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

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLUA13-001640_Report 1PROJECT INFORMATION OWNER: MICHAEL & DOROTHY URBAN DRAWINGS BY: ECCO DESIGN INC. 203 N 36TH ST SUITE 201 SEATTLE, WA 98103 206-706-3937 SITE ADDRESS: 4151 & 4157 WILLIAMS AVE N RENTON, WA 98056 PARCEL NUMBER: (4157) 0518500340 & (4151) 0518500350 BODY OF WATER: LAKE WASHINGTON LEGAL DESCRIPTION: {0518500340) TRACT 35, RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LUA 10-023 LLA, REC. NO. 20120802900003 IN PLAT OF BARBEE MILL, VOL 248 OF PLATS, PP. 25-38, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WA (0518500350) LOT 34, BARBEE MILL, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 246 OF PLATS, PAGES 25 THROUGH 39, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: INSTALL A NEW GROUND BASED BOAT LIFT. VICINITY MAP '• Mt Baker B-Oulevard ,.. La-ke People Park c,n Hid 5G,.;/\.an;3: $f1"1;;rrl Park ' Rainier Vaiiey PROJECT SITE: LAT: 47.52966° N LON: -122.20505° W NW 114 S:32 T:24N R:5E PURPOSE: Boat Moorage DATUM: C.O.E. Locks Datum NAME: Michael & Dorothy Urban REFERENCE#: Est. 1919 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: 1. Yinan He & Ma Hong 2. Barbee Mill Waterfront LLC SITE LOCATION ADDRESS: 4151 &4157WilliamsAve. N Renton, WA 98056 W~,;t :,,e:,11,:i·.,d':' • Killamev GlenPa~/.r L . 'llio'f :-,~~=k:.-~i-"""" Mercer 1-si:md ~.~-- (:)and Crest Pe.rk Renton l I ,.1,. ~ ' ' ) - r ~ f I PROPOSED: Boat Lift IN: Lake Washington AT: Renton ' COUNTY: King STATE: WA SHEET 1 of 3 DATE:August20,2013 EXISTING BULKHEAD TO REMAIN I. 15' -r PROPOSED BOAT LIFT~ 1 ' i ~ I I ~-111 21.85' OHW I ' I ' I I i ~1111 ' ' I ! I i I 111 <O ' <O ' ' in , 11 I i t: ! 111 I I i , i 111 i 1111 i I 111 -Ii I i II I 1111 1111 i I I 1111 . 'II I :I --·-- I --' ------,,_, -------- II 1!11 Ill _1,II 1111 _1111 1_111_~· 1111 _ 'Ii 1111_ 11_1 __ 1_:0 _-:_1111 _ ~1111 1111 Iii 1111 i _!Ille llllt_llll ii, ,, 1 llllc II': II! APPROX. LOCATION ELEVATION DETAIL OF LAKE BED SCALE 1/8" = 1 '-0" Reference: Applicant: Michael & Dorothy Urban Proposed: Boat Lift At: Renton, WA Sheet 3 of 3 Date: 8/20/2013 PLEASE NOTE THAT THE SHORELINE CONFIGURATION AND PROPERTY LINE LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY. PROPERTY LINES ARE BASED ON AN AUGUST 2012 SURVEY BY CORE DESIGN. OHWM 21.85'@ SHORELINE -, ~ PROPOSED BOAT LIFT YINAN HE & MA HONG 4163 WILLIAMS AVE N ,·-·-·-----------------·----, • • ! MICHAEL & DOROTHY URBAN \ 12' 15' 4157WILLIAMSAVEN \ ~------------·----------- ' ,---=-+ ·-"-f . r-B~~B~-~~ ~-M-;~~ ~~G:-~1;:;I;;· ~ ~\ ----415~1LLIAMSAVE_N _____ j r··_) • i ' I ' I ' I ' EXISTING COMMUNITY DOCK TO REMAIN DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES PARC. # 3224059066 I 1]:i!i L ffl OHWM 21.85' @ BULKHEAD ~ • ± -· -· -· ---· -· -· -· -----· __ _J .... <>:! EXISTING ADJACENT DOCK .. "' ~ TO REMAIN ---~ t-j __ _ ,--------==i=======------+ ·---------Fl SITE PLAN ~ SCALE 1" = 40'-0" BARBEE MILL WATERFRONT LLC 4125 WILLIAMS AVE N • I • I • I ' l ·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·------~ GARY & BRENDA BEEM 4119 WILLIAMS AVE N Reference: ) Applicant: Michael & Dorothy Urban I Proposed: Boat Lift At: Renton, WA Sheet 2 of 3 Date: 8/20/2013 Date: 7/29/2014 To: Lori Lull, Karen Walter, Lynda Priddy, Vivian Roach, Vanessa Dolbee, Kris Sorensen, Michael and Dorthy Urban From: Troy Hussing: Ecco Design Inc. Re: Urban Boat Li ft Enclosed: I) Record of Surey (Conner Homes) 2) Drawings showing Boat and Boatlift at the Site 3) Boat and Boatlift Specifications 4) Marine Surveys and Assessments Response to Comments 5) Revised and recorded Easement 6) Original Lake & Stream Study which includes planting plan and sequence Please take the following action: • For your information and file. D Sign and/or complete and return. D Call to discuss this matter. D For your review and comment. D For your approval. D Other: e C C 0 des i g n in c. Architects July 31, 2014 Lori Lull -USACE , Karen Walter -Muckleshoot ~ Vanessa Dolbee -City of Renton? Kris Sorensen -City of Renton Jennifer Henning-City of Renton Lynda Priddy -EPA '1 Vivian Roach -DNR S Charlie Conner -Conner Homes Michael & Dorothy Urban -Owners Subject: Urban Boatlift Good afternoon, I wanted to contact everyone in regard to our site meeting this past Tuesday at the Urban Residence Shoreline. I am sorry that not everyone was able to attend the meeting but I appreciate those who were able to make it. I feel like we made good progress and I appreciate everyone's willingness to think outside the box in order to come up with a creative solution that may benefit all. As everyone is aware, the Urban's recently purchased their home with the understanding I they were granted an easement that would allow them to place the boatlift in the location that is on the current drawings. There was some confusion as to the actual size of the easement however that has been amended and the new lease has been recorded with King County and has been approved by Barbee Mill Community Organization. The current easement area is properly shown on the current drawings. We did confmn at our meeting that no other easements or agreements are in place for this site at the community pier. The community pier has one permanent moorage space at the fmger pier as was originally permitted and the only other easement on this parcel is for the Urban Residence. There will be no future permanent moorage proposed at this parcel. At our meeting we discussed the previous studies and fmdings that have been conducted as well as the ongoing monitoring that is happening at the site. A majority of the historical contamination was upland from the shore where the current pond/fountain now resides. On-going monitoring of the wells continues with Barbie :Mill and that monitoring is being posted with Department of Ecology. It was confirmed at our meeting that the shoreline within the immediate vicinity of the Urban Residence known as the Barbee Mill Beach does not have contaminants. It is our understanding that any contaminant concerns within Lake Washington are further to the North by more than 550 feet. eccodesigninc.com 203 North 36th Street Suite 201 Seattle WA 96103 2067063937 FX 2067065276 The lakebed was relatively clear at our site visit and we were able to observe that the substrate at the proposed location is a sand/silt mixture. There is no evidence of any aquatic vegetation and the comer of the proposed boatlift site is being held in place by a steel sheet pile bulkhead with a concrete cap. At our site visit we were able to view the posted "no boat" signage that is in place on the North side of the conununity pier. Those signs extend from the shoreline and continue waterward for approximately 68' -0". At our meeting the Urban's did confirm that they have no intention of driving their boat