb line shall remain in place along N. 4"' Street. An 8' planter shall be located behind the curb and an 8' sidewalk shall be located behind the planter along this street. Right of way dedication will be required to the back of the 8' sidewalk. c. The proposed curb bulbs at the comers of N. 3'' Street and Garden Avenue N. and N. 4'" Street and Garden Avenue N. are acceptable. The bus parking lane shall be 8' in width along Garden Avenue N. A 10' sidewalk will be required behind the bus parking lane. Right of way dedication will be required to the back of the 10' sidewalk. d. The curb radius at all intersections shall be 35'. Appropriate right of way dedication at each comer Is required to accommodate the curb radius. e. Perpendicular curb ramps conforming to current ADA and WSDOT standards will be required at each corner. Curb ramps shall be perpendlcular to the roadway centerline. Two curb ramps are required at each comer. f. The existing curb along all frontages shall be replaced with a new curb that meets City standards. • / )11/1d.n U/Y! /',,.tf>l/'-5' 1 ' r--g. 'Proposed access points to the site appear acceptable. Any proposed site access from Park Avenue N. Is discouraged and will be subject to further review. h. No on-street parking will be permitted on any street frontage surrounding the site. i. Future two-way configuration of N. 3"' and N. 41 " Street is at least 10 years away. Two- way configuration of these streets shall not be considered as part of the design process for this project. j. Current channeli«ation on all adjacent streets shall remain. iJ ,:f1tl11y i1n{~4ffFaffic impact analysis per City of Renton standards will be required as the new school will generate new vehicular traffic exceeding 20 vehicles per hour in both the AM and PM peak periods. The traffic report shall address the capacity of the parent load/ unload zone. City staff is concerned about the possibility of load/ unload traffic externiing into N. 4" Street. 4. Street lighting analysis is required to be conducted by the developer along all street frontages. Required street lighting shall be to City of Renton standards. H:\CED\Planning\Current Planning\PREAPPS\2016 Pn,apps\PRH6-000428\16-0623 ?RE16-000428 Civil Pre-App Cornme-nts.docx I i I ! l I l Sartori Eiemenlary School-PRE16-000428 Page6of6 June 23, 2016 5. Paving and trench restoration within the City of Renton right of way shall comply with the City's Restoration and Overlay requirements. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. The SDCs listed are for 2.016. The fees that are current at the time of the utllity permit application will be levied. Please see the City of Renton website for current SDCs. 2. Storm drainage detention vaults and retaining walls that are 4' or taller from bottom of footing will require a separate building permit. Structural calculations and plans prepared by a licensed engineer will be required. 3. A conceptual utility plan is required as part of the land use application. 4. The survey and all civil plans shall conform to the current Clty of Renton survey and drafting standards. Current drafting standards can be found on the City of Renton website. 5. A final survey that is stamped and signed by the professional land surveyor of record will need to be provided. All existing utilities need to be surveyed and shown. Please reference COR Maps for mapping and records of existing utilities in the project vicinity. 6. Separate p\an submittals wllf be required for construction permits for utility work and street improvements. All plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer in the State of Washington. 7. When utility plans are complete, please submit four (4) copies of the plans, two (2) copies of the drainage report, an electronic copy of each, the permit application, an Itemized cost of construction estimate, and application fee to the counter on the sixth floor. H :\CEO\Plannlng\Current Plannlng\PREAPPS\2016 Preapps\PRE16-000428\16-0623 PRE16•000428 Civil Pre-App r .... --~ .. .,., ..4,.,.-v DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Renton0 MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: June 23, 2016 Pre-Application File No. 16--000428 Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner Sartori Elementary 315 Garden Ave N General: We have completed a preliminary review of the pre-application for the above- referenced development proposal. The following comments on development and permitting issues are based on the pre-application submittals made to the City of Renton by the applicant and the codes In effect on the date of review. The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision-makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Community & Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator, Planning Director, Development Services Director, and City Council). Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. The applicant is encouraged to review all applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. The Development Regulations are available for purchase for $50.00 plus tax from the Finance Division on the first floor of City Hall or on line at www.rentonwa.gov. Project Proposal: The subject property is the block located on east side of Park Ave N, between N 3'• St and N 4"' St, at 315 Garden Ave N. The project site totals 5.11 acres in area and is located within the Residential-10 (R-10}, Commercial Neighborhood (CN), and Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning classifications. The pre-application packet indicates that the proposal is demolish all existing structures and to construct a new 3-story, 75,000 square foot elementary school with parking for 74 vehicles. The site also includes bus load/unload spaces for 15 buses. The site is located in Zone 2 of the Wellhead Protection Area and is located within the seismic hazard area. Current Use: The subject parcels contain an existing education facility, small grocery store, and several single family residences all proposed for demolition part of a redevelopment proposal. Zoning: The project site totals is located within multiple zones given the consolidation of several parcels of land: Residential-10 {R-10), Commercial Neighborhood (CNl, and Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning classifications. A K-12 educational facility is permitted in all three zones as a Hearing Examiner Conditional Use. Therefore, a Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit is required. The following is criteria considered for Conditional Use Permits: H:\CEO\Planning\Current Planning\PREAPPS\14·000678 ' I' i I Sartori Elementary Page 2 of ll 315 Garden Ave N a. Height and Design: The height of the proposed tower and/or antenna as well as incorporation of design characteristics that have the effect of reducing or eliminating visual obtrusiveness. b. Proximity to Surrounding Uses: The nature of uses on adjacent and nearby properties and the proximity of the tower and/or antenna to residential structures and resldential district boundaries. c. Nature of Surrounding Uses: The nature of uses on adjacent and nearby properties. The proposed use at the proposed location shall not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. d. Topography and Vegetation: The surrounding topography and tree canopy coverage. e. Ingress/Egress: The proposed Ingress and egress. f. Impacts: The potential noise, Ught, glare, and visual impacts. g. Collocation Feasibility: The availability of suitable existing towers and other structures to accommodate the proposaL h. Consistency with Plans and Regulations: The compatibility with the general purpose, goals, objectives and standards of the Comprehensive Plan, this Title, and any other City plan, program, map or ordinance. i. Landscaping: Additional landscaping may be required to buffer adjacent properties from potentially adverse effects of the proposed use. Development Standards: The project would be subject to RMC 4·2-llOA and RMC 4·2·120A, "Development Standards for Residential/Commercial Zoning Designations" effective at the time of complete application (noted as "R-10, CN, and CA standards" herein). A copy of the currant standards is included herewith. The table below notes the current standards for the zones: Type of Standard R-10 CN CA Minimum Lot Size 4,000 square feet 5,000 square feet 5,000 square feet Minimum lot Width 40 feet -interior lot None None 50 feet -comer lot Minimum Lot Depth 70 feet None None Min Front Yard 20 feet 15 feet the minimum 15 feet the minimum setback may be setback may be reduced to 0 ft. reduced to 0 ft. through site plan through site plan review review Max Front Yard None 20 feet 20 feet H·\rFn\Plannin2\Current Plannin~\PREAPPS\14-000678 I Sartori Elementary Page 3 of 11 31S Garden Ave N Side Yard Rear Yard Side Yard Along-A• Street Building Coverage Ratio Maximum Impervious Surface Building Orientation Maximum Gross Floor Area of Any Single Commercial Use on a Site Height II of Stories Parking Bicycle Parking 4 feet None, except 1S ft. if None, except 15 ft. if lot abuts or is lot abuts or is adjacent to a lot adjacent to a lot zoned residential. zoned residentia I. 1S feet None, except 15 ft. if None, except 15 ft. lf lot abuts a lot zoned lot abuts a lot zoned residential. residential. 15 feet 20 feet 20 feet 55% 65%; 75% if parking Is 65%; 75% if parking is provided w/in the provided w/in the bldg bldg 70% N/A N/A N/A All commercial uses See urban design shall have their regulations in RMC 4- primary entrance and 3-100. shop display window oriented toward the street frontage. N/A 5,000 gross sq. ft. The N/A maximum size shall not be exceeded, except by conditional use permit 24 feet-Wall Plate 35 feet so feet, except 60 feet for mixed use {commercial and residential) in the same building. 2 N/A A minimum and maximum of 1 per employee. in addition, if buses for the transportation of students are kept at the school, 1 off-street parking space shall be provided for each bus of a size sufficient to park each bus. The number of bicycle parking spaces shall be equal to ten percent (10%) of the number of required off-street vehicle parking spaces H:\C(O\Planning\Current Planning\PREAPPS\14-000678 Sartori Elementary Pagt> 4 of 11 315 Garden Ave N On Site Street Frontage landscaping Tree Retention 10-feet 20% l 10% l 10% The subject site is within multiple zones which have conflicting development standards and design regulations not included in the application. Additionally, the proposed structure straddles several property lines and the applicant would be required to obtain a Lot Combination In order to consoltdote at/ parcels located on site as part of a formal land use application which would ultimately create a single lot with several zones. In order to resolve the conflicting development standards the oppltcont hos the optton to request a Comprehensive Plan Amendment with on ossocfoted Rezone. Altematively a Planned Urban Development can be applied for (see criteria below). A Comprehenstve Plan Amendment to establish the site os Resident/al High Density with an associated Rezone to the CN zone would likely be supported. The applicant would be required to demonstrate compliance with the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone criteria (refer to RMC 4-!NJ2D and RMC 4-9-180 respectively}. Other Development Standards: Parking-The applicant will be required at the time of land use application to provide a parking analysis of the subject site with calculations based on the requirements noted above. Twenty f1ve percent (25%} reductfan or Increase from the minimum or maximum number of parking spaces may be granted far nonresident/al uses through site plan review If the appllcant can Justify the modification to the satisfaction af the Administrator. Justif,cation might include, but is not limited to, quantitative information such as sales receipts, documentation of customer frequency, and parking standards of nearby cities. In order for the reduction or increase to occur the Administrator must find that satisfactory evidence has been provided by the applicant. Modifications beyond twenty five percent (25%} moy be granted per the criteria and process of RMC 4-9-250,D.2, This detailed written request can be submitted before or concurrently with a land use application. The applicant will be required at the time of land use permit to provide a parking analysis of the subject site. The analysis would include dimensions of stalls and drive aisles. See RMC 4-4-080 for more details. Surface parking lots with SD-100 or more stalls shall provide a minimum of 25 square feet of landscaping per parking space In addition ta the 10 feet required frontage landscaping. It should be noted that the parking regulations specify standard stall dimensions. Surface parking stalls must be a minimum of 9 feet x 20 feet, compact dimensions of 8* feet x 15 feet, and parallel stall dimensions of 9 feet x 23 feet; compact surface parking spaces shall not account for more than 30 percent of the spaces in the surface parking lots. ADA accessible stalls must be a minimum of 8 feet ln width by 20 feet in length, with an adjacent access aisle of 8 feet In width for van accessible spaces. The appropriate amount of ADA accessible stalls based on the total number of spaces must be provided. H:\CED\Plannlfll!\Current Planning\PREAPPS\14-000678 Sartori Elementary Pages of 11 315 Garden Ave N Loading: Buildings which utilize ground level service or loading doors shall provide a minimum of forty five feet (45') of clear maneuvering area in front of each door. Landscaping -All portions of the development area not covered by structures, required parking, access, circulation or service areas, must be landscaped with native, drought-resistant vegetative cover. Pleaw refer to landscape regulations (RMC 4-4-070) for additional general and specific landscape requirements (enclosed). A conceptual landscape plan and landscape analysis meeting the requirements in RMC 4-B-l20D.12, shall be submitted at the time of oppllcation for lpnd use application. Tree Retention· Significant trees shall be retained in the following priority order: Priority One: Landmark trees; significant trees that form a continuous canopy; significant trees on slopes greater than 20%; significant trees adjacent to critical areas and their associated buffers; and significant trees over 60' in height or greater than 18" caliper. Priority Two: Healthy tree groupings whose associated undergrowth can be preserved; other significant native evergreen or deciduous trees; and other significant non-native trees. Priority Three: Alders and cottonwoods shall be retained when all other trees hove been evaluated far retention and ore not able to be retained, unless the alders and/ or cottonwoods are used as part of an approved enhancement project within a critical area or its buffer. The Administrator may require independent review of any land use application that involves tree removal and land clearing at the City's discretion. A formal tree retention plan would be reviewed at the time of Building Permit application. Please note that all trees existing on site prior to demolition of the existing structure would be required ta be considered as part of the tree retention calculations. Lighting -Parking lot or display lot light fixtures shall be non-glare and mounted no more than twenty five feet (25') above the ground to minimize the impact onto adjacent and abutting properties. See 4-4-07S for additional standards. Refuse and Recycling Areas -rn office, educational and Institutional developments, a minimum of two (2) square feet per every one thousand (1,000) square feet of building gross floor area shalt be provided for recyclables deposit areas and a minimum of four (4) square feet per one thousand (1,000) square feet of building gross floor area shall be provided for refuse deposit areas. A total minimum area of one hundred (100) square feet shalt be provided for recycling and refuse deposit areas. ~ -If the applicant intends to install any fences as part of this project, the location must be designated on the landscape plan. A fence detail should also be included on the plan as well. Screening -Screening must be provided for all surface-mounted and roof top utility and mechanical equipment. The site plan application will need to include elevations and details for the proposed methods of screening. Planned Urban Development Should the applicant opt to pursue a Planned Urban Development the following are objectives, standards, and processes intended to guide a successful application: H:\CED\Planning\Current Planning\PREAPPS\14-000678 I ' j I I I I i ' l I Sartori Elementary Page 6 of ll 31S Garden Ave N There are two principal purposes of the planned urban development regulations. First, it is to preserve and protect natural features of the land. Second, it is to encourage innovation and creativity in the development of residential, business, manufacturing, or mixed use developments by permitting a variety in the type, design, and arrangement of structures and improvements. Planned Urban Development standards RMC 4-9· 150 states that in approving a planned urban development, the City may modify any of the standards of chapters 4·2, 4-4, and 4-7 RMC and RMC 4-6-060, except as listed in subsection S3 of this Section (Le. uses, density, and procedures). All modifications indudlng but not limited to height, parking, setbacks, etc. w/11 be considered simultaneously as part of a planned urban development. PUD Decision Criteria The City may approve a planned urban development only if It finds that the following requirements are met. Demonstration of Compliance and Superiority Required -Applicants must demonstrate that a proposed development is In compliance with the purposes of the Planned Urban Development and with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed development shall be superior to that which would result without a planned urban development and that the development will not be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties. Public Benefit -In addition, applicants shall demonstrate that a proposed development will provide identified benefits that clearly outweigh any adverse impacts or undesirable effects of the proposed planned urban development, particularly those adv@rse and undesirable Impacts to surrounding properties, and that the proposed development will provide one or more of the following benefits than would result from the development of the subject site without ·the proposed planned urban development: a. Critical Areas: Protects critical areas that would not be protected otherwise to the same degree as without a planned urban development; or b. Natural Filatures: Preserves, enhances, or rehabilitates natural features of the subject property, such as significant woodlands, native vegetation, topography, or noncritical area wildlife habitats, not otherwise required by other City regulations; or c. Public Facllltles: Provides public facilities that could not be required by the City for development of the subject property without a planned urban development; or d. Use of Sustainable Development Techniques: Design which results in a sustainable development; such as LEED certification, energy efficiency, use of alternative energy resources, low impact development techniques, etc.; or e. Overall Design: Provides a planned urban development design that is superior to the design that would result from development of the subject property without a planned urban development. A superior design may include the following: i. Open Space/Recreation: Sartori Elementary Page 7 of 11 315 Garden Ave N a)Provides increased open space or recreational facilities beyond standard code requirements and considered equivalent to features that would offset park mitigation fees in Resolution 3082; and b) Provides a quality environment through either passive or active recreation facilities and attractive common areas, including accessibility to buildings from parking areas and public walkways; or ii. Circul~tion/Screening: Provides superior circulation patterns or location or screening of parking facilities; or iii. Landscaping/Screening: Provides superior landscaping, buffering, or screening in or around the proposed planned urban development; or iv. Site and Building Design: Provides superior architectural design, placement, relationship or orientation of structures, or use of solar energy; or v. ~: Provides alleys for any proposed single family detached, semi-attached, or townhouse units. Additional Review Criteria -A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria: a. Building and Site Design: i. Perimeter: Size, scale, mass, character and architectural design along the planned urban development perimeter provide a suitable transition to adjacent or abutting lower density/intensity zones. Materials shall reduce the potential for light and glare. ii. Interior Design: Promotes a coordinated site and building design. Buildings in groups should be related by coordinated materials and roof styles, but contrast should be provided throughout a site by the use of varied materials, architectural detailing, building orientation or housing type; e.g., single family, detached, attaclled, townhouses, etc. b. Circulation: I. Provides sufficient streets and pedestrian facilities. The planned urban development shall have sufficient pedestrian and vehicle access commensurate with the location, sixe and density of the proposed development. All publlc and private streets shall accommodate emergency vehicle access and the traffic demand created by the development as documented in a traffic and circulation report approved by the City. Vehicle access shall not be unduly detrimental to adjacent areas. ii. Promotes safety through sufficient :;ight distance, separation of vehicles from pedestrians, limited driveways on busy streets, avoidance of difficult turning patterns, and minimization of steep gradients. iii. Provision of a system of walkways which tie residential areas to recreational areas, transit, public walkways, schools, and commercial activities. iv. Provides safe, efficient access for emergency vehicles. H:\CEO\Planning\Current Planning\PREAPPS\14-000678 Sartori Elementary Pages of 11 31S Garden Ave N c. Infrastructure and Services: Provides utility services, emergency services, and other improvements, existing and proposed, which are sufficient to serve the development. d. Clusters or Building Groups and Open Space: An appearance of openness created by clustering, separation of building groups, and through the use of well-designed open space and land,caping. or a reduction in amount of impervious surfaces not otherwise required. e. Privacy and Building Separation: Provides Internal privacy between dwelling units, and external privacy for adjacent dwelling units. Each residential or mixed use development shall provide visual and acoustical privacy for dwelling units and surrounding properties. Fences, insulation, walks, barriers, and landscaping are used, as appropriate, for the protection and aesthetic enhancement of the property, the privacy of site occupants and surrounding properties, and for screening of storage, mechanical or other appropriate areas, and for the reduction of noise. Windows are placed at such a height or location or screened to provide suffJCient privacy. Sufficient light and air are provided to each dwelling unit. f. Building Orientation; Provides buildings oriented to enhance views from within the site by taking advantage of topography, building location and style. g. Parking Area Design: Provides parking areas th~t Jre complemented by landscaping and not designed in long rows. The size of parking areas Is minimized in comparison to typical designs, and each area related to the group of buildings served. The design provides for efficient use of parking, and shared parking facllities where appropriate. Common Open Space -Open space shall be concentrated ln large usable areas and may be designed to provide either active or passive recreation. h. Open space must be at least 10 percent of the development site's gross land area. Open space may include, but is not limited to the following: i. A trail that allows opportunity for passive recreation within a critical area buffer (only the square footage of the trial shall be Included in the open space area calculation, or ii. A sidewalk and its associated landscape strip, when abutting the edge of a critical area buffer and when a part of a new public or private road, or iii. A similar proposal as approved by the reviewing official. i. Stormwater facilities may be incorporated with the open space, common space, or recreation area on a case-by-case basis if the Reviewing Official finds: i. The stormwater facility utilizes the techniques and landscape requirements set forth in The Integrated Pond, King County Water and Land Resources Division, or an equivalent manual; or ii. The surface water feature serves areas outside of the planned urban development and is appropriate in size and creates a benefit. Note to Appl/cant: The following concerns ha11e been raised: • Proximity of the building to Park Ave. The scale of the structure should be considered when establishing the setback from the Park Ave. The City is not likely to .,,,rcn\Plannlnelrurrent PlannlnR\PREAP1'S\l4-tl00678 J,s,rtf Sartori Elementary Page9 of 11 315 Garden Ave N • support modifications from the setback requirements of the zone. You are encouraged to maintain a 20-foot setback from the new property line along Pork Ave. Additionally, pedestrian scale amenities, and landscaping, shall also be incorporated into the design along Park Ave. Location of Visitor Parking: The location of the visitor parking ot the comer of N 3"' St and Gorden Ave does not appear to be the most idea/ location. Additionally, the combined entrance with the service location will present challenges. First Story Height: Taller ground level spaces typically are more successful in urban environments, the minimum height is typically 15 feet floor-to-ceiling and in many coses, even taller in areas of active commercial uses and main streets (such as the subject location). • Traffic: Traffic generated on adjacent neighborhood streets, specifically Garden Ave. Please ensure to incorporated analysis and appropriate mitigation for such Impacts. Additional site plan feedback will be provided as the site pion is fine-tuned prior to formal /and use submittal. • Fencing: Choice of materials being used for fencing along the perimeter of the site. • On-Site Landscaping: A landscape buffer shall be provided between the field and the public sidewalk. • Observation Seating: WIii observation seating be provided near the proposed playfield. Critical Areas The site Is located in Zone 2 of the Wellhead Protection Area and also contains sensitive slopes. The City may require an applicant to prepare a hydrogeologic study If the proposal has the potential to significantly impact groundwater quantity or quality, and sufficient information is not readily available. Such a report shall be prepared by a qualified professional at the applicant's expense. Additionally, geotechnical studies by licensed professionals, such as a geotechnical engineer and/or engineering geologist, shall be required. The required studies shall demonstrate the following review criteria can be met: (a) The proposal will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre-development conditions; and {b) The proposal will not adversely Impact other critical areas; and (c) The development con be safely accommodated on the site. Environmental Review The proposal will exceed several thresholds and as a result Environmental 'SEPA' Review would be required. The Renton School District has chose to take lead agency and conduct their own Environmental 'SEPA' Review. Public Information Sign: The applicant is required to install a proposed land use action sign on the subject property per the specifications provided in the accompanied public information sign handout. The applicant is solely responsible for the construction, installation, maintenance, removal, and any costs associated with the sign. H:\CED\Planning\Current Plannmg\PREAPPS\14-000678 I • I I ! Sartori Elementary Page 10 of 11 315 Garden Ave N Public Meeting: A neighborhood meeting, according to RMC 4-8·090, is required for: a. Preliminary plat applications; b. Planned urban development applications; and c. Projects estimated by the City to have a monetary value equal to or greater than ten million dollars ($10,000,000), unless waived by the Administrator. The intent of this meeting is to facilitate an informal discussion between the project developer and the neighbors regarding the project. The neighborhood meeting shall occur after a pre- application meeting and before submittal of applicable permit applications. The public meeting shall be held within Renton city limits, at a location no further than two (2) miles from the project site land Use Permit Requirements The proposed development would require Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezone, Conditional Use Permit, Site Plan Review, Lot Consolidation, and likely several modifications. Alternatively, the proposal would require a Preliminary Planned Urban Development, Conditional Use Permit, and a Lot Consolidation. If a Comprehensive Plan Amendment is sought all associated land use permits could be processed within an estimated time frame of 16 weeks. The application fees are the following: Comprehensive Plan Amendment is $2,500; Relone is $2,500; Site Plan Review Fee is $2,500; the Conditional Use Permit is $2,500; and the lot consolidation is free. Any modification request would be reviewed with the land use application and would costs $150 each. A 3% technology fee would also be assessed at the time of land use application. lf a Planned Urban Development is sought all associated land use permits could be processed within an estimated time frame of 12 weeks. The application fees are the following: Planned Urban Development is $2,500; the Conditional Use Permit is $2,500; and the lot consolidation is free. A 3% technology fee would also be assessed at the time of land use application. Detailed information regarding the land use application submittal is provided In the attached handouts. In addition to the required land use permits, separate construction and building permits would be required. The review of these penmlts may occur concurrently with the review of the land use permits, but cannot be issued prior to the completlon of any appeal periods. The applicant will alsa be subject to Design Review as part of the Site Plan Review/Planned Urban Development and a Design Checklist shall be completed and submitted as port of the appllcotian materials. In addition to the required land use permits, separate construction, building and sign permits would be required. The review of these permits may occur concurrently with the review of the land use permits, but cannot be Issued prior to the completion of any appeal periods. Impact Mitigation Fees: In addition to the applicable building and construction fees, the following impact fees would be required prior to the issuance of building permits. • A Transportation Mitigation Fee based on ITE manual; t Fire Mitigation Fee based on $0.45 per square foot of new building area. ... \ronll>l•Mh,alnirrPnt P!annine\PflEAPPS\14-000678 Sartori Elementary Page 11 of 11 315 Garden Ave N Expiration: Upon site plan/conditional use permit/planned urban development approval, the site plan is valid for two years with a possible two-year extension. H:\CED\Planning\Current Planning\PREAPPS\14-000678 • Sartori Elementary School PPUD Application Materials #5 -Project Narrative Project Name, Size, and Location Sartori Elementary School (SES) will be located on the site of Renton School District's Sartori Education Center (SEC) at 315 Garden Ave Nin Renton , Wash ington, which is slated for demolition. The site is a full block bounded by Park Ave N to the west, Garden Ave N to the east, N 4th St to the north , and N 3rd St to th e south . The new three-story building will be approxim ate ly 79 ,000 square feet in size and located fronting the western/Park Ave N side of t he block. The property is currently 5.28 acres in size. Figure 1. Vicinity fvlap Land Use Permits Required for the Proposed Project Th e proj ect is required to obtai n th e following land us e perm its and approva ls from th e City of Renton: • Preliminary Planned Urban Development (PP UD ) -thi s application. • Conditi o na l Use Permit (CUP) -processed concurrent with the PPUD. • Lot Conso lid atio n -to combine the 14 lots that comprise the project into one lot. • Fin a l Planned Urban Development (FPUD) -to be submitted at a later date . Th e Renton School District intends to complete the FP UD process in late 20 16/early 2017 . • SEPA Environmental Review and a SEP A Determination will be performed and completed by the Renton School District as SEPA Le ad Agency. SEPA Notice of Consu ltati on was issued on August 24 , 2016 , with a commen t period that expires on September 23, 20 16. Th e Distric t intends to issue a SEPA Determination by late September, 2016 . Zoning Designation of the Site and Adjacent Properties The site comprises four zoning districts: Residential 8 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) (R8), Residential 10 du/ac (R10), Commercial Neighborhood (CN), and Commercial Arterial (C A ). The total site area is approximately 212,381 square feet (4.88 acres). The R8 zoning di s trict comprises approximately 12% of the total site area , primarily in the southeast corner of the site. The R10 zoning district comprises approximately 63% of the total site area, primarily in the northeast portion of the site. The CN zoning district comprises approximately 18% of the total site area, primarily in the southwest corner of the site. The CA zoning district comprises approximately 7% of the total site area , primarily in the northwest portion of the site. Properties adjacent to the north of the project site, across N 4th St, are comprised of Commercial Arterial (CA) and Industrial Light (IL) zoning districts. Properties adjacent to the east of the project site , across Garden Ave N, are comprised of Residential 10 du/ac (R10) and Residential 8 du/ac (R8) zoning districts. Properties adjacent to the south of the project site, across N 3rd St, are comprised of Commercial Neighborhood (CN) and Residential 8 du/ac (R8) zon ing districts. Properties adjacent to the west of the project site, across Park Ave N, are comprised of Commercial Ne ighborhood (CN) and Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning districts . Figure 2 shows the layout of zoning districts present on the project site and within the immediate vicinity. 2 .. Existing Land Use and Site Improvements The site has been used for a combination of single-family residential homes, Park Avenue Market and Deli, Happy Hounds Dog Groomer, and the Sartori Education Center (SEC). SEC has provided educational programs for approximately 60 students in the upper grades. At the time of application, all of the existing structures have been demolished, with the exception of the vacant Sartori Education Center, two homes, a food mart and burrito restaurant, and the Happy Hounds Dog Groomer, all of which will be demolished in the fall of 2016. They are located at 314,330, 336 and 350 Park Ave N. Existing improvements include public utilities and adjacent roadway improvements such as sidewalks, curbs, and gutter. These will be removed and replaced with new. Special Site Features The site contains no special features. The site is rectangular in shape and bounded by streets on each side. It is relatively flat in grade and does not contain any critical areas such as wetlands, streams, or floodplains. Soil and Drainage Conditions As detailed in the Geotechnical Report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, dated August 4, 2016, soils identified beneath asphalt and sod/topsoil generally consist of bedded sandy gravel, clean sand, silty sand, clayey and lean silt with occasional lenses of peat and other organics scattered throughout the soil column. These sediments are likely representative of recent alluvium deposited in former channels of the Cedar River. Proposed Land Use and Scope of Development The new Sartori Elementary School (SES) is being developed as a choice school with specialized programs, and is anticipated to serve up to 650 students from kindergarten to 5th grade. The choice program will have a neighborhood enrollment boundary and will also draw students from the District as a whole. The primary design objectives are to address student safety and security, vehicle queuing, way- finding, and functional programmatic needs of the school to support its community. The school will be the first elementary school in the Renton School District that is in close proximity to the downtown core and is being developed as a civic and community asset to the city center, where it is located. The new three-story building will be approximately 79,000 square feet in size and located fronting the western/Park Ave N side of the block. In addition to classrooms, the school will contain a gymnasium and library. The building footprint was purposefully minimized to maximize the available open space areas for recreational use. The grounds will include a hardscape play area, play equipment on soft surface, and a grass play field that are intended for shared use with the community. A 10,300-square foot, shared-use, public plaza is located at the main entry at the corner of Park Ave N and N 3rd St. This plaza can be expanded into the adjacent parking area after school hours to offer a total of approximately 14,900 square feet in public gathering space. The plaza and entry parking area will be demarcated with concrete paving to distinguish it from typical asphalt parking areas and will be softened at the edges with landscaping and seating elements. Approximately 83 vehicle parking spaces will be provided in three parking areas. One parking lot is accessed off N 4th St and also allows for convenient parent drop-off/pick-up. Two visitor parking areas are accessed from N 3rd St. Bus parking will be provided along the west side of Garden Ave N for loading and unloading of approximately 15 large and small school buses. 