No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA87-082 (4) • is )16 January 4, 1993 Renton City Council Minutes Page 6 In response to Council inquiry, City Attorney Warren reported that he presented a brief stating that Mr. Clifford had failed to join Boeing in his injunction request and that State statute did not allow injunctions by private individuals in shorelines cases. On these grounds, the temporary restraining order was revoked, the injunction was denied, and Mr. Clifford was charged with legal fees totalling $3,265. Mr. Warren also stated that he has prepared a motion to dismiss Mr. Clifford's application for Writ on Council's actions approving the Customer Service Training Center Site Plan on the same basis. Mr. Warren will schedule the motion • for a later date if no response is received. iIf City Attorney Warren also reported preparation of a packet containing all t pleadings in the Writ case, the injunction case, and the Shorelines case for Council review. II • Court Case: Lexington Court case (CRT-92-018) filed by Grahame R. Ross,, Trustee in Ridge Site Approval (SA- Bankruptcy for Canada-America Associates Limited Partnership, against 87-084., CRT-92-018 the City of Renton; Hearing Examiner; Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator; and Development Services Director, for termination of the building permit application for Lexington Ridge (SA-87-082). Refer to City Attorney. Community Event: Sister Executive Division recommended adoption of a resolution establishing a City Sister City affiliation policy with Nishiwaki, Hyogo, Japan. Refer to Community Services Committee. H&HS: 1993 Community Human Services Division requested a revision in the amount allocated to Development Block Grant the Renton Area Multi-Service Center (RAMSC) under the 1993 IV Program Revision Community Development Block Grant Program. Refer to Community ! Services Committee and set public hearing for 1/18/93. II H&HS: Human Services Human Services Division requested Council approval of a resolution { Lobby Day supporting Human Services Lobby Day. This special day will show broad Id support for human services and encourage legislators to learn about and respond to human services issues. Refer to Community Services Committee. II II Fire: E-911 Automatic Information Systems Division proposed a new service that will provide pl Line Identification E-911 automatic line identification, rather than a single street location, to Valley Communications Center. Refer to Public Safety Committee. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY SCHLITZER, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. II CARRIED. II {I� II CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI #: SUBMITTING DATA: FOR AGENDA OF: 1/04/93 Dept/Div/Board.. City Clerk Staff Contact.. Marilyn Petersen AGENDA STATUS: Consent XX SUBJECT: Public Hearing.. Court Case: Grahame R. Ross, Trustee in Correspondence.. Bankruptcy for Canada-America Associates Ordinance Limited Partnership (CRT-92-018) Resolution Old Business.... EXHIBITS: New Business.... Order Setting Civil Case Schedule study Session... Summons Other Petition for Writ of Review & Complaint for Damages RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVALS: Refer to City Attorney Legal Dept Finance Dept.... Other FISCAL IMPACT: Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment.. Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated... SUMMARY OF ACTION: CRT-92-018 - Court Case filed against the City of Renton, Renton Hearing Examiner, Lynn Guttmann, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator, and James C. Hanson, Development Services Director. Conceptual design of the storm drainage system for SA-87-082, Lexington Ridge site plan located between NE Fourth Street and NE Third Street, west of Edmonds Ave. NE and east of Bronson Way NE, was not approved and caused termination of the building permit application No. 8810. agendabl.doc/c IN THE SUPERIOR COURT Of THE STATE OF WASniNGTON FOR THE COUNTY OF KING 92 2 29569 5 Plaintiff ( s ) , ) NO . vs . ORDER SETTING ORIGINAL CIVIL CASE SCHEDULE Defendant ( s ) . ) Y OF RENTON DEC 2 3 1992 I . BASIS RECEIVED Pursuant to LR 4 , IT IS ORDERED that the parties shall Gldm67: R)a$CIfFKI-Ee following schedule : II . SCHEDULE CASE EVENTS DUE DATE Filed Wed 12/23/92 *Confirmation of 'Service .(KCLR 4 . 2 ) Wed 1/20/93 , *Deadline for Filing Statement of .Arbitrability Wed 6/02/93 (KCLR 16 . 1 ( f) ; KCLMAR 2 . 1 ( a) ) *Confirmation of Joinder of Parties, Claims and Defenses Wed , 6/02/93 (KCLR 16 . 1 ) NOTE: If no "Joinder" document is filed, parties are required to appear at -the Status Conference Status Conference ( if needed) (KCLR 16 . 1 ) • Wed . 6/16/93 Disclosure of Possible Primary Witnesses (KCLR 26 ) Mon 2/14/94 Disclosure of Possible Rebuttal Witnesses (KCLR 26 ) Mon 3/28/94 *Deadline for Filing Jury Demand (KCLR 38 (b) (2 ) ) Mon 4/11/94 Final Date to Change Trial (KCLR 40 ( e ) (2 ) ) Mon 4/11/94 Discovery Cutoff (KCLR 37 ( g) ) Tue 5/31/94 Exchange of Witness and Exhibit Lists and Documentary Mon 6/27/94 Exhibits (KCLR 16 ) Deadline for Hearing Dispositive Pretrial Motions (KCLR 56 ) Tue 7/05/94 *Joint Statement of Evidence (KCLR 16 ) Mon 7/11/94 Pretrial Conference (KCLR 16 ) Mon 7/11/94 NOTE: Only for .cases assigned to Individual Calendar Judge Trial (KCLR 40 ) Mon 7/18/94 ' Requires the filing of a document with the Clerk III . ORDER • •It is ORDERED that all parties shall .comply with the foregoing schedule and that sanctions , including but not limited to those set forth in Rule 37 of the Superior Court Civil Rules, .may be imposed for noncompliance . DATED: DEC 2 3 IW92 (77ra.L-✓ n,, 9 O JUDGE (IMPORTANT: See Notices on Back) EMOMMEMOM ®A ® !! ■ RECEIVED CITY OF RENTON CEC 2 3 1992 • DEC •2 3 199? Ca;;hie;'Ssli3c�n NEGEL ED 2 Court f* ' CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 3 • 4 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY 5 GRAHAME R. ROSS, as Trustee in ) 6 Bankruptcy for Canada-America ) , r Associates Limited Partnership, ) j NO.S2 �, . 2 , 9 7 Plaintiff, + ' 5 8 ) SUMMONS V. ) 9 ) CITY OF RENTON, a municipal ) 10 corporation; RENTON HEARING ) • EXAMINER; LYNN GUTTMANN, ) • 11 Administrator of the Renton ) Department of Planning/Building/ ) Public Works; and JAMES C. ) 12 HANSON, Renton Development ) Services Director, ) • 13 ) Defendants. ) 14 ) 15 THE STATE OF WASHINGTON .TO: DEFENDANTS 16 1. A lawsuit has been started against you in the above- 17 entitled court by the plaintiff. 18 2 . Plaintiff's claim is stated in the written complaint, a 19 copy of which is served upon you with this summons. 20 . 3 . In order to defend against this lawsuit, you must respond 21 to the complaint by stating your defense in writing, and serve a 22 copy upon the undersigned person within 20 days (if service is made 23 on you within the state of Washington) , or within 60 days (if 24 .service is made on you outside the state of Washington) , after the 25 Law Offices Summons - 1 • HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON • A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue • Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 • 1 date of service on you of this summons, excluding the day of 2 service, or a default judgment may be entered against you without 3 notice. A default judgment is one where the plaintiff may be 4 entitled to what is asked for because you have not responded. 5 4 . If you serve a notice of appearance on the undersigned 6 person you are 'entitled to notice before a default judgment may be entered. 7 5. If not previously filed, you may demand that the 8 9 plaintiff file this lawsuit with the court. If you do so your demand must be in writing and must be served upon the undersigned ' 10 -person. Within 14 days after you serve your demand, the plaintiff 11 must file this lawsuit with the court, or the service on you of 12 this summons and complaint will be void. . 13 6. If you wish to seek the advice of a lawyer 'in this 14 matter, you should do so promptly so that your written response, if 15 any, may be served on time. 16 7 . This summons is issued pursuant to Rule 4 of the Civil 17 Rules for Superior Court of .the State of Washington. 18 , DATED this )(( day of December, 1992 . 19 ', HILLIS CLARK 20 MARTIN & PETERSON, P. S . f 21 )t( {� • (/� \ By L.( 22 ' Melody BO McCutcheon, WSBA # 18112 : Attorneys for Plaintiff 23 24. 315527 • 25 • Law Offices Summons - 2 • HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON • A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 (206)623-1745 Facsimile(206)623-7789 i iA Sua! t' Mie 1 Slettcla41 2 3 -...4 4 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY 5 GRAHAME R. ROSS, as Trustee in ) 6 Bankruptcy for Canada-America ) „ Associates Limited Partnership, j NO. 9 2 2. 2 9 5 6 9 7 Plaintiff, ) 5 ) PETITION FOR WRIT OF REVIEW 8 v. ) AND COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 9 ) CITY OF RENTON, a municipal ) 10 corporation; RENTON HEARING ) EXAMINER; LYNN GUTTMANN, ) • 11 Administrator of the Renton ) Department of Planning/Building/ ) Public Works; and JAMES C. ) 12 HANSON, Renton Development ) Services Director, ) 13 ) Defendants. ) 14 ) 15 Plaintiff Grahame R. Ross, as Trustee in Bankruptcy for Canada 16 America Associates Limited Partnership, alleges as .follows: 17 I. PARTIES 18 i. Plaintiff Grahame R. Ross is Trustee in Bankruptcy for 19 Canada-America Associates L.P. , a Washington limited partnership, 20 pursuant to appointment by the United States Bankruptcy Court, 21 Western District of Washington, in proceedings under Chapter 11 of 22 the United States Bankruptcy Code (Cause No. 90-03783) . Plaintiff, 23 as Trustee, is the owner of property located at 300 Vuemont Place 24 25 Law Offices Petition for Writ of Review • HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON • and Complaint for Damages - 1 A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 1 N.E. , Renton, Washington, and is the applicant for Building Permit 2 Application No. 8810 from the City of Renton. 3 2 . Defendant City of Renton is a municipal corporation 4 existing under the laws of the State of Washington. 5 3 . Defendant Renton Hearing Examiner has been authorized by 6 the Renton City Council to hear and decide administrative appeals pursuant to Renton Municipal Code 4-8-10 (A) (8) and 4-8-10 (A) (13) . 7 4 . Defendant Lynn Guttmann is the Administrator of the 8 Planning/Building/Public Works Department of the City of Renton, 9 the City department responsible for reviewing and processing 10 building permit applications in the City of Renton. Defendant 11 Guttmann is Defendant Hanson's supervisor. 12 5. Defendant James C. Hanson is the Development Services 13 Director within the Planning/Building/Public Works Department of 14 the City of Renton. Defendant Hanson made the decision not to 15 approve the Plaintiff's conceptual design of the storm drainage 16 system and to terminate the Plaintiff's Building Permit Application ' 17 No. 8810. Defendant Hanson's decision was appealed to the Renton 18 Hearing Examiner, who made the City's final decision on Building 19 Permit Application No. 8810 in Hearing Examiner File No. AAD-92- 20 151, for which Plaintiff seeks review by this court. 21 II. FACTS 22 6. In 1987 , Centron Equities Corporation, on behalf of 23 Canada-America Associates L.P. , a Washington limited partnership, 24 applied to the City of Renton for site plan approval for a multi- ' 25 Law Offices Petition for Writ of Review • HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON ■ and Complaint for Damages - 2 A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 1 family development known as "Lexington Ridge" consisting of 360 2 units on approximately 13 . 4 acres (hereinafter referred to as. the 3 "Lexington Ridge Property") . The Lexington Ridge Property is 4 located between Northeast Fourth Street and Northeast Third Street, west of Edmonds Avenue Northeast and east of Bronson Way Northeast 5 in the City of Renton. 6 7. A Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Lexington 7 Ridge project was published in November 1988 . The Final 8 Environmental Impact Statement for the Lexington Ridge project was 9 published in January 1989 . On June 15, 1989, the Environmental 10 Review Committee of the City of Renton issued its final decision 11 imposing mitigation conditions on the Lexington Ridge project 12 pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) , RCW ch. 13 43 . 21C. 14 8 . On October 13 , 1989, the Lexington Ridge site plan was 15 approved by the Renton Hearing Examiner in File No. SA-082-87 . The 16 Hearing Examiner's decision approving the site plan required the 17 applicant to comply with the conditions imposed by the 18 Environmental Review Committee. 19 9 . On May 31, 1990, a petition in In re Canada-America 20 Associates L.P. was filed in United States Bankruptcy Court for the 21 Western District of Washington at Seattle, and was assigned Cause 22 No. 90-03783 . 23 10. On January 4, 1991, Plaintiff was appointed as Chapter 11 24 Trustee in Cause No. 90-03783 , and given authority to administer 25 Law Offices Petition for Writ of Review • HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON • and Complaint for Damages - 3 A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 1 the property of the bankruptcy estate including the Lexington Ridge ; 2 Property. 3 11. Renton Municipal Code (RMC) Section 4-31-33 (I) provides 4 that the final approval of a site plan expires two years from the 5 date of approval. If a building permit application is filed prior 6 to the expiration of the site plan approval, the site plan approval remains in effect while the building permit application is being 7 processed. If a building permit is issued, the site plan approval 8 9 remains in effect as long as the building permit is valid. 10 12 . Pursuant to RMC 4-31-33 (I) , the site plan approval for Lexington Ridge would have expired on October 13 , 1991 unless a 11 building permit application was submitted prior to that date. 12 13 . Plaintiff applied to the City of Renton for a building 13 permit on September 17, 1991. Plaintiff's application was assignedi 14 Building Permit Application Plan Review No. 8810. 15 14 . One of the conditions imposed by the Environmental Review 16 Committee required the applicant to obtain approval by the City's 17 Public Works Department of plans for a storm drainage detention 18 system, in advance of the issuance of any building permits for the ; 19 Lexington Ridge project. 20 15. The Plaintiff first submitted to the City a design and 21 supporting analysis for the Lexington Ridge storm drainage system 22 on September 17, 1991. Since that date, Plaintiff has been 23 diligently attempting to obtain approval from the City's 24 25 Law Offices Petition for Writ of Review • HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON • and Complaint for Damages - 4 A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 1 Planning/Building/Public Works Department of a storm drainage 2 system for the Lexington Ridge project. 3 16. City staff comments on the Plaintiff's initial submittal 4 were first provided to the Plaintiff by the City on or about 5 October 31, 1991. On or about December 4, 1991, the Plaintiff's 6 engineers met with City staff, who requested additional analysis of 7 the capacity of the City's downstream storm drainage system. 8 17. On or about December 23 , 1991, Plaintiff's engineers 9 provided supplemental information on the analysis of the capacity 10 of the downstream system. 11 18. During January and early February 1992, Plaintiff's engineers called City staff on numerous occasions to request the 12 13 results of staff review of the supplemental information provided in 14 December 1991. 19 . On or about February 11, 1992 , City staff responded by 15 requesting additional information on the capacity of the downstream 16 system. Plaintiff's engineers provided the requested information, 17 which disclosed a lack of capacity in the City's downstream storm 18 drainage system to accommodate stormwater flows from the Lexington 19 Ridge project. 20 20. On or about February 24 , 1992 , the Plaintiff's engineer 21 submitted to City staff a conceptual proposal , including' 22 infiltration calculations, for a stormwater infiltration system on 23 the Lexington Ridge Property. City staff gave Plaintiff's engineer 24 verbal approval of the design on February 27 , 1992 . The 25 Law Offices Petition for Writ of Review • HILLIS CLARK MARTIN 8 PETERSON • and Complaint for Damages - 5 A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 1 calculations and conceptual designs were based upon soils testing 2 performed during preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement 3 on the Lexington Ridge project. Those soils tests portrayed a site 4 with highly permeable soils. Based upon these soils tests, 5 Plaintiff's engineers and City staff believed that a stormwater 6 infiltration system would be feasible on,the Lexington Ridge Property. 7 8 21. On or about March 31, 1992, the Plaintiff's engineers 9 submitted their stormwater infiltration system structural design to' the City. 10 22 . On or about May 5, 1992 , the City staff completed its 11 review of the revised stormwater system design. Among other 12 13 things, City staff requested that the Plaintiff's engineers verify, through additional field testing, the infiltration rates used in 14 design of the stormwater system. 15 23 . The Plaintiff authorized an independent soils engineer to 16 perform the tests requested by the City. On or about June 15, 17 1992, the Plaintiff's engineers obtained the report and 18 recommendation of the soils engineer, which revealed that the soils 19 on the site were of a type which would not support the proposed 20 infiltration system. Both the Plaintiff's engineers and City staff 21 agreed at that point that an infiltration system would not be 22 feasible due to the character of the soils on the site. 23 24 . On or about June 19, 1992 , the Plaintiff's engineers met 24 with City staff to discuss another conceptual proposal for the 25 Law Offices Petition for Writ of Review . HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON and Complaint for Damages - 6 A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 1 storm drainage system for the Lexington Ridge project, and to 2 request clarification of the criteria or design parameters to be 3 used by the City in reviewing this conceptual proposal. 4 25. On July 10, 1992 , the Plaintiff's engineers received the 5 City's response to their request for clarification of applicable 6 criteria for design of the storm drainage system. This response 7 was set forth in a letter from Tom Kress to Bruce Dodds dated July 8 7 , 1992 . 9 26. As of August 1992 , the only material issue remaining to 10 be resolved with respect to the Lexington Ridge building permit application was the City's approval of the design of the storm 11 drainage system. All other matters which were required to be 12 performed prior to issuance of the building permit had been agreed 13 upon by the Plaintiff and City staff. 14 27 . On August 7, 1992 , the Plaintiff's engineers met with 15 City staff and the City Attorney to present a conceptual proposal 16 for a storm drainage system design which met the criteria set forth 17 in the City's letter of July 7, 1992 and conformed in every respect 18 to the applicable criteria and conditions of site plan approval . 19 The Plaintiff's engineers requested the City staff's conceptual 20 approval of this proposal and asked for a prompt response. 21 28 . On August 19 , 1992 , the City of Renton Building Division 22 received two petitions purportedly signed by nine neighboring 23 residents expressing concern that the Lexington Ridge property 24 "will be excavated prior to issuing a site approval or a building 25 Law Offices Petition for Writ of Review • HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON • and Complaint for Damages - 7 A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 1 permit" and that excavation might "take place. without capability of 2 continuing the development to completion. " 3 29 . During August and early September 1992 , Defendants Hanson 4 and Guttmann requested City staff to analyze whether the City of 5 ' Renton could withhold issuance of the Plaintiff's building permit 6 and require additional land use approvals for the Lexington Ridge project. 7 30. On several occasions during August and early September 8 9 1992 , the Plaintiff's engineers and counsel telephoned and wrote City staff requesting a response to the storm drainage system 10 proposal presented on August 7, 1992 . 11 31. On September 14, 1992 , the Plaintiff's engineers received 12 a letter from Defendant Hanson, dated September 10, 1992 , stating 13 that the City staff would not support the conceptual storm drainage, 14 proposal, and stating that the Plaintiff's building permit 15 application would expire on September 17, 1992 . 16 32 . On September 17, 1992 , Plaintiff's engineers submitted 17 i plan corrections, together with a $29, 325. 00 check for the building! 18 permit and another check in the amount of $4 , 000 . 00 for a revolving 19 cash bond as required by an Environmental Review Committee 20 condition. 21 33 . By a letter dated September 30, 199.2 , Defendant Hanson 22' returned the two checks and advised Plaintiff that the plan 23 • submittals"does not fulfill the requirement of Section 304 (d) " 24 because "it was not reasonable to expect the City to review your 25 Law Offices Petition for Writ of Review . HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSONI• and' Complaint for Damages - 8 A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 rsnn,,, ,-„ r..__...L,r-,nr)rn,'77on 1 resubmittal and issue a permit within a couple of hours on 2 September 17 , 1992 . " Defendant Hanson also advised Plaintiff that 3 the City may dispose of the plans within 30 days unless the plans 4 were picked up or the Hearing Examiner ruled in Plaintiff's favor. 5 34. In determining that the Plaintiff's building permit 6 application would expire and that the City would terminate further 7 review of the application, Defendant Hanson purportedly relied upon 8 Section 304 (d) of the Uniform Building Code, 1988 edition 9 (hereinafter "UBC") . 10 35. UBC Section 304 (d) provides for expiration of a building 11 permit application only where the applicant fails to take action necessary or refuses to proceed expeditiously to secure the permit. 12 Plaintiff has not failed to act, and has responded to each request 13 from the City staff with respect to design of the storm drainage 14 system. The delay in issuance of the building permit has been due 15 to City delays in reviewing and acting upon materials submitted by 16 Plaintiff. 17 36. UBC Section 304 (d) does not require that a building 18 permit be issued within 360 days after the date of application. 19 UBC Section 304 (d) does not operate automatically to make a 20 building permit application expire within 360 days after 21 application. UBC Section 304 (d) did not authorize or require 22 termination of review of Plaintiff's Building Permit Application 23 No. 8810. 24 25 Lsw Offices Petition for Writ of Review • HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON • and Complaint for Damages - 9 A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 1 37 . Prior to termination of the Plaintiff's Building Permit 2 Application No. 8810, Defendant City of Renton had never terminated' 3 a building permit application where an applicant was diligently 4 taking action to obtain the permit. 5 38 . Both prior to and after termination of the Plaintiff's 6 Building Permit Application No. 8810, Defendant City of Renton issued numerous building permits to other applicants who had 7 applied for their permits more than 360 days before the permits 8 9 were issued. 39 . On September 16, 1992 , Plaintiff filed a timely appeal of 10 Defendant Hanson's decision to the Renton Hearing Examiner. 11 Plaintiff's appeal was assigned File No. AAD-92-151. 12 40. The City of Renton, through its Department of 13 i Planning/Building/Public Works, has refused to conduct further 14 review of Plaintiff's Building Permit Application No. 8810. 15 41. On November 10, 1992 , a hearing was held before the 16 Renton Hearing Examiner to consider Plaintiff's appeal . 17 42 . On December 9, 1992 , the Renton Hearing Examiner issued 18 his decision upholding the decision not to approve the Plaintiff's 19 conceptual design of the storm drainage system and to terminate the 20 Plaintiff's Building Permit Application No. 8810. 21 III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF 22 A. Writ of Review 23 43 . Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the 24 allegations in paragraphs 1 through 42 above. 25 Lass'Offices Petition for Writ of Review • HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON • and Complaint for Damages - 10 A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 • • • 1 44. The decision of Defendants Hanson 'and Guttmann .not to 2. approve Plaintiff's conceptual design of the storm drainage system and that Plaintiff's Building Permit Application No. 8810 had 4 expired, and to terminate further review of Plaintiff's 5 application, and the decision of the Renton Hearing Examiner in 6 File No. AAD-92-151, was arbitrary and capricious, contrary to law, 7 'and in excess of the Defendants' jurisdiction, for the following 8 reasons: 9 44 . 1 The' Defendants' decision was contrary to UBC Section 10 3.04 (d).. 11 44. 2 The-Hearing Examiner's Finding of 'Fact No. 4 is not' supported by the evidence in the record. 12 44. 3 The Hearing Examiner's Finding of Fact No-. 6 'is 'not 13 supported by the evidence in the record. 14 44.4 .The Hearing Examiner's Finding of Fact No. 8 is not 15 supported by the evidence in the record. 16 44 .'5 The Hearing 'Examiner's Finding of Fact No. 9-.is not 17 . supported by the evidence in the record. 18 44. 6 The Hearing Examiner's Finding of Fact No. 10 is not 19 supported by the evidence in the record. 20 44 .7 The Hearing Examiner's • Finding of Fact No. 11 is •not 21 supported by the 'evidence in the record. • 22 44.. 8 The Hearing Examiner's Findings' of Fact No'. 12 are not 23 . supported by the evidence in the record. 24 25 • ' Law Offices • Petition for Writ of Review • HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON ■ and Complaint for Damages - 11 A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 1 44 . 9 The Hearing Examiner's Finding of Fact No. 14 is not supported by the evidence in the record. 2 44 . 10 The Hearing Examiner's Finding of Fact No. 15 is not 3 4 supported by the evidence in the record. 44 . 11 The Hearing Examiner's Finding of Fact No. 18 is not 5 supported by the evidence in the record. , 6 44. 12 The Hearing Examiner's Findings of Fact fail to address 7 relevant and material evidence entered into the record by Plaintiff 8 pertaining to Exhibits 1 through 21 in that proceeding. 9 44 . 13 The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 1 is not supported 10 by the evidence in the record. 11 44. 14 The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 4 is not supported 12 by the evidence in the record. 13 44. 15 The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 5 is not supported 14 by the evidence in the record. 15 44. 16 The Hearing Examiner's . Conclusion No. 5 is contrary to 16 RMC 4-24-1 and Uniform Building Code (1988 edition) Section 304 (d) . 17 44 . 17. The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 6 is not supported 18 by the evidence in the record. 19 44 . 18 The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 6 is contrary to .� 20 RMC 4-24-1 and Uniform Building Code (1988 edition) Section 304 (d) . 21 44 . 19 The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 7 is not supported 22 by the evidence in the record. 1 23 44 .20 The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 7 is contrary to 24 RMC 4-24-1 and Uniform Building Code (1988 edition) Section 304 (d) . 25 Law Offices Petition for Writ of Review . HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON ■ and Complaint for Damages- 12 A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 • • 1 44.21 The .Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 8 is not supported 2 by the evidence in the record. 3 ;b 4.4. 22 The .Hearing• Examiner's Conclusion No. 8 is contrary to 4 RMC _4-24-1 and Uniform Building Code (1988 edition) Section 304 (d) . 5 44.23 The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 9 is not supported 6 by the evidence in the record. 7 44.24 The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 9 is contrary to RMC 4-24-1 and Uniform ,Building Code (1988 edition) Section 304 (d) . 8 44. 25 The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 10 is not 9 supported by the evidence in the record. 10 44.26 The Hearing Examiner's •Conclusion- No. 10 is contrary to 11 RMC 4-24-1 and Uniform Building Code (1988 edition) Section 304 (d) . 12 44.27 The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 11 is contrary to 13 RMC 4-24-1 and Uniform Building Code (1988 edition) Section 304 (d) . 14 4.4 .28 The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion .No. 12 is not 15 .supported by the evidence in the .record. 16 44. 29 The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 12 is contrary to 17 RMC 4-24-1- and Uniform Building Code (1988 edition) Section 304 (d) .. • 18 44 . 30 The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion NO-. 13 is not 19 supported by .the evidence in the record. 20 44 . 31 The Hearing Examiner's Conclus.ion. No. 13 is contrary to 21 . ,applicable law. • 22 • 44.32 The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 14 is not 23 supported by, the evidence in the record. 24 25 Law'Offices Petition for Writ of Review ■ HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON ■ and Complaint for Damages - 13 A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington-98101-2925 r • • I • 1 44. 33 The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 14 is contrary to 2 applicable law. • 3 44 . 34 The •Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 15 is, not 4 supported by the evidence in the record. • 44:35 The .Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 15 is contrary to 5 6 applicable law. , 7 44 .36 The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 16 is not .supported by the evidence in the record. 8 44. 37 The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 16 is contrary to 9 applicable law. 10 44. 38 The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 17 is not 11 12 supported by the evidence in the record.. 44 .39 The Hearing Examiner's Conclusion No. 17 .is contrary to 13 RMC 4-24-1 -and Uniform Building Code (1988 edition)_ Section 304 (d) . 14 45. Plaintiff has no appeal from the Renton Hearing 15 Examiner's decision other than to court, nor any plain, speedy, and , 16 adequate remedy at law. 17 • • ' B. Damages 18 • • (1) RCW :ch. 64 . 40. � . 19 46. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates :by reference the 20 allegations in paragraphs 1 through 4.2 and 44 above. 21 47. The decision of Defendant City of Renton, acting by and 22 through its Department of. Planning/Building/Public Works, and 23 Defendants Guttmann and Hanson, not to approve . Plaintiff's 24 conceptual design of the storm drainage system and to terminate 25 Law Offices Petition for Writ of Review . HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON ■ and complaint for _Damages - . 14 A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle Waahinotnn PRIM-7975 1 Plaintiff's Building Permit Application No. 8810, and the decision 2 by the Renton Hearing Examiner to affirm said decisions, placed 3 requirements, limitations, or conditions upon the use of real 4 property in excess of those allowed by law. 5 48 . The decisions of Defendants City of Renton, Hanson, and 6 Guttmann, and the Renton Hearing Examinee were arbitrary, capricious, unlawful, and in excess of the City's lawful authority 7 pursuant to the City's storm drainage requirements, the conditions 8 of site plan approval SA-082-82 , the Environmental Review Committee 9 Conditions, and under RMC 4-24-1 and UBC § 304 (d) . 10 49 . The decisions of Defendants City of Renton, Hanson, 11 Guttmann, and the Renton Hearing Examiner were known to be or 12 should reasonably have been known to be unlawful and in excess of 13 lawful authority. 14 50. Plaintiff has incurred and will continue to incur 15 expenses 'and losses as a result of the decision of the Defendants 16 City of Renton, Hanson and Guttmann, and the Renton _Hearing 17 Examiner not to approve Plaintiff's conceptual design of the storm 18 drainage system and their decision to terminate Building Permit 19 Application No. 8810, in an amount to be proven at trial. 20 (2) Violation of Civil Rights (42 U. S. C. § 1983) . 21 51. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the 22 allegations in paragraphs 1 through 42 , 44, and 47 through 50 23 above. 24 25 Law Offices Petition for Writ of Review • HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON ■ and Complaint for Damages - 15 A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle.Washington 98101-2925 • 1 52 . Defendants City of Renton, Hanson, Guttmann, and the 2 Renton Hearing Examiner, acting under color of state law, deprived 3 Plaintiff of his rights to due process as guaranteed by the 5th and 4 14th Amendments of the Federal Constitution and Section 1 of the 5 14th Amendment of the State Constitution, in that their action in 6 not approving the conceptual storm drainage design and in 7 terminating Building Permit Application No. 8810 was arbitrary, 8 capricious, unlawful, in excess of their authority, and was not 9 supported by the evidence. (3) Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage. 10 53 . 'Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the 11 allegations in paragraphs 1 through 42 , 44, and 47 through 50 12 above. 13 54 . Plaintiff's application for building permits to construct 14 an apartment complex contemplated a contract or contracts with 15 others, through sale of the Property and development permits for 16 the Lexington Ridge project. 17 55. The action of Defendants City of Renton, Hanson, Guttmann 18 and Renton Hearing Examiner in not approving Plaintiff's conceptual 19 storm drainage system design and in cancelling Building Permit 20 Application No. 8810 intentionally and improperly interfered with 21 Plaintiff's prospective contractual relationship. 22 56. Defendants' interference with Plaintiff's prospective 23 , contractual relationship has caused Plaintiff to suffer damages, in 24 an amount to be proven at trial. 25 Law Offices Petition for Writ of Review . HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON ■ and Complaint for Damages - 16 A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue QQtnt_,a')c WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief as follows: 1 1. For a writ of review pursuant to RCW 7 . 16. 040 directing 2 the City of Renton and Renton Hearing Examiner to certify the 3 record in Building Permit Application Plan Review No. 8810 and File 4 No. AAD-92-151; 5 2 . For a judgment that the City of Renton, acting through 6 Defendants Hanson and Guttmann, acted arbitrarily and capriciously 7 and contrary to law in not approving Plaintiff's conceptual storm 8 drainage system design and in terminating review of Building Permit 9 Application No. 8810;. 10 3 . For a judgment that the Renton Hearing Examiner acted 11 arbitrarily and capriciously and contrary to law in affirming the 12 disapproval of Plaintiff's conceptual storm drainage design and the 13 termination of Building Permit Application No. 8810 ; 14 4 . For a judgment ordering the City of Renton to approve 15 Plaintiff's conceptual storm drainage design and reinstate 16 Plaintiff's Building Permit Application No. 8810 and Site Plan 17 Approval No. SA-082-87 ; 18 5. For damages, in an amount to be proven at trial ; 19 6. For costs of suit; 20 7. For attorneys' fees pursuant to RCW 64 .40. 020 and 21 42 U.S.C. § 1988 ; and 22 8 . For such other and further relief as the Court deems. just 23 and proper. 24 // 25 Lass'Offices Petition for Writ of Review e H I LLI S CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON 6 and Complaint for Damages - 17 A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle Wachinatnn QRI01_7Q7S DATED thisJi/-cr day of December, 1992 . 1 HILLIS CLARK 2 MARTIN & PETERSON, P. S . 3 4 By 7)./Utlatg, C� /UV./ Sarah Et/ Mack, WSBA #12731 5 Melody B. McCutcheon, WSBA #18112 Attorneys for Plaintiff 6 Grahame R. 'Ross, Trustee in Bankruptcy 7 8 3 1 5 4 4 5 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 • 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Law Offices Petition for Writ of Review and Complaint for Damages - 18 • HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON ■ A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle.Washineton 98101-2925 1 VERIFICATION 2 3 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. 4 COUNTY OF KING 5 The undersigned on oath states that he is the Plaintiff 6 herein, that he has read the foregoing petition and complaint, 7 knows its contents and believes the allegations to be true. 8 9 10 Grahame R. Ross, Trustee in Bankruptcy 11 12 /1 ' SUBSCRIBED and SWORN to before me this AIL L day of 13 e6J li�,P/j'n/a0 / , 1992 . 14 15 N TARY PUBLIC in and for the tate of Washington, residing a 16 My Commission expires: 17 18 19 3 1 5 4 4 5 20 21 22 23 • 24 25 Law Offices Petition for Writ of Review • HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON • and Complaint for Damages - 19 A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 • • .I DEC 2 3 1992 • 2 JUDICIAL Au r;i•?I ;"RIB I ION 3 4 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY 5 GRAHAME R. ROSS, as Trustee in ) 6 Bankruptcy for Canada-America ) Associates Limited Partnership, . ) 7 ) NO. 92-2-29569-5 Plaintiff, ) 8 ) AGREED v. ) ORDER DIRECTING 9 ) ISSUANCE OF WRIT CITY OF RENTON, a municipal • ) OF REVIEW 10 corporation; RENTON HEARING ) EXAMINER; LYNN GUTTMANN, ) 11 Administrator of the Renton ) Department of Planning/Building/ ) Public Works; and JAMES C. ) 12 HANSON, Renton Development ) 13 Services Director, ) ) Defendants. ) 14 ) Ii 15 THIS MATTER having come before the Court upon the agreement 16 and stipulation of the parties, by and through their attorneys, 17 that a Writ of Review may issue; directed to the City of Renton and 18 Renton Hearing Examiner, requiring said defendants to certify to 19 this Court a complete record of the decision of the Renton 20 Planning/Building/Public Works. Department in Building Permit 21 Application Plan Review No. 8810, and of the proceedings had by the 22 Renton Hearing Examiner in File No. AAD-92-151, and it appearing 23 that this is a proper cause for the issuance of such a writ, now 24 therefore, • 25 Agreed Order Directing Law Offices Issuance of Writ of Review - 1 ■ HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON ■ A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue • Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 1 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a Writ of Review issue under the 2 seal of this Court directed to the City of Renton and the Renton 3 Hearing Examiner, commanding them forthwith to certify fully and 4 return to this Court on or before the 26th day of February, 1993 , a 5 full and complete copy of the record of the decision of the Renton 6 Planning/Building/Public Works Department, in Building Permit Application Plan Review No. 8810, and of the proceedings had by the 7 8 Renton Hearing Examiner in File No. AAD-92-151. The costs for 9 preparation Of the record shall be borne initially by Plaintiff and 10 may be included as an item for taxation of costs should Plaintiff 11 be entitled to recover his costs in this matter. The City of Renton shall also provide to counsel for Plaintiff a complete copy 12 of the certified record at a reasonable cost. 13 _ /� DONE IN OPEN COURT this J3 YCJ day of December, 1992 . 14 15 PETER D. JAI �: 4.�, : 16 Judge of the Superior Court 17 Presented by: 18 HILLIS CLARK MARTIN& PETERSON, P.S. 19 20 By -)/(LCIre (64( 21 Sarah E. Mk, WSBA #12731 Melody B. McCutcheon, WSBA #18112 22 Attorneys for Plaintiff Grahame R. ROss, Trustee in Bankruptcy 23 24 / / 25 Agreed Order Directing - Law Offices Issuance of Writ of Review - 2 • HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON ■ A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 1 Approved as to Form and Notice of Presentation Waived: 2 4 Lawrence J. War n, WSBA #5853 of WARREN, KELLOGG, BARBER, 5 DEAN & FONTES, P.S. Attorney for Defendants 6 e # 3 1 5 4 9 8 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 . 15 16 17 18 19 • 20 21 22 23 24 25 Agreed Order Directing Law Offices Issuance of Writ of Review - 3 . HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON ■ A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle.Washineton 98101-2925 DEC 2 31992 DE.pAiiTtif= Wr C:* 1 �rll^ ADM ••� , ,i�. D1CiAL AD �,tta r f�T9C)t�; 2 3 4 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY 5 GRAHAME R. ROSS, as Trustee in ) 6 Bankruptcy for Canada-America ) „ Associates Limited Partnership, NO. 92-2-29569-5 Plaintiff, ) 8 v. ) STIPULATION FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT 9 CITY OF RENTON, a municipal ) OF REVIEW corporation; RENTON HEARING ) 10 EXAMINER; LYNN GUTTMANN, ) Administrator of the Renton ) 11 Department of Planning/Building/ ) Public Works; and JAMES C. ) 12 HANSON, Renton Development ) Services Director, ) 13 ) Defendants. ) 14 ) 15 COME NOW THE PARTIES, by and through their respective 16 attorneys, and stipulate and agree as follows: 17 1. A Writ of Review may issue, directed to the City of 18 Renton and Renton Hearing Examiner, requiring said defendants to 19 certify to this Court, on or before the 26th day of February, 1993 , 20 a complete record of the decision of the Renton 21 Planning/Building/Public Works Department in Building Permit • 22 Application Plan Review No. 8810, and of the proceedings had by the 23 Renton Hearing Examiner in File No. AAD-92-151. 24 25 Stipulation for Law Offices Issuance of Writ of Review - 1 • HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON ■ A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 1 2 . The costs for preparation of the record shall be borne 2 initially by Plaintiff and may be included as an item for taxation 3 of costs should Plaintiff be entitled to recover his costs in this 4 matter 5 3 . The City of Renton shall also provide to counsel for 6 Plaintiff a complete copy of the certified record at a reasonable cost. 8 Respectfully submitted, 9 DATED: /4_,R3 -1c HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON, P.S . 10 / II kt 11 Sarah E 1 Mack, WSBA #12731 12 Melody B. McCutcheon, WSBA #18112 13 Attorneys for Plaintiff 14 Grahame R. Ross, Trustee in Bankruptcy 15 16 • 17 DATED: 17 Dt 18 / Lawrence J. rren, WSBA #5853 of WARREN, K JOGG, BARBER, DEAN & FONTES, P.S . 19 Attorney for Defendants City of 20 Renton, Renton Hearing Examiner, Lynn Guttmann, and James C. Hanson 21 3 1 5 4 9 9 22 23 24 25 Stipulation for Law Offices Issuance of Writ of Review - 2 • HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON • A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 • Y DEC 2 3 1992 1 • Dr-:r?c.R•:•A r.j. JUDICIAL AD1,`,4 NISTRATIO 2 3 4-IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY 5 GRAHAME R. ROSS, as Trustee in ) 6 Bankruptcy for Canada-America ) Associates Limited Partnership, ) � t NO. 92-2-29569-5 Plaintiff, ) 8 ) v. ) 9 ) WRIT OF REVIEW CITY OF RENTON, a municipal ) corporation; RENTON BEARING ) 10 EXAMINER; LYNN GUTTMANN, ) II Department of the Renton ) Department of Planning/Building/ ) Public Works; and JAMES C. ) 12 HANSON, Renton Development ) Services Director, ) 13 ) Defendants. ) 14 ) 15 TO: DEFENDANTS CITY OF RENTON AND RENTON HEARING EXAMINER: 16 WHEREAS, it has been represented to this Court by the Petition 17 for Writ of Review and Complaint for Damages of Grahame R. Ross, 18 Trustee in Bankruptcy, on file herein, that you have acted 19 illegally in the matter of the termination of Plaintiff's Building 20 Permit Application and the decision not to approve the conceptual 21 design of the storm drainage system in Plan Review No. 8810 and 22 Hearing Examiner File No. AAD-92-151, and that your actions were 23 arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law and that you exceeded 24 your jurisdiction; and that a Writ of Review is sought for the 25 • Law Offices Writ of Review - 1 • HILLIS CLARK MARTIN .& PETERSON • A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 purpose of having said issues inquired into and determined by the 2 Court; and it appearing to the Court that sufficient grounds have 3 been alleged for issuance of said writ; and • 4 WHEREAS, by an Order of this Court in the above-entitled 5 proceeding on the day of December, 1992 , . it was ordered that 6 a Writ of Review issue to you, el 7 NOW, THEREFORE, you are commanded forthwith to fully certify 8 and return to this Court on or before the 26th day, of February, 9 1993 , a full, true, and complete copy of the entire record of the 10 decision of the Renton Planning/Building/Public Works Department in 11 Building Permit Application Plan Review No. 8810, and of the proceedings had by the Renton Hearing Examiner in File No. AAD-92- 12 151, in accordance with the Order Directing Issuance of Writ of 13 Review, along with such other evidence as the Court deems 14 appropriate. A conformed copy of this writ may be served on the 15 defendants through their attorneys of record, and have the same 16 effect as a certified copy. 17 DONE IN OPEN COURT this c3 ►'f-' day of December, 1992 . 18 19 PETER D. JARVIS 20 Judge of the Superior Court 21 DEC 2 3 �992 Attest by my hand and seal of said Superior Court this 22 day of 1992 . i;i..':, 23 )'__.. 24 Clerk of the Superior Court 3 1 5 4 9 5 25 Law Offices Writ of Review - 2 • HILLIS CLARI MARTIN & PETERSON ■ • A Professional Service Corporation 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 :, , CITY vF RENTON . . „� Hearing Examiner icy5,11 Fred J. Kaufman r) , Earl Clymer, Mayor CITY OF REKr" SEP Z ;.) 1992 September 24, 1992 kct.iciVED c,ITY CLERK'S OFFICE Sally H. Clarke Hillis Clark Martin & Peterson 500 Galland Bldg 1221 Second AVE Seattle, WA 98101-2925 Re: Lexington Ridge - SA-082-87 Dear Ms. Clarke: This office has reviewed your request for an extension of the site plan approval for the above referenced proposal as well as the rest of the record and finds that with the initial site plan time limits and the building permit term, this project has had almost three years to come to fruition. This office does not believe it is appropriate to extend further the original site plan approval. Under separate letter this office will be scheduling the appeal you have filed in regards to City actions on this proposal. If this office can be of further assistance please feel free to write. Sincerely, ... "Q-1 FRED J. K FMAN HEARING EXAMINER FJK:wmb cc: Mayor Clymer Don Erickson Lenora Blauman City Clerk Larry Warren Jim Hanson 700 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2593 • Law Offices • J. • HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON • ij( ' A Professional Service Corporation e612/qDi- ( . 500 Galland Building,1221 Second Avenue ^( Seattle,Washington 98101-2925 j<}ACv� (206)623-1745 Facsimile(206)623-7789 %.,t46‘46 0 sFp 413.. I� „4;) September 15, 1992 i` J9 `i' iv VIA FACSIMILE • Hon. Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Re: Lexington Ridge - SA-082-87 Extension Request Dear Mr: Kaufman: As you know, this firm represents Grahame Ross, the Trustee of the Chapter 11 bankruptcy estate that is the owner of the Lexington Ridge property. You may recall that during 1991 we had an exchange of letters regarding the need for an extension of the above-referenced site plan approval. (For your convenience, I am enclosing copies of our correspondence with this letter. ) At that time, it was determined that no extension of the site plan approval was necessary because a complete building permit application was submitted to and accepted by the City prior to expiration of the site plan approval. You confirmed that the site plan approval would remain in effect during review of the building permit application by the City, and would thereafter remain in effect as long as the applicant possessed a valid building permit. I am writing now to renew our request for an extension of the site plan approval, for the reasons set forth below. The Examiner's original approval was granted on October 13 , 1989, and would have expired on October 13, 1991 pursuant to the City's Site Plan Review Ordinance. The Trustee submitted a complete building permit application on September 17., 1991. Hon. Fred J. Kaufman September 15, 1992 Page 2 Since that time, the Trustee has invested significant time, money and effort in working with the City staff to resolve the pivotal issue of the appropriate storm drainage system for this project. The storm drainage system is mandated by Condition C.2 (e) imposed by the Environmental Review Committee and affirmed by the Examiner: 2 . That the following mitigation measures need to be incorporated into the storm drainage system, with specific plans subject to the approval of the Public Works Department in advance of the issuance of Building Permits: e. That the applicant provide a detention system, subject to the approval of the Public Works Department. (Note: This system is to be coordinated with downstream system capacity, sufficient to carry a 25 year storm and incorporating a two year storm with no increase in flows from the site for that two year storm as a result of development. The detention system capacity/design should be provided based upon data provided in studies conducted in conjunction with the EIS and in conjunction with Condition 2 .b. above, using the SCS unit hydrograph/approved method. See 6/15/89 Memo from Garth Cray, Public Works Department. ) ERC Staff Report, April 5, 1989, as modified June 15, 1989, p. 7 . Obviously, pursuant to this condition substantial discretionary authority resides in what is now the Department of Planning/Building/Public Works. During the past eleven months since the building permit application was filed, the applicant's representatives have worked diligently to resolve this pivotal issue and to obtain staff approval of the storm drainage system. They have performed additional testing, calculations and design work to provide information in response to staff requests, they have explored in detail an alternative on-site infiltration system at staff's suggestion, and finally they have proposed a conceptual design which meets the requirements of the memorandum referenced in the ERC condition. Hon. Fred J. Kaufman September 15, 1992 Page 3 The chronology of the applicant's contacts and discussions with City staff has been documented along the way in numerous letters and memoranda. Our understanding all along has been that both we and the staff were diligently proceeding to resolve outstanding issues to enable issuance of the building permit. However, yesterday we received a letter dated September 10, 1992 from Mr. James C. Hanson, a copy of which is enclosed. The next to last paragraph of Mr. Hanson's letter states as follows: Your building permit application will expire on September 17 , 1992 . According to Section 304d of the 1988. Uniform Building Code, no extension beyond September 17 , 1992 may be granted. Remaining unapproved corrections required in our June 10, 1992 letter must be made and approved by the City prior to September 17 , 1992 . With the exception of the storm drainage system design, no unresolved issues remain with respect to this building permit application. All corrections referred to by Mr. Hanson either have been resolved or are capable of prompt performance. The enclosed letter constituted our first notice that the. City intended to invoke Section 304 (d) of the UBC with respect to this permit application. We believe Mr. Hanson's position is both unfair and wrong as a matter of law, and we are working with the City Attorney and the Department of Planning/Building/Public Works to resolve this issue. A copy of our letter to Lynn Guttman is enclosed for your information. In the meantime, however, we believe it prudent to once again request an extension of the site plan approval pursuant to RMC 4-31-33 (I) . We request that the extension be retroactive to October 13 , 1991, so that the extended term of the site plan approval would end October 13, 1993 . We believe this period would be sufficient to resolve this critical outstanding issue, and to finally obtain a building permit for this project. Due to circumstances beyond our control, time is of the essence, and we would therefore appreciate it if you would telephone or fax your response prior to September 17 , 1992 . If Hon. Fred J. Kaufman September 15, 1992 Page 4 you need additional information, please call me or Sarah Mack at 623-1745. Thank you for your consideration of this request. ery truly yo rs, Sally H. Clarke Enclosures: April 1, 1991 letter from Clarke to Examiner April 4 , 1991 letter from Examiner to Clarke April 17 , 1991 letter from Clarke to Examiner April 29, 1991 letter from Examiner to Clarke September 23 , 1991 letter from Clarke to Examiner September 27 , 1991 letter from Examiner to Clarke September 30, 1991 letter from Clarke to Examiner September 10, 1992 letter from Hanson to Bruce Dodds,. Dodds Engineering September 15, 1992 letter from Clarke to Lynn Guttman cc (w/o encs) : Grahame Ross Larry Warren 314376 c SA- 082-87 cm OF a�-rorr d RECEIVE AUG 1 9 1992 BUILDING DIVISION August 16, 1992 A Petition to the City Planning Department: We the undersigned are concerned that the development known as Lexington Ridge will be excavated prior to issuing a site approval or a building permit. We are concerned that the property located at 300 Vuemont Place NE will be altered in such a fashion to increase water run-off should the excavation take place without capability of continuing the development to completion. This would have an effect on the potential for high water run-off, on our property values, and on the quality of life in the neighborhood of single family homes directly adjacent. Name Address Date 35l S-co\f<s0-. Wet,„l\ Re,6\605(p �S-l(n-q�-- 62,7He7, WE, :�ems- c � .�S� Rrrn e-v, u.s� j 2 4-e4t& /GrAnsw-) 3 to 64,4, -ok 6.7 ./‘ cc: Mayors Office, City Council, City Planning Commitee CITY OF RENTON RECEIVED AUG 1 9 1992 BUILDING DIVISION August 17, 1992 A Petition to the City Planning Department: We the undersigned are concerned that the development known as Lexington Ridge will be excavated prior to issuing a site approval or a building permit. We are concerned that the property located at 300 Vuemont Place NE will be altered in such a fashion to increase water run-off should the excavation take place without capability of continuing the development to completion. This would have an effect on the potential for high water run-off, on our property values, and on the quality of life in the neighborhood of single family homes directly adjacent. Name Address Date 0 —9,15)zr-NAer—i--) ), 144g-5-•:z / /• 1/42_ 6-,e4,L,, y. 6,47 ,z)L / �z�zi /cS / a- G' ct4/4 558 626vaA--6-7-1 ( cJ YID �,�,�v, act rI(ff I GI cc: Mayors Office,City Council, City Planning Commitee A ff/y: f-ona ; .0st . ��rr,._THE FERRIS COMPANY r July 21 , 1988 JUL 2 2 1988 If Mr. Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator Building and Zoning Department City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Re: Lexington Ridge. Apartments Job No. 2902 Dear Don: I ' d like to take this opportunity to provide a progress update on the Lexington Ridge Apartments EIS. Pursuant to the Schedule of Completion from our Contract for Services , we submitted a preliminary Draft EIS to the City on 6-22-88. Collected comments were due back from the City on 7-6-88. On 7-11-88 a meeting was held between the City staff, The Ferris Company, Colin, Quinn and John Phillips to discuss the City' s comments on the preliminary Draft EIS. At that meeting, .the 'City( staff indicated that they would be collecting their comments into a single document plus supplemental pages by 7-15-88. While we have not received these collected comments yet, we are hoping to receive them by tomorrow. Therefore , according to the initial Schedule of Completion, the EIS schedule has been delayed somewhat. We have begun work on several areas of the Draft EIS based on our notes from the 7-11-88 meeting. However , we will need to reexamine the Schedule of Completion when we receive the collected written comments from the City. If you have an questions or require further information, don' t hes- itate to call . Sincerely, Gret en Brunner. Senior Planner GEB: tmk cc: Colin Quinn, John Phillips Seattle Trust Building,Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue,WA 98004 206/462-7650 " to) CITY OF RENTON ..I� MAYOR y r Earl Clymer July 21, 1988 Michael Blumen Project Manager The Ferris Company Seattle Trust Building, Suite 300 106555 NE 4th Street Bellevue, WA 98004 RE: City Comments on the Preliminary Draft EIS for Lexington Ridge, SA-082-87 Dear Mike: Pursuant to the contract for this project I am forwarding to you the City staff's comments on the Preliminary Draft EIS or PDEIS. I found our meeting last Monday, July 11th, very useful in clarifying some of the issues, and I• hope this follow-up will result in a fuller understanding of those areas where we have concerns or would like ,to. .see clarification or expansion in the PDEIS. Greenbelt/Slope Issue Per our meeting last week my notes indicate that whereas there was still some difference of opinion amongst staff, your interpretation of the Greenbelt Regulations (Section 4- 745) seems correct. However, it was agreed that no development exceeding one unit per acre could occur within the 25% to 40% slope areas of designated greenbelts without a PUD. further, no development would be allowed in any area exceeding a slope of 40% within the designated greenbelt shown on the City's Comprehensive Plan. In terms of parking within the utility greenbelt, it was agreed that Section 4-745 (D) 3 .e. does allow fifty (50%) percent of the adjoining greenbelt to a R-3 zone to used for this purpose provided that the remainder is "compatibly landscaped or retained in a natural state". 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2580 Mr. Michael Blumen Re: Lexington Ridge July 21, 1988 Page 2 Project Description It was agreed that both the proposed action and the design alternative would have the same density based upon the R-3 zone density of 25 units to the acre, or 360 dwelling units. Parking in both cases would not exceed the minimum levels established by code. The high-density alternative will be adjusted as necessary to reflect the greenbelt policies, i.e. approximately 432 (units unless a conditional use is requested for buildings at a higher density than 35 DU per acre which have parking below ground or totally contained within the structure) . Project Siting It was basically agreed that no structures would be sited within those portions of the greenbelt having slopes greater than 25% along the southern edge of the site. References to 40% open space on the site must be clarified. The common definition of open space includes any area not occupied by any structures or impervious surfaces. However, your text needs to make it clear that the 40% is not common usable open space, which will be a much lessor amount. The amount of the site to be developed as usable open space should be addressed for each alternative. Likewise, the estimated amount of usable open space per dwelling unit needs to explained for each alternative and linkages to off- site recreation, such as the City trail system, need to be addressed. The impact of parking within the Puget Power right-of-way needs to be addressed, particularly as it relates to the future trail system and its usability. Earth Under this section the impacts of clearing and grading approximately 93% of the site need to be addressed. To suggest that there will be no adverse impacts from excavating another 200, 000 cu.yds of material from the site and clearing it of virtually all of the existing vegetation should be addressed in terms of drainage and loss of habitat. The statement on page 3-8 that "should grading be attempted during damp or wet weather" should be clarified to state that the City discourages excavation during the rainy seasons. In the case of inclement weather during the permitted construction window, such measures may be taken. Mr. Michael Blumen Re: Lexington Ridge July 21, 1988 Page 3 Water The Scope of Work for this EIS required the consultant to "include an analysis of pre- and post-development drainage characteristics; erosion control and detention requirements; flooding conditions; and relationship to the City' s critical drainage basin designation. " This latter element pertaining to the critical drainage basin has not been addressed. Apparently significant flooding occurs at NE 3rd/Bronson/Houser yet this has not been addressed. The design storm calculations for this project should include both the 25 and 100 year events because of these serious flooding problems. The Public Works Director, has stated that this area would require design for the 100-year storm in order to minimize the problems with freeway drainage. The need for detention/retention for a 100-year event on- site was not discussed. The ability of the highly permeable soils to accept very high levels of run-off needs to be addressed. The DEIS needs to go well beyond the City's code and fully discuss the existing setting, impacts, and needed mitigation. The DEIS should, under mitigating measures for surface drainage, also explore the advantages and disadvantages of using a biofiltration drainage system rather than a tight- line system for on-site drainage. If soil permeability is a problem in this regard it should be so stated. The accumulative impacts of this development in conjunction with that of the proposed ERADCO and McMahon projects should also be discussed in terms of flooding, erosion and impacts to groundwater. Under mitigation measures you should specifically itemize what the "best management practices" for storm drainage would be for this project as well as what will be implemented, and explain why those not being proposed are inappropriate. The alternative drainage system supposedly under consideration and mentioned on page 3-12 should be addressed more fully in this section. Plants and Animals The site should be inventoried by a trained biologist to determine whether any endangered, threatened, or species of special concern frequent the site. This section should also discuss the adequacy of ornamental and native trees and shrubs and grass to serve has replacement habitat for any such species if found on the site. Mr. Michael Blumen Re: Lexington Ridge July 21, 1988 Page 4 Environmental Health This section needs to address the potential implications and probability of Puget Power constructing a 230-kv line within the existing transmission line right-of-way, along the eastern edge of the site. If a 230-kv line were built, what if any impacts might there be for those parking automobiles under these lines and would these lines have any deleterious affects on trail users from the project? Some discussion of the new standards adopted in states like Florida and Montana would be helpful so that one gets an idea of the range of suggested setbacks from these higher voltage power lines. Land Use Again, references to "passive open space" need to be clarified so that the reader does not interpret this as ' usable passive open space. This section as well as the water, traffic, utilities and recreation sections should address the cumulative effects of this project :and the two .other .projects currently proposed for the hill. These include the ERADCO and Centron/McMahon projects which, when combined with this project would have a .total population of approximately. 