into the proposed boatlift location. To get the boat to the lift location they will turn the engine off when they reach North side of the pier and they plan on walking the boat into position on the lift. This would aid in the concerns of wake impact and would ensure there would not be the potential for boat scour through prop wash within the first 70'-0" to 80'-0" of the shoreline. This distance could be increased if it was found necessary by the agencies. We did discuss the possibility of adding a scour mitigation cap/habitat mix within the area below the boatlift. The owners are willing to add this if the agencies think this is something that will benefit the nearshore environment. Given that there will be no motorized use within this area I am not sure how substantial the benefit will be but we are willing to discuss this and add it to the mitigation plan. We understand that Karen is still waiting on as-builts of the planting plans from the original platting and the conununity pier. There has been some confusion as to who has that information due to the original permitees, however I will follow up with Lori and Susan on this matter to see if the monitoring reports and as-builts have been completed. At our meeting Michael and Dorothy emphasized that they are more than willing to add plantings to the shoreline in order to help mitigate for the added boatlift at their site. In walking the shoreline in front of the Urban's residence there appears to be ideal locations for possibly two Scoulers Willows (Scouleriana) and two Red-Osier Dogwoods (Coruns Sericea). These plants will need to be approved by the Homeowners Association but we have received assurances that this can be achieved. The additional item that was discussed was the length of the easement terms for the boatlift. The Urban's are very aware of the concerns that the agencies have with the boatlift and its location. They understand what is necessary in order to aid in protecting the area and they understand the precautions they must take in order to minimize impacts to the adjacent restored nearshore environment and shorelands. They also understand that the agencies are concerned with the fact that the Urban's are aware of the concerns but future users may not be. The Urban's are willing; even though they paid a substantial amount of money for the ability to have an easement at their property, to have that easement be removed once they sell their property. In essence the length of the easement will only be for the length of time the Urban's own the property. The boat and boatlift 2 will permanently be removed at the end of their ownership. They are willing to write this amendment into their easement terms that will be sold with the property. In summary, the existing conditions at the boatlift location as well as the overall site allow us the ability to mitigate some of the concerns of wake, wave action, scour and sediment erosion and no crushing ofbenthic habitat. The owners are aware of the concerns and were already planning on having no motor power near shore. They are willing to add to the shoreline plantings to aid in in the shoreline restoration. It was confirmed at our meeting that no other easements are associated with this community pier. The Urban's are willing to give up the future easement rights that run with the property. Given each of these factors it is our opinion that this project could move forward and still address the concerns of the agencies. In light of this information we ask that all the agencies review this material and evaluate your support for the project. The owners have been very cooperative and continue to want to reach out to make this a successful project for everyone involved. At our site meeting; Kris, Vanessa and Jernrifer mentioned they would be willing to host a conference call to discuss this project given our findings. The project is currently "On- Hold" with the City of Renton. The work window for this area is from July 16th - December 31". We would like to try to resolve this matter as soon as possible and we would ask that the City of Renton try to hold this conference call during the Week of August 18th so that we can move forward with our permitting efforts. I We appreciate everyone's effort with this project. If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contract us. Sincerely, Troy Hussing ecco design inc. 3 \!'H'll lCATION\ O VERALL L ENGTH: w/sTO. INTEGRALflXTENDED SWIM PLATFORM 21' 6.40 M -- BEAM: 8' 6 " 2.59 M -- D RAFT: STER ND RIVE DOWN 35" 88.9 CM D RAFT: STER NDRIV[ UP 21" 53.5 CM DRY WEIGHT: 3,694 LB S 1,676 KG FUEL CAPA CITY : 40 GAL 15 1 L ---- DE AD RI SE: 20° 20° M AX P ERSONS/WE IGH T: 8/1, 100 LBS 499 KG (MW () MA X WEI GHT P ERSONS/GEAR: 1,200 LBS 544 KG Tlw ~peof,col1u11~ ,ni.·wwcmenrs ore approx,mutic,,., a,;d 'Ju bjec l ro var,ance Some equ,pm,w sho11, r may be op/Jor,ul Optrom and colors shown may nut oe ova,lubll'. Pleme see your au rhor,zed \ea Roy deo le, fur color op r,ons ~ Standard Layour (~-~ .~~'): '~I 1 111 ,1 .. ~11 •1,. ;,£ Optional Layout A .!ti ,,..,. Optional Layout 8 Ups ca l e helm features power- as sist ed t i lt stee r ing with integrated Vessel Co ntrol System (VCS ) and rich-wood acce nts. MORE I NFORMAT ION SPECS PG. 79 COLORS/G RA PHICS PG. 56 C ANVAS PG. 58 EN GINE PG. 64 Optional cockpit la yout includes an aft seat that folds u p to prov ide a comfortable ba ck rest for extra - large su n pad . WWW.SEA RAY.COM Bow are a includes molded-in arm rests and optional fill er cush ion to cr ea te a forward sun pad . 1 5 Specit,..:ations ':,i, ( :;ipacity (pounds) 2,000 2,000 3,000 4,500 6,5iJC 8,000 10,000 12,000 18,000 24,000 I llti11g Ranges· 36'/48'/60" 3!2'/48'/60" '.!6' 36"/±6;"/60'/(72") :ib :L.'f.'(ii.:,·. ? ...: : fili"/(72"'') fili"/(72"") fili"/(72"") fi_Q"/(72'") QQ"/(72""') ( ;.ipacity at Max. Lifting Range 1,800 1,800 3,000 4,000 ..:. 5UO 8,000 9,500 9,500 14,250 19,000 111111k Length 6' 8' 10' 10' 12 12' 14' 18' 20' 22' I rame Length 95" 95" 10'5" 10'5" 1t':./ 12'5" 14'5" 18'5" 20'5" 24' I rrnne Width 5'6" 5'6" 9'6' 9'6' ·,u 11' 11' 11' 12'6" 12'6" Woight (pounds) 200 210 450 550 ~:::i5 1,000 1,050 i,500 2,000 2,500 LiJ-ting Speed (T yp ) 15 sec 15 sec 15 sec 25 sec :;.5 "'"' 50 sec 50 sec 50 soc 55 sec 60 sec Min. Water Depth Required (Typ.) 18" 18' 23" 25" .;_7' 36" 40' 44" 50" 62' Min. Depth w/Shallow Water Roller (Typ.) N/A NIA NIA 16' 1',' 30" 34" 39' NIA NIA r~emote Control Opt. Opt. Opt. Std. S:~J Std. Std Std. Std. Std Leg Lengths Available 2'-6' 2'-6' 2'-24' 2'-24' L ,: .. 2'-24' 2'-24' 2'-24' 2'-24' 2'-14' Available Canopies P1260t P126Dt P22108 P221D8 k:~~ '.