3 Landscaping will be provided around the site perimeter, to include a combination of new and existing street trees, shrubs, and grasses to provide 100% ground coverage. The interior play areas will be a combination of grass and hard surface. The parking lot will be landscaped in accordance with City standards, to include a combination of trees, shrubs, and groundcover. Site grading for construction will be limited to the amount required to ensure conveyance of stormwater. Existing utilities will be replaced with new service lines. The adjacent sidewalks, curbs, and gutters will be replaced. The sidewalk widths will vary; the width along Park Ave N will be expanded to 12 feet, Garden Ave N will be 10 feet and N 3'' St and N 4th St will be 8 feet each. Proposed Site Access Access will be provided in two locations. At the north on N 41 " St, two driveways are provided, one for entering the parking and pick-up/drop-off area and one for exiting. At N 3'' St at the south end of the project, one driveway provides access to the visitor parking area located at the southwest corner and also the small visitor parking area close to the main entry. The south access also provides service area access. Proposed Offsite Improvements The City of Renton will require frontage improvements and right-of-way dedications along all four sides of the site. These improvements will include new curbs (at existing locations), 8-foot wide planters along Park Ave N, N 3rd St, and N 4th St, and new sidewalks of varying widths along all sides. Sidewalk would be 12 feet wide along Park Ave N, 8 feet wide along N 3rd St and N 4th St, and 10-feet wide along Garden Ave N. All intersections would require new curb returns with radii of 35 feet at all corners, and perpendicular curb ramps will be required at each corner. Construction Cost Estimate The total cost for the project is estimated to be $27 million. Proposed Excavation/Fill Activities There will be approximately 2,000 cubic yards of cut and 4,000 cubic yards of fill for project construction. Filling, excavation, and grading is limited to that associated with the removal of existing underground utilities and impervious surfaces, and the creation of grades to accommodate stormwater conveyance. Grading will be limited to slight contouring at areas of backfill and of existing minor slopes of less than 5%. Resulting excavations will be backfilled with approved fill per City of Renton standard specifications, to be proposed by the contractor and approved by the owner. Proposed Tree Retention and Removal According to the Arborist Report, there are 41 trees of 17 species on the site that ranged from 4 to 28 inches in diameter. They include 10 street trees. The trees range in health from poor to very good. All onsite trees will be removed for project construction. Nine of the street trees will be retained. Natural vegetative features will be rehabilitated upon the completion of the project by including a majority of native plant species within the landscape plan, with the remaining plantings adaptive to the Pacific Northwest. The site perimeter will be landscaped, as will the parking lot and building perimeter. Around the perimeter there will be 100% ground coverage consisting of a mix of trees, shrubs, and groundcovers. The plaza at the corner of N 3rd St and Park Ave N will include planters and seating. 4 .. Street Trees to be Retained Tree Identifier Tree Type DBH (in) Condition 1 Callery pear 8 Fair 2 Callery pear 8 Fair 4 Callery pear 8 Fair -· 5 Callery pear 7 Fair 7 Callerv pear 9 Fair 23 Green ash 9 Good 24 Green Ash 11 Good 26 Green Ash 11 Good 27 Green Ash 12 Good Proposed Land Dedications Land will be dedicated to the City for right-of-way around the project perimeter. The dedication area is required to extend from the current property line to the new back of the sidewalk on each street section. The width of the dedication area along each roadway is as follows: Garden Ave N: 9.0 feet Park Ave N: 12.0 feet N 3rd St: 4.5 feet N 4th St: 8.0 to 8.5 feet The total right-of-way dedication area is 17,524 square feet. Draft legal descriptions for the right-of-way dedication area are included. Proposed Job Shacks It is expected that the selected contractor will have a job shack onsite to manage the construction activities. It will be located so as to oversee the activities, while not interfering with them. At this time, the location is not known. Proposed Modifications Being Requested and Justification The project site comprises one city block with four zoning districts. Each zoning district requires different development standards. The project requires a Planned Urban Development (PUD) application in order to deviate from certain inconsistent or inappropriate development standards for a project of this type. The purpose of the PUD process is to encourage innovation and creativity in the site design by permitting a variety in the type, design, and arrangement of structures and improvements. The proposed PUD will be superior in building design, site layout, internal circulation, and public benefit than what would otherwise be required with strict application of the development standards in each underlying zoning district. Since the site comprises multiple residential and commercial zoning districts that vary in development standards, it is not possible to develop an elementary school on the property without deviating from some of the standards. The PUD process allows for flexibility where needed so that an exemplary public education facility can be designed that meets educational needs, but also is complimentary to the site and neighborhood in which it is located. The result is a project that maximizes open space in the residential zoned area and orients the elementary school building in the commercial zoned area with primary frontage toward the commercial arterial street frontage. 5 The proposed deviations from the development standards will allow for the development of a school campus that maximizes the site's potential to provide adequate outdoor recreational space, parking areas, and a state-of-the-art educational facility that will serve not only the students of the Renton School District, but the surrounding neighborhood as well. Strict adherence to the development standards would result in multiple site design features that would be incompatible with the proposed elementary school use, including: • Significantly larger building footprint (based on the maximum height restrictions), resulting in significantly smaller playfield and recreation area. • Building modulations for setback compliance rather than good design. In the front yard and side yard setbacks, there is as much as 20 feet of difference. The floor plan would be inefficient, wasting needed space for educational facilities. • Inadequate parking facilities and potential pick-up/drop-off congestion (based on the minimum and maximum space requirements per employee). As a choice school, the District anticipates more drivers visiting the site than traditional schools, as students are transported from around the District as a whole. • Emphasis on exterior pedestrian movement (based on 12-foot wide public sidewalk requirements in the city center) rather than a blend of exterior and interior. As a public education facility, there are interior walkways that most of the daytime students and parents will use for safe and convenient access to the school and outdoor areas. The proposed 8-, 10-, and 12-foot wide sidewalks, combined with the interior walkways, provide better access, safety, and wayfinding. A comprehensive list of each deviation and justification for approval is provided in Section 11 of this PPUD application. 6 Sartori Elementary School PPUD Application Materials #7 Project Sequencing Plan Sartori Elementary School will be constructed in one phase as follows: Start of construction: April 2017 Installation of TESC measures and clearing and grubbing: April 2017 Demolition of structures and utilities: April and May 2017 Piling and foundation installation: May to July 2017 Building construction: July 2017 to August 2018 Utilities Installation: Fall of 2017 through Spring of 2018 Concrete sidewalks and site paving: Spring and Summer of 2018 Landscaping: Summer 2018 End of construction activities: August 2018 . : .. Sartori Elementary School PPUD A11pH¢~tion Materials #8 -Conditional Use Permit :Justifications Renton Municipal Code Section 4-9-030-D outlines the Decision Criteria for approval of the Conditional Use. Below are each of the criteria with justification for approval of Sartori Elementary School. 1. Consistency with Plans and Regulations: The proposed use shall be compatible with the general goals, objectives, policies, and standards of the Comprehensive Plan, the zoning regulations and any other plans, programs, maps or ordinances of the City of Renton. The new Sartori Elementary School is ideally located within close proximity to the City's downtown area and compatible with the general goals, objectives, policies, and standards of the Comprehensive Plan, zoning regulations, and other City of Renton plans, maps and ordinances. The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan describes goals and policies that support the project as follows: Goal L-L: Transform concentrations of pre-existing linear form commercial areas in into multi- use neighborhood centers characterized by enhanced site planning, efficient parking design, coordinated access for all modes of transportation, pedestrian linkages from adjacent uses and nearby neighborhoods, and boulevard treatment. Policy L-6: Site and design essential public facilities to be efficient and convenient while minimizing impacts on surrounding uses. Facilities should be sited on an arterial street, where there is good access to transportation, including transit service, location, and where parking requirements are appropriate to the use. If the use is people intensive, it should be in a Center, compatible with surrounding uses, and co-located with other uses when possible. Policy L-16: Residential Medium Density-Place areas that can support high-quality, compact, urban development with access to urban services, transit, and infrastructure, whether through new development or through infill, within the Residential Medium Density (MD) Designation. Within the MD Designation, allow a variety of single-family and multi-family development types, with continuity created through the application of design guidelines, the organization of roadways, sidewalks, public spaces, and the placement of community gathering places and civic amenities. Residential-8 Zone -Zone lands Residential-8 (R-8) where there is opportunity to re-invest in existing single-family neighborhoods through infill or the opportunity to develop new single- family plats at urban densities greater than four dwelling units per acre. R-8 zoning is allowed in the Residential Medium Density Land Use Designation. Policy U-18: Commercial and Mixed Use -Place areas with established commercial and office areas near principle arterials within the Commercial and Mixed Use (CMU) Land Use designation. Allow residential uses as part of mixed-use developments, and support new office and commercial development that is more intensive than what exists to create a vibrant district and increase employment opportunities. The intention of this designation is to transform strip commercial development into business districts through the intensification of uses and with cohesive site planning, landscaping, signage, circulation, parking, and the provision of public amenity features. Commercial Neighborhood Zone -Zone lands Commercial Neighborhood (CN) that provide goods and services on a small-scale to a surrounding residential neighborhood and that front on a street classified as a Principal arterial, Minor arterial, or Collector. Expanded CN zoning should only be where there is opportunity to provide small limited-scale commercial opportunity to the immediately surrounding residential community that would not result in an increase in scale or intensity, which would alter the character of the nearby residential neighborhood. The CN zone implements the Residential High Density Land Use designation. Commercial Arterial Zone -Zone lands Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning where a historical strip pattern dominates, characterized by large surface parking in front of buildings, long blocks oriented to automobiles, and an incomplete street grid. CA zoning should be located within one quarter mile of transit, provide employment, and allow mixed-use development. CA zoning implements the Commercial and Mixed Use and Employment Area Land Use Designations. Policy L-52: Include human-scale features such as pedestrian pathways, quality landscaping, and public spaces that have discernible edges, entries, and borders to create a distinctive sense of place in neighborhoods, commercial areas, and centers. Policy L-53: Orient buildings in developments toward the street or a common area, rather than toward parking lots. Policy L-61: Improve the appearance of parking lots through landscaping and screening. Policy L-63: Create a supportive environment for cultural activities and the arts. The Housing and Human Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan also provides support for the project through Policy HHS-22, which states: "Support the link between land development and physical activity by increasing options for transit use, walking, and bicycling, such as providing physical connections between residential areas and schools and/or commercial development." The Parks, Recreations, Natural Areas, and Trails Element of the Comprehensive Plan also provide support for the project through Policy P-1, which states: "Expand parks and recreational opportunities in new and existing locations with an identified need, in order to fill gaps in service and keep pace with future growth" The Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan states that Renton currently has 13,000 students in preschool-12'h grade and is growing. The Plan states that the Sartori project is needed to meet levels of service to accommodate rapid growth that is expected. Policy CF-2 requires that the City "ensure adequate public facilities concurrent with development". 2. Appropriate Location: The proposed location shall not result in the detrimental overconcentration of a particular use within the City or within the immediate area of the proposed use. The proposed location shall be suited for the proposed use. The proposed city center location is ideal for the proposed elementary school. As the first school that is within close proximity to downtown Renton, it is not over-concentrating schools in the area. As an area previously used for educational uses, it is ideal for adaptive re-use as proposed. 3. Effect on Adjacent Properties: The proposed use at the proposed location shall not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. ·, The proposed location of the new school will not have substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. Drainage: Drainage will be controlled onsite through a series of catch basins and conveyance pipes and will not impact adjacent properties the site will be graded to allow slight contouring to accommodate stormwater conveyance into the onsite facilities. Erosion: A temporary sediment and erosion control plan, prepared in accordance with the City of Renton's stormwater manual, will be in place to ensure that erosion is controlled during clearing and construction. Emissions -School busses will be turned off during the pick-up and drop-off times to limit emissions caused by idling. Aesthetics -the site will be enhanced by planting all undeveloped areas with trees, shrubs and groundcover to soften the impact of the building and parking areas. Traffic -All adjacent intersections are forecasted to operate at a level of service of "C" or better with the project. Driveways have been strategically located at N. 4th St and N 3"' Street and minimized to just one location on each street. All other existing driveways within the site area will be eliminated. Parking: The project will provide 83 parking spaces, exceeding the City code requirement by approximately 23 spaces. The parking analysis demonstrates the parking is appropriate for a "choice" type school which will draw students from around the District. The additional parking will serve to alleviate the spill of parking onto adjacent streets and also avoid vehicles stacking onto N 4th St as they arrive for drop-of and pick-up of the students. 4. Compatibility: The proposed use shall be compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood. The site and building have been designed in consideration of the adjacent uses and activity occurring in the neighborhood to minimize impacts and reflect the scale and character of the neighborhood. The main presence of the building is located along Park Ave N, which allows integration into future commercial development and anticipated growth along that arterial. This orientation allows the field, playground and lower scale of development to be oriented toward the residential area to the east and south of the site. The building entry and public plaza have been located adjacent to N 3rd St and the SW corner of Park Ave N where they face residential properties. The plaza area features planters, flagpoles and seating and will be softened with street trees and frontage landscaping. Fencing will be used at the play field for safety of students as well as securing equipment from inadvertently leaving the site. Pedestrian safety has been enhanced through interior walkways connecting the exterior sidewalks and parking lots to the main and rear school entries. Parking has been designed to minimize conflicts with pedestrians. Additional parking spaces have been added to the project to minimize the potential for parking to spill onto the adjacent side streets, and for minimize spill onto the streets caused by vehicle queuing during drop-off and pick-up times. 5. Parking: Adequate parking is, or will be made, available. The school is proposing approximately 83 parking spaces onsite. The City of Renton requires a minimum and maximum of one (1) parking space per employee for the proposed use, and the school anticipates approximately 60 employees. Accordingly, strict application of the code would limit parking to 60 spaces. Sartori Elementary School will be a choice school, meaning it will draw students from around the district in addition to the local area. It is anticipated that approximately 70% of the enrollment will come from outside the local area. Parking demand counts and observations performed by Heffron Transportation for elementary schools have found peak mid-school-day demand rates of about 1.23 vehicles per employee, which includes demand generated by all employees plus visitors and volunteers. The new school is projected to have a midday peak parking demand of about 74 vehicles, which is likely to occur during late morning when all teachers, administrative staff, kitchen staff, and volunteers are typically on site. Extra parking relieves queuing particularly during afternoon pick-up times when family drivers arrive about 10 to15 minutes prior to dismissal and park to wait for their students. The additional parking supply will help to better accommodate this activity and reduce the likelihood that queued vehicles will spill out onto N 4th St. The additional parking will also be used for after hour school events. Bus parking will be accommodated in a specially-designated area along Garden Ave N. Street Parking is currently and will continue to be accommodated along the east side of Garden Ave N. 6. Traffic: The use shall ensure safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians, and shall mitigate potential effects on the surrounding area. Vehicle entries to the site are placed to allow for adequate sight distance and distance to adjacent intersections. By placing parking areas for the school at the north and south sides of the site, the majority of the site interior is preserved for pedestrians, which was a primary goal for safety of students on the site. Where vehicles do access the site, parking has been designed in a way to provide clear pedestrian pathways as close as possible to building entries and to minimize pedestrians crossing drive aisles. There are only two points of entry for vehicles to the site, one each from N 4th St and N 3rd St, limiting new driveways on busy streets. On N 3rd St, this represents a decrease from the number of driveways previously present when multiple residents were located along this arterial. At Park Ave N, all existing driveways will be removed, and there will be no vehicle access. Establishing two separate parking areas will minimize conflicts between staff/visitor parking and parent loading/unloading areas. Placing the bus loading/unloading area in a curb cut-out along Garden Ave N will minimize conflict points between vehicular traffic surrounding the site, staff and visitor parking areas, and student walking routes. The staff and visitor parking areas will be screened by perimeter landscape buffers that will provide 100% ground coverage consisting of trees, shrubs and groundcover. The project will replace all existing curbs, gutters and sidewalks along all street frontages with new. The net new trips forecasted for the project will be reduced by approximately 200 average daily trips (because existing uses generate more trips than the proposed school), In the PM peak hour a total of 93 new trips are forecasted. In the "commuter" PM peak hour a reduction of 26 trips is forecasted. All adjacent intersections are forecasted to operate at a level of service of "C" or better with the project. 7. Noise, Light and Glare: Potential noise, light, and glare impacts from the proposed use shall be evaluated and mitigated. Noise -Temporary, short-term noise impacts typical of construction projects will occur with operation of equipment during construction. Construction of the pile foundation system will occur over the course of a 6 to 8 week period. An auger-cast type of construction method is proposed (not a pile-driving type of construction method, which can be noisy and cause vibrations). Auger cast piles use a hollow stem auger that drills to the design depth (50 feet) and when the auger is extricated grout is injected into the hole. The noise levels are the same as those used for typical construction vehicles such as dump trucks and loaders. Construction will normally occur during the hours subject to the appropriate City of Renton ordinance. Construction operations will occur during weekdays between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 pm. Work on Saturdays will be restricted to the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. No work will occur on Sundays. Hauling hours will be restricted to the hours between 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved in advance by the Development Services Division. To mitigate general noise impacts during the construction phases, measures such as locating stationary equipment away from receiving properties, erecting portable noise barriers around loud stationary equipment, limiting construction hours to the appropriate City of Renton ordinance, turn off idling construction equipment, require contractors to rigorously maintain all equipment, and train construction crews to avoid unnecessarily loud actions near noise- sensitive areas will be employed. Long term noise will be typical of that associated with an elementary school, including vehicular and school bus noise, which is most prevalent at school start and stop times. Truck deliveries will be minimal. The noise of children at play in the outdoor areas will occur during various times throughout the school day. Once the school is under operation, the school buses will be turned off to limit idling during the load/unload period. Light and Glare The school building, parking lot and grounds will be lit after dusk each evening for safety purposes. Lighting will be directed downward and shielded so as not to interfere with views or create glare. The parking lots will be lit with non-glare type light fixtures placed 25 feet above the ground. The fixtures will be fitted with a cutoff type luminaire. Street lighting will also be provided in accordance with the City's street standards. A light spill analysis will be completed during project review to demonstrate that light spill will not impact adjacent residential properties. 8. Landscaping: Landscaping shall be provided in all areas not occupied by buildings, paving, or critical areas. Additional landscaping may be required to buffer adJacent properties from potentially adverse effects of the proposed use. The site will be landscaped as follows: Parking Lot Landscaping: The proposed landscaping exceeds the overall interior and perimeter parking lot requirements stipulated in RMC 4-4-070.H1. For the interior parking lot calculation we applied the overall 83 parking space requirement of 25 SF per space (rather than apply the requirement of each individual parking lot, which would have resulted in less area) to determine that the amount required is 2,075 square feet. The actual area provided is 4,782 SF -more than double the requirement. The requirement for the perimeter of the parking lots to be landscaped at a width of 10 feet is also exceeded. Although the width varies along the perimeter the total provided is 6,863 SF, which exceeds the prescriptive requirement of 6,000 SF. The varied widths of the landscaping provide more interesting and aesthetically pleasing landscaping arrangement. The overall width does not go any lower than 5 feet. Street frontage landscaping: The street frontage requirement is the same as the parking lot perimeter requirement in the areas of the site where the parking lot is adjacent to the public street. The 10-foot on-site frontage requirement is fully met on Garden Ave N. A 20-foot landscape area (exceeding the code requirement) is provided along Park Ave N in front of the school building with a combination of grass, shrubs and groundcover. Playgrounds and Plaza: The public plaza is one area where different landscaping is provided consisting of planter boxes and seating, fiagpoles and concrete surfacing. The area is intended to be more open and inviting to encourage neighborhood gathering and to accommodate peak studenUpedestrian usage during school start and stop times. The overall screening and softening of hard surfaces is still provided with the planter boxes and seating as well as the 8-foot wide planter in the right-of-way. Street Trees per Street Standards: An 8-foot wide planting strip is providing along each street frontage in accordance with the City's street standards. Nine of the existing street trees will be retained and a variety of new street trees will be added at the size and spacing requirements dictated per code. Sanori Elementary School PPUD At,plit:;ation Materials #10 Construction Mitigation Description Construction will begin in April 2017 and run through August 2018. Construction hours of operation will occur weekdays between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 pm and on Saturdays between 9:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. No work will occur on Sundays. A haul route control plan will be developed by the General Contractor, after the project has been executed, and will be reviewed and approved by the City of Renton prior to the start of construction. Preliminary estimates are that the earthwork would generate about 165 truckloads (165 trucks in and 165 trucks out) primarily during two periods at the beginning and end of the project. Assuming the trips are condensed to about two months each, this would correspond to about eight truck trips per day (four in, four out) and one or fewer truck trips per hour on a typical eight-hour work day. This volume of truck traffic may be noticeable to the residents living adjacent to the site, but it is not expected to result in significant impacts to traffic operations in the site vicinity. There is no anticipated need for special hauling hours. Temporary, short-term noise impacts typical of construction projects will occur with the operation of equipment during construction and will be limited in duration. Mitigation measures will include using and regularly maintaining efficient mufflers and quieting devices on all construction equipment and vehicles. Construction of the pile foundation system will occur over the course of a 6 to 8 week period. An auger- cast type of construction method is proposed (not a pile-driving type of construction method, which can be noisy and cause vibrations). Auger cast piles use a hollow stem auger that drills to the design depth (50 feet) and when the auger is extricated grout is injected into the hole. The noise levels are the same as those used for typical construction vehicles such as dump trucks and loaders. Construction activities at the site could stir up dust particles and create mud and construction vehicles and equipment could be a potential source of exhaust emissions. Watering dust prone area as needed during construction activities will control dust particles, construction entrances and wheel washing vehicles prior to leaving the site will reduce mud entering the street and vehicles and equipment not in use will be shut off. A Construction Management Plan (CMP) will be developed by the General Contractor, once contracted, and will be reviewed and approved by the City of Renton prior to the start of construction. The plan will address traffic and pedestrian control during school construction and define truck routes, lane closures, walkway closures, and parking disruptions as necessary. The CMP should direct trucks to arterials and away from residential streets to avoid unnecessary conflicts with resident and pedestrian activity. The CMP may also include measures to keep adjacent streets clean on a daily basis at the truck exit points (such as street sweeping or on-site truck wheel cleaning) to reduce tracking dirt offsite. The CMP should identify parking locations for the construction staff; to the extent possible, construction employee parking should be contained on-site. Temporary erosion control measures will be installed and maintained for the duration of the project. A Temporary erosion and control plan will be prepared. Within 30 days of completion of grading work, the site will be hydroseeded, planted with an appropriate groundcover, or mulch over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within 90 days. The work will comply with the Surface Water Design Manual and be approved by the Renton Development Services Division. The site is located in an Aquifer Protection Area and as such will be required to comply with RSD 4-4- 030.C.8 if construction vehicles will be refueled on site and/or the quantity of hazardous materials that will be stored, dispensed, used and handled on the construction site, will exceed 20 gallons. The scope of this project includes work within the right-of-way. No major impacts to local traffic are anticipated. An FAA application (form 7460-1 Proposed New Construction) has been filed for the use of tall cranes during construction. The application number is 2016-ANM-2624-0E. Sartori Elementary School PPUD Application Materials #11 -Compliance with Decision Criteria 1. Demonstration of Compliance and Superiority Required - The proposed Planned Urban Development (PUD) will be superior in building design, site layout, internal circulation, and public benefit than what would otherwise be required with strict application of the development standards in each underlying zoning district. Since the site comprises multiple residential and commercial zoning districts that vary in development standards, it is not possible to develop an elementary school on the property without deviating from some of the standards. The PUD process allows for flexibility where needed so that an exemplary public education facility can be designed that meets educational needs, but also is complimentary to the site and neighborhood in which it is located. The result is a project that maximizes open space in the residential zoned area and orients the elementary school building in the commercial zoned area with primary frontage toward the commercial arterial street frontage. The proposed deviations from the development standards will allow for the development of a school campus that maximizes the site's potential to provide adequate outdoor recreational space, parking areas, and a state-of-the-art educational facility that will serve not only the students of the Renton School District, but the surrounding neighborhood as well. Strict adherence to the development standards would result in multiple site design features that would be incompatible with the proposed elementary school use, including: • Significantly larger building footprint (based on the maximum height restrictions), resulting in significantly smaller playfield and recreation area. • Building modulations for setback compliance rather than good design. In the front yard and side yard setbacks, there is as much as 20 feet of difference. The floor plan would be inefficient, wasting needed space for educational facilities. • Inadequate parking facilities and potential pick-up/drop-off congestion (based on the minimum and maximum space requirements per employee). As a choice school, the District anticipates more drivers visiting the site than traditional schools, as students are transported from around the District as a whole. • Emphasis on exterior pedestrian movement (based on 12-foot wide public sidewalk requirements in the city center) rather than a blend of exterior and interior. As a public education facility, there are interior walkways that most of the daytime students and parents will use for safe and convenient access to the school and outdoor areas. The proposed 8-, 10-, and 12-foot wide sidewalks, combined with the interior walkways, provide better access, safety, and wayfinding. The new Sartori Elementary School (SES) is ideally located within close proximity to the City's downtown area and is compatible with the general goals, objectives, policies, and standards of the Comprehensive Plan, zoning regulations, and other City of Renton plans, maps, and ordinances. The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan describes goals and policies that support the project as follows: The Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan states that Renton currently has 13,000 students in preschool through 12th grade and is growing. The Plan states that the Sartori project is needed to meet levels of service to accommodate rapid growth that is expected. Policy CF-2 requires that the City "ensure adequate public facilities concurrent with development." 1 Goal L-L: Transform concentrations of pre-existing linear form commercial areas in into multi-use neighborhood centers characterized by enhanced site planning, efficient parking design, coordinated access for all modes of transportation, pedestrian linkages from adjacent uses and nearby neighborhoods, and boulevard treatment. Policy L-6: Site and design essential public facilities to be efficient and convenient while minimizing impacts on surrounding uses. Facilities should be sited on an arterial street, where there is good access to transportation, including transit service, location, and where parking requirements are appropriate to the use. If the use is people intensive, it should be in a Center, compatible with surrounding uses, and co-located with other uses when possible. Policy U-18: Commercial and Mixed Use -Place areas with established commercial and office areas near principle arterials within the Commercial and Mixed Use (CMU} Land Use designation. Allow residential uses as part of mixed-use developments, and support new office and commercial development that is more intensive than what exists to create a vibrant district and increase employment opportunities. The intention of this designation is to transform strip commercial development into business districts through the intensification of uses and with cohesive site planning, landscaping, signage, circulation, parking, and the provision of public amenity features. Commercial Neighborhood Zone -Zone lands Commercial Neighborhood (CN} that provide goods and services on a small-scale to a surrounding residential neighborhood and that front on a street classified as a Principal arterial, Minor arterial, or Collector. Expanded CN zoning should only be where there is opportunity to provide small limited- scale commercial opportunity to the immediately surrounding residential community that would not result in an increase in scale or intensity, which would alter the character of the nearby residential neighborhood. The CN zone implements the Residential High Density Land Use designation. Commercial Arterial Zone -Zone lands Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning where a historical strip pattern dominates, characterized by large surface parking in front of buildings, long blocks oriented to automobiles, and an incomplete street grid. CA zoning should be located within one quarter mile of transit, provide employment, and allow mixed-use development. CA zoning implements the Commercial and Mixed Use and Employment Area Land Use Designations. Policy L-52: Include human-scale features such as pedestrian pathways, quality landscaping, and public spaces that have discernible edges, entries, and borders to create a distinctive sense of place in neighborhoods, commercial areas, and centers. Policy L-53: Orient buildings in developments toward the street or a common area, rather than toward parking lots. Policy L-61: Improve the appearance of parking lots through landscaping and screening. Policy L-63: Create a supportive environment for cultural activities and the arts. The Housing and Human Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan also provides support for the project through Policy HHS-22, which states: "Support the link between land development and physical activity by increasing options for transit use, walking, and bicycling, such as providing physical connections between residential areas and schools and/or commercial development." 