3,400 people. Section X. of..the •Scope of. Services- states: "In the areas of Transportation, Land Use and Services, the proposal and alternatives ' contribution to cumulative impacts will be described and evaluated by the Consultant. The cumulative impacts of this development on land use and services have not been adequately addressed. What increases in services (retail, parks, schools, etc. ) will be required as a result of all this development and are these services readily available or likely to be available under current zoning and programmed improvement plans? Also, any of the CH2M Hill traffic study information that is available should be incorporated into the EIS., . now even if it is not complete. Aesthetics This section should address the impact of the development on views from Brighton Ridge Apartments as well as give some indication of the views out from the site. In this latter regard the Public Works Department ha's indicated that a second above ground reservoir of approximately 3 .5 million gallons and similar in size and scale to the existing water tank is proposed. This new tank would be opposite Bldgs "D" and "E" and would rise in height to about the top of Bldg. MT. Michael Blumen Re: Lexington Ridge July 21, 1988 Page 5 "C" and would likely have significant view blockage impacts to these units. Likewise a new emergency generator complex is to be constructed nearby using two very large diesel motor generators. Public Works indicates that these could have significant noise impacts on Bldg.s "C, D and E" unless precautions are taken in the design of these buildings to minimize this sound on the residents. Transportation The only major questions raised here pertained to transit (apparently there is some confusion over the routes that actually would serve the site) access off Bronson Way and the need to address "accidents at 3rd a • et" . Apparently, no routes are any longer on -: -' . - Way. One staff member wondered if Route # 110 was actually Route # 111? The cumulative impacts of traffic will need to be addressed to the extent that this information is available. Public Services and Utilities A number of questions were raised about impacts of this development on fire service. Concerns that were raised related to how traffic congestion at NE 3rd Street and Houser Way S. might affect response time; how the design and layout of the alternatives might in and by themselves affect response time; what is the capacity and rating of existing water lines in terms of size and pressure for fire fighting purposes; and what measures (alarms, special sprinkerling, building identification) are being taken to improve both fire safety and response time? Likewise, the section on Police needs to address many of these same issues as well as ways the demand for police services might be lessened through the use of deadbolt locks, special outdoor illumination, intrusion alarms, and good building identification. Regarding schools, there is a real concern that the cumulative effects of this project, ERADCO, and McMahon could have serious impacts on the school system unless monies were found to open school buildings previously closed. Walking distances and average time to elementary and middle schools that might be used at a future date should be addressed and a map showing their locations should be provided in this section. Since elementary schools typically are designed for a half mile walking radius, it would be desirable to draw and show these in relationship to the site. Mr. Michael Blumen Re: Lexington Ridge July 21, 1988 Page 6 Parks and Recreation Under mitigation the suggestion that approximately 40 percent of the site would be retained in open space for passive recreational use is clearly misleading. This 40 percent includes all residual areas of the site that are not paved or covered by buildings. Two foot wide planting strips in parking lots obviously are not usable as open space whether active or passive. Passive usable open space probably is much less than 40 percent of the site and should be identified. Although reference is made to two tot lots on site there is no indication where these are on any of the site plans contained in the DEIS. These should be identified on the appropriate site plans. The document notes that cumulative impacts on recreational facilities, such as balifields, could be significant but no mitigation is proposed. Some form of mitigation should be suggested here that would be acceptable to the Parks and . ,Recreation Department. Also, possible locations for off-site improvements should be considered in this document since they might have some bearing on the site planning for this . or one of the. other two projects. Water The cumulative affects of this project, ERADCO, and the McMahon site should be addressed as they impact water services in the area. As already noted a new reservoir tank is proposed along the west edge of the site. More narrative of what is being proposed and whether it will be adequate to address the cumulative affects of proposed residential development within this service area should be provided: If these tanks are down hill of the subject site the issue of adequacy of water pressure, particularly for fire fighting purposes is also raised and should be addressed. Sewer This section like the above should address cumulative effects of all three projects on existing sewer trunk lines serving the area. Also, the issue as to whether these lines will be "tight-lined" to lessen the likelihood of spillage above the aquifer should be addressed under mitigation measures. The potential for contamination to the City's aquifer from leaking sewer lines should be addressed. Seattle-King County Health might be a resource in this regard. Mr. Michael Blumen Re: Lexington Ridge July 21, 1988 Page 7 As noted above, these are a compendium of comments from a number of staff who have reviewed the whole document or parts of it. I have also attached the comments of Carrie Trimnell of the Planning Division who has address a number of specifics including the labeling of exhibits and traffic related issues she is personally aware of. She also addressed the Fiscal Analysis, an area with which she, also, is quite familiar because of her work on annexations. If after reviewing these comments you have questions please give me a call and we can set up another meeting to go over them with you if you wish. Overall I thought the document was fairly complete for a preliminary DEIS! Dona d K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator DE:adk Attachments: T_ a 0 CITY OF RENTON ..AL POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor MEMORANDUM DATE: July 13, 1988 TO: Don Erickson FROM: Carrie Trimnell SUBJECT: Lexington Ridge Preliminary DEIS Fiscal Analysis I have reviewed the fiscal impact section of the above referenced DEIS, and I have the following comments. Property Tax The DEIS estimates that the Lexington Ridge complex will generate a property tax return to Renton of approximately $70,000 annually. This figure is derived by assuming that each of the 360 units will be assessed at an average of $50,000 per unit, for a total assessed value of $18 million. The 1988 Renton levy rate is $12.56897 per every $1,000 worth of assessed valuation, of which $3.89525 per $1,000 worth of assessed valuation is returned to Renton. The 240-unit Centron-owned Brighton Ridge complex, located immediately to the east of the Lexington Ridge property, was assessed at $8,433,500 in 1988. This averages to approximately $32,000 assessed value per unit. Approximately $32,850 in property tax is returned to Renton by this complex. Since the Lexington Ridge complex is designed similar to the Brighton Ridge complex, and since the complexes will be built, owned and operated by Centron, it is likely that the assessed value of Lexington Ridge will be similar to that of Brighton Ridge. A 360-unit complex, assessed at an average of $32,000 per unit, will total an assessed value of approximately $11,520,000. This will generate an annual property tax return to Renton of approximately $45,000, rather than $70,000, as estimated in the DEIS. The assessed valuation figures presented in the DEIS appear to be significantly overestimated, which in turn, overestimates the annual property tax return to Renton. As a further indication of this overestimation, the 186-unit Marina Landing Apartment complex, located across from Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park, is assessed at $6,425,400, . for an average of $34,545 per unit. Many of these units have views of the park and Lake Washington, hence the higher assessed value per unit. Therefore, it appears unlikely that the Lexington Ridge complex will be assessed at an average of $50,000 per unit. 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206)235-2552 • Lexington Ridge Preliminary DEIS July 13, 1988 Page 2 Police Protection The City of Renton currently has 61.7 full-time police officers, for an average of 1.7 officers per 1,000 resident population. The annual estimate of Police Department costs per employee is approximately $53,000. The Lexington Ridge complex is expected to house approximately 648 to 810 people at build-out. This will necessitate an additional 1.1 to 1.4 officers plus incremental increases in administrative support services. An additional $58,000 to $68,000 in annual Police Department expenditures may be expected as a result of the proposal. Fire Protection The City of Renton currently has 58.0 full-time firefighters, for an average of 1.6 firefighters per 1,000 resident population. The annual estimate of Fire Department costs per employee is approximately $49,600. At build-out, the Lexington Ridge complex will necessitate an additional 1.0 to 1.3 firefighters plus incremental increases in administrative support services. An additional $49,600 to $64,000 in annual Fire Department expenditures can be expected as a result of the proposal. Cumulative Impacts The DEIS does not address the cumulative financial impacts associated with the Lexington Ridge, Eradco and McMahon projects. Since the cumulative impacts associated with land use and transportation were addressed in the DEIS, the cumulative financial implications should be addressed as well. I hope this information is of assistance to you. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. ct:dsk6a:lexdeis2 . „. 1tio r 3 ry y-P 7 +,s7 /1 „c„ ^.6 t ' /mo �eJ� G Q o 4 G �' 1\ I ry r .„..e....,.> °o \` .0J0 1 c„,.--- Py \.\\ \4)• O \// 11 / a �XIS�rIN� / Old Road With Asphalt Top � / r_ \TANK ', ieo_ \ L7 I , K—/--I r / O d % i �`z Old Road—Unpaved LEGEND fir.•.�:/. 't •; ,. a �j t ��1° Surface Elevation "' � - - Contour °o/ —�;— \ . Property Boundary ——— Property Limits ,,0 / _�� 3Ra�fiFEl ` \ ("�.� r�o 1 N.E. 3R0 STREET `v�-r s North 0 200' III'11)fM`3 464 § t ?°o `'''o ..'o Abeam. gro4 k•towd;n. Lexington Ridge C' 'h..' gJ `' Topography Z� Figure 9 APARTMENTS ■ ......m, • omow■ aAMM c ;WPM ono G G_ 1 i JI 1 it fi AM i .. 300 300 r EXISTING PROFILE GRADE(TYP.) PARKING/DRIVEWAY c EXISTING �� PARKING/DRIVEWAY ��-_-� -- "4RKING/DRIVEWAY 250 I __ PARKING/DRIVEWAY 250 FINAL PROFILE GRADE(TYP.) �__ PARKING/DRIVEWAY y $J„ ` BLDG.P 200 • BLDG.K 200 ------- - BLDG.D 150 • PROPOSAL w 3.5 rt.„ PROFILE GRADE(TYP.) 300 PARKING/DRIVEWAY 250 FINAL PROFILE GRADE(TYP.) PARKING/DRIVEWAY �/ 250 PARKING/DRIVEWAY .: �F.-____ . i BLDG.P - -- 200 ` ,= BLDG.C 150 DESIGN ALTERNATIVE ` EXISTING PROFILE GRADE(TYP.)300 - --- -- PARKING/ -- ---:-;--;------1_-- FINAL PROFILE GRADE(TYP.) DRIVEWAY _----- - PARKING/DRIVEWAY 250 _ PARKING/ 250 DRIVEWAY ., .. ..-r. PARKING/DRIVEWAY -' _----,-).,,,_ - .. : �. BLDG.P PARKING/DRIVEWAY ---- . ---'' . BLDG.J 200 BLDG.C SCALE 150 1"=30' HORIZONTAL 150 Source: Dodds Engineering, Inc., 1988 HIGH DENSITY ALTERNATIVE 1"=30'VERTICAL Lexington Ridge Cross-sections Figure 12 APARTMENTS . .111111 MN .JIIII Jell All . JIJI III xistm , mitimiiiiii- RIN EXISTING 4- k P CHURCH �_, EXISTING APARTMENTS m ,/` i ..r , g ) ir \ 1 WI ,\, A �{i y:-\ :44. 1 441/49' = r. t . , , ,.,......... ,„.... . ._,r,7 :\ -."Ali* .% --. ‘ . 7 , . •' , . \ . lirtl\I /4....p. . \.I I lAr re c:1. •...• : -• ' . 10 .' "Mill 2-...:\ liiiii" '''' i\c'c)0' . ' i 41 I 1 O • • �. e f f 'S 1• 'REC�;� ' n ,Er I -- '—� 0 ,i // .•:, }. i POOL j \\‹. BLDG", �% I m ratio00 I, „, '';' WA* • , - 4 -.,' \c.).__J 1111.. ... , if \ • -111 • 33 9. 1. 1 APA ENTS 1 (0 � ■ L- 'J 1 "I O \\\ , - \ '.1 lir . •it, ..- • .104 . _ _ --- \,( • ... . .. .. ... ---4t it.E. - . ,_ .:_._ - -4191.4-- _ - --, • -- \ ,1616.2E _ • ,... ..._44:42,,,g/ , 1 , , -1 • 1.-_-__,-, midi. I .fWelliirj , ..- i...:: .1 , I ilik 1 tji 1 ___. Trigg; - il 40-* , , _ \ o ° _ - - fir '. , -40 ' • ' - �--�� - n'North • ' ' NE 3rd ST 0 200' Lexington Ridge Site Plan Figure 3 A P A 11 T NI E N T S ' New 3,S 'IIh 4% 0-4/6tv data/ ) 0 CITY OF RENTON "'LL BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor Y Ronald G. Nelson, Director MEMORANDUM DATE: July 12 , 1988 TO: Nancy Laswell Morris John Adamson Gary Norris Jeanette Samek Mc,ague Lenora BlaumanA gli FROM: Don Erickson, = • ect Manager SUBJECT: Lexington Ridge P.D.E.I.S. Reviewing Times . Please submit your billable time for reviewing the Lexington Ridge Preliminary Draft E. I.S. to Willis Roberts by Friday, July 15, 1988, so that she can keep her books up to date for this project. DKE:adk 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 CITY OF RENTON sal POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor MEMORANDUM DATE: July 5, 1988 TO: Don Erickson FROM: ..\NS- Nancy Laswell Morris SUBJECT: Lexington Ridge P-DEIS I have deep concerns about the P-DEIS for Lexington Ridge. The proposal and alternatives are not consistent with either the comprehensive plan or zoning. There is not one alternative which would be consistent with our codes. The Comprehensive Plan shows a broad stripe of greenbelt along the southern border of the site, as illustrated in Figure 14 of the P-DEIS. The consultant has taken the liberty of interpreting this stripe to apply only to a 1 acre portion of 40% slope along the southwestern border. In fact, this designation applies to several acres. This mistake is extremely serious since the density which is allowed on the property is directly related to the greenbelt area. Therefore, both the proposed density and the proposed locations for development are inconsistent with the City's policies and ordinances. In addition to this fatal flaw, I have the following concerns: 1. The scope of work for the DEIS required that the consultant prepare a slope/density analysis consistent with the City's Greenbelt Policies to evaluate the relationship of the density which would be allowed on the property to the proposed development. This requirement was not fulfilled. 2. The consultant has incorrectly calculated permitted density. Under the greenbelt policies no development potential is allowed for those greenbelt areas with 40% slope or greater. The slopes between 25 and 40% may be developed at only 1/4 of the underlying density. The DEIS states throughout that the project density is 26.9 du's/net acre. In fact, this density assumes that development potential is equal for all 13.4 acres. The density may only include developable portions of the property. If the proponent wishes to average the density then a PUD is required. 3. The high-density alternative is not consistent with the City's codes even if the property had no greenbelts. I cannot understand why this alternative was even suggested as being legitimate. 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206)235-2552 Lexington Ridge P- [S Page 2 July 5, 1988 4. The consultant has stated that 40% of the project would be left in open space. This assertion is absurd. The small areas of landscaping around the buildings and walls do not qualify as open space. This assumption which is found throughout the DEIS should be deleted and replaced with a forthright discussion of usable open space areas, landscaped areas, and parking lots. 5. The scope of work required the consultant to "include an analysis of pre and post-development drainage characteristics; erosion control and detention requirements; flooding conditions; and relationship to the City's critical drainage basin designation." This was not done. As explained during several meetings with the consultant, a primary issue with this site is its location in a critical drainage basin which experiences significant flooding. The problems with flooding at NE 3rd/Bronson/Houser were not discussed. The need for detention/retention for the 100-year event on-site was not discussed. The need for a very limited release rate for storm water was not discussed. Instead, the discussion focused on the City's ordinance. This DEIS needs to go well beyond the City's code into a full discussion of the existing setting, impacts, and needed mitigation. 6. The proposal to place parking in the Puget Power right-of-way was not discussed in light of City policies which would limit such parking. Further, the impact of putting parking on the right-of-way was not evaluated in light of the proposal of using the power corridor to link residents with the city trail system. 7. Why isn't parking being proposed under the buildings as suggested by the agreed-upon design alternative? 8. How does the proponent proposed to pay for his share of the needed parks/open space for the City? 9. The water services section needs to address fire flows. 10. Will this project be entirely natural gas for home heating as suggested on page 1- 19? 11. The fiscal analysis should include a discussion of the incremental costs of this project in terms of capacity for water, sewer, storm water, and general administration. 12. The discussion of landslide conditions on page 3-4 is not consistent with Figure 11. Specifically, more discussion is needed about the SP3 soils which are located in the steep slope areas along the southern boundary of the site. 13. The DEIS should address the City's policies on rockeries. What are the maximum heights allowed? What are the dangers to the residents (especially small children) of these rockeries? What mitigation is proposed to minimize the dangers of serious falls and injuries? Are there are units which are not immediately adjacent to such hazards? 14. The mitigation for earth to time development and construction "as much as possible" to the drier periods should be revised to state that the City will limit the construction periods to drier periods in order to minimize erosion/siltation problems. Lexington Ridge P- :S Page 3 July 5, 1988 15. The statement on page 3-8 that "should grading be attempted during damp or wet weather" should be clarified to state that the City discourages excavation during the rainy seasons. In case of inclement weather during the pemitted construction window, however, such measures would be required. 16. The design storm calculations for this project should include both the 25 and 100 year events because of the serious flooding problems in the area. Also, Dick Houghton has stated that this area would require design for the 100-year storm in order to minimize the problems with freeway drainage. 17. The decision concerning on-site detention/retention should be made at this stage • in the process and not delayed as suggested on page 3-10. 18. The DEIS should discuss the relative benefits/disbenefits fo using a tight-line system or using biofiltration and swales for on-site drainage. Should a retention/detention system sized for the 100-year storm be installed it may be possible to use swales and thereby enhance the site environment as well as minimize water quality impacts. 19. The proposal for the apartment managers to maintain the storm water system may not work. Is bonding in order? 20. The mitigation section should specifically itemize what the "best management practices" for storm drainage would be for this project, discuss which will be implemented, and explain why those not being proposed are inappropriate. 21. The Environmental Health section did not adequately address the issue of the power line. 22. The zoning discussion on page 3-22 is in error. The L-1 area across Bronson Way is not B-1 and R-3. In addition to my comments, Carrie Trimnell has reviewed the DEIS. Her comments which focus on transportation issues is attached and incorporated. • �$ 0 CITY OF RENTON POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor MEMORANDUM DATE: June 30, 1988 TO: Nancy Laswell Morris • FROM: Carrie Trimnely ✓ SUBJECT: Preliminary DEIS/// Lexington Ridge Apartments I have the reviewed the above referenced preliminary DEIS, and I have the following comments regarding the adequacy of the document. * Figure 3 - Re-label "Proposed Action Site Plan" instead of "Site Plan." The lack of a reference to the proposed action is confusing. * pages 3-17 and 3-18 - Information is missing regarding the impacts environmental impacts associated with the design and no-action alternatives. * Figure 14 - Re-label "Comprehensive Land Use Map" instead of "Generalized Land Use Map." * pages 3-29 and 3-30 - Add and address the following transportation objectives and policies, as listed in the City's Comprehensive Plan: B. FACILITIES OBJECTIVE: Viable transportation facilities should be created and maintained and non-functional ones removed. Policies 3. To create a system of efficient service, transportation should serve to define development patterns while providing effective service. 5. Transportation facilities should be coordinated with and integrated into the surrounding land uses. 6. The development of property should provide for public street improvements necessary to serve the site. 7. Rights-of-way should be identified and acquired prior to development of adjacent property. C. STREETS OBJECTIVE: Streets should be well designed, constructed and maintained. • 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206)•235-2552 e b Lexington Ridge DEIS June 30, 1988 Page 2 Policies 1. Through traffic should be routed around residential, commercial and industrial areas. 2. The design, scale and location of streets should be appropriate to the area. * page 3-40 - Table 1 shows the NE 3rd Street/Bronson Way NE intersection as operating as LOS B in both the a.m. and p.m. peaks, but the text reads, "Of particular note was the westbound traffic on NE 3rd Street in the a.m. peak, which is often backed up from the signal at Sunset Boulevard North past the Bronson Way NE intersection, interrupting the flow at the Bronson Way NE/NE 3rd Street intersection." If this is the case, how can this intersection be operating at LOS B? The DEIS also indicates that this intersection will continue to operate at LOS B after the completion of the proposed project with the project's anticipated increase of 187 to 234 additional a.m. trips and 226 to 283 p.m. trips. • In addition, I question the accuracy of the LOS A designation at the NE 4th Street/Edmonds Avenue NE intersection, both currently and at anticipated completion of the proposed project. Traffic often backs up through this intersection during the a.m. peak. * page 3-40 - Transit routes no longer run adjacent to the subject site along Bronson Way NE. These routes have been re-routed onto Windsor Way NE, bypassing the site by about one block. * pages 3-48, 3-49 - The DEIS should address the possibility of postponing action on this proposal until the completion of the City's Arterials Study, which will identify necessary road improvements in the NE 3rd Street/NE 4th Street corridor given the future development which is anticipated to take place this area. In addition, the transportation mitigating measures should address developer contributions in order to fund the required road improvements identified in the Arterials Study. • * page 3-57 - The DEIS should also address developer contributions in order to fund necessary park acquisition and/or improvements. This information should be added to the mitigating measures discussion in the Parks and Recreation section. ct:dsk6a:lexdeis $$ Q CITY OF RENTON • sill BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor Ronald G. Nelson, Director MEMORANDUM DATE: June 29, 1988 TO: Nancy Laswell Morris John Adamson • Gary Norris FROM: Don Erickson SUBJECT: Lexington Ridge Preliminary DEIS Just a quick reminder that our contract with the Ferris Company calls for us to have our comments in to them on the draft by July 6, 1988 . I would appreciate getting your comments back by 5: 00 PM on Friday, July 1st because of the long holiday weekend. At the very latest, if your comments are to be considered in the Comments Compendium I 'll have to • have them by 9: 00 AM on Tuesday July 5, 1988. Your prompt attention to this will be appreciated. k you, DE: • 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 • • 41 ® CITY OF RENTON "LL PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor Design/Utility Engineering MEMORANDUM • DATE: June 24, 1988 TO: Building & Zoning FROM: Bob Bergstrom, Engineering Supervisor SUBJECT: Lexington Ridge Apartments E.I.S. and Future City Water. Department Expansion at' Mt. Olivet Tank Site I had the opportunity to review the proposed Lexington Ridge Apartments Draft E.I.S. I noticed that the City of Renton Department of Public Works proposed Mt. Olivet Tank Site Improvements have not been considered. Public Works Water Utility has two improvements -proposed in the near future: • 1 . Second above ground reservoir approximately 3.5 million gallons — similar to existing tank. • the tank would be opposite -units "D" and "E", and would rise to about the top unit of "C" — significant view blockage may occur. 2. A new emergency-generator complex will be constructed, using two very large- diesel motor generators. This can be a significant noise source, and units "C, D and E" should be designed to minimize the noise impacts upon the residents. These two items are significant and should be incorporated into the E.I.S. • FraL aA451;A;Ld 1D.10.22.REB:mf c.117 P,7 Pen",e"161,9 N \il ""' JUN 7 . "U'LGQ -JG/ZONING l)EPT. 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2631 41 0 CITY OF RENTON "LL BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor Ronald G. Nelson, Director MEMORANDUM DATE: June 22 , 1988 TO: .Nancy Laswell Morris John Adamson Vary Norris FROM: Don Erickson SUBJECT: Lexington Ridge Preliminary DEIS Attached is a copy of the above that Michael Blumen dropped off this afternoon. Although there are obviously going to be revisions required to portions of the document, Michael inquired if we could each do a quick review for general ade- quacy so that we can make a determination as to whether to accept the document or not. As you may recall, the contract we negotiated with the Ferris Company states that they will only be paid for the 'preliminary' DEIS when we "accept" it, not at the date it is "submitted" . Because they haven't been remunerated for any of their work to date, they obviously are anxious to be paid. I told Mike that I would ask each of you to do a quick cursory review and that I would try to let him know by Tuesday, June 28, 1988, whether we believe the document is acceptable. Again, your prompt response to this request is appreciated in advance. Thanks, DE: n�y ://i " I /M/ 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 /RN June 22, 1988 Don Erickson Zoning Administrator Building and Zoning Department City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Re: Lexington Ridge EIS Dear Don: Enclosed please find eight (8) copies of the Lexington Ridge , preliminary Draft EIS for your review and comment . We trust that the document is consistent with our Scope of Work and adequately addresses the applicable environmental issues . Also enclosed is an Invoice which details the labor and materials expended to date on the project . Pursuant to Exhibit C, Schedule of Payments, our first payment of 50 percent of the contract amount is now due . We would like to receive this payment no later than June 24th. Please recognize that a substantial amount of time and resources has been spent on this project, dating back to December , 1987 when we were first selected . The Ferris Company has not been compensated for any of this work to date . In addition to our own labor, a substantial amount of money is owed to other consultants and vendors (i .e. , printers, delivery) . We trust that you will find the enclosed document acceptable and will authorize payment within the next two days. According to our revised Time Schedule of Completion (Exhibit B) , we will expect to receive a unified set of comments from the City by July 6th. Please call me if you have any questions or comments in the meantime. Sincerely , 741.„./ a, Michael J. Blumen Project Manager MJB: slw Enclosures cc : Colin Quinn Seattle Trust Building,Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue,WA 98004 206/462-7650 HE FERRIS COMPANY CITY Yeti `ON May20, 1988 G `4 '',� '•_` Mr. Don Erickson Zoning Administrator Building and Zoning Department City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue S . Renton, Washington 98055 Re: Lexington Ridge EIS Job No . 2901 Dear Don: Enclosed please find the revised time schedule for completion of the Lexington Ridge EIS (Revised Exhibit B from our Contract for Services with the City of Renton) . These revisions were necessary as a result of delays in authorization to proceed on the EIS . If you have any questions or comments , don' t hesitate to call. Sincerel Gretc n Brunner Senior Planner GEB: slw Enclosure Seattle Trust Building,Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue,WA 98004 206/462-7650 1\; EXHIBIT B TIME SCHEDULE OF COMPLETION Contract Signature/Authorization to Proceed May 11 Submit Preliminary Draft EIS to City June 22 City delivers unified (one set) comments to Consultant July 6 Submit revised Preliminary DEIS to City July 15 City approves revisions July 22 Print DEIS and deliver to City July 29 DEIS issuance/public notice July 31 Comment Period July 31 — Aug. 30 Begin Final EIS preparation August 31 Submit Preliminary Final EIS to City Sept . 14 City delivers unified (one set) comments to Consultant Sept . 28 Submit revised Preliminary FEIS to City October ,5 City approves revisions October 12 Print Final EIS and deliver to City October 19 FEIS issuance October 20 • _ •n INTEROFFICE MEMO TO: r4 - - GSS DATE: CITY OF F RENTON FROM: �1'. s 6 E,es MAY 1 3 1988 SUBJECT: FC)<- 0 2'Cr\ oN MAYOR'S OFFICE - ctc�. w\r•= 4t 1-ESi=t›z,sst . ?LE AS C. CAL, \� yeti,. �'S y •ClhQs-C 1C,N- ,., . . .. .• F' C?i,'Lt1 .: �." " ,�� [:i:.PI. • - 1 ►�'°�:.:..,, ;.�.,..:� :��'r HE FERRIS COMPANY April 12, 1988 Mr. Alan L. Wallis , Police Chief City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Re: Lexington Ridge Apartments Environmental Impact Statement Dear Chief Wallis : The Ferris Company is conducting preliminary research in order to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) with the City of Renton for the Centron . Corporation ' s proposed Lexington Ridge Apartments project . I am requesting information on the potential impacts the proposal and a high density alternative may have on your facilities- and services . The project site is located between NE 3rd Street and NE 4th Street , west of Edmonds Avenue NE and east of the Bronson Way NE/NE 3rd Street intersection (see attached map) . The Lexington Ridge project proposes to construct a maximum of 360 multi-family rental units in approximately 15 buildings on a 13 . 4-acre parcel . In addition to the residential buildings , the apartment complex would include a recreation center with activities such as racquetball courts , weight room and spa; and trails and passive open space . Associated parking (about 580 parking stalls) and landscaping would also be provided . It is expected that about 475 persons would reside in the completed development . An alternative to the project which will be evaluated in the EIS is a higher density project of approximately 445 dwelling units (with about 580 residents) and associated recreation, parking and landscaping features . Two nearby proposed projects are the ERADCO and McMann multi- family residential developments . Descriptions of these projects are available for your review in the City ' s project files . In general , the ERADCO project proposes to construct 425 dwelling units on 41 acres . The McMann project proposes to develop about 1 , 000 dwelling units on several acres . A total of approximately 2 , 430 persons would reside in • the proposal , the McMann project and the ERADCO project . In order to address the potential impacts of this project and the high density alternative , and the cumulative impacts of develop— ment in the project vicinity , I would appreciate your response to the following questions : Seattle Trust Budding.Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue WA 98004 _0G 462•7650 Chief Wallis - April 12, 1988 Page 2 1 . Where is the police station that would serve this area? 2 . What is the patrol district that would serve this area? 3 . Does the Department feel that the patrol district and site vicinity are presently being provided with an adequate level of police protection (e .g . officer : population ratio) ? If not, please : explain. 4. What types and number of calls per year and response times can be expected for this residential development? 5 . What impacts would the proposal have on the Department? Would any additional equipment and/or personnel be required as a result of the proposal? 6 . What impacts would the high density alternative have on the Department? 7. What cumulative impacts would the proposal , together with the McMann and ERADCO projects have on the Department? 8. Please elaborate on any long—term plans or other information you feel may be valuable for accurately identifying potential impacts of this proposal . Thank you for your time and consideration in preparing responses to these questions . As the schedule for completing the EIS is fairly tight , I. would appreciate your response by Friday, April 22 , 1988 . Sincerely, Caroline V. Berry Senior Planner CVB : slw cc : Colin Quinn Don Erickson XI _ . • n rr,„. ... r T , .- il,ji \ i 16-.1 .4„....". • .....'*;•••-"..." 01 a.. / Iti I Q T 1�,Z..l I �I 1 -„tj 111— 1 N NL— j ! /I" • 1 I I I(■ 2� '•' IIro• .( 1� :, I hlrr l l"� + I /1Fl ( r ,aw• 1(` I E I (� nr. �.lu � ; mall'� I.t ron 1 _ _J• ' .111111111 1_u a.lt IN IN u•.. Nil I . g. w11.! n•••.•���1 --'� ...it m ' �. ^D'df `''k -Z. •.I� `t. r1 11_...., ik\ •Z i M•wl _I/a_ i 'y 11• 1 .,M • a ._.._ _ .li-_i. -_•'i..__ .i� yY V �rtiiI4L _ Y_11 i._I .} U I1 r_ O. ,� W. .. •J owns 10.— b I �.•/�� -��if„r ,. Ib�rF, ', ti,L�nu _. CD 4 — r' til paw.-••r. In: -11 14A1 ..I ul_1 -- a s '�1 -i-2) /± . I t .. ( t>; i ■ ' i I 0 �� ,r11,N.� :-ll' �' i• y n.,..r z—s•-- �$ a (n "-'tip-0 i 11•t i i i.... : --I , c,. I i . ;E� yy1 i 9 ', -I -aIt- -- - g In..v_y- - 1 -�i/l• ;�'LI 21.2 ,:d -- w.. T: 1 ►...... q!- r ) • ,, •1=.,1.I. ,,„,,. ..tro1r_ Il II_ iP -9i::1:-j ! _ wi,r,s '. 1 'AilLnl..�I .r. _�: 11 u - YL•Y..., r I 1 .•'!.J. !_ .tY-- _.. 7 G :�i. 1 0 :•I.31ir, I '3 I I.IIN•V 11 r 9 .11 ltl,LL••I t Z' 71...N 1 r 4L, IL'!M- .!l y IN,r..I. Ft 1 1 1 .i• 41. A I W.n.. y, W.' h r,11 • ^ ril4}[l W..ul'• o Y- ..I.. ......Ulf] tR Y • ik -iL 1�.1frY t il ! 7 -1 �1 I /:0 - I 7 A ,��i3O I i A q. , 2 b _. „ 0 CITY OF RENTON • POLICE DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor Alan L. Wallis, Chief April 22, 1988 Ferris Company • Seattle Trust Bldg., Suite 300 10655 NE Fourth Street Bellevue, WA 98004 Dear Sirs: The responses to your guestions regarding your proposed Lexignton Ridge development in Renton are as follows: 1. Police department is located in the City Hall building at 200 Mill Avenue South. This location is approximately one mile from the proposed construction site. 2. Currently the city is divided geographically into three primary zones, those being south, central and north. For • the purpose of patrol officer assignment, these zones have then been divided into two districts each. The district designators for the northern most zone are seven and nine. The proposed construction site would lie within the nine district, which geographically encompasses the southeasterly third of the northern zone. This district presently accounts for approximately 25% of the total city population. It is primarily a residential area with the major business entity being the Renton Vocational Technical Institute which lies approximately one-half mile east of the proposed building site. 3. This patrol district is presently provided with an adequate level of police protection. It is believed, however, that this level of adequacy is at its limit. Additional population will require an increase in police coverage. 4. We currently experience a significantly higher than average per capita call for service in this district. All types of calls are represented. Proportionally, the greatest numbers would probably fall into the categories of burglaries, thefts, vandalisms, traffic accidents, and domestic/residential disturbances. Throughout the city, our police response times average slightly under three minutes in emergency situations and just under ten minutes for non-emergency situations. )(Nl - Renton. Washington U804c Ferris Company April 22, 1988 • Page 2 of 3 5. Without taking into account any of the variables, and simply projecting the current ratio of 1.7 officers per 1000 population, the original proposal of housing for 475 persons would necessitate a departmental commissioned officer increase of .8 officers. The second proposal, using the same formula, would necessitate the increase of one full officer. Other impacts would obviously include the proportionate needs for increases of support personnel and equipment. 6. Answer already provided. 7. Using the same formula as in question five, the McMann/Eradco Projects by themselves would necessitate the hiring of 4.1 commissioned officers. Those two projects when added to the Lexington Ridge complex, depending on which alternate was used, would result in either a 4.9 officer increase or a 5.1 officer increase. Again as in question five, support personnel and additional equipment would have to be considered, commensurate with the increase of commissioned personnel. 8. While this area provides good accessibility for calls for service, the Lexington Ridge development, particularly if it is combined with either or both of the other proposals, would have a significant impact on overall traffic patterns in this area. Existing arterials are highly stressed at this time during peak-traffic-flow hours and will become inadequate at a given point in time. This point in time will arrive much sooner than expected given this type of development. This would obviously require development of alternate arterial routes and will be of great concern to Traffic Engineering Division. The projection of increased need of commissioned officers based on the 1.7-to-1000 population ratio was accomplished by utilizing current statistics. Based on crime statistics relating to certain types of high density housing, a conclusion could be made that this 1.7 figure may not be adequate. Statistics gathered over the first three and one-half months of this year indicate that three such high density housing developments in the nine district, which account for less than 20% of the total population, also account for anywhere from 20% to 45% of the crime statistics generated. Because of these types of variables and the lack of time and statistics necessary to Ferris Company April 22, 1988 Page 3 of 3 consider them, a significant in-depth answer to question eight is not possible at this time. If you have any questions, please feel free to call. Sincerely, ALA L. WALLIS, CHIEF OF POLICE D.E. Gerber, Lieutenant Administrative Services Division DEG:mw ti CAG 023-88 THE FERRIS COMPANY CONTRACT FOR SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this 22nd day of April, 1988, by and between the City of Renton, a Washington municipal corporation, (hereinafter called "City"), and The Ferris Company, a Washington Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant"). In consideration of the following promises, warranties, and covenants, it is agreed between the parties as follows: • 1. Employment of Consultant: The C)ty hereby agrees to employ the Consultant and the Consultant hereby agrees to perform the services hereinafter set forth. The Consultant is employed to produce the described SEPA documents as set forth in Paragraph 2 and Attachment A, Scope of Work. The Consultant is authorized to use Golder Associates, TDA, and Dodds Engineering as a subconsultant. No other subconsultants shall be employed unless authorized in writing by the City. Nothing in this contract shall be construed to create an employee - employer relationship between the Consultant, its employees and the City. 2. Scone of Work: The Consultant shall furnish the necessary equipment, materials and professionally trained and experienced personnel to facilitate completion of the work described in Exhibit A, "Scope of Work," which is attached hereto, and is incorporated into this agreement as though fully set forth herein. The Consultant hereby warrants that it has the necessary experience, qualified and trained personnel, equipment and materials to complete the work detailed in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. 3. Time. of Performance: The work detailed in the Scope of Work will be performed according to Exhibit B, Time Schedule of Completion, attached hereto, and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. It is agreed that all the Consultant's services shall be completed and all products shall be delivered by September 27, 1988, notwithstanding delays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant. If, after receiving Notice to Proceed, Consultant is delayed in the performance of its services by factors • that are beyond its control, Consultant shall notify the City of the delay and shall prepare a revised estimate of time and cost needed to complete the Project and submit the revision to the City for its approval. Time schedules are subject to mutual agreement for any revision unless specifically described as otherwise herein. 4. Payment for Services: The Consultant agrees to perform work specified in the Scope of Work and City agrees to pay the Consultant an amount, subject to conditions set forth in this Contract, not to exceed $39,385.00 for services rendered in fulfillment of the Scope of Work. Payment of said sum will include payment for all necessary labor, materials, and facilities used in the completion of the "Scope of Work." Attached as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by this reference is the schedule of payments for the completion of specified work products. • THE FERRIS COMPANY CONTRACT FOR SERVICES PAGE 2 In the event City desires services exceeding the Scope of Services, Consultant shall promptly provide a written estimated completion schedule and detailed scope of services for such Additional Services. Additional Services shall be paid upon a time and expense basis utilizing the fee schedule attached hereto as Exhibit C. 5 Project Management: The Project Manager for the Consultant shall be Michael Blumen. The Project Manager for the City shall be Donald K. Erickson. All correspondence, work orders, payment requests concerning this project shall be directed to these individuals. • 6. Warranty of Authority: The Consultant hereby warrants and represents that the person who has executed this contract has full authority from the Consultant to do so. The City hereby warrants that the Mayor and City Clerk of City have full power to execute this contract. 7. Indemnification: The parties further agree that neither party shall be liable for the negligent acts, errors, or omissions of the other party with respect to development, management, operation of the property or project with respect to the performance of each party's respective duties and obligations under this agreement. To that end, each party shall indemnify, hold the other harmless and defend the other party against any damages, including costs of litigation and attorney's fees, incurred with respect to any claims or legal actions resulting from the negligent acts, errors or omissions of the imdemnifying party. 8. Products of Services: All documents, working documents, notes, maps, drawings, photos, etc. produced by or for the Consultant, in furtherance of this Contract, shall be the property of the City and shall be delivered to the City prior to full payment for services under this Contract. 9. Additional Responsibilities: The City shall endeavor to provide the Consultant in a timely manner with all necessary criteria and full information pertinent to the services to be rendered by the Consultant. Further, the City shall endeavor to make available to the Consultant all information, drawings, maps, specifications in City's possession which City and the Consultant consider pertinent to the Consultant's Scope of Work. The Consultant agrees to perform the work specified in a timely manner and to complete the work in a form acceptable to the City within the specified budget and time authorized by this Contract notwithstanding delays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant. 10. Assignment of Rights: Neither party may assign its rights and obligations under this Contract without the express written consent of the other party. 11. Entire Contract: This agreement, consisting of 3 pages and Exhibits A, B, C constitutes the entire agreement or contract between the parties. The agreements set forth in this contract supersede all prior written or oral understandings. This agreement may not be amended except in writing signed by the parties hereto. THE FERRIS COMPANY CONTRACT FOR SERVICES PAGE 3 12. Professional Responsibility: - Consultant represents that the services shall be performed, within the limits prescribed by this Contract as amended, in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other professional Consultants performing similar services in the State of Washington or of the type used in the Project under similar circumstances. No other representations to City, express or implied, and no warranty or guarantee is included or intended in this Contract or in any report, opinion, document or otherwise. 13. Opportunity to Remedy: The parties agree that in the event of alleged error or omission by Consultant in performance of the Project, City shall notify Consultant promptly in writing of the fact and allow Consultant a reasonable time to remedy the problem. Upon notice, Consultant shall promptly review and remedy the problem at the cost of Consultant, if Consultant accepts responsibility for it. City agrees not to remedy the problem at the cost of Consultant without first giving Consultant a reasonable opportunity to remedy the problem. It shall be the Consultant's responsibility to remedy any problem that arises out of their performance under this contract whenever this is possible and where the Consultant cannot remedy the problem by itself, it shall use its best effort to work with others to remedy the problem. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the CITY and THE FERRIS COMPANY have executed this Contract as of the date first set forth above:. CITY O TO g I by s.,iimiuRec: President Zoning Administrator ZC\a n-kA OA Earl Clymer, Mayo ATTEST: (?i -,c..e� City Clerk APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AO , ' r11�. ,Ls11L...�, _Iir. � Lawrence War City Attorney iiii lexeis • EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope outlined below is for preparation of the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS and FEIS) for the Lexington Ridge apartment project in Renton, Washington. The Ferris Company (the Consultant) will prepare the DEIS and FEIS consistent with the State Environmental Policy Act and the City of Renton Environmental Ordinance , Chapter 28 of the Renton Zoning Code. The Consultant has reviewed the existing studies for the project prepared by Golder Associates (geotechnical analysis) and Transportation, Planning & Engineering - TP&E (transportation study) and determined that the studies may need to be supple- mented and expanded by the subconsultants to provide the information and detail necessary to complete the preliminary DEIS . It has also been determined that Dodds Engineers , Inc . , will provide all necessary data on surface water quality and quantity to the Consultant. The Consultant will coordinate with the subconsultants , review their reports for adequacy and completeness , and incorporate the information into the DEIS. The Consultant. will provide a description and comparative evaluation of the alternatives , including the proposal in the DEIS . A discussion of the affected environment, environmental impacts , proposed mitigating measures and other possible mitigating measures for the alternatives , including the proposal will also be prepared for the following elements of the environment identified in the scoping process: I. Earth - The geotechnical engineering study for the project site and the Earth section of the DEIS will address existing soils , geologic and topographic conditions ; results of field exploration of subsurface conditions; soil permeability issues ; recommendations for drainage and erosion control ; issues related to clearing and grading, and the movement of earth material on and off-site ; and measures to ensure foundation support and slope stability. II. Traffic - The specific transportation study for the project and alternatives and the Transportation section of the DEIS , will address trip generation (including an explanation of trip generation rates) ; level-of-service impacts at the key intersections; circulation, parking and access issues ; and recommendations for mitigation. Impacts regarding pedestrian safety and access and mitigating measures will be assessed by the transpor- tation consultant and Transportation section as well. TDA, Inc . will prepare the transportation report for this EIS . A-1 The Consultant will review and summarize the progress of the CH2MHi11 area—wide transportation improvement program as it applies to the proposal and alternatives . Results of this study , particularly as related to potential mitigation will be incorporated into the EIS when available. III. Land Use — The relationship to the City of Renton' s zoning code and comprehensive plan policies (including the City ' s Greenbelt Policies) will be discussed by the Consultant. The relationship to existing land use , zoning and comprehensive plan designations in the immediate vicinity will also be included. The proposal and all alternatives will be assessed. The Consultant will prepare a slope/density analysis consistent with the City 's Greenbelt Policies , to evaluate the relationship of the density to the slopes in the development area on—site . A discussion of the impacts of the density and other land use compatibility issues will be provided . IV. Recreation — The proposal includes the provision for on—site recreational opportunities . Both passive (trails, open space) and active facilities are proposed. The increase in demand represented by the on—site population will be evaluated in relation to the proposed opportunities to gauge overall impacts to local and regional park and recreation facilities. Existing facilities in the area will be described and impacts assessed . Impacts from all alternatives will also .be addressed. Measures to mitigate. impacts will be addressed . V. Aesthetics — The proposal and alternatives ' design, scale, orientation, siting, privacy , views and aesthetic/visual compatibility as related to internal impacts and surrounding land uses will be addressed by the Consultant through a written description and evaluation. Specifically, the density, open space , buffering and setbacks will be analyzed. Site plans , elevations and cross—sections for each alternative will be provided to the Consultant by the Centron Corporation (the proponent) for incorporation into the DEIS . No additional graphics (i. e. , photos , shadow diagrams) will be prepared for the visual analysis . VI. Water Quantity/Quality — The surface water quantity and quality information prepared by Dodds Engineers , Inc . will include an analysis of pre and post—development drainage characteristics ; erosion control and detention requirements; flooding conditions; and relationship to the City ' s critical drainage basin designation. Golder A-2 r/) . & Associates will provide data on groundwater quality and quantity as related to the proposal and alterna- tives , including references to potential impacts on aquifers in the area. The Consultant will review and integrate the data into the Water section of the DEIS. VII . Public Services and Utilities - The Consultant will address impacts on the local service providers includ- ing fire, police and school services for the proposal and alternatives. Existing capacities and anticipated impacts will be identified. For utility issues , the Consultant assumes that Dodds Engineers and the City will provide the required information related to existing capacity and needed improvements . An estimate of anticipated public costs and revenues associated with the project and alternatives will be made based on a model prepared by the City of Renton Public Works Department. VIII. Plants and Animals - The Consultant will discuss existing habitat conditions on-site and will evaluate post-development impacts. The impacts from clearing and grading and opportunities for mitigation will be assessed. IX. . Environmental Health - An analysis will be conducted by the Consultant addressing the possible health and safety issues related to the electrical transmission lines adjacent to the site. Literature will be reviewed and Puget Power , BPA and other sources of information will be consulted on the subject to gauge potential impacts. If substantiated and relevant, the reports and information will be related to project and alternatives impacts. Mitigating measures to reduce impacts will be identified , if appropriate. X. Cumulative Effects - The City has identified two proposed projects in the vicinity (the McMann and Eradco projects) for the cumulative impact discussion. In the areas of Transportation, Land Use and Services , the proposal and alternatives ' contribution to cumulative impacts will be described and evaluated by the Consultant. For cumulative transportation issues , information from the CH2MHill study will be referenced as available. XI. Proposed Action and Alternatives - The proposed action is a 360-unit rental apartment project in 15 buildings on a 13.4-acre parcel. In addition, it consists of surface parking areas , a recreation building , land- scaping and 40 percent of the site as open space. The Consultant will address up to three (3) alternatives to the proposed action. The alternatives will include the no-action alternative, or retention of the site in A-3 its ' present undeveloped state ; an alternative developed consistent with the R-4 zoning designation with approximately 430 units and a similar site plan as the proposal; and finally, a design alternative to the proposal, consisting of possibly a lesser number of units (which shall be agreed to in writing by the City) , and with increased common and interconnected open space, increased buffers and retention of vegetation and additional staggering of buildings. XII. Meetings - The Consultant will attend up to ten ( 10) meetings on the DEIS and five (5) meetings on the FEIS with City of Renton officials. XIII. Printing - The Consultant assumes printing of up to fifteen (15) copies of the preliminary DEIS. XIV. Draft EIS - Upon submittal of the preliminary DEIS and receipt of comments from the City and proponent, the Consultant shall revise, complete and issue the DEIS. The fee for completion of the DEIS includes printing of up to eighty (80) copies of the document for public and agency review. XV. Final EIS - The Consultant' s estimated budget and scope for the FEIS assumes revising the DEIS, printing up to eighty (80) copies and responding to a relatively small number of substantive comment letters (10 to 12) dealing with the DEIS. If the City requires the Consultant to address additional comment letters and/or comments dealing with topics not discussed in the DEIS, or a level of detail not provided within this scope , the estimate for the FEIS may be revised. If the scope and cost estimate are beyond what has been estimated herein, the Consultant will meet with the City to develop a mutually acceptable scope and budget. ASSUMPTIONS A) Specific project description information, including reproducible site plans , elevations , and cross sections will be provided to the Consultant by the proponent at the outset of the EIS effort. In addition, the propo- nent will provide all necessary written and graphic material for all alternatives including illustrative site plans, elevations , number and layout of parking, access/ circulation, number of units and stories , street orientation, etc. Such information will provide for a complete description of the proposal and alternatives and relevant design features. A-4 B) The major issues to be addressed include Transporta— tion, Slopes, Soils, Land Use and Services. Emphasis will be placed on these issues by the Consultant and by the subconsultants to the proponent. Evaluation of impacts on other environmental elements will be more brief in nature. A-5 / EXHIBIT A-1 PROJECT BUDGET SUMMARY LEXINGTON RIDGE The following outlines the proposed budget to prepare the Draft and Final EIS. The Draft and Final EIS budget represents our best estimate of the labor and costs associated with completing the tasks identified in the previous section. Preliminary Draft EIS Labor (preparation of the document , management and coordination) $14,500.00 Subconsultants* 7 ,700.00 Word Processing 1 ,000.00 Graphics (preparation of up to ,twenty (20) exhibits) 1 , 900.00 Reimbursable Expenses* (mileage , parking, xerox copying, printing of up to fifteen (15) copies, and miscellaneous costs) 550.00 Subtotal $25, 650.00 Draft EIS Labor $ 4,520.00 Subconsultants* 1 ,083.50 Word Processing 600.00 Graphics 300.00 Printing (up to eighty (80) copies) 900.00 Reimbursable Expenses* 357. 00 Subtotal $ 7 , 760.50 TOTAL $33, 410.50 Final EIS Labor $ 3, 480.00 Subconsultants* 995.50 Word Processing 600.00 Printing (up to eighty (80) copies) 650.00 Reimbursable Expenses* 250.00 TOTAL $ 5,975.50 * Subconsultants and expenses = cost plus 10 percent fee. A-6 EXHIBIT A-2 LABOR BREAKDOWN AND HOURLY RATES Preliminary DEIS _ Labor. THE FERRIS COMPANY: Hourly Hours Rate Total Blumen - Project Manager 30 $60. $ 1 ,800. Brunner - Principal Author 128 50. 6,400. McGuire - Planner 140 45. 6,300. Subtotal $14,500. DODDS ENGINEERS: Borneman - Engineer 25 $40. $ 1 ,000. GOLDER ASSOCIATES: . Cotton - Principal 3 $75. $ 225. Lavielle - Senior Engineer 28 60. 1,680. Clerical 3.8 25. 95. Subtotal $ . 2,000. TDA, Inc. : Perlic - Senior Associate 9 $55. $ 495. Boettcher - Associate 39 37.50 1 ,462.50 Ghassemi - Associate 49 35. 1 , 715. Graphics 8 27.50. 220. Clerical, Support 107.50 Subtotal $ 4,000. LABOR TOTAL $21 ,500. A-7 1 Draft EIS — Labor Hourly Hours Rate Total THE FERRIS COMPANY Blumen 12 $60. $ 720. Brunner 40 50. 2,000. McGuire 40 45. 1 ,800. Subtotal $ 4,520 DODDS ENGINEERS: Borneman 6 $40. $ 240. GOLDER ASSOCIATES: Lavielle 4 $60. $ 240. TDA: Boettcher .6 $37.50 $ 225. Ghassemi 8 $35. $ 280. LABOR TOTAL $ 5,505. Final EIS — Labor THE FERRIS COMPANY Blumen 8 $60. $ 480. Brunner 24 50. 1 ,200. McGuire 40 45. 1 ,800. Subtotal $ 3 ,480. DODDS ENGINEERS: Borneman 4 $40. $ 160. GOLDER ASSOCIATES: Lavielle 4 $60. $ 240. TDA: Boettcher 6 $37.50. $ 225. Ghassemi 8 $35. $ 280. LABOR TOTAL $ 4,385. A-8 EXHIBIT B TIME SCHEDULE OF COMPLETION Contract,Signature/Authorization to Proceed April 22 Submit Preliminary Draft EIS to City May 31 City delivers unified (one set) comments to Consultant June 14 Submit revised Preliminary DEIS to City June 24 City approves revisions June 30 Print DEIS and deliver to City July 7 DEIS issuance/public notice July 8 Comment Period July 8 - Aug. 7 Begin Final EIS preparation August 8 Submit Preliminary Final EIS to City 0 August 23 City delivers unified (one set) comments to Consultant Sept. 6 Submit revised Preliminary FEIS to City Sept. 14 City approves revisions Sept. 20 Print Final EIS and deliver to City Sept. 27 FEIS issuance Sept. 28 • CONTRACT FOR SERVICES EXHIBIT C SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS First Payment: 50% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of Preliminary • Draft EIS by City of Renton (06/15/88 on Project Schedule. Second Payment: 30% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of Draft EIS by City of Renton (07-08-88 on Project Schedule. Third Payment: 20% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of Final EIS by • City of Renton (09-27-88 on Project Schedule. CONFERENCE REPORT NAME OF PROJECT: 400/CIGrAd &rDE f5 477E DATE OF CONFERENCE: /4Pe/6- Z2'/ /1! $ PROJECT NUMBER: TIME: 3 vo (START) (END) NAME AND TITLE OF ORGANIZATION PHONE PEOPLE_ATTENDING jOlG G.rr 3,25 --zsSO 0 Hitt ,4 Mel SO N 1 4'To 1/ Z3 2 t?-% df)N4 t-1 rl-}G�1--1 PA-t`F-f 4 Co 2- &G /AWOL L ce/A, ç221i (4,c,/T/20/ r 2 2- Z88 8 It ti COMMENTS: 0.-2/ '- ii li ____IViike_ 4,________ _...60)..._ m _____ il --VA6 Tr . ac44,40, 5 .40_, A COCALgaftY 11 so 7 l T. . 54 zIL /c/we J lii aec-ic#942 . . iesen a 1 II - . 10.4.-- „ , , _. I mil_ 1.1 AM,6, ,,t41.m. Ij 1 11 P : /as V &( , ! . I, II fj sj ___t7,/:_ li / icy...._._. _._._ _._._ _._. _ _.._._._. __._._._ ._ ._.._._ _ 11 frt ,, Ii q Ijf. I 44 /7, 410---- 61-1210"-a yl ii , Iy._/g_:_ __. ... .. . _ ._______. _ i. . ._ . 01.0--t ____ . __ 11 I ,i li il 11 I Ii II , yl If II ly i it t$ ® CITY OF RENTON "LL BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor Ronald G. Nelson, Director MEMORANDUM DATE: April 21, 1988 TO: Larry Warren ,� \, FROM: Jeanette Samek-McKague &1". RE: FINAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF FERRIS COMPANY CONTRACT FOR LEXINGTON RIDGE EIS We received copies of the revised Scope of Services yesterday and are transmitting these documents to you for your final review and signature approving the contract as to form. The documents are arranged with Attachment "A" on first followed by the Contract and Attachments "B" and "C. " I have also included our copy of the Scope of Services document with our changes since the first two pages of the revised documents are missing. We would like these documents returned to our office tomorrow since a meeting has already been scheduled with representatives of the Ferris Company and Centron and would like to be able to give them a signed contract. If you have any questions please contact Don or myself at 2550. Warlexct JSM:cs 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 11111 =�� ;`:.,i�".'7.?l.i:�i ._�: `n'i.a" APs+"ii rn .rt- - .. ..., ... r:I�r�:1.��CYK�1��l�Id► April 21 , 1988 Orly y 0I F?ENN e ON iD) © LV1n .rtt� 22 1998 Patty Rohrer-Bartlett ' RWWLDNG/ZON NG QEQT Washington Dept. of Wildlife Non-Game Data System MS - EX12 600 North Capitol Way Olympia, Washington 98504 Re: Lexington Ridge Apartment Project Wildlife Data Search Payment Dear Ms. Rohrer-Bartlett: Pursuant to instructions given by Mr. Tom Owens , Washington Department of Wildlife, enclosed please find a check intthe amount of $14.02 to cover the costs for a wildlife data system search for the Lexington Ridge apartment project site located in Renton, Washington. As the schedule is fairly tight for completing the environ- mental report, I would appreciate it if you could process the financial paperwork as soon as possible. Sincerely, Caroline V. Berry Senior Planner cc: Tom Owens, Washington Department of Wildlife Colin Quinn / Don Erickson ✓ Seattle Trust Building,Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue,WA 98004 206/462-7650 .THE FERRIS COMP21NY LETT 3 LVU T3QQKs-ri ruQo. Seattle Trust Building, Suite ' .., 10655 NE 4th Street - Bellevue WA 98004 DATE JOB NO. ATTENTION'/�) y //-. --7 ( // RE 1 Cam, j IPn�..�dz,. CITYI?�ll� �l� � °o frvt L-U 4 �o-v.1-1 '_�. `� i L. lJ Z WE ARE SENDING YOU Attached 0 Under separate cover via I:,.;L • , ,, . ..:the.following.items: ❑ Shop drawings 0 Prints 0 Plans 0 Samples 0 Specifications • Copy of letter 0 Change order ❑ COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION flyAvrJa „LI I A C (a .1 C�1 a I c e-i�, U • THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval 0 Approved as submitted 0 Resubmit copies for approval nor your use 0 Approved as noted 0 Submit copies for distribution /�_As requested? .... 0 Returned for corrections 0 Return corrected prints ( ❑ For review and comment 0 O FOR BIDS DUE 19 0 PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS COPY TO SIGNED: /hI-e.___— If enclosures are not as noted. kindly notify us at ones. FORM 240-2-AveMMbIs from�MCM3'/Townsend.Mass.01400 a a £se ;s-,`'a".;a?.a tn -•� '�'a txartp..�„ - 1.111116H .' S ,•, • •' '.<:. .x,....w.....r....r........._.:.:,.,a.»,max.: �'`.... , �_.e�.., .- April 14, 1988 CITY OF RENTON Mr . Tom Owens /-+G&k 15199C Department of Wildlife, Non-Game 600 North Capitol Way BUILDING / �O�iB6�G DEPT. Olympia, Washington 98504 Re: Lexington Ridge Apartments Environmental Impact Statement Dear Mr . Owens : The Ferris Company is conducting preliminary research in order to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) with the City of Renton for the Centron Corporation' s proposed Lexington Ridge apartment project . Pursuant to our telephone call this morning , I am requesting information regarding identification of wildlife species of concern on-site and in adjacent areas . The project site is located in the City of Renton between N.E. 3rd Street and N.E. 4th Street , west of Edmonds Avenue N.E. and east of the Bronson Way N.E. /N.E. 3rd Street intersection (please refer to the attached map) . The Lexington Ridge project proposes to construct a maximum of 360 multi-family residential units in approximately 15 buildings on a 13. 4-acre parcel. As the schedule for completing the EIS is fairly tight, I would appreciate it if your office could telephone me regarding the information search costs so we may reduce the turn-around time by mailing the required fee as soon as possible. My business phone number is (206) 462-7650. Thank you for your time and effort in preparing the environmental information. Sincerely , 64644J4 /Caroline V. Berr Senior Planner CVB: slw cc : Colin Quinn Don Erickson • Seattle Trust Building,Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street • Bellevue,WA 98004 206/462-7650 ec O "ri--- _ ,✓ I ® I ICI Or _1- rt,�. ➢, z II .l'i .s t1 o I I a fl • ' �I Q I. i • O I r r V I► i' TT 1 - r r.. rc II vi ru a. �Ybln1�/ Aa nlwl, 1t'28 um I A r,p�L y r_l An/ I�'/ y...... At MIIS �: .,itT., y rt is.n., R R nitl .''*. F+-1 U xl_ r6 I•nn�•Aw c -�irx�n vnwln yy� 1 Ad, (-J( 3 le r — L --lc Ar.. wlbri _ t . ._- ^ is,. g1tAi r _.. j �' Ar Mll/l -r, At - mai___ l:.,.1 `,a 1u....I IA.,IIL. '''d -�� I I "tII�' �,8i a� :,tna O I 1 -I1u.lnt„ - An a I t I is RV i 1-i' IG►'= It -.I^I°I n 1, •. 0 , t t .1 r . • .- '1 �a tRa --tt/- .. .'v-•I •A,•. t. (eon' I _, 1 w •,J A . [! .� .t•.. �'! C Ct 1 !!! , FA.Ina ^1 N k d ..I i1} I.4 Moe ^ -- ^",wWI e� j /,. p n to Plait-p A. clm t - �.'.". r. AI¢. -�1NlnlI '� �- .is..-Ail mill-- .r, o_ K' -�0 ' ''... --- G f- w—Ara. ~,nn — - - ..__ �: ... . I�. sI . 01) • • ,.:.• • cA y. *�ii� •/ g Z w— •�I •, r 4 I•• I n AV i w —.. 1 f�t e f if 1 I I.1, n•[. ' T" •� Ir t.,on I_ .i' ,I I" _ t _ t 1 I O V .. jj 4111170 tl -- ...__ filyt I. i. —�sa�'•'Imat e 'I •I�,Icr� �8�E k p I ,. �7 J. 1�0 'HRy :'Ni V.9 I -,-;;�A_�� 7 b1,1••,n I"G s r./..;u w im & ••+ 1 L V �f..' _rill.� ,2. ;.. 4 , iiW trI< ,. iISM - k. •rlri 0 • - A •- ---- —i•1• 41 Jr N la,'L1`! .' r rr I w•..w k I'R �" ' + Y I ;��a \ I,i v • 7l9sR �- •F ito t Ft.iiiT. IA. To ••' •' A. IMM K Mtn•;" i /I •6�lia.ann C f •i_ •. .. na wur• •.plrll + • bs ,. at• S' III _ •I t - ` A —I• O '\ •. ri. ,1i ,n tarn n a R� Ir_,:-,:-'---?:.-_-.iiti In,.. . f t }, a, ' I •'l0 1/F, tt l'.7 • w1•`71-"7p 4/7 yt� Y Q ••• '1 .._.h_ V. !.19 1.-..liti I .1:1•X• K .3 ' .,n T 1- �M!� il•,r',,,-.a -/! 1• '-rI° �„°. �ry � I.. -- - -�4: - - ----� ' 2 al -� n. tp■ TIT- r h�I I t L k t I ..„..... • t(i S b Y Art wits'N t IMAw I.ri) Iw A. ..n. :.- I. _ I• F n l y.A I.14 . 1 {. •: nV l3 •• , /� �� F -r ITii twin F 9 w n on 'T P\ % C7 i ' , 9 A9Mn,37ii —I— .NII...je.;r1 M[0[El f 13 { :A•4.. ,• '.V.11 ,�.1 • If WT,t 14 1 I 1/Ib..1,1I _!E Ni � � .I �iilia% . •ti; u,w. r(f I j D //'-�\. ,. ry,RT. a ry I JA . G ., U7 [11;•Z � Y' •/�' r •� la 111: ' �.:Z'�Q'a� fd�1 'ti'. tA�,l I.„, 10114 h. •.•: +l H-Mervin f ,l !�``!q V \ ,,Ar a rwr -g1 .,t.qr1 10 I..,ar 1'r..s�/,r.� . • w • Q 1 • ,''. • • . ■ • April 14, 1988 Ms. Nancy Sprague Washington Natural Heritage Program Dept. of Natural Resources MS-EX 13 Olympia, Washington 98504 Re: Lexington Ridge Apartments Environmental Impact Statement Dear Ms. Sprague : The Ferris Company is conducting preliminary research in order to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) with the City of Renton for the Centron Corporation' s proposed Lexington Ridge apartment project . Pursuant to our telephone call yesterday , I am requesting information regarding identification of rare and high quality native plant species and wetlands of concern on-site and in adjacent areas. The project site is located in the City of Renton between N.E. 3rd Street and N.E. 4th Street, west of Edmonds Avenue N.E. and east of the Bronson Way N.E./N.E. 3rd Street intersection (please refer to the attached map) . The Lexington Ridge project proposes to construct a maximum of 360 multi-family residential units in approximately 15 buildings on a 13.4-acre parcel. As the schedule for completing the EIS is fairly tight, I have mailed a $15.00 check to cover information search costs to the Department of Natural Resources, Financial Services Division, pursuant to your instructions in order to reduce the turn-around time. Thank you for your time and effort in preparing the environmental information. - Sincerely, Caroline V. Berry Senior Planner CVB: slw cc: Colin Quinn Don Erickson Seattle Trust Building,Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue,WA 98004 206/462-7650 -wir?k am Ocg` , ri i....A ;r ,av ad 'u � «� •,:'_ • FERRIS COMPANY • April 14, 1988 Department of Natural Resources Financial Services Division MS - QW-21 Olympia, Washington 98504 Re: Washington Natural Heritage Program Dear Sir : Pursuant to instructions given by Nancy Sprague, Washington Natural Heritage Program, enclosed please find a check in the amount of $15.00 to cover the costs for a data system search for the Lexington Ridge apartment project site located in Renton, Washington. As the schedule is fairly tight for completing the environmental report, I would appreciate it if you could process the financial paperwork as soon as possible. Sincerely, 5-""`E-1/TaAl Caroline V. Berry Senior Planner CVB: slw cc: Nancy Sprague, Washington Natural Heritage Program Colin Quinn Don Erickson Seattle Trust Building,Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue,WA 98004 206/462-7650 , , . ,91,,,, ,...a. r ..„,__ CONTRACT FOR SERVICES T IS AGREEMENT, entered into this I/ day of , 1987, by and between the City of Renton, a I Wa ington municipal corporation, (hereinafter called "City") , - and The Ferris Company, a Washington Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant") . . In consideration of the following promises, warranties, and covenants, it is agreed between the parties as follows: 1. Employment of Consultant: The City hereby agrees to 41 employ the Consultant and the Consultant hereby agrees to perform the services hereinafter set forth. The Consultant is employed to produce the described SEPA documents as set forth in Paragraph 2 and Attac m t , Sc e of Work. The Consultant is authorized to use , I as a subconsultant. No other subconsultants shall be employed unless authorized in writing by the City. Nothing in this contract shall be construed to create an employee - employer relationship between the Consultant, its employees and the City. 2 . Scope of Work: The Consultant shall furnish the necessary equipment, materials and professionally trained and experienced personnel to facilitate completion of the work described in Exhibit A, "Scope of Work," which is attached hereto, and is incorporated into this agreement as though fully set forth herein. The Consultant hereby warrants that it has the necessary experience, qualified and trained personnel, equipment and materials to complete the work detailed in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. 