~ P27126 P27126 P27126 Custom Custom P30126 P30126 P30126 P36126 P36126 P36126 P42126 P42126 ' P42126 ' Some lifting ranges reqwe opnoml arm cx1ens,ons. Srondard ranges are shown with underline (example: 3,Q") ' Special ordf.'f Model XR 72" Range. Special mo(Je/ numb~s: SLB012XR, SL9514XH. SL9518XR, SL 74220XR and SL 190?2XR t Special order ONLY. " ,~U/· ,:"lo::-;:.' Cnpacity (pounds) 6,000 10.500 13,000 I \unk Length 12' 14' 19' I 111 Length 20' 24' 29' 11ft Width UP Position 10'6" 11 '11" 11'11' Weight (pounds) 1,300 2,500 2,900 \ ; 1unching Speed (T yp ) 18 sec 18 sec 40 sec W:11or Depth Required draft+12' draft.+ 12·· draft+ 12" 11\!tnOtC Std. Std Std. M111i111um Slip Width 12' 14" 14•• M,1)(11nurn Boat Beam 8'6" 10'6" 10'6' Alh1w;1ble Draft for V-Hull t 20-22" 34' 34" Av.1il;1blc Canopies FA-H24108 FA-H3D144 FA-H30144 l'Vl<l,11 ,,lip rcY1uired for be8ms ovC:!r 9'6" ,. Wider slip requrrv<.J for beE1ms over 10'6" f For Cat Hull Dilowable droft sublrac/ 12" 13,000 18' 29' 13'4" 3,100 40 sec draft+ 12" S1d 16'" 12' 34" N/A 15,000 23' 34' 11'1 I" 3,812 40 sec draft+ 12" Std. 14'· 10'6' 34" FA-H30144 24,000 20' 39' 16' 8,000 60 Sec 7' Std. 18-22' 13'9" 36" NIA Note: Specifications are subject to change without notice. A PORTION OF GOV'T. LOT 1. SEC. 32, lWP. 24 N. RGE. 5 E., W.M. LAND DESCRIPTION LEASE AREA DNR LEASE NO. 22-086046 LESSEE, BARBEE MILL COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION 11,AT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, OF SECTlON 32, TOVINSHIP 24 NOR1H, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON. DESCRIBED AS FOUOWS: t'f88"'4,'1'22"W 2198.~ 1; COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TRACT 35 OF BARBEE MIU. -LOTS 35 & 36 LOT UNE AD.J.JSTMENT, RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 20120802900003; THENCE N89'04'39"W 29.11 FEET TO A POINT ON 11-+E INNER HARBOR LINE AS SHOWN ON SAID LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT, SAID POINT BEING 11-+E POINT Of BEGINNING Or HERElN DESCRIBED TRACT; mENCE S01'06'3rw. ALONG SAID INNER HARBOR LINE, 47.18 FEET; THENCE N89'04'39W 166.19 FEET; THENCE N00'55'21"E 72.06 FEET: THENCE S89'04'39'E 166.43 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID INNER HARBOR LINE; THENCE SD1'06'32'W. ALONG SAID INNER HARBOR LINE, 24.88 FEET TO TI1E POINT OF BEGINNING. · · •· · · .· · -·~ 33 . • .. • //'.(,//:(.//><! ,a,;;·.2;;-"-·'-------, ' I I i"--otmR HAR{IC'f;: I U>< '\ M\6"4~·12\ ... _,~--::!!!~~·~·~ -:F: --.../ -292s 94 I 'JG~ "ID ·5~~5~"; ~:195%9.66 ~ "2980"~ V I I { I I I /~ 'I: ·95333 85 • l.\O('l2" G2 '//·/·/·/·/·//://·j://'/'.//·j://'/:/r." //• ./• ,/• ,/• ,/• ,/• ,/• ,.DNR ~ll~fR~WL/ ,•/•/' ,•/•/' .• ~, ....... ·/.·.·/,·,·/ ... / ... /. 34 ~ ~LL//:///.//-;.,.,,;.,..;;,~·./ . . . ~ e I 15• ,,. z ~ z 5:: ~ ~ REFERENCES \~~00~ LEASE AREA (SEE SMEET 2 OF 2 ~ ?R~ IMPR<MMENT DfTA!LS) Nl39"0+'39-'W 166.19 ..... ,; f1}cv 6 NGS PID S".36C7 ',~Q·...i:\I~,',· ~-192307.4~ ~: "29987~.5 1 INNER HARBOR LINE 'S. 1. STATE OF WASHINGTON COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC LANDS, MAPS OF LAKE WASHINGTON SHORE LANDS TILES 29 ANO 28, DATED AUGUST 15, 1921. ~ t 1159·~~·39'·N bd. '8 -·;~ 33 TRACT 35 ' 8~.,.,,,.. IK '89'o<'39•, ,c!~29.11 ~"',.1528 •0 12929 I' POINT Cf' 5 36 :'.i BEGNNING -:.:, • ~ ~,~ i~ SOJlHWEST CORNER Cf TRACT 35 36-A ~1§ .* I::: , 0 e ~ •. / -~!fu · ,~ARY HIGH ~ ~89"0·f 39" II '2 ;"°8 -;,: • / WATER UNE-..,,<S 1J~ 39 !::,~ §~ £: . 37 N89~tJ4'~"W \~" '1~9·u·39"w1 2, ICC er; 36 1.39 23 • NOTES 1. TH!S SUR',£Y WAS MADE AT THE REQUEST OF CONNOR HOMES TO OBTAiN A LEASE FOR DOCK USE, MAIN"TENANCE ANO MOORING PILINGS. ~ E. ~e~ Ul ~' Z' . I I f, 2. THIS SUR',£Y REPRESENTS \IISIBL.E PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENT CONDITIONS EXISllNG SCALE: N' ~ 1" = 30' .·!'' jlj l)ij i l--- 1 S 2. Pl.AT Of' BARBEE Mill. RECORDED IN VOULME 2-46 OF PLATS, PAGES 25-.!i9, UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 20060208000182, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON 3. BARBEE MIU. -LOTS 35 & 36 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT, LUA-10-02.!i-LLA, RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 2012080290000.!i VERTICAL DATUM NAVO 88 (CONVERSION FROM LOCKS DATUM: t.llNUS 3.25 FEET) BENCHMARK ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS LAKE WASHINGTON SHIP CANAL LOCKS DATUM, MEASURED AT 11:00 AM FEBRUARY 1, 2010. BASIS OF BEARINGS WASHINGTON STATE COORDINATE SYSTEM, NORTH ZONE (NAO 83/91) ON JUNE 28, 2010. .::;. AREA OF PROPOSED LEASE AREA: 11,964± SQUARE FEET (0.2751± ACRES). 4. ALL O!STANCES ARE !N FEET. 5. THIS IS A COMBINED FIELD TIU.VERSE ANO GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM SURVEY. A SOKKIA FIVE SECOND COMBINED ELECTRONIC TOTAL STAllON ANO TRIMBLE 5700 GPS TOTAL STATION ~E USED TO MEASURE THE ANGULAR AND DISTANCE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN 1HE CONTROWNG MONUMENTATION AS SHO'MII. CLOSURE RATIOS OF THE TRAVERSE MET OR EXCEEDED rno:x: SPECIFIED IN WAC 332-1.!i0-090. All. IIIEASURING INSTRUMENlS AND EQUIPMENT ARE MAINTAiNED IN AO.JJSThlENT ACCORDING TO MANUFACTURER'S 5PECIFICA llONS. 6 DISTANCES SHOWN HEREON ARE GROUND VALUES. COORDINATES SHOWN HEREON ARE GRID VALUES. TO CONVERT GRID COORDINATES TO GROUND VALUES Dlv1DE BY TI1E COMBINED FACTOR OF 0.99998394 NOTE NO CORNERS HAVE BEEN SET IN CON.JJNCllON WITH THIS SURVEY I I I I I I I I I I I • ' I \ I I I /! 1/ I 'Ji I~ I§ I I \ \ \ I I I I I \ \ I I I •g 1207t "'i2 NC~ [H '°'U~R TEH 1 :,~P•1C' ;c:1c~ / 3, ~-BP:N~E ~_·JC ~~U .~ )NC~ 'J :~'J·: 0 'JST ~~·l,t, ; ~ IN 1,K'J P.Si:: "':'< ~'.AT ~·f' :lA~RE~ I.II_L ,';;,ff NC 2) 32-24-CS N '1Q74J54 :·1303~48.21 KENMORE ~[- IRKLANO RENTON VICINITY MAP N r--- 0 0 0 it T""I i" 11- i I 1t N " ! ' ro .. 0 0 ' ' ' ~ t < ' a < -< < If -I C . ~ 9) > m , X " "' z C S C L '.J' ~ C < > UJ > c:: w., :) Zo (/) v,wO w > ro LL :, .,: m ~I<( ~~ 0 E5 ~ l..J. C ~ ,-5 olw c:: u <O :J 0 ,>W rom (,) UJ c:: w t-'-'.> ( ~ lJ~ 0 ~ t~ -""' IJ. t~1:! ~ N .. 0 "' -'-~:.s t-~ §':;;! ,(/') ~ C:'"~•wl · W ,1:~:i!:1· ~ (J ~.-s,t 1_I I C "' --, 01 ,,. ~ (C) ..__' E5 -;;1 '::!I '-':l ·~ ~ Z' c-... N :t,~'i:"7Z! j l,j,,, '~ ~ ~ ,l 0, I 0 ~ OJ ~ 5-0 ! I > 3 g::; ~ ,~1 I.LI &~ r-~ ::)I > t:".,::: -:,I N "' ;! ;S t, I l,j,,, ..C: <:: >---I ""\ ,___ ,._tG I .., ..c, 'I:" (/) w ~ 6 CJ Cc, ,.-, -,; cS IJ. i t -~ :_'j t-t -1) ,.., c::: "'_g.:,, kl W.gs,; [; CJ : :::i;· 1, ~ I ' ,~ C!Je11 !u~ Z ~ I~~ -1 }z '5 C :j ::,__(.'),"" c::~-"~~ 0 "''110 t j a .} u~1·;~ w "-~~g a: ' " I~;,; 1 g '-> :;" ~ MARINE SURVEYS & ASSESSMENTS ; .! I S ..... .\ G S T L'. \ 0 \X' .-\ \ I' 0 R ·1 l O \X '.. S E S D \\ .-\ t) '.'