2 The Parks, Recreations, Natural Areas, and Trails Element of the Comprehensive Plan also provide support for the project through Policy P-1, which states: "Expand parks and recreational opportunities in new and existing locations with an identified need, in order to fill gaps in service and keep pace with future growth." 2. Public Benefit Required - a. Critical Areas: There are no critical areas on the project site. The proposal is within Zone 1 of the Aquifer Protection Zone. b. Natural Features: There are no significant woodlands or wildlife habitats on the subject property. Eleven street trees along the frontages of Park Ave N, N 3'd St and Garden Ave N will be retained. Natural vegetative features will be rehabilitated upon the completion of the PUD by including a majority of native plant species within the landscape plan, with the remaining plantings adaptive to the Pacific Northwest. There will be 100% ground coverage consisting of a mix of trees, shrubs, and groundcovers. c. Public Facilities: The new SES is a much needed public educational facility, offering a choice educational programs to students from kindergarten through 51 h grade. The District is offering the program to its students district-wide, but it will also have a neighborhood boundary. The school is needed to respond to continued growth in the City. In addition, the school is providing public amenities for neighborhood use such as public gathering and recreation areas. A plaza at the corner of Park Ave N and N 3'' St will be available for public use after school hours. It includes bike racks, benches, and landscaping. The parking area adjacent to the plaza can be easily converted to expand the plaza area to a total of approximately 14,000 square feet. The school fields and play areas are also available for community use after school hours. Other public facilities the project will provide include frontage improvements along all four property boundaries, including new sidewalks, curb, and gutters. The streetscape along Park Ave N in particular will include 12-foot sidewalks and 8-foot planter strips with new landscaping, creating a public boulevard affect for this important commercial corridor. The District will dedicate over 17,000 square feet of land to the City for expanded right-of-way. d. Overall Design: i. Open Space/Recreation - The project will provide hard scape play area, play equipment on soft surface, and a grass play field, which are open space and recreational facilities for student and community use, but are not required by Renton Municipal Code (RMC). These areas have been designed for shared use to support Elementary Educational curriculum and be an asset to the surrounding community for after-hour use. Hardscape play areas will have striping for games and solid ball walls at the perimeter. Play equipment including tetherball poles and basketball hoops will be provided. Open grass playfield, as well as grassy play areas with some elevation changes, are being provided. 3 ii. Circulation/Screening - Vehicle entries to the site are placed to allow for adequate site distance and distance to adjacent intersections. By placing parking areas for the school at the north and south sides of the site, the majority of the site interior is preserved for pedestrians, which was a primary goal for safety of students on the site. Where vehicles do access the site, parking has been designed in a way to provide clear pedestrian pathways as close as possible to building entries and to minimize pedestrians crossing drive aisles. There are only two points of entry for vehicles to the site, one each from N 4th St and N 3rd St, limiting new driveways on busy streets. On N 3rd St, this represents a decrease from the number of driveways previously present when multiple residents were located along this arterial. At Park Ave N, all existing driveways will be removed, and there will be no vehicle access. Establishing two separate parking areas will minimize conflicts between staff/visitor parking and parent loading/unloading areas. Placing the bus loading/unloading area in a curb cut-out along Garden Ave N will minimize conflict points between vehicular traffic surrounding the site, staff and visitor parking areas, and student walking routes. The staff and visitor parking areas will be screened by perimeter landscape buffers that will provide 100% ground coverage consisting of trees, shrubs, and groundcover. iii. Landscaping/Screening - The proposed landscaping is superior to strict application of the code requirements and is responsive to the use, neighborhood, and function of the site. The proposed landscaping exceeds the overall interior and perimeter parking lot landscape area requirements. The variation in widths and dimensions provides more interesting and aesthetically pleasing landscaping arrangement, while not going any lower than 5 feet in any area. The onsite frontage requirement is exceeded along the Park Ave N/building frontage with a 20-foot landscape area. The public plaza is intentionally more open and inviting, with the use of planter boxes and seating to encourage neighborhood gathering. The overall screening and softening of hard surfaces is provided through the planter boxes and streetscape plantings. iv. Site and Building Design - The school will be the first elementary school in the Renton School District that is in close proximity to the downtown core and is being developed as a civic and community asset to the city center, where it is located. The primary objective of the development of this facility is to provide a safe and secure educational environment -this includes appropriate vehicle queuing, wayfinding, and functional requirements to support its use as an elementary school. The building has been sited to anticipate future growth in the downtown core and to respond to the residential scale to the south and east of the site. The new three-story building is located on the west side of the site along Park Ave N, allowing lower scale elements to face the residential areas to the east. This anticipates growth of a civic boulevard along Park Ave N. 4 Development of a public plaza as a community asset defines the prominent corner at Park Ave N and N 3'' St. A dual-use parking court is being developed adjacent to the pedestrian plaza to support additional visitor parking that is required for successful daily operation of an elementary school that can also be restricted to vehicle use and become an extension of the plaza area for community use. This area will utilize concrete and pavers to distinguish it from typical vehicle parking areas and will be softened at the edges using landscape features such as planters and seating. The building form has been simplified to maximize site utilization and observation/safety. A compact form allows for as much site area as possible to be provided for student play. The exterior architectural expression of the building is a direct reflection of the building's internal organization and massing, and its relationship to the site. Two interlocking forms bring together volume and material to create modulated facades. Areas of brick provide a durable base surface and reference the history of buildings on the site. Metal clad classroom wing is a reflection of the energy of elementary students. The brick volume also anchors the site and larger community program areas such as the gymnasium. The form that sits atop the base is simple in overall expression, with dramatic recessed areas that help carve out the volume of the fa9ade, express the depth of wall assembly, and provide levity in the fa9ade. Fenestration at the recessed areas allows light into instructional spaces, providing a rich interior environment for primary learners. Window placement along the fa9ade creates a rhythm that expresses classrooms within the building and also provides scale breakdown of the fa9ade. Additional expanses of glazing are located to highlight the symbolic and physical importance of community assets such as library, commons, and gymnasium spaces. v. Alleys -Not applicable. 3. Additional Review Criteria - a. Building and Site Design: i. Perimeter - The building was designed to have its main presence along Park Ave N, which allows integration into future commercial development along that arterial, along with lower density development toward residential zones to the east and south of the site. The play area and field have been located facing Garden Ave N, and a public plaza with pedestrian scale landscape and hardscape elements has been located facing N 3" St. The building design includes a base of durable material clad in masonry with individual windows, which allows smaller scale elements and material texture to be at the level of lower density properties. ii. Interior Design - The interior of the site is defined by hardscape and soft surface play areas for use by students and the community. These play areas are designed to be complementary to the building design using a consistent palette of concrete, 5 masonry, and pavers, as well as landscape elements consistent with the design of the site perimeter. There is a single building on the site, but site elements such as equipment storage, trash enclosure, fencing, and seating will be consistent throughout the development. b. Circulation: i. Pedestrian facilities for the site consist of perimeter and internal walkways and pedestrian common space. A 12-foot sidewalk is provided at the front side of the property along Park Ave N, in order to emphasize the civic boulevard development along that fa9ade. Sidewalks along the other perimeter streets are 8 feet on N 3rd St and N 4th St, and 10 feet along Garden Ave N, which provide generous space for student, parent, and visitor use. Common areas at the street intersections and site interior are sized to allow for large groups to gather as part of school and community functions. Sufficient drive aisles have been provided for onsite vehicle circulation. Emergency vehicles are able to navigate these parking areas, which are located within close proximity to existing arterial streets. The Transportation Technical Report (Heffron Transportation, August 2016) prepared for the project indicates that the surrounding intersections would operate at level of service (LOS) C or better during morning, afternoon, and commuter PM peak hours with the school project and would meet the City of Renton's minimum operational standard for arterial intersections. The report also indicates that all movements at the site access driveways would operate at LOS B or better during all conditions. ii. Vehicle entries to the site are placed to allow for adequate site distance and distance to adjacent intersections. By placing parking areas for the school at the north and south sides of the site, the majority of the site interior is preserved for pedestrians, which was a primary goal for safety of students on the site. Where vehicles do access the site, parking has been designed in a way to provide clear pedestrian pathways as close as possible to building entries and to minimize pedestrians crossing drive aisles. There are only two points of entry for vehicles to the site, one each from N 4th St and N 3rd St, limiting new driveways on busy streets. On N 3rd St, this represents a decrease from the number of driveways previously present when multiple residents were located along this arterial. At Park Ave N, all existing driveways will be removed, and there will be no vehicle access. Driveways and parking area layouts are simple, with wide drive aisles in order to avoid difficult turning patterns and allow for access of multiple vehicle types, including service and emergency vehicles. There are no steep gradient areas on the site. iii. Emergency vehicles may access the site from the north or the south via widened drive aisles and hard scape areas, which allow close access to the building. At the north parking area accessed from N 4th St, the drive aisle is widened to allow for emergency vehicle bypass around personal vehicles, and an access to hardscape area in front of the building will allow emergency vehicles to access the interior of the site. At the south parking area accessed from N 3rd St, emergency vehicles may access the building via the service yard located directly proximate to the site entry. 6 c. Infrastructure and Services: The sewer jurisdiction is the City of Renton. Existing 8-inch sewer mains are located within the site and drain north to N 4th St. Sewerage flows west within N 4th St. Sanitary sewer will connect to the new building plumbing at four locations on the east side of the building. The proposed sanitary sewer system will consist of pipes, cleanouts, and precast concrete manholes. Pipes will typically be 6-inch PVC. The water jurisdiction is the City of Renton. An 8-inch water main is located in N 4th St, 6-inch and 12-inch water mains are located in Garden Ave N, an 8-inch water main is located within N 3rd St, and a 16-inch water main is located within Park Ave N. The existing Sartori Education Center (SEC) is served by the water mains within Garden Ave N. To serve the new SES, the existing public water mains will be utilized. A minimum of two new fire hydrants will be extended to the site from Park Ave N. Fire hydrants will be located to provide 300-foot hose length coverage around the proposed building. The existing hydrants located along the site frontage will also be utilized for fire coverage of the new building. Fire sprinkler and domestic service will extend from the water main within Park Ave N to the building mechanical/fire sprinkler room. A double detector check valve assembly (DDCVA) will be located outside of the building in a concrete vault, as required by the City of Renton. The domestic meter, irrigation meter, DDCVA, and fire department connection (FDC) will be located west of the building along Park Ave N. In addition, the City of Renton requires aboveground, reduced-pressure, back/low assemblies on both the domestic water and irrigation service lines. Pipes for the fire hydrant extensions will be 6-inch ductile iron pipe (DIP). The fire service will be 6-inch DIP and the domestic service will be 4-inch DIP. The domestic meter will be 4 inches. Existing gas mains are located within Garden Ave N. Proposed gas service will be coordinated with Puget Sound Energy (PSE). PSE will construct the service up to the meter and the contractor will be responsible for trenching, bedding, backfill, and street restoration. It is assumed that gas service will be provided from Garden Ave N, pending further coordination with PSE. d. Clusters or Building Groups and Open Space: There is only one building onsite and it is located toward the western side of the block on the commercial corridor (Park Ave N). The building footprint has been minimized to allow for maximizing the open space/recreational areas located in the center and eastern portions of the property. e. Privacy and Building Separation: The majority of the program is to be located on Park Ave N as the commercial corridor. The building has been located away from surrounding residential properties. At N 3•d St where the building entry faces residential properties, landscaping will be located to provide privacy and aesthetic enhancement. The design of the building also includes a base level with smaller windows than other areas of the building, which keeps first floor program elements including administration areas and kindergarten classrooms more private. 7 A service yard is being planned, which will include trash and recycling containers, mechanical units for kitchen equipment, and a mechanical cooling unit to serve the school. This yard will be enclosed by a combination of solid walls and decorative fencing. Fencing will be used at the play field for safety of students, as well as securing equipment onsite. f. Building Orientation: The design of the building allows for views from the upper floors of the building. The pronounced recesses along the fa9ade are located at shared learning areas, where instruction is provided for groups of students. These recesses have large glazed portions that allow for territorial and city views in all directions, including observation of airport activity from the third floor. The placement of the library and its glazing design will allow this important community asset to have views facing south on Park Ave N, which is a significant connector between areas of Renton. g. Parking Area Design: i. Design- Onsite parking has been designed to be compact, with regularly placed landscaping. The quantity of parking provided allows for operational use of an elementary school, which must support student drop-off and pick-up, and staff, volunteer, parent, and visitor parking. The parking also serves after-hour events being held by the school and by the community onsite and in the building. ii. Adequacy - As outlined in the referenced Transportation Technical Report, the new school could have a midday peak parking demand of about 74 vehicles, which is likely to occur during late morning when all teachers, administrative staff, kitchen staff, and volunteers are typically onsite. Afternoon demand is often somewhat lower, as part-time staff often leave after lunch. The proposed onsite parking supply of 83 spaces is expected to accommodate this typical midday peak parking demand. Additional details related to parking for occasional evening events and afternoon dismissal queuing demand is provided in the Transportation Technical Report. h. Phasing: Not applicable. The project will be constructed in one phase. 8 11. Development Standards Deviations and Justification The SES site comprises four zoning districts that vary in development standards. Two of the districts are residential zones (R8 and R10) and two are commercia l zones (CN and CA). The zones are depicted on the site in the illus tration below. The adjacent zoning (i.e., across the street) is consistent with each of the Sartori site zoning designations. The following sections describe th e various deviations needed for the schoo l and why the deviation is justified. These are organized by the chapters that the development standards occur in, Chapters 2 , 4, and 6 of Title IV of the RMC . Figure 1.· Sartori Property Zoning Districts 9 Title IV, Chapter 2 -Deviations and Justification Chapter 2 establi shes the bulk and height re gulations for each zon ing district. For the Sartori property, they are summarized in the table below. The table indicates which development standard does and does not require a deviation. Table 11 .1 -Title IV, Chapter 2 Development Standards Development RS R10 CN CA Proposed Deviation Standard District District District District PUD Requested Underlying 12% 63% 18% 7% 100% Zoning Area (0.59 acres ) (3.07 acres) (0 88 acres) (0.34 acres) (4.88 acres) N /A within PUD Minimum Front Yard N/A N/A 15 feet 15 feet 20 feet No (Pa rk Ave N) Maximum Front Yard N/A N /A 20 f eet 20 feet 20 feet No (Park Ave N) Minimum S ide 187 feet Yard Along a (from Ga rde n Ave N) Street 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 135 feet No (Ga rden Ave N , (from N 4th St) N 4'" and N 3'" 72 feet Streets) (from N 3rd St) Maximum Side 187 feet Yard Along a (from Garden Ave N ) Street N/A N/A 20 feet 20 feet 135 feet Yes (Garden Ave N , (from N 4th St) N 4th and N 3•d 72 feet Streets) (from N 3'd St) Maximum 16% Building 50% 55% 65% 65% (34 ,200 sf footprint, N o Covera ge 79,000 sf total size) Max. Impervious 65.6% Surface 65% 70% N/A N/A Yes Coverage (139,357 sf) Maximum 3 stori es/ Number of 2 stories 2 stories 35 feet 50 feet 50 feet Yes Stories / Height Maximum Wall 24 feet 24 feet Plate Height N/A N/A 45 feet Yes 10 The proposed PUD requests the following deviations from Chapter 2 of the City's Development Standards: Table 11.2 -Requested Deviations -Residential Development Standards RMC Title IV, Chapter 2, Section 110A (4-2-110A) Development Standard Code Requirement Proposed Deviation Maximum Impervious Surface 65% in the R8 district 66% Coverage 70% in the R1 O district Maximum Number 2-stories in both the 3-stories of Stories R8 and R10 districts Maximum Wall 24 feet in both the 45 feet Plate Height R8 and R10 districts Deviation Justification: The request to deviate from the maximum impervious surface coverage standards of the underlying RS district will allow for the development of parking areas and a building footprint that will adequately serve the proposed development. The impervious surface coverage standards of the underlying residential districts are meant to guide residential development, not development of this type and scale. The overall site impervious coverage will be 65.6%, which is less than 1 % greater than the maximum for the R-8 zone. In the adjacent R-10 zone, the maximum impervious coverage is 70%, which the project is compliant with. The request to deviate from the maximum story standard of the underlying zoning districts will allow for the construction of an appropriately sized school that will contain classrooms, a gymnasium, and a library serving up to 650 students, while minimizing the structure's footprint. By minimizing the structure's footprint on the site, the campus can provide play areas and a play field along the frontage of Garden Ave N, serving as a transitional element from the school and the lower density residential development found along the east side of Garden Ave N. The request to deviate from the maximum wall plate height standard of the underlying zoning districts will allow for the construction of an elementary school building that includes a gymnasium and other similar interior uses that are not typically found in residential buildings. Without the height and wall plate deviation, the school would need to be spread out over a larger, lower footprint. This would severely impact the school's ability to provide the outdoor recreational and play spaces required for an elementary school. 11 Table 11.3 -Requested Deviations -Commercial Development Standards RMC Title IV, Chapter 2, Section 120A (4-2-120A) Development Standard Code Requirement Proposed Deviation 135 feet from the north property line (along N 4th St) Maximum Side Yard Setback 20 feet in both the 72 feet from the Along a Street CN and CA districts south property line (along N 3rd St) 187 feet from the east property line (along Garden Ave N) Maximum Building 35 feet in the CN district 50 feet Height 50 feet in the CA district Deviation Justification: The request to deviate from the maximum side yard setback standards along a street of the underlying zoning district will allow for the development of a school building that fronts the primary commercial arterial, Park Ave N, while providing physical and visual separation from land uses across N 3rd St and N 4th St. The increased setback along the southwest portion of the site will be used for an entry plaza that serves as a community asset and public gathering area, and defines the prominent corner of Park Ave N and N 3rd St. The increased setback along the northwest portion of the site, at the corner of Park Ave N and N 4th St, will be used for staff and visitor parking with landscape screening. The placement of the school building in the center of the project site along Park Ave N responds to the urban context and anticipation of neighborhood growth, while considering the visual impact on neighboring residential uses. Without the requested deviation, the school building would essentially need to comprise the entire site, less the stated setbacks. The other functional needs of the school, including recreation and parking areas, could not be provided. The request to deviate from the maximum building height standards of the underlying zoning districts will allow for the construction of an appropriately sized school that will contain classrooms, a gymnasium, and a library serving up to 650 students, while minimizing the structure's footprint. The school has been designed to front Park Ave N, where future commercial development is anticipated. Locating the three- story building along the frontage of Park Ave N will mitigate visual impacts to residential uses adjacent to the south and east as the corridor develops. By minimizing the structure's footprint on the site, the campus can provide play areas and a play field along the frontage of Garden Ave N, serving as a transitional element from the school and the lower density residential development found along the east side of Garden Ave N. Without the requested deviation, the school would need to be spread out over a larger, lower footprint. This would severely impact the school's ability to provide the outdoor recreational and play spaces required for an elementary school. 12 Title IV, Chapter 4 Deviations and Justification Chapter 4 focuses on the design related standards, such as parking, landscaping, lighting and refuse areas. The following deviations are requested: Table 11.4 • Requested Deviations-Landscaping Standards RMC Title IV, Chapter 4, Section 070 (4-4-070) Development Standard Code Requirement Proposed Deviation 10 feet provided along Garden Ave N Street Frontage 10 feet of on-site landscaping to be provided along public street Other frontage landscaping Landscaping frontages widths vary depending on adjacency to parking lot, plaza, or building Perimeter Parking 10 feet in width from the street Width varies, in no case less Lot Landscaping right-of-way than 5 feet in width Deviation Justification: The proposed landscaping exceeds the overall interior and perimeter parking lot requirements stipulated in RMC 4-4-070.H1. For the interior parking lot calculation, we applied the overall 83 parking space requirement of 25 square feet per space (rather than apply the requirement of each individual parking lot, which would have resulted in less area) to determine that the amount required is 2,075 square feet. The actual area provided is 4,782 square feet -more than double the requirement. The requirement for the perimeter of the parking lots to be landscaped at a width of 10 feet is also exceeded. Although the width varies along the perimeter, the total provided is 6,863 square feet, which exceeds the prescriptive requirement of 6,000 square feet. The varied widths of the landscaping provide more interesting and aesthetically pleasing landscaping arrangement. The overall width does not go any lower than 5 feet. The street frontage requirement is the same as the parking lot perimeter requirement in the areas of the site where the parking lot is adjacent to the public street. The 10-foot onsite frontage requirement is fully met on Garden Ave N. A 20-foot landscape area (exceeding the code requirement) is provided along Park Ave Nin front of the school building, with a combination of grass, shrubs, and groundcover. The public plaza is one area where different landscaping is provided, consisting of planter boxes and seating. The area is intended to be more open and inviting to encourage neighborhood gathering and to accommodate peak student/pedestrian usage during school start and stop times. The overall screening and softening of hard surfaces is still provided with the planter boxes and seating, as well as the 8-foot wide planter in the right-of-way. The parking lot and frontage landscaping could be accommodated as required by code; however, the result would be less responsive to the use, neighborhood, and function of the site, and would be less interesting landscape. 13 Table 11.5 -Requested Deviations-Parking Standards RMC Title IV, Chapter 4, Section 080 (4-4-080) Development Standard Code Requirement Proposed Deviation The total number of employees F.10.d. Number of Parking A minimum and maximum of planned for SES is 60. The Spaces Required 1 space per employee. proposed school will provide 83 parking spaces. The SES parking lot maneuvering space, maximum slope (8%), and fire access requirements have been met. Parking stall dimensions are provided as required and shown on the plans. The SES project is exceeding the parking stall requirements. Number of employees planned for SES is as follows: Fulltime Classroom Teachers: 32 Specialists: 12 (Gym, Library (2), Music (2), Counselor, Psychologist, ELL, SLP, LAP, OT/PT, Resource Specialist) Paraprofessional/Instructional Assistant 6 Administration Staff: 6 Kitchen Staff: 2 Custodial Staff: 2 Total: 60 Number and dimensions of standard, compact, and ADA accessible spaces provided: Standard: Compact: ADA: Total: 61 (Typical dimension: 9' x 20') 18 (Typical dimension: 8-1/2' x 16' and 9' x 16') 1 (Typical Dimension 9' x 20') 83 School buses will load and unload curbside on the west side of Garden Ave N. The district plans for 11 full size and 3 smaller buses. All spaces are accommodated in the designated area. The buses are not kept onsite. Deviation Justification: We are proposing an increase in code allowed parking greater than 25%. The requested increase is being driven by the following factors: 1. Choice school students will be drawn from all of Renton School District (approximately 70%) with 30% enrollment anticipated from the local area. The "choice" parents and visitors are more likely to arrive in vehicles. Parking demand counts and observations performed by Heffron Transportation for elementary schools have found peak mid-school-day demand rates of about 1.23 vehicles per employee, which includes demand generated by all employees plus visitors and volunteers. The new school is projected to have a midday peak parking demand of about 74 vehicles, which is likely to occur during late morning when all teachers, administrative staff, kitchen staff, and volunteers are typically onsite. 14 2. Extra parking relieves queuing, particularly during afternoon pick-up. The largest regular school- day need to accommodate vehicles onsite is during the afternoon dismissal period when family drivers arrive about 10 to 15 minutes prior to dismissal and wait to pick up students. Some prefer to park and walk students (particularly younger students) between classrooms and vehicles. The additional parking supply will help to better accommodate this activity and reduce the likelihood that queued vehicles will spill out onto N 4th St. 3. Due to downtown location, availability of offsite parking for after-hour events is limited. The largest peak parking demand for elementary schools occurs during the occasional evening events, which typically occur once per month. Some large school events can generate parking demand in excess of 225 vehicles. The proposed supply will help reduce the event-related overspill to local on-street parking. Table 11.6 • Requested Deviations -Refuse and Recyclables Standards RMC Title IV, Chapter 4, Section 090 Development Standard Code Requirement Proposed Deviation C.3 Setbacks from Shall not be located within 50 Located on property zoned Residential Properties feet of a lot zoned residential R-8 and R-10 C.8 Screening of Deposit Areas A 6-foot wall or fence shall 8-foot wall and gate height enclose outdoor deposit areas Gate openings shall be at least Two individual gates will be 10 C.9 Gate Opening and feet wide each. 10 feet wide. Vertical clearance Vertical Clearance of at least 15 feet. The vertical clearance of the roof is 9.5 feet. Deviation Justification: The refuse and recycling area meets the City's code requirement for dimension and size. The location within the residential zoning district is justified because it is located in an area that is secure from pedestrian walkways and screened visually from view of the street and residential properties. It is conveniently located adjacent to the kitchen and receiving area of the school for efficient and secure access. A planting area will be located between the southern wall of the enclosure and the adjacent pedestrian walkway. The service yard will be enclosed by a perimeter masonry wall consistent with the fa~ade of the adjacent gymnasium/commons building form. At the front (east) side of the garbage/recycle collection area, gates will be used to provide screening, while allowing access. The 8-foot wall height provides needed screening of the refuse area, as well as serving as a wall for the adjacent mechanical equipment. The size of the roof/clearance area is reduced from the 15-foot requirement to 9.5 feet to reflect the scale of the adjacent residential area at that corner of the block. Strict application of the refuse and recycling requirements impacts the unique operational needs of the school. Deliveries are typically made one time per week, and recycling and refuse pick-ups are made twice per week. The low use of the facility and the need to screen and enclose the area to protect the schoolchildren from encounters with the trucks and equipment dictate the unique site design. 15 Chapter 6 Deviations and Justification Table 11.7 -Requested Deviations-Street Standards RMC Title IV, Chapter 6, Section 060.F.2 (4-6-060.F.2) Development Standard Code Requirement Proposed Deviation 8 feet along the north and south frontages Sidewalk Width 12 feet within the City Center (N 3rd St and N 4th St) Community Planning Area 10 feet along the east frontage (Garden Ave N) Deviation Justification: The proposed deviation will provide a superior design by providing a mix of adequate exterior sidewalks with interior walkways. As a public education facility, there are interior walkways that most of the daytime students and parents will use for safe and convenient access to the school and outdoor areas. The combination of the proposed 8-, 10-, and 12-foot wide sidewalks on the street frontages, combined with the interior walkways, provide better access, safety, and wayfinding. The 8-foot sidewalks along the frontages of N 3rd St and N 4th St are sized to serve pedestrian connectivity to surrounding land uses that consist primarily of residential uses. Adjacent to the sidewalk along N 3rd St is the public plaza, which serves as a gathering space for school activities and neighbors. The plaza is located on the corner of Park Ave N and N 3rd St to emphasize the civic use of the site and encourage public engagement. There is also a separate 5.5-foot pedestrian walk in front of the building connecting the southeast and south parking areas to the main entry. Based on the size of the plaza and the pedestrian walkway in front of the building, much pedestrian activity will be pulled into the site, justifying a reduced sidewalk width along the frontage of N 3rd St. There should be no impact to site functionality or circulation. The 8-foot sidewalk along the frontage along N 4th St is complimented by a 17-foot walkway on the southern edge of the parking area to accommodate greater internal circulation. Delineating internal site circulation from pedestrian through-traffic allows the site to function with minimal conflicts between multiple modes of transportation, even during peak hours of student pick-up and drop-off. The 10-foot sidewalk along the frontage of Garden Ave N has also been designed to serve pedestrian connectivity to the primarily residential land uses in the immediate vicinity, with additional consideration for the bus pick-up and drop-off uses along the frontage. By locating the sidewalk along the curb of the bus lane, students will have direct ingress/egress to the buses. The 10-foot width provides adequate space for students to navigate the sidewalk and for general public use. Without the proposed deviations, the playground areas of the site would have to be reduced to accommodate the increased sidewalk width. The playground is already small for a typical elementary school. The combination of sidewalks and pedestrian walkways meets the neighborhood and school pedestrian needs. 