3 . Time of Performance: The work detailed in the Scope of Work will be performed according to Exhibit B, Time Schedule of Completion, attached hereto, and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. It is agreed that all the Consultant' s services sh 1 be com leted and all products shall be delivered by $- , 1988, notwithstanding delays due to factors th t are beyond the control of the Consultant. If, after receiving Notice to Proceed, Consultant is delayed in the performance of its services by factors that are beyond its control, Consultant shall notify the City of the delay and shall prepare a revised estimate of time and cost needed to complete the Project and submit the revision to the City for its approval. Time schedules are subject to mutual agreement for any revision unless specifically described as otherwise herein. /. CONTRACT FOR SERVICES PAGE 2 4 . Payment for Services: The Consultant agrees to perform work specified in the Scope of Work and City agrees to pay the Consultant an amount, subj t to conditions set forth in this Contract, not to exceed $ 000. 04 for services rendered in fulfillment of the Scope of Work. Payment of said sum will include payment for all necessary labor, materials, and facilities used in the completion of the "Scope of Work. " Attached as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by this reference is the schedule of payments for the completion of specified work products. In the event City desires services exceeding the Scope of Services, Consultant shall promptly provide a written estimated completion schedule and detailed scope of services for such Additional Services. Additional Services shall be paid upon a time and expense basis utilizing the fee schedule attached hereto as Exhibit C. 5. Project Management: The Project Manager for the Consultant shall be Michael Blumen. The Project Manager for the City shall be Donald K. Erickson. All correspondence, work orders, payment requests concerning this project shall be directed to these individuals. 6. Warranty of Authority: The Consultant hereby warrants and represents that the person who has executed this contract has full authority from the Consultant to do so. The City hereby warrants that the Mayor and City Clerk of City have full power to execute this contract. 7 . Indemnification: The parties further agree that neither party shall be liable for the negligent acts, errors, or omissions of the other party with respect to development, management, operation, of the proerty or project with respect to the performance of each party' s respective duties and obligations hold the other harmless and defend the other party against any damages, including costs of litigation and attorney's fees, incurred with respect to any claims or legal actions resulting from the negligent acts, errors or omissions of the imdemnifying party. 8 . Products of Services: All documents, working documents, notes, maps, drawings, photos, etc. produced by or for the Consultant, in furtherance of this Contract, shall be the property of the City and shall be delivered to the City prior to full payment for services under this Contract. 9 . Additional Responsibilities: The City shall endeavor to provide the Consultant in a timely manner with all necessary criteria and full information pertinent to the services to be rendered by the Consultant. Further, the City shall endeavor to make available to the Consultant all CONTRACT FOR SERVICES PAGE 3 information, drawings, maps, specifications in City' s possession which City and the Consultant consider pertinent to the Consultant' s Scope of Work. The Consultant agrees to perform the work specified in a timely manner and to complete the work in a form acceptable to the City within the specified budget and time authorized by this Contract notwithstanding delays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant. 10. Assignment of Rights: Neither party may assign its rights and obligations under this Contract without the express written consent of the other party. 11. Entire Contract: This agreement, consisting of 4 pages and Exhibits A, B, C constitutes the entire agreement or contract between the parties. The agreements set forth in this contract supersede all prior written or oral understandings. This agreement may not be amended except in writing signed by the parties hereto. 12 . Professional Responsibility: - Consultant represents that the services shall be performed, within the limits prescribed by this Contract as amended, in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other professional Consultants performing similar services in the State of Washington or of the type used in the Project under similar circumstances. No other representations to City, express or implied, and no warranty or guarantee is included or intended in this Contract or in any report, opinion, document or otherwise. 13 . Opportunity to Remedy: The parties agree that in the event of alleged error or omission by Consultant in performance of the Project, City shall notify Consultant promptly in writing of the fact and allow Consultant a reasonable time to remedy the problem. Upon notice, Consultant shall promptly review and remedy the problem at the cost of Consultant, if Consultant accepts responsibility for it. City agrees not to remedy the problem at the cost of Consultant without , first giving Consultant a reasonable opportunity to remedy the problem. It shall be the Consultant' s responsibility to remedy any problem that arises out of their performance under this contract whenever this is possible and where the Consultant cannot remedy the problem by itself, it shall use its best effort to work with others to remedy the problem. CONTRACT FOR SERVICES PAGE 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the CITY and 16 640 have executed this Contract as of the date first set forth ab ve: CITY OF RENTON by Rec: President Zoning Administrator Earl Clymer, Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM Lawrence Warren, City Attorney EXHIBIT B TIME SCHEDULE OF COMPLETION Contract Signature/Authorization to Proceed April 11 Submit Preliminary Draft EIS to City May 31 City delivers unified (one set) comments to Consultant June 14 Submit revised Preliminary DEIS to City June 24 City approves revisions June 30 Print DEIS and deliver to City July 7 DEIS issuance/public notice July 8 Comment Period July 8 - Aug. 7 Begin Final EIS preparation August 8 Submit Preliminary Final EIS to City August 23 City delivers unified (one set) comments to Consultant Sept. 6 Submit revised Preliminary FEIS to City Sept . 14 City approves revisions Sept. 20 Print Final EIS and deliver to City Sept. 27 FEIS issuance Sept. 28 CONTRACT FOR SERVICES EXHIBIT C SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS First Payment: . 1�% of Con act Amount upon acceptance of PDEIS by City of Rent. ( on oiec , Schedule) . Second Payment: 30% of Co ract Amount upon acceptance of DEIS by City of Renton ( 7 on Project Schedule) . ' r t: 0% Cont Am u upo ccep- ce of Dra F I by Cit f Ren (2 8 on 'ect hedu Payment: 20% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of FEIS by City of Renton ( on Project Schedule) . of-2 1- CITY OF RENTON 4 � �� ��= f BY 1; , .�. B8 Its Mayor Its pa 6 , ATTEST: By ' ir.,e.e-,,c-ems Its City Clerk m? -100 THE FERRIS COMPANY CONTRACT FOR SERVICE THI • GREEMENT, entered into this 4th •ay of A►ril, 1988, by and between the City of Renton, a Washington municipal corporation, (herei after called "City"), and The Ferris Company, . Washington Corporation (hereinafter referr:d to as "Consultant"). In consideration of th. following promises, warranties, and c•venants, it is agreed between the parties as follows: I. Employment .f Consultant: The City hereby ag ees to employ the Consultant and the Cons tant hereby agrees to perfor the services hereinafter set L ./ forth. IV► d` `_tom AP)DA forth.Consultant is e .Toyed` to pro.uce the des ribed SEPA documents as set forth in Paragraph 2 . d Attachmen co.: of Work. The Consultant is authorized to use Gold- Associates, and and Dodds Engineering as a subconsultant. No other ubconsultants s a ie employed unless authorized in writing by the City. Nothing in this contract shall .e construed to reate an employee - employer relationship between the Consu nt, its emplo ees and the City. 2. Scope of Work: The Consultan shall fu nish the necessary equipment, materials and professionally traine• and ex erienced personnel to facilitate completion of the work described in Exhib t A, "Scope of Work," which is attached hereto, and is incorporated i o th s agreement as though fully set forth herein. The Consultant hereby wa rants that it has the necessary experience, qualified and trained perso, •1, equipment and materials to complete the work detailed in Exhibit A, S•.pe of Work. 3. Time of Performance: The work detail:. the Scope of Work will be performed according to Exhibit B, Time Sch• .ule of Completion, attached hereto, and incorporated herein as though ully s:t forth. It is agreed that all the Consultant's services shall be co .leted . d all products shall be delivered by September 27, 1988, notwit standing ►elays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consul nt. If, a .•r receiving Notice to Proceed, Consultant is delayed in the ••rformance of 'ts services by factors that are beyond its control, Consultant -hall notify the k'ty of the delay and shall prepare a revised estimate of t me and cost need•• to complete the Project and submit the revision to th; City for its approva . Time schedules are subject to mutual agreement for .ny revision unless speci .lly .escribed as otherwise herein. 4. Payment for Services: The Cons tant agrees to perform work specified in the Scope of Work and City agrees to pay the Cons . . • . .. . nt subject to conditions set forth in this C ntract, not to excee. $4379444/0 for servic: 3t,3d5.O' rendered in fulfillment of the Scope of Work. Payment of said sum wil include payment for all neces ry labor, materials, and facilities used in the completion of the "Scope of ork." Attached as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by this reference is the schedule of payments for the completion of specified work products. THE FERRIS COMPANY CONTRACT FOR SERVICES PAGE 2 In the event City desires services exceeding the Scope of Services, Consultant shall promptly provide a written estimated completion schedule and detailed scope of services for such Additional Services. Additional Services shall be paid upon a time and expense basis utilizing the fee schedule attached hereto as Exhibit C. 5 Project Management: The Project Manager for the Consultant shall be Michael Blumen. The Project Manager for the City shall be Donald K. Erickson. All correspondence, work orders, payment requests concerning this project shall be directed to these individuals. 6. Warranty of Authority: The Consultant hereby warrants and represents that the person who has executed this contract has full authority from the Consultant to do so. The City hereby warrants that the Mayor and Cite,Clerk of City have full power to execute this contract. • 7. Indemnification: The parties further agree that neither party shall be liable efe for the negligent acts, errors, or omissions of the other party with re ect to development, management, operation of the property or project wit respect o 6 to the performance of each party's respective duties and obligations hold the other harmless and defend the other party against' any damages, including costs of litigation and attorney's fees, incurred with respect to any claims or legal actions resulting from the negligent acts, errors or omissions of the imdemnifying party. 8. Products of Services: All documents, working documents, notes, maps, drawings, photos, etc. produced by or for the Consultant, in furtherance of this Contract, shall be the property of the City and shall be delivered to the City prior to full payment for services under this Contract. 9. Additional Responsibilities: The City shall endeavor to provide the Consultant in a timely manner with all necessary criteria and full information pertinent to the services to be rendered by the Consultant. Further, the City shall endeavor to make available to the Consultant all information, drawings, maps, specifications in City's possession which City and the Consultant consider pertinent to the Consultant's Scope of Work. The Consultant agrees to perform the work specified in a timely manner and to complete the work in a form acceptable to the City within the specified budget and time authorized by this Contract notwithstanding delays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant. 10. Assignment of Rights: Neither party may assign its rights and obligations Nc under this Contract without the express writte - o, ent of the other party. 11. Entire Contract: This agreement, consisting o pages and Exhibits A, B, C constitutes the entire agreement or contract between the parties. The agreements set forth in this contract supersede all prior written or oral understandings. This agreement may not be amended except in writing signed by the parties hereto. , THE FERRIS COMPANY CONTRACT FOR SERVICES PAGE 3 12. Professional Responsibility: - Consultant represents that the services shall be performed, within the limits prescribed by this Contract as amended, in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other professional Consultants performing similar services in the State of Washington or of the type used in the Project under similar circumstances. No other representations to City, express or implied, and no warranty or guarantee is included or intended in this Contract or in any report, opinion, document or otherwise. 13. Opportunity to Remedy: The parties agree that in the event of alleged error or omission by Consultant in performance of the Project, City shall notify Consultant promptly in writing of the fact and allow Consultant a reasonable time to remedy the problem. Upon notice, Consultant shall promptly review and remedy the problem at the cost of Consultant, if Consultant accepts responsibility for it. City agrees not to remedy the problem at the cost of Consultant without first giving Consultant a reasonable opportunity to remedy the problem. It shall be the Consultant's responsibility to remedy any problem that arises out of their performance under this contract whenever this is possible and where the Consultant cannot remedy the problem by itself, it shall use its best effort to work with others to remedy the problem. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the CITY and THE FERRIS COMPANY have executed this Contract as of the date first set forth above: CITY OF RENTON by Rec: President Zoning Administrator Earl Clymer, Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM Lawrence Warren, City Attorney lexeis EXHIBIT B TIME SCHEDULE OF COMPLETION Contract Signature/Authorization to Proceed April Submit Preliminary Draft EIS to City May 31 City delivers unified (one set) comments to Consultant June 14 Submit revised Preliminary DEIS to City June 24 City approves revisions June 30 Print DEIS and deliver to City July 7 DEIS issuance/public notice July 8 Comment Period July 8 - Aug. 7 Begin Final EIS preparation August 8 Submit Preliminary Final EIS to City August 23 City delivers unified (one set) comments to Consultant Sept. 6 Submit revised Preliminary FEIS to City Sept. 14 City approves revisions Sept. 20 Print Final EIS and deliver to City Sept. 27 FEIS issuance Sept. 28 $ _1144 ®1 ! .� HE FERRIS COMPANY April 19, 1988 CITY OF {PO'nN Don Erickson �,� Zoning Administrator Building and Zoning Department City of Renton utPT. 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Re: Lexington Ridge EIS Dear Don: Enclosed are three (3) copies of the revised Scope of Services, pages A-3, A-4 and A-5 (the pagination changed on the Budget pages, so they are now A-6, A-7 and A-8) . The language under Alternatives and Assumptions reflects your requested changes and your discussion with John Phillips . I have also enclosed three original signature pages signed by Mike Ferris in order to facilitate final approval. Once all of the appropriate City people have signed, please send us an original for our files . As we discussed yesterday, we are prepared to meet with you this Friday. I checked with Colin Quinn and Friday afternoon is okay with him as well. Please call me when you have a specific time to meet. Si cerely, Michael J. Blumen Project Manager MJB: siw cc: Colin Quinn Seattle Trust Building,Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue,WA 98004 206/462-7650 iip II 411 I Dr?, .. Il 1 _ i it1 Par A - I/ - .0k, aaated., 4- 44-4 zii ,%7 . I1 6. Wed b a c ,t C�•r.._ 2iA,� • ......_ I ________12.4.4.e.14€4,11 42, A2.0-44, .!Ple..-rpt-ree-Gf--0 r ...z4t-zesk II lilt ___,..4.1..ionel.4.44..._ .4/2424.,e2Ara-e_y ____ 1; ____ _._ ; (PHONE Gd4W( _ it FOR i �/' /. i DATE f "' TIME 6'�'/3 P.M. . ef M ( �.__.y _I OF '`�`�f'� . .. .LEPHONEO. }.:.. ..___..__ _._ I . RETURNED : - I PHONE YOUR CALL. I AREA CODE NUMBER EXTENSION11 jI _ MESSAG 2�- 1 7 P�i� :�:...►PLEASE CALL� 45 WILL CALL AGAIN I _ wy /y CAME., - II I l/•v 0i7t ..� TO SEE-YOU-, II I JaW WANTS< — --- c_I J Q� ^!+ TO SEE`YOU;. II SIGNED I TOPS 9 FORM 4003 I _ , _ 1 II _ L I II II . 1 fI II II 11 . 1I II 1 1 . 1 I it 11 / .. • • - E FERRIS COMPANY April 12, 1988 CITY Cr RENTON Mr. Alan L. Wallis , Police Chief APR 131988 l City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 BUILDING IZON,NG DEPT Re : Lexington Ridge Apartments Environmental Impact Statement Dear Chief Wallis: The Ferris Company is conducting preliminary research in order to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) with the City of Renton for the Centron Corporation' s proposed Lexington Ridge Apartments project. I am requesting information on the potential impacts the proposal and a high density alternative may have on your facilities and services . The project site is located between NE 3rd Street and NE 4th Street, west of Edmonds Avenue NE and east of the Bronson Way NE/NE 3rd Street intersection (see attached map) . The Lexington Ridge project proposes to construct a maximum of 360 multi—family rental units in approximately 15 buildings on a 13.4—acre parcel. In addition to the residential buildings , the apartment complex would include a recreation center with activities such as racquetball courts , weight room and spa; and trails and passive open space. Associated parking (about 580 parking stalls) and landscaping would also be provided . It is expected that about 475 persons would reside in the completed development . An alternative to the project which will be evaluated in the EIS is a higher density project of approximately 445 dwelling units (with about 580 residents) and associated recreation, parking and landscaping features. Two nearby proposed projects are the ERADCO and McMann multi— family residential developments. Descriptions of these projects are available for your review in the City ' s project files. In general, the ERADCO project proposes to construct 425 dwelling units on 41 acres . The McMann project proposes to develop about 1 , 000 dwelling units on several acres . A total of approximately 2,430 persons would reside in the proposal, the McMann project and the ERADCO project. In order to address the potential impacts of this project and the high density alternative , and the cumulative impacts of develop— ment 'in the project vicinity, I would appreciate your response to the following questions : Seattle Trust Building,Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue,WA 98004 206/462-7650 %, . ; - Chief Wallis April 12, 1988 Page 2 1 . Where is the police station that would serve this area? 2. What is the patrol district that would serve this area? 3. Does the Department feel that the patrol district and site vicinity are presently being provided with an adequate level of police protection (e.g. officer:population ratio)? If not, please explain. 4. What types and number of calls per year and response times . can be expected for this residential development? 5. What impacts would the proposal have on the Department? Would any additional equipment and/or personnel be required as a result of the proposal? 6. What impacts would the high density alternative have on the Department? 7. What cumulative impacts would the proposal, together with the McMann and ERADCO projects have on the Department? 8. Please elaborate on any long-term plans or other information you feel may be valuable for accurately identifying potential impacts of this proposal. Thank you for your time and consideration in preparing responses to these questions . As the, schedule for completing the EIS is fairly tight, I would appreciate your response by Friday, April 22, 1988. Sincerely, 544644—V34-1-1 Caroline V. Berry Senior Planner - CVB: slw cc : Colin Quinn Don Erickson • 13 0 4.'s i,k2:::;;' -ir-- 1v�' ` q g �+IIrr$ Irtie ' p . t 4 rt... ` I "VVII - '/ ,/• / • �!! all •V Nllt21.1fr tE—IF. . I t9 . `1 JJJ E ' // • I g 0111• 1 14 it1.. .n di � i E r nrl ,oNl`�.�!(! ! A C11 to ,` Il.l wl \•iiiV. 11N E0 A{ll0 N r •N IINr Futloliu_ A eV Y I_ u _LL� 1_ - -L --f to mac• kl) 44 /�a ! 1 +! rrl .•. IEib • 1 . O 4 _A1al,.7..Ar .II.. •I. 0 ir •i o ff _ - . 9L_ Iwuaol j._ -i _.v ...II 2121 I. r �i •n + ,,�.r . •. .r'. 1.1 .. r(r rC I� 1 4L/i i •,A cir t 1 ♦ j1 ..i CO �y • 33 { .1 ii\tig I • •. 1 u1Lr' i.rut Ill—•.�—. A' i MONO• •AV,4 ^"A I - Y N11,_ 4 1' 7 n1.a•ralr,ii . y h �i �• ,,''n ,1• �.'d ~ . 'A .ul '.'I.CI-A A A/1 r� b:SiNii A lD , 1, y .} i 4v�4 7. _ 1111 ._41.... : .r! i3 r".o• i_ :r..I-� rr'F':Yi��4.1yyN �i * it ,,..i L1 s I A 9 YIximill "j� h �- f 1• a-j .+. 7 .4 % .—At a 4, :i_ I �'.�nt..."Al islll. ' a , . ® �_�� e •.�1 AA 7 CO r,nj Y tt � 1e11iH.,+ . ''�I r._ 4 J �•In.r.t ha ' �'r1 • ON CI Y! y 1 .•• O`{� • ' 1 N 1 ,n�,',)}1'iC q �• • y/L., +w I1 _�"..l tlY L ,� ll r I I ;:... Y r,ll7_�'1 .._ l]. •.f..f ,i V. ,„1„,..,„n •` mot _ .. N 1 kkkSSS777"'°°' INI AV YC r 1 y • • 1 ' -� la. . 1 1.. i - M • I . 9 ! _.11 1rn1 wv si t 1.i °L .. i Il 1! t • O �"•4 - ._h.)1241U ,!Y...a. _ ..— +— ,. i s'' o r.• - ' 1111'- fiLi ; 1i -"nu 6f;, i ...aw. . _u1�1 a I��1 1 Li..I. . 'till `I11!41I�ri. i- '°V-- - 5(I.. 4 1 " I I jj� • v lift Ii O 7 Nu.n d i N AAJI I 'I• I IlI1N.r tl w P r�• tt L N'Ar 1 :IYl.np &y'lato....I4�'• ' .__!Y!!L Ar y IIYIN•r.E�y�,1 Fy11. Fe _._ _ PCI 7 .T.t '_.1 a a I 1,.....y fp s wig A` 1 I I 1-y {�'tLL it t�I. •.7,or. - 1J1yF. FqF �i 1,..__ _r1w et 4 I V:�'1�.V..�..•pNy I m .n..�L IW1"I by {i 1.61�11. A_71`J !V AYu i /y �. VI I ...au ! I I ./ .1• 'i ,r 1*% 1'r I Ih 1 I{7 7 1 3 LL O ..... � i J �d I' I�-7 lu •Y y I" I L7 4 J ••I I -1 D I w y " II FjLj Z' 1•• uiln Ar II x>40 ij ly....a C 9 �i�li»� I I ...11� .. :Y; \'S:t_ 1 a >I -�' A ill 1 r /° \. I 1 ,; _ x t., r '-� E FERRIS COMPANY d ti y r i�?t 1: [ rt^µ V.. „a c:..: ' 1.,.. '�; .. . ■ April 12, 1988 Mr . John Morris, Coordinator Housing and Community Development Renton Parks Department 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Re: Lexington Ridge Apartments Environmental Impact Statement Dear Mr . Morris: The Ferris Company is conducting preliminary research in order to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) with the City of Renton for the Centron Corporation' s proposed Lexington Ridge Apartments project. I am requesting information on the potential impacts the proposal and a high density alternative may have on your facilities and services . The project site is located between NE 3rd Street and NE 4th Street , west of Edmonds Avenue NE and east of the Bronson Way NE/NE 3rd Street intersection (see attached map) . The Lexington Ridge project proposes to construct a maximum of 360 multi—family rental units in approximately 15 buildings on a 13. 4—acre parcel. . In addition to the residential buildings , the apartment complex would include a recreation center with activities such as racquetball courts, weight room and spa; and trails and passive open space. Associated parking (about 580 parking stalls) and landscaping would also be provided. It is expected that about 475 persons would reside in the completed development. An alternative to the project which will be evaluated in the EIS is a higher density project of approximately 445 dwelling units (with about 580 residents and associated recreation, parking and landscaping features . Two nearby proposed projects are the ERADCO and McMann multi—family residential developments. Descriptions of these projects are available for your review in the City ' s project files. In general, the ERADCO project proposes to construct 425 dwelling units on 41 acres. The McMann project proposes to develop about 1 , 000 dwelling units on several acres. A total of approximately 2,430 persons would reside in the proposal, the McMann project and the ERADCO project. In order to address the potential impacts of this project and the high density alternative, and the cumulative impacts of develop— ment in the project vicinity, I would appreciate your response to the following questions : Seattle Trust Building,Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue,WA 98004 206/462-7650 John Morris April 12, 1988 Page 2 1 . What recreational facilities and activities are currently available in the project area? 2. Could the Parks Department adequately accommodate the project with present facilities? If not, what changes and improvements would be necessary? 3. Does the City Parks Department have established standards and guidelines for assessing needs for park and recreational facilities? If so , how would these apply to the proposal? To the high density alternative? 4. What other impacts would the high density alternative have on the Parks Department ' s ability to provide service? 5. What cumulative impacts would the proposal plus the McMann and ERADCO projects have on the Parks Department ' s ability to provide recreational opportunities? 6. Please elaborate on any long—term plans or other information you feel would be valuable in accurately identifying potential impacts of the proposal. Thank you for your time and consideration in preparing responses to these questions. As the schedule for completing the EIS is fairly tight, I would appreciate your response by Friday, . April 22, 1988. Sincerely, 64-1/44,AdAA.1 Caroline V. Berry Senior Planner CVB:slw cc: Colin Quinn Don Erickson - O. cc i 11!/ I J 1 '_•11,.w1►n —) F .W i t °I ' 4 1 I Ox 1 r 4 ›- U II . � aw �° 1 " .: p� _ • il,r ¢ n rr.. Pv7•t• - I I k"° nu •... ' Ertijciir.ii• •� h z II �, rmiU 1 �.' II.v 1K1R +: .11pr•, w 1 Rv na1 .. n a •.tr:.•�°1 �`•� 7 •ITT— lit' % nv� - 1 I I..•n - Alm? i ..10Yy�.Pa RIpp'R�7.,w1n1 ini i _vs .r k__mai__.'"I.'G1.'4,t`i_ e3 I uyWI_. Z h.l I 6 •rr t^1� F? vnu, 1 I 1 11..mat 1 - -. -- - I-.1 rVIIM rr,t. O 1 I M� & ktry+ ' ;S I,V ••lilt►►1� It -.1 F"15►1 M 0 j1}arr.111IA., �� M1t _. F k �•--� 11..1 �I �til`r�'_. h,�lj� ! 9 -ttf 'AV eau IF, I r " 1. F M u' u� ;11.! I-rt , I �^ Alr _1! `•: i,f' .,,'4eI i 1 I. ,1,n -_. ._ _t d „IIIi1i ev t Mo. ^ ~ __ w i i 1- r. ,` ply, �nr. . JI ,...,ri ---I— �; F IV. V aelr�t" 1!-_- - --mit-- iR,w"{• •- 1 • -• '• f-ri I N 7......,. - . _ r.K�'n I n 1.w:1 7"..V. Ali I".-• . O . er n. ; ..... _1S.-.• •IS...Ii l Mitt[t f 'Y0_ �PI s l� o,.rr.,v. t. t. Iqi r• ,• :• ,i n`r ii>, ,))"_ �� 1 ,.r.. - f•�II:} .. I} {r•1". •Ct It.rlii'Ni w —" '� A ; a I nn ry1.' 4.1 ■t .1 ,r ....Y ,I •1 I �� b V .. 1 1 /•17w•,17 `k X� _ e- itrI - C L - N - O • �Q) r •U k~ k = r . 4r1 1': .Cr.r i 1 I a-. �.•.—Z—�� C n.• !i1 ,vi k-... l li•Ii:f i r li IT.T7 t.•.• F ft /` '� .•_ ———— I — 3 r c ; v. A5. n '"1Etsw w•_L� F ? • �• T 1 i i i-7a 7• ' .°. i 1 1 y 11t. •1 ti�� F # Ir�4.= r. r .n wa,. • 11 s,`jO�'+ 1j1uan11 ] co = M1 u •, 1L.. 1 .r.1 �'♦•t! , i` I ivi i r r•; e.,TWIT M a �` IQ • ._Tom ,n,.. tiro ,y •, .. .l i � ,� LL` tr. - kA !ilium _ i n o.rn.•w RC .r.°,�„�1�• , • hT h _` _ , I ■ ...1 _ ,' e It a Q it ,C tv22:••1__ ~ a8w • a Ir .T! k1.,N,rill I�2 r�',,:.n • �. '~'i r• r• I 1.. cy Ii iv � • •• f ..,,..oK �-.. �� ,.�•r.In. R; s • I'Iiilt7v =}+tw. ,wv I 3 D �F rj 111'� a S 11101 ir.. r. Ix-- .....- .,„i 14. ___*--- k I 14341-i-:" ' 0 ' • ,I,•111.Cr. 1 i; . .A op.11 e . •1; It k!!,iXSIMZ;P,••Z•47•,,gr"4. •Pt.1... • . • iiiaimmimaaggintaidann 0 -6‘ V .n,. ,c F },..sa t! 3t ia 13-,- i.`. ....., r�.�$ i FM:�. L.f.tC«...L;re'.Cr'�,u�,•-� - April 12, 1988 Mr. Denny Lensegrav, Business Manager Puget Sound Power and Light P. 0. Box 329 Renton, Washington 98057 Re : Lexington Ridge Apartments Environmental Impact Statement Dear Mr. Lensegrav : The Ferris Company is conducting preliminary research in order to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) with the City of Renton for the Centron Corporation' s proposed Lexington Ridge Apartments project. I am requesting information on the potential impacts the proposal and a high density alternative may have on your facilities and services . The project site is located between NE 3rd Street and NE 4th Street , west of Edmonds Avenue NE and east of the Bronson Way NE/NE 3rd Street intersection (see attached map) . The Lexington Ridge project proposes to construct a maximum of 360 multi-family rental units in approximately 15 buildings on a 13. 4-acre parcel. In addition to the residential buildings , the apartment complex would include a recreation center with activities such as racquetball courts , weight room and spa; and trails and passive open space. Associated parking (about 580 parking stalls) and landscaping would also be provided. It is expected that about 475 persons would reside in the completed development . An alternative to the project which will be evaluated in the EIS is a higher density project of approximately 445 dwelling units (with about 580 residents) and associated recreation, parking and landscaping features. Two nearby proposed projects are the ERADCO and McMann multi-family residential developments. Descriptions of these projects are available for your review in the City' s project files. In general, the ERADCO project proposes to construct 425 dwelling units on 41 acres . The McMann project proposes to develop about 1 ,000 dwelling units on several acres. A total of approximately 2 , 430 persons would reside in the proposal, the McMann project and the ERADCO project. In order to address the potential impacts of this project and the high density alternative, and the cumulative impacts of develop- ment in the project vicinity, I would appreciate your response to the following questions : 1 . Is electrical power available to the site? If so, would it be delivered by ,underground or overhead transmission lines and at what voltage? Seattle Trust Building,Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue,WA 98004 206/462-7650 Mr . Lensegrav - April 12, 1988 Page 2 2. What is the distance to the closest existing substation to the site? What is the reserve capacity available? Is this sufficient for this proposed project? 3. What effect would the project have on power requirements? Would the project require a new substation or other facility improvements? 4. What would the estimated annual energy requirements be for the project? What percentage of Puget Power ' s total requirements is this? What are the multipliers that are used to determine these estimates? 5. What impacts would the high density alternative have on Puget Power ' s ability to provide service? 6. What cumulative impacts would the proposal plus the McMann and ERADCO projects have on Puget Power 's ability to provide service? 7 . . What is the voltage of the transmission lines located in the Puget Power right-of-way to the east of the site? What would the electric and magnetic fields be from these transmission lines at the project site ' s boundary (approxi- mately 150 feet from the transmission lines)? Does Puget Power have any plans for up-scaling these transmission lines in the short or long-term? Please expand upon any electri- cal and biological effects the transmission lines may have on the proposal. 8. Please elaborate on any long-term plans or other information you feel may be valuable in accurately identifying potential impacts of this proposal. Thank you for your time and consideration in preparing responses to these que,tions. As the schedule for completing the EIS is fairly tight, I would appreciate your response by Friday, April 22, 1988. Sincerely, &*44.6.414- Caroline V. Berr Senior Planner cc : Colin Quinn Don Erickson • a2 11 ''� '1, i . I 1 ,v -1- R,v: 1 J IS•y a I 1 I Qx r • t' U I I Iiv E r t ei L i � et tl h 2 - I iVf well j 74.171N. I j n nrl1t i,•1 il 7 A 71 Ay ti.. A t. W �+ 1 1M,a.IR1u b I i- uw jkli.. ..R AiL 1-irr"— s ;t ---1- nr-- - wi&T •..---I ._ I. A - - H ' fig}• � i•1:'ntiil� r4 1 I q A1'11 P 1 O rl., et t 1 11 j- C •1 1 J7] I `r R'7.r NMI i -A AV --iRnt___ .I t:,.r c.R 1uaw, Z 1 ..,11M i i.I:Ii,..ma, I �! - -- -- - I1... E,93 .1 H jAI t Z~II3-s n-v t Crrlt►1C 1..n>, w , J I�7 ran - nIN9t/j / 7 -.7. t k J w qr. �'= r I:Iin.rl 'I,i ti�t.�.{.�`�o.sy�� H ,114 ! .. -1 --n I .. - .77 - -Wan I I -..�i w .L. �1! x� ,t,., „Ilil` 't.i1/ 2 a..n1.1 ^I -- I �, j " " 1n _ 1 _„" 9 mere __ ll" 11___ 7 --ALAI-- IV; q� ^nx _ Itl.� I — __•__.._...r. _-.. _ K'nlwl I n,.wirr •R 1 O r Jr.;:c.; N1w1 ! ^I' —.. "i! '"is R141 I • !Al,• O F' ae Lc I .I t K ._ 0p .— ci ;f=,. Ira ——� _.-1.._ - .._- ; ; ...._ 1n[ in.nr•••• ... t .�� Is AV NMi ;r-. r d "a••' r.•,. 7 1 II�.,n .lLi II'b�,t Z1: [ —,L P I: ► .�.1.., •[1 n nvi .!S t oDe -i f i. t IK E n IKI[[—� '� I t~ 1 ! "tl - A 11N••. -- * tvl • •.tl ..1 •i -'¢ Or) * I v r Z-7�� -. ir • , 1'• C 4. '.IF-y .,-, �'u.k.i. a i --,,.. n V+txv'..111, ; A N i'M — - H - I or.I,. L 1 (1 y .:1 -. .r �1et- i ,.?!. 1"„eri x i trr3 _ !:•� 1n (1 • A •- -----I —;�- 4• N • r.' r:ti. .. ELrr to gm r, .,, ' K 1 �,.I r• r p • I 3. K ••il n9�:'; 1�7 i, i I a 0 M �e a �","'+„, ...: 3:'vt •- r�'tt'' •1RL 1 a; e., to ,_pl 1n1wi ••.•Iltll •, 717. mom I I 1 11-: t t: Pt, ' ' A': i;.-1.0 l'r-':'' ..4 itn -'77.7.11.4 all 1- if. . .: 71 ni. ..72.r. i .,,,„...,,,, .:\ .,k,,,i1 _ i r 1 -1215 1 1N ��. �^ " .In torcNMl r t ---1,:. - U -—;'{-— v-• - -- % / 1i, ' ,,,,, ,„\. ., = 0 ^.•t Y 1 X — i`•n n I I; •j Y 1. I A IM Ar 171+111p* -1ii 1;a re,n `• t ® 7Tt $? R aII♦Li- >�.^\ P I,• , a. r }!-I.L 1.11 •1 '• N P• M)M•irI — M AT I M OBI I rg 'A.11.1n" l nc• p, .wn r N/j \�. ii1.o. ° 1in �� O AIrg711A. TN , •1w . t 3 D \ i ,,,P1RR: P. )NA INY - F 1< i'I// 7 ~..,1,-- ....-- „;4...\. t,._.Iwir—" "_i Nl. cc,... c �S� _ —Ls nw , / ,.► A.ill,jF.w £ Cl 0 Q '[v'..ti,.` :''1 . • HE FERRIS COMPANY April 12, 1988 Renton "School District No . 403 Plant Facility 435 Main Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Attention: Environmental Review Section Re: Lexington Ridge Apartments Environmental Impact Statement The Ferris Company is conducting preliminary research in order to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) with the City of Renton for the Centron Corporation' s proposed Lexington Ridge Apartments project. I am requesting information on the potential impacts the proposal and a high density alternative may have on your facilities and services . The project site is located between NE 3rd Street and NE 4th Street , west of Edmonds Avenue NE and east of the Bronson Way NE/NE 3rd Street intersection (see attached map) . The Lexington Ridge project proposes to construct a maximum of 360 multi-family rental units in approximately 15 buildings on a 13.4-acre parcel. In addition to the residential buildings , the apartment complex would include a recreation center with activities such as racquetball courts, weight room and spa; and trails and passive open space. Associated parking (about 580 parking stalls) and landscaping would also be provided. It is expected that about 475 persons would reside in the completed development. An alternative to the project which will be evaluated in the EIS is a higher density project of approximately 445 dwelling units (with about 580 residents) and associated recreation, parking and landscaping features. Two nearby proposed projects are the ERADCO and McMann multi-family residential developments. Descriptions of these projects are available for your review in the City ' s project files. In general, the ERADCO project proposes to construct 425 dwelling units on 41 acres . The McMann project proposes to develop about 1 , 000 dwelling units on several acres . A total of approximately 2,430 persons would reside in the proposal, the McMann project and the ERADCO project. In order to address the potential impacts of this project and the high density alternative , and the cumulative impacts of develop- ment in the project vicinity, I would appreciate your response to the following questions : 1 . Please identify the schools which on-site students would attend, their respective locations , rated capacities, and current enrollments. Seattle Trust Building,Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue,WA 98004 206 1462-7650 Renton School District No . 403 April 12, 1988 Page 2 2. What are the current enrollment trends in the District? What are the projected enrollments for the District through 1993 and beyond (if available)? 3. What changes are planned in the District (i . e. new school facilities)? 4. How many students are expected to be generated by the project? In the experience of The Ferris Company, the multiplier of .33 student per multi—family dwelling is generally accepted by the school districts in the Puget Sound metropolitan area. Based on this multiplier , the proposal would generate approximately 119 students ; the high density alternative would generate approximately 147 students ; and the proposal plus the ERADCO and McMann projects would generate approximately 589 students. Would existing and planned facilities be capable of accommodating the increased numbers of school—age children generated by the project? the high- density alternative? the proposal plus other proposed projects in the area? If not , what personnel and facility changes would be necessary to handle the increased number of students? 5. What is the District' s policy regarding transporting students between home and school? 6-. Please elaborate further on any long—range plans or other information you feel would be valuable in accurately identifying potential impacts of this proposal. Thank you for your time and consideration in preparing responses to these questions . As the schedule for completing the EIS is fairly tight, I would appreciate your response by Friday, April 22, 1988. . Si cerely, Caroline V. Ber y Senior Planner CVB: slw cc : Colin Quinn Don Erickson g � 1 1—r1 E 1 I '1►�L`,. • J , i ^_I ..NOCI1 a G IQxt - ° j14L k/ lilt m.IS Ai IK, n :IN - - 1 ._. „ I "u, mY y 'p.Nutt 1 ts A, �IiAt i Ec" rc.K 1i un"1 1 1 1 1.� , um.,.(q w _ - •11 I.. i �1 ; :::::71:1:: • 0 1 i 9 "1 H , 1. 1 1 MITrI - Is AV �' IC►1: - •-tt !earls = 1 .-f;.N t .. ui �.. �71la Iran fl --t> /I Y.•��•a -. Av... x errtn 1 :,. f I 1!, �[ Hi k / 'I1�� ►+ 1x e1 t q..Nn/ MA r,tI n.011,1, _ --� _Lit � ¢ �'' t` r.',If A.M1.1 —..--. t �' tl' V "itri• -- i 'AtAT•- , ► , 1N. . - -. - ■ I n,I f,- • - f,T)j Er ;ntJ(: Itlii }+ - -Y.'i.. -t -..— t- :I:I"" A.I Fir- - +,,Y OO- k'O --• `5.tMAP-- t j-- 1= w.-A.�T - --1 - - .-- • - . •! x� I-. • .; ...- . Li ( t + wig,-,.• - r K 1n"1 I- , �t1- —�__--.-..�.. rt Av olii :MI - . r, . . . ( % ►.',.PV,.. -•• fury ,. . , I! '� It_At 1Ki W. - .:at R ; 1111, T . f'. 1 1N/..n.)1 rJ..r+ Cl N 1 1 O 1 tNufalll itiL _• .!% r ItI t t I `U tl' r t "[ A n i ---• i1 '1 .1.i1 # A• t. s. .N( 10� Ii B v • ��//�� C !t : "i1F;,i ' 9 a ['__"t i id. - € I- "i� 4 .ty, 1i . ,J11 1Tii•,3 t •►'Li ! _ _ .- — _—I — i C _• litr,....... r: '' 1,[r:ram' - ..Nw r� "= '7 r I gypt..1. s Ni„ E'.1l� �`.`--�•--]] K •,•I, 3 • i t1Y� :-R n "i 'f „.,J O _ I 1 4 Orj _ t%. t ,41 a I - I • fr.01 I I. r b 01 iiit•, • I1 , .....r• f' I ,ram t 1 , it 1 • t.1 ;A_ . a Ili I-ts-/4 T rT1� 1!.'�,N;t� . . 1P:' _'i t. >< .1 . I—,4 -` e ., E r r l'q a Si Is IN AV , ilr -1R IF: 1NI,n • • '11. a ' .. • "o - Mom_ -MIM I,. — " w co +- t- I;Irv—n r� 7 :n,n,. ,N mini,' 1 ti 1 .. 1 II 1.0... .I�tTTaa , � t � i 3 f = .rraM R I 1 1 1114 E g IN V q 3 j4— It tI a M mama, . nii1�1•�i?�1. �,y 7 ►� •?:' 'filli)�� le ,Item! . E—L ! L.� 1 _'L ` N 1170kk'� . � .w1 ,sit— v S 4 O R . - x ' . HE'FERRIS-COMPANY • April 12, 1988 • Mr. Bob Vaughan, Manager Land Development Division Washington Natural Gas P. 0. Box 1869 Seattle, Washington 98111 Re: Lexington Ridge Apartments Environmental Impact Statement Dear Mr. Vaughan: The Ferris Company is conducting preliminary research in order to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) with the City of Renton for the Centron Corporation's proposed Lexington Ridge Apartments project . I am requesting information on the potential impacts the proposal and a high density alternative may have on your facilities and services. The project site is located between NE 3rd Street and NE 4th Street, west of Edmonds Avenue NE and east of the Bronson Way NE/NE 3rd Street intersection (see attached map) . The Lexington Ridge project proposes to construct a maximum of 360 multi-family rental units in approximately 15 buildings on a 13.4-acre parcel. In addition to the residential buildings , the apartment complex would include a recreation center with activities such as racquetball courts, weight room and spa; and trails and passive open space. Associated parking (about 580 parking stalls) and landscaping would also be provided. It is expected that about 475 persons would reside in the completed development. An alternative to the project which will be evaluated in the EIS is a higher density project of approximately 445 dwelling units (with about 580 residents) and associated recreation, parking and landscaping features . Two nearby proposed projects are the ERADCO and McMann multi-family residential developments. Descriptions of these projects are available for your review in the City ' s project files. In general, the ERADCO project proposes to construct 425 dwelling units on 41 acres. The McMann project proposes to develop about 1 , 000 dwelling units on several acres. A total of approximately 2,430 persons would reside in the proposal, the McMann project and the ERADCO project. In order to address the potential impacts of this project and the high density alternative , and the cumulative impacts of develop- ment in the project. vicinity, I would appreciate your response to the following questions : Seattle Trust Building,Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue,WA 98004 206/462-7650 Mr. Bob Vaughan April 12, 1988 Page 2 1 . Would you please send an inventory of existing facilities in the immediate site vicinity? 2. If natural gas is available for space heating, what is the estimated gas use per year for the proposal? 3. Would you anticipate any facility problems when supplying the project? If so , what are they? 4. Would any new facilities be required to handle the increased demand from the proposed project? 5. What impacts would the high density alternative have on WNG' s ability to provide service? 6. What cumulative impacts would the proposal plus the McMann and ERADCO projects have on WNG' s ability to provide service? 7. Are there any concerns regarding long—term service of natural gas to the area? 8. Please elaborate on any long—term plans or other information you feel may be valuable in accurately identifying potential impacts of this proposal. Thank you for your time and consideration in preparing responses to these questions. As the schedule for completing the EIS is fairly tight, I would appreciate your response by Friday, April 22, 1988. Sincerely, Caroline V. Be ry Senior Planner CVB: slw cc: Colin Quinn ' Don Erickson • • lC...a v AV 7}....r Ir'-I ` -g 'y -� r{ am, 9 / 1 _•• .1r- A(T s r N ' { _.wl� 1 1'".42 -/T—If-� , CI it 1 7. - /n l 1 .l ,4 e 1```x ; I r k ; ::-1 •4 " IF,14 �;.ir Yt. t l{r�uu. r uu i,'. I lily f1♦ . too nl :nt,o.IN. nt t .at■atr_ Z .v n I'_' ii. ti o c ;1 q`f ad T1i e r.cu . 41 lr..,,• t. ^-�- Y-i _l�.l!] �r' ..... elm _llama.: ba`..rA Mc- ru_--U 91lT f p a t i; . . „ r li ;J4A . 8 lM' %-,q 1_r t.. . •:..„.. pip y a `� 33 4t .,j•`,- \ 1 •p'_; 1 a'�,: ►;r.1r. i` rr��,. {� ri �I ♦ Il Ano- Anr • . rr III, vG► Y • `t J '14`4 •••'Iv' I y .�v •l e.w. .v_�s 3 l 7 1 s t 3 .} �1`� 1 o : l 3 11 ate" i rsti*,. .v k.��- h.., , .1.............. 4 �..I ———— • i _ 1r1_I• I ic2aaL• ' •.1 —it- I d s;-.w1P_�` Y 1 i ,..I__ i Ems! 3 Air 'i�3 ,.J .. !:4K' i-f /(A 4 1 ,'!1el 44T" 7 .. I i .- -'W_12-V 4 1 aLori u„..3-- -!I :!Vt.... I:li h. �i 1 • p W G .. IV'".'" 1 7 ���„ G1 2 —I �// :1-111 1' I 'lActldi.1 il t' i.r.r v w- - R. I I i LHIO AU-1:1; ua _• l._ •r I CI 1 i w..r I ;ryryt��Y .. . a ..— 1111U AV{t .�`. .1 / �{ 7r _ ..11. AI� •— . y N so 1 .1 kl�..... ;In• M�. � '� ,4'-1 1 � _In wv s!. ! 1 ■ �p[ ="�=-,1 � 11 ww.l.v ?t • r ..I.-------- il 01 -p i� _Ai.I IbW !Y...il- _ .). r1 i :imp—MIN 01; • A>Q . r• Y•• -lyla..u I .■.n'.0 - -.'v l�'- .r.,..I:il. a 'All, . - ,lt...1- --1.11. ° it I -- lbw e u ��* 1-. •..r•. $ C ryc• / ' I i 1'1>. 4.4# r ..-1- _a �..�-_ t'. wl1,,u / ..1{�{■. ' �''----i Llu.r y ± 1 141,.....%i4':it':'AV 14iil:, x -1lwAt t- r 'At t l'.• +41 tuna-. ". .. ell. ._ c.•I • ./u-- �11 ei II a 1 .61a.l ir "I.I.1l�.i� -- .Lilt__ ._....5[ 1 7. 'Nmut u_. 1 H : id i.1 1 a I raw•r a ~ I 1, I I 3wAnis IfyTV.,s,....1,q.4-.;.1ILA!!!_ Ar 15 WIN.I. �,! F4y IL d 1 I1. eII a i .- 7 I id,.•r.K p 1.w111 n k — ILC II.. '--- -- 'u'..rlwr.M I L '. 'TiP� 7 u �' i n r.I>/ • ..m./1 [-- i Fq( .6orl�i. . :i 1. Ivl Ar u 1SI ''• f11■ Y I ..Ik.kl ONO eY Il ^I - 11- I i♦ i'•I 1 Z I�f nU1 n Y 'I+)1� 11 1 ` 1 IY I _ '�M " °r - 1a I i y `I .uw w •r A I 1 a a y D r 11 I 11 z 3 S."—I 3 . u _1= �' �I I r 1 �"� 1 i O bZ • ::t FY HE FERRIS COMPANY• . ■ . April 12, 1988 Mr. Glen Gordon, Fire Marshall City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Re: Lexington Ridge Apartments Environmental Impact Statement Dear Mr. Gordon: The Ferris Company is conducting preliminary research in order to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) with the City of Renton for the Centron Corporation' s proposed Lexington Ridge Apartments project. I am requesting information on the potential impacts the proposal and a high density alternative may have on your facilities and services. The project site is located between NE 3rd Street and NE 4th Street , west of Edmonds Avenue NE and east of the Bronson Way NE/NE 3rd Street intersection (see attached map) . The Lexington Ridge project proposes to construct a maximum of 360 multi-family rental units in approximately 15 buildings on a 13.4-acre parcel. In addition to the residential buildings , the apartment complex would include a recreation center with activities such as racquetball courts, weight room and spa; and trails and passive open space. Associated parking (about 580 parking stalls) and landscaping would also be provided. It is expected that about 475 persons would reside in the completed development. An alternative to the project which will be evaluated in the EIS • is a higher density project of approximately 445 dwelling units (with about 580 residents) and associated recreation, parking and landscaping features . Two nearby proposed projects are the ERADCO and McMann multi-family residential developments. Descriptions of these projects are available for your review in the City ' s project files. In general, the ERADCO project proposes to construct 425 dwelling units on 41 acres . The McMann project proposes to develop about 1 ,000 dwelling units on several acres. A total of approximately 2,430 persons would reside in the proposal, the McMann project and the ERADCO project. In order to address the potential impacts of this project and the high density alternative, and the cumulative impacts of develop- ment in the project vicinity , I would appreciate- your response to the following questions : Seattle Trust Building,Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue,WA 98004 206/462-7650 Mr. Glen Gordon V • April 12, 1988 Page 2 1 . What are the existing Fire Department' s capabilities (i. e. officer :population ratio)? 2. What is the location of the fire station(s) which would serve the site? What equipment and numbers of staff (paid and volunteer) are presently available at this station(s)? Are any staff increases anticipated in the next five years without the additional service demands the site would generate? 3. What are the service area boundaries for the station(s)? What is the approximate resident population of the service are? 4. What are the estimated response times to the site? 5. What is the District ' s rating? 6. What mutual aid agreements does the District have with neighboring jurisdictions? 7. What was the total number of calls from the service area during 1987? How many of those calls were medical-aid related? 8. What impact on equipment and staff can be expected upon completion of the development? Would this proposal be directly responsible for these impacts or a contributing factor? 9. How many calls per year would the proposal be expected to generate? 10. What special programs or design features could be included in the proposal to augment fire protection services? 11 . What impacts would the high density alternative have on the Department? 12. What cumulative impacts would the proposal plus the McMann and ERADCO projects have on the Department? 13. Please elaborate further on any long-term plans or other information you feel may be valuable in accurately identifying potential impacts of this proposal. Mr . Glen Gordon April 12, 1988 Page 3 Thank you for your time and consideration in preparing responses to these questions. As the schedule for completing the EIS is fairly tight, I would appreciate your response by Friday, April 22, 1988. Sincerely, &444-4"4-1 Caroline V. Berry Senior Planner CVB:slw cc: Colin Quinn Don Erickson i I el/ ► Q ' I i—T.Iir -1— R,�:j p SC ' ' \ fI•.NI,GI r .W 11 C1 I I :¢ I Q I O1 I r ?. U I I , ei t � n I .. .. �. I-' 1 R v r r.. n:.t - 1 I i �r IT =1 R u Tint 1 t W , 3IMI . I1 -4r IKI . R�.n,. F na.,tn •Ir — :=- -- ..y �--1- n•.. N11�►� - • . .-. .% I i•u"GI Rf� • - I--I I y f• 11"jA,N1b1 I -f1 A• -RIM I (tile,r •c,4� gu•111-. 1 I•.TI>nP-� �6 ��If A.111111 1 A _ - •1/I i•• i..idly Ri7u -u•1V1: O I 1, (i• _.1"-11I 15 41 ,.1 H i N,,il 2 U I 't lg. / AV ,'r'I;.It \, Q O --n 1 e11111 i = I P ! ill,- ill, .1 4ti11-,•-. 'I i(/F. Z iycl�i earl` ,N --t, x=. -. .A7" G t: -'emn rye 1 .--`(_ G`j I ••fii .IINa.Ct9! H .�..111.1 =� I. i •di •• 1,411,.. ^ -- 1 1 tA.� S 1 = ,� • i 7�R A.1 . . 1� ..7 yy 11111 ' � f1' V i�"II. M /_ 11___ 4 -_A1AI-" -Trim�'{' ,w i1 11 '•111, :I ..NI.. r1 Y�.-/..1. -lIS- - .0 Rl I T 111.'1./1 : 111.1 IIA1 7 • ` r -nIi a Mltl ^ ,:, - —..—r I -�-'-Aii i11[1E-' R\ !y 0- K' —�I 1�.IA.- t 1— = tT=A.s.—nlnli'— --; II.. .__ 1. - I ,' _..._. 0f " ic. b 1L..1 �. ,3. S I iw. ��jj +et \t • Y ,. I., J Y� !1 / )• R UZ pi N.e.. I.) '� •� ,, 'p� �j s I 1. t..i.v,. - is A.t ..•♦' [ C .1 -I I' �, IS AV w dy p#C ,1 � � I R 11 '4. •t I.I,NO,,i; L'y IL • a _ C '1 i Q0 Tit, Ii1lRlrt -t IN• :.mow. {■r1.17d,.... ; J A• ti E—n— Ii!—n- i— am I . }..•- ..iI •v K• t ::_A I,”�'_ I, il - I ,� • i •Rw9I. 11Z—'_ IICLLy -..sl1i .'1l!• 'ti1A` . E r tt , �t a 11F•y r �'Nik1, I —..�4. o1N A,""'� 1 T!x I.CM — -- �+ .y`,�/ tn ./ 1�I1Y1 � ... rr.��} Ii'li.T 1 *t....1 I< 15•.T7 G. : A d r' '!• C i 1•I .1�`'� -� - 'It�'I -� 1j�- j}'1■y f b_-- •�IJt V - � -- —+i� \ /t [� A, —iF7s',1 I . t 4... • n. w a,. •oN.V •+Y NC 17 r,A.r••111 1,�Ej y p `I ..•1' J,1. 1 . 41.:� — —1 G t to • lt7Sm7is O _ I •1 sI0. ~1, �N",1"i ,1 •. Y •Q .` 1`•� 1 � r.,•: E ,, , a0 • _.:JJ Ml Ia1N1 •n.il 1y1" •., + t /� •ct- •Owl - t:t: i Fits , „:11Pa �S �,. �i.•:�ll• rQ;TA) Y. ill.) ltt1PTØi -P. AT ` _ ;(i•, % . al AV IN A• Arm 1Mr Iii-V iM,n I`,• ' 8 • Aaa•) G \+ �'Ti�.�� Q- \. , 2 ° —/— 1.wnA_JN- T I,i or1.`13 n•n•. 1 ...if', 4 f n1I 4 VI Aiifli7PII?ai ipl �� I 3 /�� �,i: , ( {s] )11 • Eg� r., vli -+f1 ! r•'Lj A� !h(111110 a,/ •_ `i 1_1 1• G _ � y n� 1 ._T R A. MM --Tit. .....-L �I� y ~.' L I "\(t]!FLIT '' tiA i'11 a . -..� 6 .j' ",--ram . �l .rC IS-.Q1- /�C+I� 1 i6 ,A (1 "_' .Li H.10mo.I, k ��r .sue , ` M A. r &71.-1—t i, Y•1 (4 ..,,,A - i • 5 ,irt�l^-:K7^.lF:N.J ;`T�+i.�' VS. F .',('� a `k_1-7 `.a � lac � ' �, '.€ HE FERRIS COMPANY April 12, 1988 Mr . Frank Forrest, Manager of Engineering Pacific Northwest Bell 300 S .W. 7th Renton, Washington 98055 Re: Lexington Ridge Apartments Environmental Impact Statement Dear Mr. Forest: The Ferris Company is conducting preliminary research in order to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) with the City of Renton for the Centron Corporation' s proposed Lexington Ridge Apartments project . I am requesting information on the potential impacts the proposal and a high density alternative may have on your facilities and services . The project site is located between NE 3rd Street and NE 4th Street , west of Edmonds Avenue NE and east of the Bronson Way NE/NE 3rd Street intersection (see attached map) . The Lexington Ridge project proposes to construct a maximum of 360 multi-family rental units in approximately 15 buildings on a 13.4-acre parcel. In addition to the residential buildings , the apartment complex would include a recreation center with activities such as racquetball courts, weight room and spa; and trails and passive open space. Associated parking (about 580 parking stalls) and landscaping would also be provided. It is expected that about 475 persons would reside in the completed development . An alternative to the project which will be evaluated in the EIS is a higher density project of approximately 445 dwelling units (with about 580 residents) , and associated recreation, parking and landscaping features . Two nearby proposed projects are the ERADCO and McMann multi-family residential developments. Descriptions of these projects are available for your review in the City' s project files. In general, the ERADCO project proposes to construct 425 dwelling units on 41 acres . The McMann project proposes to develop about 1 ,000 dwelling units on several acres . A total of approximately 2,430 persons would reside in . the proposal , the McMann project and the ERADCO project. • In order to address the potential impacts of this project and the high density alternative , and, the cumulative impacts of develop- ment in the project vicinity, I would appreciate your response to the following questions : Seattle Trust Building,Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue,WA 98004 206/462-7650 Mr. Frank Forrest April 12, 1988 Page 2 1 . What facilities are currently available in the project area? Are the lines underground or overhead and in what locations? 2. Could Pacific Northwest Bell adequately supply the project with the present facilities? If not, what changes and improvements would need to be made? 3. What would the projected service demand for the proposal be (new lines per year)? 4. What impact would the high density alternative have on PNB' s ability to provide service? 5. What cumulative impact would the proposal plus the McMann and ERADCO projects have on PNB' s ability to provide service? 6. Please elaborate on any long-term plans or other information you feel would be valuable in accurately identifying potential impacts of this proposal. Thank you for your time and consideration in preparing responses to these questions. As the schedule for completing the EIS is fairly tight, I would appreciate your response by Friday, April 22, 1988. Sincerely, (21.44.1-Le....1114. Caroline V. Berr Senior Planner CVB: slw cc: Colin Quinn Don Erickson ,T • N. 33 • • • __ !1^ /'C'FI q /kt,1I .` — eTy r `T1yr y_'1��• { b ~ �"•' - �w111.'r 1 'I . t� r l � 7I 1 /— --� �1 t1 -Yhi .r w 1�_. ?'ii{ I .1Yu "n ll! {. Y { „ y•.u•u. fa arIcao jw 1 % � g A `rY .w,�w.F 7 uc.oclw_ ! .v YI •i un n r1 _���III �- � uu p .r" a° `s CD 0 "j ; ,tea C! \ t ,\ 'c•+ 1- 7 ."{ S;;S E(cants .r 1� ' '"• - iv1=-4-, -11 ...i. : 4 A-: -- '7.Ldtisathill 1.--- I I rii ": irlid ,7 11i 25 • 44 ... • .4., . . 1.'„. .-. .... 'rill. e 3. l' 14 qiili A kj7 ) ' -a 2 ... 1• - T- .. ,,Q........ T. yi Ifra-2Av 4 I % -' ;Ls k4 • . . i xi r....i 1. . ;--11 ,.. ••irt,,,14 .ri. . 1.,,,,, ,_ . . ...............,..„ . CD nMD. •r•w" .. •It ` 1 IU.o.r.j• • • i ? _ 2 1 ! li tam ` 3 a .. 4•1} `• t `' 1 -�-r+r..•- m f. . Y a .. pi �Irr�..�r .r.� ,,+ .r f• i.��'.t1 ,r �jLP,.9 .. — ?. , r ► n.a - t I a� .1 I[ F•r•�t- 9 1 g co /;� 4 ,1.'q (111 ". tf ,i3 •,.; It,r w••1+ It•T/' y.2 ,' e-4 .► "'•• 'S� i, E I 7 ? SL+LEI ! II ii • 412•11git • •illjjj AV SS r i ._It.�1alL '!Y_..8. _1 •'r. • C,Wilk • yL, Ir I.•r.w - - .in.yy R� .+•.. a Ir '. • t C l+ .. itt Iwn_ a __1l _ 1 .,saw eI.0 i-. .. .r.n•r $ .3-4 r ,,i .. .�- -1 - - [ M wll S.0 rf(M .A i--•_-L_ ..wnd 1 /+>y cu ' ii1: '� it[ �i_ � � rr 1 C. =�umu_ eY t • _ilia • k: 7 7 : y by '" — 1 JJ .v 111r �y] H aE Ito 'I4r f4I:li�1.�.1~� 7_ .��__ ._...5€� - ~ 1 t - IN 16Y[I _. I I r I;l 11 l Iw.r,l I L{� O ,,.IA....z H AVI# 4.$ 9 I ilw•.. Z 3I..,"n 6 L �'-k•".,.4.• I ---)YI!!— •r tj I min•r E►.�,► �y„ IF C. I 1 a ? .r �" I . v l IN.r.. u ns(li. 17y[ h1TT F i4J .„,.. . .-.In ly y{; IWI EY \ rNn „ I1.liWH i /f1 '' wn./rly iF. (1 [l.l I? 2 �i . I .w.• .r a rs 4 I i 0 .fit n D 1 kp I I o f l z � 1 11H 6 4E: . CITY OF RENTON BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor Ronald G. Nelson, Director MEMORANDUM CITY OF RENTON RECI1!T DATE: _ April 5, 1988 APR, O51g88 TO: John Adamson BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. JNancy Laswell-Morris • FROM: Don Erickson SUBJECT: Lexington Ridge Scope of Services Review Attached is the prcposed final draft Scope of Services which the consultant, the Ferris Company, would like to go with. Please quickly review and let me know if you have any problems with this version. I would like to get the consultant contract signed e sday, o ur prompt response would be appreciated. Don rickson ids/gg Morris bOr1 - '/! I o),-)&r dein;An a.,l ke r nee ci t~ der, CO Wevia-7"- ►S pro ba-ta Li rn+ ao1, s s c e I c.u.la- s t,tei Vw c�v�epwl�s4-(.k- o�.caa-a�- e.. . I � �,�w- l� `�� o� 1 uw�e�. us -��4-ev .�.ti ._-- `1 4-L 1�-c.. eA 41) `14- 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 \ra,-- (i ,n.�av &11 H 4. , 4 , CITY OF RENTON ma BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor Ronald G. Nelson, Director MEMORANDUM TRAFFIC MG.nn. * 0 ri ( EEQGVE DATE: . April 5, 1988 - • TO: ',John Adamson APR 5 1988 Nancy Laswell-Morris • FROM: Don Erickson SUBJECT: Lexington Ridge Scope of Services Review Attached is the proposed final draft Scope of Services which the consultant, the Ferris Company, would like to go with. Please quickly review and let me know if you have any problems with this version. I would like to get the consultant contract signed e sday, o ur prompt response would be appreciated. J Don rickson b A1p r SR- Morris Y.rvv- " 9 ` 1(741/4r . 1, Pvtitre... 6 i eiNito ch-129 tA4wfl 4-0-...-1 t‘ w ttirj.t,t r A iii.112-5 pZ I r 44--. 4-0-4^:0 e Ls' 4tee,t, co.._ .e.e.............0,0 i- 44.4, 7410-. iictigg • -%/.. de.e.0...g--e! ° .„... .-:„- GA-7 " et:c , •%.A.044, " /4%- /0-14=e-- cgr-a- a.' a- j ,t, 1..<, dm,c r two/'e-z A" ) Ad-- Ar..4.d:C.x. AI -x..; - . _ -� i 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 • HE FERRIS COMPANY March 25 , 1988 CITY OF RENTON Don Erickson RECF \ID Zoning Administrator Building and Zoning Department MAR 251988 City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. Renton, Washington 98055 Re : Lexington Ridge EIS Scope Dear Don: Enclosed are three copies of another revised Scope of Work and Budget to prepare the Lexington Ridge EIS. We trust that the revisions made to the scope address all of your concerns, and we can now proceed with the project . Specifically, we have now included TDA, Inc . , to conduct the transportation work (since Mr . Adamson indicated that only TP&E, Dave Hamlin and Transpo would not be eligible to work on this project, we assume TDA is acceptable) . We have added language under all environmental elements to indicate that "proposal and all alternatives will be assessed" . Finally, we have , in coordination with Centron, identified the specific nature of the three alternatives that will be addressed in the EIS. As regards to the Contract Agreement , your Schedule of Payments as indicated in the March llth letter is acceptable to the consultant team. We still have not received any feedback on our suggested modifications to the contract language , however . We hope this is forthcoming in the next few days. Please review the enclosed and call me if you have any remaining questions . We trust that a Contract Agreement can be finalized and signed by the end of the month so that we can begin on the EIS. Sincerely, Michael J. B umen Project Manager MJB: slw Enclosures Seattle Trust Building,Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue,WA 98004 206/462-7650 HE FERRIS COMPANY March 30, 1988 C i \/ RENTON Jeanette McKague U ,, 1.7�8 Building and Zoning Department iLI ` City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South BWWLDf G /ZUWNG DEPT Renton, Washington 98055 Re : Lexington Ridge EIS Contract Dear Jeanette : The Ferris Company has received the revised Contract for Services to prepare. the EIS for the Lexington Ridge project. All provisions of the contract are acceptable to us except Paragraph No . 7 , Indemnification. Our Suggested Contract Modifications sent to Don Erickson on February 25th included a modification to the original City of Renton Standard Contract form regarding indemnification and insurance . Our modification read as follows : "Consultant will hold the City harmless , and assume liability for loss from claims arising in whole or in part out of Consultants' negligent performance of the professional services as set forth in this Agreement . For any damage caused by negligence other than profes- sional negligence, Consultant ' s liability, including that of its employees, agents and subcontractors , in the aggregate under this Agreement , shall not exceed the limits of Consultant ' s comprehensive general and automobile liability insurance coverage, which is $500,000. " The City ' s revised Paragraph No . 7 now includes the following statement: "The Consultant shall carry professional liability insurance in an amount of at least $500, 000. " The Ferris Company does not carry professional errors and omissions insurance due to the type of work we are engaged in. As you are aware, planning and environmental impact statement work does not involve risks related to errors and omissions , as in architecture and engineering design. In addition, as indicated in the first sub-paragraph under No . 7 , "the Consultant will hold the City harmless and assume liability for claims due to our negligent performance of the professional services . " Seattle Trust Building,Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue,WA 98004 206/462-7650 r Given the above, we would like to have the above statement on professional liability insurance stricken from the contract . As all other provisions of the contract are acceptable, this is the last item in question. We would like to have it resolved as soon as possible. I have also included two copies of Exhibit B, Time Schedule of Completion, for the City ' s review. This schedule assumes contract signatures and authorization to proceed by April 11 . Please call me if you have any further questions. Sincerely, Michael J. Blumen Project Manager MJB: slw Enclosures CITY OF RENTON ••LL w • BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor Ronald G. Nelson, Director MEMORANDUM DATE: April 5, 1988 TO: Larry Warren, City Attorney FROM: Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator RE: Ferris Company Contract for Services Lexington Ridge EIS As you are aware, the Ferris Company has been selected to prepare the EIS for a development known as Lexington Ridge. I have been working with the Ferris Company on the language in the Contract for Service document. We incorporated the language changes you suggested and submitted them to the Ferris Company. We appear to be close to signing a contract. The only section which the Ferris Company does not agree with is Section 7 titled Idemnification. As you had suggested we modified the contract language to read as follows: "The Consultant shall carry professional liability insurance in an amount of at least $500, 000. " The Ferris Company would like this wording stricken from the document. They sent us a letter, which I have attached, which explains their position. The Shapiro and Associates, Inc. Contract for Services, which you approved as to form, contained the following language under the Indemnification Section: /r/ At 0/f/ /01,91471 am/ • if dad fir % dAte/1 „,044,4 kwitot ti 40tM--fittr,d ‘011if age% a.- . 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 Larry Warren April 5, 1988 Page 2 7 . Indemnification: The parties further agree that neither party shall be liable for the negligent acts, errors, or omissions of the other party with respect to development, management, operation of the property or project with respect to the performance of each party' s respective duties and obligations hold the other harmless and defend the other party against any damages, including costs of litigation and attorney's fees, incurred with respect to any claims or legal actions resulting from the negligent acts, errors or omissions of the imdemnifying party. I would like you to review and comment on the different wording options for the Indemnification Section. I disagree with the Ferris Company letter in the assertion that the preparation of an EIS document does not result in risks to the City. While the risks due to an omission in an EIS may not be as tangible as an omission or error in architectural and engineering design, there is still the potential for a problem arising from the information provided (or not provided) in an EIS document. /Thanks, C- 2) 4A(.." Donald Erickson DKE:JSM:cs CONTRACT FOR SERVICES TR. S AGREEMENT, entered into this day of ' f , 1987 , by and between the City of Renton, a Wa� corporation,ton municipal (hereinafter called "City") , g and The Ferris Company, a Washington Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant") . In consideration of the following promises, warranties, and covenants, it is agreed between the parties as follows: 1. Employment of Consultant: The City hereby agrees to employ the Consultant and the Consultant hereby agrees to perform the services hereinafter set forth. The Consultant is employed to produce the described SEPA documents as set forth in Paragraph 2 and Attac m tddpe � of Work. The Consultant is authorized to useR as a subconsultant. No other subconsultants shall be employed unless authorized in writing by the City. Nothing in this contract shall be construed to create an employee - employer relationship between the Consultant, its employees and the City. 2 . Scope of Work: The Consultant shall furnish the necessary equipment, materials and professionally trained and experienced personnel to facilitate completion of the work described in Exhibit A, "Scope of Work, " which is attached hereto, and is incorporated into this agreement as though fully set forth herein. The Consultant hereby warrants that it has the necessary experience, qualified and trained personnel, equipment and materials to complete the work detailed in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. 