\ S fi ':( l't'I.J6ll.3S.1-.J.07J E m ,l i 1 . m a r i 11 t' . ~ 11 r \" ..: ,. ~ . i n c -'a g m <1 i I . c o m Gerald Wasser City of Renton Associate Planner Subject: Washington Department of Natural Resources and Muckleshoot Tribe Comments Case LUAl3-001640 Michael Urban Boat Lift Project Conner Hornes, Barbee Mill Community 415 l Williams Avenue N., Renton, WA 98056 Dear Mr. Wasser, The Michael Urban Boat Lift Project was initially submitted as an addendum to the Biological Evaluation for the Barbee Mill Community Dock Project (Case#: LUA 10-006). The proposed action was to add a boat lift to the already completed dock. at the project location. On December 17, 2013. the City of Renton received comment on the proposed Michael Urban Boat Lift project from the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNRJ and the Muck.leshoot Tribe (see Attachment l for correspondence). In brief, DNR was most concerned about the potential impacts of this additional boat lift due to: increased shading impacts on aquatic vegetation, increased vessel wake impacts on natural shoreline processes, scour and sediment erosion through vessel propeller scour, crushing of benthic habitat, and a greater risk of release of contaminants into the water column. The Muckleshoot Tribe shared many of these concerns, as well as some additional concerns related to mitigation and shoreline development. Each of these impacts is addressed below. In addition, relevant project details are included to aid in review. Project Location: 'I, Section NW32, Township 24N, Range OSE. 415 l Williams Avenue North Renton, WA 98056 Latitude: 47.515745°N; Longitude: 122.206114°W Project Information: The proposed location for this boat lift is on the site of the former Barbee Mill Company lumber mill, which has recently been restored and includes a residential neighborhood (the Barbee Mill Community, developed by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC). The addition of this proposed boat lift to the already completed dock at the project location is expected to have little additional impact on the aquatic habitat as this area is already heavily developed and disturbed. For a more detailed impact summary please refer to the original Biological Evaluation. See Figure I for a revised site plan. Pictures of the proposed boat lift location can be seen in Figures 2 and 3. Washington DNR concerns: I. Location of project in relation to DNR-leased land: MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 1 The proposed location of the lift has been revised. The lift will be located J' further to the east than the originally proposed location. which places the lift 4· away from state owned aquatic lands. This will ensure that no part of the lift will extend over state owned aquatic lands and that no part of the boat will extend over state owned aquatic lands when it is on the lift (Figure I). The stem of the boat will hang off of the west portion of the lift that is closest to the adjacent state owned aquatic lands. Because of how the boat lift operates, the west side of the bunk supporting the boat will be approximately 6' away from the adjacent state owned aquatic lands when the boat is stored on the lift. When stored on the lift the stem of the boat will overhang the western edge of the bunk by approximately J'. In the revised proposed location this means that the stern of the boat will be approximately 3· away from the adjacent state owned aquatic lands when the boat is stored on the lilt. 2. Increased shading impacts to aquatic vegetation: Although few studies exist in reference to boat lilts. a boat lift can be considered similar to a small pier in its impacts. This is because both are open structures that extend over water. The impacts of piers on aquatic vegetation are well studied, especially in saltwater systems. Unsurprisingly. piers reduce the amount of light available below the structure (Mulvihill et al l 980, Burdick and Short 1995). However, many factors influence how much light is actually available below an overwater structure. In the current situation, two factors are most relevant: a lower overwater dock height provides greater shading as compared to higher overwater dock height (Burdick and Short l 995), and a considerable amount of light-transmitting grating is needed to minimize shading impacts. For example. Fresh et al. ( 1995) found that at least 50% grating was needed to allow enough light transmission to significantly benefit eelgrass (Zostera marina). The current proposal features a boat (which, by its nature, is not able to integrate grating or light transmitting structures) stored at a low over-water height, so shading concerns are relevant and must be addressed. There is likely to be very little aquatic vegetation at the project site. A dive survey was conducted by Marine Surveys & Assessments divers on March 20, 2007 near the now-constructed community dock (Attachment 2). This survey observed two types of aquatic vegetation: invasive Eurasian mil foil (lv{yriophyllum spicatum) and an unidentified filamentous alga. Eurasian milfoil was first noted approximately 100' waterward of the current bulkhead, and increased in density from 120'-200' waterward. The unidentified filamentous alga was first noted 25' waterward of the current bulkhead. In both cases, impacts to aquatic vegetation from the boat lilt would be best avoided by locating it inside (landward) of aquatic vegetation. The current proposal locates the boat lilt as landward as possible, keeping it well away from any aquatic vegetation. The boat launch will occupy a small IO' by 27' gap between a vertical bulkhead and an existing pier, ramp, and float structure (Figures 1-3). This small gap is effectively closed in by the existing dock and bulkhead on 3 sides, and this is likely already limiting the available light. While the DNR view-that there will be increased shading impacts to aquatic vegetation-is correct, the extent of this impact depends on the presence of aquatic vegetation at the project site and the siting of the boat lilt. In this case. the proposed location of the boat and lift in a shaded "pocket" near shore without appreciable aquatic vegetation will effectively minimize overwater shading impacts. 3. Increased vessel wake impacting natural shoreline processes due to larger and more frequent wave action: There are two major times when this development could increase vessel wake: when the vessel is entering/exiting the boat lift. and once it is underway on Lake Washington. Each impact is considered below. The major shoreline impact from vessel traffic is erosion due to boat-generated wake waves. The extent of this impact will be determined by the intensity of the waves as well as the composition of shoreline banks (Asplund 2000). In the case of entering and exiting the boat lift, wave sizes are likely to be minimal. Because of the location of the proposed lift, speeds will. by necessity. be very low. Maneuvering an 8.3· wide vessel into a 10' gap, along the pre-existing 170' long dock. will require speeds that are unlikely to produce wake. The tight confines of the dock and boat lift effectively enforce a "no-wake zone." Furthermore, the shoreline at and near the proposed boat lift is already bulkheaded. The bulkhead is impounding any sediment above