16 £1 VAlbES --------1'--< --'--->7---"""_, l,Ji.P,fOSCAP'e ctMcHJ COHCRElE PLAHlcN SIOEWM..K PER CtTY OF RaiTON $TN,OA,RO DETAILS rootl &m1£S N«l FOOl'. I I CD PARK AVENUE STREET SECTION 1 NOT TO SCN...E r-VAAE$ I I NORTH 4TH STREET AND ® NORTH 3RD STREET SECTIONS 2 NOT TO 6CAI.E ROW I' t-•oq:r,q1~=-r f ~ == c:eMENT~ \_. TYPE"D"LOH I Ol:Ma!INl:D aMB N«> C~ & GUTTER WAUC W11N REVERSE. OUTW< 0 ~~ 0 ~EN AVENUE NORTH SECTION Proposed Street Sections 17 FACILITIES, OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE CENTER CAPITAL PROJECTS OFFICE 7812 S 124th Street, Seattle, WA 98178-4830 425-204-4403, Fax 425-204-4476 NOTICE OF SEPA CONSULTATION The Renton School District ha.~ issued a SEPA Checklist and associated documents for comment prior to issuing a threshold determination for the corn;truction nf Sartori Elementary School. Project Name: Sartori Elementary School Name of Applicant: Renton School District No. 4()), Facilities Department Notice ofSEPA Consultaticm Posted: AugusL 24. 2016 Site Location: The school 'will be located at 315 Garden A ,·e N. Renton. WA. It is comprised of tax parcel numhers.: 7)6460-0170. - 0180. -0181, -0182, -018.,, -0184. and 722400-0620. -0615, -0610. -0600, -0590, -0580. -0595. -0605. It is lamed in Section O 17 Township 23 Range SE Project Description: The new Sartori Elementary St.:hooJ (SES) wJII be located on the site of Renton School District's Scutori Education Center (SEC) at J 15 Garden Ave Nin Renton. Washington. The site is a full block bounded by Park Ave N to the west. Garden Ave N to the cast, N 4th St to the north, and N 31d St to 1he south. The new school is heing developed as a choice school to house a specialized progrum and is anticipated to serve a maximum uf 650 students from kindergmlcn to 5th grade. The school will be the first elementary school in Renton School District that is in close proximi1y to the downtown core and is being developed as a civic and community asset Lo the city center where it is located. The choice program will have a neighborhtiod boundary and also draw studcnls from the whole school district. The 1ww three story building will be approximately 76.000 square feet in size and located fronting the western/Park A venue side of the block. In addition to classrooms. the school will ccmtain a gymnasium and library. The grounds will include a hardscape play area. play equipment on soft surfocc, and a grass play field that are designed for shared use wilh the communily. A puhlic plaza is located at the main entry al the corner of Park Ave N and N 3rd St. A total of approximately 80 vehicle parking: spac:cs will be provided in three parking areas. One parking lot is ac1.:c~.wd uff N 4th St and also allows for c:onvcniem parent drop-nff/pick¥up. Two visitor parking areas are accessed from N 3rd St. School buse:,, will park along Lhe west side of Garden Ave N for loading and unloading. Requested Apprm·als: City of Renton Pcrn1its/Approvals: Preliminary and Final Planned UniL Development; Conditional Use Permit: Site Plan Review: Clei.lring. Grading & Site Development Pe1mit: Building Permil; Fire Sy$tCm Permit: Electrical Permit Other Agency Permit!./Apprnval5: SEPA deterrnina1ion by the R~nton School District: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) by the Washington Slate Department or Ecology Identification of Existing Environmental DoL-umeots: The Construction Stonnw..ner General Notice of Intent wus published in the Seattle Times on April 25. 20 l 6 and May 2. :?.O t6: PBS Engineering and Environmental is preparing 1hc ncccssmy environmental docum~ntation thut is required for the site dcmoliliun permits; Geotcchnical Rcpo11 prepared hy Associated Earth Sciences. August. 2016: Arhori::;t Report prepared by Wa1>hington f'orcstry Consultants Augu:,.t 2016: Survey. prepared by AHBL, Inc. Febrna1)' 24. 2016: Tree Retention Worksheet and Plan prepmed by Wcisrm.m AssodaLe.~ August 2016: Transpoi1ation Technic;1J Report prepared by Heffron Transporlatinn. Inc. August 2016; Drainage Rcpo11 prepared by AHRL August 2016: Light Spill Analysis 10 he prepared. Copies of the documcnls pertaining to this SEPA consultation ure available for review during regular husiness hours al lhc Ren Inn School Distritl Facilities Dcpm1ment at 1he address listed below School District Contact: Rick Strac~c, Excrnl!Ye Uirectnr of Fuci!ilics. Maintenance. Operatinns. Safety. and Security De-signaled SEPA Responsihle Official Renton School Disttict 78 J 2 South 124th Street Sealtk. WA 98178-48)() Please submit your written comments by 5:00 pm, Sl1ptemher 23, 2016 lo Rick Stracke at the address above. Launching Learniflg to Last a Lifetime 7812 S 124'° Street, Seaffle Washington 98178 J p.425.204.4403 / 1.425.204.4476 www.rentonschools,us ··---..... RENTt)N ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST for RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 403 Sartori Elementary School August 24, 2016 Prepared For: Rick Stracke, Executive Director of Facilities Planning Renton School District No. 403 7812 South 1241 h Street Seattle, WA 98178-4830 Prepared By: Lisa Klein, AICP Associate Principal AHBL, Inc. 2160359.30 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY A. 1. 2. 3. BACKGROUND Name of proposed project, if applicable: Sartori Elementary School Name of applicant: Renton School District No. 403 Mailing address and telephone number of applicant and contact person: Owner/ Applicant: Contact: Address: Phone: Fax: Contact for SEPA: Address: Phone: Fax: E-mail: Renton School District No. 403 Mr. Rick Stracke, Executive Director of Facilities Planning 7812 South 1241h Street Seattle, WA 98178-4830 (425) 204-4403 (425) 204-4479 Lisa Klein AHBL, Inc. 2215 North 301h Street Tacoma, WA 98403 (253) 383-2422 (253) 383-2572 lklein@ahbl.com 4. Date checklist prepared: August 23, 2016 5. Agency requesting checklist: Renton School District No. 403 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction will occur in one phase beginning in the spring of 2017 and be complete by end of summer 2018. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Version Page 2 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. There are no other plans for the Sartori Elementary School other than what is fully described herein. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. • The Construction Stormwater General Notice of Intent was published in the Seattle Times on April 25, 2016 and May 2, 2016. • PBS Engineering and Environmental is preparing the necessary environmental documentation that is required for the site demolition permits. • Geotechnical Report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, dated August, 2016 • Arborist Report prepared by Washington Forestry Consultants dated August 17, 2016 • Survey, prepared by AHBL, Inc. dated February 24, 2016 • Tree Retention Worksheet and Plan prepared by Weisman Associates dated August 2016. • Transportation Technical Report prepared by Heffron Transportation, Inc. dated August 2016. • Drainage Report prepared by AHBL dated August 2016 • Light Spill Analysis to be prepared 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. There are no other applications affecting this property at this time. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. City of Renton Permits/ Approvals: • Preliminary and Final Planned Unit Development • Conditional Use Permit • Lot Consolidation • Clearing, Grading & Site Development Permit • Building Permit • Fire System Permit • Electrical Permit Other Agency Permits/ Approvals: SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Version Page 3 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) • SEPA determination by the Renton School District • National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) by the Washington State Department of Ecology 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. The new Sartori Elementary School (SES) will be located on the site of Renton School District's Sartori Education Center (SEC) at 315 Garden Ave N in Renton, Washington. The site is a full block bounded by Park Ave N to the west, Garden Ave N to the east, N 4th St to the north, and N 3rd St to the south. The new school is being developed as a choice school to house specialized programs and is anticipated to serve a maximum of 650 students from kindergarten to 5th grade. The school will be the first elementary school in Renton School District that is in close proximity to the downtown core and is being developed as a civic and community asset to the city center. The choice program will have a neighborhood boundary and also draw students from the whole school district. The new three story building will be approximately 76,000 square feet in size and located fronting the western/Park Avenue side of the block. In addition to classrooms, the school will contain a gymnasium and library. The grounds will include a hardscape play area, play equipment on soft surface, and a grass play field that are designed for shared use with the community. A public plaza is located at the main entry at the corner of Park Ave N and N 3"' St. A total of approximately 80 vehicle parking spaces will be provided in three parking areas. One parking lot is accessed off N 4th St and also allows for convenient parent drop-off/pick-up. Two visitor parking areas are accessed from N 3'd St. School buses will park along the west side of Garden Ave N for loading and unloading. 12. location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should SEPA Environmental checklist jWAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Version Page 4 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) B. 1. submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The project is located at 315 Garden Ave N in the NW Quarter of Section 17, Township 23 North, Range 05 East in Renton, Washington. It is comprised of the following tax parcel numbers: 756460-0170, -0180, -0181, -0182, -0183, -0184, and 722400-0620, -0615, -0610, -0600, -0590, -0580, -0595, -0605 A copy of the legal description is available upon request. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one):@ rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: The property is generally flat. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Less than 5%. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960} May 2014 Version Page 5 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, mulch)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. As detailed in the Geotechnical Report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, soils identified beneath asphalt and sod/topsoil generally consist of bedded sandy gravel, clean sand, silty sand, clayey and lean silt with occasional lenses of peat and other organics scattered throughout the soil column. These sediments are likely representative of recent alluvium deposited in former channels of the Cedar River. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No, there are no indications of unstable soil in the vicinity. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. There will be approximately 700 cubic yards of cut and 4,500 cubic yards of fill for project construction. Filling, excavation, and grading is limited to that associated with the removal of existing underground utilities and impervious surfaces and the creation of grades to accommodate stormwater conveyance. Grading will be limited to slight contouring at areas of backfill and of existing minor slopes of <5%. Resulting excavations will be backfilled with approved fill per City of Renton standard specifications, to be proposed by the Contractor and approved by the Owner. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Yes, erosion could occur because of clearing and construction. However, the implementation of a temporary sediment and erosion control plan using Best Management Practices should mitigate impacts. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Version Page 6 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) It is anticipated that approximately 65.6 percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after the completion of the proposed improvements. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: 2. AIR The applicant is required to obtain a Department of Ecology General Permit to discharge Stormwater associated with construction activity. The project will comply with Erosion and Sediment Control guidelines set in the City of Renton's stormwater manual. AHBL will prepare a Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (TESC) and a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SW PPP) to meet the 12 Required Elements per the NPDES permit and the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual, as amended by the City of Renton. Specific measures to reduce or control erosion include clearly marking the clearing limits with high visibility fencing; stabilizing construction entrances located off N 3rd and N 41h Streets and Garden Ave N. Stabilized construction roads and parking will also be provided onsite. Stormwater flow rates will be controlled through temporary sediment traps or ponds, as well as through permanent stormwater control facilities. Perimeter protection will be provided through silt fencing. Sediment controls may also include filtration or chemical treatments, if necessary. Temporary and permanent soil stabilization will occur through seeding/sodding, mulching, and plastic covering. Slopes will be protected through interceptor swales and check dams. Inlet protection will be provided to prevent discharge of sediment-laden stormwater offsite. All temporary proposed drainage channels will be stabilized and protected through outlet protection. The contractor will implement, inspect, and maintain all BMPs on a regular basis. a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Construction would result in a temporary increase in air pollution, including emissions from equipment and dust from construction activities. Dust controls will include watering soils to prevent blowing of dust. Construction vehicles will be turned off when not in use to help control emissions. SEPA Environmental checklist {WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Version Page 7 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Construction activities and equipment will follow the appropriate regulations for controlling emissions to the air. Post-construction emissions would include emissions from vehicle trips associated with the elementary school use and maintenance equipment used for the grounds and field. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. There are no known off-site sources of emissions or odors observed that might effect this proposal. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: 3. WATER Potential BMPs include using water sprays or other non-toxic dust control methods on unpaved roadways, minimize vehicle speed while traveling on unpaved surfaces, prevent the tracking out of mud onto public streets, cover soil piles when practical, and minimize work during periods of high winds. Additionally, to minimize air quality and odor issues caused by tailpipe emissions, BMPs will be used. Such BMPs include maintaining engines of construction equipment while also minimizing the idling of construction equipment. During the school bus loading and unloading times, school buses will be turned off to limit emissions caused by idling. a. Surface: 1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No, there is no surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site. 2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Not applicable. SEPA Environmental checklist {WAC 197-11-9601 May 2014 Version Page 8 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) 3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None. 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. According to Map Number 53033C0977F of the FEMA National Flood Insurance Program's Flood Insurance Rate Maps dated May 16, 1995, the proposed project is not within a floodplain. 6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste material to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground Water: 1. Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 2. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals ... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No waste material will be discharged into the ground. The site is connected to sanitary sewer. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Version Page 9 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) c. Water Runoff (including stormwater): 1. Describe the source of runoff (including stormwater) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Stormwater runoff will be collected through a series of pipes and precast concrete catch basins. Flow control will be provided by a series of detention pipes. Additional onsite stormwater management will include Filterra stormwater vaults and catch basin storm filters. The site ultimately discharges to the Cedar River and Lake Washington Watershed via the public conveyance system. The site is within Zone 1 of the Aquifer Protection Zone (APZ). The City of Renton prohibits all facilities that may allow infiltration within Zone 1 of the APZ. 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: As noted above, the project will utilize a storm drainage system in accordance with the City of Renton's drainage requirements in effect at the time of the project application. During construction, a storm water pollution plan and associated BMPs will be implemented to manage storm water properly. 4. PLANTS a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site. ~ Deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other: .lL Evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other: ~_Shrubs .lL Grass Pasture _ Crop or grain _ Orchards, vineyards, or other permanent crops SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Version Page 10 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) _ Wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other: _ Water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other _ Other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? According to the Arborist Report, there are 41 trees of 17 species on the site that ranged from 4 to 28 inches in diameter. They include 10 street trees. The trees range in health from poor to very good. All onsite trees will be removed for project construction. Nine street trees will be retained. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. To our knowledge, there are no threatened or endangered plant species on or near the project site. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: There are no significant woodlands or wildlife habitats on the subject property. Nine street trees along the frontages of Park Ave N, N 3rd St and Garden Ave N will be retained. Natural vegetative features will be rehabilitated upon the completion of the PUD by including a majority of native plant species within the landscape plan, with the remaining plantings adaptive to the Pacific Northwest. The site perimeter will be landscaped as will the parking lot and building perimeter. Around the perimeter there will be 100% ground coverage consisting of a mix of trees, shrubs, and groundcovers. The plaza at the corner of N 3rd St and Park Ave N will include planters and seating. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. None known or identified. 5. ANIMALS a. List any birds and other animals, which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include: _ Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other _ Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: small rodents _ Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Version Page 11 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. To our knowledge, there are no threatened or endangered animal species on or near the project site. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. The site is located within the Pacific Flyway for migratory birds. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: No measures are proposed. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. None known. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. The school will utilize electric power and natural gas to maintain normal operations once the project is completed. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. There will be no impact on the potential to utilize solar energy for neighboring properties as a result of this proposal. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Energy conservation features include a high-efficiency heat pump system with heat recovery, LED lighting with occupancy and daylighting controls, high-performance building envelope system, low-e glazing, and inclusion of weather vestibules at main entries 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Version Page 12 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) No. Any identified contaminants would have been removed as part of site demolition. 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. Underground fuel storage tanks existing at the project site from the previously existing school. The underground storage tanks were removed during previous construction, and appropriate identification and mitigation measures have been taken. 2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. There are no gas transmission pipelines present on or within the immediate vicinity of the project site. Existing natural gas mains are located within Garden Ave N. Proposed gas service will be coordinated with Puget Sound Energy (PSE). PSE will construct the service up to the meter and the Contractor will be responsible for trenching, bedding, backfill, and street restoration. 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. Chemicals typical of construction activities will be used during the construction process, including gasoline for vehicle use. No other toxic or hazardous chemicals will be stored onsite after construction. 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. No special emergency services will be required other than those normally provided such as police and fire protection. 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None are anticipated to be required. Specialized erosion and sediment control measures will be implemented if contaminated soils are detected during the construction process. Standard dust control measures will be implemented to mitigate dust emissions resulting from construction activities. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Version Page 13 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) b. Noise. 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)? There are no off-site sources of noise that will impact this proposal. The primary source of noise in the area is generated from vehicular traffic adjacent to the property. Speeds during school hours on these roads are limited to 20 mph and will help to reduce vehicular noise. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Temporary, short-term noise impacts typical of construction projects will occur with operation of equipment during construction. Noise and vibration will occur specifically with the installation of the pile foundation system. Construction will normally occur during the hours subject to the appropriate City of Renton ordinance. Construction operations will occur during weekdays between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 pm. Work on Saturdays will be restricted to the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. No work will occur on Sundays. Hauling hours will be restricted to the hours between 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved in advance by the Development Services Division. Long term noise will be typical of that associated with an elementary school, including vehicular and school bus noise, which is most prevalent at school start and stop times. Truck deliveries will be minimal. The noise of children at play in the outdoor areas will occur during various times throughout the school day. 3) Proposed measure to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: To mitigate general noise impacts during the construction phases, measures such as locating stationary equipment away from receiving properties, erecting portable noise barriers around loud stationary equipment, limiting construction hours to the appropriate City of Renton ordinance, turn off idling construction equipment, require contractors to rigorously maintain all equipment, and train construction crews to avoid unnecessarily loud actions near noise-sensitive areas will be employed. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197·11·960) May 2014 Version Page 14 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Once the school is under operation, the school buses will be turned off to limit idling during the load/unload period. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. At the time of application the site contains residential and commercial uses, however the remaining structures on the project site will be demolished in the fall of 2016. Current uses of adjacent properties include the following: East: Garden Ave N -single family residential uses North: N 4th St-the Renton School District Transportation facility South: N 3'a St-single and multifamily residential uses West: Park Ave N -commercial, single and multifamily residential uses b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forestlands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forestland of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forestland tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? There is no indication of the project site being used as working farmlands or forestlands prior to its use as the Sartori Education Center, single family residential and commercial/business. 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: No, the proposal will not impact, nor be impacted by, farm or forest land operations. c. Describe any structures on the site. At the time of preparing this SEPA Checklist there are two residences, a small commercial building containing a food mart and a burrito restaurant, and a dog grooming business. They are located at 314, 330, 336 and 350 Park Ave N. SEPA Environmental checklist {WAC 197-11-960} May 2014 Version Page 15 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Yes, the structures listed in "c:!' above will be removed as part of the new school construction. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The site contains four zoning classifications: RlO-Residential 10 du/ac RB -Residential 8 du/ac CN -Commercial Neighborhood CA-Commercial Arterial f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Residential High Density, Residential Medium Density and Commercial Mixed Use g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. The property is located in Zone 1 Aquifer Protection Zone. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? The school is expected to employ 60 people. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Two existing residents will move offsite to make way for project construction. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: No measures are proposed. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Renton's Comprehensive Plan calls for growth, which will add to the existing 13,000 students in preschool -12th grade. Overall, this project serves to meet the projected growth needs for the City and demonstrates SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Version Page 16 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) consistency with zoning code and Comprehensive Plan, as well as the stated purpose in the PUD and CUP regulations. The proposed project spans over three land use designations, residential medium density, residential high density and commercial mixed use, which is consistent with the adjacent land use designations. The property also contains four zoning districts that are consistent with the adjacent property zoning (i.e. properties across the street). Each zoning district has distinct development standards, and thus deviations are required. However, these deviations do not conflict with the intent of the zoning code or land use element of the comprehensive plan. The R-8 and R-10 residential zones are categorized as medium density in the comprehensive plan, which encourages access to service, as well as public spaces, gathering places, and civic amenities. The Commercial Arterial (CA) zone and Commercial Neighborhood (CN) zones are categorized as commercial mixed use in the comprehensive plan. The CA zone calls for enhanced site planning, pedestrian orientation, efficient parking lot design and coordinated access; all of which are improved by the new site design. The Commercial Neighborhood (CN) zone calls for uses that serve the larger area, as well as the immediate area, and are compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood. The proposed project adds service to the area by providing an educational facility and open space areas for public use. Overall, the project is designed to match its neighborhood context and meet future growth needs, while providing a public amenity to the adjacent residential neighborhood. Requested deviations from development standards include yard setback minimums, building height/number of floors, tree retention and impervious surface coverage. Deviations in one zoning category are needed to enhance the overall site design and utility, such as adequate circulation and continuous open space. As an educational/institutional use, the setback standards for detached residential homes should not apply. The height deviation from two to three stories is not expected to have an adverse impact on adjacent properties or community character due to increased setback distances. The taller structure also reduces the building footprint maximizing area available for open space and recreational use. The site overall does not propose an excess of impervious surface, and parking areas are screened by the addition of street trees. zz SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960} May 2014 Version Page 17 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) m. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: No measures are proposed-there are no agricultural or forest lands within the immediate vicinity of the proposal. 9. HOUSING· a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None, there is not a residential component to this proposal. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Two middle income residences will be eliminated. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: No measures are proposed. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Approximately 50 feet. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? There are no views in the neighborhood that will be altered. The view of the property itself will change from a mixture of uses with a variety of structures of varying condition to a new state of the art educational facility with outside play areas and landscaping. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: The new school will incorporate many aesthetically pleasing attributes, including street trees, perimeter landscaping, interior landscaping and new building construction dominated by masonry and windows. The corner plaza at Park Ave N and N 3rd St will be constructed with textured or stamped concrete and contains trees for shade and seating areas. It is intended to be an inviting place for after school community use. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 version Page 18 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly oc.cur? Light or glare will be produced after dark from building and parking lot lighting. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard, interfere with views, or affect wildlife? No, lighting will be produced to enhance safety. It will be directed downward so as not to interfere with views or provide glare. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? There are no off-site sources of light or glare that will impact the proposal. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Lighting fixtures will be shielded and lighting cast downward to reduce light and glare impacts. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Liberty Park is located two blocks south of the project. There is an existing playfield onsite associated with the Sartori Education Center that will be replaced with a new playfield. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The proposed project will temporarily displace the playfield at Sartori Education Center during construction. The playfield will be reconstructed as part of the proposed project to include hardscape play area, play equipment on soft surface, and a grass play field, which are open space and recreational facilities for both student and community use. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or application, if any: A portion of the existing Sartori playfield will remain open to the public during the majority of the construction project, for community access. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197~11~960) May 2014 Version Page 19 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers located on or near the site? If so, specifically describe. The Sartori Education Center was built originally in 1929 with additions in 1939, 1948, and 1955 and renovations in 1969 and 1980. The building is not listed on any preservation registers. b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. There are no landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use/occupation on the project site. The Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Historic Property Inventory Report was reviewed to assess the presence of historic features. c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. The applicant reviewed the City's maps and data for the site, as well as the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Historic Property Inventory Report. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. If cultural or archeological objects are found during site preparation work, the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation will be notified, and appropriate measures will be taken. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 version Page 20 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) 14. TRANSPORTATION A detailed Transportation Technical Report (Heffron Transportation, Inc., August 2016) has been prepared for the project that documents the existing and future transportation system in the site vicinity, details trip generation estimates for the project, and evaluates the project's impacts. a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any: The site consists of 14 parcels bounded by N 4th St on the north, Park Ave N on the west, Garden Ave N on the east, and N 3"' St on the south. The new school is proposed to include two parking lots-one at the north end of the site and one at the south end. Visitors and staff would access the southern lot from a driveway on N 3'd St; additional staff parking and parent-vehicle load/unload would be directed to the north lot with access from two one- way driveways on N 4th St. School bus load/unload is proposed curbside on the west side of Garden Ave N. b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? King County Metro Transit provides bus service directly to the project site with one stop located on Park Ave N at N 3"' St (serving northbound buses) and two stops on Park Ave N at N 4'h St (one serving southbound buses on the south side of the intersection and one serving northbound buses on the north side of the intersection). The three stops are all served by Routes 167, 240, and 342. There are also stops located about 0.35 mile to the west on Logan Ave N south of N 4th St served by Metro's RapidRide F Line. There are stops about Y.-mile to the north served by Sound Transit's ST Express Bus Service Routes 560 and 566. c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non- project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? The new elementary school will have approximately 80 parking spaces onsite. The existing school use has approximately 83 striped stalls; the existing supermarket/restaurant site has a large paved area with about 17 marked spaces and additional unmarked pavement that can be used for parking. Most of the single family residences also have driveways and/or garages that serve on-site parking. The proposal will eliminate the parking SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960} May 2014 Version Page 21 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) associated with the existing uses as part of the demolition phase of the project. d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). The City of Renton will require frontage improvements and right-of-way dedications along all four sides of the site. These improvements will include new curbs (at existing locations), 8-foot wide planters along Park Ave N, N 3rd St, and N 4th St, and new sidewalks of varying widths along all sides. Sidewalk would be 12-feet wide along Park Ave N; 8-feet wide along N 3rd and N 4th Streets, and 10 feet wide along Garden Ave N. All intersections would require new curb returns with radii of 35 feet at all corners and perpendicular curb ramps will be required at each corner. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. The proposed project will not use or occur within the immediate vicinity of water, or rail transportation. The Renton Municipal Airport is located approximately 0.5 miles to the west of the property, but the project will not use this facility. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and non passenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? Based on standard rates published for Elementary Schools (Land Use 520) in the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, the project is anticipated to generate 1,170 vehicle trips per day (585 in, 585 out). Peak volumes typically occur during morning arrival and afternoon dismissal when the school is estimated to generate 400 trips (225 in, 175 out) and 240 trips (105 in, 135 out), respectively. Based on information provided by the District about truck activity, there are typically two (2) trash pick-ups per week and one food delivery per week. As a result, less than O.S% of the trips are expected to be trucks. In addition, based on data and projections provide by Renton School District Transportation staff, the site would be served by up to 15 school buses (11 full sized and 4 small) during arrival and dismissal. School buses would represent about 5% of the total daily trips. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Version Page 22 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. This proposal will not impact, nor be impacted by, the movement of agricultural and forest products within the vicinity of the project site. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Several measures have been recommended to reduce and control transportation impacts including physical improvements to the adjacent roadway network and operational measures. Details about each can be found in the referenced Transportation Technical Report: Roadway Markings & Signage: • Work with the City of Renton to install lane channelization markings (painted arrows) and/or street signs on N 4th St approaching Park Ave N. • Coordinate with the City of Renton to confirm the locations, extent, and signage of the school-bus load/unload zone along the west side of Garden Ave N. • Coordinate with the City to review walk routes and determine if any changes should be made to crosswalk locations, signage, or pavement markings. Operational Measures: • Develop a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) • Coordinate with the City of Renton to enforce school zone speed limits and to locate and staff crossing guard locations • Develop a neighborhood Event Communication Plan • Require the selected contractor to develop a Construction Management Plan (CMP) 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. There will not be any increased need for public services beyond that which already exists on the site. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197~11~960) May 2014 Version Page 23 of 24 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any: No special measures are proposed. 16. UTILITIES C. a. b. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other: Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity, which might be needed. Water and Sewer will be provided by the City of Renton Electricity and Natural Gas will be provided by Puget Sound Energy Cable, Internet and Telephone Service will be provided by Comcast or Centurylink SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. '-;~?JC /!ftL---SIGNATURE: __ ?I __ I _________________________ _ NAME OF SIGN EE: Lisa Klein POSITION AND AGENCY/ORGANIZATION: Agent for the Renton School District. No.403 DATE SUBMITIED: August 23, 2016 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Version Page 24 of 24 Neighborhood Detail Map Lege nd c::J Sartori E lementary Sch ool S ite Parcels 0 50100 200 -c:::=--• F ee t N A ' Sartori Elementary School PPUD Application Materials #17 Design District "D" Overlay-Statement of Compliance The site for Sartori Elementary School is located with Design District D. The project meets the requirements of the design district as follows: Renton-District D Design Requirements: 1. Site Design and Building Location a. Site Design and Street Pattern The development of the project is limited to the curbs at the bounding streets. No new streets are proposed within the boundaries. On-site vehicle circulation is limited to parking lot drive aisles only. b. Building Location and Orientation i. The front entry of a building shall not be oriented to a drive aisle, but instead a public or private street or landscaped pedestrian-only courtyard. The front/main entry of Sartori Elementary does not orient to a drive aisle -it is oriented to a pedestrian plaza at the corner of Park Ave N and N 3'd St. ii. The availability of natural light (both directed and reflected) and direct sun exposure to nearby buildings and open space (except parking areas) shall be considered when siting structures. The building has been sited in order to minimize impact on light and sun exposure to adjacent properties. By orienting the building north/south, the impact on properties to the north and the south of the site is minimal. The building is sited 40'-0" from the edge of curb on the west side of the site (Park Ave N) which does not impact properties to the west. The play areas/open space for the school have been located east of the building so there is no solar impact to properties to the east. iii. Building shall be oriented to the street with clear connections to the sidewalk. The building is oriented to face Park Ave N and N 3'd St. There is a direct connection between the main entry and the pedestrian plaza at this intersection. iv. The front entry of a building shall be oriented to the street or a landscaped pedestrian-only courtyard. The front/main entry of Sartori Elementa'j' is oriented to a pedestrian plaza at the corner of Park Ave N and N 3' St. 1 c. Building Entries i. The primary entrance of each building shall be: 1. Located on the fa<;ade facing a street, shall be prominent, visible from the street, connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk, and include human-scale elements. The front/main entry of Sartori Elementary is oriented to a pedestrian plaza at the corner of Park Ave N and N 3'a St. The plaza may include a grove of smaller scale trees, along with seating and planters to encourage use of this space. 2. Made visibly prominent by incorporating architectural features such as a fa9ade overhang, trellis, large entry doors, and/or ornamental lighting. The main entry is located under a 2-story height overhang and a lower covered walkway. Sunshades on the view glazing from the library and frosted glazing from the gym provide views of activity within the building, indicating activity beyond. Large doors with specialty lighting further invite users into the building. ii. Building entries from a street shall be clearly marked with canopies, architectural elements, ornamental lighting, or landscaping and include weather protection at least 4W wide. Buildings that are taller than 30' in height shall also ensure that the weather protection is proportional to the distance above ground level. Fa<;ade overhang and canopies are located 10'-8" above grade to ensure that they are providing weather protection iii. Building entries from a parking lot shall be subordinate to those related to the street. The main entry at the corner of Park Ave N and N 3'a St is the most architecturally prominent and will have clear building sign age. Other entries from the staff/visitor parking lot which serve operation of the elementary school have simple overhang and/or canopies for weather protection. iv. Features such as entries, lobbies, and display windows shall be oriented to a street or a pedestrian-oriented space; otherwise, screening or decorative features should be incorporated. The main entry and lobby/reception area of the school are oriented to the pedestrian plaza at the southwest corner of the site. v. Multiple buildings on the same site shall direct views to building entries by providing a continuous network of pedestrian paths and open spaces that incorporate landscaping. A single building is being proposed on the site, thus not applicable. vi. Ground floor units shall be directly accessible from the street or an open space such as a courtyard or garden that is accessible from the street. There are no housing units proposed in this project. vii. Secondary access (not fronting on a street) shall have weather protection at least 4W wide over the entrance or other similar indicator of access. Secondary access points at the north and east sides of the building are located beneath 4'-0' fa<;ade overhangs to provide weather protection. viii. Pedestrian access shall be provided to the building from property edges, adjacent lots, abutting street intersections, crosswalks, and transit stops. New 2 • sidewalk is proposed at all property edges of the block. Hard scape pathways connect these frontage sidewalks to all portions of the site. d. Transition to Surrounding Environment i. At least ONE of the following design elements shall be used: 1. Building proportions, including step-backs on upper levels in accordance with the surrounding planned and existing land use forms. Outdoor learning porches provide step-backs at portion of upper levels. 2. Building articulation to divide a larger architectural element into smaller increments. The fa~ade throughout the building is articulated vertically between the ground floor and upper floors. Upper floors are articulated with 30'-50' wide recessed areas and material transitions. Program areas along the south fa~ade project as separate volumes with different material expression. Areas of glazing respond to program areas in the building and are further articulated through the use of vertical fin sunshades. 3. Roof lines, roof pitches, and roof shapes designed to reduce apparent bulk and transition with existing development. Roof line and shapes step down in scale from the main entry and classroom wing toward commons/gym volume, kitchen, and service yard as a response to lower scale existing development to the east. 4. The administrator may require increased setbacks at the side or rear of a building in order to reduce the bulk and scale of larger buildings and/or so that sunlight reached adjacent yards. The placement of the building oriented north to south on the site allows for natural light and sun exposure through the majority of the site. By providing a 20' setback from the line of Right of way dedication along Park Ave N, the height of the structure does not limit natural light at properties across Park Ave N. This setback also reduces the bulk of the structure along the Park Ave N as it transitions to a civic boulevard. e. Service Element Location and Design i. Service elements shall be located and designed to minimize the impacts on the pedestrian environment and adjacent and/or abutting uses. Service elements shall be concentrated and located where they are accessible to service vehicles and convenient for tenant use. The service area keeps service elements secure from pedestrian walkways and screened visually from view of the street. The service yard is located directly adjacent to the kitchen and receiving area of the school and is minimized in size to the functions necessary for daily operation of a public school. Access for delivery and service vehicles is accommodated while screening view into the yard from pedestrian and vehicle entry points. A planting area will be located between the southern wall of the service yard enclosure and the adjacent pedestrian walkway. At the north side of the service yard, the screen wall will provide durable ball-wall surface at the covered play area. 3 ii. In addition to standard enclosure requirements, garbage, recycling collection, and utility areas shall be enclosed on all sides, include a roof and be screened around their perimeter by a wall or fence and have self-closing doors. The service yard will be enclosed by a perimeter masonry wall consistent with the fac;ade of the adjacent gymnasium/commons building form. At the front (east) side of the garbage/recycle collection area, gates will be used to provide screening while allowing access. This area will have a roof. iii. Service enclosures shall be made of masonry, ornamental metal or wood, or some combination of the three. Service yard enclosure will be made of masonry consistent with the fac;ade design as well as fencing. iv. If the service area is adjacent to a street, pathway, or pedestrian-oriented space, a landscaped panting strip, minimum 3' wide, shall be located on three sides of such facility. In order to maximize play area for students and allow for safe pedestrian circulation from the visitor lot at the southeast corner of the site, the north and south sides of the service yard have concrete pedestrian areas adjacent. The east side of the service yard will have a planter area. f. Gateway-The Sartori Elementary School site is not located at a gateway, thus not applicable. 2. Parking and Vehicular Access a. Surface Parking i. Parking shall be located so that no surface parking is located between: 1. A building and the front property line. No parking is located between the building and the front property line at Park Ave N. 2. A building and the side property line. Parking has been minimized on the side property line and the building. Between the building and N 3rd St there are 8 parking spaces. The spaces are located to provide convenient access to the main entry of the school. The parking area will be denoted with concrete paving and appear to be an extension of the plaza. After school hours these spaces will not be needed and can be used to expand the plaza area. ii. Parking shall be located so that it screened from surrounding streets by buildings, landscaping, and/or gateway features as dictated by location. Parking is screened from surrounding streets by landscaping. iii. Parking lot lighting shall not spill onto adjacent or abutting properties. Parking lot light fixtures have been selected to control cut-off to adjacent properties and will be controlled on a time clock to be off during night hours. Frontage lighting will be designed per City of Renton standards. iv. All surface parking lots shall be landscaped to reduce their visual impact. Landscape buffers are provided at perimeter of all parking to screen from surrounding streets. 4 v. Wherever possible, parking should be configured into small units, connected by landscaped areas to provide on-site buffering from visual impacts. Parking is divided between a small lot at the southeast corner and a lot at the north side of the site to divide the impact on the site. Where parking is located at side property lines it has been designed to be a compact arrangement with regularly placed landscape and pedestrian pathways to break up large fields of parking stalls. vi. Access to parking modules should be provided by public or private local streets with sidewalks on both sides where possible, rather than internal drive aisle. Parking areas at the north and south sides of the site are accessed via N 4th St and N 3'd St respectively and are not connected by an internal drive aisle. vii. Where multiple driveways cannot be avoided, provide landscaping to separate and minimize their impact on the streetscape. There is a 20'-0" landscape separation between the entrance and exit drive aisles on N 4th St. b. Vehicular Access i. Vehicular access to parking lots shall not impede or interrupt pedestrian mobility. Vehicle access to parking lots has been minimized to avoid interruption to pedestrian access at perimeter sidewalks. Where located, curb ramps and visual indicators are provided to promote pedestrian safety. ii. Access to parking lot shall be from alleys, when available. If not available, access shall occur at the side streets. Access to parking lots occurs from N 41h St and N 3'd St. There is no alley. No vehicular access occurs from Park Ave N and Garden Ave N. 3. Pedestrian Environment a. Pedestrian Circulation i. A pedestrian circulation system of pathways that are clearly delineated and connect buildings, open space, and parking areas with sidewalk system and abutting properties shall be provided. 1. Pathways shall be located so that there are clear sight lines, to increase safety. Building placement and site design allows clear sight lines at pedestrian pathways. 2. Pathways shall be an all-weather or permeable walking surface, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed surface is appropriate for the anticipated number of users and complementary to the design of the development. All pedestrian pathways are concrete or asphalt. ii. Pathways within parking area shall be provided and differentiated by material or texture from abutting paving materials. Permeable materials are encouraged. The pathways shall be perpendicular to the applicable building fagade and no greater than 150' apart. Design of parking areas is such that pathways within are minimal. Pathways will be striped as a visual indicator at these limited areas. 5 iii. Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of buildings shall be sufficient width to accommodate anticipated numbers of users. Specifically: 1. Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of mixed use and retail buildings 100' or more in width (measured along the fa9ade) shall provide sidewalks at least 12' in width. The pathway shall include an 8' minimum unobstructed walking surface. The sidewalk between Park Ave N and the building will be 12'-0". 2. Interior pathways shall be provided and shall vary in width to establish a hierarchy. The widths shall be based on the intended number of users; to be no smaller than 5' and no greater than 12'. Internal pedestrian pathways are provided between all parking areas, play fields and building entries. Pathways are clearly delineated in material and composed in such a way that allows for clear site lines. The surface of all pedestrian walkways will be concrete or asphalt to provide an all-weather and durable walking surface. iv. Mid-block connections between buildings shall be provided. Multiple buildings are not proposed as part of this project, thus not applicable. b. Pedestrian Amenities i. Architectural elements that incorporate plants, particularly at building entrance, in publicly accessible spaces and at facades along streets, shall be provided. At the pedestrian plaza adjacent to the main area, landscaping will be used to break up the scale of the space. At all other publicly accessible pedestrian spaces, planting areas with small scale plantings will be provided as well as play equipment as shown on site plan. ii. Amenities such as outdoor group seating, benches, transit shelters, fountains, and public art shall be provided. Outdoor group seating and/or benches will be provided. 1. Site furniture shall be made of durable, vandal-and weather-resistant materials that do not retain rainwater and can be reasonably maintained over an extended period of time. Site furniture will be pre-finished metal or cast-in-place concrete designed to not retain rainwater. 2. Site furniture and amenities shall not impede or block pedestrian access to public spaces or building entrances. Site furniture will not block pedestrian access to entries or public spaces. iii. Pedestrian overhead weather protection in the form of awnings, marquees, canopies, or building overhangs shall be provided. These elements shall be a minimum of 4W wide along at least 75% of the length of the building fa9ade facing the street, a maximum height of 15' above the ground elevation, and no lower than 8' above ground level. There is a fa9ade overhang and canopy at the N 3"' St fa9ade along 75% of the fa9ade elevation. iv. Transit shelters, bicycle racks, benches, trash receptacles, and other street furniture should be provided. Bicycle racks are located adjacent to the main entry at the south side of the building. 6 v. Street amenities such as outdoor group seating, kiosks, fountains, and public art should be provided. Outdoor seating will be provided. vi. Architectural elements that incorporate plants, such as fa9ade-mounted panting boxes or trellises or ground-related or hanging containers are encouraged, particularly at building entrances, in publicly accessible spaces, and at facades along pedestrian-oriented streets. At the pedestrian plaza adjacent to the main area, landscape will be used to break up the scale of the space. At all other publicly accessible pedestrian spaces, planting areas with small scale plantings will be provided as well as play equipment as shown on site plan. 4. Landscaping, Recreation Areas and Common Open Space a. Landscaping i. Street trees are required and shall be located between the curb edge and building, as determined by the city of Renton. Street trees will be provided at all frontage landscape areas as required by City of Renton. ii. On designated pedestrian-oriented streets, street trees shall be installed with trees grates. Tree grates will be included as required by City of Renton. iii. Surface parking areas shall be screened by landscaping in order to reduce views of parked cards from the streets. Such landscaping shall be at least 1 O' in width as measured from the sidewalk. Surface parking is screened by landscaping at perimeter areas. An average 10'-0" width is provided at all locations. b. Recreation Areas and Common Open Space i. Development located at street intersections should provide pedestrian-oriented space at the street corner to emphasize pedestrian activity. A pedestrian plaza is provided at the corner of Park Ave N and N 3'' St. ii. All buildings and developments with over 30,000 SF of nonresidential uses (excludes parking garage and floorplate areas) shall provide pedestrian- oriented space. 1. The pedestrian-oriented space shall be provided according to the following formula: 1% of the site area + 1% of the gross building area, at minimum The pedestrian plaza is approximately 7,800 s.f. which exceeds 1% of the site area + 1 % of the gross building area (approx. 3,100 s.f. when combined). Additional pedestrian-oriented spaces are included on the site in the form of large playground and field spaces, covered play area, and throughout with widened pedestrian walkways at parent and bus drop-off areas. 2. The pedestrian-oriented space shall include all of the following: a. Visual and pedestrian access to the abutting structure from the public right-of-way or a non-vehicular courtyard. Visual and 7 pedestrian access to the school building is provided through the pedestrian plaza. b. Paved walking surface of either concrete or approved unit paving. Walking surface will be concrete or asphalt. c. On-site or building-mounted lighting providing at least 4 foot- candles (average) on the ground. To be provided d. At least 3 lineal feet of seating area or one individual seat per 60 SF of plaza area or open space. Seating area at pedestrian plaza will be coordinated with other potential uses of the space for flexibility and to promote use. 3. The following area shall not count as pedestrian-oriented space: a. The minimum required walkways. b. Area that abut landscape parking lots, chain link fences, blank walls, and/or dumpsters or service areas. The area of the pedestrian plaza does not include these types of spaces. 4. Outdoor storage -Outdoor storage for PE equipment and other items used for elementary school operation is provided beneath the covered play structure. iii. Public plazas shall be provided at intersections identified in the Commercial Arterial Zone Public Plaza Locations Map and as listed below. A pedestrian plaza is provided at the corner of Park Ave N and N 3•d St. iv. The plaza shall measure no less than 1,000 SF with a minimum dimension of 20' on one side abutting the sidewalk. Pedestrian plaza is approximately 7,800 s.f. Dimensions abutting sidewalks are 85-100'. v. The public plaza must be landscaped consistent with RMC 4-4-070, including at minimum street tress, decorative paving, pedestrian-scaled lighting, and seating. RMC 4-4-070 standards will be used in developing pedestrian plaza design. vi. Public plazas are to be provided at North Renton Area. A large pedestrian plaza is provided at the corner of Park Ave N and N 3•d St. A smaller pedestrian area is provided approximately 130' south of the corner of Park Ave N and N 41 " St. 5. Building Architectural Design a. Building Character and Massing i. Building facades shall be modulated and/or articulated to reduce the apparent size of buildings, break up long walls, add visual interest, and enhance the character of the neighborhood. Two interlocking forms bring together volume and material to create modulated facades. Areas of masonry provide a durable base surface and reference the history of buildings on the site. Metal clad classroom wing is a reflection of the energy of elementary students. Accent materials, glazing, and projected volumes 8 further articulate these forms. Window placement along the fa9ade creates a rhythm which expresses classrooms within the building and also provides scale breakdown of the fa~ade. ii. All building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than 40'. The building form has been simplified to maximize site utilization for student use and support safety of the site. A compact form allows for as much site area as possible to be provided for student play and pedestrian circulation. The exterior architectural expression of the building is a direct reflection of the building's internal organization and massing, and its relationship to the site. Expanses of glazing are located to highlight the symbolic and physical importance of community assets such as library, commons, and gymnasium spaces. iii. Modulations shall be a minimum of 2' deep, 16' in height, and 8' in width. Large areas of modulation throughout the design of the building form have at least these dimensions. iv. Alternative methods to shape a building such as angled or curved fa9ade elements, off-set planes, wing walls, and terracing will be considered' provided, that the intent of this Section is met. The following methods are used in the architectural expression: • Angled elements: Cornice projection above the main entry is angled to create dynamic movement within the building form. • Off-set planes: Wide recessed portions of the fa~ade at the east and west of the building have complimentary materials at the back and side planes of the volume to create interest in the forms. • Wing walls: The building envelope is detailed to express its depth and application to an internal volume of contrasting color/material. • Terracing: Outdoor learning porches provide terraced areas at upper floors. v. Buildings greater than 160' in length shall provide a variety of modulations and articulations to reduce the apparent bulk and scale of the fa9ade or provide and additional special feature such as a clock tower, courtyard, fountain, or public gathering area. Outdoor learning porches are provided at both the west and east facades in order to provide outdoor learning opportunities centrally located within the building and to reduce the scale of the building form. Additionally, public gathering areas are located at both facades, including play areas and fields to the east and a large pedestrian plaza on the west. b. Ground Level Details 1. The use of material variations such as colors, brick shingles, stucco, and horizontal wood siding is encouraged. Material variation is included in the ground level of the project. A variety of colors and textures including masonry, smooth colored composite panel and glazing are being proposed. ii. Human-scaled elements such as a lighting fixture, trellis, or other landscape feature shall be provided along the fa9ade's ground floor. The ground floor design will include building mounted lighting as well as a landscape buffer between the base of the building and the sidewalk(s). The ground 9 floor also includes fenestration corresponding to classrooms, commons, and administration program areas which responds to the human scale. iii. Any fac;:ade visible to the public shall be comprised of at least 50% transparent windows and/or doors for at least the portion of the ground floor fac;:ade that is between 4' and 8' above ground. Glazing and doors between 4'-8' above ground comprise 35%-60% of building facades. Visibility to building interior is balanced with privacy needs for elementary school students and glazing responds directly to program areas. iv. Upper portions of building facades shall have clear windows with visibility into and out of the building. However, screening may be applied to provide shade and energy efficiency. The minimum amount of light transmittance for windows shall be 50%. Clear glazing is proposed at the second and third floor. Areas of frit will be applied at the south facing library volume to control solar gain. At the west and east fac;:ades, vertical sunshades will be applied at glazing areas. At the south facade, a brise soleil comprised of vertical and horizontal elements will be applied. Shades will be constructed of pre-finished perforated metal and will be mounted to the storefront system. v. Where windows or storefronts occurs, they must principally contain clear glazing. The majority of glazing at ground level will include clear glazing. At the gymnasium, translucent glazing is proposed in order to provide privacy for students while in an instructional space. vi. Tinted and dark glass, highly reflective (mirror-type) glass and film are prohibited. No tinted, dark, or reflective glass is being proposed. vii. Untreated blank walls visible from public streets, sidewalks, or interior pedestrian pathways are prohibited. 1. A wall (including building facades and retaining walls) is considered a blank wall if: a. It is a ground floor wall or portion of a ground floor wall over 6' in height, has a horizontal length greater than 15'. And does not include a windows, door, building modulation or other architectural detailing. b. Any portion of a ground floor wall has a surface area of 400 SF or greater and does not include a window, door, building modulation or other architectural detailing. 2. If blank walls are required or unavoidable, they shall be treated. The treatment shall be proportional to the wall and use one or more of the following: a. A planting bed at least 5' in width abutting the blank wall that contains trees, shrubs, evergreen ground cover, or vines. b. Trellis or other vine supports with evergreen climbing vines. c. Architectural detailing such as reveals, contrasting materials, or other special detailing that meets the intent of this standard. 10 I d. Artwork, such bas-relief sculpture, mural, or similar. e. Seating area with special paving and seasonal planting. Blank walls at ground level have been limited to areas adjacent to playground and courtyard which support recreational activities typical of elementary school students including chalk art and ball play. c. Building Roof Lines i. At least one of the following elements shall be used to create varied and interesting roof profiles: 1. Extended parapets. Extended parapets have been incorporated at west, north, and east facades to create varied material profile around the building edges. 2. Feature elements projecting above parapets. 3. Projected cornices. A projected cornice extends from the library entry volume toward the southeast. Roof cornices above outdoor learning porches extend the depth of the building articulation. 4. Pitched or sloped roofs. 5. Roof mounted mechanical equipment shall not be visible to pedestrians. Roof mounted mechanical equipment is limited for this project as the building has been designed to include the majority of the system internally. The only equipment that will be roof mounted are the Dedicated Outside Air System unit and units serving the commons, gym, and kitchen. These units will be screened with pre- finished metal panel consistent with the design of the fa~ade and located away from the roof edge as to minimize any ground-level visibility. d. Building Materials i. All sides of buildings visible from a street, pathway, parking area, or open space shall be finished with the same building materials. detailing. and color scheme. The material and detailing approach is comprehensive at all areas of the building. All materials continue on all sides and will include consistent detailing at fenestration and accent materials. ii. All buildings shall use material variations such as colors, brick or metal banding, patterns, or textural changes. Material of the building's fa~ade is using combinations of masonry and metal siding, composite panel and glazing. Accent materials will include pre-finished metal panel, pre- finished metal trim and canopies. iii. Materials. individually or in combination, shall have texture, pattern, and be detailed on all visible facades. The proposed materials each have inherent texture and pattern, and when combined create a comprehensive texture and pattern vocabulary for the building. iv. Materials shall be durable, high quality, and consistent with more traditional urban development, such as brick, integrally colored concrete masonry, pre- 11 finished metal, stone, steel, glass and cast-in concrete. Materials being proposed are as follows: Masonry, Pre-finished metal panel, composite panel product, steel, and glass. These materials are durable and high quality in keeping with the development of a 50-year public school building. v. If concrete is used, walls shall be enhanced by techniques such as texturing, reveals, and/or coloring with a concrete coating or admixture. No concrete is proposed in a vertical application. vi. If concrete block walls are used, the shall be enhanced with integral color, textured blocks and colored mortar, decorative bond pattern and/or shall incorporate other masonry materials. At this time, masonry is the proposed building material. 6. Signage a. Signage shall be an integral part of the design approach to the building. Address and building naming is being proposed integrated at the south facade, facing the pedestrian plaza. b. Corporate logos and signs shall be sized appropriately for their location. As a public school building, signage may include a mascot logo. The mascot for the school has not been determined at this time. When incorporated into signage it will be done at a scale appropriate for the location. c. Prohibited signs include: i. Pole signs. No pole signs are proposed. ii. Roof signs. No roof signs are proposed. iii. Back-lit sign with letters or graphics on a plastic sheet. Exceptions: Back-lit logo signs less than 1 Osqft are permitted as are signs with only the individual letters back-lit. d. Freestanding ground-related monument signs, with the exception of primary entry signs, shall be limited to 5' above finish grade, including support structure. A freestanding monument sign will be located at the entrance to the vehicle entry from N 4'" St. This sign will not be taller than 5'-0" above finish grade. e. Front-lit, ground-mounted monument signs are the preferred type of freestanding sign. Monument signs will be front-lit and ground-mounted. An electronic reader board sign is planned. Typically about 16 inches tall and 6 feet wide. They are used to display messages. It is still to be determined if it will be a monument sign or freestanding. f. Blade type signs, proportional to the building favade on which they are mounted, are encouraged on pedestrian-oriented streets. No blade signs are proposed. 7. Lighting a. Lighting 12 ' , i. Pedestrian-scale lighting shall be provided at primary and secondary building entrances. Light poles and/or bollards will be used to define the pedestrian plaza at the main entry. At secondary building entrances, building mounted lighting will be used at the vertical surface and soffits. ii. Accent lighting shall also be provided on building facades and/or to illuminate other key elements foe the site such as gateways, specimen trees, other significant landscaping, water features, and/or artwork. Accent lighting will be provided in the large facade articulations that define both east and west facades. iii. Downlighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicular movement, unless alternative pedestrian-scale lighting has been approved administratively. Downlighting will be the primary means of lighting pedestrian and vehicle site areas. 