3 . Time of Performance: The work detailed in the Scope of Work will be performed according to Exhibit B, Time Schedule of Completion, attached hereto, and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. It is agreed that all the Consultant ' s services shl be/ com leted and all products shall be delivered by ›�.,/� A , 1988 , notwithstanding delays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant. If, after receiving Notice to Proceed, Consultant is delayed in the performance of its services by factors that are beyond its control, Consultant shall notify the City of the delay and shall prepare a revised estimate of time and cost needed to complete the Project and submit the revision to the City for its approval. Time schedules are subject to mutual agreement for any revision unless specifically described as otherwise herein. CONTRACT FOR SERVICES PAGE 2 4 . Payment for Services: The Consultant agrees to perform work specified in the Scope of Work and City 'agrees to pay the Consultant an amount, subje,t to conditions set forth in this Contract, not to exceed $ °~i & 64 for services rendered in fulfillment of the Scope bf Work. Payment of said sum will include payment for all necessary labor, materials, and facilities used in the completion of the "Scope of Work. " Attached as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by this reference is the schedule of payments for the completion of specified work products. In the event City desires services exceeding the Scope of Services, Consultant shall promptly provide a written estimated completion schedule and detailed scope of services for such Additional Services. Additional Services shall be paid upon a time and expense basis utilizing the fee schedule attached hereto as Exhibit C. 5. Project Management: The Project Manager for the Consultant shall be Michael Blumen. The Project Manager for the City shall be Donald K. Erickson. All -correspondence, work orders, payment requests concerning this project shall be directed to these individuals. 6 . Warranty of Authority: The Consultant hereby warrants and represents that the person who has executed this contract has full authority from the Consultant to do so. The City hereby warrants that the Mayor and City Clerk of City have full power to execute this contract. 7 . Indemnification: The parties further agree that neither party shall be liable for the negligent acts, errors, or omissions of the other party with respect to development, management, operation of the proerty or project with respect to the performance of each party ' s respective duties and obligations hold the other harmless and defend the other party against any damages, including costs of litigation and attorney' s fees, incurred with respect to any claims or legal actions resulting from the negligent acts, errors or omissions of the imdemnifying party. 8 . Products of Services: All documents, working documents, notes, maps, drawings, photos, etc. produced by or for the Consultant, in furtherance of this Contract, shall be ' the property of the City and shall be delivered to the City prior to full payment for services under this Contract. 9 . Additional Responsibilities: The City shall endeavor to provide the Consultant in a timely manner with all necessary criteria and full information pertinent to the services to be rendered by the Consultant. Further, the City shall endeavor to make available to the Consultant all CONTRACT FOR SERVICES PAGE 3 information, drawings, maps, specifications in City' s possession which City and the Consultant consider pertinent to the Consultant ' s Scope of Work. The Consultant 'agrees to perform the work specified in a timely manner and to complete the work in a form acceptable to the City within the specified budget and time authorized by this Contract notwithstanding delays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant. 10. Assignment of Rights: Neither party may assign its rights and obligations under this Contract without the express written consent of the other party. 11. Entire Contract: This agreement, consisting of 4 pages and Exhibits A, B, C constitutes the entire agreement or contract between the parties. The agreements set forth in this contract supersede all prior written or oral understandings. This agreement may not be amended except in writing signed by the parties hereto. 12 . Professional Responsibility: - Consultant represents that the services shall be performed, within the limits prescribed by this Contract as amended, in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other professional Consultants performing similar services in the State of Washington or of the type used in the Project under similar circumstances. No other representations to City, express or implied, and no warranty or guarantee is included or intended in this Contract or in any report, opinion, document or otherwise. 13 . Opportunity to Remedy: The parties agree that in the event of alleged error or omission by Consultant in performance of the Project, City shall notify Consultant promptly in writing of the fact and allow Consultant a reasonable time to remedy the problem. Upon notice, Consultant shall promptly review and remedy the problem at the cost of Consultant, if Consultant accepts responsibility for it. City agrees not to remedy the problem at the cost of Consultant without first giving Consultant a reasonable opportunity to remedy the problem. It shall be the Consultant' s responsibility to remedy any problem that arises out of their performance under this contract whenever this is possible and where the Consultant cannot remedy the problem by itself, it shall use its best effort to work with others to remedy the problem. CONTRACT FOR SERVICES PAGE 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the CITY and /4 1kidliiii have executed this Contract as of the date first set forth ab/bve: CITY OF RENTON by Rec: President Zoning Administrator Earl Clymer, Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM Lawrence Warren, City Attorney EXHIBIT B TIME SCHEDULE OF COMPLETION Contract Signature/Authorization to Proceed April 11 Submit Preliminary Draft EIS to City May 31 City delivers unified (one set) comments to Consultant June 14 Submit revised Preliminary DEIS to City June 24 City approves revisions June 30 Print DEIS and deliver to City July 7 DEIS issuance/public notice July 8 Comment Period July 8 — Aug. 7 Begin Final EIS preparation August 8 Submit Preliminary Final EIS to City August 23 City delivers unified (one set) comments to Consultant Sept . 6 Submit revised Preliminary FEIS to City Sept . 14 City approves revisions Sept. 20 Print Final EIS and deliver to City Sept. 27 FEIS issuance Sept. 28 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE 10:00 A.M. Renton Municipal Building March 23, 1988 3rd Floor Conference Room MINUTES ATTENDING: Ron Nelson, Chairman; Larry Springer, Policy Development Director; Dick Houghton, Public Works Director; Don Erickson, Zoning Administrator; Earl Clymer, Mayor; Mike Parness, Administrative Assistant; Jeanette Samek-McKague, Senior Planner; John Adamson, Project Development Coordinator; Carolyn Sundvall, Recording Secretary. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman. CONTINUED: RENTON VILLAGE CINEMA Application for site plan approval to allow the expansion of an existing three-plex cinema (20;.000 sq. ft. and 1,405 seats) to operate as an eight-plex cinema for a new total of 36,253 sq. ft. and 2,260 seats. Property located in the Renton Village complex at 25 South Grady Way. (ECF-090-87; SA-103-87) Don Erickson gave background information. He briefed the Committee and circulated a letter from the applicant dated March 8, 1988, in which the applicant had responded to the request for additional information prior to recommendation on the site plan approval. Concern was expressed for the road alignment and the applicant had been asked to clarify what the alignment would be. Don felt that the driveway entrances should be kept away from the elbows on the street. Discussion then took place. . Larry Springer brought up the concern whether it should be a private or public road. Most of the road is now public and it is a major cross route. It was suggested that the speed limit be 25 mph. Larry felt that it needs to be a public street Ile agrees that it would be a cut off for Grady and Talbot intersection. Other issues were: the placement of Puget Power transmission lines on the edge of the right-of-way and the lose of a large greenbelt area . Don stated that a number of issues still remain unresolved. How the road is developed and the standards for the whole site are really important. Ron stated that Jerry Lind had written to Puget Power to try to work with them on the landscaping under the powerlines. DECISION: Ron made a motion to keep the roadway public, seconded by Larry Springer. The project will be brought back for the next ERC meeting. Don Erickson stated that a lot of the issues would carry over to the site plan review. WILLETT Application for site plan approval to allow a seven-unit apartment building. Applicant previously proposed eight (8) units on site. Property located at 354 Taylor Ave. N.W. (ECF-077-087; SA-088-87) Don Erickson gave background information on the project. He stated that there are no major impacts since we saw it last. The applicant took out a unit on the lower level and made it into a community room. He stated that the project had some slope issues because of the steepness of the site. John Morris had some concerns about the Rainier Bike Trail bypass. The Committee then reviewed the conditions listed on the Staff Report and discussion took place. DECISION: Ron Nelson made a motion to accept staff recommendations and issue a Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated with the six conditions listed on the Staff Report. Larry Springer seconded the motion. Carried DOUGLAS PRELLWITZ Application for preliminary plat approval to allow a twelve (12) lot single family subdivision on 2.56 acres of property. Property located in the 2300 block of N.E. 13th Place. (PP-013-87) Jeanette Samek-McKague gave background information on the project. The critical question with the preliminary plat application was that the applicant was serving the plat by a cul-de-sac street. The Committee asked that they get secondary access because of the length of the cul-de-sac, either through • the north end of the plat or work with the property owner immediately to the west. They have now come in with a design and Swanson Homes is going to purchase the property. Two major issues that the Committee had discussed before was secondary access and because the site is wooded, whoever developed it would need to provide a tree survey to retain as many trees as possible. DECISION: Defer ° ERC Minutes March 23, 1988 NEW PROJECTS: POLYGON CORPORATION SUNPOINTE PHASE III " Application for Final Planned Unit Development (FPUD) approval for Phase III of Sunpointe Condominiums to allow the construction of sixty (60) multi-family units on approximately 11.62 acres of property. Property located west of southwest 5th Court and south of southwest Sunset Boulevard. (ECF-098-87; FPUD-111-87) Don Erickson gave background information. He stated. that there are no significance adverse impacts.' The Committee then reviewed the conditions on the Staff Report and discussion took place. Larry Springer stated that it would be a good idea to have this approved by the Hearing Examiner as a modification to their preliminary and final. DECISION: Larry Springer made a motion to issue a Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated with the six conditions listed on the Staff Report, deleting the Note: under condition 2 (referring to the noise level). Ron Nelson seconded the motion. Carried. RENTON FAMILY PRACTICE CENTER Application to rezone eight (8) lots (115'x 350')/.92 acres located at the Northwest corner intersection of South 5th Street and Williams Avenue South from R-3 (Multiple-Family Residential) to B-1 (Commercial) to enable future commercial development at this site. This proposal includes three undeveloped lots, one lot developed with a single-family home and four lots developed with medical services, under a conditional use permit. Property located at 411 to 425 Williams Avenue South. (ECF- 001-088; R-001-88) Don Erickson gave background information on the project. He stated that it is a rezone proposal and that the applicant had not given any indication as to what the uses might be. He noted the singe-family character of much of the R-3 zone and noted that full B-1 zoning could have severe consequences for these surrounding areas. Discussion then took place on the zoning for the surrounding.lots. Jeanette Samek-McKague stated that when this property was developed with the medical office, R-3 zoning allowed it. R-3 does not allow medical offices any longer. The applicant had been told that a rezone on the northern half of the site which would be consistent with the commercial designation and the B-1 zone would be considered if they wanted to reapply. Larry Springer stated that it is the clear intent of the Comp Plan to avoid "leap frog" rezones. Because there is uncertainty with what could go on the property and what the impacts would be, he recommended denials on the Staff Report to the Hearing Examiner based on too many undetermined impacts. He stated that in terms of the potential uses of B- 1 Zone and lack of any other information we have to assume worst case impacts on the surrounding residential area and that it would be significant in consequence. DECISION: Ron Nelson made a motion to issue a Declaration of Significance, seconded by Larry Springer. After further discussion the Committee then withdrew the motion and asked Don Erickson to meet with the applicant and ask them to amend their application to reflect the Comp. Plan land use designations. CITY CENTER MOTEL Application for site plan approval to allow the construction of a new 93 unit motel. The project will include the demolition of the existing motel units and swimming pool. Property located at 112 South 3rd street. (ECF-073-87; SA-081-87) Don Erickson gave background information on the project. Some of the concerns expressed was the need to provide pedestrian linkage to Safeway and Hertiage Book Store, question on the fill material that is required to fill in a portion of the site and noise impacts from the traffic drive-through and construction, because of its downtown location. There were questions about adequacy of landscaping and screening around the building. Don stated that this project will go through Site Plan Review. He recommends it go to the Hearing Examiner. Ron stated that we should add the roadway improvements to the site plan. It was stated that we should express to the applicant a need for a meeting room. DECISION: Ron Nelson made a motion to issue a Declaration of Non-Significance - Mitigated with the three conditions listed on the staff report. Larry Springer seconded the motion. Carried. CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS P1 CHANNEL - BOX CULVERT Applications or conditional use and substantial development permits to construct a box culvert which will be for rerouting Springbrook Creek under I-405. The box culvert is an element of the proposed Green River Eastside Watershed Project. Property located west of the proposed Oakesdale Ave. S.W. extension and to the east of Springbrook Creek. (ECF-008-88; CU-008-88; SM- 008-88) • ERC Minutes March 23, 1988 m' Page 3 Don Erickson briefly described the project. He felt that it might be prudent to get a request a Shorelines Substantial Development Permit to " relocate the portion of Springbrook Creek that would actually go into the Box Culvert. Larry Springer stated that, as he understands it, this request is to give permission to build the Box Culvert, not to run water through it. Larry stated the reason is that we didn't want to raise the Springbrook Creek issue until we were ready to deal with all the issues south of 16th, which is what we promised we would do. Ron Nelson then briefed the Committee on a meeting held in Olympia. He stated that they. agreed to leave the culvert alone. They were concerned with the attachment of Springbrook to that culvert and so we decided in order to keep it going we would do it now as a culvert and then do the realignment at a latter date. They would not oppose the box culvert providing the application was for construction of the box culvert only. Larry Springer stated that it was a agreement that Larry Warren and Mike Parness worked out with DOE that we would not raise this issue and the City is well aware of the risk we run that we may build a box culvert that we can't put water through. DOE has already agreed that we don't need a shoreline permit for the box culvert, but asked that we apply for one anyway and they would grant it, for the records. The agreement is that we will apply for the Oakesdale and Box Culvert and they'll process it and we can start construction at the same time as long as Springbrook is not involved. DECISION: Ron Nelson made a motion to issue a Declaration of Non-Significance - Mitigated with the one condition listed on the Staff Report, deleting the note to applicant. Larry Springer seconded the motion. Carried. DISCUSSION: RENTON HONDA Proposed new Honda car dealership to be located at the N.W. intersection of S.W. Grady Way and Rainier Avenue South. Don Erickson gave background information. He stated that because this is a high visibility area and a gateway from the freeway into the City, we may want to look at higher design standards and try to enhance the intersection with landscaping, and a "Welcome to the City" sign, etc. He also asked if this was the direction we want for this portion of downtown to move in, i.e. an extension of auto row west on Grady Way. How far south do we want to extend auto row? Is it good land use in terms of the proximity to the City's major hotel? Discussion then took place on usage for this area. Don recommended that this project go through site plan review. He also recommended that we look at establishing a policy that major entrances into the community' have a higher design standard apply to them because it would set the tone for the City. BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK Letter from Barbara Moss of First City Developments in response to ERC letter of February 29th. Don Erickson referred to a letter from Barbara Moss dated March 8, 1988 regarding the north half development constraints on Blackriver Corporate Park. He then read the letter to ERC members. He stated that what he had done was clarify the wetland issue for her and our concerns about the 600 foot buffer around the rookery. Barbara Moss has written back and asked a number of questions. Don stated that the letter dated 2/29 were not ERC conditions, but the direction that the City had moved in towards her site. Don told the ERC he would respond to the letter and attach a map for her convenience. OTHER: LIBERTY VIEW Dick Houghton brought a question on the walkway for Liberty View. Jeanette Samek- McKague reviewed the issue of'the walkways. An easement is present from property located in Victoria Park. The easement however, does not serve all the parcels of property included in the Liberty View plat. The letter of understanding that Larry Warren sent out to Liberty View's attorney, said that the applicant only needed to do off- site improvement in front of their project, including walkway improvements. Dick Houghton 'asked what do you need from Public Works to clarify this issue? Jeanette stated that our position was established on the front of the memo from the attorney that we are not going to do anything and that all improvements would be along their frontage only. • ER'C Minutes March 23, 1988 Page 4 -LEXINGTON EIS" A Dick Houghton stated he had received a letter from Dave Hamlim regarding Lexington Ridge. Apparently they are doing an EIS and prior to the EIS they did a traffic study prepared by Dick Bishop. They hired the Ferris company to do the EIS which does not prepare traffic studies and they asked Dave Hamlin if he did transportation studies. Ferris company then asked if they could use Dave Hamlin. Gary Norris made the comment that he didn't think Dave does that kind of work. Larry Springer stated that he had read a letter from Don to Centron having to do with who selects the consultants and what the procedures are. It did lay out City policy with regard to retaining consultants for EIS and traffic studies on mitigated DNS, etc. He stated that it sounds like we may not have been providing the same direction to Centron in this case. Don said his department, working with John Adamson and Nancy Lazwell-Morris, had gone through a consultant selection process, having interviewed three firms and decided on the Ferris Company. The issue according to Don was whether we would let the proponent's technical consultants continue as sub-consultants for the E.I.S. Don then stated that our environmental ordinance allows us a lot of latitude as to whether we, the City, prepare the EIS, whether we do a three party agreement or we let the applicant do it. He then reviewed the procedures for the selection process with the ERC. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 12:15 p.m. a 40 CITY OF RENTON Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Daniel Kellogg - David M. Dean-Mark E. Barber -Zanetta L. Fontes -Theodore R. Parry Assistant City Attorn'e ys. • March 15, 1988 Lit TO: Donald K. Erickson, Building & Zoning Department FROM: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney RE: Consultant Contract for Services - The Ferris Company Dear Don: I have reviewed the Contract for Services as forwarded to me. In order to eliminate some of the blanks, I would suggest that we refer to the consultant' s formal name and then fill in a parenthesis stating "(hereinafter referred to as "consultant" ) . " Thereafter , whenever the company' s name would appear , we could have already filled in consultant. Paragraph 7 is unacceptable as written. Our City Council policy is that we do not limit liability of consultants. Additionally, we require the professional consultants to carry professional liability insurance, and I see no mention of such insurance except a disclaimer on the limitation of damages paragraph. The first paragraph of Paragraph 7 is acceptable. The last paragraph is unacceptable and we need to insert a paragraph establishing the amount of required professional liability insurance. Paragraph 8 is superfluous. We either need to eliminate this paragraph, or make the prevailing party have the right to recover its reasonable attorneys fees. I don't like the last sentence of Paragraph 14. If we can' t eliminate the last sentence, then I would suggest that the wording be changed to require the consultant to remedy the problem if consultant is able to remedy the problem and, if the consultant is unable to remedy the problem by itself , that it would endeavor to use its best efforts to work with others to remedy the problem. The last sentence, as presently written, is an invitation for the contractor to find excuses why it can' t remedy the problem. Lawrence J. Warren LWJ:as cc: Mayor • N8 .20 : 24 . Post Office Box 626 - 100 S 2nd Street - Renton, Washington 98057 - (206) 255-8678 t `' CITY OF RiENTON �s MIL BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor Ronald G. Nelson, Director March 11, 1988 Mr. Michael Blumen, Project Manager The Ferris Company Seattle Trust Building, Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue, WA 98004 RE: Lexington Ridge EIS Consultant Contract Dear Michael: We have reviewed your letter of February 25, 1988 and find that some of the changes you have requested are acceptable, whereas others are not. I will outline some of these below: Schedule of Payments: First Payment: We are not willing to remunerate you with 60% of the contract amount at submittal of the PDEIS. We would be willing to pay you 50% of the Contract Amount upon our acceptance of the PDEIS. Second Payment: Likewise, we believe that the amount indicated in Exhibit C, Schedule of Payments, should remain the same at 30% of the Contract Amount upon acceptance of the DEIS. Third Payment: In light of the above, this payment would end up, as you have proposed, at 20% of the Contract Amount upon acceptance of the FEIS. In terms of the proposed Scope of Service, Exhibit A, we believe elements I. Earth; VI. Water Quantity/Quality; VIII. Plants and Animals; X. Cumulative Effects; XII. Meetings; and XIII. - XV. Printing; appear to be acceptable. Elsewhere, whenever we are evaluating the "proposal" we want reference made to the alternatives so there is no question that these are being evaluated in a comparable fashion, where appropriate. In element V. Aesthetics, you note that the "project" will be addressed in terms of its design, scale, orientation, etc., "as related to surrounding land uses". We are just as interested in its internal impacts . Siting, orientation, view outlook, shadows, privacy, sense of community, etc. which are internal to the project must also be addressed in the document and are a major component of the City's Site Plan Review Ordinance. We also need to be very clear that graphics will be prepared for each development alternative proposed, i.e. low density alternative, medium density - dispersed, and medium density - clustered alternatives. 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 Mr. Michael Blumen March 11, 1988 Page 2 Item XI. Alternatives, needs to be expanded before the contract is signed to clearly identify the three development alternatives, including the "no action" alternative. You may want to meet with the proponents soon to ensure that they are clear on what these will be. We do not see any problems with Exhibit A-1, Project Budget Summary. Regarding Exhibit A-2 and who the sub-consultants are, there apparently has been some breakdown in communication. At our meeting of February 8, 1988, it was agreed that because their previous work on the project was basically complete, Dodd Engineers and Golder Associates could continue to be listed as sub-consultants for this project. However, for the transportation sub-consultant, the City wanted someone other than Transportation Planning and Engineers. (Note: this is not a reflection on the qualifications of this firm but rather the City's desire to maintain greater control over the project.) I would recommend that you submit a list of transportation sub-consultants for our consideration. If not, Gary Norris, the City's Traffic Engineer, can provide you with a name that would be acceptable to the City. Regarding the last attachment titled "Suggested Contract Modifications", I have incorporated these into our earlier contract and forwarded them to the City Attorney for his review. As soon as I hear from him I'll contact you. I hope we can get moving on this project very soon. By working out the details now, things should proceed much smoother. If you have any questions please give me a call. Sincere Dona . Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator DE:cs Lxtndeis EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES • The scope outlined below is for preparation of the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS and FEIS ) for the Lexington Ridge apartment project in Renton, Washington. The Ferris Company (the Consultant) will prepare the DEIS and FEIS consistent with the State Environmental Policy Act and the City of Renton Environmental Ordinance , Chapter 28 of the Renton Zoning Code. The Consultant has reviewed the existing studies for the project prepared by Golder Associates (geotechnical analysis) and Transportation, Planning & Engineering - TP&E (transportation study) and determined that the studies may need to be supple- mented and expanded by the subconsultants to provide the information and detail necessary to complete the preliminary DEIS . It has also been determined that Dodds Engineers, Inc . , will provide all necessary data on surface water quality and quantity to the Consultant. The Consultant will coordinate with the subconsultants , review their reports for adequacy and completeness , and incorporate the information into the DEIS. The Consultant will provide a description and comparative evaluation of the alternatives , including the proposal in the DEIS . A discussion of the affected environment , environmental impacts , proposed mitigating measures and other possible mitigating measures for the alternatives , including the proposal will. also be prepared for the following elements of the environment identified in the scoping process : I . Earth - The geotechnical engineering study for the project site and the Earth section of the DEIS will address existing soils , geologic and topographic conditions ; results of field exploration of subsurface conditions ; soil permeability issues ; recommendations for drainage and erosion control ; issues related to clearing and grading, and the movement of earth material on and off-site ; and measures to ensure foundation support and slope stability. II. Traffic - The specific transportation study for the project and the Transportation section of the DEIS , will address trip generation (including an explanation of trip generation rates) ; level-of-service impacts at the key intersections; circulation, parking and access issues ; and recommendations for mitigation of the project ' s impacts . Impacts regarding pedestrian safety and access and mitigating measures will be assessed by the transportation consultant and Transportation section as well . A-1 The Consultant will review and summarize the progress of the CH2MHill area-wide transportation improvement program as it applies to the proposal. Results of this study , particularly as related to potential mitigation for the project , will be incorporated into the EIS when available . III. Land Use - The proposal ' s relationship to the City of Renton ' s zoning code and comprehensive plan policies (including the City 's Greenbelt Policies) will be discussed by the Consultant . The proposal ' s relation- ship to existing land use , zoning and comprehensive plan designations in the immediate vicinity will also be included. The Consultant will prepare a slope/density analysis consistent with the City ' s Greenbelt Policies, to evaluate the relationship of the proposed density to the slopes in the development area on-site . A discussion of the impacts of the proposed density and other land use compatibility issues will be provided. IV. Recreation - The proposal includes the provision for on-site recreational opportunities . Both passive (trails , open space) and active facilities are proposed . The increase in demand represented by the on-site population will be evaluated in relation to the proposed opportunities to gauge overall impacts to local and regional park and recreation facilities. Existing facilities in the area will be described and impacts assessed . Measures to mitigate impacts will be addressed . V. Aesthetics - The proposal ' s design, scale, orientation and aesthetic/visual compatibility as related to surrounding land uses will be addressed by the Consultant through a written description and evalua- tion. Specifically , the proposed density , open space , buffering and setbacks will be analyzed . Site plans , elevations. and cross-sections will be provided to the Consultant by the Centron Corporation (the proponent) for incorporation into the DEIS. No additional graphics will be prepared for the visual analysis . VI. Water Quantity/Quality - The surface water quantity and quality information prepared •by Dodds Engineers , Inc . will include an analysis of pre and post-development drainage characteristics ; erosion control and detention requirements ; flooding conditions ; and relationship to the City ' s critical drainage basin designation. Golder & Associates will provide data on groundwater quality and quantity as related to the proposal, including A-2 references to potential impacts on aquifers in the area. The Consultant will review and integrate the data into the Water section of the DEIS. VII . Public Services and Utilities - The Consultant will address impacts on the local service providers includ- ing fire, police and school services. Existing capacities and anticipated impacts will be identified . For utility issues , the Consultant assumes that Dodds Engineers and the City will provide the required information related to existing capacity and needed improvements. An estimate of anticipated public costs and revenues associated with the project will be made based on a model prepared by the City of Renton Public Works Department. VIII. Plants and Animals - The Consultant will discuss existing habitat conditions on-site and will evaluate post-development impacts. The impacts from clearing and grading and opportunities for mitigation will be assessed. IX. Environmental Health - An analysis will be conducted by the Consultant addressing the possible health and safety issues related to the electrical transmission lines adjacent to the site . Literature will be reviewed and Puget Power , BPA and other sources of information will be consulted on the subject to gauge potential impacts. If substantiated and relevant, the reports and information will be related to project impacts. Mitigating measures to reduce impacts will be identified, if appropriate . X. Cumulative Effects - The City has identified two proposed projects in the vicinity (the McMann and Eradco projects) for the cumulative impact discussion. In the areas of Transportation, Land Use and Services , the proposal' s contribution to cumulative impacts will be described and evaluated by the Consultant . For cumulative transportation issues , information from the CH2MHill study will be referenced as available . XI . Alternatives - The Consultant will address up to three (3) alternatives to the proposed action, including the no-action alternative ; an alternative with a reduced density ; and an alternative with a higher density or an alternative design. XII. Meetings - The Consultant will attend up to ten ( 10) meetings on the DEIS and five (5) meetings on the FEIS with City of Renton officials. XIII. Printing - The Consultant assumes printing of up to fifteen (15) copies of the preliminary DEIS . XIV. Draft EIS — Upon submittal of the preliminary DEIS and receipt of comments from the City and proponent, the Consultant shall revise, complete and issue the DEIS. The fee for completion of the DEIS includes printing of up to eighty (80) copies of the document for public and agency review. XV. Final EIS — The Consultant' s estimated budget and scope for the FEIS assumes revising the DEIS, printing up to eighty (80) copies and responding to a relatively small number of substantive comment letters (10 to 12) dealing with the DEIS. If the City requires the Consultant to address additional comment letters and/or comments dealing with topics not discussed in the DEIS, or a level of detail not provided within this scope , the estimate for the FEIS may be revised. If the scope and cost estimate are beyond what has been estimated herein, the Consultant will meet with the City to develop a mutually acceptable scope and budget . ASSUMPTIONS A) Specific project description information, including reproducible site plans , elevations , and cross sections will be provided to the Consultant by the proponent at the outset of the EIS effort . In addition, the propo— nent will provide all necessary written and graphic material for all alternatives including site plans , elevations , number and layout of parking , access/ circulation, number of units and stories , street orientation, etc. Such information will provide for a complete description of the proposal and alternatives and relevant design features. B) The major issues to be addressed include Transporta— tion, Slopes , Soils , Land Use and Services . Emphasis will be placed on these issues by the Consultant and by the subconsultants to the proponent. Evaluation of impacts on other environmental elements will be more brief in nature . EXHIBIT A-1 PROJECT BUDGET SUMMARY LEXINGTON RIDGE The following outlines the proposed budget to prepare the Draft and Final EIS. The Draft and Final EIS budget represents our best estimate of the labor and costs associated with completing the tasks identified in the previous section. Preliminary Draft EIS Labor (preparation of the document, management and coordination) $14,500.00 Subconsultants* 7, 700.00 Word Processing 1 ,000.00 Graphics (preparation of up to twenty (20) exhibits) 1 ,300.00 Reimbursable Expenses* (mileage , parking, xerox copying, printing of up to fifteen (15) copies , and miscellaneous costs) 550.00 Subtotal $25,050.00 Draft EIS , Labor $ 4,520.00 Subconsultants* 803.00 Word Processing 600.00 Graphics 300.00 Printing (up to eighty (80) copies) 900.00 Reimbursable Expenses* 357.00 Subtotal $ 7, 480.00 TOTAL $32 ,530. 00 Final EIS Labor $ 3,480.00 Subconsultants* 715 .00 Word Processing 600.00 Printing (up to eighty (80) copies) 650.00 Reimbursable Expenses* 250.00 TOTAL $ 5 , 695 .00 Subconsultants and expenses = cost plus 10 percent fee. EXHIBIT A-2 LABOR BREAKDOWN AND HOURLY RATES Preliminary DEIS - Labor THE FERRIS COMPANY: Hourly Hours Rate Total Blumen - Project Manager 30 $60. $ 1 ,800. Brunner - Principal Author 128 50. 6,400. McGuire - Planner • 140 45. 6,300. Subtotal $14, 500. DODDS ENGINEERS: Borneman - Engineer 25 $40. $ 1 ,000. GOLDER ASSOCIATES: Cotton - Principal 3 $75. $ 225. Lavielle - Senior Engineer 28 60. 1 ,680. Clerical 3.8 25. 95. Subtotal $ 2,000. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND ENGINEERING: Bishop - Principal 8 $95. $ 760. Meijsen - Engineer 52.5 50. 2 ,625. Eager - Drafter 12 34. 408. Clerical 6 34. 207. Subtotal $ 4,000. LABOR TOTAL $21 , 500. • Draft EIS — Labor Hourly Hours Rate Total THE FERRIS COMPANY Blumen 12 $60. $ 720. Brunner 40 50. 2,000. McGuire 40 45. 1 ,800. Subtotal $ 4,520 DODDS ENGINEERS: Borneman 6 $40. $ 240. GOLDER ASSOCIATES: Lavielle 4 $60. $ 240. TP & E: Meijsen 5 $50. $ 250. LABOR TOTAL $ 5 ,250. Final EIS — Labor THE FERRIS COMPANY Blumen 8 $60. $ 480. Brunner 24 50. 1 ,200. McGuire 40 45. 1 ,800. Subtotal $ 3 ,480. DODDS ENGINEERS : Borneman 4 $40. $ 160. GOLDER ASSOCIATES: Lavielle 4 $60. $ 240. TP & E: Meijsen 5 $50. $ 250. LABOR TOTAL $ 4, 130. EXHIBIT A-3 FEE SCHEDULE - THE FERRIS COMPANY LEXINGTON RIDGE Personnel Title Hourly Rate* Mike Ferris Principal $65.00 Mike Blumen Program Manager $60.00 Lisa Verner Project Manager $60,00 Gretchen Brunner Senior Planner $50.00 Susan McGuire Senior Planner , $45.00 Caroline Berry Senior Planner $45.00 Word Processing $25.00 Salary plus overhead and fee. Expenses = direct cost plus 10 percent fee. ATTACHMENT THE FERRIS COMPANY SUGGESTED CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS Paragraph 3 _ Time of Performance — Modify to Read : The work detailed in the Scope of Work will be performed according to Exhibit B, Time Schedule of Completion, attached hereto , and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. It is agreed that all _ services shall be completed and all products shall be delivered by. , 1988, nothwithstanding delays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant. If, after receiving Notice to Proceed , Consultant is delayed in the performance of its services by factors that are beyond its control, Consultant shall notify the City of the delay and shall prepare a revised estimate of time and cost needed to complete the Project and submit the revision to the City for its approval. Time schedules are subject to mutual agreement for any revision unless specifically-. described as otherwise herein. - Paragraph 4 — Payment for Services — Include : - In the event City desires services exceeding the Scope of Services , Consultant shall promptly provide a written estimated completion schedule and detailed scope of services for such Additional Services. Additional Services shall be paid upon a time and expense basis utilizing the fee schedule attached hereto as Exhibit Paragraph 7 — Indemnification — Modify to Read : Consultant will hold the City harmless, and assume liability for loss from claims arising in whole or in part out of Consultants ' negligent performance of the professional services as set forth in this Agreement . For any damage caused by negligence other than professional negligence , Consultant ' s liability, including that of its employees, agents and subcontractors , in the aggregate under this Agreement , shall not exceed the limits of Consultant ' s comprehensive general and automobile liability insurance coverage, which is $500,000. Paragraph 10 — Additional Responsibilities — Include as part of last sentence : . . . .notwithstanding delays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant. New Paragraph Professional Responsibility - Include : Consultant represents that the services shall be performed, within the limits prescribed by this Contract as amended, in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other professional consultants performing similar services in the State of Washington or of the type used in the Project under similar circumstances . No other representations to City, express or implied, and no warranty or guarantee is included or intended in this Contract or in any report, opinion, document or otherwise. New Paragraph - Opportunity to Remedy - Include: The parties agree that in the event of alleged error or omission by Consultant in performance of the Project, City shall notify Consultant promptly in writing of the fact and allow Consultant a reasonable time to remedy the problem. Upon notice, Consultant shall promptly review and remedy the problem at the cost of Consultant, if Consultant accepts responsibility for it. City agrees not to remedy the problem or to contract with a third party to remedy the problem at the cost of Consultant without first giving Consultant a reasonable opportunity to remedy the problem. Where responsibility for a problem may be shared by Consultant and others , Consultant shall endeavor to remedy Consultants` share (and the share of any Consultant subcontractor or agent) at the cost of Consultant and to ,cooperate with others involved . r • • • CONTRACT FOR SERVICES • THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this day of , 1987, by and between the City of Renton, a Washington umnicipal corporation, (hereinafter called "City") , and , a Washington Corporation (hereinafter called is ) . In consideration of the following promises, warranties, and covenants, it is agreed between the parties as follows: 1. Employment of Consultant: The City hereby agrees to employ and hereby agrees to perform the services hereinafter set forth. is employed to produce the described SEPA ' • documents as set forth in Paragraph 2 and Attachment A, Scope of Work. is authorized to use - as a subconsultant. No other subconsultants shall be employed unless • authorized in writing by the City. Nothing in this contract shall be construed to create an employee - employer relationship between , its employees and the City. • 2. Scope of Work: shall furnish the • necessary equipment, materials and professionally trained and • experienced personnel to facilitate completion of the work ' described in Exhibit A, "Scope of Work," which is attached hereto, and is incorporated into this agreement as though fully set forth • herein. hereby warrants that it has the necessary • experience, qualified and trained personnel, equipment and • materials to complete the work detailed in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. 3. Time of Performance: The work detailed in the Scope of • Work will be started and completed by on the dates specified in Exhibit B, Time Schedule of Completion, attached hereto, and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. It is agreed that all services shall be completed and all • products shall be delivered by 1988. • 4. Payment for Services: agrees to perform work specified in the Scope of Work and City agrees to pay an amount, subject to conditions set forth in this i • Contract, not to exceed $ for services rendered in fulfillment of the Scope of Work. Payment of said sum will include • payment for all necessary labor, materials, and facilities used in the completion of the "Scope of Work." Attached as Exhibit C and • incorporated herein by this reference is the schedule of payments for the completion of specified work products. 5. Project Management: The Project Manager for shall be The Project Manager for the City shall be All correspondence, work . orders, payment requests concerning this project shall be directed ' to these individuals. 6. Warranty of Authority: hereby warrants and represents that the person who has executed this contract has • full authority from to do so. The -City hereby warrants that the Mayor and City Clerk of City have full power to execute this contract. 7. Idemnification: hereby agrees to idemnify and hold the City of Renton harmless from any and all claims, causes of action, damages and other actions growing out of this consultant's contract' or arising under this contract. • Including within this indemnification agreement shall be the f. responsibility of . to provide legal counsel to . ' ' V...Wa..aaw n+w A Lvx, eJL'tV.V J.W.A:i7 . PAGE 2 ... defend any claim,-action, cause of action or other legal proceeding brought by any third party to enforce this contract or, for damages arising out of any alleged lack of performance or negligent • performance of thie contract. Should not retain an • • .attorney to provide said defense, then it hereby agrees to reimburse the City of Renton for any legal fees it has expended in its own defense, together with interest at 10% since such fees were incurred. S. Legal Fees: If either party hereto shall bring suit to enforce this contract, the prevailing party, as defined by the laws of the State of Washington, shall receive those remedies and costs and attorney fees allowed by law. All lawsuits brought by either • • party for enforcement of this Contract shall first be brought in the King County • , Washington Superior Court. 9. Products of Services: All documents, working documents, notes, maps, drawings, photos, etc. produced by or for • , in furtherance of this Contract, shall be the property of the City and shall be delivered to the City prior to • full payment for services under this Contract. - 10. Additional Responsibilities: The City shall endeavor to provide in a timely manner with all necessary criteria and full information pertinent to the services to be • • rendered by . Further, the City shall endeavor to • make available to all information, drawings, maps, • specifications in City's possession which City and • consider pertinent to Scope of Work. • agrees to perform the work specified in a timely • manner and to complete the work in a form acceptable to the City • within the specified budget and time authorized b• y this Contract. • 11. Assignment of Rights: Neither party may assign its • rights and obligations under this Contract without the express • written consent of the other party. 12. Entire Contract: This agreement, consisting of pages and Exhibits A, B, C constitutes the entire agreement or contract between the parties. The agreements set forth in this • contract supersede all prior written or oral understandings. This .. agreement may not be amended except in writing signed by the parties hereto • IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the CITY and have executed• • this C • ontract as of the date first set forth above: CITY OF RENTON ' • by Rec: President Zoning Administrator Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor ATTEST: • • City Clerk . APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM Lawrence Warren, City Attorney • CONTRACT FOR SERVICES EXHIBIT B PROJECT SCHEDULE • EIS • Scope of work/contract • Deliver Preliminary Draft EIS to City (Complete document) • Renton delivers unified (one set) comments to consultant • Revised DEIS delivered to Renton Renton approves revisions • Print DEIS and deliver to City DEIS issuance/public notice . DEIS comments due • • • Begin FEIS preparation . • Draft FEIS to Renton Renton delivers unified (one set) comments. . • Revised FEIS to Renton Renton approves FEIS Print FEIS and deliver to City • Issue FEIS Appeal Period for FEIS • • , " So • CONTAACT FOR SERVICES 4 EXHIBIT C SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS • • First Payment: 30% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of • Preliminary Draft EIS by City of Renton. • • Second Payment: 30% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of • Draft EIS by City of Renton. Third Payment: 40% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of : • Final EIS by City of Renton. •:•• • .• „., • • • • • • • • • •• • „ . . .„ • • • • .• • •.• • • •"• • • • • •• .• • • • • • • •• ,• • • • . • ATTACHMENT THE FERRIS COMPANY SUGGESTED CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS Paragraph 3 - Time of Performance - Modify to Read : The work detailed in the Scope of Work will be performed according to Exhibit B, Time Schedule of Completion, attached hereto, and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. It is agreed that all services shall be completed and all products shall be delivered by , 1988, nothwithstanding delays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant. If, after receiving Notice to Proceed, Consultant is delayed in the performance of its services by factors that are beyond its control, Consultant shall notify the City of the delay and shall prepare a revised estimate of time and cost needed to complete the Project and submit the revision to the City for its approval. Time schedules are subject to mutual agreement for any revision unless specifically described as otherwise herein. Paragraph 4 - Payment for Services - Include: ' In the event City desires services exceeding the Scope of Services , Consultant shall promptly provide a written estimated completion schedule and detailed scope of services • for such Additional Services. Additional Services shall be paid upon a time and expense basis utilizing the fee schedule attached hereto as Exhibit Paragraph 7 - Indemnification ,- Modify to Read : Consultant will hold the City harmless , and assume liability for loss from claims arising in whole or in part out of Consultants' negligent performance of the professional services as set forth in this Agreement. For any damage caused by negligence other than professional negligence , Consultant ' s liability, including that of its employees, agents and subcontractors, in the aggregate under. this Agreement , shall not exceed the limits of Consultant 's comprehensive general and automobile liability insurance coverage, which is $500,000. Paragraph 10 - Additional Responsibilities - Include as part of last sentence : . . . .notwithstanding delays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant. New Paragraph — Professional Responsibility — Include: Consultant represents that the services shall be performed , within the limits prescribed by this Contract as amended, in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other professional consultants performing similar services in the State of Washington or of the type used in the Project under similar circumstances . No other representations to City , express or implied , and no warranty or guarantee is included or intended in this Contract or in any report, opinion, document or otherwise. New Paragraph _ Opportunity to Remedy — Include: The parties agree that in the event of alleged error or omission by Consultant in performance of the Project , City shall notify Consultant promptly in writing of the fact and allow Consultant a reasonable time to remedy the problem. Upon notice, Consultant shall promptly review and remedy the problem at the cost of Consultant , if Consultant accepts responsibility for it. City agrees not to remedy the problem or to contract with a third party to remedy the problem at the cost of Consultant without first giving Consultant a reasonable opportunity to remedy the problem. Where responsibility for a problem may be shared by Consultant and others , Consultant shall endeavor to remedy Consultants' share (and the share of any Consultant subcontractor or agent) at the cost of Consultant and to ,cooperate with others involved . !!r//// !, . . CONTRACT FOR SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this day of , 1987, by and between the City of Renton, a Washington municipal corporation, (hereinafter called "City") , and , a Washington Corporation (hereinafter called " ) . In consideration of the following promises, • warranties, and covenants, it is agreed between the parties as follows: • 1. Employment of Consultant: The City hereby agrees to employ and hereby agrees to perform the services hereinafter set forth. is employed to produce the described SEPA documents as set forth in Paragraph 2 and Attachment A, Scope of Work. is authorized to use as a subconsultant. No other subconsultants shall be employed unless authorized in writing by the City. Nothing in this contract shall be construed to create an employee - employer relationship between , its employees and the City. 2. Scope of Work: shall furnish the necessary equipment, materials and professionally trained and experienced personnel to facilitate completion of the work described in Exhibit A, "Scope of Work," which is attached hereto, and is incorporated into this agreement as though fully set forth herein. hereby warrants that it has the necessary experience, qualified and trained personnel, equipment and materials to complete the work detailed in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. • 3. Time of Performance: The work detailed in the Scope of Work will be started and completed by on the dates specified in Exhibit B, Time Schedule of Completion, attached hereto, and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. It is • agreed that all services shall be completed and all products shall be delivered by 1988. , • 4. Payment for Services: agrees to perform work specified in the Scope of Work and City agrees to pay an amount, subject to conditions set forth in this Contract, not to exceed $ for services rendered in fulfillment of the Scope of Work. Payment of said sum will include payment for all necessary labor, materials, and facilities used in the completion of the "Scope of Work." Attached as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by this reference is the schedule of payments for the completion of specified work products. • 5. Project Management: The Project Manager for shall be The Project Manager for the City shall be All correspondence, work orders, payment requests concerning this project shall be directed to these individuals. • • 6. Warranty of Authority: hereby warrants and represents that the person who has executed this contract has full authority from to do so. The •City hereby warrants that the Mayor and City Clerk of City have full power to execute this contract. 7. Idemnification: hereby agrees to idemnify and hold the City of Renton harmless from any and all claims, causes of action, damages and other actions growing out of this consultant's contract or arising under this contract. Including within this indemnification agreement shall be the responsibility of to provide legal counsel to e • // - • CONTRACT FOR SERVICES PAGE 2 • defend any claim,-action, cause of action or other legal proceeding brought by any third party to enforce this contract or, for damages • arising out of any alleged lack of performance or negligent • • performance of this contract. Should not retain an • attorney to provide said defense, then it hereby agrees to reimburse the City of Renton for any legal fees it has expended in its own defense, together with interest at 10% since such fees were incurred. 8. Legal Fees: If either party hereto shall bring suit to enforce this contract, the prevailing party, as defined by the laws • • of the State of Washington, shall receive those remedies and costs ' and attorney fees allowed by law. All lawsuits brought by either party for enforcement of this Contract shall first be brought in the King County, Washington Superior Court. 9. Products of Services: All documents, working documents, notes, maps, drawings, photos, etc. produced by or for , in furtherance of this Contract, shall be the property of the City and shall be delivered to the City prior to • full payment for services under this 'Contract. 10. Additional Responsibilities: The City shall endeavor to ' provide in a timely manner with all necessary criteria and full information pertinent to the services to be • • rendered by . Further, the City shall endeavor to make available to all information, drawings, maps, specifications in City's possession which City and • consider pertinent to Scope of Work. agrees to perform the work specified in a timely • manner and to complete the work in a form acceptable to the City within the specified budget and time authorized by this Contract. 11. Assignment of Rights: Neither party may assign its rights and obligations under this Contract without the express written consent of the other party. • 12. Entire Contract: This agreement, consisting of • pages and Exhibits A, B, C constitutes the entire agreement or • contract between the parties. The agreements set forth in this contract supersede all prior written or oral understandings. This agreement may not be amended except in writing signed by the • parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the CITY and have executed this Contract as of the date first set forth above: CITY OF RENTON by Rec: President Zoning Administrator i • Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM ' • Lawrence Warren, City Attorney yr. • CONTRACT FOR SERVICES EXHIBIT B PROJECT SCHEDULE • EIS • 1 Scope of work/contract Deliver Preliminary Draft EIS to City (Complete document) Renton delivers unified (one set) comments to consultant Revised DEIS delivered to Renton Renton approves revisions • Print DEIS and deliver to City DEIS issuance/public notice DEIS comments due Begin FEIS preparation Draft FEIS to Renton Renton delivers unified (one set) comments. Revised FEIS to Renton • Renton approves FEIS Print FEIS and deliver to City Issue FEIS Appeal Period for FEIS • • • CONTRACT FOR SERVICES EXHIBIT C SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS First Payment: 30% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of Preliminary Draft EIS by City of Renton. Second Payment: 30% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of Draft EIS by City of Renton. Third Payment: 40% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of Final EIS by City of Renton. i • CONTRACT FOR SERVICES • THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this day of , 1987, by and between the City of Renton, a Washington municipal corporation, (hereinafter called "City") , and , a Washington Corporation (hereinafter called It ) . In consideration of the following promises, warranties, and covenants, it is agreed between the parties as follows: • 1. Employment of Consultant: The City hereby agrees to employ and hereby agrees to perform the services hereinafter set forth. is employed to produce the described SEPA documents as set forth in Paragraph 2 and Attachment A, Scope of Work. is authorized to use as a subconsultant. No other subconsultants shall be employed unless authorized in writing by the City. Nothing in this contract shall be construed to create an employee - employer relationship between , its employees and the City. 2. Scope of Work: shall furnish the necessary equipment, materials and professionally trained and • experienced personnel to facilitate completion of the work described in Exhibit A, "Scope of Work," which is attached hereto, and is incorporated into this agreement as though fully set forth • . herein. hereby warrants that it has the necessary experience, qualified and trained personnel, equipment and materials to complete the work detailed in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. 3. Time of Performance: The wo�r detailed in the Scope of Work will be started and completed by /1J / 4 C 0) „ on the dates specified in Exhibit B, Time Schedule of Completion, attached hereto, and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. It is •• agreed that all f�tri5uf di(b 4; u�, //aks� ces shall be completed and all products shall be delivered by _ 1988. 4. Payment for Services: '/-6 r ! agrees to perform . work specified in the Scope of Work and' CZvty , agrees to pay -f7e_ f?, (A • an amount, subject to conditions set forth in this ' Contract, not to exceed $ for services rendered in • fulfillment of the Scope of Work. Payment of said sum will include • payment for all necessary labor, materials, and facilities used in the completion of the "Scope of Work." Attached as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by this reference is the schedule of payments • �-r-9 for the completion of specified work products. 5. Project Management: The Project Manager for shall be The Project Manager for the City shall be . All correspondence, work • . orders, payment requests concerning this project shall be directed to these individuals. • 6. Warranty of Authority: hereby warrants . and represents that the person who has executed this contract has full authority from to do so. The City hereby warrants that the Mayor and City Clerk of City have full power to • execute this contract. r� 7. Idemnification: 1:7 .wee .. L hereby agrees to idemnify and hold the City of Renton harmless from any and all claims, causes of action, damages and other actions ,growing out of this consultant's contract or arising under this contract. Including within thhisindemnification agreement shall be the responsibility of ;`11 LAC Pi to provide legal counsel to - CONTRACT FOR SERVICES ' PAGE 2 • defend any claim,-action, cause of action or other legal proceeding brought by any third party to enforce this contract or, for damages arising out of any alleged lack of ,performan a or negligent performance of this contract. Should Ti C (j) . not retain an attorney to provide said defense, then it hereby agrees to reimburse the City of Renton for any legal fees it has expended in its own defense, together with interest at 10% since such fees were incurred. 8. Legal Fees: If either party hereto shall bring suit to enforce this contract, the prevailing party, as defined by the laws of the State of Washington, shall receive those remedies and costs and attorney fees allowed by law. All lawsuits brought by either party for enforcement of this Contract shall first be brought in the King County, Washington Superior Court. • 9. Products of Services: All documents, working documents, notes, maps, drawings, photos, etc. produced by or for , in furtherance of this Contract, shall be the property of the City and shall be delivered to the City prior to full payment for services under this Contract. 10. Additional Responsibilities: The City shall endeavor to provide 4/ t ph • in a timely manner with all necessary criteria 'and full ui"nformat,�'oq pertinent to the services to be rendered by -jet 44V.& y Sl rlrrnS grAl1 urther, the City shall endeavor to make available to .%lf t XAfvt I,b all information, drawin s, maps, specifications in City's possession which City and ,� s,�v/$' c9nsider pertinent to Scope of Work. ( agrees to perform the work specified in a timely manner and to complete the work in a form acceptable to the City • within the specified budget and time authorized by this Contract. 11. Assignment of Rights: Neither party may assign its rights and obligations under this Contract without the express written consent of the other party. • 12. Entire Contract: This agreement, consisting of pages and Exhibits A, B, C constitutes the entire agreement or contract between the parties. The agreements set forth in this contract supersede all prior written or oral understandings. This agreement may not be amended except in writing signed by the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the CITY and have executed this Contract as of the date first set forth above: • CITY OF RENTON by Rec: President Zoning Administrator • Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor • ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM Lawrence Warren, City Attorney • • • • • r. • CONTRACT FOR SERVICES • EXHIBIT B PROJECT SCHEDULE EIS , 1 Scope of.work/contract Deliver Preliminary Draft EIS to City (Complete document) Renton delivers unified (one set) comments to • consultant Revised DEIS delivered to Renton Renton approves revisions Print DEIS and deliver to City DEIS issuance/public notice • DEIS comments due • Begin FEIS preparation • Draft FEIS to Renton Renton delivers unified (one set) comments. • Revised FEIS to Renton - Renton approves FEIS Print FEIS and deliver to City Issue FEIS • Appeal Period for FEIS • • CONTRACT FOR SERVICES • EXHIBIT C SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS First Payment: - of Contract Amount upon acceptance of • Preliminary Draft EIS by City of Renton. • Second Payment: 30% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of Draft EIS by City of/Renton. 00 Third Payment: Ae% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of Final EIS by City of Renton. :•• • • • •. • • • • • • • • • ' . ATTACHMENT THE FERRIS COMPANY SUGGESTED CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS Paragraph 3 - Time of Performance - Modify to Read : The work detailed in the Scope of Work will be performed according to Exhibit B, Time Schedule of Completion, attached hereto , and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. It is agreed that all services shall be completed and all products shall be delivered by , 1988, nothwithstanding delays due to factors .....- that are beyond the control of the Consultant. If, after I receiving Notice to Proceed, Consultant is delayed in the fl performance of its services by factors that are beyond its control, Consultant shall notify the City of the delay and ;� �c Wi shall prepare a revised estimate of time and cost needed to i I Y��� complete the Project and submit the revision to the City for its approval. Time schedules are subject to mutual PC v agreement for any revision unless specifically described as otherwise herein. Paragraph 4 - Payment for Services - Include : In the event City desires services exceeding the Scope of Services , Consultant shall promptly provide a written estimated completion schedule and detailed scope of services ~ for such Additional Services. Additional Services shall be paid upon a time and expense basis utilizing the fee schedule attached hereto as Exhibit Paragraph 7 _ Indemnification - Modify to Read : a)/ \1 ' Consultant will hold the City harmless , and assume liability We/ " ' j for loss from claims arising in whole or in part out of � ��� 0,_ Consultants' negligent performance of the professional �/ services as set forth in this Agreement. 2 For any damage caused by negligence other than professional negligence , Consultant ' s liability, including that of its employees, agents and subcontractors , in the aggregate under this Agreement , shall not exceed the limits of Consultant 's /07# V ° comprehensive general and automobile liability insurance coverage , which is $500,000. Paragraph 10 - Additional Responsibilities - Include as part of last sentence : . . . .notwithstanding delays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant . • New Paragraph - Professional Responsibility - Include : Consultant represents that the services shall be performed, within the limits prescribed by this Contract as amended, in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other professional consultants performing similar services in the State of Washington or of the type used in the Project under similar circumstances . � 'No other representations to City, express or implied, and no ,�� Q, ,\ warranty or guarantee is included or intended in this Contract or in any report, opinion, document or otherwise. New Paragraph - Opportunity to Remedy - Include: The parties agree that in the event of alleged error or omission by Consultant in performance of the Project , City shall notify Consultant promptly in writing of the fact and allow Consultant a reasonable time to remedy the problem. � � 1 ' ,. Upon notice, Consultant shall promptly review and remedy the , problem at the cost of Consultant, if Consultant accepts _..