the ordinary water mark (OWM). Because the Army Corps of Engineers (USACEJ controls the water depth of Lake Washington at 2 l .85' above MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·2 Puget Sound mean lower low water (with small variations\ the substrate seaward of the bulkhead is continuously submerged to a depth of 5.5'. These two factors-small waves due to low boat speed. and low erosion due to the bulkhead and water depth-make shoreline erosion unlikely. Once the boat is past the existing dock and under way in Lake Washington. it will obviously travel at speeds that result in a wake. and ultimately. shoreline wave action. Recreational motorcraft produce waves that average 1-25 cm in height (Bhowmik et al. 1992). In a study along an Australian river. waves greater than 30 cm were able to cause shoreline erosion (Nason et al. 1994 ). However, this finding cannot be directly translated to Lake Washington because the erosive potential of waves is dependent not only on the actual size. but the composition of the shoreline itself(Asplund 2000). From the limited research available, it is safe to assume that every recreational motor boat on Lake Washington does have the potential to contribute to shoreline erosion. However, it is not reasonable to assume that the construction of this boat lift will directly add to an increase in shoreline erosion via larger and more frequent waves once underway in Lake Washington. According to Michael Urban. the proponent, the boat is likely to be used twice weekly from the months of June to September. On an already crowded urban lake, the addition of approximately 24 recreational boat trips per year cannot be considered a substantial development. This is especially true because the proponent could add this volume of traffic to the lake independent of the boat lift, simply by using the boat from public launches. Because the project is unlikely to result in larger or more frequent waves while entering/exiting the dock, and is only adding a fractional increase in the total lake trat1ic while underway, additional shoreline erosion is unlikely. 4. Scour and sediment erosion through prop scour: Propeller scour can affect sediments at depths of up to Io· (Gusinski 1982, in Asplund 1997). Recreational boat propeller scour can significantly increase turbidity (via sediment resuspension) and can directly impact aquatic plants through eroding sediment and cutting plants (Asplund I 997). lt appears that the direct physical impacts of scouring (sediment erosion and cutting plants) are most responsible for reducing aquatic plant biomass. as opposed to indirect impacts from increased turbidity (Asplund & Cook 1997). Clearly, DNR concerns about sediment scour and erosion are valid in the shallow (<10') environment. However, Lake Washington is a deep lake that quickly drops off at the shoreline. Scour impacts are not likely once in deeper waters. As the 2007 SCUBA survey noted (Attachment 2), water depth was greater than IO' within 125' of the current bulkhead. The current dock extends approximately 170'. [t is reasonable to assume that, once near the dock and within the shallow nearshore environment, the boat will be operated at "no-wake'' speeds that cause a minimal amount of scour. This is not due to any enforced .. best practices·' on the part of the boat driver, but to the tight confines of maneuvering to the boat lift. It is simply not possible to travel quickly here, and the low speeds in shallow water will effectively minimize scour and sediment erosion. 5. Crushing of benthic habitat: The water depth at the most landward end of the boat lift, in relation to OHW in Lake Washington, is 5.5'. According to the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the water level in Lake Washington is maintained within a 2' range. Therefore, the .. worst case .. minimum water depth at the boat lift would be 3.5' (42"). The draft of the Searay 210 boat with the stern drive up for landing is 2 I" (specifications for this boat are available at: http://www.searay.com/Page.aspxlpageld/ I 0232/pmid/309 IO 1/210-Select.aspx). Therefore, the closest the boat would come to the sediment, under .. worst case" conditions, is 21" above the bottom. This is a reasonable buffer to ensure that there is no direct contact with the benthic habitat. The boat lift will be a free-standing unit that only contacts the sediment on the corner foot pads. The specifications for the proposed Sunstream SL60 I 2AR boatlift are available at http://www.sunstreamcorp.com/sl60 I 2.htm. While sediment will be crushed under these small footpads, the total area impacted will be small. The siting of the boat lift, in a shaded area with no appreciable aquatic vegetation, minimizes the impact of this crushing. 6. Heightened potential for release of contaminants into the water column: MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·3 There are three potential sources of contamination that must be addressed al this site. t\>O \>hich are inherent to boats and boat lifts: the motor boat and boat lift both have the potential to release fluids that may impact the aquatic environment. The third concern is site-specific. because the proposed action is within the Barbee Mill toxic clean-up site. This site has soil. groundwater. and lake sediment contamination, but only lake sediments will be directly addressed here as these may be returned to the water column as a result of the proposed action. Recreational motor boats do have the potential to release metals (lead, cadmium, and mercury) and hydrocarbons (methane, gasoline, oils) into the water (Asplund 2000). Most studies on the impacts of this exhaust have found that there are minimal effects on aquatic organisms due to dilution as well as the fact that most hydrocarbons disperse quickly in water (Asplund 2000). It is important to note that these studies were done when older 2-stroke motors were common; the modern motor in the Searay 210 boat will have fewer emissions. The boat lift itself will be run using the required USACE guidelines from Regional General Permit 1 for watercraft lifts: "All equipment used in or around water will be clean and inspected daily prior to use to ensure that the equipment has no fluid leaks. Should a leak develop during use, the leaking equipment will be removed from the site immediately and not used again until it has been adequately repaired." (USA CE 20 13 ). While the boat and lift do not pose substantial risk of releasing contaminants into the water column, the fact that they have the potential to stir up sediments at the Barbee Mill toxic clean-up site must be addressed. The Washington Department of Ecology (WA DOE) has done extensive monitoring of the Barbee Mill toxic clean-up site. In 1999, and again in 2003, offshore sediment was removed from the site for characterization. Though it