13 Sartori Elementary Sch0<;,I l'PUD Application Materials #22 l:.andscape Analysis, Lot Coverage, and Parking Analysis Lot Coverage Analysis Total square footage of the site (existing/all parcels): 5.28 acres or 229,996.8 square feet Total square footage of the site (after dedication of right of way): 4.88 acres or 212,572.8 square feet Total square footage of existing impervious surface area: 119,090 square feet Total square footage of proposed impervious surface area: 139,357 square feet Total square footage of the footprints of all buildings: 39,933 square feet for footprint Total square footage of all buildings: 79,061 square feet Square footage (by floor and overall total) of each individual building and/or use Main school building First Floor Second Floor Third Floor Total 33,933 SF 23,626 SF. 21,382 SF 78,941 SF Outdoor Storage at Covered Play First Floor!Total 120 SF. Percentage of lot covered by buildings or structures: 212,572.8 SF (site area)/ (34053 SF) total building footprint~ 6.24% Parking Analysis Number of parking spaces required by city code City code allows 1 per employee for educational uses. Number of employees is as follows: Full time classroom teachers: 32 Specialists: 12 (Gym, Library (2), Music (2), Counselor, Psychologist, ELL, SLP, LAP, OT/PT, Resource Specialist) Paraprofessional/Instructional Assistant 6 Administration Staff: 6 Kitchen staff: 2 Custodial Staff: 2 Total: 60 Number and dimensions of standard, compact, and ADA accessible spaces provided Standard: Compact: ADA: Total: 61 (Typical dimension 9' x 20') 18 (Typical dimension 8.5' x 16' or 9' x 16') .i_(Typical dimension 9' x 20') 83 We are proposing an increase in code allowed parking greater than 25%. The requested increase is being driven by the following factors: 1. Choice school students will be drawn from all of Renton School District (approximately 70%) with 30% enrollment anticipated from the local area. The "choice" parents and visitors are more likely to arrive in vehicles. Parking demand counts and observations performed by Heffron Transportation for elementary schools have found peak mid-school-day demand rates of about 1.23 vehicles per employee, which includes demand generated by all employees plus visitors and volunteers. The new school is projected to have a midday peak parking demand of about 74 vehicles, which is likely to occur during late morning when all teachers, administrative staff, kitchen staff, and volunteers are typically on site. 2. Extra parking relieves queuing particularly during afternoon pick-up. The largest regular school-day need to accommodate vehicles on-site is during the afternoon dismissal period when family drivers arrive about 10 to 15 minutes prior to dismissal and wait to pick up students. Some prefer to park and walk students (particularly younger students) between classrooms and vehicles. The additional parking supply will help to better accommodate this activity and reduce the likelihood that queued vehicles will spill out onto N 4th Street. 3. Due to downtown location, availability of off-site parking for after hour events is limited. The largest peak parking demand for elementary schools occurs during the occasional evening events, which typically occur once per month. Some large school events can generate parking demand in excess of 225 vehicles. The proposed supply will help reduce the event-related overspill to local on-street parking. Landscaping Analysis Landscape Total on-site: 78,886 SF (required), 75,277 SF (provided) Landscape Total off-site: 9,095 SF (required), 9,107 SF (provided) Parking Lot Landscaping: 2,025 SF (required), 11,645 SF (provided) Perimeter Parking Lot Landscape: 6000 SF (required) /6,863 SF (provided) Interior Parking Lot Landscape: 2017 SF (required)/ 4782 SF (provided LOT COMBINATION GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS AND APPLICATION The revised code of Washington (RCW) Section 58.17.040 (6) allows for adjusting the boundary (combining) line between contiguous properties provided that: • No additional parcels, sites, tracts, or lots are created; and • No parcels are established which have insufficient area or setbacks as required by zoning or other regulations. In order to insure that a Lot Combination meets these requirements, it must be reviewed by the Department of Community and Economic Development. Once approved, it must be recorded with the King County Recorder's Office. REQUIRED ELEMENTS OF A DECLARATION OF LOT COMBINATION {SEE SAMPLE COPY ATTACHED) ARE AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Declaration of Lot Combination document must contain the complete and accurate legal descriptions, including any recorded easements along with the parcel number(s) of the existing/original. When completed, the document must contain the notarized acknowledgements and signatures of ALL involved parties; 2. An accurate drawing of the existing/original and the revised/combined parcels, depicting the parcel number, the location of all roads, easements, structures, and other features. The drawing does not need to meet a particular scale, but it must be legible and clearly show property dimensions, distances from all structures to property lines, and an arrow pointing north. A clear one (1) inch margin shall be left on all four (4) sides of the drawing. Drawings should not exceed 8 W' x 14" in size. The existing/original lots must be labeled Parcel A, Parcel B, and so on; 3. Deeds, deeds of trust, or mortgage releases if ownership is being transferred; 4. "Declaration of Lot Combination" must be clearly filled in with dark ink printing or typing. The document must have exact State required margins as follows: 3" Top Margin, 1" on each Side and Bottom of the page (your return address can be within the 3" top margin). All other sheets must have 1" margins on both sides. Once drafted, the original proposed Lot Combination documents (including items 1 through 4 above) plus one (1) copy of each submittal item shall be submitted to Department of Community and Economic Development along with any applicable processing fee. In the application, be sure to attach the name, address, and phone number of the person who should be contacted when the Declaration of Lot Combination is ready to record or if a problem arises. When approved, the applicants are notified that their Declaration of Lot Combination Documents are ready for recording with King County, along with necessary supportive documents such as an excise tax affidavit deed(s), deed(s) of trust, or mortgage releases. One (1) copy of the recorded document shall be returned to Development Services, and one (1) copy to the King County Assessor's Office, to assure proper processing of the revised parcels. CAUTION: Applicants may wish to obtain a title report and have the Declaration reviewed by a licensed land surveyor and/or title officer to ensure that all deeds, legal descriptions, and maps are correct and accurate. The accuracy of the Declaration and the associated deeds is the responsibility of the applicant. The City of Renton assumes no liability for any errors or complications that arise therefrom. h :ce d\data \forms-templates \se If-help ha n douts \plan n i ng \I otcom bi nation . doc 11-21-2011 • City File Number ___ _ APPLICATION FOR LOT COMBINATION City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development NATURE OF REQUEST: The Renton School District has acquired several parcels of land adjacent to the original Sartori Education Center and would like to combine the individual parcels to accommodate a proposed site improvement Taxpayer/Owner Renton School District No. 402 Address 7812 S. 124'" ST City/State Seattle, WA 98178-4830 Applicant Address City/State AHBL, Inc. 2215 N. 30'" ST, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403-3350 Phone: (425) 204-4478 Phone: (253) 383-2422 Agent Address City/State ___________________ Phone: L_) ____ _ Parcel Data: Site Address: 331 Garden Avenue N. Renton. _________________ _ Parcel #:756460-0170 Location: Quarter Section _NW_ Section 17 Township 23N Range 5E Related Parcels: 756460-0180, 756460-0181, 756460-0182, 756460-0183, 756460-0184, 722400-0580, 722400-0590, 722400-0600, 722400-0610, 722400-0615, 722400-0620 Existing Zoning: CA 722400-0620, 722400-0615, 722400-0610; CN-722400-0600, 722400-0590, 722400-0580; R8 756460-0180, 756460-0181, 756460-0182, 756460-0183, 756460-0184; R10 756460- 0170 Shoreline Environment: _No_ Legal Description: PARCEL I: Lots 1 through 10, inclusive, Block 3, SARTORISVILLE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 8 of Plats, page 7, records of King County, Washington. PARCEL II: The West 55 feet of Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, SARTORISVILLE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 8 of Plats, page 7, records of King County, Washington. PARCEL III: The West 50 feet of the East 225 feet of Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, SARTORISVILLE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 8 of Plats, page 7, records of King County, Washington. PARCEL IV: The West 50 feet of the East 175 feet of Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, SARTORISVILLE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 8 of Plats, page 7 records of King County, Washington. PARCEL V: The West 50 feet of the East 125 feet of Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, SARTORISVILLE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 8 of Plats, page 7, records of King County, Washington. PARCEL VI: The East 75 feet of Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, SARTORISVILLE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 8 of Plats, page 7, records of King County, Washington. PARCEL VII: Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12 and 13, Block 7, RENTON FARM PLAT, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 10 of Plats, page 97, in King County, Washington. EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion of said Lot 11 conveyed to the City of Renton by deed recorded June 7, 1994 as Recording No. 9406070577. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion of said Lot 12 conveyed to the City of Renton by deed recorded June 7, 1994 as Recording No. 9406070576. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion of said Lot 13 conveyed to the City of Renton by deed recorded June 7, 1994 as Recording No. 9406070575. All dimensions must be shown, total square footage must be shown on revised lot drawing. Please list parcel numbers for the original lots. Return Address: City Clerk's Office City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Title: DECLARATION of LOT COMBINATION Project File #: LUA _-__ -LC Section Township North Range Grantor(s): 1. Property Tax Parcel Number(s): Address or Intersection: East, W.M., City of Renton, King County, Washington Grantee(s): 1. City of Renton, a Municipal Corporation I (We), hereby certify that I am (we are) the owner(s) of the property described in Exhibit 'A' on page~ said property being in common ownership, do hereby petition the City of Renton to allow the separate parcels to be combined into single legal lot(s) of record as described in Exhibit 'B' on page~ as specifically allowed by the Revised Code of Washington, Section 58.17.040 (6). The Map Exhibit on page __ depicts the original and the hereby revised parcels. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits to accrue herefrom and by signing hereon, the parties do for themselves, their heirs and assigns, revise the boundary lines of the parcels described in the aforementioned Exhibit 'A' and establish and recognize the parcel legal description(s) in the aforementioned Exhibit 'B' as the new parcel legal description(s). IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said Grantor has caused this instrument to be executed this day of 20 __ City of Renton Approval: The petition of the property owner(s) to combine the separate properties described in the aforementioned Exhibit 'A' into legal lots of record as described in aforementioned Exhibit 'B'. This lot combination is binding upon recordation and the resulting parcel(s) may only be divided through the City of Renton's formal subdivision process. Planning Director Date City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development INDIVIDUAL FORM OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT Notary Seal must be within box STATE OF WASHINGTON I ss COUNTY OF KING I 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 Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print) My appointment expires: Dated: REPRESENTATIVE FORM OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT Notary Seal must be within box STATE OF WASHINGTON I ss COUNTY OF KING I l certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that signed this instrument, on oath stated that he/she/they was/were authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the and of to be the free and voluntary act of such party/parties for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary {Print) My appointment expires: Dated: CORPORA TE FORM OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT Notary Seal must be within box STATE OF WASHINGTON I ss COUNTY OF KING I On this day of 20_, before me personally appeared to me known to be of the corporation that executed the within instrument, and acknowledge the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and each on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print) My appointment expires: Dated: EXHIBIT 'A' Original Legal Description PARCEL I: LOTS 1 THROUGH 10, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 3, SARTORISVILLE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 8 OF PLATS, PAGE 7, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL II: THE WEST 55 FEET OF LOTS 11 AND 12, BLOCK 3, SARTORISVILLE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 8 OF PLATS, PAGE 7, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL III: THE WEST 50 FEET OF THE EAST 225 FEET OF LOTS 11 AND 12, BLOCK 3, SARTORISVILLE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 8 OF PLATS, PAGE 7, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL IV: THE WEST 50 FEET OF THE EAST 175 FEET OF LOTS 11 AND 12, BLOCK 3, SARTORISVILLE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 8 OF PLATS, PAGE 7 RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL V: THE WEST SO FEET OF THE EAST 125 FEET OF LOTS 11 AND 12, BLOCK 3, SARTORISVILLE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 8 OF PLATS, PAGE 7, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL VI: THE EAST 75 FEET OF LOTS 11 AND 12, BLOCK 3, SARTORISVILLE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 8 OF PLATS, PAGE 7, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL VII: LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12 AND 13, BLOCK 7, RENTON FARM PLAT, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 97, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 11 CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 7, 1994 AS RECORDING NO. 9406070577. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 12 CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 7, 1994 AS RECORDING NO. 9406070576. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 13 CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 7, 1994 AS RECORDING NO. 9406070575. EXHIBIT 'B' Revised Legal Description LOTS 1 THROUGH 12, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 3, SARTORISVILLE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 8 OF PLATS, PAGE 7, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. TOGETHER WITH LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12 AND 13, BLOCK 7, RENTON FARM PLAT, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 97, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 11 CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 7, 1994 UNDER RECORDING NO. 9406070577. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 12 CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 7, 1994 UNDER RECORDING NO. 9406070576. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 13 CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 7, 1994 UNDER RECORDING NO. 9406070575. cb EXHIBIT "B" NORTH 4TH STREET I I} APN I 1 722400-0620 I VII / 12 APN , 722400-0615 II APN 722400-0610 i 10 APN j 722400-0605 ~ APN VII 722400-0600 I B APN 722400-0595 7 APN 722400-0590 b 2 4 ------- I APN 756460-0170 b ~ -->"'---- 7 ~~ ---------1-.{- __ _t,P_N __ ~ 722400-0580 B \fl ? 1--'==' ---- :z r--4 4~---IL CS 15' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT=-::--t ~ rl } 10 REC. NO. 20081028000318 ~ II llJ i II III IV V VI Ci ------~ l'SiA,iiP--.i-Nm,,A,iiP--.i-Ni<,,-11-=. APN APN VII 756460 75646 56460 756460 -756460- -0180 -0181 -0183 -0182 -0184 12 NORTH 3RD STREET 2215 North 30th Street, Suite 300, Tacoma, WA 98403 253.383.2422 TEL 253.383.2572 FAX JOB NO. 2150674 August 15, 2016 ORIGINAL PARCELS LEGAL BY: BO EXHIBIT BY: TD w: \sdakproj\2015\2150874\lot combo.dwg lHIS EXHIBIT HAS BEEN PREPARED TO ASSIST IN THE INTERPRETATION or THE ACCOMPAN'1NG LEGAL DESCRIPTION. Ir THERE IS A CONA.JCT BETWEEN THE •1TIEN LEGAL DESCRIPTION ANO THIS SKETCH, THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION SHALL PREVAIL N4' 43' 40"E 50.09' N4' 43' 54"E 90.16' NO' 54' 56"E 44.98' i:!: ~ ~ ..!: I ~ "I: i l I • N CD 1·=100· JOB NO. 2150874 August 15, 2016 REVISED PARCEL I~ EXHIBIT "B" NORTH 4TH STREET __ 12_ ! 2. 220,!05 SF N89' 05' 29"W-·· 104.73' ~ APN 756460-0170 1 10 APN --- 722400-0605 1---N1' 02' 58"E I 4 44,98' N89' 05' 03"W _..,_ __ ---t-~----1 104.54' ,, B APN • • 722400-0595 i,._.=Nl' 02 58 E 44.98' S89"0450E •~ ,-1 _____j--~ ;- • ~~ rl-----+ ---, _ ___, ~~ --~-..6.J~.-+-----1 \-~ :~r-4 L ~ii': ".s ---1 10 15' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT=--l <;:, ~ IO REC. NO. 20081028000318 ~.2 c==----~ .2.j II ---- N89" 03 29 W NORTH 3RD STREET •• ~~ ~r mnl=J1• 3: ., "' "' 0 vi I ~ ~ ~ I ai :::,; "I: ~ ~ I ~ 2215 North 30th Street, Suite 300, Tacoma, WA 98403 253.383.2422 TEL 253.383.2572 FAX LEGAL BY: BO EXHIBIT BY: TD 1HIS EXHIBfr HAS BEEN PREPARED TO ASSIST IN THE INTERPRETATic»I Of 1HE ACCOMPAN"l'ING LEGAL DESCRIPTION, If' THERE IS A CONFLICT BETIEEN lHE ~TTEN LEGAL ~IPTION AND THIS SKETCH, TI-IE w: \tdekproJ\2015\2150874\lot combo.dwg LEGAL DESCR1PTI0H SHALL PREVAIL REVISED DESCRIPTION LOTS 1 THROUGH 12, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 3, SARTORISVILLE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 8 OF PLATS, PAGE 7, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. TOGETHER WITH LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12 AND 13, BLOCK 7, RENTON FARM PLAT, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 97, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 11 CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 7, 1994 UNDER RECORDING NO. 9406070577. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 12 CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 7, 1994 UNDER RECORDING NO. 9406070576. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 13 CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 7, 1994 UNDER RECORDING NO. 9406070575. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT --------Renton 0 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. TREE RETENTION WORKSHEET Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 I www.rcntonwa.gov Total number of trees over 6" diameter', or alder or cottonwood trees at least 8" in diameter on project site Deductions: Certain trees are excluded from the retention calculation: Trees that are dangerous' Trees in proposed public streets Trees in proposed private access easements/tracts Trees in critical areas 3 and buffers Total number of excluded trees: Subtract line 2 from line l: 41 5 11 16 25 Next, to determine the number of trees that must be retained 4 , multiply line 3 by: 0.3 in zones RC, R-1, R-4, R-6 or R-8 0.2 in all other residential zones 0.1 in all commercial and industrial zones 8 List the number of 6" in diameter, or alder or cottonwood trees over 8" in diameter that you are proposing5 to retain 4: 0 Subtract line 5 from line 4 for trees to be replaced: (if line 6 is zero or less, stop here. No replacement trees are required) 8 Multiply line 6 by 12" for number of required replacement inches: 96 Proposed size of trees to meet additional planting requirement: trees trees trees trees trees trees trees trees trees trees inches (Minimum 2" cali~er trees reguired for re~lacement, otherwise enter O} 2 inches per tree 9. Divide line 7 by line 8 for number of replacement trees 6: (If remainder is .5 or greater, round up to the next whole number) 48 trees 1 Measured at 4.5' above grade. 2 A tree certified, in a written report, as dead, terminally diseased, damaged, or otherwise dangerous to persons or property by a licensed landscape architect or certified arborist, and approved by the City. 3 Critical areas, such as wetlands, streams, floodplains and protected slopes, are defined in RM( 4-3-050. 4 Count only those trees to be retained outside of critical areas and buffers. s The City may require modification of the tree retention plan to ensure retention of the maximum number of trees per RMC 4-4-130H7a. 6 When the required number of protected trees cannot be retained, replacement trees, with at least a two-inch {2") caliper or an evergreen at least six feet (6') tall, shall be planted. See RMC 4-4-130.H.l.e.(ii] for prohibited types of replacement trees. 1 H :\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\Planni ng\ Tree Retention Worksheet.docx 08/2015 Minimum Tree Density A minimum tree density shall be maintained on each residentially zoned lot (exempting single-family dwellings in R-10 and R-14). The tree density may consist of existing trees, replacement trees, or a combination. Detached single-family development': Two (2) significant trees 8 for every five thousand (5,000) sq. ft. of lot area. For example, a lot with 9,600 square feet and a detached single-family house is required to have four (4) significant trees or their equivalent in caliper inches (one or more trees with a combined diameter of 24"). This is determined with the following formula: ( Lot Area ) .. x 2 = Mm1mum Number of Trees 5,000sq.ft. Multi-family development (attached dwellings): Four (4) significant trees 8 for every five thousand (5,000) sq. ft. of lot area. (_ LotArea ) \s,OOOsq.ft. x 4 Minimum Number of Trees Example Tree Density Table· Lot Lot size Min significant New Trees Retained Trees Compliant trees required 1 5,000 2 2 @ 2" caliper 0 Yes 2 10,000 4 0 1 tree (24 caliper Yes inches) 3 15,000 6 2 @ 2" caliper 1 Maple-15 Yes caliper inches 1 Fir -9 caliper inches. 7 lots developed with detached dwellings in the R-10 and R-14 zoned are exempt from maintaining a minimum numQer of significant trees onsite, however they are not exempt from the annual tree removal limits. 8 Or the gross equivalent of caliper inches provided by one (1) or more trees. 2 H :\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Self-H elp Ha ndouts\Plann ing\ Tree Retention Worksheet.docx 08/2015 , WASHINGTON FORESTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. FORESTRY AND VEGETATION MANAGEMENT SPECIALISTS w F C I 360/943-1723 FAX 360/943-4128 1919 Yelm Hwy SE, Suite C Olympia, WA 98501 August 23, 2016 Lisa Klein AHBL, Inc. 2215 North 30th Street, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 RE: Arborist's Report -Sartori Elementary School -Renton, WA Dear Ms. Klein: The Renton School District is planning to construct the new Sartori Elementary School at the site of the old Sartori Education Center at North 3rd Street and Park Ave. North in Renton, WA. Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. was asked to inspect all of the trees on the site to determine their condition and potential to be saved in the new project. The inspection included all mapped trees that are 6 inches DBH and larger. A Level 2 inspection was completed on July 21, 2016. At the time of the site visit some demolition had occurred, but all trees had been retained. Findings I found 41 trees of 17 species. The trees ranged from 4 to 28 inches in DBH (DBH=diameter measured 4.5 ft. above the groundline). They included 10 street trees of which 6 (Callery pear) were in grates along Park Ave. North, and 4 (Green ash) were in a curblawn zone along North 3rd Street. The street and landscape area trees health ranged from 'Poor' to 'Very Good'. Only 4 trees were classified 'Poor' and would not be good long-term trees if protected (the 5th Poor rated tree was a street tree). The table below provides a summary of the tree inventory. A complete list of trees is provided in Attachment #4 and maps of tree locations are provided in Attachments 2 and 3. URBAN/RURAL FORESTRY • TREE APPRAISAL • HAZARD TREE ANALYSIS RIGHT-OF-WAYS• VEGETATION MANAGEMENT• ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES• CONTRACT FORESTERS Member of International Society of Arbor/culture and Society of American Foresws Sartori Elementary School -Assessment Table 1. Summarv of the tree inventorv. DBH Tree Condition Range Very Very Total# Species (in) Good Good Fair Poor Poor Trees Callerv pear 8-9 5 I 6 (15%) Annie 5-8 2 2 (5%) Flowering 14 1 1 (2%) plum Fraser fir 6-7 2 2 (5%) Dwarf Alberta 8-9 2 1 3 (7%) spruce Weeping 8-9 2 2 (5%) flowering cherrv Flowering 4-28 4 2 1 7 (17%) cherrv Douglas-fir 16 1 1 (2%) Green ash 8-12 4 4 (10%) Colorado blue 2 2 (5%) spruce Hinoki cypress 8-15 2 2 (5%) Spirea 12 I 1 (2%) Peach I 1 (2%) English walnut 10 I 1 (2%) Arborvitae 4-12 4 4 (10%) Weeping 6 I 1 (2%) Alaska-yellow cedar Pt. Orford 20 1 1 (2%) cedar Sum 1 9 25 5 1 41 (100%) Generally, trees rated in 'Poor' or worse condition are not considered long-term trees and are not recommended for retention. On this site, 15% (6 trees) were rated 'Poor' or worse. However, one 'Poor' rated flowering cherry could be saved since it was healthy but had poor form. All trees were rated as a 'Low' in the tree risk assessment process (see Attachment #5). The minimum root protection zone radius in feet is provided for each tree in the full tree list in Attachment #2. Intrusions (cuts or fills) should not impact more than 25% of this minimum root protection zone radius. The tree numbers in the tree list correspond to the map locations in Attachment #3 and 4, the site maps. Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. Page 2 ' , Sartori Elementary Sch -Tree Assessment Tree Retention The project proposes to retain nine street trees (numbers 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 23, 24, 26, and 27). All other onsite trees will be removed for project construction and replaced in accordance with the city's tree replacement requirements. Please give me a call if you have questions. Respectfully submitted, Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. Yf~YJ.J~ Galen M. Wright, ACF, ASCA ISA Board Certified Master Arborist No. PN-129 Certified Forester No. 44 ISA Tree Risk Assessor Qualified Wa shington Fores try Co nsultants, In c. Pa g e 3 Sartori Elementary School -Ass es sment ' Attachment #1. Aerial photo of project site. Washington Forestry Cons ultants , In c. Page4 Sarto r i Elemen tary Sch -Tr ee A ssess ment Attachment #2 . Existing Conditions -North Portion of Site ~ I·-. 1· :t ' .J .. Ill I ', ~ I,. • I Ill t I "'1 (!) , I ' I 0: '·1 I I ~ i~ l 1 .. ·.I o:: (') e I I WC'lt t-~ (!) "{ •, ·. I z ~ J . I w i ' /· . '· 1 0"~ ..... ~ z~g Q~ ~~5 O~U ::,"" (!) . c~~ . :a::.:: " W!A.I~ 1 '• ~!~ r· .... 0~ .... ~ o::~ .... ~im ;A~~ •m I llf i~ ~ I !ll 1 ... ~u ~ :a: g 0: ~ ... 'I( Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. Pa ge 5 Sartori Elementary School -Assessment Attachment #3. Existing Conditions -South Portion of Site I I ' . I I . ·. l ·~-------I Washington Forestry Consultan ts, In c. . j Page 6 Sartori Elementary Sch -Tree Assessment Wa s h ing ton Forestry Con s ultants, Inc. Attachment #4. Tree List. (2 pages attached) Page 7 Sartori E lementary School -· Assessment Attachment #5. Photo Log (WFCI 7/21/16). Photo A. View of tree #30 , a Hinoki cypress . Photo B. View of Eng Ush walnut (#34) and other less er trees. Wa s hing ton Forestry Consultants, Inc. Pa ge8 I Sartori E lementary Sch -Tree Assessment Photo C. View of tree #21, a 16 inch DBH Douglas-fir. Photo D. View of tree #31, an 18 inch DBH Colorado blue spruce. Washington Forestry Consultants, In c. Page 9 Sartori Elementary School -: Assessment \ Photo E. View of tree #41, a 20 inch DBH Port Orford Cedar. Wa shington F orestry Cons ultants, In c. Page 10 Sartori Elementary Sch -Tree Assessment Attachment #6. Tree Risk Assessment -Brief Summary of Process The purpose of this document is to summarize the methodology of modem tree risk assessment for users of this type of information. This methodology has been put into place by the International Society of Arboriculture and has been in use in its present form since 2013. It updates the initial changes put into place in 2011. Tree risk assessment is the systematic and qualitative process to identify, analyze, and evaluate tree risk. Tree risk evaluation is the process of comparing the assessed risk against given risk criteria to determine the significance of the risk. This methodology is based on the ANSI A300 standard 1 for tree risk assessment. This standard is supported by a best management practices 'd 2 gm e. Those qualified to do tree risk assessment have the qualification from the International Society of Arboriculture called 'Tree Risk Assessor Qualified.' The methodology for tree risk assessment is more recently detailed in the authoritative tree risk assessment manual3, which provides the state of the art for tree risk assessment. Risk is the evaluation and categorizing of both the likelihood (probability) of occurrence of a tree or tree part failure, and the severity of consequences (value of and damage to the target that is impacted). The magnitude of risk can be categorized and compared to the client's tolerances to determine if the risk is acceptable. Tree risk management is the application of policies, procedures and practices used to identify, evaluate, mitigate, monitor, and communicate tree risk. It is up to the tree owner to determine what level of risk they are able to tolerate, and to conduct any mitigation required when that risk is unacceptable. There are 3 levels of tree risk assessment: Level 1 --assessment is limited to a visual assessment of the tree (s) near specified targets, such as along roadways or utility rights-of-ways to identify specified conditions or obvious defects. Assessment shall be from a specified perspective such as foot, vehicle, or aerial patrol. Level 2 -assessment shall include a 360 degree, ground based visual inspection of the tree crown, trunk, trunk flare, above-ground roots, and site conditions around the tree in relation to targets. It may include sounding the stem to look for internal decay and/or the use of hand tools, or binoculars to view the crown better. Surrounding site conditions are also evaluated. 1 ANSI A300 (Part 9 -2011) -American National Standard for Tree Care Operations -Tree, Shrub, and Other Woody Plant Management -Standard Practices (Tree Risk Assessment a. Tree Structure Assessment). American National Standards Institute, Inc. Washington D.C. 14 pgs. 2 Smiley, E. Thomas, Nelda Matheny, and Sharon Lilly. 2011. Best Management Practices -Tree Risk Assessment. International Society of Arboriculture. Champaign, IL. 3 Dunster, Dr. Julian et al. 2013. Tree Risk Assessment Manual. International Society of Arboriculture. Champaign, IL. Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. Page 11 Sartori Elementary School -: Assessment Level 3 -all of the level 2 techniques, plus advanced methodologies such as coring or drilling the tree stem or roots to look for decay, a climbing assessment, probing, pull testing, or radiation, sonic, or subsurface root assessments. In tree risk assessment, targets are people who could be injured, property that may be damaged, or activities that could be disrupted by a tree failure. A tree must have a target for there to be a risk rating higher than 'Low'. The target has a value and people are the highest value target, followed by structures, cars and other high value objects. Fences would be a low value target. As part of a target assessment, the assessor considers if the target can be moved out of reach of the tree or tree part that might fail, or if people could be excluded from the target area of the tree. As part of the risk analysis, the assessor must conduct a site analysis. This may include looking for signs of recent tree removal that may expose a previously sheltered subject tree to winds, construction activity that severed roots of the tree, or other site or soils conditions/changes that affected drainage or tree health. Defects often predispose a tree or part of a tree to failure. A key part of tree risk assessment is to categorize the likelihood of failure of the tree or a defective part. The tree or defect is examined, and the likelihood of failure is categorized in a matrix (below) as: Improbable, Possible, Probable, or Imminent. A tree with a lifting root plate would likely be categorized as 'Imminent' to fail. A tree with a broken and hanging branch that is still attached would likely be categorized as 'Improbable' or 'Possible.' Cracks in a trunk or branch would likely be categorized as 'Probable' or 'Imminent' to fail. This rating of 'Likelihood of Failure' is then brought forward into the Likelihood of Failure and Impact matrix to assign a level of risk of the tree. The level of risk is then categorized as Low, Moderate, High, or Extreme. The following 2 tables are used by Tree Risk Assessor Qualified professionals to rate the risk of the tree. Note: this system does not use a numerical rating system as old systems used. Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. Page 12 I Sartori Elementary Sci -Tree Assessment Matrix I. Likelihood matrix. Likelihood likelihood of Impacting Target of Failure Very low Low Medium High Imminent Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely Very likely Probable Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely Possible Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Improbable Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix. likelihood of Consequences of Failure Failure & Impact Negligible Minor Significant Severe Very likely Low Moderate High Extreme Likely Low Moderate High High Somewhat likely Low Low Moderate Moderate Unlikely Low Low Low Low Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. Page 13 Sartori Elementary School -Assessment Attachment #7. Assumptions and Limiting Conditions. 1) Any legal description provided to the Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. is assumed to be correct. Any titles and ownership's to any property are assumed to be good and marketable. No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character. Any and all property is appraised or evaluated as though free and clear, under responsible ownership and competent management. 2) It is assumed that any property is not in violation of any applicable codes, ordinances, statutes, or other governmental regulations, unless otherwise stated. 3) Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has been verified insofar as possible; however, Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information. 4) Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services as described in the fee schedule and contract of engagement. 5) Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidated the entire report. 6) Possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. 7) Neither all or any part of the contents of this report, nor copy thereof, shall be conveyed by anyone, including the client, to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales or other media, without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. -· particularly as to value conclusions, identity of Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc., or any reference to any professional society or to any initialed designation conferred upon Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. as stated in its qualifications. 8) This report and any values expressed herein represent the opinion of Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc., and the fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified value, a stipulated result, the occurrence neither of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding in to reported. 9) Sketches, diagrams, graphs, and photographs in this report, being intended as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys. 10) Unless expressed otherwise: l) information contained in this report covers only those items that were examined and reflects the condition of those items at the time of inspection; and 2) the inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible items without dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems or deficiencies of the tree or other plant or property in question may not arise in the future. Note: Even healthy trees can fail under normal or storm conditions. The only way to eliminate all risk is to remove all trees within reach of all targets. Annual monitoring by an ISA Certified Arborist or Certified Forester will reduce the potential of tree failures. It is impossible to predict with certainty that a tree will stand or fail, or the timing of the failure. It is considered an 'Act of God' when a tree fails, unless it is directly felled or pu.,hed over by man's actions. Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. Page 14 \ r-lrn' l _ I I ~-SERVICE YARD L __ .J r---, I I I I 9 I I~ L __ .J _Jl i 1 '-o")j 20·-o" A 1 4 SCREENING PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 0 b i b ..... _, co ~ (2 ROOF STRUCTURE MASONRY SCREEN WALL SERVICE ACCESS DOOR 3 NORTH ELEVATION-SCREENING SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0" integ r.~T~TUH 0 b l o ..... _, co 2 4 . ' EXHIBIT"A" THAT PORTION OF LOT 12, BLOCK 3, SARTORISVILLE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 8 OF PLATS, PAGE 7, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AND THAT PORTION OF LOT 1, BLOCK 7, RENTON FARM PLAT, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 97, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, LYING SOUTHERLY OF A LINE 34.50 FEET NORTHERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF NORTH 3'0 STREET. CONTAINING 1,727 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS. Q:\2015\2150874\SO_SUR\NON_CAD\Legals\3RD ST ROW.docx EXHIBIT 11 8 11 NORTH 4TH STREET I I 1,; H--------!-------------__ _J l:l. ! l~_i_ f-------... 1 -;, -·-- 10 4 ') 5 ' ---------- ------------- --·----J --·-- ----------- ------ ------·-------J ~N89' 03' 29"W 383.69' I __ __, -------N1' 02' 58"E ' l:l. TPOB---_ I / 4.50' I "VI/. -NO' 56' 31"E ..,..,l,::,_,-,._=-==:r,z:z:!z:rz:===='=-========~~ 3450'-(_ ·~ 30.00' 443.61' Nag• 03' 29'\V - , '-29.94' ___ 1_.4t:. 