„K , \1 responsibility for it._ City agrees not to remedy the aproblem or to contract with a third party to remedy the problem at the cost of Consultant without first giving Consultant a reasonable opportunity to remedy the problem. �--\ Where responsibility for a problem may be shared by 4 . / onsul ntta Aa- -d h•e=r-- e-n-d. s , Consultant shall eavo.—t-o remedy 11 Consultants' share (and the share of any Consultant ,�' lk subcontractor or agent) at the cost of Consultant and to „I�°� -cooperate with others involved. !'- ®® CITY OF RENTON } ' r``, BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor Ronald G. Nelson, Director ® - ANDU �, 4 DATE: March 2, 1988 MAR 2 19 TO: John Adamson Nancy Laswell Morris From: Donald K. Erickson tf/ RE: Lexington Ridge EIS/Scope of Services Attached please find copies of a cover letter and revised Scope of Services and Budget from The Ferris Company for the Lexington Ridge E. I.S. Please review this material as I will be contacting you this week to establish a meeting to discuss this material. ' ( ) \t" 6.-- ' 0 eld-S 96* 69 a44#1°. 3 62-- Asor Cie") 1�;A.) e0xisv , . J ,, 1�t Eli Lam., ®st, t9 I 0 ti ed i A) der `' `l 6) h \y/ „ , ‘,.0..,j4, ,. e t ' IC., f- ' ei 0.21,c,4 ,,,,,,,ze,„ y t 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope outlined below is for preparation of the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS and FEIS) for the Lexington Ridge apartment project in Renton, Washington. The Ferris Company (the Consultant) will prepare the DEIS and FEIS consistent with the State Environmental Policy Act and the City of Renton Environmental Ordinance , Chapter 28 of the Renton Zoning Code. The Consultant has reviewed the existing studies for the project prepared by Golder Associates (geotechnical analysis) and Transportation, Planning & Engineering — TP&E (transportation study) and determined that the studies may need to be supple— mented and expanded by the subconsultants to provide the information and detail necessary to complete the preliminary DEIS . It has also been determined that Dodds Engineers, Inc. , will provide all necessary data on surface water quality and quantity to the Consultant. The Consultant will coordinate with the subconsultants, review their reports for adequacy and completeness , and incorporate the information into the DEIS . The Consultant will provide a description and comparative evaluation of the alternatives , including the proposal in the DEIS . A discussion of the affected environment , environmental impacts , proposed mitigating measures and other possible mitigating measures for the alternatives , including the proposal, will, also be prepared for the following elements of the environment identified in the scoping process : I . Earth — The geotechnical engineering study for the project site and the Earth section of the DEIS will address existing soils , geologic and topographic conditions ; results of field exploration of subsurface conditions ; soil permeability issues ; recommendations for drainage and erosion control ; issues related to clearing and grading, and the movement of earth material on and off—site ; and measures to ensure foundation support and slope stability. IT . Traffic — The specific transportation study for the project and the Transportation section of the DEIS , will address trip generation (including an explanation of trip generation rates) ; level—of—service impacts at the key intersections ; circulation, parking and access issues ; and recommendations for mitigation of the project ' s impacts. Impacts regarding pedestrian safety and access and mitigating measures will be assessed by the transportation consultant and Transportation section as well. A—i The Consultant will review and summarize the progress of the CH2MHill area—wide transportation improvement program as it applies to the proposal. Results of this study , particularly as related to potential mitigation for the project, will be incorporated into the EIS when available. III. Land Use — The proposal ' s relationship to the City of Renton ' s zoning code and comprehensive plan policies (including the City' s Greenbelt Policies) will be discussed by the Consultant . The proposal ' s relation— ship to existing land use, zoning and comprehensive plan designations in the immediate vicinity will also be included. The Consultant will prepare a slope/density analysis consistent with the City ' s Greenbelt Policies, to evaluate the relationship of the proposed density to the slopes in the development area on—site. A discussion of the impacts of the proposed density and other land use compatibility issues will be provided. IV. Recreation — The proposal includes the provision for on—site recreational opportunities . Both passive (trails, open space) and active facilities are proposed . The increase in demand represented by the on—site population will be evaluated in relation to the proposed opportunities to gauge overall impacts to local and regional park and recreation facilities . Existing facilities in the area will be described and impacts assessed . Measures to mitigate impacts will be addressed. V. Aesthetics — The proposal ' s design, scale, orientation and aesthetic/visual compatibility as related to surrounding land uses will be addressed by the Consultant through a written description and evalua— tion. Specifically, the proposed density , open space , buffering and setoacks will be analyzed . Site plans , elevations and cross—sections will be provided to the Consultant by the Centron Corporation (the proponent) for incorporation into the DEIS . No additional graphics will be prepared for the visual analysis . VI. Water Quantity/Quality — The surface water quantity and quality information prepared by Dodds Engineers , Inc . will include an analysis of pre and post—development drainage characteristics ; erosion control and detention requirements; flooding conditions ; and relationship to the City ' s critical drainage basin designation. Golder & Associates will provide data on groundwater quality and quantity as related to the proposal, including A-2 references to potential impacts on aquifers in the area. The Consultant will review and integrate the data into the Water section of the DEIS. VII . Public Services and Utilities - The Consultant will address impacts on the local service providers includ- ing fire, police and school services. Existing capacities and anticipated impacts will be identified . For utility issues , the Consultant assumes that Dodds Engineers and the City will provide the required information related to existing capacity and needed improvements . An estimate of anticipated public costs and revenues associated with the project will be made based on a model prepared by the City of Renton Public Works Department. VIII. Plants and Animals - The Consultant will discuss existing habitat conditions on-site and will evaluate • post-development impacts. The impacts from clearing and grading and opportunities for mitigation will be assessed. IX. Environmental Health - An analysis will be conducted by the Consultant addressing the possible health and safety issues related to the electrical transmission lines adjacent to the site. Literature will be reviewed and Puget Power , BPA and other sources of information will be consulted on the subject to gauge potential impacts. If substantiated and relevant, the reports and information will be related to project impacts. Mitigating measures to reduce impacts will be identified, if appropriate . X. Cumulative Effects - The City has identified two proposed projects in the vicinity (the McMann and Eradco projects) for the cumulative impact discussion. In the areas of Transportation, Land Use and Services , the proposal' s contribution to cumulative impacts will be described and evaluated by the Consultant . For cumulative transportation issues , information from the CH2MHill study will be referenced as available . XI . Alternatives - The Consultant will address up to three (3) alternatives to the proposed action, including the no-action alternative ; an alternative with a reduced density; and an alternative with a higher density or an alternative design. XII. Meetings - The Consultant will attend up to ten ( 10) meetings on the DEIS and five (5) meetings on the FEIS with City of Renton officials. n q it ex e' �1'0 r XIII. Printing - The Consultant assumes�,prin Ling of up to fifteen (15) copies of the preliminary DEIS . XIV. Draft EIS - Upon submittal of the preliminary DEIS and receipt of comments from the City and proponent , the Consultant shall revise, complete and issue the DEIS. The fee for completion of the DEIS includes printing of up to eighty (80) copies of the document for public and agency review. XV. Final EIS - The Consultant' s estimated budget and scope for the FEISassumes revising the DEIS, printing up to eighty (80) copies and responding to a relatively small number of substantive comment letters (10 to 12) dealing with the DEIS. If the City requires the Consultant to address additional comment letters and/or comments dealing with topics not discussed in the DEIS, or a level of detail not provided within this scope , the estimate for the FEIS may be revised. If the scope and cost estimate are beyond what has been estimated herein, the Consultant will meet with the City to develop a mutually acceptable scope and budget . ASSUMPTIONS A) Specific project description information, including reproducible site plans , elevations , and cross sections will be provided to the Consultant by the proponent at the outset of the EIS effort . In addition, the propo- nent will provide all necessary written and graphic material for all alternatives including site plans , elevations , number and layout of parking, access/ circulation, number of units and stories , street orientation, etc. Such information will provide for a complete description of the proposal and alternatives and relevant design features. B) The major issues to be addressed include Transporta- tion, Slopes , Soils , Land Use and Services . Emphasis will be placed on these issues by the Consultant and by the subconsultants to the proponent . Evaluation of impacts on other environmental elements will be more brief in nature. EXHIBIT A-1 PROJECT BUDGET SUMMARY LEXINGTON RIDGE The following outlines the proposed budget to prepare the Draft and Final EIS. The Draft and Final EIS budget represents our best estimate of the labor and costs associated with completing the tasks identified in the previous section. Preliminary Draft EIS Labor (preparation of the document, management and coordination) $14,500.00 Subconsultants* 7,700.00 Word Processing 1 ,000.00 Graphics (preparation of up to twenty (20) exhibits) 1 ,300.00 Reimbursable Expenses* - (mileage , parking, xerox copying, printing of up to fifteen (15) copies, and miscellaneous costs) 550.00 Subtotal $25,050.00 Draft EIS . Labor $ 4,520.00 Subconsultants* 803.00 Word Processing 600. 00 Graphics 300,00 Printing (up to eighty (80) copies) 900.00 Reimbursable Expenses* 357.00 Subtotal $ 7,480.00 TOTAL $32,530.00 Final EIS Labor $ 3,480.00 Subconsultants* 715 .00 Word Processing 600.00 Printing (up to eighty (80) copies) 650.00 Reimbursable Expenses* 250.00 TOTAL $ 5 , 695.00 Subconsultants and expenses = cost plus 10 percent fee." EXHIBIT A-2 LABOR BREAKDOWN AND HOURLY RATES Preliminary DEIS - Labor THE FERRIS COMPANY: Hourly Hours Rate Total Blumen - Project Manager 30 $60. $ 1 ,800. Brunner - Principal Author 128 50. 6,400. McGuire - Planner - 140 45. 6,300. Subtotal $14,500. DODDS ENGINEERS: Borneman - Engineer 25 $40. $ 1 , 000. GOLDER ASSOCIATES: Cotton - Principal 3 $75. $ 225. Lavielle - Senior Engineer 28 60. 1 ,680. Clerical 3.8 25. 95. ,�,��� Subtotal $ 2,000. TR' , ORTATION PLANNING AND ENGINEERING: Bishop - Principal 8 $95. $ 760. Meijsen - Engineer 52.5 50. 2,625. Enger - Drafter 12 34. 40 . Clerical 6 34. 207. Subtotal $ 4,000. LA R TOTAL $21 ,500. Draft EIS — Labor Hourly Hours Rate Total THE FERRIS COMPANY Blumen 12 $60. $ 720. Brunner 40 50. 2,000. McGuire 40 45. 1 ,800. Subtotal $ 4,520 DODDS ENGINEERS: Borneman 6 $40. $ 240. GOLDER ASSOCIATES: Lavielle 4 $60. $ 240. TP & E: Meijsen 5 $50. $ 250. LABOR TOTAL $ 5,250. Final EIS — Labor THE FERRIS COMPANY Blumen 8 $60. $ 480. Brunner 24 50. 1 ,200, McGuire 40 45. 1 ,800. Subtotal $ 3,480. DODDS ENGINEERS: Borneman 4 $40. $ 160. GOLDER ASSOCIATES: Lavielle 4 $60. $ 240, Meijsen 5 $50. (1-----T;-0-7—=D LABOR TOTAL $ 4, 130. EXHIBIT A-3 FEE SCHEDULE - THE FERRIS COMPANY LEXINGTON RIDGE Personnel Title Hourly Rate* Mike Ferris Principal $65.00 Mike Blumen Program Manager $60.00 Lisa Verner Project Manager $60.00 Gretchen Brunner Senior Planner $50.00 Susan McGuire Senior Planner - , $45.00 Caroline Berry Senior Planner $45.00 Word Processing $25.00 * Salary plus overhead and fee. Expenses = direct cost plus 10 percent fee. ATTACHMENT THE FERRIS COMPANY SUGGESTED CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS Paragraph 3 - Time of Performance - Modify to Read : The work detailed in the Scope of Work will be performed according to Exhibit B, Time Schedule of Completion, attached hereto , and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. It is agreed that all services shall be completed and all products shall be delivered by , 1988, nothwithstanding delays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant. If, after receiving Notice to Proceed , Consultant is delayed in the performance of its services by factors that are beyond its control, Consultant shall notify the City of the delay and shall prepare a revised estimate of time and cost needed to complete the Project and submit the revision to the City for its approval. Time schedules are subject to mutual agreement for any revision unless specifically described as otherwise herein. Paragraph 4 _ Payment for Services - Include : ' In the event City desires services exceeding the Scope of Services , Consultant shall promptly provide a written estimated completion schedule and detailed scope of services for such Additional Services. Additional Services shall be paid upon a time and expense basis utilizing the fee schedule attached hereto as Exhibit . Paragraph 7 - Indemnification - Modify to Read : Consultant will hold the City harmless , and assume liability for loss from claims arising in whole or in part out of Consultants ' negligent performance of the professional services as set forth in this Agreement. - For any damage caused by negligence other than professional negligence , Consultant ' s liability, including that of its employees, agents and subcontractors , in the aggregate under this Agreement , shall not exceed the limits of Consultant ' s comprehensive general and automobile liability insurance coverage , which is $500,000. Paragraph 10 - Additional Responsibilities - Include as part of last sentence: . . . .notwithstanding delays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant. • New Paragraph e Professional Responsibility — Include : Consultant represents that the services shall be performed, within the limits prescribed by this Contract as amended, in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other professional consultants performing similar services in the State of Washington or of the type used in the Project under similar circumstances . No other representations to City, express or implied, and no warranty or guarantee is included or intended in this Contract or in any report, opinion, document or otherwise. New Paragraph - Opportunity to Remedy — Include: The parties agree that in the event of alleged error or omission by Consultant in performance of the Project , City shall notify Consultant promptly in writing of the fact and allow Consultant a reasonable time to remedy the problem. Upon notice, Consultant shall promptly review and remedy the problem at the cost of Consultant , if Consultant accepts responsibility for it. City agrees not to remedy the problem or to contract with a third party to remedy the problem at the cost of Consultant without first giving Consultant a reasonable opportunity to remedy the problem. Where responsibility for a problem may be shared by Consultant and others , Consultant shall endeavor to remedy Consultants' share (and the share of any Consultant subcontractor or agent) at the cost of Consultant and to ,cooperate with others involved. • CONTRACT FOR SERVICES • • THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this day of , 1987, by and between the City of Renton, a • . Washington municipal corporation, (hereinafter called "City") ; and a Washington Corporation (hereinafter called " ) . In consideration of the following promises, warranties, and • covenants, it is agreed between the parties as follows: 1. Employment of Consultant: The City hereby agrees to • employ and hereby agrees to perform the services hereinafter set forth. is employed to produce the described SEPA documents as set forth in Paragraph 2 and Attachment A, Scope of Work. is authorized to use as a • subconsultant. No other subconsultants shall be employed unless • authorized in writing by the City. Nothing in this contract shall be construed to create an employee - employer relationship between , its employees and the City. 2. Scope of Work: shall furnish the • necessary equipment, materials and professionally trained and experienced personnel to facilitate completion of the work described in Exhibit A, "Scope of Work," which is attached hereto, and is incorporated into this agreement as though fully set forth herein. hereby warrants that it has the necessary • experience, qualified and trained personnel, equipment and • materials to complete the work detailed in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. 3. T • ime of Performance: The work detailed in the Scope of • Work will be started and completed by on the dates • . specified in Exhibit B, Time Schedule of Completion, attached hereto, and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. It is agreed that all services shall be completed and all • products shall be delivered by 1988. 4. Payment for Services: agrees to perform work specified in the Scope of Work and City agrees to pay • an amount, subject to conditions set forth in this + Contract, not to exceed $ for services rendered in • • fulfillment of the Scope of Work. Payment of said sum will include payment for all necessary labor, materials, and facilities used in • the completion of the "Scope of Work." Attached as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by this reference is the schedule of payments for the completion of specified work products. 5. Project Management: The Project Manager for shall be The Project Manager . for the City shall be All correspondence, work • • orders, payment requests concerning this project shall be directed ' to these individuals. 6. Warranty of Authority: hereby warrants • and represents that the person who has executed this contract has full authority from to do so. The City hereby • warrants that the Mayor and City Clerk of City have full power to execute this contract. 7. Idemnificatior;: hereby agrees to idemnify and hold the City of Renton harmless from any and all claims, causes of action, damages and other actions growing out of this consultant's contract or arising under this contract. • Including within this indemnification agreement shall be the responsibility of to provide legal counsel to . - . • ,...v99tiv1A:1' .eVri u11:4yJLa.:Je.:s ' PAGE 2 defend any claim,-action, cause of action or other legal proceeding brought by any third party to enforce this contract or, for damages • • arising out of any alleged lack of performance or negligent • performance of this contract. Should not retain an • • attorney to provide said defense, then it hereby agrees to reimburse the City of Renton for any legal fees it has expended in its own defense, together with interest at 10% since such fees were ' • incurred. 8. Legal Fees: If either party hereto shall bring suit to • enforce this contract, the prevailing party, as defined by the laws of the State of Washington, shall receive those remedies and costs and attorney fees allowed by law. All lawsuits brought by either • party for enforcement of this Contract shall first be brought in the King County, Washington Superior Court. i • 9. Products• of Services: All documents, working documents, notes, maps, drawings, photos, etc. produced by or for : . , in furtherance of this Contract, shall be the .• • property of the City and shall be delivered to the City prior to • • full payment for services under this Contract. • 10. Additional Responsibilities: The City shall endeavor to •• • provide in a timely manner with all necessary . criteria and full information pertinent to the services to be rendered by . Further, the City shall endeavor to • - make available to all information, drawings, maps, specifications in City's possession which City and • consider pertinent to Scope of Work. agrees to perform the work specified in a timely • manner and to complete the work in a form acceptable to the City • • within the specified budget and time authorized by this Contract. • 11. Assignment of Rights: Neither party may assign its • rights and obligations under this Contract without the express • written consent of the other party. • 12. Entire Contract: This agreement, consisting of • pages and Exhibits A, B, C constitutes the entire agreement or contract between the parties. The agreements set forth in this contract supersede all prior written or oral understandings. This agreement may not be amended except in writing signed by the parties hereto. • IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the CITY and have executed • this Contract as of the date first set forth above: • •• CITY OF RENTON • by Rec: • President Zoning.Administrator • Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor • ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM • 0 Lawrence Warren, City Attorney • • CONTRACT FOR SERVICES • EXHIBIT B PROJECT SCHEDULE • EIS • Scope of work/contract Deliver Preliminary Draft EIS to City (Complete document) Renton delivers unified (one set) comments to consultant Revised DEIS delivered to Renton Renton approves revisions • Print DEIS and deliver to City • DEIS issuance/public notice DEIS comments due Begin FEIS preparation . Draft FEIS to Renton • Renton delivers unified (one set) comments. . • • Revised FEIS to Renton Renton approves FEIS Print FEIS and deliver to City Issue FEIS ' Appeal Period for FEIS • • • • • • • • • • • . 0 - - , • • CONTRACT FOR SERVICES EXHIBIT C SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS • First Payment: 30% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of Preliminary Draft EIS by City of Renton. • • Second Payment: 30% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of Draft EIS by City of Renton. Third Payment: 40% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of Final EIS by City of Renton. • •- • • jJc to 80 CITY OF RENTON 'tIL `� ' . BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor Ronald G. Nelson, Director Oa',j 0 3/0 0 (5f/Z ANDU M 0 T ;c:r c-1:). ;, ;1 DATE: March 2 ,, 1988 MAR 2 19 TO: John Adamson Nancy Laswell Morris From: Donald K. Erickson tf/ RE: Lexington Ridge EIS/Scope of Services Attached please find copies of a cover letter and revised Scope of Services and Budget from The Ferris Company for the Lexington Ridge E. I.S. Please review this material as I will be contacting you this week to establish a meeting to discuss this material. ' ' -''''(-- 774- ---..-L-- )L & 0- go /alit"- .) 6"______ _ _� Y� 6 / c._, 9 k 0 v 44 4,007- 10 - 414C # , ,.... ,.; , tee, 5V/36/ 7,0 "''' CP"--- iw.,:tzooe, 0 ii -1 Etc ;. ,...,r 0 N- 1 a„,,,, ft, i 0 0-- 46 Cig-A*24-e-- 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Wa ;ton 98055 - (206) 235-2540 EXHIBIT A-1 PROJECT BUDGET SUMMARY LEXINGTON RIDGE The following outlines the proposed budget to prepare the Draft and Final EIS. The Draft and Final EIS budget represents our best estimate of the labor and costs associated with completing the tasks identified in the previous section. Preliminary Draft EIS Labor (preparation of the document , management and coordination) $14,500.00 Subconsultants* 7, 700.00 Word Processing 1 ,000.00 Graphics (preparation of up to twenty (20) exhibits) 1 , 900.00 Reimbursable Expenses* (mileage , parking, xerox copying, printing of up to fifteen (15) copies, and miscellaneous costs) 550.00 Subtotal $25, 650.00 Draft EIS Labor $ 4, 520.00 Subconsultants* 1 ,083.50 Word Processing 600.00 Graphics 300.00 Printing (up to eighty (80) copies) 900.00 Reimbursable Expenses* 357 .00 Subtotal $ 7, 760.50 TOTAL $33,410.50 Final EIS Labor $ 3,480.00 , Subconsultants* 995 .50 Word Processing 600.00 Printing (up to eighty (80) copies) 650.00 Reimbursable Expenses* 250.00 TOTAL $ 5 ,975.50 * Subconsultants and expenses = cost plus 10 percent fee. A-5 EXHIBIT A-2 LABOR BREAKDOWN AND HOURLY RATES Preliminary DEIS - Labor THE FERRIS COMPANY: Hourly Hours Rate Total Blumen - Project Manager 30 $60. $ 1 ,800. Brunner - Principal Author 128 50. 6 ,400. McGuire - Planner 140 45. 6 ,300. Subtotal $14, 500. DODDS ENGINEERS : Borneman - Engineer 25 $40. $ 1 ,000. GOLDER ASSOCIATES: Cotton - Principal 3 $75. $ 225. Lavielle - Senior Engineer 28 60. 1 ,680. Clerical 3.8 25. 95 . Subtotal $ 2 ,000. TDA, Inc. : Perlic - Senior Associate 9 $55. $ 495. Boettcher - Associate 39 37 .50 1 , 462.50 Ghassemi - Associate 49 35. 1 , 715. Graphics 8 27.50. 220. Clerical, Support 107 .50 Subtotal $ 4,000. LABOR TOTAL $21 ,500. A-6 Draft EIS — Labor Hourly Hours Rate Total THE FERRIS COMPANY Blumen 12 $60. $ 720. Brunner 40 50. 2,000. McGuire 40 45. 1 , 800. Subtotal $ 4, 520 DODDS ENGINEERS : Borneman 6 $40. $ 240. GOLDER ASSOCIATES: Lavielle 4 $60. $ 240. TDA: Boettcher 6 $37.50 $ 225. Ghassemi 8 $35 . $ 280. LABOR TOTAL $ 5 ,505 . Final EIS — Labor THE FERRIS COMPANY Blumen 8 $60. $ 480. Brunner 24 50. 1 , 200. McGuire 40 45. 1 , 800. Subtotal $ 3 ,480. DODDS ENGINEERS : Borneman 4 $40. $ 160. GOLDER ASSOCIATES: Lavielle 4 $60. $ 240. TDA: Boettcher 6 $37.50. $ 225. Ghassemi 8 $35 . $ 280. LABOR TOTAL $ 4,385 . A-7 p / EXHIBIT A-3 FEE SCHEDULE — THE FERRIS COMPANY LEXINGTON RIDGE Personnel Title Hourly Rate* Mike Ferris Principal $65.00 Mike Blumen Program Manager $60.00 Lisa Verner Project Manager $60.00 Gretchen Brunner Senior Planner $50.00 Susan McGuire Senior Planner $45.00 Caroline Berry Senior Planner $45.00 Word Processing $25.00 Salary plus overhead and fee. Expenses = direct cost plus 10 percent fee. CAG 023-88 THE FERRIS COMPANY CONTRACT FOR SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this 22nd day of April, 1988, by and between the City of Renton, a Washington municipal corporation, (hereinafter called "City"), and The Ferris Company, a Washington Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant"). In consideration of the following promises, warranties, and covenants, it is agreed between the parties as follows: Employment of Consultant: The City hereby agrees to employ the Consultant and the Consultant hereby agrees to perform the services hereinafter set forth. The Consultant is employed to produce the described SEPA documents as set forth in Paragraph 2 and Attachment A, Scope of Work. The Consultant is authorized to use Golder Associates, TDA, and Dodds Engineering as a subconsultant. No other subconsultants shall be employed unless authorized in writing by the City. Nothing in this contract shall be construed to create an employee - employer relationship between the Consultant, its employees and the City. 2. Scope of Work: The Consultant shall furnish the necessary equipment, materials and professionally trained and experienced personnel to facilitate completion of the work described in Exhibit A, "Scope of Work," which is attached hereto, and is incorporated into this agreement as though fully set forth herein. The Consultant hereby warrants that it has the necessary experience, qualified and trained personnel, equipment and materials to complete the work detailed in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. 3. Time of Performance: The work detailed in the Scope of Work will be performed according to Exhibit B, Time Schedule of Completion, attached hereto, and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. It is agreed that all the Consultant's services shall be completed and all products shall be delivered by September 27, 1988, notwithstanding delays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant. If, after receiving Notice to Proceed, Consultant is delayed in the performance of its services by factors that are beyond its control, Consultant shall notify the City of the delay and shall prepare a revised estimate of time and cost needed to complete the Project and submit the revision to the City for its approval. Time schedules are subject to mutual agreement for any revision unless specifically described as otherwise herein. 4. Payment for Services: The Consultant agrees to perform work specified in the Scope.of Work and City agrees to pay the Consultant an amount, subject to conditions set forth in this Contract, not to exceed $39,385.00 for services • rendered in fulfillment of the Scope of Work. Payment of said sum will include payment for all necessary labor, materials, and facilities used in the completion of the "Scope of Work." Attached as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by this reference is the schedule of payments for the completion of specified work products. THE FERRIS COMPANY CONTRACT FOR SERVICES PAGE 2 In the event City desires services exceeding the Scope of Services, Consultant shall promptly provide a written estimated completion schedule and detailed scope of services for such Additional Services. Additional Services shall be paid upon a time and expense basis utilizing the fee schedule attached hereto as Exhibit C. 5 Project Management: The Project Manager for the Consultant shall be Michael Blumen. The Project Manager for the City shall be Donald K. Erickson. All correspondence, work orders, payment requests concerning this project shall be directed to these individuals. 6. Warranty of Authority: The Consultant hereby warrants and represents that the person who has executed this contract has full authority from the Consultant to do so. The City hereby warrants that the Mayor and City Clerk of City have full power to execute this contract. 7. Indemnification: The parties further agree that neither party shall be liable for the negligent acts, errors, or omissions of the other party with respect to development, management, operation of the property or project with respect to the performance of each party's respective duties and obligations under this agreement. To that end, each party shall indemnify, hold the other harmless and defend the other party against any damages, including costs of litigation and attorney's fees, incurred with respect to any claims or legal actions resulting from the negligent acts, errors or omissions of the imdemnifying party. 8. Products of Services: All documents, working documents, notes, maps, drawings, photos, etc. produced by or for the Consultant, in furtherance of this Contract, shall be the property of the City and shall be delivered to the City prior to full payment for services under this Contract. 9. Additional Responsibilities: The City shall endeavor to provide the Consultant in a timely manner with all necessary criteria and full information pertinent to the services to be rendered by the Consultant. Further, the City shall endeavor to make available to the Consultant all information, drawings, maps, specifications in City's possession which City and the Consultant consider pertinent to the Consultant's Scope of Work. The Consultant agrees to perform the work specified in a timely manner and to complete the work in a form acceptable to the City within the specified budget and time authorized by this Contract notwithstanding delays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant. 10. Assignment of Rights: Neither party may assign its rights and obligations under this Contract without the express written consent of the other party. 11. Entire Contract: This agreement, consisting of 3 pages and Exhibits A, B, C constitutes the entire agreement or contract between the parties. The agreements set forth in this contract supersede all prior written or oral understandings. This agreement may not be amended except in writing signed by the parties hereto. THE FERRIS COMPANY CONTRACT FOR SERVICES PAGE 3 12. Professional Responsibility: - Consultant represents that the services shall be performed, within the limits prescribed by this Contract as amended, in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other professional Consultants performing similar services in the State of Washington or of the type used in the Project under similar circumstances. No other representations to City, express or implied, and no warranty or guarantee is included or intended in this Contract or in any report, opinion, document or otherwise. 13. Opportunity to Remedy: The parties agree that in the event of alleged error or omission by Consultant in performance of the Project, City shall notify Consultant promptly in writing of the fact and allow Consultant a reasonable time to remedy the problem. Upon notice, Consultant shall promptly review and remedy the problem at the cost of Consultant, if Consultant accepts responsibility for it. City agrees not to remedy the problem at the cost of Consultant without first giving Consultant a reasonable opportunity to remedy the problem. It shall be the Consultant's responsibility to remedy any problem that arises out of their performance under this contract whenever this is possible and where the Consultant cannot remedy the problem by itself, it shall use its best effort to work with others to remedy the problem. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the CITY and THE FERRIS COMPANY have executed this Contract as of the date first set forth above: TY OF N ON by 4ident / vRec: Zoni g Adminis rator Earl Clymer, Mayor ATTEST: /2261-4 City Clerk APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM C Lawrence Warre C ty Attorney . . lexeis & Associates will provide data on groundwater quality and quantity as related to the proposal and alterna- tives , including references to potential impacts on aquifers in the area. The Consultant will review and • integrate the data into the Water section of the DEIS. VII . Public Services and Utilities - The Consultant will address impacts on the local service providers includ- ing fire, police and school services for the proposal and alternatives. Existing capacities and anticipated impacts will be identified. For utility issues , the Consultant assumes that Dodds Engineers and the City will provide the required information related to existing capacity and needed improvements. An estimate of anticipated public costs and revenues associated with the project and alternatives will be made based on a model prepared by the City of Renton Public Works Department. VIII. Plants and Animals - The Consultant will discuss existing habitat conditions on-site and will evaluate post-development impacts. The impacts from clearing and grading and opportunities for mitigation will be assessed. IX. Environmental Health - An analysis will be conducted by the Consultant addressing the possible health and safety issues related to the electrical transmission lines adjacent to the site. Literature will be reviewed and Puget Power , . BPA and other sources of information will be consulted on the subject to gauge potential impacts. If substantiated and relevant, the reports and information will be related to project and alternatives impacts. Mitigating measures to reduce impacts will be identified, if appropriate. X. Cumulative Effects - The City has identified two proposed projects in the vicinity (the McMann and Eradco projects) for the cumulative impact discussion. In the areas of Transportation, Land Use and Services , the proposal and alternatives ' contribution to cumulative impacts will be described and evaluated by the Consultant. For cumulative transportation issues , information from the CH2MHill study will be referenced as available. XI. Proposed Action and Alternatives - The proposed action is a 360-unit rental apartment project in 15 buildings on a 13 .4-acre parcel. In addition, it consists of surface parking areas , a recreation building, land- scaping and 40 percent of the site as open space. The Consultant will address up to three (3) alternatives to the proposed action. The alternatives will include the no-action alternative, or retention of the site in A-3 its' present undeveloped state; an alternative developed consistent with the R-4 zoning designation with approximately 430 units and a similar site plan as the proposal; and finally, a design alternative to the proposal, consisting of possibly a lesser number of units (which shall be agreed to in writing by the City) , and with increased common and interconnected open space, increased buffers and retention of vegetation and additional staggering of buildings . XII. Meetings - The Consultant will attend up to ten ( 10) meetings on the DEIS and five (5) meetings on the FEIS with City of Renton officials. XIII. Printing - The Consultant assumes printing of up to fifteen (15) copies of the preliminary DEIS. XIV. Draft EIS - Upon submittal of the preliminary DEIS and receipt of comments from the City and proponent, the Consultant shall revise, complete and issue the DEIS. The fee for completion of the DEIS includes printing of up to eighty (80) copies of the document for public and agency review. XV. Final EIS - The Consultant' s estimated budget and scope for the FEIS assumes revising the DEIS, printing up to eighty (80) copies and responding to a relatively small number of substantive comment letters (10 to 12) dealing with the DEIS. If the City requires the Consultant to address additional comment letters and/or comments dealing with topics not discussed in the DEIS, or a level of detail not provided within this scope , the estimate for the FEIS may be revised. If the scope and cost estimate are beyond what has been estimated herein, the Consultant will meet with the City to develop a mutually acceptable scope and budget . ASSUMPTIONS A) Specific project description information, including reproducible site plans, elevations, and cross sections will be provided to the Consultant by the proponent at the outset of the EIS effort . In addition, the propo- nent will provide all necessary written and graphic material for all alternatives including illustrative site plans, elevations, number and layout of parking, access/ circulation, number of units and stories , street orientation, etc. Such information will provide for a complete description of the proposal and alternatives and relevant design features. A-4 B) The major issues to be addressed include Transporta— tion, Slopes, Soils, Land Use and Services. Emphasis will be placed on these issues by the Consultant and by the subconsultants to the proponent. Evaluation of impacts on other environmental elements will be more brief in nature. A-5 EXHIBIT A • SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope outlined below is for preparation of the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS and FEIS) for the Lexington Ridge apartment project in Renton, Washington. The Ferris Company (the Consultant) will prepare the DEIS and FEIS consistent with the State Environmental Policy Act and the City of Renton Environmental Ordinance, Chapter 28 of the Renton Zoning Code. The Consultant has reviewed the existing studies for the project prepared by Golder Associates (geotechnical analysis) and Transportation, Planning & Engineering - TP&E (transportation study) and determined that the studies may need to be supple- mented and expanded by the subconsultants to provide the information and detail necessary to complete the preliminary DEIS. It has also been determined that Dodds Engineers, Inc . , will provide all necessary data on surface water quality and quantity to the Consultant. The Consultant will coordinate with the subconsultants , review their reports for adequacy and completeness, and incorporate the information into the DEIS. The Consultant will provide a description and comparative evaluation of the alternatives , including the proposal in the DEIS. A discussion of the affected environment, environmental impacts , proposed mitigating measures and other possible mitigating measures for the alternatives , including the proposal will also be prepared for the following elements of the environment identified in the scoping process: I. Earth - The geotechnical engineering study for the project site and the Earth section of the DEIS will address existing soils, geologic and topographic conditions ; results of field exploration of subsurface conditions; soil permeability issues ; recommendations for drainage and erosion control; issues related to clearing and grading, and the movement of earth material on and off-site ; and measures to ensure foundation support and slope stability. II. Traffic - The specific transportation study for the project and alternatives and the Transportation section of the DEIS, will address trip generation (including an explanation of trip generation rates) ; level-of-service impacts at the key intersections ; circulation, parking and access issues ; and recommendations for mitigation. Impacts regarding pedestrian safety and access and mitigating measures will be assessed by the transpor- tation consultant and Transportation section as well. TDA, Inc. will prepare the transportation report for this EIS . A-1 The Consultant will review and summarize the progress of the CH2MHill area-wide transportation improvement program as it _applies to tte proposal and alternatives. Results of this study, particularly as related to potential mitigation will be incorporated into the EIS when available. III. Land Use - The relationship to the City of Renton' s zoning code and comprehensive plan policies (including • the City 's Greenbelt Policies) will be discussed by the Consultant. The relationship to existing land use , zoning and comprehensive plan designations in the immediate vicinity will also be included. The proposal and all alternatives will be assessed. The Consultant will prepare a slope/density analysis consistent with the City ' s Greenbelt Policies , to evaluate the relationship of the density to the slopes in the development area on-site. A discussion of the impacts of the density and other land use compatibility issues will be provided . IV. Recreation - The proposal includes the provision for on-site recreational opportunities . Both passive (trails, open space) and active facilities are proposed. The increase in demand represented by the on-site population will be evaluated in relation to the proposed opportunities to gauge overall impacts to local and regional park and recreation facilities. Existing facilities in the area will be described and impacts assessed . Impacts from all alternatives will also be addressed . Measures to mitigate impacts will be addressed . V. Aesthetics - The proposal and alternatives ' design, scale , orientation, siting, privacy, views and aesthetic/visual compatibility as related to internal impacts and surrounding land uses will be addressed by the Consultant through a written description and evaluation. Specifically, the density, open space , buffering and setbacks will be analyzed. Site plans, elevations and cross-sections for each alternative will be provided to the Consultant by the Centron Corporation (the proponent) for incorporation into the DEIS. No additional graphics (i.e. , photos, shadow diagrams) will be prepared for the visual analysis . VI. Water Quantity/Quality - The surface water quantity and quality information prepared by Dodds Engineers , Inc . will include an analysis of pre and post-development drainage characteristics ; erosion control and detention requirements; flooding conditions; and relationship to the City ' s critical drainage basin designation. Golder A-2 EXHIBIT A-1 PROJECT BUDGET SUMMARY LEXINGTON RIDGE The following outlines the proposed budget to prepare the Draft and Final EIS. The Draft and Final EIS budget represents our best estimate of the labor and costs associated with completing the tasks identified in the previous section. Preliminary Draft EIS Labor (preparation of the document, management and coordination) $14,500.00 Subconsultants* 7 , 700.00 Word Processing 1 ,000.00 Graphics (preparation of up to twenty (20) exhibits) 1 ,900.00 Reimbursable Expenses* (mileage , parking, xerox copying, printing of up to fifteen (15) copies, and miscellaneous costs) 550.00 Subtotal $25,650.00 Draft EIS Labor $ 4,520.00 Subconsultants* 1 ,083.50 Word Processing 600.00 Graphics 300.00 Printing (up to eighty (80) copies) 900.00 Reimbursable Expenses* 357.00 Subtotal $ 7, 760.50 TOTAL $33, 410.50 Final EIS Labor $ 3,480.00 Subconsultants* 995.50 Word Processing 600.00 Printing (up to eighty (80) copies) 650. 00 Reimbursable Expenses* 250.00 TOTAL $. 5,975.50 Subconsultants and expenses = cost plus 10 percent fee. A-6 EXHIBIT A-2 LABOR BREAKDOWN AND HOURLY RATES Preliminary DEIS _ Labor THE FERRIS COMPANY: Hourly Hours Rate Total Blumen - Project Manager 30 $60. $ 1 ,800. Brunner - Principal Author 128 50. 6,400. McGuire - Planner 140 45 . 6,300. Subtotal $14,500. DODDS ENGINEERS: Borneman - Engineer 25 $40. $ 1 ,000. GOLDER ASSOCIATES: • Cotton - Principal 3 $75. $ 225. Lavielle - Senior Engineer 28 60. 1,680. Clerical 3.8 25. 95 . Subtotal $ 2,000. TDA, Inc. : Perlic - Senior Associate 9 $55. $ 495. Boettcher - Associate 39 37.50 1 ,462.50 Ghassemi - Associate 49 35. 1 , 715. Graphics . 8 27.50. 220. Clerical, Support 107.50 Subtotal $ 4,000. LABOR TOTAL $21 ,500. • A-7 Draft EIS - Labor Hourly Hours Rate Total THE FERRIS COMPANY Blumen 12 $60. $ 720. Brunner 40 50. 2,000. McGuire 40 45. 1 ,800. Subtotal $ 4,520 DODDS ENGINEERS: Borneman 6 $40. $ 240. GOLDER ASSOCIATES: Lavielle 4 $60. $ 240. TDA: Boettcher 6 $37.50 $ 225. Ghassemi 8 $35 . $ 280. LABOR TOTAL $ 5 , 505 . Final EIS - Labor THE FERRIS COMPANY Blumen 8 $60. $ 480. Brunner 24 50. 1 ,200. McGuire 40 45. 1 ,800. Subtotal $ 3 , 480. DODDS ENGINEERS: Borneman 4 $40. $ 160. GOLDER ASSOCIATES: Lavielle 4 $60. $ 240. TDA: Boettcher 6 $37.50. $ 225. Ghassemi 8 $35. $ 280. LABOR TOTAL $ 4,385 . A-8 EXHIBIT B TIME SCHEDULE OF COMPLETION Contract Signature/Authorization to Proceed April 22 Submit Preliminary Draft EIS to City May 31 City delivers unified (one set) comments to Consultant June 14 Submit revised Preliminary DEIS to City June 24 City approves revisions June 30 Print DEIS and deliver to City July 7 DEIS issuance/public notice July 8 Comment Period July 8 - Aug. 7 Begin Final EIS preparation August 8 Submit Preliminary Final EIS to City August 23 City delivers unified (one set) comments to Consultant Sept. 6 Submit revised Preliminary FEIS to City Sept. 14 City approves revisions Sept. 20 Print Final EIS and deliver to City Sept. 27 FEIS issuance Sept. 28 • CONTRACT FOR SERVICES EXHIBIT C SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS First Payment: 50% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of Preliminary Draft EIS by City of Renton (06/15/88 on Project Schedule. Second Payment: 30% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of Draft EIS by City of Renton (07-08-88 on Project Schedule. Third Payment: 20% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of Final EIS by City of Renton (09-27-88 on Project Schedule. ,..._ • 7a HE FERRIS COMPANY February 25 , 1988 CITY OF RENTON F®® FEB 251988 Don Erickson BUIDQNG/ZONING DEPT. Zoning Administrator City of Renton Building and Zoning Department 200 Mill Avenue South Renton,' Washington 98055 Re : Lexington Ridge EIS Dear Don: Enclosed please find three copies of our revised Scope of Work and Budget to complete the Lexington Ridge Draft and Final EIS . The revised scope and budget reflect changes based on your comments related to subconsultant costs , labor hours and billing rates, the number of meetings and the scope for the Final EIS. We trust that these revisions are acceptable to the Committee and we can move ahead with contract agreement and initiation of the project . In addition to the changes in scope and budget , The Ferris Company wishes to modify the Contract to include several standard provisions that are normally included in our EIS contracts. Given the inherent uncertainty of EIS work, we feel some flexibility in certain areas is warranted . An attachment is provided at the end of this package which outlines our suggested modifications to the Contract. The Ferris Company also wishes to modify the Schedule of Payments outlined in Exhibit C of the Basic Contract for Services previously sent to us . It has been our experience on EIS projects , that the majority of work conducted by Consultants occurs during the preliminary DEIS . We would like the Schedule of Payments to reflect the actual percentage of work that will be performed by the team, as follows : First Payment : 60% of Contract Amount upon submittal of Preliminary Draft EIS to City of Renton. Second Payment : 20% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of Draft EIS by City of Renton. Third Payment : 20% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of Final EIS by City of Renton. Seattle Trust Building,Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue,WA 98004 206/462-7650 Since all funds will be deposited at the outset of the project by the proponent , we believe this is a more equitable schedule than that previously shown. In addition, it should be recognized by all parties that the consultants that will be involved in this project are all professionals with reputations to uphold and interest in continuing to provide EIS services . The quality and timeliness of our products are critical to the ongoing success of all firms concerned . The Ferris Company and entire EIS team are prepared to start work immediately upon contract agreement and authorization. Please call me if you have any remaining questions . Sincerely, Michael J. Blumen Project Manager MJB: slw Enclosure EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES • The scope outlined below is for preparation of the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS and FEIS) for the Lexington Ridge apartment project in Renton, Washington. The Ferris Company (the Consultant) will prepare the DEIS and FEIS consistent with the State Environmental Policy Act and the City of Renton Environmental Ordinance , Chapter 28 of the Renton Zoning Code. The Consultant has reviewed the existing studies for the project prepared by Golder Associates (geotechnical analysis) and Transportation, Planning & Engineering - TP&E (transportation study) and determined that the studies may need to be supple- , mented and expanded by the subconsultants to .provide the information and detail necessary to complete the preliminary DEIS . It has also been determined that Dodds Engineers, Inc. , will provide all necessary data on surface water quality and quantity to the Consultant. The Consultant will coordinate with the subconsultants, review their reports for adequacy and completeness, and incorporate the information into the DEIS. The Consultant will provide a description and comparative evaluation of the alternatives, including the proposal in the DEIS . A discussion of the affected environment , environmental impacts , proposed mitigating measures and other possible mitigating measures for the alternatives , including the proposal will, also be prepared for the following elements of the environment identified in the scoping process: I. Earth - The geotechnical engineering study for the project site and the Earth section of the DEIS will address existing soils, geologic and topographic conditions ; results of field exploration of subsurface conditions ; soil permeability issues;, recommendations for drainage and erosion control ; issues related to clearing and grading, and the movement of earth material on and off-site ; and measures to ensure foundation support and slope stability. II. Traffic - The specific transportation study for the project and the Transportation section of the DEIS, will address trip generation (including an explanation of trip generation rates) ; level-of-service impacts at the key intersections; circulation, parking and access issues ; and recommendations for mitigation of the project' s impacts. Impacts regarding pedestrian safety and access and mitigating measures will be assessed by the transportation consultant and Transportation section as well. A-1 The Consultant will review and summarize the progress of the CH2MHill area-wide transportation improvement program as it applies to the proposal. Results of this • study , particularly as related to potential mitigation for the project , will be incorporated into the EIS when available . III. Land Use - The proposal' s relationship to the City of Renton' s zoning code and comprehensive plan policies (including the City ' s Greenbelt Policies) will be discussed by the Consultant . The proposal ' s relation- ship to existing land use, zoning and comprehensive plan designations in the immediate vicinity will also be included. The Consultant will prepare a slope/density analysis consistent with the City 's Greenbelt Policies, to evaluate the relationship of the proposed density to the slopes in the development area on-site . A discussion of the impacts of the proposed density and other land use compatibility issues will be provided . IV. Recreation - The proposal includes the provision for on-site recreational opportunities . Both passive (trails, open space) and active facilities are proposed . The increase in demand represented by the on-site population will be evaluated in relation to the proposed opportunities to gauge overall impacts to local and regional park and recreation facilities. Existing facilities in the area will be described and impacts assessed . Measures to mitigate impacts will be addressed. V. Aesthetics - The proposal' s design, scale, orientation and aesthetic/visual compatibility as related to surrounding land uses will be addressed by the Consultant through a. written description and evalua- tion. Specifically, the proposed density, open space, buffering and setbacks will be analyzed. Site plans , elevations and cross-sections will be provided to the Consultant by the Centron Corporation (the proponent) for incorporation into the DEIS . No additional graphics will be prepared for the visual analysis . VI. Water Quantity/Quality - The surface water quantity and quality information prepared by Dodds Engineers , Inc . will include an analysis of pre and post-development drainage characteristics ; erosion control and detention requirements; flooding conditions ; and relationship to the City ' s critical drainage basin designation. Golder & Associates will provide data on groundwater quality and quantity as related to the proposal, including A-2 references to potential impacts on aquifers in the area. The Consultant will review and integrate the data into the Water section of the DEIS. VII . Public Services and Utilities - The Consultant will address impacts on the local service providers includ- ing fire, police and school services. Existing capacities and anticipated impacts will be identified . For utility issues, the Consultant assumes that Dodds Engineers and the City will provide the required information related to existing capacity and needed improvements . An estimate of anticipated public costs and revenues associated with the project will be made based on a model prepared by the City of Renton Public Works Department. VIII. Plants and Animals - The Consultant will discuss existing habitat conditions on-site and will evaluate • post-development impacts. The impacts from clearing and grading and opportunities for mitigation will be assessed. IX. Environmental Health - An analysis will be conducted by the Consultant addressing the possible health and safety issues related to the electrical transmission lines adjacent to the site. Literature will be reviewed and Puget Power , BPA and other sources of information will be consulted on the subject to gauge potential impacts. If substantiated and relevant, the reports and information will be related to project impacts. Mitigating measures to reduce impacts will be identified, if appropriate . X. Cumulative Effects - The City has identified two proposed projects in the vicinity (the McMann and Eradco projects) for the cumulative impact discussion. • In the areas of Transportation, Land Use and Services , the proposal' s contribution to cumulative impacts will be described and evaluated by the Consultant . For cumulative transportation issues , information from the CH2MHill study will be referenced as available. XI. Alternatives - The Consultant will address up to three (3) alternatives to the proposed action, including the no-action alternative ; an alternative with a reduced density; and an alternative with. a higher density or an alternative design. XII. Meetings - The Consultant will attend up to ten (10) meetings on the DEIS and five (5) meetings on the FEIS with City of Renton officials. XIII. Printing - The Consultant assumes printing of up to fifteen (15) copies of the preliminary DEIS . XIV.. Draft EIS - Upon submittal of the preliminary DEIS and receipt of comments from the City and proponent , the Consultant shall revise, complete and issue the DEIS. The fee for completion of the DEIS includes printing of up to eighty (80) copies of the document for public and agency review. XV. Final EIS - The Consultant ' s estimated budget and scope for the FEIS assumes revising the DEIS, printing up to eighty (80) copies and responding to a relatively small number of substantive comment letters (10 to 12) dealing with the DEIS. If the City requires the Consultant to address additional comment letters and/or comments dealing with topics not discussed in the DEIS, or a level of detail not provided within this scope , the estimate for the FEIS may be revised. . If the scope and cost estimate are beyond what has been estimated herein, the Consultant will meet with the City to develop a mutually acceptable scope and budget. ASSUMPTIONS A) Specific project description information, including reproducible site plans , elevations , and cross sections will be provided to the Consultant by the proponent at the outset of the EIS effort. In addition, the propo- nent will provide all necessary written and graphic material for all alternatives including site plans , elevations, number and layout of parking, access/ circulation, number of units and stories , street orientation, etc. Such information will provide for a complete description of the proposal and alternatives and relevant design features. B) The major issues to be addressed include Transporta- tion, Slopes , Soils , Land Use and Services. Emphasis will be placed on these issues by the Consultant and by the subconsultants to the proponent. Evaluation of impacts on other environmental elements will be more brief in nature. EXHIBIT A-1 PROJECT BUDGET SUMMARY LEXINGTON RIDGE The following outlines the proposed budget to prepare the Draft and Final EIS. The Draft and Final EIS budget represents our best estimate of the labor and costs associated with completing the tasks identified in the previous section. Preliminary Draft EIS Labor (preparation of the document, management and coordination) $14,500.00 Subconsultants* 7, 700.00 Word Processing 1 ,000.00 Graphics (preparation of up to twenty (20) exhibits) 1 ,300.00 Reimbursable Expenses* (mileage, parking, xerox copying, printing of up to fifteen (15) copies, and miscellaneous costs) 550.00 Subtotal $25,050.00 Draft EIS , Labor $ 4,520.00 Subconsultants* 803.00 Word Processing 600.00 Graphics 300.00 Printing (up to eighty (80) copies) 900.00 Reimbursable Expenses* 357.00 Subtotal $ 7,480.00 TOTAL $32,530.00 Final EIS Labor $ 3,480.00 Subconsultants* 715 .00 Word Processing 600.00 Printing (up to eighty (80) copies) 650.00 Reimbursable Expenses* 250.00 TOTAL $ 5 ,695 .00 Subconsultants and expenses = cost plus 10 percent fee. l EXHIBIT A-2 LABOR BREAKDOWN AND HOURLY RATES Preliminary DEIS - Labor THE FERRIS COMPANY: Hourly Hours Rate Total Blumen - Project Manager 30 $60. $ 1 ,800. Brunner - Principal Author 128 50. 6,400. McGuire - Planner • 140 45. 6,300. Subtotal $14,500. DODDS ENGINEERS: Borneman - Engineer 25 $40. $ 1 ,000. GOLDER ASSOCIATES: Cotton - Principal 3 $75. $ 225. Lavielle - Senior Engineer 28 60. 1 ,680. Clerical 3.8 25. 95. Subtotal $ 2,000. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND ENGINEERING:. Bishop - Principal 8 $95. $ 760. Meijsen - Engineer 52.5 50. 2,625. Enger - Drafter 12 34. 408. Clerical 6 34. 207. Subtotal $ 4,000. LABOR TOTAL $21 ,500. • Draft EIS - Labor Hourly Hours Rate Total THE FERRIS COMPANY Blumen 12 $60. $ 720. Brunner 40 50. 2,000. McGuire 40 45. 1 ,800. Subtotal $ 4,520 DODDS ENGINEERS: Borneman 6 $40. $ 240. GOLDER ASSOCIATES: Lavielle 4 $60. $ 240. TP & E: Meijsen 5 $50. $ 250. LABOR TOTAL $ 5,250. Final EIS - Labor THE FERRIS COMPANY Blumen 8 $60. $ 480. Brunner 24 50. 1 ,200. McGuire 40 45. 1 ,800. Subtotal $ 3,480. DODDS ENGINEERS : Borneman 4 $40. $ 160. GOLDER ASSOCIATES: Lavielle 4 $60. $ 240. TP & E: Meijsen 5 $50. $ 250. LABOR TOTAL $ 4, 130. EXHIBIT A-3 FEE SCHEDULE - THE FERRIS COMPANY - LEXINGTON RIDGE Personnel Title Hourly Rate* Mike Ferris Principal $65.00 Mike Blumen Program Manager $60.00 Lisa Verner Project Manager $60.00 Gretchen Brunner Senior Planner $50.00 Susan McGuire Senior Planner , $45.00 Caroline Berry Senior Planner $45.00 Word Processing $25.00 Salary plus overhead and fee. Expenses = direct cost plus 10 percent fee. ATTACHMENT THE FERRIS COMPANY SUGGESTED CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS Paragraph 3 - Time of Performance - Modify to Read: The work detailed in the Scope of Work will be performed according to Exhibit B, Time Schedule of Completion, attached hereto , and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. It is agreed that all services shall be completed and all products shall be delivered by , 1988, nothwithstanding delays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant. If, after receiving Notice to Proceed , Consultant is delayed in the performance of its services by factors that are beyond its control, Consultant shall notify the City of the delay and shall prepare a revised estimate of time and cost needed to complete the Project and submit the revision to the City for its approval. Time schedules are subject to mutual agreement for any revision unless specifically described as otherwise herein. Paragraph 4 - Payment for Services - Include : • In the event City desires services exceeding the Scope of Services , Consultant shall promptly provide a written estimated completion schedule and detailed scope of services for such Additional Services. Additional Services shall be paid upon a time and expense basis utilizing the fee schedule attached hereto as Exhibit Paragraph 7 - Indemnification - Modify to Read: Consultant will hold the City harmless, and assume liability for loss from claims arising in whole or in part out of Consultants' negligent performance of the professional services as set forth in this Agreement. For any damage caused by negligence other than professional negligence, Consultant ' s liability, including that of its employees, agents and subcontractors, in the aggregate under this Agreement, shall not exceed the limits of Consultant 's comprehensive general and automobile liability insurance coverage, which is $500,000. Paragraph 10 - Additional Responsibilities - Include as part of last sentence: . . . .notwithstanding delays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant. • New Paragraph - Professional Responsibility - Include : Consultant represents that the services shall be performed, within the limits prescribed by this Contract as amended, in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other professional consultants performing similar services in the State of Washington or of the type used in the Project under similar circumstances . No other representations to City, express or implied , and no warranty or guarantee is included or intended in this Contract or in any report, opinion, document or otherwise. New Paragraph - Opportunity to Remedy - Include: The parties agree that in the event of alleged error or omission by Consultant in performance of the Project, City shall notify Consultant promptly in writing of the fact and allow Consultant a reasonable time to remedy the problem. Upon notice, Consultant shall promptly review and remedy the problem at the cost of Consultant', if Consultant accepts responsibility for it. City agrees not to remedy the problem or to contract with a third party to remedy the problem at the cost of Consultant without first giving Consultant a reasonable opportunity to remedy the problem. Where responsibility for a problem may be shared by Consultant and others , Consultant shall endeavor to remedy Consultants' share (and the share of any Consultant subcontractor or agent) at the cost of Consultant and to ,cooperate with others involved. • CONTRACT FOR SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this day of , 1987, by and between the City of Renton, a Washington municipal corporation, (hereinafter called "City") , and , a Washington Corporation (hereinafter called ) . In consideration of the following promises, warranties, and covenants, it is agreed between the parties as follows: 1. Employment of Consultant: The City hereby agrees to employ and hereby agrees to perform the services hereinafter set forth. is employed to produce the described SEPA documents as set forth in Paragraph 2 and Attachment A, Scope of • Work. is authorized to use as a subconsultant. No other subconsultants shall be employed unless • authorized in writing by the City. Nothing in this contract shall be construed to create an employee - employer relationship between , its employees and the City. 2. Scope of Work: shall furnish the necessary equipment, materials and professionally trained and experienced personnel to facilitate completion of the work described in Exhibit A, "Scope of Work," which is attached hereto, and is incorporated into this agreement as though fully set forth herein. hereby warrants that it has the necessary experience, qualified and trained personnel, equipment and materials to complete the work detailed in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. 3. Time of Performance: The work detailed in the Scope of Work will be started and completed by on the dates specified in Exhibit B, Time Schedule of Completion, attached • hereto, and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. It is agreed that all services shall be completed and all products shall be delivered by 1988. 4. Payment for Services: agrees to perform work specified in the Scope of Work and City agrees to pay an amount, subject to conditions set forth in this Contract, not to exceed $ for services rendered in fulfillment of the Scope of Work. Payment of said sum will include payment for all necessary labor, materials, and facilities used in the completion of the "Scope of Work." Attached as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by this reference is the schedule of payments for the completion of specified work products. 5. Project Management: The Project Manager for shall be The Project Manager for the City shall be All correspondence, work orders, payment requests concerning this project shall be directed to these individuals. 6. Warranty of Authority: hereby warrants and represents that the person who has executed this contract has full authority from to do so. The City hereby warrants that the Mayor and City Clerk of City have full power to execute this contract. 