did have elevated concentrations of wood waste and carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (cPAHs). WA DOE concluded that '·No Further Action" was required and that there were no restrictions on sediment use (WA DOE 2008). Since this time, the Barbee Mill Co. Inc. has removed contaminated sediments and wood from Lake Washington along the site (WA DOE 2012). A farther contamination concern is arsenic, which has been found in groundwater, porewater (water within the sediment) and sediments at the site. To reduce the ability of arsenic to run off to Lake Washington, a passive attenuation zone (PAZ) was installed at the down-slope property boundary of the forn1er mill site. Since this time, arsenic concentrations in the porewater (IO cm below the mudline) have been measured at levels ranging from non- detectable to 17 µg/L; the WA DOE threshold clean-up value is at 20 µg/L (Patmon! & Porter 20 I 0). Arsenic concentrations in the top 10 cm of the sediment have not exceeded 16 mg/kg, below the WA DOE threshold of20 mg/kg (Patmon! & Porter 20 I 0). Bioassays of this sediment were completed with the benthic macroinvertebrates Hyalella and Chironomus, and there were no significant impacts on survival or growth (Patmont & Porter 2010). It appears that the post-cleanup sediment at Barbee Mill does not pose a danger to benthic macroinvertebrates, an important food source for fish. Even if the boat lift "stirs up" sediment, during construction or use, the resuspension of this sediment will not be likely to introduce dangerous concentrations of contaminants. Muckleshoot Tribe concerns: l. Scouring effects of the boat lift and watercraft on contaminated sediments at the Barbee Mill site: See points 3, 4 and 6 in the above ·'Washington DNR concerns'' section. 2. The boat lift and boat in the nearshore, where juvenile salmon are likely to be found, can cause them to avoid the nearshore and increase their risk of predation: It is generally accepted that overwater structures can alter migration behavior of juvenile salmon (though the effects may vary depending on the design and orientation of the structure. degree of shading, and the presence of artificial light), and reduce salmon prey resources and refugia by shading aquatic plant life (Simenstad et al. 1999; Nightingale and Simenstad 200 I). However, the significance of these effects is not clear. As Simenstad et al. state, '·We found no studies that described empirical evidence supporting or refuting that modification of juvenile salmon behavior in shoreline habitats was reflected in changes in survival." Nightingale and Simenstad (2001) state, "Presently, although we know that under some conditions small juvenile salmon will delay or otherwise alter their MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns A shoreline movements when encountering an ovenvater structure, the conditions under which this behavioral modification is significant to the flshes' fitness and survival is relatively unknm.vn." In tenns of increased predation risk, some relevant research has been done in the marine environment. At this time, there is no evidence of docks aggregating salmonid predators in the Puget Sound (Ratte & Salo 1985; Cardwell et al. 1980: Nightingale and Simenstad 200 I). It might be assumed that birds would be interested in small migrating juveniles. but there is no evidence that docks provide an aggregation site for predatory birds (Taylor and Willey 1997). Based on existing research, it cannot be stated that the presence of this small nearshore structure will increase the predation rates of juvenile salmon ids, either through changes in migratory behavior or by providing a predator-aggregation structure. 3. The boat lift will permanently displace benthic habitat: This is true, in that the boat lift will shade approximately 175 ft' ofbenthic habitat when the boat is on it ( calculated based on the Seamy 210, with a 21' length x 8.3' beam). The actual footprint of the lift in the benthic habitat will be much smaller, only encompassing the 4 small footpads it will rest on. However. the location of the lift has been selected to add the least possible impact to the nearshore. By placing it as landward as possible. it is located landward of the known aquatic plants in the area, in a shaded "pocket" that is already bulkheaded (Figures 3 and 4 ). This area is clearly impacted by pre-existing development, and by placing the structure here it ensures that areas that are relatively un-impacted will be avoided. See points 2-5 in the above "Washington Department of Natural Resources concerns" section. 4. The boatlift and motorized watercraft have the potential to adversely affect the restoration work in the WDNR withdraw! area to the north through increased wave action that can adversely affect natural shoreline processes and vegetation growth: See point Jin the above '·Washington DNR concerns'' section for a discussion of wave action as a result of proposed the boat lift and watercraft. 5. There is no discussion of the potential for additional boatlifts and other permanent moorage proposed for this community pier: As of this response letter, there are no known proposals for additional boat lifts or permanent moorage at or near the Barbee Mill community pier. 6. There is no mitigation identified for the boatlift: The proposal now includes the addition of two Pacific willow trees (Salix iucida) to the southwest corner of the Urban property. This will place the trees as close as possible to the water. These trees will aid in shoreline bank stabilization and water quality improvement, and may provide sites for future avian roosting. See Figure I for the location of the proposed planting. As part of this proposed mitigation planting, the proposal also includes a monitoring and maintenance plan; Monitoring An as-built drawing and report will be submitted to the City of Renton as documentation of the implementation of the approved planting plan within one month of installation. The plan will include vegetation description and photo documentation from established photo stations. Monitoring will take place over a period of 5 years at the end of the growing season (late August or early September) of each monitoring year. The performance standards will be monitored by measuring plots in zones within the planting area that will be established and mapped after planting occurs, on the as-built plan. There will be photo points for each plot and they will be referenced on the as-built plan. Photos will be taken at all points for MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response lo Concerns· 5 all years as visual documentation of the performance standards progress, or lack of. Collected data and photos will be compiled into a report for City of Renton DCD. The report will address whether the performance standards are