1"=100' JOB NO. 2150874.50 August 15, 2016 ROW DEDICATION LEGAL BY: BO EXHIBIT BY: TD w: \adakproJ\2015\2150874\row dedlcatlona.dwg NORTH 3RD STREET .•• U~rr ... ,~ m•ffl=JII POC 2215 North 30th Street, Suite 300, Tacoma, WA 98403 253.383.2422 TEL 253.383.2572 FAX THIS EXHIBIT HAS BEEN PREPARED TO ASSIST IN THE INTERPRETATION OF THE ACCOMPANYING LEGAL DESCRIPTION. If THERE IS A CONFLICT BEnlEEN THE \\lllTTEN LEGAL DESCRIPTION AHO THIS SKETCH, THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION SHALL PREVAIL ' EXHIBIT "A" THAT PORTION OF LOTS 1 THROUGH 12, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 3, SARTORISVILLE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 8 OF PLATS, PAGE 7, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, LYING EASTERLY OF A LINE 39.00 FEET WESTERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF GARDEN AVENUE NORTH. CONTAINING 5,400 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS. Q:\2015\2150874\SO_SUR\NON_CAD\Legals\GARDEN AVE ROW.docx r ' ! ~ 0:: 0 .!!: Ill :::, I ~ ::::,; '<:( ::c 0:: ~ I- <( ~ 1"=100' JOB NO. 2150874.50 August 15, 2016 ROW DEDICATION r, 1i II 10 7 ~ ? EXHIBIT "B" NORTH 4TH STREET 4 7 UJ j"' > TPOB Nes· 06' 1o·w 9.00' ~ ~-S1' 02' 58"W I-~ 600.00' i 30' EXISTING R-0-W NORTH 3RD STREET POC N88' 57' 02"W 30.00' 39.00' 2215 North 30th Street, Suite 300, Tacoma, WA 98403 253.383.2422 TEL 253.383.2572 FAX LEGAL BY: BD EXHIBIT BY: ID THIS EXHIBIT HAS BEEN PREPARED TO ASSIST IN THE INTERPRETATION OF THE ACCOMPANY1NG LEGAL DESCRIPTION. If TI-IERE IS A CONF'UCT BETWEEN lHE WRITTEN LEGAL 0£SCRIPT10N ANO THIS SKETCH, THE w: \adlkprol\2015\2150874\row dedlCGtlon,.dwg LEGAL DESCRIPTION SHALL PREVAIL EXHIBIT "A" THAT PORTION OF LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12 AND 13, BLOCK 7, RENTON FARM PLAT, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 97, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, LYING WESTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE: COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF PARK AVENUE NORTH WITH NORTH 3'0 STREET; THENCE NORTH 00"54'56" EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF PARK AVENUE NORTH A DISTANCE OF 29.99 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTERLINE SOUTH 89°05'04" EAST A DISTANCE OF 30.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 1; THENCE SOUTH 89°03'29" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE THEREOF A DISTANCE OF 12.50 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID LINE NORTH 00°54'56" EAST A DISTANCE OF 462.92 FEET; THENCE NORTH 04°50'04" A DISTANCE OF 137.12 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 13 AT A POINT LYING 51.87 FEET EASTERLY OF AND PERPENDICULAR TO THE CENTERLINE OF PARK AVENUE NORTH AND THE END OF THIS LINE DESCRIPTION. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 11 CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 7, 1994 UNDER RECORDING NO. 9406070577. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 12 CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 7, 1994 UNDER RECORDING NO. 9406070576. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 13 CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 7, 1994 UNDER RECORDING NO. 9406070575. CONTAINING 6,357 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS. Q:\2015\2150874\SO_SUR\NON_CAD\Legals\PARK AVE ROW.docx EXHIBIT 11 8 11 ~'ix, O::~ cm :c: <O ~ I ~l" :::,,; <O q: '." :ic ... 0:: '." ~~I S89' 03' 29"E 12.50' sag· 05· 04 "E 30.00' POC N Cl) 1"=100' JOB N 0. 215087 4. 50 August 15, 2016 ROW DEDICATION 51.87' IO B TPOB I LEGAL BY: BD EXHIBIT BY: TD w: \tc:lskproJ\2015\2150874\row dedleatlona.dwg NORTH 4TH STREET ----------...J 4 I ~ ,30' EXISTING R-0-W 0:: s C ~"' :c: ~ ;, > I~ ----\!} ':L_- (s (5 :::,,; ~ ;r; q: ~ \f) ~ ---~ I II IZ NORTH 3RD STR~ •• J. 2215 North 30th Street, Suite 300, 71h mlll1= Tacoma, WA 98403 253.383.2422 TEL 253.383.2572 FAX THIS EXHIBIT HAS BEEN PREPARED TO ASSIST IN THE INTERPRETATION Of" THE ACCOMPANYING LEGAL DESCRIPTION. IF THERE IS A CONFLICT BETV,££N lHE WRITIEN LEGAi. OESCR1P110N ANO lHIS SKETCH, lHE LEGAL DESCRIPTION SHAU. PREVAIL ' EXHIBIT "A" THAT PORTION OF LOT 1, BLOCK 3, SARTORISVILLE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 8 OF PLATS, PAGE 7, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AND THAT PORTION OF LOT 13, BLOCK 7, RENTON FARM PLAT, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 97, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, LYING NORTHERLY OF A LINE 38.50 FEET SOUTHERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF NORTH 4TH STREET. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 13 CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 7, 1994 UNDER RECORDING NO. 9406070575. CONTAINING 3,196 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS. Q:\2015\2150874\SO_SUR\NON_CAD\Legals\4TH ST ROW.docx 30' EXISTING R-0-W EXHIBIT "B" NORTH 4TH STREET N89' 06' 10"W_ 445.15' POC 38.50' 1i i i ' ---t_ II I ~ IO 4 I r ") ! s B 6 7 I -----------! ' 7 6 r- ---··--1 e--s I B --~ ----·- L r--4 I 5 Ci ~ ----< ----•-----i IL ' ' ~ .cl ~ -e---- 10 z i!z i II ----------·-·--+- i I I 1i N N89' 06' 10"W 376.28' -----··· llJ ;;J "' > -'l1_ ;'.s ---- ~~ --< \fl ---·---~-- -------- ~ ~ <: ~ B:i I :::. q: f5 ~ ~ so· 53• so·w 30.00' S1' 02' 58"W 8.50' Cl) NORTH 3RD STREET 2215 North 30th Street. Suite 300, 1"=100' JOB NO. 2150874.50 August 15, 2016 ROW DEOICA TION LEGAL BY: BD EXHIBIT BY: TD w: \adekproj\2015\2150874\row dedlcotlons.dwg Tacoma, WA 98403 253.383.2422 TEL 253.383.2572 FAX THIS EXHIBIT HAS BEEN PREPARED TO ASSIST IN THE INl'ERPRETATION OF THE ACCOMPANYING LEGAL DESCRIPTION. IF' THERE IS A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE v.Rlm:N LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND THIS SKETCH, THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION SHALL PREVAJL 1~-1--: ; ll,r=,r~ ~. ·~-,.~. ,--2-,- \ ~ I ~ I ;,i0z_~~~~ 'I if--::;;:: Jt~--tf H~-::: <J.:_;{ -3 ----, -4 Na_,,,.~ -;-·.·'-'-i~___:_ SARTDRIBVILLE /[bf{! CrN/tL'y; &/.s7t-< (1c,Vfl:"d._k~1.reft. f":' .,f/,!JuTt_i~.r.. .. ··... ·-..... -·.-:. _L"Xr,p(l'//t'dliut : _-. ".,,. ' ==~"'.,r::·:;~~~::_: ';! ;~:;;:;;;; ~:;,,~~·;,:;;;~~~~:~~,~~:~;;~~:;;,~:~, ~;:;;',,.;;;, '' :::;;':..:-1: .. -::;~~ X. :t:;,iit::r~:;~~it~?~'E:~r11Ifi{i!/f;,:i:;:;;;£~::rfrd:i:~:'1; ;:::/; :;,z:t.-;:;::,-t~/::;t'c)7;:~-.ff ;/~ ,:;;~:.~';;?'~~:;; :~,c'~h::~~~~d/::~;·;;~~{':l:, ?:;:;~ h•- iw:>nvu,y.-_NU 2<:,?.~~ ~n ''"'·'.'.;: •J»-·h,:-n.:-d.,,,d-// ,,, /ic;u•n>'h,:7~ 4J.':'t~ff£.·.!rJ>-~ .. .Llc~/ ica/-/r ./l,. -~.,,,":~' ---,// ..;~<"~<' by /fi,,,..fa;/'.r:i·~.,,.H_L c. /,Z,_a? u,,,. !~?N,?TZ':_ ·Jkr/,,,_-,-a,,..,·-,, ,-,(-·n,U<"' ·--r=.,:·;;'-7r.e if~5>e'N fl-:P '.,h-,:"'I', .,.o/"<;"r-~·,,. i"',-,/~i/;i"< ,=¥-•rzUF-<--. _,;w_,.p.,,.,,i' ,c.-nd ,.rife c,,r,,utri-/'"' /r,.-.-,:,.-~n-r,vi'<"' r//(2<."' a.Z,,,:•·<""de'c- O'N,-~l" _.Pnff"rily. ,,..-r":,.t,"y . .,,z,,,.,._.u,,·.-/,h,o· _P.'°al' a.s-/fi,-, /-'"?a,{ if ;Ja.-;7,:r,-":,_.,,/Jc"cod. ,.-,,,._.,,..£'/ ?:.'<~c/,-:'"" r',cc /,/A,-_!"-'"·~"" <;>·' /h-, j~~.,;i&/u,_;,,:i.r,r,·e~· ?X·," ,._r/.r,,-e,'.s ,,,,.,-..-,,_r ___.qv.,,·n.a--<.;; /'/a-./kiz __ /,~,.,,.~,c;~. -.('i;,=..,.-,..,.-,-,.,.H9Awr.- :,~·';; 5:/,:;~"S~:;; ::::~:.;;. :.;J·;,-::·;:;;;~;~:;--;;;5 ;,,-:::,;;;:;;·;_~-:.::>\;;:;;:j:~t: .:::,:i;;;:- 'D;,;;;:;-::::;;;t/,t::~h:::,;'';,/,;';::~:;~=;,~~;/;;::; ;;;~~;-:,_-;;~,':;7;~/;;:;";;~~;;~~-:~::;,;" ·:,·y-.d:-,r.«-o·:·~JJ.J"_f,-·iiu., rpc,,tl'e,i' b;,-' ,,-,,,,,,;-e_ ('>~,,,_,../,..,-c. ,,_,-/e-arn, h',;.rce """P_"o/ at!h:V.Y, ,,.,.,,,,-:,:,:11!. p,;,,.e,'; a.n?.i /h"e-·/:;:/;:;"<'~;~:;:s· ;;:;::t::;;:::: .. ~'.~;::;~:;.~;u-:;;.(: ... ;:h;,~;:;~ ~~;;;::;~,:~JJ;;::;t;;:~;:;; ;;r::::?;;j :·.,._,.u/,u'. . +._:;;i:;:;:;:·~.:~~:,.,c·~;;:;~.""".J::;::;'_d('.7~z ,7ar -~~·:?•f?,_~·-.:tM." _.(eds 7.,;,: n74 do¥,;,/ Sq,~ .'9..7.Uh! n,: //. //?hi~ }",;,-/,w ./77/crh"~';' CN/;,,,d·, // .:,,,-,-,',:;;-·£- _//;''*,;, /../ /-.,,;,;..,f ft,,,,n "C,,;,-7,·r~ <i.., "'· ~1,,"',ec,·~·YN;;.N<'O"~-'.,,;,,,\ ·1 _c,,,,f',,·c ,-.;;,"""""" '?h;_,.~;-,.,,.,,..1.:,,. __ .,::Zc/;'//.CN//41':79/,¥f'...lt/. \ :, '-...I (:;,.~·,..(yo/ /,,-",-,..,9 .I"'"' f:.J,.., //u ~ /;, ,../oy ,:/ ;;•,.y.;/;h'.J/ /.1:u,/~:'to-ua./..{.,.;..· ,,-7?;-c,.,-,.,,,-z_ P-';kr...-7)2e r>~_.., ,,,-,d~-r-·,·Y"".-:-_<fX ./K-/,~,-yr,-,,~/,r ,.,,, ,_.,.,,.,,..;;p..--7,r.,;_hz:n~,¥':-''· _.h' S~-;.-/e>rr: ,:,,_,;,uc .ff~"""-'"'H .lrN //v 7-'<"r.J>-r,r_ nh,,-,,-;,'A _;,~,,n,,.-,-,·.c"/.A'//,-.,H,.V/''-./;;·,.,_,.~~,.,." d',.-<_c,;¥,:,_rz: .-;·,,,>' ./e,,Hu. ,fru,c·/,,,..~ /z:,.s ,<~'/'' ,,.-.,·cc.,,..µd/.4,-, Jf;,-.,,_p,;~<'"-"' .,.,.-,.,_,,-.,,=r~;.,,., , ,,-,o' he arA,,-,,_,..kdi=c-7"r4,,.~.( -"&._ ='.crpn'-'c<<' .. C:''"''~ -s~·,c,/,<>d l"'h.--,Cd/'n',-" r•,:a=rZ ·. ·.·_:i:2.f::i,~£:!::37:~:;:;~;;!;;~;::: :: :;:_:_:::::.:.~::~ ;::::~:;;:~·,,:·::/~'~:·.::,,:::$ . /~/./ .Q"A..-r"~, _.,-.:;· • ..;.,,.-,,.-?.--,.h7f,-/H ,·o,-..-?/-'7' /1.'$-~h, rcs,d.;,-,:9,n s».-=-W'<', T'"-.S: fi.--';_;-;;~:;,,,..,.,~ .. ~,;;, '> """ ,,/sc',.,.,,,,,,,,,'<.r<~•~f.Y. »~.Ji rn~n'., "' -'"'j ·. ,,.,.,,.,,.h_.,,,,,.,. 7 • -+"='"'"""· e/.?,~-.>''~"",.;'"'"-'- --------------------· ------------------ o a ~ .. , .. 641.7458 -"'rrcr;o n...,,,._;"tJ· For and In coosidaralJoo or Ooe T ,_, incf o~er valu1blt-<:ona:klenUon, lhe recci~, ul whlc:tl 1.s hert'by ldnowledpd, ,Cz..z,r.: ~"~'"c,,;:""--'"~·~-Ms~-~,z~c~aa;:,,r<-••~N~Q:L.~L..,,,.-~,~dL.~r ... ~_,~,,~"'~RV2!<+· ~1:~.~·,c.,,~'/~(€€A£'---- Clira.nwr" herelnl. h".reb)' ifiJ!llii. conveys .t..fld war£"Mts to PUGET SOUND POW£R & LIGHT COMPANY. 1 Wuhiru11•.-Jt1 col'p(lra\loo ("(irantt.oe·· ht1rain1. for the purposes hereinafter set font,, • perpetual MllllffleQl over, aero,:~ and under the rouawing c1e!crlbed reia.! property {lhe · · Prq.ien1,·· · herel,n ln --~K~lun~nL ____ _ C-..un(l·. Wnshln1tton. The $0".:tti 5 feet. of the e«ast 8 feet of the fol lowing: The west SD feet of the east 175 feet of Lot 12, Block J1 of the Plat of Sarcorlsv!lle 7 a~ recorded In VolUl!lC!I 8, Page 7 of plats, records of Krng CountyJ Washington~ rn the Nor-ti-u 1/.t. of Sectlon 17., Township 23 North, Ranqe 5 i:::asr, W"~l'!, t:xC'~-pt ,b mi!}' bl:' c1lht"twbl:' s4'i for!h h1•n·in Gr&f\l{'c>·s riJtht~ sh:ill ht• t•xnr1s1"11 ut}On lhnt ponion or LhP Property Hhe .. RIFt1u-a!-Way·· h.er1a•i1, de-,;; •rlbild u: !t11lo111s ., RiW}[-ul'•Way 5 x 8 fee! W'--•hiln-~WfM-Hnn•---~HHHHH_.,._LQ£.low:.h.r,vJ.dlh.llllll adi..li.l.Lle..ul:1...amtec.lJ.iw..dc5.cciti.ld U5 Coltrms: as described ~bOve. \ 1'11rpc""" Gr.mt~ .... -:hi.11 ha\. n~tn,~·1. 01,1cr111,•. mnlnu,ln, ,repalr. r('f>lan. and enhrse or.,:, or mur•• ..i,1:·1n,· tr,,uMni,.,.iol\ a,'1<1 ur ,lli:.tribulion Un .... ~ O\"'-'T Lll1<L or 111\0cr the Qlsttlt·Of•Wav IDJtelht•r with 11.tl m1:·1·-.~'lr} or c·um,~1u.-n1 iolJ-lput'h'lnmcl.'b o, ... refi>r. "'hio.,l\ mB)"lm:Jud1;1bu1 ur .. , nol llmhed tu lh•• lnl\owlru1 ,1 [ht•rh,•ad f;u:-UUl":1. l'olci,; aiid.'Dr lDWl'I"!. ~·ich cro!is:1rml>. b-rac\•,i:, tt'UY" .. ml ,11!l'h<it:,.. i:kct, ic 1ri.lns.mJs;-;1on .in1I rJb1nhurim1 ILm.•s. commuhil'lllion uncl -.1,=n,,l Lin,-,.,. lrllflMurm~·rs h Undl!"rJrovnd h1<"Hltlt'!i Uml•·ri,:rwM <'tinthliis, c-llbh-~. ,·1:1uh~. munhuh.~. s""lll·ht·:-. ;inrl 1ran~rorm1·.r~. seml·hurled or i,:ruuni1 mounu.11.! filt:11111••,; sul'h a, rmd:,. 1nm .. 1ornu,r-. 11ml ~.,.ileh•·~ 1-"<11!011:lni.:. tlw inltlal L"onstnictlur, of Lts facdltitis. Gnui1L'C.' may from time to !lme construct sueh add.i- foi111l lln..-1. 111lll udlt'r focilhl!' u, lt muy n,qulre . .! Ac., . ....,, c;r,1111<.,, -.hall ha\·1.• 011• ri,i.:111 ur ,1n-1-s:, 10 1h1• Higtll•or.wa)" OYl·r .ind .ic.·z-u .. ~ 'llle J'>rop1tr1y to PfllllJlo· <,r,,m,·,· 11, ,.,, n·,-.,. 11-. rrWn., Ji,-r,,m!!Pr. prn1·111t~J. lflllt C'ir,l/11~· .,hall a>mp~satc Ciranior-fpr an}' ,1,1m,11,:,· 1n ih,· l'c,11il·rt~ r.:iuM•I ti) llw ,·x1.·rt:"1~1· of ,-;,;11! ri,:JH of ilCn·ss . . 1 Cu11l.n,1t rd Tn·P1 liranr1..,, -.hull tmvt• Ute rluM tr, <'IH or-lrlm ww a11ri nil bni,;h nr-lrL"llS suindln8 or ~rowtr1~nrmn lht" Hi;i,)'11·1,l•W.iy 1u1r2 111:.o lhcrtghtto cul CJr r~tm any tre,a,?> uron ih,• J>rnp1•nr whJch. In fallln1, ,·,)Uld. In Or'ur.r· .. ··~ n._.MJnllhk j1,dAmrnt. be II hw:ord IO Gnu1lt't··:-. f.,L'llhle~ F Gnnror'" t/"lt' of RIP,T•of•W•) Cirnr.•rir n•srn-,., tilt' rli;;ht lo 11:,to 1hr Rl~l·Of·Wll} (or any purpasr rn,1 wrr.,1-.i-.ti-ru "1111 flu· r!,lt1ts h(·rdn ,1,;:-.1n11-d prrwhl1"tl, L'1i.t c;r.ln!or shnrl nrll Hitl'ill"\Tt"T ,.,, matn111ln 1tn:., b< llrllns or utllt'r :.1rm·1un• un 1Jw flil,:hl·of·Wuy ,1111J ,iranlur ,h111J du no hla~lln.ii 11,llhln mo rt•,: r Gran1ei:'5 fadUtlC'!I 11.rUrou1 <mir:h•1• "Prmr 1ur11n1 ron.,mr J ~-Jndemnll}' Hy acr~,ptJ~ .iml r'l'<"OnJ/n11: I.his 1·11~1 1ml'rll. or,mlt'I' ;1/1,r/.., ... ro lnckmnHr anrt llnM hn.rmh·~~ lrntnlllr fnJm ,mr and ~II claJm:; for 1ramH,t1~ .-.,,fft•r11J liy My rNson 'loh!cri may he cau~•.1:I ti_; GriJlltt·e·,~ •·Xt•rr1-1t• of 1h1• rJ;'hl'i hr.•rc>ln arantt.o,:1. provldtd. thllt Grnncee shall nnr ,,,. r1~pun-.lhl,• JfJ Gr11nwr for 1my 1lam.u'-1'.~ rt•;'i.Ultm,.: from JnJurh•, wan;· 1wrr.c11 ('tlUM!d 1/y 11c1s or 11mh;s1on<. nf rir:mior h M1tnduiun,•nr f/11 1 r1t!}!1~ h1•r/'Jn itr'anr,'fl :>1~11111 conU!'llf' unlll !ttld1 r111w .u~ (irnnt,••· ,·,,11.~,·~ 1" n:.,• !lw mwu t1f·Wl1J. ff)r :i p1•fJ()IJ (lf fi1·e 1~1 :;u1.•c1•:o:...l\'f~ Yt•ar... !:1 wtJld: 1.•,·(!n! 1h11, •r"~•-mem •-h111t u•rm111/jr,• 11nrl ;ilJ rli,:l1b lwn1rn,la'r :,hull r1 \rrl ltJ (;ruruur /)rO\"IIJt.,l, 1b11t no atJirndonmL"l! -i'1nll tit" <l•·•·rrwrf tn '111\•· ,,,.t,1rr1~1 ti·; r1·u~rn1 of c;rnulPi'., (,ulun· 10 inlrittlly in,iull 0-.. {,id/JU,ufi 0,,1 lht.• Rl,i.ht·nf-WuJ \IJllllll .m_i p•·rJud or llmr' frnm 1111' d1111• ]ll"r11)( "' ... OJ C 0 ~ ! -,., ... iLi.,Jt , ....... ..,, m1 -Th• rtlh,. ...i 1111lct'3fd-"'"""'-llbfll ~ 111..sa 1,,,.,m or..., .. b\ndlnv. up;;M1 uurtr ~v• ... ccesson uc1 am'1l'a.-~ ,Uiia fii.. JJJ1JJ!:1tf JVJ U.::l II~ OATrnthis~dayat,.:5""_.epV:A(/V'l'-, !9..I.L9._. CRANTOR ·;:,, J. .A ~TATE Of W ,\SlltSCiTO."i 1111 un .. _ ,\;,,) ,,! ------- ··-----... ..i ---------- lwl<Jn• n,,.,. th,• ul'ld<!n.lfJl•~L. pt·rMm•1l~ llplW\lhJ __ _ _ .. -~ __ • 10 m01 k:',o\l,ir, to hi.• Uw 11rwl -------·- n·"l".,.,,,,,i. ut lho: curpan1lon lh•l ecocurnd th~ f<trf'Jl,Cltn~ lll">lf\lment, um ~knu,r,l "l_.:."1 ,n,· ~did ln~irum...-.1 1n lw th,. fr""' ...-..1 ,·olu"-1•1")' • .,t .....t dteni af ~11111 earr,t,r .. unn for lh,• 11~,·~ ancl pur'\l(l1,,.,~ Lh,.r,,111 ,n,"1"111•>1'"1 a,11.1 ""' u4il1 ,.,...,..i !NII . i'.li. ._ aulh<>rt1,~1 1,,, ~•'<'>.>1.-Ul•· •111<1 1L1-.1n,nwnt anol 1h,ot u,,. ..... 1 ,.Ji,K•"I "' th•· <.:ur11,·rah· ,01••1 ul •AHi <.'.Ur'\lUl'&Jl:i ... ~ .. ,., 5J r JJ¢;:····. 5~ .. ~~· , \111'.'.E~ ... MY 11.,-..11 ., ... o on IVl!\L "~:Al. h(!n•10 arr,]l.~.PfAI~ ~u nr~t .1,.,,...~ .... r,uw, ---~~7 t,,.· f!,-, (!,· iJ r~. <llnll: "' --------------· ---- t-.' :-} ,t:1 ,.;. J..A u i. \ C-r··t-e.-,, .,_ _ _._...;.._IDM!GET!DtJlll ...,...,1; LICHJ COIOAltt, I~ W"PO-c.r,.,_·· ~.......,,.for .. ,....,_,........,....11111 .... •..,... ___ ,_._ _. ..... ......._. _,...., rNI """""> ,it,t -p~" ~ !ti c...i:, ........... noe south 5 feet of thee.au 5 fee, of the west 10 fut of tl',f fol t-i"'J: The .. H SD tut of lot 12, Bloc;k 3, plat of S1rtorlnlllic, es recorded t,, \loi..-8, P•ge 7 of Pl•O, records of King toun!v, Washington; In th .. fk>rtfwoest I/It of SectlGII t7, T°"'"ship l3 North, «1nge 5 E;!IH, lr',f't. ~I u -, !-. ........_ -r..,a R..--C.-'s rl.-lblll bl --.i --pm'Ucll ol -P~ 1 .. ltl,tll-riil-WII)'"" ....... ,,,._...... ........ A RW,t-<I(·~ 5 l 5 !Ml t Ma IE la;----------------------------.i-41J_.M< __ _.,....,., ........_ ar. described above. l 1'111...-. C~• *-!J 11au ~· rwit 111 -.-• ..-, .,.._, .....-. ~ • _....,...,. uode-rrl'UIIIO d'K'U'ic ~ alt• dlM....,.._ .,.._ .... _ _...a.a..,. .... ..,.....,.. ... JIil ,__,.,, er -taMII. IRIII"~~ dlenf,:,r •tilct.JN)ildmdetat1•••~ ID .,.tot--.:~ O!llllulw. ~-,_ffll>lll<'aloQ IIMS. ,-.i.s.-. •. ...nd,a.md~;-S~f//f .......... llclllltn FClllonrll 1M IPITllil CWr ..... f'fiolld 1-.~Jow. ~..,. ,,_ llaa• .._._a.<* ....... r--.. • IC -,-1.-. 2. ActtllL r;,--.iJ MO"<&>e-l'l#'"d-"' ae •~w.r-a -.. p._..ry 11:1 -..bis <l-11> n<>N"""" 1,s np1~-... p __ U>olG.....,..~l~O' Gn111or !or Mt......, 111 die P,-,.ty <:111-.l by llor -= ... <olaidnalllol-,; J ~lelill: ta.~ c;,._, . .-i, ;.,_ WIit ID ti--U-. Ila-. u ...... .........,,I_ ...illlln - l!ltfl,.,.. ... " RI m1i· lnel Ml 11r-llR .... 1UtM...r·Way WI lile, ..... 1 ..-.Illy ~ ID eAn,, <OIi ... po,,,_.. flit !<>r.h m ;•ftra.;r¥ I i><-rMI pr,wld,ed l!>lt i,.i,, •IIC *'). -'"'tr\,.. GIWt\lH, tholl, 111 ... Bl.-1 ,......, prac.,il~~ -,o~ ;t,• 11,e,,.of-'ll/ay "' llte csabtlaot 11 ,.._ .111.'Hdlltlti)' prier \0 IUffl -,rt,, FGl .... lfll Ill,, ~ ol. Gnn•·• ..nStt_.:rnomr! 1-11•~ l'".r•lc.r "'8)'.......,,... 9IJ .,.._ lmp-llO 1111 l~lllt, of ltll' llpt-<,t·Wq,. "'°""""' thu., ·r-nr -pl .. a'<ll&Ubr,p-..,,_~ -Wbc, .,,.--,.Ny.,.._.w~or lmpratl:l<tl &ar Glwll•II> , ........ -,.._,~ I. --·, u .... ...---.,. ~ ·-.. n,Jlt W -11k, !Utltt-Qf-Way for a:, Ja'11111e IIQI 1nconal.ll&I .-,111 ... ''*'""lln-.-!Jr ..--i..a. pro,,~·._~ -.II -~..,. _.. •t .....«4lfW or OM" '-'""""~.., ~ ll>c111·llf-V.a)· afl,cfl .. _. .....-1-.. ,di h -.:1•1111'• ~ ...._ ....,i.: Ill-. •l .......... ....Una or Olltoer !urm o/ .,.,,.sin,c,iotl atf!l'il)-lib&!) ~dme..-, ... ,..,.....,, .W.-W 6-ri, 1w <ll>--'Ir_.,,. ,;r.,-·~ fa,,ill,I• M <hl' R'fh,...i.v,·•i. or e.'ld--lht, lolzrod _.. • -~; -' hi M bl.llllq -.JI br, ~ .t11tl11 1~ le.t of 11W' 11,..,,...r.w.~ .1 W.,..Jti,·. ~} -..,u1111 "'1 l'fUlrCiftf, 11111 -l. ~ ._ ...... to indomnlfy -lic:,ld llann.lN• (ir•111or from "")" ond ,1,11 ~i.im, l<rr ~ ...rrM.i bi, 111'1) ~ --, 11,., ,_,.,. b', Gr-·o u1N:IH ,>f VI• r1,t,lf. iw- M••rnl'd pro,·-11\or ,-.,._,... ..i.ll -tw, •-ul:N<! it, Qr-1$r • ........ •••dtloll f,-111)llrl• 10 "") ~r""" , .... _, t,:, .,.., or ...,,,_larlo o/ G.....,., • AN*--flit~ .,mret11 &nal,11;1 """'I.,....__ •""' .._ N ar.,,..,. ..-o, 1M .. ilW,, of"•~ In, • pmod of lrn ,~1 ......,_.n ,-.-,. lrl-.. -lhl• --1l .. ....._..,. llll .,..,. •-• -.JI NW..-1 l<l c...-. p.....--Ill>~ llloll .. ...__ 10 ti.• -rnd b, ,_ rt Grat•,..·~ /ailllr• 10 iroltlllll] lMWI ,11, ractuu .. • .i,. lt••·al-'Wa,, •llllll,...,.. lf*'W' d ~ !ram N -........, 7 . ......_. _. ~ 1'M n,11u IOtd Dbltp~ or.,. paru• .i,a11 ...,,... "' --· o1 -11,, hwt,,. .,. u. ... , •• ....,.,,i •• -----a...1- " ffATI 0, W-.m:l'I l . a CCIIMTT OF 1L..:.:..!:.:_ 3nl\"31138 ·~~i.~1'?':··,, ·o:: u~n,:;, B?~·.c.i '.''.~:'~ 1.:·:n ,c-•1 ,, , , pJOl3H JGI O U .. ,, .... , ... , o. • .,,.....,__.....__,,J,r!rif1o/i j/fV.'(l),:U .•---•"-•~-...._ ... _. ................. ..__----. .. ......._. .. ~._. .. _~.n11 .,.......,. ............ _ .. ,..,... ............. GIYDI ..... wr NAN) AICI OFl'IOAL IM1. .,._3t. £; ., y,., r ... ~ """'"~---l . OIi Ml-*:,: .11_.~~::::-· ~ --:,.,------.......... . ............ _,... .......... -. ......... . ,.....,...,...,_ .. .,...,rr--~--..,.d----.ror--............ ..,... ______ _....... ...,...'"'_ ........ ____ ... -tft'INIKN~--Mld-- NOTAIY PllllUC ......... lllaS:..dW ........ ....... __________ _ ~-, ~:, i1 ,,. 12 o; ••_,·; ·I ,.'!I ... ; lo! ~. PUGET PO•z» EASE.\.fD.'T FOR l"'\:Df:RGROL'XD F.1.ECTRIC SYSTEM SCHOJL DISTRICT NO. 403 Q JI.I •::s~_ -,1 r·Gr.u,1...-h .. ,,.,r,1 \'Tanis r.n,w,.,.., ~n;l ,~.,rr~~,,, 1,, rn--:FT Sill ·-.,:r, Nn\ f'.R ir ur;tn 1 J)\.1i'.\ '.:\ " \\';r.sh,n~»r, "~ pol";,,hr,o r·Gr,m1,,,. h..; .. ml r", 1h·· P"r;""'"' 1-,, ,, mah , "' lnrfl " I" ,..., ·,ul , .-1-.,,m,.~· ,,,.1, , ~ ,,,.., .-1nrl '", r ,h,. fol lmo.1nsi df>l',Cf"1h,,rl rral f'l'"l'>Nh /!h,,, · Pr,'f"'n, h,.r, ,n, K1.n9 C',>1mt1 "~•hm"'"'l Lots l to 10, Block 3, Sartorisville Addition, according to Plat recorded in Volume 8 of Plats, page 7, records of King CoWlty, Washington, as located in the Northwest 1/4 of Sect.ion 17, Tovnship 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. Except oD may be olhen.nse !lf'1 forth hertrin Gran1~·s ri¢lh ,hall b,, e~ upoo that portion r,f 1ht Pmpertv (!ht ··11.,,;111. cf wav~ here-in] i' .saibed i" folk,,.,.ss A R~I-Of-Wi>; _ fN!t ir. "'~dth h111nii ---'-·-· __ fo.-,1.-,£ sur.h widrh ufl Pach ~,<Wof aa>nlt'f'· line ddenbed as foll="' As now eonstructed, or as may be construi:::ted, extended or relocated by mutual consent within the above described property. l. l'spiae. Granlee slwU have the ~I lo c:oo&ruct ()Jlfmlte, ~imain, repair. replace end enlarge an ~ ~ tran:mri3llion and/Of dimiburion ,:,.'Siem DJlflTI and midel" the Rlg!klf-Way toeether ...-i!h .ail neDe:S$1il'Y or C£1n\l"t'!ruent ap- purteoanas therefor. wrudi may include but are not lim.il'o'd to the follo,,risig: ~ oondum. ca~. c:ommLDDCation lines: vanlti. manholes. switche!;. and tnnsfonoers: and smn!-bllried or gtmmd moonled faclibes. F~ the initial (X)ll- struction of its facilitie!I. Grantee may fr(Tn tiTM 10 tirne ~ s1'd:i addiOOMJ [aciliti~ a it ma.y ~- 2:. .\a;ell.. C,antr.,e 5h.ill have die tight of. a,x,es:s t() the R~t-of.\Vay ovet and acro,s lhe Properfy 1oer,ableGranlee lO """r- cise it, n,:ftt,; hereunder. provided. 11w Grant a-~U rompcll531e GraD101 for an~· damage lo the Property c:allled. ~ !he exer- ,::ne d sail' ri8h1 of ace.ass i. ~ ~ Granlre may from time 10 time remm,,;i trees, bushe!I. or other ohsh-u,::tions wilhln die Righi· of-Waf and may Je,,.,el and~ the Righ1-of-W.ry lo rhe exleflt reasooab]y ~· toearry OUI the purpooe set forth in Pffl181"3,ph 1 ~. pn,virled. !hat folJowing any such won:. Cran1M diaU, to 1Jv, f<Xkm( reas<Wbly practicable. ~ th,, ~I-Of-Way to the condition i1 was immediately prior to sueh work. Fall!IWUI!! the imtallalioa of Grantee's 1mdergrmmd l ·dlilie$..G1'8nW ma.y 1.111&,nab-any ordi~ improvement& to 1he ]eno:l<oCi,pins rlthe Rii!hi-d-Way. pro< '~ lba'C ooiret'$or otbef' plar'lb. shall 00 placed lhet=n which would be uruell!Otlably eTpemi~ or impracnc:al for Grulee to fl'!fll(:M!" and -- L ........,. Dy ~and recmding th.is-,. Gnu11ee ~ 111 mdamllify .nd hokl barmlaaGnmtm: fna _,. md .U clama for iDI~ -1/or dafflllPII, 11111fend try ffl>' ~ which may be ca-,d by lhe cramee·, ~ ol lbe ri,tm ber,ein panted; pnwided, that Glmll8e ahall POI be rapmllihle tc:, Grantot IIN' any injllriel aod/or ~ to 1111y ...- cauaod by actJ or omimom or Granlor. L The righl!I hi,,rein gr11n1o,d shill! vmtinul' unhl !JIJo.:h llm" as Gran lee ceases to~ the Ri#i•..,J-Way for 1 pe,r;od of five (51 ... 00l!allle y~. in wh1di l!Ven: lh1>, Pasemenl sha!l ,,.r,,1111atf! and ell ri#IIS hereu~ sball ,.,..-eM to CraQ-- lor. prwi&d !hat no >1bandoomen1 Wn bP deemed to ha~ uocurro,d by reuoo of Gtantee's lailur., lo initially itllllll i!S facililia on !he Jli8ht.of.Way wilhill any period of hme from th<! date ~r ...... f 7. S-,. _.Mllllpll. rbe rishb and ohhMalioru: of 1he p.arti.,. stiQ;I ,mm to the 1>enef11 of ;1nd be hindmaupoolheir r~sua:e9'0f'l~1Tlr· FILED FOR RECORD AT AEC'JEST OF· 0452009 PU'.iET rrJwrn ,,.l,al'J KJ/U R[Al [STAT[ DIVISION 1-'UGf.l POW£~ BLOG 235/66 B[Llf:VU[ WASHINGTON !lllXJ9 i, J.1'TtN'l'I0Y I· P. CLUCUY .... ~- s.: 1·;,~1.. ;'.C:f ,;,:.u .... ¥.1ri Cv. ~re~ P,1,.,~r ¥,,f&,"11 ,Dep~tt ' . -- ,.. ( -- n I I I 1, l!! ·1 a .• I ( WHEN RECOIDll> JIEll/111"' TO- ~ <lfdlc aq, cat. ---'Z!DQ ... "-,_.. by and bctwccn 1.srina A Kmk:c • • • ....... _ GlwMCtil Mw: (et 1 fl1Q rt a ff: -+: 19 ?5 .. \ hettinafter ealkd -Grantot(s). • and thr crIY OF RENTON, :a Manidpd c«ponlion oCDlg c.ountf, i Washinglon, httcin2fttt caDcd -Gtanttt.• \ Th;.tmd.Grmtor(s),fotandlncomiduwtiWollhcSUDlaC$ U$l z.,j.q;, '8 paid by GrUllec, and OChtt ftluabk: coosidu:ation, rccdpt of .,..bi,di a ~ r c1o bf ..., ~ prc,ents. gnnr, bargain, sdl, COlffl.7, and wanma 1mto die slid Gnmrec. Its~ and ~ H!ligns, 1111 eDa'JlmC for publk:: tJdlitlcs. (lndodiqg watcrmd ,ewe-) w1lh necrmry&ppWfcmuiccs OKr. 1ll1ilkl"' thro'llgh, aattiS Uld upon the rolk,wtng desal:,ed property ('-flpl:,af-w2f) bt King O:xuf. W25hingtbn. morc·putieuladydcscrihed as (olbws: i Tbc East 12 fen cl Lots. I thruagb ,-. Bloct. 7 Rentoa. farm Plat Ao:ordial, lo lhc Plat thc:reol rccordcd in Volume 10 ol.Pbcs, Pqc 97. in ~ Coaaty, 'WashiDgton.. . The East 30 fa:t of Lols I 1broUgb 3, IDcd. 7 kaloll. falm. Pia: ~ 10 tbr: Plat mcn:of n::oJl'dcd in V-olumc: 10 of Plds, Page 97, ID Dig Cola:y, 'W'.l> .... I .... on. Said leulporaty construcUon nscmmt tball remain in bee dmtQa: .,..,._., md md sacb tlmr as chc utilitic:s and appurtenu,ccs bzft: bccD a,ccepLed b 1hc opcnrioll a:ad by the Gnntu- bul nat b1cr dml Qr:rrmbq 31 J99f _ -,1-934'3 ~t./OV-/rt. 5J5.~·'1'1.l'f- ·,:- • I • • • i Forth< pwpo,cof-. """"'1rudln, -..-----maintaining r.'ff Unn, tlJldhtt 1rilh lhr rlglll otfnrp:9 and care-dado 1dbout prtor ......... ol any suit or procttdings of law and wilhc:U lnCUrriQg any kpl Clbllpd(Ja or-llllllly 1hcrdltt:. ~ the 1nitial constNdion of Its bd.Htk:5, Gran1ee may from dim: ttt timt; «lnltrUt1; sach lllldlt:iomJ flldlllks u it may rcquitt. Thfs cascmcnt is granted ~ to dac followitc kf1m :lb(( 05 I . The Grantee shall, upoa com.pktioft of any wort.~ the pmpcrty cO'VICffli by the ca:ICIIIC5, ~ the 5~ of the casement, Uld any pm.te improRmenb disturbed~~ during a~ofthcwort, t5ncutya~IOlheCCDdllioa lhcyWtttkl.it 17: t; before COdbiXJICt.iik!Olofthc wodr ara,try by the Gnnltt. 2. Grantt.tr shall f'l:tain tbie right to use the swfaor: of tht: ~ • long as soda mt does not inlfflttr Wid:i the cucmcnt ~ ,IT.UJlCd to lhc Gnnke. Gnntor shall !IOI, bowntt, hirtt the tigllr to: a.. Erect or mainlaln 'UI)" buildmgs or 5IIUC:tUra w1thln. the asc:mem; ar b. ftlnt trees, shrubs or vqptl3tiOo. haYing *ep root patecms which may cause damaF to or intcrfrn: '9i'tth the utilities to be placed Wkhin tb:: c::ac:mcot by lbc GrVJICC; « c. Devdop, bnd!lc:ape, orbeaw:lfythc-~ma lnmzr'Wll'f'whic:hwauid ww J7 WTQ5C the: cosu. 10 the Gnntec ol ratonng the ~ area lllld any prlTalc :lmp.c tb::n::n. d. Dig. tunnel or pcd"onn other fOffll!I of COft5UUt'tian acmtlics 91.iJ ~ done-on the property whidl would disturb the: compaction or w,carth Grantec'5 &cilitic5 on the rf8ht~. or~ 1he lall!ftl support facilitks. C'. Blast Within fafttt:D. (!5) feet of the ri1!114-wllf. This nscmmr shall run With the and dQiQibcd hcral, and sbaD k hladlms up,o the putics, thdE" bdts. Slk"~ in ink?a1 md uslgns. Granlors ~ Cha thcf att: 1hr lawful owucn of the ahcwe ~ and mat rfk'Y hz9C a good 2nd tawfuf ,ww ro csecuk: dm :aw w STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING -- ) ) ss ) ,nd ,nd ,nd .... :r1:,~ ::::.~·-?-!"'"""!":;'.""-1~</~'i~-t --.... hlJ -- ,-. __ ,,,,._..-,._;: __ . ' • • ./ ' .ai;.,· ' - . r I '! ... ii i 'D I L I I ~' I i ' I . I i . I • ' I ----+- ---+- ---I-- ---+- ---+- -~ N 3TH SIREEI • • · I· • p ,, ORIGl~l~I EC:5£ iAA ~OT PfQL11REO \ EASEIIENT s., f ,;;:''Jict '~;:,: ... F,:,, .._,., ~ ol Cr1t C1C11o (11 DO) ..:i ...-~~ ho -..pi al Midi• f*"°J ~.tfiNRXf cro,w&wr:twc:o;s trna-;,("G(.--__,j,.._,.".,. ;;.· ~ _, __. m il\E£T SOI.N> POIJIIEA a i.JGri! ~Nl'f. a~~ fur.,..-'-1, IQ: the ~ ~ -to.1\. a....-....---· a,e,oa ollw:I ._... Iha "**"19 dNcftl«I :'NI p.~~°1',,;,pln)·,-iritc..gCor.n,.~ ~ . .i...ot. 12. Bloek 1, Renton t•nr. Plat, ac:oor-dir4 t-:i the plat a re-::c,::ded in \':::ilu.e 10 of Plats. page 97. Jl.eco:-ds of f.ing ~ County, W45.bingto.n; Situat~ in the MOrtbwe:at ~arter of Section 17, Townahi~ 23 North, Jwnqe 05 £i\.St. W.N. i:.ICtf)I u ~ be mi-.. IDl1h "9IMl Gr.,...·, nghls ~ t.. ~ l4)(Jtl~ pottOl1 ol ~ Pf~ (!l'MI "i=iq>!<A-W.-," law\J ~ • t*Jao5 J..fuolrt-al·W&)'bll.W-11'1-.dl!>'et..... ·11 Tl 17 Oill'IH!.~1•1111 rl' 1dnc:Jibadu ·- The West fiv~ \51 fe~t a£ the i&bove described Property. 1. ~ ~ Villll 1-. it. ngtl: i., cansw::t, ~-~. ""*· ~ u,d .,.i.,v. one or-~--.-olDl~--~~\ll'Glllh~-Wa, ..... wiltl.il~ or~~ -....0 . ...t.;11 ,,-,. n;:k.dl, bul-!!di lirnlld b'lha ~ L a....d ....... PoilS and.flW ~~ ~.~.~rd an:hor$, ~ D'mnDDl a'l0dlltrb..4IOl'l lw.s; ~ ,rll 19111 w.s: ~ ti. ~llir,;IIM. ~ IXll'O.lil$, ..-.-*.~. ~ ~ ~:~Ot ~ ~lacilml IUCh•pa:ls. ~and~ ~ ... ...,. ~ a1 a t..ilbn. c....-. rn,,y m,rn rwn. w. -IZXISlTUd: Ra::h addibonal .._ ~ohlla::ii:ift.at,,_,,~ 2. "-,, Gra,ae lilAI. tia... ltw ngN ol -.-ID lhl Rigtll..gt-W-,. ,,_ and acroa it. Prot*IY to ..,.... '--*" IQ -• ,.,. ~-pronad. that~ ll'all ~ ~ b any dar"""9 11';1 tt.~~t,,. .. ..-..dNlid19'1DI-. 1 ~ oll t..._ GI.-INI ,_ 1ha r9'f. 'D WC OI" tml uiy and .. IM\,stl or UNS sand..; Qt ~ l40! .. ~-n 111o,. rva 1::i ai Of....,..,~ upon sr. ~ whk::h. in 1;a1rig. Q:l.lld 11 c;.,...--·,~ ,....... ... haallllll ~·~~ 4. c.r..r·• • • ... • -,. ~ .-ti. raglW; 11c:i .-t!l9 RiQtll~·W-r tor any ~ ..... -...-. wllti .. ..,.. ~ ~ pn,nSad. .... Gs...-.... -CIClll--=t Qf ...-. ..,. ~groet......-onN ~-d-llllaf and ~slllll do nobllalil'I;..._ 300"'9t:dGrarae"t. ... llfllhDUt GranlM's ""°'......, ~ S. .......,._ BJ -.apllli nl ~ lhil .-ll. C.... ,v.. t:i nanny and 1'll)ld hannlitn Gr.....-~.., -.. ~ IDr ..... wdlm .... ....., ti, .. ,.,.on.. .tli:n _,. ba ca-i bl" 1M ~'s __,.. ftl Iha tigMf ~ ...-,ct; JlflMIIMI. M Gt.-. ... ngt t,a ~ 11C1 Graww Jor q ..,,,._ ~~IIO ... ~c:a,-dby&taor-vfc.r.-. I. TM,.. _, ~ .... IIIIMnlll id! IUCft -a 0,.,.. ~ IO -h Rlj;Jh-d·W.., b 1i,....Sut M r.;J._ ,-s.. ll'l lllllld\..._ba _....-.a ...... ana 1119* ~ 1h11 ..-, KIGraQI, ~ '*"° ..,..__.. .... badNff.otD r-OCIMNd bJ"fNIQf1 r;;rl ~·,._,..IO......, ....i •.._on tw Aigt-.-d·'!Nf ..a., 11'17 pMld o,' 1111"11 from P dM-,.,_._ 7 . .._.... _. ...... n. rigla .-.cl cdiglliorl$ ol 0. part1a1 shill nn, '° Iha balwfil al .-cl ba bnilng '4Q'1 e.-........ ----and -.gr.. 711 JO 2.f.* f'M:91' (A/-t,I) "91111 !i. 1"4 i*m .t .. · __ ~;._ ___ ... ' ·• -----------------· --- • • J2 X 11 -- - -, • ) ~TEOP!'toa~~--"" •----~-• ~-~· ~~---------i•_:::.L NDlwy F\dr.-in ..clb ... Slia,d .......-~ '-*Ill• L , +:<:-:a r., ..,. .............. N,'21 ~"I ·'19S:: STATE Cl="WASHNGT0,1 <XllfTYt1' ss 0,, .. ___ ., r;rl ll_~ ---...... ~ l"dlk .... b .. Sllllaaf~ti/---..iR-.~_...., 1:1'°"" kn!Mnl:lt.h~J~in.-:l.t,Q __ ....... ~..._._-... ___ ..,. ... ______ liwa!dlllDUa,yct..clcllilldblllt--,......"""" - Prn:Nlfflt: __________ _ ,._,. Nlilc t'I nl lr:lr ..... -....._.. ......,. __________ _ yt,.......-,:apiw ______ _ f bfO c•.-, ~cCOf.0 AT REQl8!' Cl'l ~£.t~~·~~;::AAmEN'T :·o.,=.-.::::...-. -- /I. ~tiAI.JIJlla I .. ·---··' j -----~-----------.. _' ' I I . . " ORIGINAL PUOE'T' ....,ca: EASEME~~----~"------- ¥' ··-·· Kif lltla II\ rons.o.bO.'i eJ. °"' Dollar (Sl.X; a!lll alN---.i:o-L N ~ = -IS :,,e...., ~!'Oloiadg-1. Bf'"o\'1 H f,j Fffl?BTH I VQlfPl[J?) '."'G,.~ Wi.--, '1r .. 'll ~ ~ _.,.,_ '-' PUGH SOLIHO POWER 6 LIGHT C(M>AN.Y. & W-.'WlglOll ~-rt-r-· M<W.i. br IN f>o~ h9,.tri«llill"NCll;wln;•~-r;t0'9r,~ana ~-~~ ,-~ -~ ... ~·-... 1infii11 ........... ~ t..ot 13, Block I, Re:r:on far::i !>::n:, .a::::ir::!l:':J; to r,~at recorGed in \'ohin.e 10 of P~3'-S, ;:~g..-::11, Reco:.:!3 o! K1n,; Cv..int;·, iiashini;t.on; sit1.:at.e in the N:>rt~west ~-'.; o! Sec:.-c-n ;.:.i."::",s'-.!;:> .2:i North, Ra!l.<_, 05 £.~st W.M. hce;::ti a, n,ay ba ~ 581 lon:h i-...., <>·~',. ~ i,h.lt 1M u•l'C$.a ~, 1~.-p;;,o':IN! ~ Lhll ~ ,:l\il high:-al·W•y"~)~.s.t,:,11,.',ws: ARig~-o1-WaymjSJlae111Md'.h>•••-00-=~~~~~~-S'••••aaO'•Q.._ ... ., ... ,_.,o,•••••·•a'<aMO-'•"" ..... ON.;:ro:».U lollows· .t)l\'. :1,, e,._·u.\ls '-" l~) 1'.d ,-f ,ft< :!:he West five (5) fee";. of '-he a;:,;:.--.•e de-scr ~tie:;. ?r;:.?e:-~:,. 1. P'lapMa. Gnd..aial lwft Iha rvhl, ID~~. l!laQlll'I, ,~. r'!lilCt and~ - or more 11\aanc: ..... ._.._ tl'#JIDr diRb.lti:ln ._ c,,,.r -.o.oor-......,. Rigt'k,1-Way ~ 1lllilt, 1111 ,-r or~~,,__ . .tiid1....,. ~biA-l'IDll lmillil:l'&lthlobbMnu: a. OvwhMcl ........ PDIN l'!'ldlDr ~ wll'l i:raaurnm. iir-. vu,s Wld ~ ~ ~arv1~.-:-~an:111igrl,11.._:~. b. ~ ---Undi>~:,tl'IC! c:iondub., ~ ....... ~. l'IIIIC:l'la •nd tranlbr"*";-"~ or~~~~ upma, ~,: ; s~ Folbwng ttw irW&I oomtructioo al Its ~. Grarl!M may t= trtn.1::1 ~ CONb\lCI 11,ff! ait:11:iorwd I~ and~ 1a:alil111$ .u. ll may~. 2. .11:aA. Grill'II .. ahall ~ Ir. ,_. Ill a:au 1D tl1'! R,vhl-111'-W-,, -aid -ltw ~'Ty JO aMbl. G<MIN 'El u9llliM b 19'* flllr-.lM', proo,"id9d. 1hlll Cifwaae, WIIII ~~tor.,,. damq IO l!'ie Propllrty eausad b,-1'-a_.. ol Mid right ct. aoc:-.. 3. Culling gf TrML Gr.-.... &hal han the ,vtl'I IO CU'I or tnw. •"T aftd • tin.Ill\ ar ir.. !Clndrt; or s;irowing 1-lXJn Iha Ri,,t,1:-GI-W.,,. and al9:I !ha 1'pll IO CUI ar tri"I, .., ~ upor, Iha Plt:ipr.;-.icl'~ J'I ~. a.uic! l'1 Gransaa'rl ~ j,.l:fglM,nl. bl I IIIZWd a, GlwtM'l i--.. 4. CnntDr"li UN ol fllllll*WaJ· GI-...,. -tha r.lghl ID -N ~-ol-W.,-IQ>' iSt?Y purpoM 11111 ina:raaanl "*" ._ ,W,.. l'laNirl Gl'lfMCI, .--,cl. N ~..,.. nol ~ or ~ ~ buicmg or 1111w IU\ICl''-ft or,,-Fl.igtkil•Wa,, and~ lflllll do no b6atir,g....., 300 i..t rJ Gral'a,a'r; ~ with( JI G!anlM,'r; prb' ~ _.. s. lndamlly. 9" ~ aNI ,-ading .. _._ Gr.-19N1 l:I, ~ Ml boll;I ll&"ffllNI Gran.or hum .,..,. Md .a Qalllll lOf ...... IIIIMII' ~ -'-"' i,,, ..., PlfD'I. whi;tl mar M c:a.-1 bJ 1he ~·•--=-Cllllherigllll....,,~p,o,,icl,ld.1'11110.... ....... M~IDGr-*"'IDr-r WljuriN ar!Mlr ~ 1111 ll'IJ ~ ca..cl b,' ......... c. Giram:ir. t. at.w•••L Tht n;,. .._.__. ... _.. ......... Gr919aaw llll iaa It. R¢1«·Waf kW I Plftlll GI 1M 15) IUCICNIW Y9M, -1!Mtl .............. llt@I ...,,._ ...i al 19*' hafaundilr ... ,..., •O.. ........... 11D ---4 .... Ill.._ IID._.oo;:vrNI tlJ' -d Gr,_.-.r.,,...,.....,. ....... ...._ ....... ~..,_, .. pr,lllbdd_NM ...... l'lwmf. 1 . .__ Md MelgN. n-, ri8tU ano ~· d t. P9rtiN lhlil nn 10 tnt l;o,afit III n! ti. bnding u,por! ... ,....._ ... ...,.. 711.30 HA ... J. I • • 32 . 1, 'IJ• ""'' .... ~ .. ' I -' ,.,. . ; ii,, . ; .. G:..i -t D.l.TEDINI_~--"> d-~~,~-~·--------------, ... ~ IJ ~<-~~4n§ 5;...., H. ci.wcrtl'l ., __________ _ On Iha II.Ir~ epp,,,an,a ~ me BR)AN H Cl FWCJfW IO 1Mk1-l 1Dtllt h ~•l dw:macl"' .-.ii wt'O ~ 11w M1t1ir1 lll'ld tM..-;i ...._., nJ ..:du 5 Iha r.. av'1'di 11w wnt • h4 "-&rid~ ad .. a."6 lbrttw -and~ 1haiwl ~ Grl/EN ....... "'T 1'11:nd and olmal Mal U'lil \a=-CNlf"gl' ::;:r .. \rl' ,,_'l~'1+--- STATEOFWASHNGTON ) --h-~...k h ~,- An de H Nr,+::.r= Nlxary Pubic Ill and 'Dr !ftt Sza.11 Iii w...~ . ........ _.t...~-,C...----~ ,ss cx:uffiOF 1 0nltliadar'~~b9bllm11 __.tllmam;Mll1>b111hll ~S)~ il'1•-4who uacutadlhllt,llvn ardiofagDWIII rmn.mL-.. and~ ltlll: __ _ si}nlld ~ -•---I~ 1111d voi'J~ Id anc! datd for the USM and p,uipow,s tl»IVI ~i:lr.d. Grvs.~m, l'land and atrcilllalllthll ___ .... d _______ ,,, ____ . STATE OF WASHNmlN oo.MYC<' ss Ni:ay Public:: in aid tor». Stlaaal ~. RNidina • ... --·=-=·---------- On h °" l*Wlellr appe,and bllotl ----~-~-~-~-------Md ai ~kncMnmt.t. _______ _ and ~.d lhe~lhlllll.llQAtid .. ~~-~-.,, .. ~ ............. ;·,-~· ;,;.;;;;~~ .... ~ ... ;;;;-..; • ..,;;;;-- 'o'oluf'IWy ... and Ned al ud ~. lol ltwo -nl pulpllMII fMIWI ~. and .... .-.,; t!'.m: ltJ9Y aulllorizad V ..... aailt ir.n-t and that 1 ...... ._. ... ~ NIii ol Mid~ GIVEN ,,_..!f!f hlndanddflcill a..:ttlil ___ ... ~-------"·---- Hout)' PWlil:: il'1..cl au. S1a1. i:,1 w~ -·----------WJ~.:pr-. ______ _ ALEO FOR RECORD AT FIEOUEST OF: PUGET POWER REM,. CSTA TE i)EPARTMENT P.O. eax V7034 IIElL£we. .. ,..wst1•~.~crrnllli.w. -- ATTN: AUDIEH. NEUSON I I • I . • ., , I, ( < Return Address: City Clerk's Office City of Renton !055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Title: UTILITIES EASEMENT AMENDMENT Project File#: WWP-27-3298 Grantor(s): RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT 403 20081028000318.:: Tax Parcel Number(s): 756460-0170 Project Name: 2008 Sanitary Sewer Repairs Grantee(s): City of Renton, a Municipal Comoration WHEREAS, Renton School District is the owner of lands subject to an easement granted to the City of Renton, said easement being recorded under King County Rec. No. 20080707000225, dated June 11, 2008; and WHEREAS, the parties are desirous of amending and replacing said easement; and Now THEREFORE, Grantor does hereby amend said easement to read as follows: That said Grantor(s), for and in consideration of mutual benefits, do by these presents, grant,. bargain, sell, convey, and warrants unto the said Grantee, its successors and assigns, an easenienl for public sanitary sewer with necessary appunenances over, under. through, across and upon the following described property (the right- of~way) ln King County, Washington: LEGAL DESCRJPTION: The South 15 feet of Lot 10, Block 3 of the Plat of Sartoris ville, as recorded in Volume 8 of Piats, Page 7, Records of King County, Washington; Situate in the Northeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in The City of Renton, King County, Washington. for the purpose of constructing, reconstructing, installing, repairing, replacing, enlarging, operating and maintaining utilities and utility pipelines, including, but not limiled to, water, sewer and storm drainage Jines, together with !he right of ingress and egress thereto without prior institution of any suit or proceedings of law and without incurring any legal obligation or liability therefor. Following the initial cons.truction of its facilities, Grantee may from time lo time construct such additional facilities as it may require. This easement is granted subject to the following terms and conditions: l. The Grantee shall, upon completion of any work within the property covered by the easement, restore the surface of the easement, and any private improvements disturbed or destroyed during execution of the work, as nearly as practicable to the condition they were in immediately before commencement of the work or entry by lhe Grantee. H:\Fl!e Sys\PRM -Propeny Services Administrationl.K __ Mcf\Current Projects\Easements\WastcWtr\MikeB_Requests\Sartori\utilease amrnendment I .doc P,g, I EXCISE TAX .".!OT REQU!RED Kl'Jl )}:-· ,·io-::-ords Division ~~uty Title: UTILITIES EASEMENT AMENDMENT Project File#: wv.T-27-3298 Grantor(s): RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT 403 2008102800031 ~ .. ,.