7. Idemnification: hereby agrees to idemnify and hold the City of Renton harmless from any and all claims, causes of action, damages and other actions growing out of this consultant's contract or arising under this contract. Including within this indemnification agreement shall be the responsibility of to provide legal counsel to : . • • CONTRACT FOR SERVICES PAGE 2 - defend any claim,-action, cause of action or other legal proceeding brought by any third party to enforce this contract or, for damages arising out of any alleged lack of performance or negligent performance of this contract. Should not retain an attorney to provide said defense, then it hereby agrees to reimburse the City of Renton for any legal fees it has expended in its own defense, together with interest at 10% since such fees were incurred. 8. Legal Fees: If either party hereto shall bring suit to enforce this contract, the prevailing party, as defined by the laws of the State of Washington, shall receive those remedies and costs and attorney fees allowed by law. All lawsuits brought by either party for enforcement of this Contract shall first be brought in the King County, Washington Superior Court. 9. Products of Services: All documents, working documents, notes, maps, drawings, photos, etc. produced by or for , in furtherance of this Contract, shall be the property of the City and shall be delivered to the City prior to • full payment for services under this Contract. 10. Additional Resbonsibilities: The City shall endeavor to provide in a timely manner with all necessary criteria and full information pertinent to the services to be rendered by . Further, the City shall endeavor to make available to all information, drawings, maps, specifications in City's possession which City and consider pertinent to Scope of Work. agrees to perform the work specified in a timely manner and to complete the work in a form acceptable to the City within the specified budget and time authorized by this Contract. 11. Assignment of Rights: Neither party may assign its • rights and obligations under this Contract without the express written consent of the other party. • 12. Entire Contract: This agreement, consisting of pages and Exhibits A, B, C constitutes the entire agreement or contract between the parties. The agreements set forth in this contract supersede all prior written or oral understandings. This agreement may not be amended except in writing signed by the parties hereto. • • IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the CITY and have executed • • this Contract as of the date first set forth above: CITY OF RENTON by Rec: President Zoning Administrator Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM • • Lawrence Warren, City Attorney • • • CONTRACT FOR SERVICES EXHIBIT B PROJECT SCHEDULE EIS 1 Scope of work/contract Deliver Preliminary Draft EIS to City (Complete document) • Renton delivers unified (one set) comments to consultant . Revised DEIS delivered to Renton :•,.':: Renton approves revisions Print DEIS and deliver to City DEIS issuance/public notice DEIS comments due • • Begin FEIS preparation Draft FEIS to Renton Renton delivers unified (one set) comments. Revised FEIS to Renton Renton approves FEIS Print FEIS and deliver to City • Issue FEIS Appeal Period for FEIS ' • • +. • • CONTRACT FOR SERVICES EXHIBIT C SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS • First Payment: 30% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of Preliminary Draft EIS by City of Renton. Second Payment: 30% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of Draft EIS by City of Renton. Third Payment: 40% of Contract Amount upon acceptance of Final EIS by City of Renton. Budget Breakdown - Lexington Ridge EIS Preliminary DEIS - Labor Hours Rate (Hourly) Total($) Blumen - Project Manager 24 $60. $ 1 ,440. Brunner - Principal Author 128 $50. 6 ,400. McGuire - Planner 160 $45. 7, 200. Word Processing 40 $25. 1 ,000. $16, 040. DEIS Blumen 10 $60. $ 600. Brunner 40 $50. 2, 000. McGuire 60 $45. 2 , 700. Word Processing 24 $25. 600. $ 5 , 900. / ' I " ! PN?CtPOSE0 COMP.PL I'4 All A 'Ef41*T!1T AIM CR8lIA RE-TAM.A CENTER REZERIE EIS COST EST(MATE .-___ _.___..._ -- -.___-- ----. --------it PC VIITM ITEM PHASE ° 69 PO I JZ F36'! '..__ DM _ K8-_.._.... V 13k-----,--e9p/ed1tTng -Gr Cl C PRO—ICI�J 1ATlC°1 010 4 b2 j 8 1 -_ _ _ -._.._...--_-- _ :� Q PREPARpTtO d - •-- __....... _...__......_.._._._........ oFACT SHEET,C0 dTEidTS 020 ? 2 ¢ ? --_i--•_-__.__-._._._S..__..----------/-....... D o an'::ARY 021 1 4 o DESC PWStr ED ACT'Ca a22 2 24 8 ADD AL T>*rt'dATI ES o NATURAL EitVIRO E T --s -- - _... -�---_->-..- -- -EARTH(n/a) -WATER025 i _ �. - - - __..._._.. 0.11111k �. -PIANTS APO ANIMALS 026 � - 2 - - -BIRO?(n!a) - ': -LAM USE - a29 ' 1 8 .._ _ ,_ . _--.o--_._.—_..a---------__ ......._------.. PLANS AND POLICES 30 _ --_ _- 4 PO?ULATi0P1 AI¢D H0US .G(n/a) . AESTIETECS a ( 4 ) 2 — e - -• _.._ -_ _ _._-_.___� _-- _ . i'.EC •ATM c34 2 8� HISTORICAL/G.ATURAL °35 CS o- -TR Mac-CRT ATl0N °37 . 4 16 -UTE.ITES < °32 '2 8 I. 4 -PU5LESERVIS um 1A~ - — - -ECMOMSCS °36 4 8 C - o I�FEftCES 99 2 - SiJF?GaT SEFVIc S 60 48 € 10 FF.S P'PARAT10d 051 4 32 • .40 2 8 2 16 -- 40 16 2 .- ---a--- --_- _._._..._ ..-__..... _----a- ADM D1ISTRAT1M/1MANAGEK34T 045 0 :_.. Prb'EEvIEDIT 044 16 24 -.-._-__._ __— __._....___.- MET MS e , 046 `2 b ( ' -._ - IEEJ E1e. S i C200-09 . DEIS a-‘,.1 FEIS CONTC1GENCY i 1 - - -- - — / Q - a . Lr—IJTh,—,_JHE FERRIS COMPANY CITY OF RENTON January 25 , 1988 RECEI\IED JAN 2 5 1988 BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. Don Erickson Zoning Administrator City of Renton Building and Zoning Department 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Re: Lexington Ridge EIS Dear Don: Enclosed please find three copies of our proposed Scope of Work and Budget to complete the Lexington Ridge Draft and Final EIS . The proposed scope , assumptions and budget are based on our meetings and discussions with City staff, review of the information and studies submitted to date , and past experience on similar EIS projects . We believe the proposed scope is responsive to the City ' s concerns and needs . The Ferris Company is prepared to initiate work on this project immediately, and we welcome the opportunity to work with the City of Renton. We remain flexible to add or delete scope elements as necessary. Please call me when you have had an opportunity to review the enclosed . Sincerely, Michael J. Blumen Project Manager MJB: slw Enclosures Seattle Trust Building,Suite 300 10655 NE 4th Street Bellevue,WA 98004 206/462-7650 Sat EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES • The scope outlined below is for preparation orill and Final Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS an the Lexington Ridge apartment project in Renton, The Ferris Company (the Consultant) will prepare d FEIS consistent with the State Environmental Poliche City of Renton Environmental Ordinance, Chapter 28ton Zoning Code. The Consultant has reviewed the existing stud project prepared by Golder Associates (geotechnical ad Transportation, Planning & Engineering - TP&Eation study) and determined that the studies may nepple- mented and expanded by the subconsultants to information and detail necessary to complete the preliminary \AQ , IDEIS . It has also been determined that Dodds Engineers, Inc. , , �vv { will provide all necessary data on surface water quality and JI quantity to the Consultant. The Consultant will coordinate with wJ/?�yyl�t�P s their reports completeness, and incorporatetheinformati adequacy oni and ntotheDEIS . The Consultant will provide a description and comparative evaluation of the alternatives , including the proposal in the DEIS . A discussion of the affected environment , environmental impacts , proposed mitigating measures and other possible mitigating measures for the alternatives , including the proposal will also be prepared for the following elements of the environment identified in the scoping process : I. Earth - The geotechnical engineering study for the project site and the Earth section of the DEIS , will address existing soils, geologic and topographic conditions ; results of field exploration of subsurface conditions ; soil permeability issues ; recommendations �� 1 for drainage and erosion control ; issues related to clearing and grading, and the movement of earth material on and off-site ; and measures to ensure foundation support and slope stability. II. Traffic - The specific transportation study for the project and the Transportation section of the DEIS, <( will address trip generation (including an explanation 11d, , of trip generation rates) ; level-of-service impacts at the key intersections; circulation, parking and access /Y issues ; and recommendations for mitigation of the project' s impacts. Impacts regarding pedestrian safety and access and mitigating measures will be assessed by the transportation consultant and Transportation section as well. A-1 // The Consultant will review and summarize the progress of the CH2MHill area-wide transportation improvement program as it applies to the proposal. Results of this study, particularly as related to potential mitigation for the project, will be incorporated into the EIS when available . III. Land Use - The proposal ' s relationship to the City of Renton' s zoning code and comprehensive plan policies (including the City ' s Greenbelt Policies) will be discussed by the Consultant. The proposal ' s relation- ship to existing land use, zoning and comprehensive plan designations in the immediate vicinity will also be included. The Consultant will prepare a slope/density analysis consistent with the City ' s Greenbelt Policies , to evaluate the relationship of the proposed density to the slopes in the development area on-site. A discussion of the impacts of the proposed density and other land use compatibility issues will be provided . IV. Recreation - The proposal includes the provision for on-site recreational opportunities. Both passive (trails, open space) and active facilities are proposed. The increase in demand represented by the on-site population will be evaluated in relation to the proposed opportunities to gauge overall impacts to local and regional park and recreation facilities. Existing facilities in the area will be described and impacts assessed . Measures to mitigate impacts will be addressed . V. Aesthetics - The proposal' s design, scale, orientation , and aesthetic/visual compatibility as related to rJ41.114) 1(7 surrounding land uses will be addressed by Consultant through a written description andr,evalua- tion. Specifically , the proposed density, open space, buffering and setbacks will be analyzed. Site plans , elevations and cross-sections will be provided to the 4('t ,Consultant by the Centron Corporation (the proponent) UV61t�r`�7. ¢ ( for incorporation into the DEIS. No additional / i (K: a graphics� will be prepared for the visual analysis . J-u f VI.. Water Quantity/Quality - The surface water quantity and quality information prepared by Dodds Engineers , Inc . j`g will include an analysis of pre and post-development drainage characteristics ; erosion control and detention requirements; flooding conditions ; and relationship to the City ' s critical drainage basin designation. Golder & Associates will provide data on groundwater quality and quantity as related to the proposal, including A-2 / , references to potential impacts on aquifers in the area. The Consultant will review and integrate the data into the Water section of the DEIS. VII. Public Services and Utilities - The Consultant will address impacts on the local service providers includ- ing fire, police and school services. Existing capacities and anticipated impacts will be identified . �� �} For utility issues, the Consultant assumes that Dodds �� Engineers and the City will provide the required information related to existing capacity and needed improvements. An estimate of anticipated public costs p i„ and revenues associated with the project will be made 0��rin based on a model prepared by the City of Renton Public /cI Works Department. VIII. Plants and Animals - The Consultant will discuss existing habitat conditions on-site and will evaluate post-development impacts. The impacts from clearing and grading and opportunities for mitigation will be assessed. IX. Environmental Health - An analysis will be conducted by the Consultant addressing the possible health and safety issues related to the electrical transmission lines adjacent to the site. Literature will be reviewed and Puget Power, BPA and other sources of information will be consulted on the subject to gauge potential impacts. If substantiated and relevant, the ' reports and information will be related to the project. X. Cumulative Effects - The City has identified two proposed projects in the vicinity (the McMann and Eradco projects) for the cumulative impact discussion. In the areas of Transportation, Land Use and Services , the proposal' s contribution to cumulative impacts will be described and evaluated by the Consultant. For Jam' cumulative transportation issues, information from the ZCH2MHill study will be referenced as available. XI. Alternatives - The Consultant will address up to � :(r \ three (3) alternatives to the proposed action, i - ''� v including the no-action alternative ; an alternative 0 AY with a reduced density; and an alternative with a higher density or an alternative design. A4 XII. Meetings - The Consultant will attend up to ten (10) \ 4 ' °I" meetings on the DEIS with Cityof Renton officials , the \ 4' { v 10c7proponent and/or the proponent s subconsultants \,, v � , ,� XIII. Printing - The Consultant assumes printing of up to D1 fifteen (15) copies of the preliminary DEIS. A-3 XIV. Draft EIS - Upon submittal of the preliminary DEIS and receipt of comments from the City and proponent , the Consultant shall revise, complete and issue the DEIS . The fee for completion of the DEIS includes printing of up to eighty (80) copies of the document for public and agency review. XV. Final EIS - The Consultant ' s estimated budget and scope for the FEIS assumes revising the DEIS , printing up to eighty (80) copies and responding to a relatively small number of substantive comment letters (10 to (12) dealing with the DEIS. If the City requires the Consultant to address additional comment letters and/or �,, comments dealing with topics not discussed in the DEIS, \ �� .,,+ �,€\ i or a level of detail not provided within this scope , �� r.M' L, the estimate for the FEIS may be revised. OUP � � � 1 WUpon completion of the DEIS and receipt of comments Jfrom the public , the Consultant shall submit a Scope of 4 r,1 / Services and final cost for completion of the FEIS to flA1(j. r the City. If the scope and cost estimate is beyond Qg.2) �� what has been estimated here, the Consultant will meet i' ' ),, J with the City and the proponent to develop a mutually totittvu ,rn� ili acceptable scope and budget. (aU �! OTHER ASSUMPTIONS `i A) The Consultant' s responsibility will be to coordi- nate, review and integrate the work of subconsultants ;IC. (to insure consistency and completeness. It is assumed 0A,' 1 that Golder and Associates , TP&E and Dodds Engineers OCY{ 1-41\ � will prepare complete reports addressing soils, slopes 9, OJ �1 %..� and groundwater , transportation, and drainage and Ik k' ,, Futilities, respectively. ).,1 B) Specific project description information, including tit)�,,,�v reproducible site plans , elevations , and cross sections will be provided to the Consultant by the proponent at the outset of the EIS effort . In addition, the propo- nent will provide all necessary written and graphic material for all alternatives including site plans , -7-C) dayJ elevations, number and layout of parking, access/ ' circulation, number of units and stories , street 60,m '"v- jXorientation, etc. Such information will provide for a �1 1 �� complete description of the proposal and alternatives . G and relevant design features. a Q- ,, tee 0r> v" C) The major issues to be addressed include Transporta- tion, Slopes , Soils, Land Use and Services . Emphasis will be placed on these issues by the Consultant and by the subconsultants to the proponent. Evaluation of impacts on other environmental elements will be more brief in nature. A-4 1 EXHIBIT B PROJECT BUDGET LEXINGTON RIDGE The following outlines the proposed budget to prepare the Draft and Final EIS. The Draft and Final EIS budget represents our best estimate of the labor and costs associated with completing 7 Hthe tasks identified in the previous section. As indicated in the previous section, the actual budget for the Final EIS will be Jdetermined subsequent to receipt of comments on the Draft EIS. !, Preliminary Draft EIS Labor (preparation of the document, 1;i'i40rf ,l management and coordination) $15 ,040.00 , ,f Word Processing 1 , 000.00 Graphics (preparation of up to twenty (20) exhibits) 1 , 300. 00 Reimbursable Expenses (mileage , parking, xerox copying, printing of up to fifteen (15) copies, and miscellaneous costs) 550.00 Subtotal $17,890.00 Draft EIS Labor 5 ,300. 00 Word Processing 600.00 Graphics 500.00 Printing (up to eighty (80) copies) 900.00 Reimbursable Expenses 350.00 Subtotal $ 7,650.00 TOTAL $25, 540.00 Final EIS Labor $ 3,000.00 Word Processing 600. 00 Printing (up to eighty (80) copies) 650.00 Reimbursable Expenses 250.00 TOTAL $ 4,500.00 B- 1 EXHIBIT C FEE SCHEDULE LEXINGTON RIDGE Personnel Title Hourly Rate* Mike Ferris Principal $65.00 Mike Blumen Project Manager $60.00 Gretchen Brunner Senior Planner $50.00 Susan McGuire Senior Planner $45.00 Caroline Berry Senior Planner $45.00 Word Processing $25.00 ' Salary plus overhead and fee. Expenses = direct cost plus 10 percent fee. C-1 C _ j of / �v ' ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR Z wL o o �' �' MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE.SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 9,0 �• 0 9�rFD SEPIE���P BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR MEMORANDUM DATE: December 4, 1987 TO: Nancy Laswell-Morris John Adamson FROM: Don Erickson SUBJECT: Lexington Ridge EIS Advisory Committee Attached is a letter from Colin Quinn regarding the two consultant firms they would like us to interview for this project. These are consistent with my recommendations to them in a letter last month. First of all I need to know whether you wish to be a part of this technical steering committee, and if so, would you be available to meet with these consultants sometime in the ,latter part of next week. I have asked Carolyn to tentatively set up a meeting with representatives of both firms for Thursday, December 10, 1987 at 9: 00 AM in the third floor conference room. Please let me know whether you are interested in being a part __ of the Lexington Ridge EIS Technical Steering Committee and if so, whether this date will work for you. Thanks, _ DE:cs • • •i't' ,:i y tiN . t • 3025 112th Ave.N.E.C-90001 Suite 100 Bellevue,WA 98009 • 206-822-2888 November 30, 1987 CENTRON is a service mark • licensed by Centron Corporation. CITY OF RENTON Mr. Donald Erickson Zoning Administrator Oc.L 3 -1987 CITY OF RENTON - 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98005 - /-7 N! G D;tpl" RE: Lexington Ridge Apartments SA-082-87 Dear Don: Centron has selected The Ferris Company (462-7650 Mike Blumen) and Triad Associates (821-8448 Tom Hauger) as the two firms for the Renton Advisory Committee to interview. We are anxious to proceed with this proposal. -Please contact me at 822-2888 should you have questions. Sincerely, CENTRON Colin Quinn Director of Governmental Relations and Land Planning CA:kk • -,- 3025 112th Ave.N.E.'C-90001 Suite 100 Bellevue,WA 98009 206-822-2888 November 30, 1987 CENTRON is a service mark . licensed by Centron Corporation. CITY 0 RENTO Mr. Donald Erickson �_y‘ Zoning Administrator C 3 -1S87 J CITY OF RENTON 200 Mill Avenue South _ Renton, WA 98005 9'�,'' �2� .°^ , 7e+A9Pry^ ripo RE: Lexington Ridge Apartments SA-082-87 -- Dear Don: Centron has selected The Ferris Company (462-7650 Mike Blumen) and Triad Associates (821-8448 Tom Hauger) as the two firms for the Renton Advisory Committee to interview. We are anxious to proceed with this proposal . Please contact me at 822-2888 should you have questions . Sincerely, CENTRON r.„...452..> ,.e.:.„4. ...2,/ r______...........--) P9e ms Colin Quinn Director of Governmental Relations and Land Planning CA:kk /n ,„ 41/114441 . 0 1! 6 0) # }'9— 7? ) (/ . . ( if, /1---- __ --- t �� ® . 0 BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT - o RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR 0 MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 0,9gTc0 S,k40' SEP BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR MEMORANDUM DATE: December 4, 1987 TO: Nancy Laswell-Morris John Adamson FROM: Don Erickson SUBJECT: Lexington Ridge EIS Advisory Committee Attached is a letter from Colin Quinn regarding the two consultant firms they would like us to interview for this project. These are consistent with my recommendations to them in a letter last month. First of all I need to know whether you wish to be a part of this technical steering committee, and if so, would you be available to meet with these consultants sometime in the latter part of next week. I have asked Carolyn to tentatively set up a meeting with representatives of both firms for Thursday, December 10, 1987 at 9: 00 AM in the third floor conference room. Please let me know whether you are interested in being a part of the Lexington Ridge EIS Technical Steering Committee and if so, whether this date will work for you. Thanks, DE:cs v_`� G CENTRON 3025 112th Ave.N.E.C-90001 Suite 100 Bellevue,WA 98009 206-822-2888 November 30, 1987 CENTRON is a service mark licensed by Centron Corporation. N TO Mr. Donald Erickson L1 Zoning Administrator ) Li i f' CITY OF RENTON !� ce' 200 Mill Avenue South , n WAk 98005 .. _ '- _. / P�.',�{r, ^.. L( a', Renton, •o RE: Lexington Ridge Apartments SA-082-87 Dear Don: Centron has selected The Ferris Company (462-7650 Mike Blumen) and Triad Associates (821-8448 Tom Hauger) as the two firms for the Renton Advisory Committee to interview. We are anxious to proceed with this proposal . Please contact me at 822-2888 should you have questions . Sincerely, CENTRON Colin Quinn Director of Governmental Relations and Land Planning CA:kk 6F I 40 %' , .. ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Cv ,� z a " RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 a 235-2540 9A o. o91?cp SEPr E���P BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR ME " .y 0 , ANDUM DATE: December 4, 1987 TO: Nancy Laswell-Morris John Adamson - ,D,Lyy, eiK- FROM: Don Erickson SUBJECT: Lexington Ridge EIS Advisory Committee Attached is a letter from Colin Quinn regarding the two consultant firms they would like us to interview for this project. These are consistent with my recommendations to them in a letter last month. First of all I need to know whether you wish to be a part of this technical steering committee, and if so, would you be available to meet with these consultants sometime in the latter part of next week. I have asked Carolyn to tentatively set up a meeting with representatives of both firms for Thursday, December 10, 1987 at 9: 00 AM in the third floor conference room. Please let me know whether you are interested in being a part of the Lexington Ridge EIS Technical Steering Committee and if so, whether this date will work for you. Thanks, C)41\.,_U DE:cs 74 , /fc. ; e.?-�E u �,Y . io - 9.'o o - A de. . P.0 - 0.((', ,,;� 9.50 - 6 _ ., . • • ;, "yam • 4. . pp YQ�IteillrY9itOkt®® MIDI !Willi 3025 112th Ave.N.E.C-90001 Suite 100 Bellevue,WA 98009 206-822-2888 November 30, 1987 CENTRON Is a service mark licensed by Centron Corporation. CITY Y F RENTON EEc GfV Mr. Donald Erickson Zoning Administrator O 3 -1987 CITY OF RENTON 200 Mill Avenue South P'Jff Zer.`^ 7r Ftury.r, rJ: Renton, WA 98005 . l �; DE,•T, RE: Lexington Ridge Apartments SA-082-87 r Dear Don: Centron has selected The Ferris Company (462-7650 Mike Blumen) and Triad Associates (821-8448 Tom Hauger) as the two firms for the Renton Advisory Committee to interview. We are anxious to proceed with this proposal . Please contact me at 822-2888 should you have questions . Sincerely, CENTRON Colin Quinn Director of Governmental Relations and Land Planning CA:kk i e 1 40 1 % CITY OF RENTON I talk .y +R BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT iBarbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor Ronald G. Nelson, Director 1 1 November 19, 1987 8 1 fi 1 Colin Quinn Director of Planning Centron Corporation 3025-112th Avenue N.E. Bellevue, WA 98009 I RE: Consultant Selection for the Lexington Ridge Apartment i Complex, SA-082-87 Dear Colin: We have reviewed the statements of qualifications for the three consultants you submitted to this office on November 9, 1987. Any one of the three firms would be acceptable to us based upon their statements of qualification. Typically, what we do is set up an adversory committee of three or four people, with a representative of the developer, that interviews the top two firms and then makes a recommendation as to which firm to hire for the prescribed work. Although the contract is between the City and the consultant, we generally like to get the concurrence of the project proponent. -- In order to get this project moving, you should select the top two firms you want the advisory committee to interview. We will then ask them to submit written proposals describing in greater detail those elements of the environment they believe should be addressed in the EIS and their proposed methodology for doing so and a preliminary estimate of cost for preparing the preliminary DEIS, the DEIS and the FEIS (this obviously will have to take into consideration those issues already identified in the scoping process) . I have enclosed a copy of the consultant contract we are now using. As I explained some time ago, the contract is signed between the City and the consultant with the proponent paying for the consultant's time in preparing the DEIS and FEIS, as well as the City's time in reviewing and editing the draft and final EIS and managing the contract. If you have any questions please give me a call as soon as possible. 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 • Colin Quinn November 19, 1987 Page 2 If you have any questions please give me a call as soon as possible. Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator encl: Consultant Contract for Services b cc: Phillips cEr:TR0* "+ f 3N " iG Lexington Ridge To: Don Erickson Reference: EFC-074-87 SA-082-87 Date 11/9/87 ❑ For Your Approval 0 As requested ❑ For your information ❑ Please reply Attached are 3 consultant statements of qualifications from firms Centron finds acceptable. We look forward to working with you further in the final selection process. By Colin Quinn cc: 3025 112th Ave. N.E: 822-2888 CENTRON is a service mark 8; ('Y616\ 4XAMOBO XIRC-90001 • Bellevue, WA 98009 • (206) 624-1557 • (206) &XS X licensed by Centron Corporation. • 470 � October 30, 1987 = 1. i' � a l/ a� )� ; {.> City of Renton '�a Building & Zoning Department 200 Mi 1 1 Avenue South y : t1 � �1 i-7 Renton, WA 98055 Gentlemen: As a 35 year residence of Windsor Hills, my wife and I would like to register our concern over the construction of 360 apartments at the Centron site plan : SA-082-87. #1 No way could the present NE 4th Street or the old twisting Bronson Way NE handle all the traffic which the new site must use to reach the apartments. #2 Most of the traffic will be forced to go through and damage the quiet residential community of Windsor Hills. We would appreciate your careful consideration of these and other concerns. Thank you, x4444p Mr. and Mrs. Norm Hash 358 Bronson Way NE Renton, WA 98056 P. S. our phone number is 255-3705 0 %s . CITY OF RENTON "LL BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor - Ronald G. Nelson, Director October 30, 1987 Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section Mail Stop PV-11 Olympia, WA 98504 Gentlemen: Transmitted herewith are copies of the Determinations of Significance and Environmental Checklist for the following projects: Centrol ECF-074-87 Sabey Corporation ECF-034-87 If you have any questions, please call 235-2540. Sincerely, Jr. ", Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator Enclosures DE:plp 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 „ } 60 '3 CITY OF RENTON BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor Ronald G. Nelson, Director October 30, 1987 Mr. Gerald W. Marbett Building & Land Development Division 450 King. County Administration Bldg. Seattle, WA 98104 Dear Mr. Marbett: Transmitted herewith are copies of the Determinations- of Significance for the following projects: Centron ECF-074-87 Sabey Corporation ECF-034-87 If you have questions, please call 235-2540. S' rely, Donald K. Erickson,AICP Zoning Administrator Enclosures DE:DB:ss • ti 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton,Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 f G - 4,.;- EIN' 1W11\ • l3 q f� 3025 112th Ave.N.E.C-90001 Suite 100 Bellevue,WA 98009 OT I ,�� ,C 206-822-2888 October 19, 1987 �! CENTRON is a service mark , qq 1 � licensed by Centron Corporation. LAio�Y. �aV I u'-.I t..•,uj L.3,.:A I. Mr. Donald Erickson Zoning Administrator CITY OF RENTON 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 RE: Environmental Review Committee Determination of Significance for Lexington Ridge Apartments, Files ECF-074-87, SA-082-87 Dear Mr. Erickson: Centron Corporation (hereinafter Centron) hereby requests that the Environmental Review Committee reconsider its Determination of Significance issued October 7, 1987 for the Lexington Ridge Development Proposal . Centron submitted an expanded SEPA Environmental Checklist to the City of Renton September 15, 1987. The Checklist included a Supplemental Soils Analysis and Traffic Study prepared to reflect the proposed site plan. Centron is willing to provide the City with additional. information to revise or supplement the expanded checklist in order to allow the Environmental Review Committee to re-evaluate the potential impacts of this proposal . The project proponent is further prepared to commit to mitigations resulting from future studies and/or modify project features or clarify information in order to mitigate any probable significant adverse environmental impacts . We firmly believe we can prove through reasonable agreed upon mitigating measures that an Environmental Impact Statement for this proposal is not justified. The Lexington Ridge Proposal complies with the existing City of Renton Zoning and Comprehensive Plan. The project has been carefully designed to mitigate what we believed were potential impacts after considering each element of the environment. Centron recently concluded the SEPA scoping procedure for the McMahon Rezone proposal to the South which involves a project approximately four times the size of this proposal . No comments were received by the City of Renton. ' 4 IET i fl:� Pnr T ')fl!)7 i= Mr. Donald Erickson �..w e,..:r...'w; ,'.' ' ' y�, October 19, 1987 Page Two It seems clear that the much smaller Lexington Proposal on already zoned property will not be controversial . Having constructed the successful Brighton Ridge Apartments, which abut this property to the East, Centron is aware of the needs of the community and the impacts relating to development in this area of Renton . We funded over $200, 000 in off site costs for mitigations on Brighton Ridge and designed and developed a project that has been accepted by the community . The unnecessary and lengthy time delay and associated significant costs, to both Centron and the City, involved in the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement could be more productively used for public benefit through mitigations . The Determination of Significance letter, issued by the Environmental Review Committee, notes unanswered questions regarding several issues . Centron believes these questions can be answered to the E.R.C . 's satisfaction through supplemental studies and mitigating measures without an Environmental Impact Statement. 1 . The Soils Analysis prepared by Golder Associates indicates that the soil types encountered on this site generally consist of stratified sand and gravel layers . These soil types are not considered highly erosive. No ground water was encountered in any test pits . The Golder Soils Analysis provides the same degree of detail which would be found in an E. I .S . This project fully anticipates implementation of a Temporary Erosion/Sedimentation Control Program approved by the City during construction. A permanent City approved drainage system will be installed. The project will comply with recommendations of our soils consultant including hydroseeding and long term discharge measures . We are prepared to supplement the soils analysis and engineering studies or discuss additional mitigating measures to reduce potential soil erosion if requested by the E.R.C . r71 {_ •P r.'I. ry n 1 61'S J A )iqv 1u' Mr. Donald Erickson October 19, 1987 Page Three 2. The Lexington Ridge project proposes approximately 40% of the site be retained as open space. Natural percolation will occur in these areas . The storm water runoff from the impervious surfaces will be controlled by means of a City approved system. This system can be designed to maximize its recharge of the City's aquifer. We are prepared to provide additional aquifer recharge information and proposed mitigations if requested by the E.R.C . 3 . This proposal includes a Recreation Center of approximately 4, 000 feet which includes : racquetball, sunbeds, lounge, weight room, sauna, swimming pool, etc. Approximately 5 . 5 acres of the site will be retained as open space. Open space areas will be landscaped and contain tot lots and trails for passive outdoor recreation opportunities . We are more than willing to discuss or consider other mitigating measures if necessary . 4 . The question of cumulative impacts of this project and others in the area on community services and traffic has been raised by the Environmental Review Committee . The Lexington Ridge Proposal is a permitted use under the City Zoning and Comprehensive Plan . The McMahon and ERADCO Proposals are rezones . The City has required both McMahon and ERADCO to prepare Environmental Impact Statements to assist the City in considering cumulative impacts of rezoning to a higher density on traffic and community services . To ask a zoned property to examine the ' cumulative impacts of two potential rezones which are themselves doing Environmental Impact Statements seems unnecessary. 5 . A Traffic Analysis was prepared by Transportation Planning & Engineering, Inc. for the Lexington Ridge Proposal . The a .m. /p.m. peak hour trip generation figures used in this report were based on ITE Trip Generation - An Informal Report, Third Edition, 1987. The Institute of Transportation Engineers standards are nationally recognized as the accepted standard for traffic analysis . Mr. Donald Erickson October 19, 1987 Page Four At the request of the City of Renton, Centron is currently funding a Transportation Improvement Program Study for the N.E. 3rd Street corridor. This study, being prepared by CH2M Hill, will analyze the traffic impacts and necessary improvements within the corridor. Lexington Ridge is willing to reasonably mitigate its impacts established by this study. Centron would appreciate the opportunity to further discuss and address any issues the E.R.C . may raise with respect to the Lexington Ridge proposal. We can show that this project, with an agreed upon mitigated DNS will not have probable significant adverse environmental impacts necessitating an E. I .S. In light of the foregoing, we respectfully request reconsideration of the E.R.C. decision. Sincerely, CENTRON CORPORATION Colin Quinn Director of Governmental Relations and Land Planning CQ:kk cc: John E. Phillips Canadian American Associates 4 . v.. . - . , _ 7„,....„_ ,__....__ .. , ,„...„,„,,,,,,,,,,,,_, .. ",.. ,,,.. ... ,.___ _ , __ ,i......:7.--- ‘,,,--\\.:. \, \:]-,,,.,4, -- . ,.,...>,,,,..0„._,.., _,,-,-„, ,„ .„. L " „ .. . 124-, •11 I ttt Y\� l 6 j J],9 i' L + nIrp" h -,"_ t`yo 1, �a7 ?-1� O\ ii . ' \ \ t t'-';i6'• C L . ' 1I P. ° I...;' ^ .. ., .,1 1 1 S� �; ems, , ,,` •a �y 'q -. 1 \ r i ! ll ' - 0R •.` L9 z:—.F II ® i 138 4 T—.._ 1 ��� s o ti 7 . .I•• 1,_,�I4--,- --•-i • 1 ,15CAR. 1 +.l �e ° 1 . ,o _\' u E \ I -e��1,-) /• , • �R.Y CCU 7// � /,,01 �+s •'°�s��• " ��>'��.//o .y ' = 11< ��4:-(L1 b 4 8 'SS Ap t /+d I. •+_ era /`� \ �0 °: n 5' l ip.l. 1•A?! ill 31,,i, ,� u\ ,`� _ WINDSOR HILLS .a _ ei`r, ;.,. ry 2 km s- 5`• j7l .I'�', ta �ts\,,, s.' \� - . PARK ?!pAERI R;'L9 '.5 74�3 7. 6•; •', illikl-'.7 „i, //cilei. : ili!to 1 ....„ ; .4 s lc / n /11l i` ` . RION 51' 1 ll'ZU ,I a u . - I + - `� �7 —ts� • `-Tar /r $ /t .. 1 ® Gl /./2./—'), ; :I, ox 1 s 1 t' F, ///. ms ate., +• Stcf febitra . 3N a.I \ 6 \ t4K11 t 171.9 ,� 5 w {r • i")/ tt i��.'N ( T _- .1 _! 4 I:.# t d �.,..r'® rl III 11 t. / 11 w i•1 \\\ 1 I f//%VI /,- \`� ®' , 5'* _ , a�'.t,�'o a MTOLivET I I /' i •`.\ ' _° .u9 ' Af m CEMETERY I 1 �, / I. CEDAR RIVER \\ � • tb „�/ II 1 �,0�i PARK \\ . r 1 , (), I l l 1 1 1 j I i I �. • - ` . I I //'/// 1 49: • LEXINGTON RIDGE APARTMENTS • . •' , SITE PLAN APPROVAL: SA-082-87 S• ti . APPL I CANT CENTRON TOTAL AREA 13.4 ACRES PRINCIPAL ACCESS BRONSON WAY N.E. • EXISTING ZONING R-4 (RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY) • • EXISTING USE UNDEVELOPED • PROPOSED USE CONSTRUCT 360 APARTMENTS IN APPROXIMATELY •15 BUILDINGS. • COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY. ' • _ COMMENTS THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BETWEEN N.E. 3rd STREET AND N.E. 4th STREET, WEST OF EDMONDS AVENUE N.E. AND EAST OF BRONSON WAY/N.E. 3rd STREET INTERSECTION. /I • . - -------- - - ': . • .- •': 1:0,. • - • 7 - -42, 1.->,:il En gt• ,. 1-2.- ‘• ---- - - - , , ,.:///(::::' -. • - i t!:71f.t6-..:::: A\ ,,.....,o, Al PIM. "II - -''.:•/-'•'. .J.-V..:•--;.- ....--• •• : (''. .fZ:s • ''' / • 1 8 i, • g:r. %;...... Cr-SW 12431 ,...3_,/...... g,,,I ilia 2:Pir: kji:- go ,r,t,.:-. r,, -. .....• ;; -,., •.,,.,....,-,./........-_,..-, . ••__ . • .i • =61= OM CM. 13561 / ,,,,,,„ . ....„..% . .. ,. .. ,,,,,r.-/'• r---- - :-F.:1=1.. ..,....... - • ., .,-,-- e/-' .„,.,_„r„.„....„„ aes.ono..m. igh. ., liti iiim •,---, 26 torri3/ac2x / sr 3.123... MER121224 1.5 6SALLS/C311, 54D.222.6 ' • ,'''''-/• '''J'f•-• _-.4-i•.•'..‹,‘ \;.-- -----`1.•-._,..- 'i - '.Nip•••'•11c---. ...• 22.232134.2 6120611.04 SCALE:1".50' cc.cc= .2,,,"Mr., Iribtri ' ' •4 ••••---- -1 • . SITE INFORMATION -,-.,. ,..— lirris• #4 lin iL'' A,' 2 I ' • 7'72 1.-/ • / •‘/: ,-'-7'..\ , • It.....ii*••••:•• 'h. , , :=- •,-, 4. ,• /7/i's"/ , :, \ :I, SITE STATISTICS 7#14.41- -:1:= t'''' : - • ---N. / /,'..,,,_ I, / / // '..' ••••• I \ • ''.. \:: ' ---.. . ....-:_--':' ///1/4r .•••. . - -,,--_ ----------.-I ...• •- ,.:- R,• ; , - -,,, k 1 1 1 1 /,-. ‘ i ... ,. 0 ii ( /, 4 .. _ . ._ - _-_-.•,,,/./,-I.:k. N411% 0,0TH . •''' *"- '' • "• ....' ' ' ,C: / • X': 44',. : 4. .'f ,..- , - - - • , .,,.:,,,FiEir.:,-...---F.:F...:•- ...::. VICINITY MAP - 'N. 7:7' -..,.,4.,' . A - .,.. , , , „:„. • , , truzrx.r.t.r..r.."2:tti.t.T.r.rgi,•=1:'- ,, .., ,I3ENG.MA214. ....,.1....11......„e..1.... , / A't . •'''// 7 „ , „.. • 7 ::::.::nr....=:.t.t.-mr,1::::-.--T•n17,:a.:„.:IL,, • e/Ai' ' :•:\ ''' ' s.. „,.,,,,;,..' ,-.....wri-,.-. . .' / rL:':;`1:.)4.1 ,-,-,•, .. n" ' 1 :::•:.--„,.•.--•=2,:.•=.?:,•;....11:v..:,nigt,-,..z. ,..1, • / I 1 , i''4I. 7, •. i ''' ,, 1 in.; .,,,,,....,___:.ii,P\,' ii • ", i \ .. //it. '.,/1/ 1-----------!'_ -- -. -7-_',.7-'-"riz- -.1.17 ./ '3` ,7,,',./;2--; -.... • ,',,,/.. ,q... 3 § ra"•-.01,1a- ZI. .s'.-.t 111111m.; ,---'17 Ab'''' Ve ‘211 \Mi.*' 1`'" / j • / ''''• i• • , i? ; ! ,'\•( MtEi Z ar`'.' 6 r.:,....•,:zr,:-Fixtp:...,F;.;..,,,„::,27.:i.„,,....... '.- -' ':: 714-1",i---k.6'. ' \ . ";'-'. - q• ',.. c. ' 40/ / "'.• \ P.;-:,'i'l i ' , ' I - \ ,i,„ 3,'/-1, 1'.' ••.•., Ct4K5).:°!LI! ff„...9,T.•;:lev.r.,=:1,....1.. / . ,-•1 ;>,---,.., - ,- 0' ....,,4 re\-- ti ,-7,-1' i, ..:,;.".2,.,:,; / c.5.§.A >.S ;".:••=11.::':r.rt::::::1,/.7-1`...1:%r="s=1`" , /it, / Y ?, ,2%;•„:••-•'; '•• C., fil ''" VVAVA v.- IA 1 ,, ' , ______ , L:::!7":""'"''Ll .......,.,.r rt:t'-'=JIM:, (rti, LI .2,-,../ _,-. • , i *0 $10,1,\. 0 •/4 \ : —, 0 • , , - /,' \•'''' - '• ..." ' A ,, /. -- / IDE 6 i "••..:1-7,:,::•:,1.-1.., - • ,,le •1/, A ;,,,,,',, ,,' ,71:11k.....41414 itt 'OP :44.1- '1'Ir' • • • , . . ,:„. 2.,- ^ P.R , .,.--,.,... .z ....,_. .2--,------,, -1 .... 1161 l- 1.--. • =...„...„. •j......:nx • 1. .:L.\ '---.4•W,./. . ,./. pir,,,..„,\ ,.....•1 .. . „ . . .„,• .., --2- - 3"-- ,v., , • ,..,...,611:. 2 ,., L ;.,,,,,,'„-- `si)iii.1, ,. I . ...-'6‘,4, Aga ..4i. \vr, •:.-,' , ",:t\ 1\ / - ' ',., 1„:::, r".-.... -4.4 -0, . . . . ' X L ' ''• ' '". .A/ Pe/Are-UM ..,‘-.) falMitir—_. .....it 01-1. tit . . . i...1i.::.:.F.,..::::Elnii:-.=::.:::-Ivaz D'I.V:rt.. ...1 , • - ' • ;,-, i", '-:,',,,, .....- - ,e" .• AMP.;„•,,, .."'if 11. • /‘• 4•‘:;•,.;'''';,''''' i:';‘'''':s\.,.•2/, '''•''•.>.-,\\ -'-').:. V41 1 . :111&> •11t411114eit'•.‘': ,. '-'.•'`--' 1 ,.,, . , . ...... t'i .`.., i 111 - * 0 "- ' ' • a:1:•111Sii71:r2::'21:•::::•.:trcty.,5.7"`"" ' '. a. , ,_.1 . ,,,•• •.,..,, ,,, \ , ,,,./Aliii6.,,...,.N., 111, Tirvls. i. 0- so\ .‘. Vail.---- E iii:i iiiiii:Eiii:FEE:ii ir,t,‘;•.::,..-.- - ..41v.„: X,,,.-/-.-./„,„,,., .3, ‘,- „Y ' .„-py•-• 4,4 :- ,- , .j----. _.--.2 yr i" 411r Ilium \ Aviiiimg • .1:-.... -:. ,'" .". • ' • ' --• , -,„,.. ,.--).-y, ,..:., ..4650 ,, .,.,.. , 41.0. ,r 1. ib.,44 40 / '.7/.<./, 1......4111,*i.(:-. J.-4---Ii* --, 7'7 1''''• ,...:-. 40 .....'-1 .''''' 1 '•.0 , ?,,/, ,• in=1,7,1;34-.2;.i.;:t r,.r.-..v.7:1.:.•=.;!•-."- ,• "P„./ //(.. r• :::-::::::::11.zr.:7:.:,:ir.::.-7.,:..L.:11,11:E...;,,7:4:4:--' -..-•;--..'„.-,;V, ,• fit.<1°K --!'j %------.,' •.., / ....;., ,c,.' ;, ., - 7 - ,.. ..,' .‘ v.1.1p.k.-No.. • , 0..ey .. -•-r..z z lia, . MLA! i! lip,-)./,i\''-ii 7, '111.,,,,„,,„,!:Iv\, •••• •', 9,3 .___J. _V, , g • U.::::•=1;::::tr.:::1B.;*=,:=:.,.......,c-.•.. ,....,\ ---irp .-BLDG, •71', 1 :3 • '• - - i '',)/‘<,' . ',: * ,• . , '"'''-- ; '-,....t.e.,- ''/ -.461r, `--- gr::.:,.--_--rz.7...z.-:47...-..-::::,...,•-•..,":,-,;:: ,./--/,, •/. —, i- .,,,.::ii:;•ki:iFir,..........„.......::::,......-...7....,-. ,,.- - ,(yr ---s-s--...„ ,-, .,.. .:.,... ;„, : _,,,,,,A,,,,,,, 0.\„.., ,., re ,„,./..i•-:,,, .2, ,...,,,,,,A,, ..„.,„. . go ...,,,,,.....-.7. .V.--76.4.1-.. ...- . ......' 4 '.. Z 4.1:2Z.4.iltr4.::•::-..:•:°.=.v;.::.::,-.::::1'.1:1.,:. ., ,/ l.s...., . .,-------• Z tuD ........ ,• , . .. =:.,.......„;F:,..:liaili.ii...7.,.-.F.::::::_..,. ./. : y‘1,-...-.,-..„-... '.1,... .,0. ,i,"1(16 ":„.&,.. \ ks 0, 4,44,,.:::::,....,,;:,- .1:::, , . '..,„../;,*ttri, 1 rn,r. ,,,-,I 'WA. :-..,,,', ,,";:. ," !!". , \•• . x Q - ... ...4101, do,O, / . Va. ,.c ../.,.>A. ,..lotiii aria3 1; •no: ( •—i CC <ceg ,t • 4/\ \ t4, II'•..11in‘ni..... ,,,,, _ , 1 , • ,,,4 ..,'.,- :-._., ,,,, .,1----w.,/ ,: -_-_-- . /1 - •-/ ,0 4A 'Al, -1 ./i1.7-..x \ , TM';:zi:r a•. .:::'''''".:::''''.,,......... , ,,...... AEAOMIli I' . '.' .' '.9 :,..: r.:::::.,t1.-?....7.1-.::Errata•"---'••--PI”... .'00P40111.I,,4>-,--•.Nr..- '1// / \ ."Iti. '':vAsw" as'•,Y .-•''.••Iii -IV ITI\ 1.1' iiiir+khge.: / >- cc_ , . : • . :1, 1 •, .... low .3I .1', t ,., \ gliNie. ..:7. .1...a-k,-,.,:•"1•• 4 ,',.,'. •;:•. ..L,dat A .,./. k, so ttw , .• „\r LEGAL DESCRIPTION , ' .• r.?/lir__9114. . ;. 110Verdigr ‘,II...' /.. A• ''! I . / . '. •,ttr,0,1••0610-0.-...,i t.: 0:L. ....,."' 1 leastipi. . ..i, i) is• I ,. es . Ibrilikit, ) ,. ,•= I , ..„- ,.. iiiiiy.7=-i.c ;.,r v t , •t -, 11.A i •.- •.•...."' :1410 .34,...6.-a.m."1.404- , "it ts' tqt,.,i ...."11111141/10,7 , . .'' '• I .../.` . ipithw.,. ,_.., ;Lk- ..:,...,,,, ,,„ . •.., .. Lk. t_. _, ,,,,,. • , / ., . ' ,'-/ , ,,, - •„•,--•!...___-- '' i `-"' ti• , • 01, i via \ • / 4, * ' !/V/a/a*.• .---- ......,, ...MUM \•,..... tor i/ got cc ' tn.'', .? ye 00--,.. ..., •,•;,,,...... -• V:.., .... 4.t.,:.;,,, • - .• .4;,.., V , ...'I in *mv 1•. - N. ' ' ,1 / 1--/,‘ ,‘„, _ &b.1.. . ' .'--.,4 ig; • 01.11 fill ‘' -- -. , N / -•:- illibli. V ' '''WI ' '0' ' :',..J ,..:, i •‘‘M.,— crc; i ., 4.. • E . • . Apr , - kir.1 -.4 •i I - -Via ', •, I, , ....: \ '.. • ... N, 1 ,' 4.0" lap I , / , 41 Alb•' Jt..,.....Alioll .-r-effi .- ---• - •.• s -sly, ..c ,.i tik. ,, i 1,... /, .e. As'in......3..\ , -, 1. '. , • , - _. ., ..dioir.:.;_ , • -"II ' 1.4 . Iiii&a.galli MEIA . '.. ".-- . 1 '''• —4(1/4.....L...-1....„1,......,z,,-3„..... WAX" ;1,.... .. '; ' -..... -1- ipl.,_ - , , • .. , • . /44411 •,..,-aigo• ... =iv I N..„ • . ,.....•. __...„.... , ••• • 1 c . . -2•`...". 1-....: •-•• ll •- t 4:11,- ------- _--•,----- • ' '-,--- Nig -'--z..--'c,--.-----•---•--..---,,---_ .\---• •-t iiii ."';'• '.••.('`...'.:• 2-...c.. ' \••:..›.'''' : ; • •-•-------....., ,,.,,,, anait......._ ---- - ..-.-:-_--..- Htlii _ :: - :_, ,.,, __ _ ___- ____-'-"'•- •_ -.,:, ___, -.._...,,,___-_,_-_-__,,.- ___._._________________t______ ----.- • -:-_-_,• - %.,ii ;•,,,'•, ,,rs\ , \-,••\',:,_\ i-, • ' ---• '• ---,--2.-. - --- -=•-• ••-ij2__:_i -. ' , '------ --'''"'---,• - ---:-------i---- ---L--:jii:•'-- --;--17/ --11-:---'--- --------.7------:-----_71-1 --__-7--- '----_,," -•,, :•...,,- --7-• ., ,c.,..-'r • • \ L'''. --•-1 - , ' - - alliftialifi-k -, ----:----:-----1--.-----1------= ,-'---:-•-: ----:'-•,-'/EZION --.••• - • 2- ' •-- -•,-;-•,-' \L -.Nr•Tfi, C .„...„.... ..• -,....._....•:,,,, /7 „ . .......,„,.. ,.._____„.______ . .__.„. . , _...,, ___..., --r II- ,.......J , - , . ., . 1 ,. . . . - - I i . I --' . F.'"...... . k I - —1,, ,, • ..." ...-• ,. : 7 . _ 2 i •, ., . --- ,.... ). i s, \. • 7i 1..,.1 ;-,..Ae,.kZ,.,r.:.:.;'.t..,,,:A.• , =.-1.-ma,ze w. . .' -- 0 e -aG- • r.9.eeerur-i 1 / , - . , -, t- \• • •, qRri./Pb1 , / i liborwe-R.P..66.4rinIC4(1-T91C....t..) • \0dr.tt?."-';',,-,'••- ,\.- 're.14'iS' • • 6.„. .... .... - . 4. .4 . '.,t CASgosT !' eps,606. - - . .., . rgsyl.rt:7MLICaS,C.'"'SANE.c4....,A, OS4:-...,:;--....:..•-•kl. -..:1,:lot.:, - VI e..,--IUNIFE7-SpP,rie.11.1e... ' 1,.. ,.a't,, e.:„-A-1.0-ii.• i 0 rsi . .-...v.,-.4,---,.. vp.: ../.1.,;" t!...... 1 si;att.,.L 41 .-:,, 1 .;t-4 coNor-,--.,5 te...=es-h-o-er_s ette,c...6) ',4'‘' &Leo Hr. t7...x..,LA.s PC.,WEArtsLN mEr.wcs., ,../E.TE:riN gar,Gecrs4L 0.51/' ' tik* ' c".9.,.....e.A:5...,•••-•”*-1 .. Lo ----I r f, .. ---``...*1... ., .., • ^I:A. Val ,,,titikl 1 ite•Z f ,,' :MIK. 'v.' 10., , '''' ,II' A . • a s.- ',,s 1--f._ .,4_. Dr- - / $4\ki.-A:. - ''r 00,," ' - - \'"11111\till% .1' Ilk ' . • d V- - . / L.,!:mr..., .."-.--.' ,,; g-';•_': 1 l',0* --- VI ‘ FLoar,ori pL.A.NriNn(rsig) ,_ NM L.g 1 g -, #1_klow..44k- ,.... ,v) ..,;,:::,IltrizY 111114. - .,_#.4:145::*. .161 ..7„: N.ra.14.Pr.,,-ac.• 1,..k.,-. I. • x.... .. C* ' _• „ — A‘vittr .... , : -4,411,------a---V1---lk „a 4-** AEA- tali . • I,. U. ,..2A.i ...,, ..... ,.. „.,...,:,,, ...,,,..,!-; ...t.„,-c- .,..4.),,,.., E.../..c.EAN EaPc..14 -. • 1\ • %/NM MAPLE Z1;, tyfr lipkty.... .., .{‘..\\_,...,.. '' \ 014011111r4T3Lit....F....sei .,<<,. / • ' • 1 / .. ,•froggig , . • , • i 0 1114,4-1,c,...-Ag=e,00.vo-...,o o • 45".7")*Jrei rtgaMr...—.0 ',il- Airit,.. '• ., tl tel.-Whit C011i.reni\ • 3,0 I P.F.X.:Tt-4../..).4 ./ / '\ / 4..). .. ° AnAlltirrirr '4.y.., .. ..'.''.'.4.-'t,.. k i ISM .-•-•'" s GemcNV...TEAL ci) \ - 4.2.. '%;::-. '''''' -.-.. • ',Iro. 1°1" 1 k No s".."' ". 1 ' • L HOW( 3PP) ..,•,. ..., '6` 1•'-44%,t2 ' • '. I c 1244:9440,2,00.mcv...,4 ..... / -,._;:1•• _.*, los,,,, , ,,,.. , At.. •.,.. ,,:.• ... 4 7--..k; -' tititog . -,..,:: •i:;fr".-A ,.:,--,,. i -• :i...„;:k\ 7,„... , -,•.: . .• ,,-,4,,,t, •.. ' ', , / ''1: .;:::.:3:.-,.„- '-1, ,,,-*-7 ' - .i. .1;•it, - : I ,, ASE..4..E.A.( r,9) ... • .1 II / ' "•' ,.....;.:....,„,,,,,, .L.;,,p.?;:z.,,,, -171Z.: - Vti...„:„...,, /-. ...• gelk,. \ 't ., 16.. -.44-.4' • s. - A .4 4:-.1 ,71:/7.' -• ...,- I. ''S ....41.14:7‘.4k.*Mr' .„, \V "Z'... PIC ' •i' 1 :-.4.'''' 1,•:1:- . I OW-lie...42,i z we mactz.1 ve,..„...i . .• Sit,6*,521,,,4,... A::? *,e3 411S::' e'?,,..• • 0,46 , . tir‘ , VII— ,,-- , ----,,,, .,--_(—,..,...—:4_: IAF,74N, Elrv's.„,, ,.. f-H•azHe••••••a.- I-x.560.1.a ig$ -. '- '''' ''') . .i.4.,:' ._ -:•`:'1, .tissaisii) .1,,,Tory. .,,.C.• - " \ Fl....1.‘c.s..Nc.P.."..P...E.ct....,H1. • •*,. t.f____•7\ 111E\ # '‘..i/'' . ''''''.: -,-.1;11 ItkPrrillr7:4,...It le •vt:\.*15 'e ,:, - . „ . ,_ .. •,..;,, , , lir It 1 -I . Vge 44,4,4•13 ..r-INA-e- F -- , -• ,10' • • 1 11111...r---•••'41. I I.. ,,..f,7.-3,,till.f..1.1.12,stN.f..4Corm • 1 ''''N . .5' \ , 0 . ,/- ;?..., S . 4,12,,:?1/11 .,,,-,,,:it ,. „ . ...,..., -z...7-1. COX-11111- .. .:.:. attr, , o'„, ,,:::,,,:::yi.,- ...•-1 ,'4'••• . _ - . ik • , ‘.., 1161411111101 1 .„.....;. ..:ArlitiiAki - . 1.... ',ts k ‘'I‘r es' !J.-471r , ,,,,,td, .,,. . , 1.-3■•...4Ha ill t\ 4-L.„,,,,..-.., . . . . ,, / • .,„,,a'r— E.,•fr •,,, A •,.. ---,..7-2tigAiiiiit __...,„,s..A e,s, .;',V, ilk •._...........,. • . .. ._ . ...: 14111A;:-.`' •• •,-'''''...a.l. : "- ....,• .:‘ ''.1‘• 74tetgal7 -01 ''I1 ..,-011- •.,./ i 44^' 5r^-,WS ...i,..0„,. "-..... 1.-..••• ..." l (V1 "•,...,Il 1,,........• . .- 711/ NI . • .* N .,1041:441,* , ;Awl 4.,;',1' %,..,P . ‘AP• 6 ,I,V3 t \ li 4. i ilat. I At Y i -' T. . iii , el lg. 1 Si. ct 1 ,... kia it ' - A, . ,t- t .„,,, 1 , .. ,•• 'N. i ' go - , ''''. ..• ' i' ko 1 -,' 1.111a- low,.. N. , ••r•- .e... gragivirigi.... NI- :1_,,,,,,rri.:,,,,37.4 .c.'F...C,L. r-ver-t2..m...-=vea_- - Qi .... disuidigv ..... ,,. • -...., --..el...,i3 4.413Z64-' • IK.'„!..., Illr"-1111 ',' . os 9 . -, :a.:Wirl• i': • '.---;•-•"4? po.-1.1:3- ---.',-1-12-11atili, \ ....-401111.thr- ...,,,, --------/ ........ .•••- • ..!.!: ileigesir. ' • " " .',..4. % 11111,-M.A -a ,-,,;.? .' ), ,.- ' , '14'.1,,. ,., ..,. ; --.0, -,,- 1.y.:4_, , - ,,;, ..•, - % 1 1 a .4,.., I•..,p, , ,,• c. .1:,...,,, ... , ...: ,,Ns,,,:t,. ' ‘1?°` . •• e•fs..., -, a. F.FP 4.11111....ing...Angb. M. .411111%.4111.1k , '.., ,.. , .. ...dllh.....AIIIIIIIIIhgl. ..aIIIIIIN -_ ._. - .■01111... .AC ,. _ , . - •-•-ri...,.. Iir 4 .b --: ..."••••••,-__-:/---___ ------7-Z_____' __ (1• '7?-'4.: -. "------__ E.....1-R.Ici-vez.E.r.r.H.4 -r= - 64- - --- [--.,. -- - . - -= _, - --- ._ ---______----__ --- , _c:_os,...— --, 1.1- -----_ - ' ., •1/2\;. G., ' '4 • 4' —1---4-- — `i;:),4 A i - • 1- "•'? — • '..- - 2• ( - • . , • i N E , 3R0 9T , . ___ __..„ __. • , I \ s ----4 , , . ti CITY OF RENTON BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor Ronald G. Nelson, Director October 16, 1987 Canada-America Associates c/o Centron 3025 112th Avenue N.E, ' ' Belleiiie, WA 98004 Subject: Environmental Review Committee Decision SA-082-87 Dear Sir or Madam: Enclosed please find a signed copy of the recent threshold determination of the Environmental Review Committee that was referred to in our previous correspondence. If you have any questions please call. ce yours, Donald. K. Erickson, AICP.,. . Zoning Administrator DKE:plp:p1021 • • • 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE AND REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON SCOPE OF EIS FILE NUMBER(S) : ECF-074-87, SA-082-87 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Application for Site Approval of Lexington Ridge PROPONENT: CENTRON LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Located between N.E. 3rd Street and N.E. 4th Street, west of Edmonds Avenue N.E. and east of Bronson /N.E. 3rd Street intersection. EIS REQUIRED: The lead agency has determined this proposal is likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is required under RCW 43 .21C.030 (2) (c) and will be prepared. An environmental checklist or other materials indicating likely environmental impacts can be' reviewed at our offices. LEAD AGENCY: Environmental Review Committee, City of Renton The lead agency has identified the following preliminary. areas for discussion in the EIS: Natural Environment: 1. Earth: including geology, soils, topography, and erosion; 2 . Water: including surface water movement, runoff absorption, and public water supplies; Building Environment: 1. Land Use: including relationship to existing land use plans and estimated population, aesthetics, recreation, transportation, and public services; 2. Transportation: vehicular traffic, pedestrian • circulation, parking; SCOPING: Agencies, affected tribes, and members of the public are 4. invited to comment on the scope of the EIS. You may comment on alternatives, mitigation measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses or other approvals that may be required. Your comments must be submitted in , writing and received before November 2, 1987. Responsible Official: Environmental Review Committee -- % Don Erickson, Zoning Administrator Building & Zoning Department 200 Mill'Avenue S. Renton, WA 98055 APPEAL: You may appeal this determination of significance in writing pursuant to RMC 4-3016 accompanied by a $75.00 appeal fee no later than 5:00 p.m. October 26, 1987, to: Renton Hearing Examiner % City Clerk 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 City of Renton .Determination of S:Luaififcance an Request for Comments on Scope of EIS Page 2 You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact the above office to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. PUBLICATION DATE: October 12, 1987 DATE OF DECISION: October 7, 1987 SIGNATURES: Ro 1 G. Nelson M. ,.pring :41 pm- Building and Zoning Director P. icyD. elo t Director R chard . H ug n Public Works Di ctor NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION RENTON,WA AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION The mittee (ERC)has issued eatDetermination al Review o Signif- icance for the following project: Audrey Benner CENTRON(LEXINGTON RIDGE) ,being first duly sworn on oath states Application for site approval to construct 360 multi-family rental units in approximate- that he/she is the Chief Clerk of the ly 15 buildings on a 13.4 acre parcel togeth- er with recreation building and associated parking and landscaping. Property located VALLEY DAILY NEWS between N.E. 3rd Street and N.E. 4th Street west of Edmonds Ave. N.E. and east • Kent Edition • Renton Edition • Auburn Edition of Bronson/N.E.3rd Street intersection.File Nos:ECF-074-87,SA-082-87. n Daily newspapers published six (6) times a week.That said newspapers Further informationintheregarding thisd Zonacting is available in Building and Zoning are legal newspapers and are now and have been for more than six Department, Municipal Building, Renton, months prior to the date of publication referred to,printed and published Washington, 235-2540. Agencies, affected tribes and members of the public are invit- in the English language continually as daily newspapers in Kent, King ed to comment on the scope of the EIS County,Washington.The Valley Daily News has been approved as a legal Comments must be submitted to the City of newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for Renton on amber 2, 1 must b. Any appeal off t thhe ERC action be King County. filed with the Renton Hearing Examiner by 5:00p.m.October 26, 1987. Published in the Valley Daily News Octo- The notice in the exact fora ,attached,was published in the Kent Edition ber 12, 1987.R2562 , Renton Edition , Auburn Edition , (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period.The annexed notice a Notice of &ivironmental Determination was published on October 12, 1987 R2562 The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $ 21'S2 Subscribed and sworn to before me this 19tbday of Oc t o per 1987 Notary Public for the State of Washington, residing at Federal Way, King County, Washington. VDN#87 Revised 11/86 /4 NotEnvDet/dskl Pub101287 NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (.� RENTON, WA /•,---- - \ - The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has issued a Determination of- Significance for the following project: CENTRON (LEXINGTON RIDGE) Application for site approval to construct 360 multi-family rental units in approximately 15 buildings on a 13.4 acre parcel - together with recreation building and associated parking and landscaping. Property located between N.E. 3rd Street- and N.E. 4th Street west of Edmonds Ave. • N.E. and east of Bronson/N.E. 3rd Street intersection. File Nos. : ' ECF-074- 87, SA-082-87. Further information regarding this action is available in the . Building and . Zoning Department, Municipal Building,' Renton, Washington, 235-2540. . Agencies, affected tribes and members of the public are invited to comment on the scope of the EIS Comments must be submitted to the City of Renton by 5:00 p.m. on November 2, 1987. ' Any appeal of the ERC action must be filed with the Renton Hearing , Examiner by 5:00 p.m. , October 26, 1987. Published: October 12, 1987 NOTICE • ,As VECLA .i:Tr. .. , A. P+' 1 N APPLICATION NO. ECF-074-87, SA-082-87 APPLICANT CENTRON (LEXINGTON RIDGE) PROPOSED ACTION APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT 360 MULTI-FAMILY RENTAL UNITS IN APPROXIMATELY 15 BUILDINGS ON A 13.4 ACRE PARCEL TOGETHER WITH RECREATION BLDG. AND ASSOCIATED PARKING AND LANDSCPII GENERAL LOCATION AND/OR ADDRESS N. E. 3RD STREET AND N.E. 4TH STREET WEST OF EDMONDS AVE . N .E. AND EAST OF BRONSON/N .E. 3RD STREET INTERSECTION . POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (E.R.C.) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION X DOES DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT • II WILL .� WILL NOT BE REQUIRED. THE CITY OF RENTON WILL NOT ACT ON THIS PROPOSAL FOR 15 DAYS FROM THE DATE BELOW. COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY NOVFMRFR 7, 1GR7 AN APPEAL OF THE. ABOVE DETERMINATION MAY BE FILED WITH THE RENTON HEARING EXAMINER BY 5:00 P.M., OCTOBER 12, 1987' FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT AT 235-2550. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION. %e CITY OF RENTON ta),E' BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor Ronald G. Nelson, Director October 8, 1987 Canada-America Associates C/O Centron 3025 112th Ave. N.E. Bellevue, WA 98004 RE: Application for Site Plan Approval of Lexington Ridge 360 multi-family rental units, files ECF-074-87, SA-082-87. Dear Sirs: This letter is to inform you that the Environmental Review Committee completed their review of the environmental impacts of your Site Plan Approval request for property located between NE 3rd Street, and NE 4th Street, West of Edmonds Ave. NE and east of the Benson/NE 3rd Street intersection. The Committee on October 7, 1987 decided to issue a Determination of Significance because of unanswered questions regarding the following issues: . 1. Whether the applicants have provided sufficient information on erosion control, noting that 240,000 cu. yd.s of material are proposed to be removed fn the site? 2 . Whether 60% impervious surfaces (or approximately 8.0 acres) • will affect the recharge of the City's aquifer, given the site's present high percolation rate? 3. Whether sufficient measures have been taken to address recreational needs of approximately 475 new people? 4. Whether the accumulative impacts of this project and others in the immediate area, including ERADCO, McMahon, etc. on , traffic, and community services have been taken into consideration? 5. Whether the applicant's AM and Pm peak hour trip generation figures are reasonable and whether the AWVT figures are correct. for this type of project? Would PUD figures be more appropriate for a project of this scale? Because the Environmental Review Committee issued . a Determination of Significance, an " official scoping notice is being circulated. There is a required twenty-one (21) day comment period during which comments are solicited from various agencies, jurisdictions or individuals who may have an interest in the Committee's decision. The comment period will end November 1, 1987. Following the end of the comment period, the City will finalize it's selection of 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 / -- Canada-America As :iates October 9, 1987 Page 2 appropriate consulting firms to prepare the required Environmental Impact Statement on the project and coordinate the final selection with the applicant. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, please call our office at 235-2540 and ask for myself or Jeanette Samek-McKague. Fo Envircf en4al -rview Committee, Donald K. Erickson, • ICP Zoning Administrator DKE: 5, r¢ • �$ 0., CITY OF RENTON ..IL BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor Ronald G. Nelson, Director October 8, 1987 Colin Quinn 3025 112th Ave. N.E. Bellevue, WA 98004 RE: Application for Site Plan Approval of Lexington Ridge 360 multi-family rental units, files ECF-074-87, SA-082-87. Dear Sirs: This letter is to inform you that the Environmental Review Committee completed their review of the environmental impacts of your Site Plan Approval request for property located between NE 3rd Street, and NE 4th Street, West of Edmonds Ave. NE and east of the Bronson/NE 3rd Street intersection. The. Committee on October 7, 1987 decided to issue a Determination of Significance because of unanswered questions regarding the following issues: 1. Whether the applicants have provided sufficient information on erosion control, noting that 240,000 cu. yd.s of material are proposed to be removed form the site? - 2. Whether 60% impervious surfaces (or approximately 8. 0 acres) will affect the recharge of the City's aquifer, given the site's present high percolation rate? 3 . Whether sufficient measures have been taken to address recreational needs of approximately 475 new people? 4. Whether the accumulative impacts of this project and others in the immediate area, including ERADCO, McMahon, etc. on . traffic, and community services have been taken into consideration? 5. Whether the applicant's AM and Pm peak hour trip generation figures are reasonable and whether the AWVT figures are correct for this type of project? Would PUD figures be more appropriate for a project of this scale? Because the Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Significance, an official scoping notice is being circulated. There is a required twenty-one (21) day comment period during which comments are solicited from various agencies, jurisdictions or individuals who may have an interest in the Committee's decision. The comment period will end November 1, 1987. Following the end of the comment period, the City will finalize it's selection of 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 Colin Quinn October 9, 1987 Page 2 appropriate consulting firms to prepare the required Environmental Impact Statement on the project and coordinate the final selection with the applicant. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, please call our office at 235-2540 and ask for myself or Jeanette Samek-McKague. or th- E ,viro al --vie , .mmittee, Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator DKE:cs I.T MEMORANDUM DATE: September 20, 1988 TO: Don Erickson FROM: Gary Norris • SUBJECT: Transportation Section -- Lexington Ridge E.I.S. I reviewed the subject document and offer the following comments: 1. Figure 17 Existing traffic volumes shown on North 3rd west of Sunset Blvd. are in error. Actual two-way volume is 23,000 vehicles per day. 2. Table 2 Existing L.O.S. at NE 3rd and Bronson Ave. NE during the AM cannot be realized because of the extreme queues of vehicles from North 3rd & Sunset. This should b.e discussed. L.O.S. analysis should be presented and carried through the document for NE 3rd & Edmonds Ave. NE. 3. Transit System There was no discussion of the problems transit presently experiences operating in the Bronson Way Corridor:— This should be documented in the text and solutions proposed. 4. Figure 18 Y Extrapolated volumes for North 3rd are in error. See note 1. 5. Table 4 L.O.S. for NE 3rd/Edmonds should be presented. 6. Figure 19 1r 7�r ;. See Note 4 and Note 1. ' ` . 7. Table 7r a) See Note 5 • Don Erickson Page 2 September 20, 1988 b) L.O.S. analysis should be provided for the 3 alternative scenarios. 8. How does the project propose creating additional accident experience at the intersection of North 3rd & Sunset Blvd. North? 9. How does the project anticipate mitigating the unacceptable L.O.S. at North 3rd/Sunset and NE 3rd/Jefferson? The existing signal at NE 3rd/Jefferson operates on demand; therefore, .retiming is not the solution. Proposed solutions should be discussed. in the main text. We need more specificity in the description of the mitigating measures. Is it feasible to accomplish these measures? Overall , proposed mitigation needs to be discussed in much greater depth. All in alll , the report needs to present accurate facts and suggest specific workable mitigating measures. GAN:ad GAN134 •� PLANNING DIVISION C$ ® CITY OF RENTON CITY OF RENTON "LL PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT D EC 5 1988 CI Earl Clymer, Mayor E C 2 O V 2 Design/Utility Engineering MEMORANDU EWMUE DATE: December 1, 1988 DEC O 2 1988 TO: Larry Springer Wiiructiv FROM: Don Monaghan�a, --- By . SUBJECT: Draft Environmental Impact Statement LEXINGTON RIDGE APARTMENTS Dear Larry: I have reviewed the above referenced draft E.I.S. , and have the following comments: 1. The E.I.S. acknowledges that they are in Zone 2 of the aquifer protection area. It does not however, mention that it is directly adjacent to Zone 1. As a result of its location, the staff will be critical on its evaluation of the project and its required . infrastructure. 2. It will be required that the project analyze the downstream sanitary sewer system to ensure that the lines are adequate to serve this project. It appears we have some substandard lines immediately downstream, and these lines will need to be brought up to minimum standards in order to provide service to the project. 3. A fire flow determination will need to be made by the department and an analysis prepared to document the evaluation of the required fire protection for the project. Further, it will be required, as was acknowledged in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, that the project will need to upgrade the City's water system in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, to provide service and the necessary fire flow. 4. The Draft E. I.S. does not do an adequate job of detailing what elements of work will be accomplished in conjunction with the project to connect various trail systems. For example, there are sidewalks missing on Bronson Way N.E. between the most northerly entrance to the project and N.E. 3rd St. Also, there are no sidewalks on N.E. 3rd Street adjacent to the project and west of Bronson Way N.E. to Sunset Blvd. N.E. Therefore, it is suggested that as part of their requirements, sidewalks be 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2631 Larry Springer December 1, 1988 Page Two installed from the westerly terminus of the Brighton Ridge sidewalk improvements to Sunset Blvd. N.E. on N.E. 3rd St. , and on Bronson Way N.E. from N.E. 3rd St. to the most northerly property line of the project. 5. The Draft E.I.S. does not adequately address the transportation issues. Particularly, Bronson Way N.E.. southbound and the intersection of Bronson Way N.E. and N.E. 3rd St. Besides issues of capacity, this roadway and intersection also raise concerns regarding pedestrian and vehicle safety. In order to mitigate these issues, it is anticipated that Bronson Way N.E. will need to be re-constructed from N.E. 3rd St. to the east. This re-construction will attempt to bring the roadway into compliance with current design standards. Although the Draft E.I.S. considers three alternatives, it does not consider an alternative of lower density than the preferred alternate except for the "do nothing" alternate. This site and the associated impacts of the transportation issues, mandate that an alternative of lower density be considered. It would be my recommendation therefore, that this project be put on hold until an adequate mitigation program for the transportation issues is presented and evaluated and approved by staff. . Further, the evaluation of a lower density alternative is a reasonable request for a project requiring mitigation of major issues. If you require additional information or wish to discuss the matter further, please advise. LEXEIS.DGM:mf MEMORANDUM DATE: September 20, 1988 TO: Don Erickson FROM: Gary Norris SUBJECT: Transportation Section -- Lexington Ridge E.I.S. . I reviewed the subject document and offer the following comments: 1. Figure 17 Existing traffic volumes shown on North 3rd west of Sunset Blvd. are in error. Actual two-way volume is 23,000 vehicles per day. 2. Table 2 Existing L.O.S. at NE 3rd and Bronson Ave. NE during the AM cannot be realized because of the extreme queues of vehicles from North 3rd & Sunset. This should be discussed. L.O.S. analysis should be presented and carried through the document for NE 3rd & Edmonds Ave. NE. 3. Transit System There was no discussion of the problems transit presently experiences operating in the Bronson Way Corridor, -. This should be documented in the text and solutions proposed. 