being met during each monitoring year and if the final end of monitoring period standards arc going to be met. Monitoring results will determine whether or not contingency measures will be needed. Performance Standard# I (survival rate): Immediately after planting, all plants will be counted and documented. At the end of each growing season (late Aug-early Sept) plots will be visited and a count of surviving plants will be documented. The percent survival for the plots will be calculated by dividing the total number of plants after planting by the total number of surviving plants at the end of the season. Maintenance Maintenance shall occur at least twice during the growing season to ensure the survival of all native species within the mitigation area. Watering by hand or sprinkler may be necessary during the first year until the plants are established. Water requirements will depend on the timing of planting with the seasons and weather conditions. Once plants are established, extra watering may not be necessary. Hand weeding will be necessary around all plants that are being monitored for survival and coverage. Contingency Plan lfthe 90% survival rate is not met by the end of any monitoring year. plants lost to mortality will be replaced to achieve the percentage cover performance standard described above. Prior to replacement. an appropriate assessment will be performed to determine if the survival was affected by species/site selection, animal damage, or some other factor. Subsequent contingency actions must be designed to respond directly to the stressor(s), which are increasing mortality of planted native species. If a particular species is shown not to endure site conditions, another, more appropriate species will be selected. If excessive damage is observed. protective measures will be introduced. Monitoring years may be added if significant re-planting becomes necessary. 7. Previous mitigation at Barbee Mill Community Pier may not have been fully implemented: Planting plans are currently being followed on-site. Please see Attachment 3: site photography of current mitigation planting. 8. The city needs to fully evaluate this project and its potential impacts, and require mitigation as necessary. Without these elements, it is premature to issue a Determination of Non-Significance for this project under SEPA: With these additional analyses of impacts from the proposed boat lift, as well as the included mitigation plan. the city now has ample information to fully evaluate this project. MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns-6 References: Asplund. T.R. 1997a. Investigations of motorboat impacts on Wisconsin ·s lakes. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Madison. WI. Asplund. T.R. 2000. The effects of motorized watercraft on aquatic ecosystems. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Madison. WI. Asplund. T.R .. and C.M. Cook. 1997. Effects of motorboats on submerged aquatic macrophytes. Lake and Reservoir Management 13: 1-12. Bhowmik, N.G .. T.W. Soong, W.F. Reichelt, N.M.L. Seddik. 1992. Waves generated by recreational traffic on the Upper Mississippi River System. Report by the (l]inois State Water Survey, Champaign, Illinois, for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Environmental Management Technical Center. Onalaksa, WI. 6 Burdick, D.M., and Short. F.T. 1995. The effects of boat docks on eelgrass beds in Massachusetts Coastal Waters. Waquoit Bay National Research Reserve, Boston MA. Fresh, K.L., B. Williams, D. Penttila. 1995. Overwater structures and impacts on eelgrass in Puget Sound, WA. Puget Sound Research, 1995 proceedings. Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. Seattle, WA. Mulvihill, E.L. C.A. Francisco, J.B. Glad, K.B. Kaster, R.E. Wilson. 1980. Biological impacts of minor shoreline structures in the coastal environment: state of the art review. United States Fish and Wildlife Service Publication FWS/OBS-77 /4 l. Sidell, Louisiana. Nason. G.C.. A. van Krusenstierna, E.A. Bryant, M.R. Renilson. 1994. Experimental measurements of river-bank erosion caused by boat-generated waves on the Gordon River, Tasmania. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management 9: l-15. Nightingale, B. and Charles Simenstad. 2001. Overwater structures: marine issues. Submitted to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology. and Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, WA, l 77 pp. Patmon!, C., and Porter, J. 20 l 0. Memoradium from Anchor QEA and Aspect Consulting: Barbee sediment data gaps evaluation. Available: https://fortress. wa.gov/ecy/gsp/CleanupSiteDocuments.aspx?csid=2368 Simenstad, C.A., B.J. Nightingale, R.M. Thom and D.K. Shreffler. 1999. Impacts of ferry terminals onjuvenile salmon migration along Puget Sound shorelines. Phase l: Synthesis of state of knowledge. Report to WSDOT/TJSDOT Research Report T9903, Task A2, l 16 pp.+ appendices. Taylor. W.J., and W.S. Willey. 1997. Port of Seattle fish migration studies, Pier 64/65 short-stay moorage facility, qualitative fish and avian predator observations. Beak Consultants Inc., Kirkland. WA. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2014. Regional General Permit 1 for watercraft lifts. USACE Seattle District, Seattle, WA. Available: http://www.nws. usace.army.mi l/Portals/27 /docs/regulatory/RGP _!_Rev_ Text_FINAL _ 20 l O.pdf Washington Department of Ecology (WA DOE). 2008. Site hazard assessment summary score sheet: Barbee Mill Company. WA DOE, Olympia. WA. Available: https://fortress. wa.gov/ecy/gsp/CleanupSiteDocuments.aspx9 csid=2368 Washington Department of Ecology (WA DOE). 2012. Amended agreed order for Barbee Mill site. WA DOE, Olympia, WA. Available: https://fortress. wa.gov/ecy/gsp/CleanupSiteDocuments.aspx 9 csid=2368 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 7 ".-- ~ i I • I 1 I I '* ):,: / ; \ \ I ; / ' ' / I / " 'i d ) ~~ ~ J· ! ) i ' ( .. _ _.- JI :rr -1 C ' ' " I • . ! ;~ E ' ' ~ '' I. I .~ ' a i' ; i; I I ~~ 1 i :;~ I i Ji I ~~ I . i~ / i I[-~ _I ' ' I •' I ,r ! ( •,.. L ___ ~E:.._.t.,,_,., __ ~-k=._,.,,fu- !, i' ~,...,. 1 t!' lo'' ' __ ,__ ~: I ' ! ! I• I I ,: -l~ ;_ J ,: ' " I t' i ' ' ' ' I I ' ' ' ~; • ij ' ,. ,: .. ,. i ' ., I I I I I I L~----------L..IIPL ... }.-;,,;;;;.-1!!."---1 /' / ; ' ii • • ecco r - • Figure 1. Revised site plan. Note new, more landward, boat ramp location. MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·B Figure 2 . Proposed boat lift location, looking landward. MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns -9 Figure 3. Proposed boat lift location, looking waterward. MS&A Urba n Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 10 Attachment I. Correspondence with WA DNR and the Muckleshoot Tribe. ·:.,>.;1,,•,c~,;·1 ·)!",'.~:: :-;"',' ,_.,,.,,.,,i-·~" -I ·; ; Natural Resources • J" 1! ·- ·.--.