· .. Tax Parcel Number(s): 756460-0170 Project Name: 2008 Sanitary Sewer Repairs Grantee(s): Cit of Renton, a Munici al Co oration 2. Grantor shall retain the right to use the surface of the easement as long as such use does not intetfere with the easement rights granted to the Grantee. Grantor shall not, however, have the right to: a. Erect or maintain any buildings or structures within the easement; or b. Plant trees, shrobs or vegetation having deep root patterns which may cause damage to or interfere with the utilities to be placed within the easement by the Grantee; or c. Develop, landscape, or beautify the easement area in any way, which would unreasonably increase the costs to the Grantee of restoring the easement area and any private improvements therein. d. Dig, tunnel or perform other fonns of construction activities on the property, which would disturb the compaction or unearth Grantee's facilities on the right-of-way, or endanger the lateral support facilities. e. Blast within fifteen ( 15) feet of the right-of-way. This easement shall run with the land described herein, and shall be binding upon the parties, their heirs, successors in interest and assigns. Grantors covenant that they are the lawful owners of the above properties and that they have a good and lawful right to execute this agreement. By this conveyance, Grantor will warrant and defend the sale hereby made unto the Grantee against all and every person or persons, whomsoever, lawfully claiming or to claim the same. This conveyance shall bind the heirs, executors, administrators and assigns forever. All modifications contained herein shall take effecl immediately, and Grantee's exercise of any of the rights contained herein shall be deemed an acceptance of the terms. Provisions and conditions of said easement and this amendment. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said Grantor has caused this instrument to be executed this _!_day of ~~oJl..L. ~~~ REPRESENTATIVE FORM OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT ST ATE OF WASHINGTON ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) Jl',l!~:'j.)'::1,IJL&C...:~.Lj~,C.lJ:.,!;,J_~--signed this instrument, on oath the instrument and and _______ _ H:\File Sys\PRM -Property Services Administration\K~Mcf\Current ProJects\Easements\WasteWtr\MikeB_Requests\Sartori\utilease ammendment I .doc Puge2 ' ' I z (!) > <( .:,£ ~ (0 (l_ N 4th Street --·------- KING COUNTY PARCEL 756460-0170 ·-----------·- ------- ·----~--- ---·-- ----·-~ 15' SANITARY z SEWER EASEMENT (!) > <( --------C 15' TEMPORARY (!) ~ CONSTRUCTION (0 EASEMENT (9 ~----'------·--~-~--L--. __ _J 0 50 100 N 3rd Street 1· = 100' r----c---,---c------~ --1 2008102800031R ;,;, \ When Recorded Return To: Perkins Coie LLP The PSE Building 10885 NE Fourth Street, Suite 700 Betlevue, Washington 98004-5579 Anention: Edward Lin ~1i11,1111111111 FIRST A11£RICAH 2001205 PAGE-ee1 OF eeaJ ae.ee 97/22/2916 14·39 kING COUNTY, UR Document Tltle(s) (or transactions contained therein): Stipulated Judgment and Decree of Appropriation Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: None Grantors/DdendanL'i (Last name first, then first name and initials): I. MONACO LLC, a Washington limited liability company GrantffiPlaintiIT(Last name first, then firsl name and initials): I. RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 403 Legal description LOT 10, BLOCK 7, RENTON FARM PLAT, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME IOOF PLATS, PAGE 97, IN KING COUNTY, WASIIINGTON Assrssor's Property Tu Pan:el/Account Numbcr(s) 722400-0605 20160722001205 001 ,. • ; •• II " 1-;'; ,, L'i. ,,, " " 19 2~ 11 11 '-J 1A ::~ !6 ,, .!: "' "' ;1 ll 13 . .34 " ~~·1 _jj ),I )9 .,o " '1 4_;. " ., § "· 20160722001205.002 16-2-1511&-3. J<N'I' :~: ,. t r: r·, 1-· i t • ._ t i . . ..... ··-~~ 2Dlli JUH 30 Pri 3: 02 KING COUH iY SU?.ERIOR GOUP.T CL ERK .· .. ·. Kt~i. WA Sl.o"PER.1\)k C;,)UJU-OF 1111.; ST,\iE (If WAS! ll~GTON ~C>R KING COUNTY ' I r Hf:NT9NS0t00t. DJ~Tkl(."TNO; 40). ::i municip:.il 1:orpOn:ticr. of Uie Sui ti: of ' 1 W~S,hiii~H,n, , .. • -. I lEVALO(H 0.JRP0RAil0?,J. a W:i:;hint!l<•n, c.·t!Tor.:.1l_an~_SE:'.lJ'NG·tr!AN JtlM •. ~n -· llld1\idi:::il: LORI HOW:Df~'L nn inl!ividual: i_:.XTN:.I\S INC-3 W.1:ihinglcm ro:pDrnti(tfl db3 C~w~ir.t; Esr~; 0.'\ VID SO!:TER01 m\ indM:.lu::i!; UiCJ{\-PELA YO. :m irdividunl: l'.,\Ql'l:.J<J1, -r.1.-llORRn:O I.OCO LU. . .'. lJ W:ishi~rm lim}1ed lL:1.hilitv i;omp::.1)0: :.utF~·iF.y ;_-co1..r:!-: :w_ • iodivi.kal: MON~CO LtC. o W:!..~iln~.on ii~i1c-d liJhiiily.comp3ny: R,''(AN. SAFH:.L . A!°'tl) r'.\.S.,;;,:oCJA'l'ES, l:!\'C_;. \\';ishin,.~n ctirp:1r-.riio~ KF.YBAt'•H::'NATlrn.JAL~ .-·1 ASS()CV,,T,ION: ~JNG cou~.,·,·, a pe,tiiie::,J $\IJ\dh·i~fon oflhe $-lali:-of }\'&shin~o..i.: und ~11 llnl:.~v.,1 (t\l.'n:.:i ml<! 1.lntl\C1W!! Tt'rn:in\$. ' Pcfoni,far:.:s. t _______ ._} : ~1'!PULil,'EO./LIW~lEN'f.~ND o~cr.EE . . , :'~ Arl•!WPl:IA'.t.10}1-! ,J~=-ac,i11;1,~ ... 1 Slll'l.iLA lTill Jt;DGMENT AND DECi-£t qr, APl'R.QPRIATI<)N . Pili"ci:1 ~72l~O{Wlfi05 (('!,ll!(K ·s ACTION REQl!ll<P.D) l ! ' ' 20160722001205.003 .. 16-2-15118-3, JO,,'T -~ ·. 1'· . ·.~ 1 i I • I~ !' II ll 1.1 " I~ ,. " !Ji 19 20 ~I. :!:? ~.f 2.1 ., ·- .mnC:MEl<T ~tlMMAR\' -JliDGME:~'T AF'FECTL'lli TITI.f. l. Ab!-,rc,•. Lc{;t.\ f)c,;cjp\ ic,n t'f Pmr~tty; Loi. I 0,. Blk i. RcrltiJn F:um Pl3l. V ot_. 10 Pg. 9 . 2. Pb.inliff: Rcn1nn S~~ .Di~rid. NQ, 40J 3.·V~"Sl~ 1:-cc l)""lld':' t.1lin:.:o 1.1..C;s \\1tJSl1ing1on limited li:i.bilk,: cvmpny ~. Jusi C~:nj'C!l.:,,.-,\jo_nlPrin.~ip:il fadima11 Am,1um: S4~5.~J~I 5. Cost~~~ Fc.""S: F.;1~h J?ll1.Y Id lienr its D'\'lo'tl c-osu. (~. PNjudgm~nl ln1ercs1:·":/(l,n,:. ~TIPIILA nos Pbimilf RO,TO~ ~C'HOOL.DlqJUCT'NO. ~03 c-Pl;imiO-J, 1hrou~h iu: '· 1mdcr.;::.=n1.~ ll¢m~~,;_9f-Pcrl:.ir,s C;;,ic LIJ\ n1.:f~nt l\lON.4.CO Jl.C: o Wa.-.hirt.t,!lon limitcJ.li:ibilily(-'Qrnp:uiy(~.\iorgco'"'). thrnu~)l"t u.,dc#igncd ~\Jome)', fahl\ r:,u\ 1'urrn.rr. • I 'KoJt;r'!i 0~1t!.C:h & Turner Pl.LC. :.11d bcJ.::ndanl..K ¥_A~. 'SAffF.l. AN'D :\SSOCIJ\ n;._~. .l~C .. :l W:ishir.i,,'l{Jn ;orpor:1lon (~RSA"-"): ;i.!r..crrtpres::-.nt~ t,y:J~ P.l:~~I Iu~r,.~rci,Y !-ilifJl.!L'llc io 1!,~ fo!lc.l\'rll,gfxt., and c,:ttil"'-ill 10 I.!~' of 1i1t fciliowin~ Jud.,gnc:n.and l~>c cf Appropri:ilion. L lr.1hil ("Or,dtm~tiQ:n ::irl.it'?tl, Pl:;i.im.iff tecks to i;oild.1.:mn rii;;ln~ ;:i1\~ :tncflntC"~l n 1~ i;.ubj:::ct rrc-.~1tr. :s ~ of 111:iin:i!Ti. n:.:11!".'L-;c'f»n:mt of ib nC'\v $.;r!Ni clrntt."llt&)' ~hwl c:::mp:ls f_thc .;fcojc:,:f), in King Coun\r. Washing;c.,::i. ii.:;: tAl'ntcmptJI!.i!d in P.l:i.in1iff t l~:-.uru. Rr.:rolu1ioo N-.-. ):.;.. I Sil.ti ilhe -Rr-r.t,iulion-l. 2. The Rts.o!uti:i., ,;rmhoril: .. "S-(bc ~cqufaitioo hy-candcmn~ion or fut! ft!! tit)c lo 1he r~31 ,-proJ*rt;,. td......a.ifo:d !IS·l:ing County ·rWI l'.arc:i:I ~umhcr 72~40t~;. ;:~m,m!l_n!y l:n1:'~vn ~-~36 P.irk A\~u~ i:,ioro:i ~ Rc:.:Jc..n. WA. :1nd .let_':111~· d~rih=d as f,,Uows: -sri . STl!'Ul,,",;Ell Jl/001-IENT A:S'l) Df:CPJ~, _(JF APPROPRit\1.fON-·2 l'aldru. {".1:lic.Ul" ifoie P'S! &i;o;!~ . lilJ:t5•~-!: t:ollfth ~ Sl.ri1~ i'OO i:h..;in"«'. v.-:--A i;to~!!.79 f'~: 4ji.s3~1~ E~ 4!5.6):).,:.;oo' 1 I ! i 1 I • I l i I I ' i ,1 I •: ' • f ' ,, 10 II 0.) OJ ;, " ,. i, ,, iY ,. " n 13 " ,1 ,.. ;; " :,, ,, .s, :JJ :J ,;.i 3.S .. ,•i' _I~ ,';"J so .. ..::1 I ..:J ,.. J.$ •/ "' l '" l 20160722001205 004 l6·2·lSllB-l, iQiT I.OT 10; UU)CI( i. RENTON. F,'.RM PLAT,.~CC0RD1JiG TO '!11E Pl.AT THEREOF RECORDED Iii VQLUME IU QF Pl.JI rs. !•.~GE 91. IN KING COVt,.'TY. \'r.ASl l!N(~l'ON, ·111Cl\.."3fkr Lb:: ··.u41,~n;; A,"NI~ !'-;. r.::rcd"·), 3. M(\!l;lcp;~·tl1c l-e:;fu.d·r..:c: :thil;,k ~m,1t-1·of d1~ 336 t~ A1.·('1mc t.f. Pared, and HS:.·\ =:s 3 et.1rren1 oce~I of1hc )36 P;ui. Avc:nu.:..N. P.rn::t, du ni:11 Ctri"-c:.l t~· PbinfirJ'·s l'tt~ilXt ::nd ucq11tsiti.iJ1 of!hc l~ l~rt A\·trm~ N. ~rt:c~ ~n: in the rUhljc iry~Ctt$l. L~'u..i:: is :1 puhlic use. and th.:. J,rojtec :mcl nc:quis.itkm r,f 1ht-3)6 T'r:r~ A \'ffltlt' ~·. rere::1 :11c:ncceiS,:;Jy _forlh:31 public u..c,c_. 4· l'Ui,ittO' ::in~ M1.,:iaco, 11~ .Ehl:: v"~cd f~ sU1111lr o~.:;,e'f"c{f.1fu-. 336-PM ,t\.\'c:nuc. N. l'm:.d~.h~'\'t n:;Jttd \11:>.1 the: 101..11 ji_b-1 «1r11r,m.~/on m b;,: ~id (o:".PlcintitT:;: rnkin2 offet $impk 0W11.=:r.,:hip of<hc 33-t• -~ Avenu<: N, l'mccl i,-f-,,l\lr. ·Hul'!drcd Rfb ... _Fi-.·c= 111au~nd .lloll:us (:14S5,t>l.1l.t'ifl). .5. l11er'l:.(('ln,; in ~ 10 sati~~~·. the mon:uu·y 1t-quir('mcn1.c .(If ihis SliP,nlmd Jud~1ci1l a1tl.! Ut=re.c \lL-\r_r~stion. Pl:Unliff sh:=11 deposit lllla 1hcCcun Rcgi~·J}' th~.i-llll'l 01,f fo\lr l·hu,cin:J fift~-Eivc.111NL~:;id Dollm ($455:;(litO.O!!) (ihc ~Dcposif-1. 6, M~m.:.rn :i.--.d kSA sh:,IJ be -cn:illed ic remai., U, f't'£!'-i:t'J:iori OftV-330 l'arl; r\\_'t'nuc-. K Pinc..:I ~ll free .1..1nlil p..1-,b,:r .JS, 1£.il(,:, h{t,.yc·\·t'r 1 Mon:.txi oud "RSA ,i;hall be' r..:·,,p:-,n~ihlc form~irllt."tUncc ol°'l.hc ;.·;c; l'arL: Awmu.l' N. V:trt:.cJ_,'lud forrt3ymc:d of:ill utilili~_ :mqt.\llx.1\\~I~ p~ny~xp01,~1,~ Until ~orixo anC RSA ;-ec:ie I.be 3:Cb·P~ ,\,.rcn_~ N. P.JttCL I. 5'~~0-ank N,oUi.in:tl A,~i:ui,mhas .:i k:an ~ic:4 hr the 3)6 P:irl:. A,·c:11ur N, f~m:I: :i~ :stto~,,n by It-st coi:tin dc-l.-d vf 1~ 1'CCOrded Ajnil i I, :!012 ..;n<b' King Ctiunty R~~ni~-r·ND. 2o!°2.0-l 11 OOIJ4(, {:1)ted of Tmti .. j .::ind tha.t .:-crtain Assig;11nt:n1· or Rems feei'lr,:k., .. j' Apiil 11 . .!U 12 tpu:ltr·~ inr-Cnun!)' Ret'Ortlt:r ~-.:?{) 4 2'3.t 1100 !4.i.5. l/1.~i~mrnt uf RCll:ts""'l. fl'('lrn the r>eposh · ~ i.h:;111 tt: ::in amounj di!>ljjr;-..cd to tc:lB:mt:: Nniio~I / , (\, I P~n,-Coitl.J." ~-nh 't . .; i"EO .11.!0GMH..l\"T AND i)lxREf.. OF APPR-OPRl,\TION-3 lb PS£ ft.:flt!in= lt4'-' l\'J:'_ FQmih !;cr°ffl. Soi1r 700 . Rd~. \\' A ffiio,i.:,5'~ .r~ >l~.'ftJtUWi f~ 4!5.6l5.;?.:1'1&1o I I l L I f ' I ' . •' : •• , £ ., l<J n ,, ll " 20160722001205.005 16-2-15118-3, KNT lu.-:~~ti()n lO ~y o(t'l:11: fo:.:t bctw~ Mnn:i::n tlJ)J ~'cyhanl.:: Nzik;.,nl As5qei:ilicm ;'lrior tn ;..ny !lm{l,llllt b-dug disbunctl m Mor.ai:o, Momu::n !ifdl prc:s,.:.nt a ~i,.r.uc Sti;>1,1btcd ()ro.cr <.1f Diibur...err.r:,u th:tl i.'l\"!udc.£ = h).,'!J! .Plll)'Off ~ .... ,tint frl,m !~yf\urik ~tiDn!ll /usoc.i;iLi\,n 1.1nd I ' I i i I I I "' I ~liJ!!lblc.-d and Agreed lo this L•lD~ ur ! .:i}:!) <, • !016. b~-= I il ROOGF.R.i DE\Jr$Cli & nmNER rERi;.1Ns c:011: u.r I iG l " ,. :~ :0 'll !J 2J l• --:7~ a:,,·.,. .,....-:-di""""__:_,r---====--10nn. ITumcr. \VSl1Aff2t 18:2 /\Ut.1n,cy~i,r Lkfo~n: Momu:.:i·J .. J.(; ~nd . R~ian, Saffd_ond A~d:11::S., Ulc. HIPL1-,\1l'DJ\.:OOMENT ,\ND 0£..-:ru,r: OF ,\Pf'ROPRiA 1'10~-4 . lly/~ l R. Gcnmf 1.ulk WSB,,# 17692 -!1-Edw:inl C. l.in, \\'SHA a 4 I BS7 • ~tlom:ys for 1'13intiiT Renton Sc.hool Di~nn ·I No.403 , ' l ~'( f'M"tim c"'...o~ u..r lbe !'SE Suii&.;;i I i I i ' 1ta.~ :.;J:.. FtoUNI s:i:m . .S.Uiic-:;o;i [11~:'\·~~ W,4,. 1}::0~-~.~79 . J•ti_,rr: ·1~.<t.,1!.14-tiD: r--c:; ~:!~Jb~-.2<oOO ' I ,l('l)C:~IF.iq.,,Nll llECRE£ 01' Al'PROl'llUJION ·, . NOW il·IF.REFOl:1/ I! IS Hi,REBY O_ROF~l{!;D ADJl1DGh1J AND DECREEDru: . I). ' s • ,0 " 12 I) 14 1$ ,a . 17 ,; 19 :o ~I ,: el -~" ~ :,. . :!;( " ,. '6 ". ·' [, r11hfic: i1.m:r~1~ 1hc u.r.c is .:i. public use. am:! tt.1: Pn1jc.-,.:I a1!d nCl)ui.;.itio:-i of'th·~-:.;;e. ~trk A V.t1l!a< N. f1 :U'f"d ore nc::;cs.",:l:r)' for d,1:it pi.:hlk t1sr.. 1. Tht su.i, of R1ur Humlr~ J.1ft~·.fi,•c 'J'hol!S::"4 !)utbr.;. {$455,QOO.C•O) rcr,,~.!.C."llh. llit!; total j11i.1. oomi"~'":11.1ti1.)11 t., ~-p.i!d br P~i~tHT n.,t ffle,ru.11 fee lllk_e. of tllt 3-36 P:.ir..:·A\'Cll~ N. Pg.rcCL ). Ll["Q11 1•fui~1{fr,: p:i~·mcm or .Four 1-tlmdr-~-.:! fifty:'fin.i Tht•ia.""Ul'CJ l>ollnrs ls"·tS.5,00P.on} {"·Ucr,osit1 inl<'I the Court Rct:istry.. Pl::ititili !-11:JI ~ d!."'efTlod u, 1i:t,1ot: :i.ppropti:lte (ce £,:.i1111,kt1\\1lkship o( mi; '336 l'":11\. A\'cnuc ,;,,:, Parcel. ! 1.f iiuth Ocp.osi1 is not m:1dt-: with the Cict..; t,.y June 3',\ 201~. 0 l'IDj111iff~h~·11.,tsn he o~l.Lg..,tcd w ro.hnhl.ir.-c ~lon:tCO. · ~111H.i~kt,irowt. for plYdic:i;a intat.i.t :l-CC"'!ini·rin ~~ylbh~-~ ~'13U Jiom July I, ·20.161;brou£b th:: tblt of.the D~pit~iq :I. ~-tor.:::-.:...1 anJ kSA .!.li~i1 be; 1Wljtl~ 11, mri:1fri ill ::,<1:s.sc:.~ii'R f1~lhc..:H(1 P.~. ;\1•1,:n!J\." S. Jlnto.~rr~nl fr .. ~ umil QC:in~r 1.5_. 2Qt~. r,.r,wideLI ~hat MO!lXO ::1~ RSr, WU b:: rc~>~"bk for m!linlcn;.I)~ uftbe J 36 fl~• i. /1,'.'l·cnue N. r~J c."'lll (hr jl,,yment-r.l ~ii 14jliti~ um!! ~1<ot:iaro.;u1d RSA rne:r..e·:.11:!" .Hfi P.:irk ,A1.·cnut.N. P11r(d. ~-. r,.. t·cctifit'd rop~-t...f thb. S1i plll~~it 1,td~men1 :ind .Decree c.tfl, rrr~.l'•·ri3.lioo.~t1.idl ~-fik4 iu thc:·OlJitc rif dlt' c,,iu1ty Auciilhr and s.b!!.II h:: fC'Cl1rded l::y :mch . ..\udi1,,r .'.!S !I .:le~ c,f real .~3..t:" with liJ:c ;ffi:::I. srn·GL-\IT:D·JUDGMENTAND DP.Cl<!oE .. / GF. AfPRO~~·l,(TION--5' r,·r\.im CuitAH' -rne J>St[liu:ikli.irt ~nt~ ~J!. FlrA !i.';r~C ~iz;l:i:. 700 B.c11i:Yu.; "WA !'$004·$S19 i'bi:JJ.c: .C"!f.ii_;~.Jll}O f" 1~·•1l4't"""~Jlf4UDJ F.zr .;!S.61.~~-K(J I 1 l l I ! I I l 1 20160722001205.006 • s • l • ., ;fl· ll I.~ 13 " ,s " 11 It 19 !~ " I H i'I -;o ,, •l " " ,s "' '7 &, tH'l~·(',L,11..St~u:'.'ting l"l::o'I prof'CTlyU:,,."~rocn~\ll'l! ~ym!!,nt 0(1he l(~yll:mk lnrui =ndcllflt.:b13r.di113 t.D.l.:c..-s fmm the Dcrc-!tit ('rill: t~ dii-hurs:m::ut of ihc rcm;iirulcr t.l Mon:i,c-. DONE. IN OPf.t,.• CO!if.T\hi:c ·-i:by of __ ~f-~ , 2(H6 I I j I • l ~-'::>.~ Jlff",..E 1 FBO\' MCClJU.Ot!{;~ . By5 K. G~r~~ l.uv., WSfit,f! 1769'.: Jflll!Aw:ird. C . .Lin. WSllA# 41857 Art..:,m~~ for 1'1::ii"n:ilT.Kc:nt")II Sch~\ Di~rii:t No.~l:IJ Cupy ~c~cl,·~:.i\'otic.c qf r,CH:"rlla_lio-.n W:i.in·d; Ar1,r1ro,·Nl !JS tu li'(ll'm; ROp(;EHS DEUTSCI I & T\)RNl',_R· BY.,.,.-.,=1£,.---,,====---,n l~:J, _um_t:r •• WSB:~ill.l~ Annmey for Di:fenddlt Mo.-,aco lJ.C :md R~, 5:?ffd :md r\5-SC":i:il~-tnc; ~Coitu1 ,_, ~nr:: l>SL n~acr1ni: , I j I l .. 1.., i<.1i..'I x_t;·_l'c11~h s.~ ~ 7oq •V' · .Odk:1-u.:. WA, 1)~;"679 • '. f'l~ ~"l:.ii..;,,~.Joto::i t •• _r~ "'~J.l5.2~ 20160722001205.007 o, ATE OF 1\\1,811111.ffON Ccuntyol~ }•· 20160722001205.008 ' ... • Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment Face Page COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE Issued by File No.: NCS-807610-WAl FIRST AMERICAN TillE INSURANCE COMPANY First American 1itle Insurance Company, herein called the Company, for valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagor of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of the Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment if preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six (6) months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by an authorized officer or agent. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this commitment to be signed, to become valid when countersigned by an authorized officer or agent of the Company, all in accordance with its By- laws. This Commitment is effective as of the date shown in Schedule A as "Effective Date." First American Title Insurance Company Pr~//14 O&mw;. ,I Gih1101~ f.-'reiJ:1ern: J,effre~· $ Rot;.,nwn se,miciry Rrst American Tltle Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment File No.: NCS-807610-WA! Page No. 1 To: First American Title Insurance Company National Commercial Services 818 Stewart Street, Suite 800, Seattle, WA 98101 (206)728-0400 -(800)526-7544 FAX (206)448-6348 Chantale A. Stiller-Anderson (206)448-6286 cstiller@firstam.com AHBL -Civil Engineers 2215 N 30th St Ste 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Attn: Bruce Duncan REPORT NO. 2 SCHEDULE A Terri Nugent (206)615-3041 tnugent@firsta m. com File No.: NCS-807610-WAl Your Ref No.: Satori Education Center 1. Commitment Date: August 11, 2016 at 7:30 A.M. 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: AMOUNT PREMIUM TAX 3. The estate or interest in the land described on Page 2 herein is Fee Simple, and title thereto is at the effective date hereof vested in: School District No. 7 as to Parcel I and Parcel VII, Lot 9; Jeffery J. Colee, as to Parcel VII, Lot 8; and Renton School District #403, a Washington municipal corporation, as to the remainder 4. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: The land referred to in this report is described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Arst American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment EXHIBIT'A' LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PARCELi: File No.: NCS-807610-WAl Page No. 2 Lots 1 through 10, inclusive, Block 3, SARTORISVILLE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 8 of Plats, page 7, records of King County, Washington. PARCEL II: The West 55 feet of Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, SARTORISVILLE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 8 of Plats, page 7, records of King County, Washington. PARCEL III: The West 50 feet of the East 225 feet of Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, SARTORISVILLE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 8 of Plats, page 7, records of King County, Washington. PARCEL IV: The West 50 feet of the East 175 feet of Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, SARTORISVILLE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 8 of Plats, page 7, records of King County, Washington. PARCEL V: The West 50 feet of the East 125 feet of Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, SARTORISVILLE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 8 of Plats, page 7, records of King County, Washington. PARCEL VI: The East 75 feet of Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, SARTORISVILLE, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 8 of Plats, page 7, records of King County, Washington. PARCEL VII: Lots 1 through 13, Block 7, RENTON FARM PLAT, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 10 of Plats, page 97, in King County, Washington. EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion of said Lot 11 conveyed to the City of Renton by deed recorded June 7, 1994 as Recording No. 9406070577. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion of said Lot 12 conveyed to the City of Renton by deed recorded June 7, 1994 as Recording No. 9406070576. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion of said Lot 13 conveyed to the City of Renton by deed recorded June 7, 1994 as Recording No. 9406070575. First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment SCHEDULE B -SECTION 1 REQUIREMENTS The following are the Requirements to be complied with: File No.: NCS-807610-WA! Page No. 3 Item (A) Payment to or for the account of the Granters or Mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. Item (B) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record. Item (C) Pay us the premiums, fees and charges for the policy. Item (D) You must tell us in writing the name of anyone not referred to in this Commitment who will get an interest in the land or who will make a loan on the land. We may then make additional requirements or exceptions SCHEDULE B -SECTION 2 GENERAL EXCEPTIONS The Policy or Policies to be issued will contain Exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company. A. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records. B. Any facts, rights, interest, or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of said land or by making inquiry of person in possession thereof. C. Easements, claims of easement or encumbrances which are not shown by the public records. D. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by public records. E. (1) Unpatented mining claims; (2) reservations or exceptions in patents or in acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (3) Water rights, claims or title to water; whether or not the matters excepted under (1), (2) or (3) are shown by the public records; (4) Indian Tribal Codes or Regulations, Indian Treaty or Aboriginal Rights, including easements or equitable servitudes. F. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, materials or medical assistance heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. G. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance, construction, tap or reimbursement charges/costs for sewer, water, garbage or electricity. H. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgages thereon covered by this Commitment. Rrst American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment SCHEDULE B -SECTION 2 (continued) SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS File No.: NCS-807610-WAl Page No. 4 1. Lien of the Real Estate Excise Sales Tax and Surcharge upon any sale of said premises, if unpaid. As of the date herein, the excise tax rate for the City of Renton is at 1.78%. Levy/Area Code: 2100 For all transactions recorded on or after July 1, 2005: • A fee of $10.00 will be charged on all exempt transactions; • A fee of $5.00 will be charged on all taxable transactions in addition to the excise tax due. 2. Liability, if any, for pro-rata portion of Real Property taxes which are carried on the King County Tax Rolls, as tax account no. as listed below, are exempt. We note Special Charges for the year 2016 in the following amounts: APN Amount Billed: Amount Owed: Parcel: 756460-0170-04 $13.14 -0- 756460-0181-01 $12.64 -0-III 756460-0183-09 $12.64 -0-IV 756460-0182-00 $12.64 -0-V 756460-0184-08 $12.65 -0-VI 722400-0580-03 $12.54 -0-VIl-1 thru 6 722400-0590-01 $12.64 -0-VIl-7 722400-0595-06 $12.64 -0-VIl-8 722400-0600-09 $10.89 -0-VIl-9 722400-0610-07 $12.64 -0-VIl-11 722400-0615-02 $12.64 -0-VIl-12 722400-0620-05 $12.64 -0-VIl-13 3. General Taxes for the year 2016. Tax Account No.: 756460-0180-02 Amount Billed: $ 2,048.50 Amount Paid: $ 1,024.25 Amount Due: $ 1,024.25 Assessed Land Value: $ 90,000.00 Assessed Improvement Value: $ 64,000.00 (Affects Parcel II) 4. Potential charges, for the King County Sewage Treatment Capacity Charge, as authorized under RCW 35.58 and King County Code 28.84.050. Said charges could apply for any property that connected to the King County Sewer Service area on or after February 1, 1990. First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment File No.: NCS-807610-WAl Page No. 5 Note: Properties located in Snohomish County and Pierce County may be subject to the King County Sewage Treatment Capacity Charges. To verify charges contact: (206) 296-1450 or CapChargeEscrow@kingcounty.gov. 5. Restrictions, conditions, dedications, notes, easements and provisions, if any, as contained and/or delineated on the face of the plat of Sartorisville recorded September 17, 1891 as Book_ 8 of Plats, page 7, in King County, Washington. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. (Affects Parcels I through VI) Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Date: October 8, 1968 Recording Information: 6417458 In Favor of: Puget Sound Power & light Company, a Washington For: Affects: corporation Electric transmission and/or distribution system Parcel IV Easement, induding terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Date: October 31, 1968 Recording Information: 6428322 In Favor of: Puget Sound Power & light Company, a Washington For: Affects: corporation Electric transmission and/or distribution system Parcel III Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Date: October 3, 1980 Recording Information: 8010030567 In Favor of: Puget Sound Power & Light Company, a Washington For: Affects: corporation Underground electric system Parcel I This item has been intentionally deleted. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Date: June 22, 1993 Recording Information: 9306222483 In Favor of: The City of Renton For: Public utilities Affects: Parcel VII, Lots 1-3 Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Date: November 14, 1994 Recording Information: 9411141172 In Favor of: Puget Sound Power & light Company, a Washington Rrst American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment File No.: NCS-807610-WAl Page No. 6 12. 13. For: Affects: corporation Electric transmission and/or distribution system Parcel VII, Lot 12 Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Date: December 15, 1994 Recording Information: 9412150619 In Favor of: Puget Sound Power & Light Company, a Washington For: Affects: corporation Electric transmission and/or distnbution system Parcel VII, Lot 13 Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Date: October 28, 2008 Recording Information: 20081028000318 In Favor of: For: Affects: The City of Renton Public sanitary sewer The South 15 feet of Lot 10 in Parcel I 14. The effect of a document entitled "Lis Pendens", recorded June 30, 2016 as Recording No. 20160630002002 of Official Records. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. Renton School District No. 403 is purporting to condemn property that they already hold fee title to. (Affects Parcel VII, Lots 1 through 6) Evidence of the authority of the officers of School District No. 7, to execute the forthcoming instrument, copies of the current Articles of Incorporation, By-Laws and certified copies of appropriate resolutions should be submitted prior to closing. Evidence of the authority of the officers of Renton School District #402, a Washington municipal corporation, to execute the forthcoming instrument, copies of the current Articles of Incorporation, By-Laws and certfied copies of appropriate resolutions should be submitted prior to closing. ntle to vest in an incoming owner whose name is not disclosed. Such name must be furnished to us so that a name search may be made. Prior to issuance of an extended coverage policy, the Company will require an Owner's Affidavit be completed and submitted to the Company for approval prior to closing. The Company reserves the right to make any additional requirement as warranted. Matters of extended owner/purchaser coverage which are dependent upon an inspection and an ALTA survey of the property for determination of insurability. Please submit a copy of the ALTA Survey at your earliest convenience for review. Our inspection will be held pending our review of the ALTA Survey and the result of said inspection will be furnished by supplemental report. First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment File No.: NCS-807610-WAl Page No. 7 20. Unrecorded leaseholds, if any, rights of vendors and security agreement on personal property and rights of tenants, and secured parties to remove trade fixtures at the expiration of the term. 21. General Taxes for the year 2016. Tax Account No.: 722400-0605-04 Amount Billed: $ 3,177.25 Amount Paid: $ 1,588.63 Amount Due: $ 1,588.62 Assessed Land Value: $ 101,200.00 Assessed Improvement Value: $ 138,200.00 (Affects Lot 10 of Parcel VII) 22. Right of possession until October 15, 2016 as set forth in Stipulated Judgment and Decree of Appropriation recorded July 22, 2016 as Recording No. 20160722001205. (Affects Lot 10 of Parcel VII) 23. Proceedings pending in the Circuit Court for King County, being a suit for condemnation of real property Suit No.: Plaintiff: Plaintiffs Attorney/Phone No.: Defendant: Defendant's Attorney/Phone No.: (Affects Lot 8 of Parcel VII) 16-2-15118-3 Renton School District No. 403, a muncipal corporation of the State of Washington Perkins Coie LLC / 425-635-1400 Evaloch Corporation, a Washington corporation, et al Not provided First American lltle Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment INFORMATIONAL NOTES File No.: NCS-807610-WAl Page No. B A. Effective January 1, 1997, and pursuant to amendment of Washington State Statutes relating to standardization of recorded documents, the following format and content requirements must be met. Failure to comply may result in rejection of the document by the recorder. B. Any sketch attached hereto is done so as a courtesy only and is not part of any title commitment or policy. It is furnished solely for the purpose of assisting in locating the premises and First American expressly disclaims any liability which may result from reliance made upon it. C. The description can be abbreviated as suggested below if necessary to meet standardization requirements. The full text of the description must appear in the document(s) to be insured. Lots 1-12, Block 3, SARTORISVILLE, Vol. 8, pg. 7 Lots 1-7, 9 & 11-13, Block 7, RENTON FARM PLAT, Vol. 10, pg. 97 APN: 756460-0170, 756460-0180, 756460-0181, 756460-0183, 756460-0182, 756740-0184, 722400-0580, 722400-0590, 722400-0600, 722400-0610, 722400-0615, 722460-0620 D. A fee will be charged upon the cancellation of this Commitment pursuant to the Washington State Insurance Code and the filed Rate Schedule of the Company. END OF SCHEDULE B Arst American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment First American Title Insurance Company National Commercial Services COMMITMENT Conditions and Stipulations File No.; NCS-807610-WAI Page No. 9 1. The term "mortgage" when used herein shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment, other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act or reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclosure such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option, may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accorcingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of Policy or Policies committed for, and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the Policy or Policies committed for and such liability is subject to the Insuring provisions, exclusion from coverage, and the Conditions and Stipulations of the form of Policy or Policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by references, and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. Any claim of loss or damage, whether or not based on negligence, and which arises out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the lien of the Insured mortgage covered hereby or any action asserting such claim, shall be restricted to the provisions and Conditions and Stipulations of this Commitment. First American 77tle Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment The First American Corporation First American Title Insurance Company National Commercial Services PRIVACY POLICY We Are Committed to Safeguarding Customer Information File No.: NCS-807610-WAI Page No. 10 In order to better serve your needs now and in the future, we may ask you to provide us with certain information. We understand that you may be concerned about what we will do with such information particularly any personal or financial information. We agree that you have a right to know how we will utilize the personal information you provide to us. Therefore, together with our parent company, The First American Corporation, we have adopted this Privacy Policy to govern the use and handling of your personal information. Applicability This Privacy Policy governs our use of the information which you provide to us. It does not govern the manner in which we may use information we have obtained from any other source, such as information obtained from a public record or from another person or entity. First American has also adopted broader guidelines that govern our use of personal infom1ation regardless of its source. First American calls these guidelines its Fair Information Values, a copy of which can be found on our website at www.firstam.com. Types of Information Depending upon which of our services you are utilizing, the types of nonpublic personal information that we may collect include: • Information we receive from you on applications, forms and in other communications to us, whether in writing, in person, by telephone or any other means; • Information about your transactions with us, our affiliated companies, or othersi and· • Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency. Use of Information We request information from you for our own legitimate business purposes and not for the benefit of any nonaffiliated party. Therefore, we will not release your information to nonaffiliated parties except: (1) as necessary for us to provide the product or service you have requested of us; or (2) as permitted by law. We may, however, store such information indefinitely, including the period after which any customer relationship has ceased. Such information may be used for any internal purpose, such as quality control efforts or customer analysis. We may also provide all of the types of nonpublic personal information listed above to one or more of our affiliated companies. Such affiliated companies include financial service providers, such as title insurers, property and casualty insurers, and trust and investment advisory companies, or companies involved in real estate services, such as appraisal companies, home warranty companies, and escrow companies. Furthermore, we may also provide all the information we collect, as described above, to companies that perform marketing services on our behalf, on behalf of our affiliated companies, or to other financial institutions with whom we or our affiliated companies have joint marketing agreements. Former Customers Even if you are no longer our customer, our Privacy Policy will continue to apply to you. Confidentiality and Security We will use our best efforts to ensure that no unauthorized parties have access to any of your information. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those individuals and entities who need to know that information to provide products or services to you. We will use our best efforts to train and oversee our employees and agents to ensure that your information will be handled responsibly and in accordance with this Privacy Policy and First American's Fair Information Values. We currently maintain physical, electronic1 and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. c 2001 Toe First American Corporation -All Rights Reserved Rrst American Title Insurance Company DEPARTMENT OF C ____ MUNITY ------~=---::::.--------Ren ton® AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGN Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 I www.rentonwa.gov STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) ;/ ~1-&-r--i ~ ~)< ::7 sworn on oath, deposes and says: 1. On the .,q ,.J day of Wt.-f k .I' -f-20 I I;,, I installed being first duly I informati9<1 sign(s!7:and pl~stic flyer box on the property ..3=-0_.:::_0--1-µ---"t<-=t-r'----'-/<-=~_,._tr.c+--'-v.--e~:..._'-N__c:_ ____ for the fo 11 owing project: public located at cf ar--/o-r-, & /-c_/N!J-a_.,--1 ~ CA of;· l Project Name /.( ~-/--;:n_ [~/LA'v/ /)1 Sh, c+ Owner Name 2. I have attached a copy of the neighborhood detail map marked with an "X" to indicate the location of the installed sign. 3. This/these public information sign(s) was/were constructed and installed in locations in conformance with the requirements of Chapter 7 Title 4 of Renton Municipal Code and the City's "Public Information Signs In clllatio "handout package . .-"\ 1/J t'i. ~ /'/11.#!.U.,,-,..---... I nsta lier Signature SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this .'/ .s}day of ~ '"' f : ) -~ ./( ,7 \. V~$.-,('.,...___..., NO~~~ tic in and for th residing at AJJ.l, c-l-vl/1 , 20.l.l_. My commission expires on __ S-~,1-/-'--~ J"--...,/J,-"'W]-'-'-/-=/--___ _ 7 H:\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\Planning\Pub Info Sign Handout.docx Rev. 04/2016 PHONE: 425•204-4403 FAX: 425-204-4476 FACILITIES, MAINTENANCE, OPERATIONS, SAFETY & SECURITY 7812 South 124th Street Seattle, WA 98178 DISPOSITION OF OPEN PURCHASE ORDER * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * TO: City of Renton Finance Department 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Po# 2011500152 Phone: 425-430-6897 Fax: PROJECT §!. LOCATION Sartori Elementary REASON: Additional permits FUND CODE(S): 1610-21-7220-100-0140-0000 ./ > Rick Stracke, E:-:-r:fcutlve· Director :~1.ithori2er.i Si~JnRture X INCREASE P.O. BY: $ 10,000.00 DECREASE P.O. BY: CANCEL P.O. FUNDING SOURCE 2016 LEVY $ 10,000.00 Sales Tax @ 9.5% N/A TOTAL $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 August 16, 2016 • PAGE 1 OF 1 PO DATE PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER 06/07/2016 2011500152 PRINTED 06/07/2016 VENDOR: SHIP TO: SARTORI VENDOR KEY SHIP DATE FISCAL YEAR ENTERED BY ORIGINAL REQ # CITY OF RENTON 1055 S GRADY WAY FINANCE/AR 315 GARDEN AVE N RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98057 PHONE: (425) 430--6897 bburke@rentonwa.gov ATTN: THERESA REECE QUANTITY UNIT DESCRJPT/ON OF ITEMS OR MATERIALS 1 LOT Permits and miscellaneous fees related to Sartori Elementary Site Preparation and Construction. For Purchasing contact: ACCOUNT SUMMARY (FOR INTERNAL USE) ACCOUNT NUMBEa ACCOUNT AMOUNT 5,000.00 20 E 530 1610 21 7220 100 0140 0000 **Terms and Conditions found at the following link: http://www.rentonschools.us/Departrnents/Business_Office/Purcha ingWarehouse **The District is subject to Washington State sales tax and exempt from federal excise tax. **Please send invoices to rsd.accountspayable@rentonschools.us *****PO TOTAL. RECAP***** Subtotal of PAGE TOTALS Other Charges Tax Lisa Pa!mer, Purchasing Manager, 425-204-2250 rsd.purchasing@rentonschools.us UNIT PRICE 5000.00000 PAGE TOTAL TOTAL PURCHASE APPROVED BY: Purchasing Manager : CITYOF018 : 06/07/2016 : 2015-2016 : REECETHEOOO : 0000212575 AMOUNT 5,000.00 5,000.00 o.oo 0.00 5,000.00 5,000.00