4. Figure 18 Extrapolated volumes for North 3rd are in error. See note 1. 5. Table 4 L.O.S. for NE 3rd/Edmonds should be presented. 6. Figure 19 See Note 4 and Note 1. ;` 7. Table 7 ���;. �._ a) See Note 5 .. , Don Erickson Page 2 September 20, 1988 b) L.O.S. analysis should be provided for the 3 alternative scenarios. 8. How does the project propose creating additional accident experience at the intersection of North 3rd & Sunset Blvd. North? 9. How does the project anticipate mitigating the unacceptable L.O.S. at North 3rd/Sunset and NE 3rd/Jefferson? The existing signal at NE 3rd/Jefferson operates on demand; therefore, retiming is not the solution. Proposed solutions should be discussed in the main text. We need more specificity in the description of the mitigating measures. Is it feasible to accomplish these measures? Overall , proposed mitigation needs to be discussed in much greater depth. All in alll , the report needs to present accurate facts and suggest specific workable mitigating measures. GAN:ad GAN134 r r -7 PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON ID EC 1 1988 R Ecr rytr o'—F-j..I l T oEN L6 � OdC nEcz 198E BUILDING DIVISION November 29 , 1988 City of Renton Building & Zoning Dept. Attn: Environmental Review Committee 200 Mill Ave So . ' Renton, Wa 98055 Re: Lexington Ridge - Proposed Apartments 360 unit Multi-family Development Gentlemen: ' After reviewing the draft environmental impact statement of the above proposed project , Puget Power has the following comments : • • 1) Negotiations between Puget Power' s Right of Way Department and the developer must ensue prior to permitting any construction within the Puget Power right of way adjacent to the project . 2) Mitigating measures as mentioned on pages 3-19 will have . to be addressed and steps taken to resolve these issues . Sii cerely, � t CW, . Doug CY�rbin Supervisor Customer Service Engineering • The Energy Starts Here Puget Sound Power&Light Company 620 South Grady Way P.O. Box 329 Renton,WA 98057-0329 (206)255-2464 Washington StateWI Duane s.rentson Department of Transportation Secretary of Transportation District 1 f 15325 S.E.30th Place Bellevue,Washington 98007-6568 (206)562-4000 November 28, 1988 City of Renton Community Development Department Planning Division 200 Mill Ave. S Renton, WA 980.55 SR 405 DEIS Comments Lexington Ridge Apartments Dear Sir: This' letter is in response to the DEIS review we received from the City of Renton. A development of this size and location will have an impact on I-405. The. Department feels that the Transportation Section should include LOS analysis for the intersections for I-405 northbound ramps/Sunset Blvd. NE and at SR 169/Sunset Blvd. NE/Bronson Way N. - Thank you for the opportunity to comment on proposal. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Chuck Gleich at 562-4105. . Sincerely, JERRY B. SCHUTZ Development Planning Engineer CG:cmi PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON , NOV 3 0 1988 Ec iv GIA/F :hristine Gregoire • 414 r I;br • , 7��?Ei�4XXXXNNXXXxxx ,I'; i Director 'Y 4'1,R; '''� STATE Of WASIIINGTON • DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY • A'Iail cu,p PV-11 • Olympia, W.rdringmn 9850.1-87II • (206) 459-6()0() . • • November 29, 1988 • PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON --1 . Mr. Don Erickson, Zoning Administrator DEC 1 1988 City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South E C E Q U 1E -J Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mr. Erickson: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft envi- ronmental impact statement (DEIS) for the construction. of the Lexington Ridge Apartments for Centron. From the information supplied in the DEIS it appears that no permits/approvals are required from the Department of Ecology for this proposal and, therefore, we have no jurisdiction. If you have any questions, please call me at (206) 459-6020. Sincerely, • _DvAlQ;,0 • Donald J. Bales Environmental Review Section DJB: . 1411 ittor iza6),.0 0.0 OF r oP � tip United States Department of the Interior 011:- FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE o M.,a �B 2625 Parkmont Lane SW Bldg B Olympia, Washington 98502 206/753-9440 FTS 434-9440 November 30, 1988 PLANNING CITY OF RENTONDIVISION DEC 1 1988 City of Renton ,. ECEVED .0 Department of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 RE: Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Lexington Ridge Apartments Dear Mr. Springer: We have received and reviewed the referenced Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Based on information available to us at this time, it appears that the proposed project would have little impact on fish and wildlife resources of primary concern to the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). However, we offer the following comments. There is long-term evidence that flood frequency and intensity has increased in most drainage basins and subbasins within the Puget Sound area (King County Flood Awareness 88' Symposium, November 1, 1988, Bellevue, Washington). A contributing ,factor has been development in these basins, particularly the lower portion of these watersheds where encroachment has occurred onto the floodplain. The Cedar River supports important anadromous fish runs (i.e. , the largest sockeye run in the 48 contiguous United States) . Storm events which cause flooding adversely effect some of the runs by scouring spawning areas. Because the proposed development will produce additonal runoff that will ultimately ' enter the lower Cedar River, we recommend the sponsor consider and implement state-of-the-art means to attentuate stormwater discharge and to maintain water quality of this stormwater (i.e. , filter out concentrations of oil, grease, nitrates, phosphates, heavy metals, sediment, etc. prior to discharge). We recognize that this concern has been addressed in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, but want to emphasize that whatever the system(s) used, that it is the best design available. This would ensure that the sponsor, to the fullest extent possible, has minimized the cumulative impacts from flooding on anadromous fish in the lower Cedar River. It should be noted that the proposed project may be subject to permits for which we have review responsibilities. Accordingly, our comments do not preclude an additional and separate evaluation by the Service, pursuant to the. Fish and Wildlife. Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661, et seq.) or other relevant 41111 4111, a statutes. In review of permit applications, the Service may concur, with or without stipulations, or object to the proposed work, depending on specific construction practices which may impact fish and wildlife resources. In the event that such permits do become necessary, we would encourage the project sponsor to contact Tim Bodurtha at the above phone/adddress prior to permit application. We may be able to give guidance on design criteria which will facilitate the permit-review process. We appreciate notification of this proposed project and the opportunity to comment on its potential impact on fish and wildlife resources. Sincerely. CAL:4149112*/;9, Gwill Ging Acting Field Supervisor cc: BIA EPA NMFS WDE WDF WDW CITY OF RENTON • "LL POLICE DEPARTMENT • Earl Clymer, Mayor Alan L. Wallis, Chief PLANNING DIVISION MEMORANDUM CITY OF RENTON December 1, 1988 D DEC 2 1988 ID ECIEEIVE To • Don Erickson, Zoning Administrator From : Sergeant Rick Stoddard, Police Department Re • Lexington Ridge Apartments, Environmental Impact Statement The following are concerns and recommendations of the police department. 1. Pedestrian Safety. Because of the added population to the immediate area resulting from the proposed development, we recommend hard surfaced walkways on the north side of N.E. 3rd between Edmonds Ave. N.E. and Sunset Blvd No., also on the So. side of N.E. 4th from Edmonds Ave. N.E. to Bronson N.E., and Bronson N.E. to N.E. 3rd. We also recommend that the interior of the complex have pedestrian walkways. 2. Construction Noise Complaints. - Due to the close proximity of existing apartment complexes, Church and day care center, we would recommend that construction hours on Saturdays be restricted to 8:00 AM to ' 6:00PM and that no construction be allowed on Sundays. 3. Emergency Response. Because of the difficulty in locating specific buildings and apartments, we recommend that large maps of the complex be posted at all entrances. Further that each building identifier be at least 12 inches in height, be of reflective and contrasting color and, be conspicuously placed on the building to be seen from all angles of approach. Individual apartment numbers be placed on the exterior, to be seen when approaching the building. 4. Tracking of debris on the roadway That a wheel washing system be utilized to eliminate tracking of mud and debris onto surfaced roadways during construction. 5. Individual apartment security We recommend that all exterior entrances be well lighted and doors equipped with a dead bolt locking system. 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 4. CITY OF RENTON FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU • Earl Clymer, Mayor Fire Marshal: Glen G. Gordon Chief: A. Lee Wheeler MEMORANDUM DATE: November 2, 1988 TO: Larry Springer - Policy Development Administrator FROM: Glen G. Gordon - Fire Marshal Mi. SUBJECT: Draft Environmental Impact Statement • Lexington Ridge Apartments • Larry: Thank you for the opportunity to review the above-mentioned EIS. The following issues should be corrected or reexamined to maintain accuracy within this document: 1. Page 3-55, Paragraph 2, should be corrected to read "...by 3 minutes", rather than 30 seconds. 2. Page 3-55, Paragraph 4, "...city population of 85,360." This should be reexamined. I believe it is closer to 35,000 - 40,000. 3. Page 3-55, Paragraph 7, "The 4,000 gpm fire flow available at the site exceeds the 3,500 gpm required for the project (Dodds Engineering, Inc." The required fire flow cannot be calculated until a site plan has been submitted. Therefore, this information should be stricken at this time. Due to the expanse of this complex, alternate fire department access routes should be established. GGG:mbt • 200 Mill Avenue South - Rentnn Wacti;nne..:, 04ACC _ I IC' •N1r . • ' —---------1/..,,,-,. - , ..., ...‘,..,, _-_1.., 15; / \ - / • ... •• 8 r'sgrst""''''' 1171:1 135.050,F..rr. -1-- 10. .11' It ,,,P•..„.-.1-t• i.41 La'''.'ii-Nii"4:g: . ... i,,,,F ,-g,sv , 1,-. , , _T,. / , >././' ...,.?;,/'/:;li-''„'''' --.1--,--....__ . • \ . -'I ,.' • ..' / -] 1 V.I.= 'n0r..,,-, """'''". -.-; /4,,t6t.•ILIC ; ' - 2' .., , , . •.. F...7,--• .': -. - . ---. , , ,,.2. , ,, :•finWt;. tr0,,,,,,,,,,,, „.;r,,...,.... 4.5i '• ,,,,-,.Irj , .4-,••• I.-2 ' I itina gi';',c4: gi4 g''....= =Al rusa 1211211 Los.rt. •25 mrrsacsa ..=,,.. 4,, :-•fr,,kc,-, r - ')---- ,, ",„4-, • ,- •- • . , -t.--11..._i_‘_17 1 , _.,,___.' r, /2,,, 1... 2,,i -.(.2.''''/':/11' , I.\. '_,':.,..::,.z.t,:i,,,e,,,,,z7:::rt..,';,1,'.... ...... _.„.„_:/,\.,,_,.:,L, ..,,,,,,,.'_..1-___.:____.-' ,.,„•/ _./,,11--_,/r,'. , ...,'...,..c....,. . :::----1. ' `r / 51221:215.5 12152.512222: 2.5.5-22.22.5,2122, 5 .".• ' ,,, 0251..55 ..4 SITE INFORMATION ...„:„,. '''' ti2:I'll 1-1-'' IIE --',Q ili,I a-. / ii"- , ,....,..,_, ;.7. - -,,1:-. ,,,j - \ SITE STATISTICS •' .I.VH•74'-' ''' 7._,..74rir•-: o/Z• „. _• ; --•'r---`c,l'c, ' --- P.'"1-.3,--z0. ,ce •. . ' '.?,- /--.4 ( -..-7--,---- : 1 ! . . i . ...);', /,.--1 :-‘ _ ,,, OIVOkri., - f.k -,....,,•, d'Ir z`q AN § VICINITY MAP .) .., • .• . 6 . , :. ,.. •,..--- / :''-':2-'.', ''';;':--:.'. ''' - r•E.:;F:1•2"7!,:i•71:‘..E;S:".q="''•''''''“""••""' Iir. •lii / ' / / ,-S. \ r.gr.«...:.t....:T.. ::. ,'..Y.1,r,,.. I ' .-' ('` *•, ' , ,.. ..,, ';.=';:.," ,..,, ,.- $ / 4 ,......_ is\ -...„ ---,---.,-.---: F:,,.....„.,:.::„......,....„..q , ... A ‘•=.1.:40:4 . :71%F .....i§i, /. ) - 4 . ' ' . ' ' --- ' ' -.2.7•-:::,1% - ----__\ - . ., • 1-..,-,...,-,--,..,,,,..,--..zir, • , _,..t...--- . --. •---i--7-/7 1" ,,..; it . , '• fel ' ,,., , . ' '.•-• , . :ii co • 3 F.1...„L•T°:TI,.17:7.r:.:`°:::.,17,:::.-.::,-.:,z.;:r..-=',--.. ---..---4 .. 'i. ' .. .-.. '1../,'1 -- - - gg§6 -,.Z'k.'..,,‘1.^,-..*,, ' ' ; i ' 1''s : "1„...„..../, /___ . , .411kAti v.:- , .=.1, I*1\ .1 -,1/"--''' / ' --. ; '' - •.1 --.• los vit ' • 14 1 .....111..t - /. '„,, .11. , , ' 1 .' :7'1,.FiF.-1.51;:!:::...::::.=:..x:it:::;14117.... ,•• ,<`'4,- •: 2.-/ :-,,,/-7. -,`---11 lilt ii.' ' ; .• . '1" ,'vs\ I 7 - k • . ..6 •;! -----------____ ti!._ , L•-•::—:..::::`,.;r:;;;;".,...,............„,„,..... / '1./‹.°4',•• ' ',':'/'',... / '/74\ --AI** siPb- 00 . , -_ ,0, u,s-% - - _ -.. :'''. V-. i -...:....,.;1:3,,vr.:1-2.:7:::":1....„..........--. / I\ •„, , --, ,-.",; ,.. / ?,• #11111V , . , i ,s, . . - „ ik iii Irma ,3 .--...,.,.........-—,....,.--.......- / ., >. il - .-,...\,\koolit drON I . 1 ...1:,"i'.7°.:.'"°.1"1.7.;'""'•'''•`"`•""''`•'"""'''• . . , , ',,• ,/,' „.,5‘,_, .,‘,',.., / •C.,3" Oman L•-.•i 1\ \F .r'''" - • / - _ ---__, ...,_sellimillie '''•:' ...' ., ' l'. t:L.z:.:,..•z4:7,;-:::z..;::°/;°,:*::..„..-..- /' ''''''. , .\;•\C' .../55`4iLlitallii11.4 71).,, . ' ..'"-..' '61...C-..P 104-..... 1111.1.111 ..., • ••• ;-A.-- i • r •: ,, z /< -,,,, 't.!--\ ,, .>•',/ iipnrs. - 1 -_-:„._. :,..1:.,......,,....:,:,_.....,..„:„.:............,...., / i.,?•. -,,,•. , „' .,A,.-,.,.'. . t.*, .. . ...„, ... ' ,..).„...0'. ... i ..1 .4.,41 ow. tivi.. ww 1•,-1._,._ : 0 , .......,..........,..,...............„..„.......„... .. • , , .,,.\\,,„ ,../ •4.:-_,•,,,, • -,414111V1., . , __.. , . - . ...• - , (1) 1.,got i 1: ,, ' • •..,' ,*'•-: •••" ''''• to 'tiii"L''''::::3i'`'::::`':iiiiii:5,ii:"...:`F.E.....,,. ' • '19' )''''//r' \'''4, - /.-• Ne# ' .' '', .„-•4._-.1 w ' , ; 1 -\ / 7 • 55,..1 s , , , . \1 •"0,' '/;j; .,• ,i ,„, sil:/ . ,,,, v , „› .4..... .,•`•'',' t.„4riggrrl'i,.. ..''", ,---"•„A\. me . .,, ., ..,,,,Soolliiir07—;, , . .. .,. , C) ---__ , F.7.:17•71"7.177:: i1F.:1"7:.L:';'7.'',.:‘;''-‘... , ,. • ".' ''''',,••'. ,,'" % •F /./`.. ' it,,, •- •••••, ' l.., :••*,,..,•.,:"•111,`;• ,,,.. ,r 0,4. , ,.• ,..:::-. ,./iti- .------.1 -- ir,'„, -•,,,, vi';-,-'. .i • 11,,,„,.. •' -...;, *1\ ., /.. '•\- --- ::-------. ..., •.../'• -.... /.. / ..1 "'".F..-IF.T,:ni';::'.4.1r1.7:::.*.E.fiiir.:.:.7,L7.:..... . ,..' ; '',' •, , ., .:1,,0 • ,, s.'• , ,' • RE,:c•, p : ' V.., , .-- 0,0=16\L.'' i '.7 11 7.11 ----41411r. fts 4""'" diA ••' '41.- . ' -,...,5, --‘,- -.,., -.:- • ,.. al-DU, • ,',... • . ' i 7--.",I2' ° :fikly•! / 11; • •; . .. .--'•-• -- .,........N.-. .11,2/ ..'- II ti'2 9 , :. ..... ...,....s ......,...._....‘ . —:.....,.:.,•:::::,::„, - . i . ,........ _ ,- .. • .: 6 / .i;. r'''''s' .'.. 'P //4P '/. c i 0 g6 '4,i,,,,:.71,::::,•:,-14.g,-...::.1,-..,.:,.r.:,-:-.1:47,,,.:,- , ,, • ‘,,,,„,, ----,.,/..„ ' •*- , ;-"...-itt 7-41N ,;-. .‘• %,...„,,,,41, --:"-. , ir-.40:-..T.,:p.,.-s...‘ \ir, _/_.., rills ,_... / ,. . „, .• Z r nuj '.i• =.':".;;I:M.t,tit:4`7,-.Z.::IT X.:21-.,,.---. , i , '. ‘..A ,0.-• *) g '/ ". ,.' . 1 ik ,''' \lo..-111161w r„.! // - , - r '\ . -..... 0 E N , 1 'Lli C•21 Fiz •,.., IA I ,,,,,,- .- F-.111.:...."‘:17:§1;.-ZT.I.Si:;!..F,,;;E;17:EZI.a.°" •-_ ' , ':- \. - ''',..7'.':•.":-.11111F1714*-,i0P.V - r\ -for 7,7:,/,,,P c tr '.. IFFAO . 1,\Ai , .,:..,11V1,6eliXt ../ * y-fN-\ \ --t Ce .2 ce_ • , • .....„..............,.....•t,, , .,,.,e,t,....,,,... ,4 ‘ , 411ralt"11'1* i,\ ' ' 1 r-' ' ..'•1 i it a‘311117 • .: ' ., '41 ' 1 5.12ir-2:'•';i:•:i...'.+7•.:.:EISi:7:F`i.:!Ir 4::.::`," , '' -, •i / ..Dt•-•'..L.ia:'41...:....••:`,71,4111,711::2`.7,.:7=`f.!:11..;••• , . . # , s , 4,4,p. ,-..,- ...-.. -. ', ,410,‘ _..--:41 - ,..-eAkt. ... ,., , , .?,,,,,,,,- ,. •..„, t,,,, ).. -. Jaw _Aim \ A \___ • ,,7 . .: . .. 1".7/..Z.;.7.!SI.. m"'...." ‘K'Y to ....:--- ,k‘ .4.'",..t• .. ., Rijn.- . 0 , ;".7"745'..e5g:1•L'Iriairi.:11•11"."7`7=r"`r". .alayi !....t•41,11... '":•••,._,/' ' '-'' ' ,. / '1302 1111 • \' • •\*, _, >- Fiii7.:S::::*45..lil'...;41:21:7:r.;:='.:'-'•••••4-:'r ' 7 .---4,4,4p45,5,fw-..-.7/0_x ..,- •• ,./ ....',• ti `i.'-_.,:-.-010\..,,,,..,..,-, ...4140,40.. , A -. • ,. .„,,,. . . *#,6 ' :,,:.'-,,,,,,,• ,I .. . •••••• 1 i sr. ..1.,,.,,r.,,, 4 ,„„..„--- .34.--ladit -->., • .,,••••. ,..-,. -,,.- - LEGAL DESCRIPTION • ,,,, A..p.,44p, „.,,,, , , * taii *0 , II, 111111._ ".I......r_.2a,iID :l I' B .I 1111111 ....e. c I ,-,....., ' -----------' , 7.rnc....1.. Y...p.o,z...,---'IP -..'..111!/4/4„. il ........:,.., gii .1v....23,1r.; 1.,, , -••„?, „,.........{0_46--„aam 't 11 I ;Jo* . .• I , • , Mee,e.,¢T',oil . -------,.... t° • ......-. /.• :''''. . ' .-, '—2-'..:51''- 41- Alit\;,. ,,,,,1-7.., , ,1 /.0; nlifillrlig ...... .., . ", \fg:1;, .'"‘ 172.,•t,'... .. ,'-'. ' . N ,... • ,..1416-•, '... III-1 N 4'', .t 2,fib Si.. i i -/ W II \ ' . . ‘,IF'''11.'- . ''('' . .... .. , , _a . 110 ', - ') ,'. .44-...:-.. ..\•. : ., co 1 N „ illprip,_ • ,to /,y41/ \I.,:)I ' ,iii , Ali ".' . . , 1 . • tirVA ....,, ,:i.i t-.., ,... . , soil, . . p•,.. . . , . N 2, 47, 1/1-41E1 , ' '''''' , lig",, /, • lirlir .•' .... .9 • • •- 74t ,' • 1 ,--. - 0 ••11111111,Fara 1 : .. - ,r • ., , •.......•iiii .. ,, ,.. 1, 1 ge- . ••, 011 i, , , . .. , . . .•• . ) - , • , . „ . • ... .... , • . , . . ... "C • i _...... . . . ,_. .-_. • '. ( • -. - -.. ',__ _- • , .. • ----___,,,,/ ,... - _ , ..,:- • . .• . ..- ------ , \ ... . .„,..., - .„ ',--_.' - • • .:.- ;%:,., -•• -- - - , • ., -,....,-___:•,,,- •,...=.—--, .. ,--- . 1 • -_._,..1 • : ' 4'-'-.- -- ---=• --- _ _ / - _- _ ,_ - . . _ , \-- "4, `t•.;77`.'••:, ', _ 1___ ' -1 '1 -• - - - ' - .. N.--/11*-'--'t _ „----- ,At,•--..- • 0 -3---) M '-' - . - ) • - '' . 7 . ..._,__ _„— ( \ ..__ . • -- -; . .. . I • _ -,-- . •,.. i ., , •-7.-- - _:_4,1.-...r.•.. . .- .... / „!": -,.,_ • -i .Ld. •\ • . '. L}Llbri t - ••' ttWi'SQ'10J NOSWIJ AS 035NOI1 SSMY 3JWJSYL NWINIJ .• •.-•_ ..,.-, .. ` �....�'.w.. KM!M 0'3 • ; 8887•37.8(907.) LSS1179(907) • ) g00@b uolOU qSO 'ennepeg i ( '3'N enueAV 41Z1,1, 9ZOE a., N tticva i®m Le•1 -6 „ttw a ' t V1. 0.5 0 , qt)) F a �. A Y Z F `v -1 d a 11A y 31 ; el - %Qi . . '.r a ,F F , qq La+u � i 1 V q jaaWd Rr i.N , _j_ 7_ (LL. --- c ,. . • 50,..,,,,, 7i '.. 1 .,'--'..., . -, i i0, /- /,e _)� t ,n1iS•• I�" 1 cgs' 1 1,_._ .' . . ,. .t-6.;. .e il L.. . :1_rA, .... 0—..1.0 14„,1,..h-..,..1-7••i•ti.—f,,.iliiii.ii!-I i=1 1r.'N 1ri- t- n3 � -' - q -- �k A k — i �1r' P Jtl 111irkAwl4li•--ka0i;2l-il ri.-e I I-.-•.i7••••.•4•:„...M..,,,.,,,t...:.•..1_f...r•4•.i,r.1i,1,,FL.-,i.lit-, t:- . ..•.. ... , .,,,..._______ , - ''' ' .41.3r.,.... - -e311 r , :.0 \ C. \ '.{ . \I h 0 .,. \t (a I ,, .18 . .11,'- Vaillgt,,t, :,,,..„. , ...,-,_...A :,,,, 4. ___- - pY7-? p ' i , LI 1 r, C_ ' "lligWi ! ' K ,ice 1` s \\ 7• . 1 ‘�1. y w i¢: �iYY 41 eft 1 �I �Ja. I �; 4,.-Y`^ + •* ,`'AI►'P�w" * k.!/ �dG 1 ca:j(. awYk; a��� . ' f Y + e~i 3r • • .v.°��) Ire 1' , LI--- ^ ���, ° %Sy��+ t x 1 weir* 1 t a 3. Z • ,, u 7!•• + 'V'✓ , 1. !1•. (c i-7�•N n i,'fit w.., y ` ,..„-- _`.. ) n' 1's n< 44: `�E 1- Ara n t ' \- p ` S.?.1` ° . ` - t' - . A- -' d q _ •A`� 'sr �� . • �' sty. ARP �._? i fi r£ • �� _( t' .--' r '' Z .. � its,r i t L'i' r .1.Ali k f 7' '' I �trfV� to r+�+ �. r " J•• ,�r^ 1� ��1 die t>v` • I ° _ • N _�✓�i�l`•1.... ��10,0„, • 1!�a�,> ;; 'fir_ ®�• •,-I tf 1 _ LA I yn, t,t �., At Sr s, ° 1 n U \: vR :YIli t ,)� .• ,:�� i" r to t v `'h � '0 v � r�; :,:�'t a • 9'• oly �,\ ;� :` � .s��o •,l •1�03�+� 9 / N ,1 ,.- t;r4, • ';':',..*,. 1/ 1!"-- 7, , . °/- : • /Ire*t 1 , ''''— ..1 • u . t \. °l,,_ , ,' • ♦ r,, =fir.. ti -ai, 6 a' - I [4.,Y.4_ZY \ ♦ acy r N •-s• • /f• ;"104,-iii. ,N - NO:F .til-kti ---- • .._. , . ,,-,. ::i le i 1 tip.'eq*dr, ,.1. -----•_, -"egY . Q`... 'r‘.. %.it.44/Allp .1 ittii..„.... :- -,____ . 4 . Jab .4 •?,..- ,--,iiii 41,....F. • IP!- a�,.. d \ • - • / i ,/ ...... , . , ,,,, (-- --------.---' --- K: .,, . ., i., nVBEEsR::N:iT-.0 IA-CHL''.API,MPL...-ArtI..D.R-A. ..,,,. ,-• ...- LEGEND0.t..eJD,.. r ,LR E E1CF_ '..\_,,..A:..P15P2.5RO1 X.0 IMT.AOTR Ei5 AREA/ i ES/ /, z;7 t•b,'7/ ,I/.7•\,r.P'7";:,.'.1,.';-"\r ./.1. :%. ,----.-\:.' -.. .., ... .‘.\.: \-: -a 7I/ i,,',,•////,,/-/':'_, / 1 r-- _f' , . — 2 _ _ - \. / bAs O EARINGS, / / / / / \ I ' 1 / / A: 'ii / -. \ . _ / (' C •\ .`.:., :..-..i_.I..,,z. ..D1 4iL.a.ii 6Z- t•'./ ELEVA,C, 2,3 . am zo,,:, I \ I ()62 c'c. g . .• ‘-- - . - i•-•--1-'4117/;6/1-: . / NOTE:,,,,e... ..=s •-•.: ,.. o,•-',i,..: =,.......k-,•-•'- 0"--.'-';'2°.t. --„,7 457.,,,.•. ' i- i' 1111 p.-1;1.;it .... ` ,, •,-- •,,,,. , .7 ;..72-..,----' ., ' eeE_VI ... af., / . /- Amp. ip- . I fill- ' -, .1 , . • ' ' -,•.---•"- — ,,,,,,/ •-• , i '.„--''- s. A I-1 ii4 / '17101F it i 410. 41.r . . . _ .,,,, -2- . '.,...-;I- ; ,HI • .2 \,... f'\ ( ii„1,11, / . _.1 7----.-„,--.,..„..;--- ?';" .ET-5-,i.0.30- ...L•,,,,E,..o.,, -:-..,....... -, .:_1.,-,....--,._•,,,,..E,. \I,-<• ,' i'''; . ' c1/,._). , -- ‘, ..,--., ,, , /Al \ . \ '1 ..- ---- 0 Fa A 1 i . . ..., //::....'-',,,,..:..,,- ' ( .„\ ,i A .,.\ 45 77,7 .,.. I .i. . vir .... ... I. . , c i / / ,,'7„ .,.. a ...., •,..:- ...' ,fn ' ! ! :..... / / i / , ...qN • :, 1,. ,..,,,,, i 7 .7-7---H/-'-----.„_. \ • • \ ' .":. ' ' ),. /\ 7„,/,/ •. „ --.:1/. 11' i,ill',, :1 '\\\C*.\!\\.\-, y 1::IT ;::, .,- - 7-'- , 41 / .,es.,-1 ,4, • ../ I i ..•.% /..,- / , , / ' 0 - 7--- , \\,4 . ) \ /2 ./ ---' 1 '\'.''' t, 1 \''':•ir Z.,:`,...,), (-----;-:. -.• '-`1 lyi ;:i ' ). )))) i4 . • .;---'-:'g', :; :. - ic.... - . 1 :„. _ • .61.>-::. - . •'.• t' r (7 /-- / '/ / / ,, ,, ............_ , ,•... ... _ , • z gi / -------__ • „, ,,,,,,' -....,.7,?-, - —.- Y / ''/.' • /./ /•7/ 'Z,- j , _____Y ..,<' :4" . '''."J ' .4''' • /..-.: ' .4'. -'1.-"' --C' -A 1 - • ••... ' ! '// )\ , ,,//, --7 .•'..- ,,...-,,, . ____ -_, _:___„:„...:-,,,,„y-y, ,'• ---- -,.---__-_------.>- ;/- - i•-• -271i- . . ) \•,4\''''.i • ,J.' 7 -:,:," ' - . 7.-- . ,,.......•.'' :Z ,..,. : / . ,. , *, , ,...' s , . / / f..- / 7'''.• / /7 L2.-- ..... • 1 . (/' i / i. , .. i. / ..,. / -.. . , l ' ,.... ... .• , 8 +\.\, o el . ,. . \ ••• •,. .., ii...- . , - - / .... ••, A, • . . 0 7 .... 1,- -------7_,•.:,_. , 1 s‘s' \ , . ., ... .,73 \..p . ... rrK .. .. . ...., .,, .... ,.;,-.:.,-. ...... ....."/ / 1 '\ •-• • -.. //.. • •, •. . ....,.. ...... , .., ..., ? ••::: '' :-. \ . . ' • . •I- 0 • • , ...,, .... .. • ) .... -- • . ..-sts:-•-•. . „ . X ,..... \ 1 1;7/f,:•.;-,,--- ( ( , \ •\/•. ,,... - .----', '-'' _ , N 4, ,-ir. ' -\„. _ ___, /.2/, .....,.., .,\ , , •,,.. • 1 N I . f, .1 I.,,,/ .,, c •-".. . • -----: ., , / ..,..'. p N -.• (1 ' •,, p .... ."(' / I 7( \ ''' ( '-- '''') I 7 I I. )4 ) / - -..--"-- \''.• -, .‘ .1 f . • .,., , / . , ...- . , \ ' ' / ;'1 (',\ I ( : ..". / ' ,.., '.•\•••• i 0, '''''':. •,. ' \ . '., , .. .„.„, '',.. --..":"...:•. . • g . •,,, , \ -.,„,) ) ..,. ,.. /• ••• .., ' Alli. . • ...,. . .. ' _71...., . ,, / • • ...., _./-------/ • ry., '' , • ( I r .1:,.,.. . .. . ., .. .• • A ' • ,•4, //•. • '''' ' ''''',IT'' .... - --- r------- - tA-\'"'. I).• ..1 ,,, a Ar,' • IP o'?L; 1 • - - / . ''''''' '-- ____ i ! Fe°1" 21iUtiFiblaiiiIIIIIIIL '-'---------zi.--'--.._ -----Ti -';'-'-':1-r---- - - ---:- . ! TT • ' 25.,( / / __.......v / ' • -t--,--p-_/____ t ,/ ' t/ • • . ..._....... ___ , ' '-.,--±-- .. , ,.• - \ D.i.__ II t —r....._......_._._ t,..11... •- ...1,----. . , . , ,46• , 7:;§.•.'-'°' 4'4_.•b, ./.. • ,! ... ,, 1'r A z Z • ..., ... , T L cp 1 A 'e '• \tr.• •t-,,,,,• • •-f t1...—. ___I 1 ,1 ii 1,4.$„ --rt.e., I I -I ' I Ill, - T.,. • ..er.0.11,..,.A_ 0 I i - I I -1)(11't" 7-1-----T-1---IT-I ''' ail • M .1 it,.NE 7 i'••10.' i.". ...% '141.40 ‘' .' '. • ....••'• . 't I 1 'IA.',U,,E•c '") .f.o. A•P'El ••• ' .. -' I M ILI'-',: 1 t,:._ •• 1, . 'lg. •. --'''t.,•.: ,,, ...1•4:x,.,:,::•10;,..,.',4t,....7.,,,,,..7:',-;• t.' 1- ....,,,,,,, , , ,, 1 ,,,. I er .. I I' I 4.'''' -..' -4^ '•• • ‘ ,...n. ...1,4***,,T4 1../Y• %. < VP II I I I III I il Id I r 1-s• 1:• , 41 4rfr.-4 1 * / '04 -” ....A..11‘,.. '• ‘1,1 ' Ei ,,,, •,,., ' I .',":11r•': ,•••7.1r•A`.' :: , „.••,,, ,...,...,11,,,,„'..,44k.,,,„,N • Io , A„, : 1 , , 1. fg-7;?All -n -- -r-.—,...„.,, .,,-i. ..,,,,.—.:ist,.,,--1, 1 ilmai '''''''''''''' ''-'.. (7..- . , .,..,'Er ,.YRdy,..' .1Z, ._,r• , X) 1 C.' 'I"; I sin 1 ,,,,,. ,,,....,.:,e 1 1 1 ,?..',...1s,r.' t.......4'...',... t,.„ ..,, z I ,11..., 1 ---:—.-T1,171_ i ._ -4-:, ',,,,,,,I : ,.0,, . 1 1L,.4-.11111,__I 1, ilk dim IIHri, 1 _ Z ____ _ . 1, , „,. ?„.t, ..-itif.*4, 3 EUld :H.:a," ' 1 14 i 1 ,•1_th___,0 ,,10-7,1 --i • I I I III I ••0 O's 1.,,;• 4,...„,.,..,4,- ,-1.1 .,,--_-,,04,• i= ,•,.• r, to.;., ,. ',,•r! 1 1 1, 1 •1, tz • II I, 'Ill I 11 kf. -! ,. , NO );"--•ttN,P 3 27_1_-__. kr,•,,,.. , a--__:: ,, 1-- n-u I" I ' I' ' I 10 < r'-- - -•=1, 41 f77 1 I• :',„;) ;:t1 — . ., . . . • ,. ._ . „_ > ,. ,..41 1 • ,t _ r I r;".,.4,c_.•••„. .?,it,r: ''' 11;' '..2-'" ' 11 ' _ l' 1 o ,. . , ,r• , _ ,, ,„, t,,,...,....,„. ,- 0 ,,a 4••'''''., '', CA) ,P „-1:", 11,...7,,I1,'11,,iiiIrl'‘-,.1I., 'II I' ..'I,''t.,.'_Ii ,•-:'_,,, ,rI'';,'-,,i'-I,.,,e.',.,,.,',, I I' tifig. ,- I 1•,,:g III I .. I a' •• 44' ' e„. ,,,,• 'Imi 411-11'.1' . , .. ,„ ,,,.,?,, - ,,.,,.: 1 ...1!(:1171.'. II II 11 I I 1 ' 11 1 lit. I , o 1,. r-.4-• ' rig ., .•is-,' , . i 1 .,,,,,,,,,,,.,;;.... - r-411 A, A .0, ' , klotkrAik,.17, ' -tt'-f ',P,,., ', E71,...1 Vr:,. CY' ,,,,ei:4 r to,''::It I ik ,Pr' P11 ''''; A - r•T '. g • --_. ' - . ,,t`',,f, p •4'' -.. - ti=. I ' . pie. I I'%•••'t a*....:'>,41,4... ..x,4--v, A If. 1 Ifr ,,, ‘,...,:t• ..1 14-..11 t a , e,,, _ . %., 4.I.,o _•, P .1' L__....„,,, . ., --„, i----,,. . 1_, t 7 . , ' 0 t ••,•,t F,. Iv 1 I ' I L 1 , r Ti T1---, I , s.4,,,, ..,,,f..q. .14,•,,1.A*, ,0,.. ,k 4t* , ,— I E 4 - , 111:-irt..,, I r. )... 1- I Trf,.,F,' 0 4 0. ' • - 'r , ei •-.4 r I 1 11,_.,,.....',-n•1 1 I I I I.:iI-1A*I.,i I • I 1 i•',Y,,,..'r,-I -'•'1%-• _ 1 - ." -.,,,, a *58,5!* ' IIRIA14 '1 , ',?'"•14 ';'f'l I, I e'.',1 4II: , • 'tI.2. , i ttk4 I: -. 1 1, - ' 11 ,,____;_,•-_•.___! , I g '4,1•'4. 1 11:1 11 II, I III I I I • 1 ''1 1 1 • 1 : [-; ..•,•‘, ...t......,-1 •se• , ......I 1 ',4:••1.' : : ' 1 . ,..,... 6 ..--.... tti i. ...--1 • f" 'v.'1,,,.1 r , ....... . ., ___ ., , ,,,„„,..., . .... ....,,_ , Ne I 1 I •...____ ..r.I . , !1,„,ki,,,k4t#.10.,r,vitii, \ II,. .,.r., , ..z,.,g...•.;n, 1 i c,?., • '.,'itit ,)7" W.a-.,:' '",'%r,r.,'.'ittle.., , L. At ' i'3-ilt-reit ''• '1,••• 4i; 1-.;', .n..: , ., fil‘.'O'‘.5;1411'• rZ r le7--1.:.•tT gitiofIlt.r:•‘1 11 ' '.• Ili! I II I ll I I ' I I IIIIIII f,', - 4, t--11.4'• Hp ;‘,_•-•,*11,„,- - - --- -i-X0.1e1.4 -root.t.tot st ...t.-- ---• t.III..• a4 44- .,..,„1.•f; l' '• ..i ..- Ilk.".1. .:,.t.,:11 • ert`mi,'"h•3.. T4 Vi,,,r• .,pi,,,, ,,,,i,•.ii).4, — I :•:t :,..- I i• .4. st"- - t 4,,V.....,!..tk, "..!.44 t 1 " - • t Al-14k,' I - .-1 . . r`*4` = ).• t•01 -4 I kin, tlj^•,• 's V;,,,,:>,,,k. I ,, ,, -. - ...• -It: ....•lb"f'':,*;',1'"1? 14 .1"P .:gf-rt't • It .;.,,,,, r i'. •ii. ,...,,,.....-W. • AP.,lf 4'I I.1* ••, ;Ito:Itntr 1'45'4;41 ',,* FL_ te , , II -''', -1 , ,„,a, ' „e •• , II I * ? • IMF ift.M.i•F,'"4"grr • th I l'I'lill ill_lit li.11ILL11111111111. I ' ") • *. 4E..45 .14, ,. I, ,, t ,, . , n-, 1 . i pcp.g4t..• • ; II IIII di 1 '' II 1-110 itIl 11.1,. 17tY`t.i4 _ J_ I - - , • ! t'''' 1 p • t....-4'altA •••• __ 1 BM,71 M 1 t 4 - . .ri. a#14,31';-..-e2 ,‘- , 0 ' 1, 4...0 ,,..- . r,...1 M all 1-....."_. /p /..", '•,TP'• ....r...V.r,„., •• '• ,•,,*'If** c..) -•;.` '1;1404,1 ittgfl, ,:.;,,,,,,, I •-.4.:-• *-.'I.,'.s.,..,r, fo•-,-,...1 $.-.13. ,,k,', I 4/ ‘4, '•`,4, ' 'X Ft' , E.:- ti:',' . -t•-. .,-, Al4.11.P.4k I- -.RA.- ' .... ., •i,;, .„...•`,-.,: I . . : , • ....It , k _ ..0 I ,., 4 • 14,,L • '. - ', Vil'i.„Ivit. ...,•-• '7'..'"' - III li • I ,,,.,, i ...•I • . -....-.••• 4 0 .;(j".e .' ,- —• 4"-r•PAP- (.i. ' .We • ' ...W41.I.- lier,o.A..•''''• E 4%.•*., ... I14 77, II''' tf`'' .:4:4 II olt,47,,, `*.f.. 'I ! I.i'74:!,,'t7f ' I -'. !* Lj r..' .AY-4 — I 't ----------I ----------i I I ' '- 1 I 1 11 ,I1 I LI I Hi II j1 1 I . ''''' I • ':.;-:: l'I I 1 I ''-'tt-.. 1 i' "44'''‘q I I , I 'i • I', ... 1' • 1,111 ' ?t--1,- I a....../."` ..44...T.,', /k i:,x^fi•;,,‘.' n4Ve, ..,•,,'1` • . ''',, . ,, t ....., ••.2r ! , I, I I 171 III III I IIII : /A 11P41.fit:"1 l' t;341 :...:..i ",,,,••••••• • . .1._ t••• I t,t'IN' t 11- - - ' ififillilfil u 9 HIIIILUIUUMMIr Lii±_,_i lir —4[ 'irk - -- , - frei7 I-- I,—-- It 7 t• '••,-• s t `A41. • I ' '-'1 PRELIMINARY ' ' 1 ELEVATIO LEXINGTON DAN .0 WINO. • • Nf' ' Cd etEtrarrturkILM . CENTRON ,401E1111 INEAOrii DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION • , . : P q 0 ,. - I ; RIDGE 3025 112th Avenue N.E. • 1 I . , : A W UNIT RESIDENTIALO COMMUNITY • 11 Bellevue,Washington 98004 t k23,.,,14 ,42,Map,'M 98.09 ' E DoR,bo • • (206)624 1557 (206)822-2888 1 OD I a - a (206)62.1 1.557 I L IN RENTON,WASH nn,,ARCHITECT . . . — CENTRO.IS A SERVICE MARE LICENSED BY CENTRON CORPORATION I.- . ... -. • r a— ................... • • �yi ..q "%% ,,,:11, ,,P.ti. G- r.;l' 6117;\46411'.. .• _ '1:`S It. ,.. CMS!, it Lg I r o 1= I liM r al � Enn a <� :, p � 411, ' "fl L II r\-91,!....,4:10, w _ .j •to Lam . EEO. �I ""^ A. ... ________,,,„, , k / • ,,,,,,, . --. ,.-,.., r— ' !,,"..;-.4: ... :---r- . -_,-,2g III.E• rli , _ F...411 ,..,,..-.. ..,..„- .:-. <!. I. . ,.,,,,,,, .. r---,,,-, . •ril T0. L `� Iuail Ilil A •-0 jilli =I pLt� .: ` •F :4,:� , �'•� .ti..N'. .-,`•C,i\k, 1 ,,,.." •••: �•F Y•z. ysryyq" j !:.;'. F.,; - !I. • ILIA! J f ,.,,.. 1 ,i• ',,... 1 • 9 I•al , , I r N •tertAr1' tieftkS i CENTRON •• o �E ' BUILDING RIDGEGTON I ', 1� �••pg®®fl�V®® , DEVELOPMENT 3025 112th Avenue N.E. '. CORPORATION ` O PLAN I A 360 UNIT COMMUNITY Bellevue,Washington 98004 ams 112TH AVENUE N.E. f AENUE N Po0G9 1 ` IN RENTON,WASH. ` (206)624-1557 (206)822-2888 MIS rea la e24-usi E Dennis Riebe 1 ARCHITECT • S .. . CENRON IS A SEA`ACE MARK=NSW BE CENRON COINORA ON - 4 t.•_ RECEIVED• - —,2149N ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ` OCT 919 , REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: ak I rle BUILDING I ZONING DEPT. DATE CIRCULATED: September 18, 1987 COMMENTS DUE: October 2, 1987 EFC - 074 - 87 APPLICATION NO(S). : SA-0R2-R7 PROPONENT: Centron PROJECT TITLE: • IexiinggCton Ridy,g .. rental uDESCRIPnIappOF Ematel:15ARB1ird� ign for Site Approval to construct 36a0 multi-family on a 13.4 acre parbel , together with recreation build•dig and associated parking and landscapinrg. LOCATION: Located between N.E. 3rd. St. and N. E. 4th St. , West of Edmonds Ave. N.E. and East of Bronson/N.E. 3rd. St. intersection in Renton, Washington SITE AREA: 13.37 acres BUILDING AREA (gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation / 15) Public Services 1� 16) Utilities eat 1®" - • • c6 1-0 if I t.rtsif' :41 IL 4.;h%w,j4) C4tosin •-• AA,/ 4:04(A*4- et' 0.01 traced AwZ c1A .-y 41471 damPra44(I4‘5, • 1111 cdtAaw 12444#4 P.Alt 44,4/1 Atth- 074. r at- Pu.) is CIA;n L - eik 1h4 -A4.1- ated- ?-esevot eAviviatv. - IRA star-Auld dew si‘ toi gielawacoesttt lo refit V -. We have re e 'ed this application with particular attention to those areas we jp have expertis- ' a.d have identified areas of probable impact or areas where a addition- in mati is needed to properly assess this proposal. / =` /61/ Signatu' e of Director or Authorized Representative Date Form 4 ,, RENT--- BUILDING & ZONING DEN -'DENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 074 - 87 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-082-87 - E PROPONENT : CENTRON PROJECT TITLE : LEXINGTON RISE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE, APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT 360 MULTI- FAMTLV RENTAL UNITS IN APPROX. 15 BUILDINGS ON A 13.4 ACRES PARCEL TOGETHER WITH RECREATION BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED PARKING AND LANDSCAPING. LOCATION : LOCATED BETWWEN N.E. 3rd ST AND N.E. 4th ST, WEST OF EDMONDS AVE. N.E. AND EAST OF BRONSON/N.E. 3rd ST. INTERSECTION IN RENTON TO : El PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 111 ENGINEERING DIVISION ri TRAFFIC ENG , DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : f.UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION fl FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU El PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT ri BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT El POLICE DEPARTMENT Ei POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT El OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING , PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5 : 00 P.M. ON OCTOBER 2, 1987 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : ® APPROVED ri APPROVED WITH CONDI IONS OT APPROVED co„,,,,..„..1,,, ,ri, P3 IMUTI APPROVAL SUBJECT TO I 17 /t I-D ATE C ' ems Gl/-� 3 #S zs �'r.7f. on A/,E.3'=SST. x /,038?6. ' S4 a LATE i�13 AGREEMENT-WATER ��.a�,_..�._�. � SD LAN CURS MAwMENT-SEWER 1`o ,,� SYSTEM fE'M?!IlMENT CHARGE-WATER $' oa ' x 3 Goo cti4-+ - 06 3 ooO. oE� a SYSTEM PEELIPM 1T CHARGE-SEWER >/,�,5 0'/J,S: j°o - 't "� ,(�3,QOD . v_ SPECIAL ASSENT AREA CHARGE-WATER ,Jo _ / , 5, , O©D,.°D SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AREA CHARGE-SEWER A/D APPROVED WATER PLAN y,Es woe- Uit Atic° kareerido, 'a APPflOBED SEWER PLAN yES IDN' ""'APPfiOitED FIRE HYDRAF3T EuaE,6i��:) c,,, , � j� A , 0 BY FIRE Brae _-- YES c� i ...7 . q�_ , \ Es 1 ,IA 1, ( , 0 ',)9_ 9 DATE: / .� SIGNATURE IF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 • - „„,,, ,,,,,, . ...i."- , . - ,•-•-.."-.A , , • . . . . . , 1 V I I ''.....---.................. ), ,., . 1 1 k ';\ i • ( ,„,- 1 . • • i' • t'-' 1 ' t i 1 i '„ rf,'„, ;t ' 4 ....---‘•tt.'' r - , • ,1 ,V'''' \I 2;1. 'v• ' 14k.). / -"\A...... 1 1."''''' • ) ;''', k i . -- -• U t ‘\ Y• . ..„.,,, i ....i ''', Q '70/ -..,..,. - i ,k-rui! ', _2- s'i,.\ 1 • 9 (01/ ?'4--•--- 217c v (1--•--- ,' ..- ik , 1-,,,., z \, 1\ 1 11 ,i --Y4---. 0 4 . \ \ i , 1 ) ,,,r' ,•-' I k 1 i• •--1 \ 1 I i / 1 . k • - , . • s i ?-- i \1 ' 1 1 / 1 -1 `.^ ', •: 1 it t . • 1 , . ‘ 1\ ..7.--7:'',...../ / r-trI. L -- \\\ Cf 1--. I. \ . .. \ ‘‘\ r • \ , \ v\:....,.. .40/f.,,,,p4,4, - /.. ,--f-- - - \ / \„/ ,,,„ Lk I,i \\ \ , \ s ', •*?i / \0 , \ •,.\ 1 1 \ '. \ \ \ I ‘ )(\ • ‘,k \I \k \ \ ‘ 1; s• , , • : \ / \ 1, Jri .-- - - -I\ 11 • cli-41 ! . 57in-YV 2. r49)/r0 3.1° .. ... - - , -----i , : 1 1 i / \ 1 1 -:I : 1> r, - - " 1 1 . i 2, thrv(13 (4 / Pd15 9-YrnWV ,L" ..... ...... , 1 11 , Ht 7,0 pP)-C7210)\ 1 520-Yii/rgVINIIM '--'j Q71•19_I2--.1)991/3 I1/2vJ e 0• 11 t a // ( 57""fi - c0Z9 )D 6V - ---i,- i ,il i•i/0 5909110 I NI -21-QN / , i .. . fi ; i, f I I I tf i ' - f I • • ( k 7,97)V 11/011) )(NY 79J/111 1 ' li I i d ' \ 1 • • i --'•N 11 1 . , 1 I t‘ i 1 ii • • 1.Z •ON . -34:974'91%0 ‘7,0V9)5941 te , , , >i•ZiV1(11-11---TslIg Ni v.,\ \ x2v i./ 5)"1,944',7"1/09-P -557'S-P1 Q-2-- -57in Crn" / ' ' .. N .,,, ; / .e.V -i-lirl SAlind -7)92W1 / '''' , , • \ ... \ . \\ t- , orowlb56 '.......„, . 1 -- ' • . _DO filieil S 9 0-7)-9Pvd -19°1° 92- I ' , . ---„„, • • (19101097/ -99 --1-1 vs., 1-,9)5h5 rniitAn,91.Vin. owQ0-1 Ai • ____ ..5.7)oviviury p 2_0"0,41-,. . . . a-3-mhk9gd 5)voimi ricr7j 41113 _ , • . , ‘\- . , \ i• .1\ S .P\9144143 j ) non „,,\i, i,, ,, , . ........ ......_. . , „ \ , p ,v, , . . . ,. • „........„____ ._„___„ ,„. . ., , T. _ . . ,. c--',--1•N . ', h i . ,,,,,,,,...„ .., i 1 1 •• ,,,,' '42' • :1 -11 i -••• • . ,.. • r-'1 • 1,1 • „,, • , ,i , „ J.! , l• i• •,,,,s' :II • ,, •• ,\ i 1 01 . , . • i ..,'. ' \ ' ' \, ; •,--'' ; 1? •• ' 1. I . . •., l'th,,,i> 1-• "".,......1 1 i i .... . •1j i '''Illv '• • , s, ,1 it 1 k . . . ,,,i4". IV ,,,-, • I • , i .....-• , .. • , if) ,. .1. • . • . . .... .. . .,. „ ..,... ... • ., .,. ti;::::e ' H....„\\ ; : • . .. . . . • . ,.- • . , „ „, • . , . ,. , „ . , . ,,. .,..•, ,,-.01 1' , i 1 •:, ss...' . \....\.. .. i\ it ••- • r - . . • 11 I i '; ,,,*4-^ ,.: • 1 , • . i 4_A • . , . / . i . ... . .• . r- -,, •i > " 1 ''''.6....r.f.! ( k• . • 1 • , R • . . • . — , . .,. . . , .. . ,,.< •.'1 .. , . , 4 * • • ‘ '1' .- \ 4--'1-- • ,,, %b... I :• i i ,-,---;. v, -- ''. -4*-• : 1 i ...........,,„ . , • , • s 1 • --.. z•,., ', ,,, .7,1 ,.‘, , : , 1 • . . ••...„,.. ,', ', \--.3 i , ..;•• ., ,. 1 , 1,5,•k- s4 ': I t_...;:zr-- • d • ',I ' .• - \ % ..\C.'S° " , , • - ,„ i • • :.„ , A It•--,'" • . •• • \.`; \ \ 1 1.-• •• . . , . . , '''',. .: 'I,. .............. ‘.• \ '• •, , ., , i,,A. il ... \ )\., \• \ • :• ;\. '. l• k s,''','''. •,'-'t ..',.. A 1 1 \ i ., % • .. ,. i • : , i ..‘• ',,1 V ' • ) r 't• % \ '. l' " ‘; \ .'.4 • • / / z4 0 , • • . • , ,,..„ • . • . , •„ . . .,, •... . • ., ,. , , , . , „: : .., . , \ , , , , ,• .,. • : . ,•- ,, , , .• ,, , \ ,•,--, . ) • •\,, , • • I /"., , is , . : , ,,, ,, ,•••,. , ,, i.: . • , • • , . ,•5 ,/ , / , „ , , „.„., 5 ,,• -.: 1 , :.: , • ..., 1 /‘Os•& 1 ‘' , , 1 , . ''...<_. i) * • ', i ' i-..) . ,. , ,,, ',. '',\ "----:•,,,,' • „\sk -/ `•, • \ l •., `, , , ;;\ \. '•; '''s /--/.'; \‘. \ \\.‘i \,,,,, ',).,..\. .., .. \ \ /,..,...., \, \' v\. • I, REV DATE DESCRIPTION . • , B • Y .CENTRON DEVELOPMENT CORP 3025 //2TH AVENUE NE BELLEVUE WASH/NGTON 98004 1 ;) r ..3. , \ \ /1 \ • \., \‘• r \ -,, , . \ l\-, • \t, . •„/..,4 .„.........\,,, —,?,,,, ,- • LEXINGTON RIDGE Ls_ o \ \ 3 , PRELIMINARY GRAD/NG 8 UT/LIT/ES ,x... ...........,„, ,„ \ 1. - p• (206) 454-3743 OR 885-71377 • r .1: f .„-...,,-..: --- -• 0 DODDS ENGINEERS INC. :. I . : i Al..>P+-iA L:1-1 VI W• --;-,-7,L-..- -------- --,---r=- 4205-146th AVENUE NORTHEAST __,-------,-„--=." .... . / ' ' . • .4.-.. BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON 98007 . , J 1: . , ., : \ OWN DLP BOOK PROJ. NO l' , -----4.......-,..1. ,> - . --•-•-• f -i 9 . 1 t b7 87075 1, SVO DATE • ,Il r s • 0 APP.0 STEVEN L. BORNEMAN, PE SHT 0 0 F / . „ ., ,. ,. • _ I ...,. . . . . .,.. . . • .1 ;•.,,`,...`:,, . --.,,,r44,44404;71,4„::::;;vis, , , .' -.-• - ,1,,,,,;;-. , .:-. ..4...,..2)2.0iKr.."tV.,:f.v " J, ,,p ..,/0-,..,,,, A,•.,, , 7-"`'&.'`-,•-t A ',.041A.J.i,`I,-,' 2.*1-..%,..4:. 't f• ,•,. ...... . ;4 Pt; '. ,,..si.4 •••}-4* •/'. -- 4''' '• ..1.71_,‘,;'10. ..Ar,v--.It. ..4,,,‘ Ov-VI,J-4,,,,. .h.;...7,r'' ' l'a•j, ),.0 .g,....ii,,. ,.,;0.ii;,.., ,i.,e., );' "A 0,*• .I.,/i1:4'.Ab**:k"T":'A... '41,,,,- t A ,. .;„z1,4.7,m.,47..p.*:ovkr• • 49 •1-., ..;,.- . 1....,,,&,_....*1,7"?.,v-,1,,, w c.„7 ''''.20...Jt d',4;,,,,k114.,,.,.4,..h.,.,..,'t,..f•.1, iki.... 40Aritz, 7. I r. , A, .'y,,v, ,',',.,-f'"?.•i*I'Vt,,-.401•ifi-el'.74,t"1:1-4.1, $1. ,q, ..•• --1!4;,..„4,1•,,,e,.,,,dg 4A-A14,rx.••si 41 ' i'• e —,,,,1, ••4/0;,.,:,.v.•tAri,,,.•„it.M9- ,,,,, -: , ,,-, " .,_;): ,.: .,..• ,•,i' ,, '1..P., ,,m0 y . .. ,A, qs, i,;„ .•c1.;-400,,•02,.),' •,0?.,•,::•,•, ; ., , ?4,..\--. ..,‘' 4•IyAlikiz .-c;14-i*.,k1VtIv*,,a, " it f' ' 1_,•L ''i •.‘• V..,i.C% El dm. •'n I I".;:i. I %—'11c,t tirLf...,* -.14,31.:,...!: ,„Mik r \ '‘`.\\.__ E..i• •: • 1 /s 1i Li1: r,')1IIIL1 , / �,, ■�— �•BM T , '1J�"e 1i�T11 ■� It� Par '._ • .BM i8 \ hthleticfi • „,„ ,„,,, �L- . iine,„ i i GreenlFiood i(ze1 I I • u 1 3 ' t I- Meld ir : 'i -405) t I *I 1 ( d2a •�•�•. �/ • �� :� ,ter 1 / ..� _��� )� .. ._ _ Mr � 7 \ , 7 KL, , 4, /1:442k.--:b... ,• I h\i( -� e� :: :13 •406 \ 1 p O:•...,1 ,,,...a, i\1\ I,, C �,' -7▪ .--.:11::: _�� 7.:x......:iii.iiiiiii, �{ ,✓ • /i I BMA \ „ I 1 ��\ ..' --I/ #IFITI;r11 `gill, -- -= \---'--, '. - 114 ,/-- f '= �l � on L �ti ` `:'•'• 'EE do I I Sri - \ �l l ®!':Iir o� ` -, 1,mil.• _ ; , ,i,,,,.. � 1I et. , , -..N -.. � 30 1 N „..j...\\_----;‘",--- gill i IF I ' • ' - • • '• -I -, --:-‘7 7" 4S--•••l"e4-1:".. .. '... •--l.. i'''"'k... -",' . ., . ,:. .11 . I I . , ., I. __i_.__ , __„....,• . •,,.. , -.•- .. ...,__., • ,--,-.,_,.,___,•_,„ ___ ,...„ ._ _„•••_..... .... __,..70-4, -_--. - ■ phi ( �oi2' : tA -I 7 1'- - a _ r .-� r • �a J •• .'�• -T-�'-� - � I '_ �J0. �. / Fi/ H S sue'! -2�, • ‘1 1 ,‘; .1 1,La_ Ikk I ttAt„ , r: lir (T*4/ - , \ \ . ,) ' l'isc:! -.-s.'‘..-2- --r,- 2.-6- „,,,,,,' -,-, - -& It \_i ? ! -. • , al. . . -2.. • '/� I��, , I I 11( s 1oti_ ,,,,i iik\,/ - -__ -- - - j a • UCr MAPLA r" 4 A To • . , ; ,E • i : -.77ic'AiA tierajtai -.•— -1. , 1,16• A,4 \ \s ' --/-'.. 1,-. \ '-'•••.--- s. . �\ o ,1t.. ...: ,� .wed / S7,_ i\ . ` _ • ' \ � t / O -/ t- — 1\. •'-11 17, �� i � I: I � �� l I '-, 1�� �Q +( f - �.i � \ { _, � ,� • ,� It: � l ---c - iii ` _ AL) ' \ .- • MOO h. Th 1 1 i 1116%,, • :,_s::.•Ire•--,' LEGEND (01.1 . -- -11 _,-�t�` I � _ :r .• .�. ""��I%%l �1 a City Wells i 1 iF I `—�, r �'�I i ,?) ,_3-1:- Sensitive Area Scale in Feet __ \ r r -t, �� I—^-� 1 yi i ! I I ! � � � �o-� 1-1 11::: ` — 1 f '1_ �\ \ ■ More Sensitive AreaIc — \ o i000 2000 I 12• :*- 1, I•• \T- I-' j� 11 in Most Sensitive Area .r. I � I1011111" a�11� •- i I vti 1� -� The City of Renton depends upon the Cedar Potential contaminants include the following: River aquifer for up to 85%of its water supply. • Poisons • Antifreeze This aquifer lies in the Cedar River canyon near • Pesticides,herbicides • Household cleaners 1-405 and the Maple Valley highway(shown on • Paints, solvents • Detergents PROTECT YOUR map as most sensitive area). • Gasoline, fuel oils • Acids, salts As much as 14 million gallons per day is • Lubricating • Sewage, manure WATER SUPPLY pumped into the City's water system from five oils, grease • Other hazardous wells located near 1-405.Water in the aquifer is wastes replenished by precipitation above the aquifer, Good ecological housekeeping dictates proper \\ by underground flow from the Cedar River,and disposal of these and other contaminants regard- 0 by overland and underground flow of precipi- less of where you live.However,ifyou are in the Lion from adjacent drainage areas(shown on ' sensitive areas indicated on the map,it is panic- 49 me map as more sensitive and sensitive areas). ularly important to the City of Renton's water - 1 Contaminants can enter the aquifer by any of supply that you: these replenishment routes.After contaminants DO NOT ,� ' have entered the soil,groundwater, or stream • Dump or spill these materials on the ground �\ flows, they are extremely difficult to remove. or into sumps. The do not'just disappear";most do not break ' y j • Dump or spill these materials into gutters, ii Ill»down into harmless constituents, and small storm sewers, open drainage courses, or Z amounts of contaminants can render large ponds. ' ' >>> amounts of water undrinkable. • Dispose of these materials in your septic tank • t The Cirycurrentlyenjoys high quality water from or garbage can. i, the Cedar River aquifer.No treatment is required, • Allow fuel or heating oil tanks to leak onto or ��•��(�i��,, x into the ground. 7 Orris-JP /e cept chlorination to ensure total disinfection. / / c. i •, ..asedo your part to protect Cedar River water DO '/I if,,,►��''' aality. • Dispose of these materials only at approved collection points. • Call King County Health Dept. (228-2620 or 587-2722) for information about collection points. • Call CityofRenton (235-2631)to report spills City of Renton of these materials or to request additional Water Department information. • Check your home heating oil or fuel tanks and pipelines for leaks. i, • Check your septic tank and drainfield for proper operation. • CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 3541 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE "HYDRANT ORDINANCE" REQUIRING FIRE HYDRANTS , SETTING STANDARDS FOR INSTALLATION, ESTABLISHING DEFINITIONS AND ESTABLISHING A PENALTY FOR VIOLATION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS : DEFINITIONS : SECTION I : / For the purposes of this Chapter, the following words , terms , phrases , and their derivations shall have the meaning given herein, unless the context otherwise indicates . When not in- consistent with the context , words used in the present tense include the future, words in the plural number include the singular number and words in the singular number include the :plural number. The word "shall" is always mandatory. A. "Approving authority" is the Fire Chief of the Renton Fire Department, or his apointee B. "Fire Departments" is the Renton Fire Department C. "Water authority" is the Renton Department of Utilities , or any other municipal or quasi-municipal entity distributing water to fire hydrants within the City of Renton. D. "A.W.W.A. " is the American Water Works Association. E. "A.P .W.A. " is the American Public Work Associations . F. "U.L. " is Underwriters ' Laboratories , Inc. G. "U. B.C" is the Uniform Building Code as adopted, including amendments , by the City of Renton. H. "Public hydrant" is a fire hydrant situated and maintained to provide water for fire fighting purposes without restriction as to use for that purpose. The location is such that it is accessible for immediate use of the fire authority at all times . I. "Private hydrant" is a fire hydrant situated and maintained to provide water for fire fighting purposes with restrictions as to use. The location may be such that it is not readily accessible for • immediate use by the fire authority for other than certain private property. J . "Flush type hydrant" is a hydrant installed entirely below grade. K. "Fire flow" is the measure of the sustained flow of available water for fire fighting at a specific building or within a specific area at 20 pounds per square inch residual pressure. L. "Fire Marshal" is the City of Renton Fire Marshal or his appointee. M. "Municipality or quasi-municipality" is any county,. city, town, water district, sewer district , public utility district , or other governmental subdivision or agency of the State of Washington. SECTION II : FIRE HYDRANTS REQUIRED. All buildings cons- tructed within the City of Renton shall be served by fire hydrants installed in accordance with the requirements of this chapter. In addition, presently existing fire hydrants which do not conform with the requirements and standards of this ordinance when replaced, - shall be replaced with hydrants which do conform to the standards and requirements of this chapter. All fire hydrants shall be served by a municipal or quasi-municipal water system, or as otherwise approved by the Fire Marshal. All hydrants shall be subject to testing, inspection and approval by the Fire Control Division. SECTION III : PROHIBITED INSTALLATION. The installation of flush type hydrants is prohibited unless approved by the Fire Marshal and such approval shall be given only when permitted fire hydrants would be dangerous or impractical. The showing of such danger or impractica- bility shall be the burden of the builder, SECTION IV: BUILDINGS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. Public buildings , buildings available for public use, or buildings open to the public by invitation or otherwise, including, but not limited to , schools , and buildings classified under the U.B. C. within occupancy groups A, B, C or D shall conform to the requirements and standards contained in this chapter for buildings or structures in commercial, industrial, and apartment use district zones , .SECTION V: INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS . The installation of all fire hydrants shall be in accordance with sound engineering practices In addition, the following requirements shall apply to all building construction projects : -2- A. Two copies of detailed plans or drawings, accurately indicating the location of all valves and fire hydrants to be installed shall be submitted to the Fire Marshall prior to the commencement of any construction. B. All fire hydrants must be approved by the City of; Renton, Public Works Department as per the requirements of City Ordinance C. All construction of the fire hydrant installation and its attendant water system connection shall conform to the design standards and specifications of the City of Renton. D. Fire hydrant installation shall be adequately protected . against vehicular damage in accordance with Section 3-243 of the Renton City Code, E. An auxiliary gate value shall be installed at the main line tee to permit the repair and replacement of the hydrant without disruption of water service. F, All hydrants shall stand plumb, + or - 3° , to be set to the finished grade with the bottom flange 2" above ground or curb grade and have no less than 36 inches in diameter of clear area about the hydrant for the clearance of hydrant wrenches on both outlets and on the control valve, O. The port shall face the most likely route of approach and location of the fire truck while pumping, distance from pumper port to street curb shall be no further than 12`. (feet) , all as determined by the Fire Marshal. H. The lead from the service main to th.e hydrant shall be no less than six inches in diameter. Any hydrant leads over 50 feet in length from water main in hydrant shall be no less than eight inches in diameter. ' I. All hydrants newly installed in single family residential areas shall be supplied by not less than six-inch mains, and shall be capable of delivering 1 ,000 g.p .m. fire flow over and above average maximum demands at the farthest point of the installation. Hydrant leads up to 50 feet long may be six inches in diameter. J. All hydrants shall have at least five-inch minimum valve opening, "0" ring stem seal , two 2 1/2 inch national standard thread hose nozzles , one four inch steamer nozzle with City of Seattle standard threads . In addition, all hydrants shall meet A.W,W,A. standards for public hydrants and' be Cory type. • -3- K. All pipe shall meet City of Renton standards per Code Section 3-243 L. The maximum distance between fire hydrants in single family use district zones shall be 600 feet . M. The maximum distance between fire hydrants in commercial , industrial , and appartment (including duplex) use district zones shall be 300 feet . N. Lateral spacing of fire hydrants shall be predicated on hydrants being located at street intersections . 0. The appropriate water authority and the Fire Department shall be notified in writing of the date the fire hydrant installation and its attendant water connection system will be available for use . P . The Fire Marshal shall be notified when all newly installed hydrants or mains are placed in service . Q. Where fire hydrants are not in service, they shall he identified as being out of service by a method approved by the Fire Marshal . SECTION VI : SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS : The requirements of this section apply to all building construction projects in which buildings are located or are to be located such that any portion is more than 200 feet in vehicular travel from a street property line , except detached single family dwellings : A. Buildings having required fire flows of less than 2 , 500 g.p .m, , may have fire hydrants on one side of the building only. B. When the required fire flow is over 2 ,500 g.p .m, , the fire hydrants shall be served by a main which loops around the building or complex of buildings and reconnects back into a distribution supply main. C. The number of fire hydrants that shall be required for the new construction or a defined risk, shall be based on the amount of fire flow that is required to protect said risk. The requirement shall be one hydrant per 1 , 000 g.p ,m. fire flow. These fire hydrants shall be located no closer than 50 feet from the structure and no greater than 330 feet . All hydrants are to be accessible to Fire Department pumpers over roads capable of supporting such fire apparatus . The Fire Marshal shall determine the location of the hydrants based upon a determination of utility , topography and building or structure ; minor deviations may be granted by Fire Department approval of written requests . -4- D. Where the existing fire flow is not known or can not be easily determined, it shall be required by the developer to compute the available fire flow using standards and criteria set forth at Renton City Ordinance No . 3056 . SECTION VII : HYDRANT ACCESSIBILITY Hydrants shall not be obstructed by any structure or vegetation, or have the hydrant visibility impaired within a distance of 150 feet in any direction of vehicular approach to the hydrant . SECTION VIII : DEAD END MAINS PROHIBITED: Provisions shall he made wherever appropriate in any project for looping all dead end or temporarily dead end mains . A minimum 15 foot easement shall be required. Construction plans must be approved by the Public Works Department as per this Ordinance and other applicable City Ordinances prior to commencement of construction. SECTION IX: The fire flow requirement applied by the Fire Marshal under the provisions of this chapter shall be based upon criteria established in the "Guide for Determination of Required Fire Flow" as published by the Insurance Services Office of the Municipal Survey Services , 160 Water Street , New York, New York 10036. The "Guide for Determination of Required Fire Flow" , together with the standards of the American Water Works Association all as amended, added to , or excepted herein are adopted by the City of Renton. Three copies of each such collection shall be filed in the City Clerk' s office and be available for use and examination by the public . SECTION X: No building permit shall be issued until plans required under this chapter have been submitted and approved in accordance with the provisions contained in this chapter. No construction beyond the foundation shall be allowed until hydrants and mains are in place , unless approved by the appropriate City authority, following appropriate application and a finding that there is no life or safety threats involved. -5- • SECTION XI : If any provision, section, or subsection of. this chapter or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the provision, section or subsection of • this chapter and the remainder of this chapter, or the application thereof to other persons or circumstances is not affected. SECTION XII : A violation of any section or provision of this chapter is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not less than $500 . 00 for each offense or ninety days in jail or both such fine . and such jail time. Each day upon which a violation occurs or continues constitutes a separate offense. SECTION XIII : This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and approval and 30 days after its publication. . PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 4th day of May ,1981 . Ja e ores A. Mead, aftitik APPROVED BY THE MAYOR thisn 4th day of May , 1981. ' ?"tet Richai'd . St±ed1cke, Mayor "Pro t em Approved as to form: (-rev Lawrence J . «A en, ..City.,4torney Date of Publication: May 8, 1981(Summary Form) -6- • :y. . • 4 . • • • FIRE NOWT GUARD POST, 9"ROUND REINFORCED CONCRETE ilim GUARD POST • 6'-0" LONG, EQUAL TO RENTON CONCRETE r•„� PRODUCTS TO BE INSTALL WHERE DIRECTED. C) II" // PAINT WITHTWO COATS PRESERVATIVE P[ PAINT b NO. 43-114, INTERNATIONAL OR APPROVED IY' �\ EQUAL c \ I I . /FIRE HYDRANT I I f 1 • I • �S;C=III'' LI Y i CONCRETE `\ ` o / NOTE: /iy-JIINIMUM AREA OF LEVEL IF CONCRETE IS NOT SPECIFIED, A 12" Y / GROUND SURFACE EARTH BACKFILL SHALL BE \\ �"11%%�� COMPACTED IN 6" LAYERS. GUARD POST PLAN ELEVATION FIRE HYDRANT GUARD POSTS • • \in MINI 1 MU I MINIMUM CLEARANCE EACH SIDE 3.-0"MIN, \ % COREY TYPE FIRE HYDRANT EQUAL TO IOWA F-5110 AS SHOWN, 6 1\1 �' _ PACIFIC STATES CAST IRON PIPE CO. MODEL 2. OR APPROVED ��ii` EQUAL. 6"MECHANICAL JOINT INLET WITH LUGS. 51"MAIN 111111011 , III VALVE OPENING, TWO 2 NOSE CONNECTIONS NATIONAL STANDARD THREADS. 4"PUMPER CONNECTION CITY OF SEATTLE THREADS, AND 11" PENTAGON OPERATING NUT. FIRE HYDRANT • 4•„ TO BE PAINTED WITH TWO COATS OF PAINT, PRESERVATIVE PAINT NO. 43-114. INTERNATIONAL YELLOW OR APPROVED � . EQUAL. ONE MAN ROCK cal • CUT - PUMPER CONNECTION iv TO FACE ROADWAY • HYDRANT EXTENSION Pill 'L°�"n0., TWO-PIECE CAST IRON VALVE BOX, IF REQUIRED EQUAL TO RICH VALVE CO., t. II STANDARD B"TOP SECTION WITH REGULAR BASE SECTION. LENGTH S TO FIT CONCRETE BLOCKING CONCRETE BLOCKING II" L__ N 11111 12" 19�04 'Ili MIN. 16"46"a4"MINIMUM ■ - • CONCRETE BLOCK lift I'BB 1 CAST IRON TEE, WITH 6"FLANGE SIDE OUTLET II' �L, 6"GATE VALVE. FLANGE X nECHANICAL JOINT. LEVEL EACH SIDE ' EQUAL TO MUELLER CO. A-2380-16 • ONE MAN ROCK FOR MINIMUM 3'•0" 6"CAST IRON PIPE, CLASS 22 OR DUCTILE ' 7 CU.FT. MINIMUM WASHED IRON PIPE, CLASS 52. CEMENT LINED. LENGTH ' - -, �� �• _ GRAVEL PASSING 11i1 ADD TO FIT. ND 3/4"STEEL TIE RODS, LENGTH ^ J RETAINED ON 4"MESHED FOR TO FIT 6 � —�� DRAIN gla: _J FIRE HYDRANT ASSEMBLY ' J . FILL FIRE HYDRANT LOCATION IN • CUT OR FILL WATER STANDARD DETAIL CITY OF RENTON NOT TO SCALE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS JANUAFIY,MO • Amends portions of Ordinance No. 3541 J CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON • ORDINANCE NO. 4007 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON AMENDING A PORTION OF CHAPTER 35 OF TITLE IV (BUILDING REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 1628 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON" FOR THE PURPOSE OF CLARIFICATION AND REORGANIZATION OF FIRE HYDRANT ORDINANCE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I: Existing Section 4-3502 of Title IV (Building Regulations) of Ordinance No. 1628 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton" is hereby amended as follows: Section 4-3502, as amended: FIRE HYDRANTS REQUIRED. All buildings constructed within the City of Renton shall be served ' by fire hydrants installed in accordance with the requirements of this chapter. In addition, presently existing fire hydrants which do not conform with the requirements and standards of this ordinance when replaced, shall be replaced with hydrants which do conform to the standards and requirements of this chapter. All fire hydrants shall be served by a municipal or quasi-municipal water system, or as otherwise approved by the Fire Marshal. All hydrants shall be subject to testing, inspection and approval by the Fire Control Division. The number of fire hydrants that shall be required for the new construction or a defined risk, shall be based on the amount of fire flow that is required to protect said risk. The requirement shall be one hydrant per 1,000 g.p.in. fire flow. These fire hydrants shall be located no closer than 50 feet from the structure and no ' greater than 300 feet. The primary hydrant shall be not further than • • • • • • • ORDINANCE NO. 4007 150 feet from the structure. All hydrants are to be accessible to Fire Department pumpers over roads capable of supporting such fire apparatus. The Fire Marshal shall have discretion to determine the location of the hydrants based upon a review of the location of the existing utilities, topography and the characteristics of the building or structure; minor deviations may be granted by Fire Department approval of written requests. SECTION II: Existing Section 4-3504 of Title IV (Building . •Regulations) of Ordinance No. 1628 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Rentony is hereby deleted in its- entirety. SECTION III: Existing subsection (D) of Section 4-3506 Title IV (Building Regulations) of Ordinance No. 1628 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton" is hereby deleted in its entirety. • • SECTION IV: Existing Section 4-3510 of Title IV (Building Regulations) of Ordinance No. 1628 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton" is hereby amended as follows: Section 4-3510 , . as amended: BUILDING PERMITS: No building permit shall be issued until plans required under this chapter have been submitted and approved in accordance with the provisions • contained in this chapter. No construction beyond the foundation shall be allowed until hydrants and mains are in place, unless approved by the appropriate City authority, following appropriate application and a finding that there is no life or safety threats involved. Where the existing fire flow is not known or cannot be easily - determined, it shall be required of the developer to compute the available fire flow using standards and criteria set forth at Renton City Ordinance No. 3056 . ORDINANCE NO. 4007 SECTION V: This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and approval and thirty (30) days after publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 14th day of. July, 1986 . 6:2- ) i Maxine E. Motor, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 14th day of July, 1986 . onbastiw a. , . Gunptif9 Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor Approved as to form: CX0A/4-144Aa Lawrence J. Wa en, City Attorney Date of Publication: July 18 , 1986 -3- k Ames portions of Ordinance No. 3541 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 4007 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON AMENDING A PORTION OF CHAPTER 35 OF TITLE IV (BUILDING REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 1628 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON" FOR THE PURPOSE OF CLARIFICATION AND REORGANIZATION OF FIRE HYDRANT ORDINANCE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I: Existing Section 4-3502 of Title IV (Building Regulations) of Ordinance No. 1628 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton" is hereby amended as follows: Section 4-3502, as amended: FIRE HYDRANTS REQUIRED. All buildings constructed within the City of Renton shall be served by fire hydrants installed in accordance with the requirements of this chapter. In addition, presently existing fire hydrants which do not conform with the requirements and standards of this ordinance when replaced, shall be replaced with hydrants which do conform to the standards and requirements of this chapter. All fire hydrants shall be served by a municipal or quasi-municipal water system, or as otherwise approved by the Fire Marshal. All hydrants shall be subject to testing, inspection and approval by the Fire Control Division. The number of fire hydrants that shall be required for the new construction or a defined risk, shall be based on the amount of fire flow that is required to protect said risk. The requirement shall be one hydrant per 1,000 g.p.m. fire flow. These fire hydrants shall be located no closer than 50 feet from the structure and no greater than 300 feet. The primary hydrant shall be not further than • • ORDINANCE NO. 4007 150 feet from the structure . All hydrants. are to be accessible to Fire Department pumpers over roads capable of supporting such fire apparatus. The Fire Marshal shall have discretion to determine the location of the hydrants based upon a review of the location of the existing utilities, topography and the characteristics of the building or structure; minor deviations may be granted by Fire Department approval of written requests. SECTION II: Existing Section 4-3504 . of Title IV (Building Regulations) of Ordinance No. 1628 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton`-' is hereby deleted in its entirety. SECTION III: Existing subsection (D) of Section 4-3506 Title IV (Building Regulations) of Ordinance No. 1628 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton" is hereby deleted in its entirety. SECTION IV: Existing Section 4-3510 of Title IV (Building Regulations) of Ordinance No. 1628 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton" is hereby amended as follows: Section 4-3510 , as amended: BUILDING .PERMITS: No building permit shall be issued until plans required under this chapter have been submitted and approved in accordance with the provisions contained in this chapter. No construction beyond the foundation shall be allowed until hydrants and mains are in place, unless approved by the appropriate City authority, following appropriate application and a finding that there is no life or safety threats involved. Where the existing fire flow is not known or cannot be easily determined, it shall be required of the developer to compute the available fire flow using standards and criteria set forth at Renton City Ordinance No. 3056 . f w C_._INANCE NO. 4007 _ SECTION V: This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and approval and thirty (30) days after publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 14th day of. July,. 1986 . Maxine E. Motor, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 14th day of July,_ 1986. UNI6MNOO at.SRUIVDif% Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Wa en, City Attorney Date of Publication: July 18 , 1986 li i . -3- 2149N ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET O u T 2 11 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Tr?i- it DATE CIRCULATED: September 18, 1987 COMMENTS DUE: October 2, 1987 EFC - 074 - 87 APPLICATION NO(S). : SA-082-87 PROPONENT: Centron PROJECT TITLE: I exinggCton Rid.g . rental DESGRIPnIOppOox�ROtely:l6ADnhicitign for Site Apprsil to cnns.truct 360 multi-family y on a 13.4 acre pardel , together with recreation b LOCATION: Located between N.E. 3rd. St. and N. E. 4th St. , West of Edmonds Ave. N.E. and East of Bronson/N.E. 3rd. St. intersection in Renton, Washington SITE AREA: 13.37 acres BUILDING AREA (gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use v� 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation r/ 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: S g /1aGLi . e�l� rbJ t 1L SLOILAAtotla , Way 14 Ate- 6. Ph .k SS (&s M tie - . 1/8e.w*duf 14 E.+ ef.," 41(mi ties 414. 3,t, - - Tspidseigievf:s • 00126*- Peel ItWit 61*62A.S4140.1—AS 6,4 it.43/474‘rrn‘‘` t isvia ROVI _ P#4.T.ApeaVedva'436' (141 (A./47 We have reviewed this application with `" a pp particular attention ct hone=�aTeas we have expertise in and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal.• 7g 7 Signature of Director or Author' Representative Date / Form 4 ' CENTRON: LEXINGTON RIDGE 1 . Provide street lighting plans for the following: a) Bronson Way from Vermont Place NE to north property line on NE 4th Street. b) NE 3rd Street from westerly property corner to easterly property corner. 2. Development traffic will have major impact at the intersection of NE 3rd Street and Bronson Way NE. Grade approach to intersection is excessive. Provide engineering analysis for possible grade improvement to the north leg of the intersection. Buses are having trouble at the intersection now and the development will increase bus rider demand. 3. This phase of Centron' s development would increase Centron' s cost share in the traffic signal at Edmonds Ave. NE and NE 3rd Street if a latecomer ' s fee is developed. Estimated cost: 2,535 trip ends x $2. 16 per trip = $5,476.00 4. Provide for central information center for ridesharing, carpooling, vanpooling and Metro ridership. 5. Mitigation fee for signal coordination in the NE 3rd/NE 4th Streets traffic corridor. trip rate cost x trip rate x No. of units = total mitigation fee $2.37 x 6. 1 x 360 = $5,204.52 Centron 3025 112th Ave. NE Bellevue, WA 98004 (phone 624-1557) RENTI BUILDING & ZONING DEPA-MENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 074 - 87 APPLICATION NO(S) : sA-082-87 PROPONENT : CENTRON PROJECT TITLE ; LEXIN,TON RIDCF BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT 360 MULTI- FAMILY RENTAL UNITS IN APPROX. 15 BUILDINGS ON A 13.4 ACRES PARCEL, TOGETHER WITH RECREATION BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED PARKING AND LANDSCAPING. LOCATION : LOCATED BETWWEN N.E. 3rd ST AND N.E. 4th ST, WEST OF EDMONDS AVE. N.E. AND EAST OF BRONSON/N.E. 3rd ST. INTERSECTION IN RENTON TO : PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : [' ENGINEERING DIVISION MTRAFFIC ENG , DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : OUTILITIES ENG , DIVISION [11 FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU [' PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT ri BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT OPOLICE DEPARTMENT El POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FlOTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING , PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5 :00 P .M. ON OCTOBER 2, 1987 • REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : T -a4 ® APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ps NOT APPROVED Sht- 6, h Y/)1111DATE: CSC 1 SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUT ORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 J S CENTRON: LEXINGTON RIDGE 1 . Provide street lighting plans for the following: a) Bronson Way from Vermont Place NE to north property line on NE 4th Street. b) NE 3rd Street from westerly property corner to easterly property corner. 2. Development traffic will have major impact at the intersection of NE 3rd Street and Bronson Way NE. Grade approach to intersection is excessive. Provide engineering analysis for possible grade improvement to the north leg of the intersection. Buses are having trouble at the intersection now and the development will increase bus rider demand. 3. This phase of Centron' s development would increase Centron' s cost share in the traffic signal at Edmonds Ave. NE and NE 3rd Street if a latecomer ' s fee is developed. Estimated cost: 2,535 trip ends x $2. 16 per trip = $5,476.00 4. Provide for central information center for ridesharing, carpooling, vanpooling and Metro ridership. 5. Mitigation fee for signal coordination in the NE 3rd/NE 4th Streets traffic corridor. trip rate cost x trip rate x No. of units = total mitigation fee $2.37 x 6. 1 x 360 = $5,204.52 Centron 3025 112th Ave. NE Bellevue, WA 98004 (phone 624-1557) , . 2149N ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEEN REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: . DATE CIRCULATED: September 18, 1987 COMMENTS DU " 1 0Ctober 2, 11 EFC - 074 - 87 ` �' APPLICATION NO(S). : SA-OR2-87 PROPONENT: Centron PROJECT TITLE: Lexington Ridgp.. [SEQ, ? 1 O 1 rental OESCRIPTIO4OFxPmaJE1T:15Ain1ication for Site Apprnval to-rcons,truclt Wmulti-family on a 13.4 acre parcel , together with recreation build.;ng and associatcd parking and landscaping. LOCATION: Located between N.E. 3rd. St. and N. E. 4th St. , West of Edmonds Ave. N.E. and East of Bronson/N.E. 3rd. St. intersection in ,Renton, Washington SITE AREA: 13.37 acres BUILDING AREA (gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENT& ELEMENTS PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation • 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: • 71-47,7Z" • We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas we have expertise in and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. ,l/� "I7 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Form 4 RENT I BUILDING & ZONING DEN [WENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 074 - 87 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-082-87 PROPONENT : CENTRON PROJECT TITLE : ,EXINGTON RIDGE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT 360 MULTI- FAMILY RENTAL UNITS IN APPROX. 15 BUILDINGS ON A 13.4 ACRES PARCEL, TOGETHER WITH RECREATION BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED PARKING AND LANDSCAPING. LOCATION ; LOCATED BETWWEN N.E. 3rd ST AND N.E. 4th ST, WEST OF EDMONDS AVE. N.E. AND EAST OF BRONSON/N.E. 3rd ST. INTERSECTION IN RENTON TO : E PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : ® ENGINEERING DIVISION n TRAFFIC ENG . DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : LII UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION r/ FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU 1=1 PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT EBUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT OPOLICE DEPARTMENT ® POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OTHERS COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING , PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5 : 00 P .M. ON OCTOBER 2, 1987 • REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : Pfe-V-€.141CrY\ Li APPROVED APPROVED (WITH CONDITIONS fl NOT APPROVED / c2ee ao. . .��a� Gt1 --7-e-eziet, CW:1-1t27:Z 44-7/ ar-Ce-W 7.24-se--4 /4-- -.72.2:e ./,,,Le_2"),,, G�� 3 DATE: f, SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE de-F REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 aee • • Th ,,,gaz-ez-r-'• 4) aa -4- • . . • . - /2Z"//G19 e.,A,e Oft)/, REQU I RCI) FIRE FLOW CALCULATIONS 1. HAZARD IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION NAME / .X/ /7--.Dom/ 'd?,L- U.B.C. CLASS OF BUILD ADDRESS .eE7-WE,."AA/ Al. E. Sew �- ,,i/ E. 6/ r FIRE MGMT AREA 2. DETERMINE TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION - CLASS (CIRCLE ONE): I - II IV III V FIRE-RESISTIVE NON-COMBUSTIBLE ORDINARY WO RAME — (NOTE: IF "MIXED", SEE SPECIAL INSTRUCTION FOR AREA AND BASIC FIRE FLOW)D 3. DETERMINE AREA: GROUND FLOOR AREA: 4 k FT2 (A) NUMBER OF STORIES: ( /y'>/c4.c 45f4450 TOTAL BUILDING AREA: / ,. Z/, 4. DETERMINE BASIC FIRE FLOW FROM TABLE 01, USING AREA (A): 3DQv 5. DETERMINE OCCUPANCY FACTOR ADJUSTMENT: ADJUSTMENT: -- 75 ) GPM (B) IF LOW HAZARD, SUBTRACT UP TO 25% OF (B): IF HIGH HAZARDS ADD UP TO 25% OF (B)PM (C) 6. COMPUTE SUB-TOTAL (B+C): CIF 8+C IS LESS THAN 500 GPM, INSERT 500 GPM) z 2 SZD GPM (D) 7. DETERMINE SPRINKLER ADJUSTMENT: ADJUSTMENT: / / zS- GPM (E) CIF COMPLETELY SPRINKLERED, SUBTRACT UP TO 50% OF CD): IF LIGHT HAZARD OCCUPANCY AND FIRE RESISTIVE OR NON-COMBUSTIBLE CONSTRUCTION, SUBTRACT UP TO 75% OF (D). 8. DETERMINE EXPOSURE ADJUSTMENT; USING THE TABLE AT LEFT AS A GUIDE, ENTER THE SEPARATION AND ADJUSTMENT FOR EACH OF THE "FOUR FACES" OF THE BUILDING IN THE TABLE AT THE RIGHT: SEPARATION MAX. ADJUSTMENT EXPOSURE SEPARATION ACT. ADJ. 0 - 10 25% MAX. NORTH 'ZS ADD 20 % 11 - 30 20% MAX. EAST /5 ADD 7 (:) % 31 - 60 15% MAX. SOUTH /o 5 ADD S % 61 -100 10% MAX. 101 -150 5% MAX. WESTEST zs- ADD Zv % 101 OR-1 4-HR WALL TOTAL % OF ADJUSTMENT 0% MAX.� (NOT TO EXCEED 75%) : (, S % (TOTAL % ADJUSTMENT TIMES (D) ADJUSTMENT: 9. DETERMINE ROOF AND SIDING COVERING ADJUSTMENT: ��6 5 GPM (F) CIF SHINGLE COVERING, ADD 500 GPM) ADJUSTMENT: —63— 10. COMPUTE ESTIMATED FIRE FLOW REQUIRED: • GPM (G) (IF D+E+F+G IS LESS THAN 500 GPM, INSERT 500 GPM) (IF D+E+F+G IS GREATER THAN 12,000 GPM, INSERT 12;000 GPM) (D+E+F+G) REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: S 2r 7a S" GPM (H) a. 2 S O . C. .P. � r 1. SIGNED: ,� �. ; w DATE 1, /s.ef� 2149N ENviRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 7pn l v - DATE CIRCULATED: September 18, T987 COMMENTS DUE: October 2, 1987 EFC - 074 - 87 APPLICATION NO(S). : SA-082-87 PROPONENT: Centron PROJECT TITLE: lexington Ridges.. BRJEIF DESCRII?TION OF PROJECT: truct 360 multi-family ren a uni�s in approximate y on a 13.4 acre parcel , together with recreation b LOCATION: Located between N.E. 3rd. St. and N. E. 4th St. , West of Edmonds Ave. N.E. and East of Bronson/N.E. 3rd. St. intersection in Renton, Washington SITE AREA: 13.37 acres BUILDING AREA (gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1) Earth /\ 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants \� 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shol line Use 9) Housing ? LoCC O r I.( X \1 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation • 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation ` � X 15) Public Services \� 2 16) Utilities COMMENTS: PRoi)-)Asil = invot pK f No'-1 6n J u ov L o fR:C Cc N►-7Iti 0I'O RN6A_►N►trv0 C'F j 1.1C 1�-oiLl tv6 Urul�.� 14i. lv c'`! D e v M' R S-1' I rU6G7( 0 iU 1'I-16 yvA0R, S//-�rR 1 ,1Z(Z1)-r\)GA nc)cuiv-1 ice-) !6711 l-}-6(1.— U Tl-lu S I 1-*kc2 CDc, ry LC�Y���jai.�-�L�.j �'C l�K G C iU I�TC> T 1��.• �� i�,-►��suG� si ie Avg )1'VC�P�1-�����c�J () 311CL D t--c►29RT 2enu dn i lopiZcu� LA, o.F 1-16,1-I 1 L O c V\ '�1��� 'i1�(1,06G c/ou7 175 We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas we have expertise in and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. 5, fV\C Signature of Di± ctor or Authorized Representative Date Form 4 REND:"N BUILDING & ZONING DEF !TINENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 074 - 87 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-082-87 PROPONENT : CENTRON PROJECT TITLE : LEXINGTON RIDGE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT 360 MULTI- )'AMTLY RENTAL UNITS IN APPROX. 15 BUILDINGS ON A 13.4 ACRES PARCEL, TOGETHER WITH RECREATION BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED PARKING AND LANDSCAPING. LOCATION : LOCATED BETWWEN N.E. 3rd ST AND N.E. 4th ST, WEST OF EDMONDS AVE. N.E. AND EAST OF BRONSON/N.E. 3rd ST. INTERSECTION IN RENTON TO : PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : OENGINEERING DIVISION n TRAFFIC ENG . DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : tEl UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION ® FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU LII PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT F.BUILDING & ZO IILG DEPARTMENT ® POLICE DEPARTMENT OPOLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ri OTHERS ; COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING , PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5 :00 P .M. ON OCTOBER 2, 1987 • REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : n APPROVED OAPPROVED WITH CONDITIONS [} NOT APPROVED DATE: SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 v 2149N EnviRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: ECt.r DATE CIRCULATED: September 18, 1987 COMMENTS DUE: October 2, 1987 EFC - 074 - 87 APPLICATION NO(S). : SA-082-87 PROPONENT: Centron PROJECT TITLE: Iexington Ridge BR EE DESCRIPTION OF PROJE T: �n fnr Sit gpnrnyc�1 to cOfS.triirt 16O multi-family rental uni�s in approximately on a 13.4 acre parcel , together with recreation b LOCATION: Located between N.E. 3rd. St. and N. E. 4th St. , West of Edmonds Ave. N.E. and East of Bronson/N.E. 3rd. St. intersection in Renton, Washington SITE AREA: 13.37 acres BUILDING AREA (gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics YN. 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation X • 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation _ 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: PC'C / q ./( ha-i6 / G/GT r-Z°C tea /.0 kL ia 74s 41 d of< ( i// v e71 hUr/C' /)a f been ade��� �,1� add eJ-7 1 e rl/e Sli4� iu y—'— �w 1`i>lcc , The /a /a/6 /�f c a 6.0 �� -vd a ( j r II/-- . //e/t A /G1.0 ;-676,-ev.)Z/o'\-- lo�y�// bQ 1-76 T /9/a �f7 We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas we have expertise in and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional 'nf rmation is needed to properly assess this proposal. /e/ iSignat o rector or Authorized Representative Date /2. 7olecti 6rfe&I the /Z ���e /1-7� f //2 a sfU//s FOYIi1 Yj , ri i� /� i /�� h� I ,�L®� rnii�i� i 7111//2 2 ///� ��Ja y��a� v� �6,J r fl 41 //O9 �G�C //h / / - 7' ;1 °Q f/ 17/19 z v 9 s &/ser 0..2 J2 7 -v2) /J o)�/ ayam/ --y,4)9vi / 9i 7/ y y 7/I' I/ 2,fri 27 1--ft) I (A//fr.,e Gx,7 lam/ Jryzayv S7-o/ 2c2���J �/� ✓'2j�a� IiJ/ 2//-5 09,/ '�'� -�,n / !)�jr> �A�� �� d �( ry y9 19/17 P ggp �rE � � ��>� vadv 44,79,z.-71719_//d.;,-/723--77,27r9P-2-1; 2?x/S `»ado di-27 0,4-bos vvd • I • I• 1 RE 1T'l BUILDING & ZONING DEP TMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 074 - 87 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-082-87 PROPONENT : CENTRON PROJECT TITLE ; s,FxTNrTON RIDGE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATIQN FOR SITE APPROVAL TO Co STRU T 360 MULTI- dpMTT,Y RENTAL UNITS IN APPROX. 15 BUILDINGS ON A 13.4 ACRES PARCEL, TOGETHER WITH RECREATION BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED PARKING AND LANDSCAPING. LOCATION : LOCATED BETWWEN N.E. 3rd ST AND N.E. 4th ST, WEST OF EDMONDS AVE. N.E. AND EAST OF BRONSON/N.E. 3rd ST. INTERSECTION IN RENTON , TO : ® PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : [' ENGINEERING DIVISION TRAFFIC ENG , DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : OUTILITIES ENG , DIVISION ® FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU ®-PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT [' BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT OPOLICE DEPARTMENT OPOLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT LIOTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING , PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P .M. ON OCTOBER 2, 1987 e • REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION ; / Wf"S 1 9APPROVED [1 APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS [i] NOT APPROVED 4/0 &J &,c Il�/�1�nca..e e% &/ f4 DATE: CJ/2_/?? SIGNA OF DIRECTOR 0 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 2. 2149N ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Policy Development DATE CIRCULATED: September 18, 1987 COMMENTS DUE: Due: October 2, 1987 EEC -- 074 - 87 POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT COY OF MON APPLICATION NO(S). : SA-082-87 PROPONENT: Centron SEP 2 i 1987 1 PROJECT TITLE: Lexington Ridge ECM/1 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Application for Site Approval to construct 360 multi-family rental units in approximately 15 buildings on a 13.4 acre parcel , together with recreation building and associated parking and landscaping. LOCATION: Located between N.E. 3rd St. and N.E. 4th St. , West of Edmonds Ave. N.E. and East of Bronson/N.E. 3rd St. intersection in Renton, Washingtnn SITE AREA: 13.37 acres BUILDING AREA (gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE. C3 T V OF RE 4 TON MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION RE C E I' V E D IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1) Earth P2/ 172) Air 1 3) Water BUILD !ZONING iThi 1. X 2 12- 4) Plants 3 5) Animals X 6) Energy and Natural Resources X 7) Environmental Health 4 8) Land and Shoreline Use 5 9) Housing 6 10) Aesthetics 7 11) Light and Glare X 12) Recreation 8 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation X 14) Transportation 9 15) Public Services 10 16) Utilities 11 COMMENTS: 1. The environmental checklist indicates the maximum on-site slopes are less than 35%. The topo map indicates slopes of 50-60% in areas. Our preliminary information indicates that this slope is subject to land slide. More information needs to be provided on the grading of the site, slope stability, soils stability, and on the retaining walls. 2. This site lies within a critical drainage basin. More information needs to be provided on drainage. The checklist indicates an on-site field check was conducted in August and no wet areas were identified. How- ever, August was a very dry month, and there are cottonwoods and black- berries growing as natural vegetation on the site. Cottonwoods and blackberries are indicative of wetter soils. 3. All vegetation will be removed except for the scrub vegetation along the steep slopes adjacent to N.E. 3rd. (CONTINUED ON ATTACHED SHEET) We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas we have expertise in and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional inform 'on is needed to properly assess this proposal. a-3 19S27 Signature f ector or Authorized Representative Date Form 4 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET (Cont. ) POLICY DEVELOPMENT PAGE 2. 4. More information should be provided on the environmental health factors regarding the high power transmission lines running along the eastern part of the site. 5. The church will be completely engulfed by high density multi-family complexes upon completion of this project. 6. Are any of the units handicap accessible? 7. The building designs are identical - there is little innovation in terms of design or orientation on the site. 8. There is no significant open space. Very little of the site remains as passive open space. There are no tot lots or small play equipment on the site. 9. The levels of service indicated in the traffic study do not correspond to those indicated in the North Renton Study. A full-scale traffic study, including measures to mitigate the additional 2,535 trips/day, should be required. 10.&. Can the public services and utilities handle the additional demands of 11. the 475 residents of this project? 12. This project is located in Zone 1 of: the Aquifer Protection Area. Will the change in drainage on site development result in impacts to ground- water recharge or groundwater quality? This department recommends that an EIS be required focussed on the issues of (slope/soil stability, grading) drainage, relandscaping and open space, transportation, recreation, public utilities and services, environmental health, water and aesthetics. �;tJ`517 FENN o'u" v 00 BUILD 113 Z° 111'16 L� � RENT' BUILDING & ZONING DEPA WENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET EC F - 074 - 87 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-082-87 PROPONENT : CENTRON PROJECT TITLE : LEXINGTON RIDGE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT : APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT 360 MULTI- FAMILY RENTAL UNITS IN APPROX. 15 BUILDINGS ON A 13.4 ACRES PARCEL, TOGETHER WITH RECREATION BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED PARKING AND LANDSCAPING. LOCATION : LOCATED BETWEEN N.E. 3RD ST AND N.E. 4TH ST, WEST OF EDMONDS AVE. N.E. AND EAST OF BRONSON/N.E. 3rd ST INTERSECTION IN RENTON TO : 111 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : El ENGINEERING DIVISION TRAFFIC ENG . DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : El UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION 111 FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU El PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT © POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OTHERS : - . COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING . PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P .M. ON OCTOBER 2, 1987 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : POLICY DEVELOPMENT Ei APPROVED n APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS El NOT APPROVED This department recommends that an EIS be required focused on the issues of (slope/ soil stability, grading) draingage, relandscaping and open space, transportation, recreation, public utilities and services, environmental health, water and aesthetics. CM( OF RENTON RECEIVED SEP . , 24 1` 7 BUILDING /ZONING DEPT. .1:2. DATE: ,•� • o�� //27 SIGNATURE 0 DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 2149N ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: .i��( Y1�' DATE CIRCULATED: Septe ber 18, 1'987 COMMENTS DUE: October 2, 1987 EFC - 074 - 87 APPLICATION NO(S). : SA-082-R7 PROPONENT: Centron PROJECT TITLE: Iexington Ridge,. BRIE DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: _ triirt 3Ff1 multi-family ren a uni�s in approximate y on a 13.4 acre pardel , together with recreation b LOCATION: Located between N.E. 3rd. St. and N. E. 4th St. , West of Edmonds Ave. N.E. and East of Bronson/N.E. 3rd. St. intersection in Renton, Washington SITE AREA: 13.37 acres BUILDING AREA (gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation ' 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: • o, We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas we have experti in and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where Z;;;additional ormation is e ed to properly assess this proposal. Signs / of Director or Authorized Representative Date Form 4 RENT'l BUILDING & ZONING DEP1- —TMAENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 074 - 87 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-082-87 PROPONENT : CENTRON PROJECT TITLE : ] EXINGTON RIDGE_ BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT 360 MULTI- FAMTT.Y RENTAL UNITS IN APPROX. 15 BUILDINGS ON A 13.4 ACRES PARCEL, TOGETHER WITH RECREATION BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED PARKING AND LANDSCAPING. LOCATION : LOCATED BETWWEN N.E. 3rd ST AND N.E. 4th ST, WEST OF EDMONDS AVE. N.E. AND EAST OF BRONSON/N.E. 3rd ST. INTERSECTION IN RENTON TO : ® PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : ® ENGINEERING DIVISION ETRAFFIC ENG , DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : ri UTILITIES ENG , DIVISION 0 FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU ■ PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT :UILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT ® POLICE DEPARTMENT I ( POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OOTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING , PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5 : 00 P .M. ON OCTOBER 2, 1987 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : 1-D G n APPROVED X APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS n NOT APPROVED ��b•� s �tJ ( /( .��` L-Gt r�� 4o �,u L� 1 -/�1�� !O e l0�d � � • l!l 4c ����5 QJ (ems r2ccf . "/ ® 55L 0 ' s ' A //1 Au 12(( ife- DATE : SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE � = REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 REIN BUILDING; & ZONING DEN 'MENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 074 - 87 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-082-87 PROPONENT : CENTRON PROJECT TITLE : LEXINGTON RIDGE- BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT 360 MULTI- FAMILY RENTAL UNITS IN APPROX. 15 BUILDINGS ON A 13.4 ACRES PARCEL, TOGETHER WITH RECREATION BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED PARKING AND LANDSCAPING. LOCATION : LOCATED BETWWEN N.E. 3rd ST AND N.E. 4th ST, WEST OF EDMONDS AVE. N.E. AND EAST OF BRONSON/N.E. 3rd ST. INTERSECTION IN RENTON TO : El PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : OENGINEERING DIVISION n TRAFFIC ENG . DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : ® UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION ® FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU OPARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT LIII BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT E, POLICE DEPARTMENT El POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OOTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING , PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P .M. ON OCTOBER 2, 1987 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : OAPPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS [' NOT APPROVED = Zz- O-1-7L��-ram% C�G DATE: /O-/_3--c5 7 SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 ` S C'I 1^1 l:i, RENTON T, 2149N ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET Ii:. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: �r\q tivA- -ext w(1) OCT 211987 DATE CIRCULATED: September 18, 1987 COMMENTS DUE: October 2, 1987 EFC - 074 - 87 APPLICATION NO(S). : SA-O22-87 PROPONENT: Centron PROJEECT TITLE: IQxJingtnn Ridge,. rentalBRIEDESCRIPTION OFxPROJECT:2_ApoliBUllp do n for Site Approval to construct RHO multi-family on a 13.4 acre parbel , together with recreation buil(Eng and associated parking and 1-andscaprng. LOCATION: Located between N.E. 3rd. St. and N. E. 4th St. , West of Edmonds Ave. N.E. and East of Bronson/N.E. 3rd. St. intersection in Renton, Washington SITE AREA: 13.37 acres BUILDING AREA (gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1) Earth V 1 2) Air '✓ 3) Water 4) Plants ✓/ 5) Animals r/ 6) Energy and Natural Resources ✓ 7) Environmental Health V 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing ✓ = 10) Aesthetics LY 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation • 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation ✓ 14) Transportation ✓ 15) Public Services 16) Utilities ✓ COMMENTS: FA...4c. cd,y 6„j4„,,, 441 arid Rowel (1, eo Aka .rutufe. is_ 64er to ee444,444, atto- tae. (4. 0.c• C Iel ) ..� / 4po We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas we have expertise in and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. /V ( /87 Signature of Director or Autlhorized Representative Date Form 4 RENT1-- BUILDING & ZONING DEPA MENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 074 - 87 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-082-87 PROPONENT : CENTRON PROJECT TITLE : LEXINGTON RIDOF BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT 360 MULTI- F MILL RENTAL UNITS IN APPROX. 15 BUILDINGS ON A 13.4 ACRES PARCEL, TOGETHER WITH RECREATION BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED PARKING AND LANDSCAPING. LOCATION : LOCATED BETWWEN N.E. 3rd ST AND N.E. 4th ST, WEST OF EDMONDS AVE. N.E. AND EAST OF BRONSON/N.E. 3rd ST. INTERSECTION IN RENTON TO : ® PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : ENGINEERING DIVISION TRAFFIC ENG , DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : LI UTILITIES ENG , DIVISION fl FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT LI BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT El POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING , PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P .M. ON OCTOBER 2, 1987 • REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION ; - ® APPROVED ® APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS • ® NOT APPROVED 1) 1-4, Z) �,/ 0 �1C(pv�ct� (�rl C�'1�'i ,''i G tC.'( i r-(dfi .ry z a .e r' V 7��_. (ti8+f-_ 3) is L, ._ if y) ' �f.e�'YC�'- v1"��a ,�1 / (L/ T - �i r, tr��G.o'..Ps '��-rLs ' Y`�U"7--"� f C -5) �4v .,°( lama Y.3,/- ?.-•A 6,- _ c c � ) �) 1 •C' , 6.) c ra,(-L •"' S r7 t:„•-• i°fie, + �°-�'''J l ' _ G _t t .l'A � DATE . SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE V �J'�'`—cCr� ���-t.-.� ,�•2l'y,'J�+R�� cr {�.l Y f C'..:.'%�.7 t 4 r --� t�..`'�f. >-�, a�(i'�. .2n"v;Lv�'=., 4 a1e REVPSION 5/1982 /r��//c5 , Form 182 Cav OF E:EN ON ri'l r3 I) \17 2149N ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET` III 2149N REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Pcm\vGe , 1 'qn7 DATE CIRCULATED: September 18, 1987 COMMENTS DUE: October 2, 1987 EFC - 074 - 87 APPLICATION NO(S). : SA-082-87 PROPONENT: Centron PROJECT TITLE: I exington Rid,gf.., rBRtal DDESCRII?TION OoxPinWir: - -multi-family pp y on a 13.4 acre parcel , together with recreation b ll9 LOCATION: Located between N.E. 3rd. St. and N. E. 4th St. , West of Edmonds Ave. N.E. and East of Bronson/N.E. 3rd. St. intersection in Renton, Washington SITE AREA: 13.37 acres BUILDING AREA (gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health ' 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation • 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities / p CONVENTS: 7 _,-6,�-- 2? G 4p l � vrG/ar e- . a./1"--7::,-- -. )-. 'GGZP G �/ G��� d';V-- G --z- ,/ --e--G, ,-- -7 -c_._ ,--,4 ii72- _,41 ' -- -7 e----7-2"---='- , 7"--7 ,-(7---,-----e"—:-2 -,C .--‘ "--1---- GUI /Z—A af-t",::2—e �i2c^• �iG—C-f��/G� /��.v� �--dam C " We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas we have expertise in and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional informati n is needed to properly assess this proposal. et Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Form 4 of Rg'it • ti _ c, `• ® o BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT fill /QE T-6;—\` � . v 7 ea 200 Mill Avenue South r�'f .`'� i - . — Renton, Washington 98055 41E1 SEP 2 : '3 i ''?"..?.:':::',2, �' -_, c= ` :'� :R" 1 i T: II 1 82_6M31 n • / I �^�* I , ..;\/ -N."— ' 4 - --, Mr. Colin Quinn s' �, 3025 112th ave. N.E. �l i X. �� '";; �C� Bellevue, WA 98004 /,`1 C C 8 ---'6j • IJ U s P Lei NOT DELIVERABLE<-= -\ L861 • � l i' . -7 _ .AS ADDRESSED ` '] jj S( ..1';;!;`., r. R i (JJ U�J .. <./` I .vim UNABLE TO,FORWARD . 11 -I 6'Vd r,� 11 fi:�(�i1:3i r.r�,�� :,� =.�:i� - 1 P,ETUF 4 TO WRITER ' r1.isd - 1 . of ® CITY OF RENTON ..LL BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor Ronald G. Nelson, Director September 18, 1987 Colin Quinn 3025 112th Ave. N.E. Bellevue, WA 98004 RE: Application for Site Approval of Lexington Ridge 360 multi- family rental units, files ECF-074-87, SA-082-87 Dear Mr. Quinn: The Building and Zoning Department has formally accepted your environmental checklist application for the above referenced project. Your application has been routed and tentatively scheduled for the Environmental Review Committee on October 7, 1987, to consider your environmental checklist. If you have any questions regarding the scheduling of your project, please contact Betty Grimshaw of this office at 235-2540. Sincerely, -C----)014,1 Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator DKE: 200.Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 CITY OF RENTON ® pF "` BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT amen r- Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor Ronald G. Nelson, Director September 18, 1987 rt Canada-America Associates C/O Centron 3025 112th Ave. N.E. Bellevue, Washington 98004 RE: Application for Site Approval of Lexington Ridge 360 multi- family rental units, files ECF-074-87, SA-082-87 Ij Dear Sirs: The Building and Zoning Department has formally accepted your environmental checklist application for the above referenced project. Your application has been routed and tentatively scheduled for the Environmental Review Committee on October 7, 1987, to consider your environmental checklist. If you have any questions regarding the scheduling of your project, please contact Betty Grimshaw of this office at 235-2540. Sincerely, Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator DKE: 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 ti =''011 CITY OF RENTON , , BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT . Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor Ronald G. Nelson, Director September 18, 1987 Colin Quinn 3025 112th Ave. N.E. Bellevue, WA 98004 RE: Application for Site Approval of Lexington Ridge 360 multi- family rental units, files ECF-074-87, SA-082-87 In Dear Mr. Quinn: The Building and Zoning Department has formally accepted your environmental checklist application for the above referenced project. Your application has been routed and tentatively scheduled for the Environmental Review Committee on October 7, 1987, to consider your environmental checklist. If you have any questions regarding the scheduling of your project, please contact Betty Grimshaw of this office at 235-2540. Sincerely, Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator DKE: 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 P �It 4v CITY OF RENT4N BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor Ronald G. Nelson, Director February 8, 1987 Michael J. Blumen Project Manager The Ferris Company 10655 N.E. 4th Street Bellevue, WA. 981004 RE: Lexington Ridge EIS Dear Michael: As I noted to you over the phone a few days ago, the EIS Advisory Committee has reviewed the Scope of Work and Budget for the Lexington Ridge Draft and Final EIS. During our review a number of questions did come up, some of which you have already clarified with me by phone. Below is a summary of the Committee's concerns. 1 . The extent to which the consultant assumes full responsibility for the performance and timeliness of all sub-consultant's work. 20 Since earth, traffic and water quality will be main issues, is it realistic to assume that a high level of objectivity can be maintained using sub-consultants who• currently work on a regular basis for the proponent? The Committee felt the proposed sub-consultants (Dodds Engineering; Transportation, Planning & Engineering; and Golder Associates) you suggest, should be replaced with more independent consultants that you feel comfortable working with. 3 . Without knowing more about the alternatives to be considered for the DEIS, can a realistic Scope of Work and Project Budget be prepared at this time? 4. Whether the estimated $30, 040 budget includes the work of sub-consultants and what mark-up is assumed for coordinating and reviewing their work? 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 Michael Blumen February 8, 1988 Page 2 5. Whether the estimated ten meetings is realistic when one considers the amount of time required in coordinating with three sub-consultants and the City of Renton? (NOTE: In order to ensure a high degree of objectivity in the preparation of the required documentation, the consultant, under the City°s Contract for Services, will not be authorized to meet directly with the proponent except in obtaining information on the preferred alternative, and subsequent alternatives identified by the City. ) Whereas, the Scope of Services in other respects seemed to be generally acceptable (clarification of performance standards will be required) there were major reservations about the Proposed Project Budget. Specifically, there is no correlation of costs to tasks. Since you stated that the major emphasis will be placed on those items primarily being prepared by the sob-consultants and also state that the "evaluation of impacts on other environmental elements will be more brief in nature", the proposed project budget as it now stands seems higher than normal for a project of this scale, especially if it does not cover sub-consultant fees. In order to assure ourselves and the proponent that the estimated costs are realistic, we generally require that the consultant prepare an allocation of billable time for each major task or element proposed in the Scope of Work (by per person hours, skill level, and assigned responsibility) . We would appreciate such a breakdown of costs in this case as well. The other areas that will need clarification are timing and compensation. As we have previously explained to you, our process is "product" oriented with compensation paid accordingly. Thus, after submittal of the Preliminary DEIS, acceptance of the DEIS, and acceptance of the Final EIS billings up to those dates will be paid, (assuming they are in general accord with the Project Budget) . If you have any questions regarding the above, please feel free to discuss them with me. We are looking forward to discussing these in more detail with you and Gretchen on February 8 , 1988. Sincerely, Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator DE:cs pc: Erc Members Colin Quinn 011 C.4 CE, TP?, To: Jerry Lind Reference: Lexington Ridge Date 9/15/87 ❑ For Your Approval 0 As requested ❑ For your information ❑ Please reply 10 - U.S. postage stamps 1 - Additional Environmental Assessment 1 - Additional set of site plans 7 - Nbdified vicinity maps 7 - Architectural narrative 1 - Project narrative c; .. OF r,-N-:G 71 T SEP 141'' 7 BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. By Colin (Minn 822-2888 cc: 3025 112th Ave. N.E. CENTRON is a service mark C-90001 • Bellevue, WA 98009 • (206) 624-1557 • (206) licensed by Centron Corporation. V '. Y 0 ( '-TTY OF RENTO"T FILE NO(S): = bs - - BL:-..DING & ZONING DEPARTM_ .T �� '51 ♦ di mii •• 1\4TrVO MASTER APPLICATION NOTE TO APPLICANT: Since this is a comprehensive application form, only those items related to your specific type of application(s) are to be completed. (Please print or type. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) APPLICANT I I TYPE OF APPLICATION NAME • FEES CF►`TR 0 REZONE*(FROM TO ) ADDRESS 3025 112th Ave. N.E. 0 SPECIAL PERMIT* CITY ZIP TEMPORARY PERMIT* Bellevue, WA 98004 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT* TELEPHONE SITE PLAN APPROVAL , d.o . 0 SPECIAL PERMIT FOR GRADE AND FILL 822-2888 No. of Cubic Yards: CONTACT PERSON 0 VARIANCE* From Section: * Justification Required NAME • Colin Quinn ' ADDRESS ` SUBDIVISIONS: •, 3025 112th Ave. N.E. Su; App SHORT PLAT CITY ZIP 0 TENTATIVE PLAT Bellevue, WA 98004 _ 0 PRELIMINARY PLAT TELEPHONE 0 FINAL PLAT 822-2888 0 WAIVER A. (Justification Required) 1 OWNER NO. OF LOTS: NAME PLAT NAME: Canada-America Associates c/o Centron ' ADDRESS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: 3025 112th Ave. N.E. 0 PRELIMINARY CITY ZIP 0 FINAL Bellevue, WA 98004 P.U.D. NAME: TELEPHONE - 822-2888 0 Residential 0 Industrial 0 Commercial 0 Mixed LOCATION MOBILE HOME PARKS: PROPERTY ADDRESS 0 TENTATIVE EXISTING USE PRESENT ZONING t0t--11 PRELIMINARY Vacant R-4 ICJ FINAL PROPOSED USE PARK NAME: Multi-Family Residential NUMBER OF SPACES: Oil ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE FNO0 2 - SQ. FT. ACRES ;— I /� / � AREA: 582,397 13.37 6 b,ow,000 v AA TOTAL FEES {2� CSTV trIC arpri T.AFF USE ONLY -- ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSING DATE WE C E 9 v E APPLICATION RECEIVED BY: ��y yZ , C,LANco\u ID APPLICATION DETERMINED TO BE: SEP1411 7 rL'IL,51 Accepted „— BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. O Incomplete Notification Sent On By: (initials) DATE. ROUTED ADDITIONAL MATERIAL RECEIVED BY: APPLICATION DETERMINED TO BE: 0 Accepted 0 Incomplete Notification Sent On By: (Initials) ROUTED TO: 0 Building 0 Design Eng. 0 Fire 0 Parks 0 Police 0 Policy Dev. 0 Traffic Eng. 0 Utilities , REVISED 1-31-84 f Legal description of property (if more space is required, attach a separate sheet). SEE ATTACHED ^^u . `fill AFFIDAVIT I, James W. Simmers , being duly sworn, declare that I am ED authorized representative to act for the property owner,=owner of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and, the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS / DAY OF 0 i(•- -C--°� , 1951 . NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, RESIDING AT 10,• .... ;i_;:: .s\,.... ----...._______, (Nam of Notary Public) ) ( re of Owner) �, (/i / Lrg- Jots 112`4S I1 A, (Address) . (Address) T1c/1209-t,—. C.)- -- 5Yttf (City) (State) (Zip) k-zzSk (Telephone) Acceptance of this application and required filing fee does not constitute a complete application. Plans and other materials required to constitute a complete application are listed in the "Application Procedure." fi fl pi Form #174 STEWART TITLE COMPANY OF WASHINGTON, INC. 1000 Second Avenue, Suite 1300 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 622-1040 SUPPLEMENTAL TITLE REPORT TO: Centron Your Ref. No. : Can-Am 3025 112th Northeast Seller: Canada-America Associates Bellevue, Washington Mortgagor/Purchaser: Centron Attn: Kathy Our Order No . : 52875 Supplemental No. : 7 The following matters affect the property covered by this order: X The legal description has been amended to read as follows: PARCEL A: That portion of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter and the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 17, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. , in King County, Washington, lying easterly of Bronson Way "County Road No . 174" , northerly of 3rd Avenue North extension as established by the City of Renton, and westerly of the following described line: Beginning at the intersection of the westerly line of the 200 foot Puget Sound Power & Light Company right of way, as delineated on the Plat of Windsor Hills Addition to Renton, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 38 of Plats, page 22, in King County, Washington, and the southerly line of Southeast 128th Street "County Road No. 174" as delineated on said plat; thence southwesterly along the southerly line of said street 265 . 70 feet to the northwest corner of Tract of land conveyed to the First Methodist Church of Renton, by Deed recorded under Recording Number 5911567, to the true point of beginning of the line herein described; thence south 26°49 ' 30" east 379.30 feet; thence southwesterly 900 feet more or less, to the intersection of the north line of 3rd Avenue North Extension as established by the City of Renton and the west line of the east 100 feet of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section and the terminus of said line; EXCEPT that portion conveyed to the City of Renton by Deed recorded under Recording Number 4494467 described as follows: The south 425 feet of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter lying easterly of Bronson Way North, and north of Mt. Olivet Cemetery Road; EXCEPT the east 100 feet thereof; and EXCEPT the following described Parcels: CITY OF RE TO RCEO V E D (continued) SEP 141137 BUILDING /ZONING DEPT. SUPPLEMENTAL TITLE REPORT Page 2 "A" Commencing at the southeast corner of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 17, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. , in King County, Washington; thence north 1°11' 17" east along the east line of said subdivision, a distance of 425 . 04 feet; thence north 89°36 ' 41" west, parallel to and 425 .00 feet distance from the south line of said subdivision, a distance of 100. 01 feet to the true point of beginning; thence continuing north 89°36' 41" west, a distance of 141.91 feet to the easterly margin of Bronson Way North; thence north 31°49 ' 57" east along said easterly margin, . a distance 241. 87 feet; thence north 19°21' 57" east a distance...o£ 15 .80 feet; thence south 61°16 ' 40" east a distance of 151. 62 feet; thence south 31°49 ' 57" west, a distance of 236.42- feet to a point on a line west of, parallel to and 100.00 feet distant to the east line of said subdivision; thence north 1°11' 17" east, a distance of 52 .83 feet to the true point of beginning, "B" Commencing at the southeast corner of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 17, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. , in King County, Washington; thence north 1°11' 17" east along the east line of said subdivision, a distance of 425 . 04 feet; thence north 89°36' 41" west, parallel to and 425 .00 feet distant from the south line of said subdivision, a distance of 141.91 feet to the easterly margin of Bronson Way North; thence along said margin north 31°49 ' 57" east a distance of 241.87 feet; thence north 19°21' 57" east a distance of 76. 60 feet to the true point of beginning; thence continuing north 19°21' 57" east, a distance of 72 . 82 feet; thence north 52°16 ' 37" east a distance of 80.00 feet; thence south 37°43 ' 03" east, a distance of 138.40 feet; thence south 28°43 ' 20" west, a distance of 89.86 feet; thence north 61°16 ' 40" west, a distance of 147.00 feet to the true point of beginning. That portion of the north half of the northeast quarter of Section 17, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. , in King County, Washington, described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the southwesterly line of right of way of Puget Sound Power & Light Company with the southerly "line of Southeast 128th Street, as shown on Windsor Hills Addition to Renton, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 38 of Plats, page 22, in King County, Washington; thence south 26°49 ' 30" east along said southwesterly line 450. 00 feet to the true point of beginning; (continued) I \y v - SUPPLEMENTAL TITLE REPORT Page 3 thence south 63°10' 30" west 250 . 00 feet; thence southwesterly 900 feet, more or less, to an intersection with the north line of 3rd Avenue North extension as established by City of Renton and existing on September 26, 1967, with the west line of the east 100. 00 feet of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section; thence southerly along said west line to the south line of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section; thence easterly along the south line of the north half of the northeast quarter of said Section to the southwesterly line of said Puget Sound Power & Light Company right of way; thence north 26°4930" west along said southwesterly line to true point of beginning; EXCEPT that portion of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section lying south of the north line of a strip of land Deeded to City of Renton for street by Deed recorded under Recording Number 5947084; and EXCEPT that portion of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section lying between the northerly line of the more northerly strip of land Deeded to City of Renton for street by Deed recorded under Recording Number 5684198 and the southerly line of the more southerly strip of land Deeded to City of Renton by said Deed; also EXCEPT that portion thereof lying south of the northerly line of Mt. Olivet Cemetary Road, as deeded to King County by Deed recorded under Recording Number 2722078; and EXCEPT that portion of the south 115 .00 feet of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 17, lying east of said road; also EXCEPT that portion of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section, deeded to City of Renton for street by Deed recorded under Recording Number 5947084. TOGETHER WITH that portion of Mt. Olivet Cemetery Road, vacated under Ordinance Number 2329 of the City of Renton, which would attach to said premises by operation of law. X Except as to the matters reported hereinabove, the title to the' property covered by this order has NOT been re-examined. Dated as of August 31, 1987 at 8:00 a.m. STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY By: MARY DeLONG-FOLEY Authorized Signatory tr/9718g LEXINGTON RIDGE APARTMENTS PROJECT NARRATIVE This proposal involves the development of a 13.4 acre property zoned R-4 (high density multi-family) with approximately 360 multi-family residential units in 15 buildings . The proposed land use conforms to the City Comprehensive Plan. The structures are designed to be residential in appearance and will have a maximum height of 35 feet above finish grade. The plan also includes a recreation building of approximately 4, 500 square feet and provides racquetball court, weight room, lounge with big screen t.v. /video, sauna, tanning beds and swimming pool . Thirty nine percent of the site area will be landscaped open space. Existing vegetation will be preserved to the greatest extent possible particularly in buffer set-back areas . The property will be constructed as a single phase development. Construction will commence at the issuance of building permit which is anticipated to be the first quarter of 1988. Project construction time will be approximately 6 months from ground breaking to first certificate of occupancy. The site is bounded on the south by N.E. 3rd Street, an arterial street. The site is bounded on the north by Bronson Way N.E. and N.E. 4th Street which are neighborhood collector streets. The property abuts an existing apartment development to the west and a church to the north. The proposed development site is currently vacant and surrounded by urban land uses. Utilities necessary to serve the site are currently available and adequate. CITY OF REN T O;-I [11 M [1) SEP14 BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. • /� ,•„.„. 4I .. i `. {'' - .. r`d.� I 4 ,,.r 11^rr• A 3 ,•4„r »\� ',' - h -� ,,.r `0 /1 ,:i. ,.,,' 7_, ':: ,. -ic•F.j.,.'''''',.. ..,... .1‘,,'':..< - ...$ 1�tjiP, • • { I•'.' ..., ; \ • 4- r 1T 14i,.• "" .. - gc• • • • , f Y'' • •1 1 ij,.b p.: (° j J j" r !.•, l�f', , ' ior; {A:Z. h 'fRt ' !(• ,r;; vF, ,/. r� t � '' . t i, - .t l 1, t• ,5�., „� Ty:,1' '6. ' '4. t ,.. ;r' (•r •' } tI i,• `t ' J a vt� . f, • /1 't4 6.Y ry may, a.fl3 rtt `Cr, s /...1' !` 'f� /r r j '�•ll, ' 1! 7 t� It '../ /'''''..' i.l'i•••/•• • 111 • ' /J` —I� #�`\ 0. , ) �_a,! �'{_r_lA • t 4',l' ,1.. y r.f. :�,. f• t • i[[ //i,'i, ` '�'. {. • i 4ilk`,r�!l••q� to:— • • •,• .:T 7' t t• a i t i 'y r 1 { '', r r ii '� / ra :7 ' .bli , �`�1� fty� r: -; rYr .Lf'• • �,'p• , •• "Ailli / / -C / .rr • ' ...ill " 11{ ii r OM F• ,'r ; '�., �, d�'�r� !'�-L, �4,• !• ,� 7t y 1 �� .. _ /�! rt • � .r, , • ��� . — it•. •i r ' i.C• . :;:: 7 r 1 Z- `r 7 ' t T•} '' , 4 •` ¢ ' , . ,e• ( i , ',• v r ; • + • �`' ffJ� j� ` • ty_' Y� ' ` • { , a , •••. .r y J/ r '/1 k•}` dal _ ,y,,• `� , • 2r� .,i':,.''4(.• ' `,• ', r „- ] • C i` •" 111L!� ! `�••-., ,.. • r _•t eF } `'ln�c ry r / h•C' `'{'`,c 1 r ` �' 'r„ lt`* ' ,.. !rr . t r! �\` y • ' r L�- • ' ,t'a,', Sr" •', . t L 'C •, V -c j '.�•''77Ta``a�..i • i .• I F -� • • • • g;�,1^ II r' 'Ci • `` j I• •j,1 r '.r. '4 'mil I. t '08' • / .r-- �•i,. T. •` i l� ' ! :7, "D, 'l .. ',C , 1 •t • , , ,,` {t `e s ,r .,.,` .($ ? TI '1 ', / f i i ' ;•■p' '�ph 4„,t��� ..l..<�% 1 • ;1 y ., f; }Y', '• C • t •-1 1 •+1 r( , '( i • , , y • •:T •'' , l'� T• -_'pia +) 1, li.�i.IL.\p {��`.� '.t '. h ,. l;rlt'lf IrrJr • ! .� • it if _ i �',• • a -::;:-Till. •t"`"e'XOl , / ►r'i !, ''.{.` , ' ,uA' , , ,t y� f1 1 I• ys„ �► ,,„w. • rr \\ v i j�=P i (i 1:' J/ I!' (j II� - iY. ^. ' ^•VP � -(r N f fL ? l'1 '/ �. .• ,` . �' if �°i '''' ' t",�! L. C. r r I / �p.A{G:3S. ' 3, 7�•�r] rC k• -' % ' l,q '• '7 .^ c, y 1 r .Id.i;a ! , r {ey�T�'*j.� y— �• .f v F •Y�l•!' ..h•. ]a� •`'� 11 �' , I /rf T '7 { 1� i. i - _ -_-.i- !'I /�'• . 1.14 ' • . 't�,, , �' vt - � .tlM' 1 ' u ( { = / 1 Y'r i �r • • .!,: r • y,�( a • 1,y+ % �' •`.f1 { r4{ '�'N. t 0,.4.4.,- ... 7 a " -` • i• .�•1rL �i i.1t. ���, 1 : .. !r. _ s. h.. • :. '~ t,.� ,11 ' \2i :::..,:;:; • 1 1 ,; .,t',.! ill 'i 41,L". • f 4. •i r 0 •4 r it" yi r• It j' �' !' •'�'/ji1 )�` 'S.a�'e 1,. •_ Jr•Tis ,r fit . / , 1 �1-, / 11 5�.. •gip -t, ' •••• ^N Jo '• ','• '1 {., � rr�11 • r°. , / ! i. '•{''; ` • =.I i:. ••* i I `t' I I �` :� , • � ,! t• '• tiro.n' _ �, + ' r . .7..pri.> ,'.!..,, •.(....o t 1, "/� •4' I LEXINGTON RIDGE APARTMENTS Architectural Description Building materials: Horizontal beveled cedar siding with stucco accents. Roofing: Asphaltic composition shingles. Carports: Heavy timber construction with pitched composition roofs . Trash enclosures: 6 foot high solid fencing with gate. . . color coordinated with project colors . Rockeries: Earth tone natural quarry rock in an uncoarsed mosiac. Building colors : Light grey, solid body stain with contrasting grey facia and corner trim. Window and trim accents will be dual chromatic built-up. Site Lighting Buildings : Wall mounted up and down accent lighting will be utilized. (See attached) - stair wells (see attached) courtyard (see attached) . Parking areas : High pressure sodium lamps mounted 12' to 14' above paved surfaces . Directed down-lighting will be shielded to avoid glare. Carport lighting: Indirect fluorescent •lighting located in the roof interstructure area. CITY OF R ErJTO•'? MUFV1INM SEP 1967 BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. ...},7 •yeti 'L ,r jypR"!u•�- _ h r 7.`wxi hv,.',at4^w,, : ..4, ,...,.... ....,,,e„..A.A.,).1.,,..,...., i.x... _ .. L . ..____ . , . ., . . , . Seattle Lighting Fixture-r ' Alps .ba.- '.u Y: -.; :. R • r•. . �' , ...4.,:........ • y y � 4 CA.r'-p . r tiW hJ . ,,.; ,.,;•:i ,,,,..taaa.,Aiii ...„ ...„....: •:. . • , immil....wisi4tifite .. ....„4100...---tee. ;4-7M1 - ay}' O V 1Y T / � R� -1!1• •LSrf • i ::.. r F ��yyy•�.:..�,,.z • ��' 3 '' •Q , .*y'y*a-r"T[:iT.tt'.. "..7. • • - 0/S POOL 1 ` # • ' • • KA -• h '}- • ad { r ,.�,}"3.. ?_ xi pt .` }..',L «tiT r N. ( ).,: Y i 1. wri1. , I • r4 UF BT . A• �,jl1 r f 4 yI ;aFr.. - ` „a-7r�L.-y Ilt� r:•. .-�. 'y ., F r7•s: .. YrSS}'7< .<S4 ST• AIR % sr `7' •-.=.: 2E128 ALE.E.sell. c vruNw000 -- .. . „ , n ... - ' ° "-`:R°?liellevu.e'wA , iid:• 551 t- lo!: �' . •• -AY P�;•- ....w 1??..553f . 88005-` . !• +riarQ .rt,sts'�CaCc r`::,.s 77X-0.&'cu:,.4: ,; • • TAcoMA' BV ". ` RTIA'c._ ERETT 1 . ! • 1 a© [-- : .�. t v''I IP - a � a 1.. M I I 1 vN° ' ., I 4. Z do ti • " H W `H t . H� W s ,© � � • .s O? , W •0 ' a H U i• .P.2 -1. AO. c;, ./ k c 40,_ ,.. . i ...... . e i ar:/ „,_,,t. i .i ,I H rd 1l !� fir: t, ,� C.' C..)' e f1 *, �� 'z, H Or c[1:15,--' j 1 � C� ':M N,SNO �i 1 ' .I,.•3,. t . t ' • of R . _ 1I1✓✓ ,, EC F: 'I Cam' 074 8-1 4o z City of Renton LU: _ ca ,2-51 amIL UMW ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Ab9grED sePtcoo, Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43,21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for allproposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instructions for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies. use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on 'different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency.to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impacts. Use of Checklist for Nonproject Proposals: (Please Type or Print Legibly) Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer,"'and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Lexington Ridge 2. Name of applicant: CENTRON 3. Address 'and phone number of applicant and contact person: Colin Quinn - CENTRON CITY OF ZNv T O;J 3025 112th Ave. N.E. p f(V'? 11 n�J Bellevue, WA 98009 II 4. Date checklist prepared: 9/1/87 TFP�4r07 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton SUN. •�;` /NH 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Single Phase Project. Oonstruction to commence upon issuance of building Permits. Late 1987 or early 1988. 7. Do you have any pl._ for future additions, expansions, further activity related to or connected with this proposal? if yes, explain. - No. 8. List anyenvironmental informationyou know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. July 1987 Transportation Planning & Engineerings, Inc. Traffic Analysis. A soils report is presently being prepared and will be submitted shortly. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No. 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Site Plan Approval Clearing, grading, and all other necessary Building Permits permits. 1.1. 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. Construction of 360 multi-family rental units in approximately 15 buildings on a 13.4 acre parcel, together with recreation building and associated parking and landscaping. Approximately 40% of the site will be retained in open space. Recreational facilities include a swimming pool, sauna, weight room, lounge, sunbeds, racquetball court, tot lots, and trails. 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 topography map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The property is located between N.E. 3rd St. and N.E. 4th St. , West of Edmonds Ave. N.E. and East of the Bronson/N.E. 3rd St. intersection in Renton, Washington. • B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one); flat, oiling, 'P steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Approximately 35%. c. ' What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, caly, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you, know thy. rt.Pc:sificatinn ^F ^^rie-fofura1 soils specify them and note any prime rarmiand. Sand, Gravel and Glacial Till. Soils report by Golder Assoc to be provided d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. - 2 e. ' Describe the '.:.pose, type, and approximate qua-t-.._ivies of any filling or grading,proposed. Indicate source of fill. Approximately 250,000 cubic yards of material will be excavated. Approximately 10,000 cubic yards of fill will occur which will originate on site. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Erosion could occur as the result of grading on site. However, measures are proposed to minimize erosion (see h) . g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 60% of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: During construction erosion will be controlled by means of a temporary erosion sedimentation control program approved by the City. A permanent City-approved drainage system, hvdroseedinq_ and landscaping will control long term erosion. The project will comply with all recommendations of the soils report. 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Some dust may occur during construction. Minor long term emissions will result from automobiles and fireplace wood smoke. b. Are there any off-site sources of emission? No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Construction dust will be controlled with water. 3. WATER a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No. 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. No.: 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. - 3 - 4) Will the pro,,;Al require surface water withdrai::,..3 or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximately quantities if known. Some surface water diversions may occur through the city-approved storm system. The quantity and outfall location will be controlled and approved by the City. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose; and appaoximately quantities if known. Some storm water may be discharged to ground water through the city-approved retention/detention system. 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. Site is served by sanitary sewers. (including storm water): c. Water Runoff (t d g ) 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Storm water will be collected and discharged by means of a system approved by the City. The water will be discharged at a rate approved by the City to the existing drainage course. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. The storm water system will be designed to incorporate both natural and *rech.an.4r-1 f' --- ion to the greatest atest extent feasible. Site is almost all gravel, with a high percolation rate. " I • - 4 - I d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: The storm water control system will be reviewed and approved by the City. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other a( evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other d Shrubs o grass o crop or grain o Wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other o water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil. other o other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Existing vegetation will be altered in the developed portions of the site where necessary for roads, building and utilities. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. • d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: The undeveloped portions of the property will remain undisturbed. Supplemental landscaping will be provided in the developed areas of the site. 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: Hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver. other _ Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No. - 5 - d. Proposed me4.-.;aes to preserve or enhance wildlifb; , any: Supplemental landscaping will be added which will enhance wildlife habitats. Existing vegetation will be preserved to the greatest extent possible. 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 primary energy source will be Llectricity for lighting, heat and other electric needs. Gas may be utilized as a minor energy source for the recreation building. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent II properties? If so, generally &scribe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: The construction standard for this proposal will meet or exceed energy code requirements. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill. or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Minor traffic and residential noise currently exists. - 6 - I 2) What types and levals of noise would be created by dr associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Short term daytime construction noise and long term noise typical of residential uses will_ occur. Residential noise typically occurs during waking hours. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Construction noise will be muffled and limited to construction hours. Adjoining residents will be buffered by existing and new landscaping to avoid noise impacts to the greatest extent possible. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The property is currently vacant. The site abbuts road right of ways to the north and south. East of the site is multi-family residential. A church is located at the northeast property corner. Multi-family units abut the West property line. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so. describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. None. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? R-4 Residential Multi-Family. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? High Density Multi-Family. Small portion on the south is designated greenbelt. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? 'If so, specify. The sloped frontage an N.E. 3rd Ave. frontage are designated as a greenbelt area. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Approximately 475. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: N/A - 7 - 1. Proposed ures to ensure the proposal is cc.,,,-. atible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if.any: See attachment. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. 360 Middle Income Rental Units. b. Approximately how many units. if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: N/A �I 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. 35 feet maximum building height. Principal exterior building material is cedar. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Structures will be residential in appearance to be compatable. The colors will be earth tones to blend with surrounding uses. 40% of the site will remain natural open spaces; the developed portion will be extensively re-landscaped. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The exterior lighting from this proposal will be typical of residential neighborhoods. Some light will occur from dusk to dawn. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Exterior lighting will be designed to avoid glare to adjoining properties. - 8 - i 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The proposal is designed to be compatible with the surrounding multi- family uses. Landscaping, retention of open space, and other features contribute to compatibility with surrounding uses. This proposal is also compatible with the City's existing comprehensive plan designation of High Density Multifamily on the site, as well as all Comprehensive Plan goals and policies for multifamily development, and is in confor- mance with the R-4 zoning designation. Site plan approval will further assure that the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? ('Prlar River Park and Liberty Park are located in the area. The open space on site and the Puget Power right of way adjacent to the east of the property function as possible recreation areas. b. Would the proposed project.displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:. This development will include a recreation center including a swimming pool, sauna, weight room, lounge, sunbeds, racquetball court, tot lots, trails and outdoor passive open space will be provided. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Any significant discoveries will be reported to the proper authorities. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. See attached traffic analysis prepared by Transportation Planning and Engineering Inc. The site is served by Bronson Way, N.E. 4th, and N.E. 3rd. Access will be front driveways on Bronson and N.E. 4th. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximately distance to the nearest transit stop? Transit service is available on N.E. 4th St. and Bronson. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Approximately 580 parking stalls will be provided. None will be eliminated. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to axig ii�y i•ucil+:, �� i.rGets, not including driveways? If so, generally descrioe (indicate whether public or private). No. - 9 - • e. Will the prc t use (or occur in the immediate tiinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Approximately 2535 vehicular trips per day can be anticipated. Of these, 193 are expected during AM peak hour and 231 during PM peak hour. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None. The Traffic Analysis concludes that the development of the project is not expected- tb:cause a significant change in overall traffic operating conditions around the project. All intersections are expected to continue to operate at the same LOS after completion of the project. 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. Minor increase in typical public services demands will occur from this proposal. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. The increased property tax resulting from development of this site will offset the minor increased demands. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities current y available at the site: ictricitD Mural gasp c ' refuse servic telephone sanitary sewer septic system, other. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. • r Water and sanitary sewer by the City of Renton. Power by Puget Power. Gas by Washington Natural Gas. Telephone by Pacific N.W. Bell. C. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: J Name Printed: CENTRON/Colin - nn • - 10 - \ #176 11-8-84 2149N ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: DATE CIRCULATED: September 18, 1987 COMMENTS DUE: October 2, 1987 EFC - D74 - 87 APPLICATION NO(S). : SA-082-87 PROPONENT: Centron PROJECT TITLE: Lexington Ridges_. rBRIEF DDESCRIITION OF Imatecy:l_Agp]iatjgn for Site Apprnval to construct W multi-family on a 13.4 acre par'del , together with recreation building and associated parking and landscaping. LOCATION: Located between N.E. 3rd. St. and N. E. 4th St. , West of Edmonds Ave. N.E. and East of Bronson/N.E. 3rd. St. intersection in Renton, Washington SITE AREA: 13.37 acres BUILDING AREA (gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas we have expertise in and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. . Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Form 4 RENT, BUILDING & ZONING DEPI MENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 074 - 87 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-082-87 PROPONENT: CENTRON PROJECT TITLE : LEXINGTON RIDGE_ BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT 360 MULTI- FAMTT,Y RENTAL UNITS IN APPROX. 15 BUILDINGS ON A 13.4 ACRES PARCEL, TOGETHER WITH RECREATION BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED PARKING AND LANDSCAPING. LOCATION : LOCATED BETWWEN N.E. 3rd ST AND N.E. 4th ST, WEST OF EDMONDS AVE. N.E. AND EAST OF BRONSON/N.E. 3rd ST. INTERSECTION IN RENTON TO : Ell PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : El ENGINEERING DIVISION n TRAFFIC ENG . DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION 0 FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU 0 PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 0 POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT El OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS ,REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING . PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P.M. ON OCTO$ER 2, 1987 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : EIAPPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ONOT APPROVED DATE: SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 r . !7 • CERTIFICATION OF NOTIFICATION OF ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS/SITE PLAN * * *FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY* * * PROJECT TITLE: LEXINGTON RIDGE APPLICANT: CENTRON APPLICATION NUMBER: SITE PLAN APPROVAL: SA-082-87 The following is a list of adjacent property owners and their addresses. A notification of the pending site plan application shall be sent to these individuals as prescribed by Renton City Code. Chapter 7 Section 38 of Title IV (Building Regulations) of Ordinance No. 1628 relating to site plan approval. ASSESSOR'S NAME ADDRESS PARCEL NUMBER Thomas C. Williams 357 Bronson Way N.E. . 947620-0700-05 Renton, WA 98055 Irene Emmons 349 Bronson Way N.E. 947620-0720-01 Renton, WA 98056 City of Renton 172305-9119-08 City of Renton 172305-9130-03 Canada-.America Assoc. c/o James Platt 172305-9154-04 10800 N.E. 8th, Ste. 1010 Bellevue, WA 98004 Kusumi Shogo 4643 138th S.E. 172305-9160-06 Bellevue, WA 98006 Norman Hash 358 Bronson Way N.E. 947620-0440-00 Renton, WA 98055 Gerald & Cheryl B. Edgar 351 Bronson Way 947620-0715-08 Renton, WA 98056 Puget Sound Power & Light 172305-9057-02 Canada-America Assoc. c/o James Platt 172305-9120-05 10800 N.E. 8th, Ste. 1010 Bellevue, WA 98004 First United Methodist Church 2201 N.E. 4th 172305-9131-02 Renton, WA 98055 James R. Fay 3823 E. Lk. Sanmaanish Rd. 172305-9159-09 l Redmond, WA 98052 • • m ASSESSOR'S NAME ADDRESS PARCEL NUMBER • • • ASSESSOR'S NAME ADDRESS PARCEL NUMBER CERTIFICATION I, u , hereby certify that the above list(s) of adjacent property owners and their _ addresses re taken from the records of the King County Assessor as prescribed by law. ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public, in and for the State of Washington residing at on the ztat, day of,..*,„& ezuzze.e4.2 ` J SIGNED: CERTIFICATION OF MAILING I, ERK-1 , hereby certify that notices of the public meeting on the subject site plan approval were mailed on i O-Z7-87 , to each listed adjacent property owner as prescribed by law. ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before me. a Notary Public, in and for the State of Washington residing at "4VT6 on the A7Tff day of 6G-]-7).614-ej Rg7 _40-62x-o SIGNED: h., Lwv-,�.�. FORM 200