-,,-. ,, :· •11 December 17. 2013 Gerald Wasser, As.social<: Plam:cr City of Rrnlon. CFD PlaTining Dinsion 1055 S GrnJy Way Renton. \VA 98057<J21~ Subjt!ct: \\"A Ckpartmcnt of;°'Jatur:!i Rt:sourc~s CommenL~ -L"rban Bual Lift· L.L:AlJ-001640 Dc:,r ~It. Wasser: \i,-".1Shington St.1tc lkpar:.mcnt of Natural Rcsoun.:cs {''DNR '') h..Ls ohtatncd rhe City of R~n~on '.'Jotice of Application and Propo3~d Determination of~on-Signifo:an~c (DN'\1 for t!1e Crban Hoal 1.itl Project. Di'i'R manages the stJ:c .. .),~:ncd aGu.atic lands. adjact:nt t•) t;)C pro_j(:.;t, rrilpv .... al k1i.:atiun anJ herehy submit:; the fo!lc\.Vlng c-0mrncni.s for the City's record. The prnject d~":.>Cripticn stat~ the proposed tI'Cc:5~ar:ding boat lift is 3.3$4.X:iakd ·.,.-ith, h;_n n~-,t 4tu(:hc(! w. a. Cl1mmtmity dlxk. D~R administt".n :\glliltic Land.s I.case No. :.>0:{~·;4ti { th~ ··tea-.e"). ,1Uthuri:1ing Barb~e Mill Commlmhy Organiu1i0n to utiliz:~ 11.98..t. s..1uare :CC1 {:fl ~1ke \\-:1.~hingt._""Jn harbor nreJ for Lhc pur;x1sc of thi: sniJ i.:om.munity duck. The pcm1itted U&" a.u:horiud hy the Lease is to •·provi<lc lake access and tt:u.si~nt moor::a.gt: 14..ir :ipprox..in:ately 10(} uplar.J pmpercy o~n~r~. v.'lth on.e finger pier w pm.,.?dt'. pri1,,.J1c moorage for on~ dl!j:iccnt upland proper.:-o,mer'' :md for no oilier purpose .. \s pn>fXJSeJ. tile Lrb~n lloat Lift Project footprint "'11 Ix on privately held aq,:atic lands. However. a vessel plJ<:eJ on the boat iitl will extend over sr.11.:-0\\ ne<l aquatic lands, ~-pccificalJy into the le-JSehold ar~a of Bart~ ~!ill Cummur.it; Organi1ation. This encumb-rmce vt' sta:c-l>\~ncd aquatic bnJs i.,; not i..:cm;;ister,t \Vith ;he tern:-.; of the-I .c:1& and subM:que:1.tly i:-not J'Jt1orizc:-J. ,-\..!Ji~innai'.:,. DNR worket.i t:"X:~nsivdy wit.1 Conne; Homes J .. nd Li.e reg'.ilaL'1f:' ag~n..:ie:-; reg.:udi,ig the ~(·:,figuntion anll plt1(;t!lllt;!t1t ufthe 1.;,.munur.ity d,)(;k ar:J tt:rm.s l>ft!1c Lea5~ in i"•r.:ler tt) avoid ar.d minimiz::'! impaeL'-i to tt"'e adjac~-nt rcstor.:d near.shurc cnvlrnnment. shorel:.mJs :me.! bc-Jia.nJs. A-. proro~4 the l_frhJ;i Ruat I.if!. Pmject will s1lb_i.xt thi! resh)ratlnn .1r,;:a an.J oeanhore ,;;:oviron..'11CTJl to· r. MS&A • Inaeased shaJing impa.i..:t.s; to tU:p;attc \cgeut:on • lncre,L'>cli vcssd wak.:! \rnpac;ing n.u·":rJJ 'i.horcEni;." ;_1ro,.:essc:5 du~ to targ~r ar,d mllrt' n'equr!nt wave action i~ ":~,; ?;'; .; '' I ~:, ~ 1 ... ,:; -.-.'.", lt -',, I ~-ll,•'1 .;r:~ · '""°~ I i":'i r•' I INWW.DNR.WA. GOV Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 11 t/1.!"raJd \\"3.:5:5cr. ,\s:;i:,ci,:H.:-Pl~m::(:r Oc!ccmb4...-r 17, :!u: 3 Page~ of~ • S(:our ar.J scdimen; erosiun thro1;gh priJp i,;,;our • Crushing nf be::thic habilllt • Hcighknc<.~ rotential for r:?ica:_,e vf contaminants inw th~ water column A, proposed, DNR d,Jes not suppv:t th~ lrban Boat Lift Project and will not amend the ~x:,tmg Lease to permit the u.se oC stc,le·o,,u"J a,1uatic land:;. If you ha,e comments regr.rdrng this i.:Orn::;;pum.knc'-', rJease feel frc.? to con:act me by er.1ail at vlvian.roacL:a~Jn.r. ~<!:.go .... Sincerely. Vivian Roach, Aquatic Lmd Ma.-:agcr Shorclin~ Disrrict. Asuatk:; Rt:sotm.:es lJivi:.iio:1 .:· D!"iR SEP:.\ Center Di:itriCt rile Aqu:uit: Rt'"~'l.;.rtlft't''.'.'r. Fi:e MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns-12 Gerald Wasser From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Karen Walter <KWalter@muckleshoot.nsr1.us> Friday, December 27, 2013 1:14 PM Gerald Wasser Anderson, Suzanne NWS; Heller, Christa H (DFW); ROACH, VIVIAN (DNR); Tom Sibley; Priddy, Lynda Urban Boat Lift adjacent to Barbee Mill Commc:nity Pier, LUA13-001640,ECF, SM, Revised Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance Follow Up Flag: Fallow up Flag Status: Flagged Categories: Red Category Gerald, We have reviewed the Revised Notice of Application for the proposed Urban boat lift project adjacent to the Barbee Mill Community Dock (4157 and 4151 Willlams Avenue N) in Renton referenced above. We have several concerns about this project as noted below: 1, The proposed free standing boatlift is located on the north side of the existing Barbee Mill Community Dock and just south of the WDNR withdrawn area that contains contaminated sediments from the former mill site at the Superfund site on the WDNR aquatic lands. There is no consideration in either the checklist or the Lake and St'"eam study sent with the Revised NOA consider the potential impacts from the new boatlift and the operation of a motorized watercraft on the north side of the joint pier. A motorized watercraft in this location will likely create scol..ir and erosion from propeller wash that could cause a release of nearby contaminants into the water column adversely affecting fish and benthic vertebrates. Other potential impacts, include, but are not limited to: The new freestanding baatHft and a boat in the nearshore where juvenile salmon are likely to be fou11d that can cause them to avoid the nearshore and increase their risk of predation. • The boatlift will penmanenlly displace benthic habitat. The boatlift and motorized watercraft have the potential to adversely affect the restoration work in the WDNR withdrawal area to the north through increased wave action that can adversely affect natural shorel'.r.e p:-ocesses and vegetation growth. 2. There is no discussion about the po~ential for additional boatlifts and other permanent moorage proposed for this community pier. As we noted in previous comments to the Barbee Mill Community Pier project, the Tribe is concerned about this pier providing long term moorage that can create conditions which interfere with the Tribe's fishing access. 3. There is no mitigation identified for the boatlift in the documents we reviewed. Please provide the mitigation details proposed for this new boatlift and the associated watercraft. Please note that any approved mitigation at the Barbee Mill Community Pier site cannot be useC ta compensate for impacts from this new boatlift and watercraft. 4. We also concerned that previous mitigation at the Barbee Mill Community Pier may not be fully implemented. Therefore, request copies of all of the existing monitoring reports to be completed as part of the shoreline restoration work required for the entire Barbee Mill P'.at, including the community dock. 5. The City needs to fully evaluate this project; i:s potential impacts and require mitigation as necessary. Without these elements, it is premature to issue a Determination of Non-Significance for this project under SEPA. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and [ook forward to the City's responses. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns-13 • Attachment 2. Habitat survey. Conner Homes Company Community Tract Pier Project Substrate Slope Information March 20, 2007 A SCUBA survey was done March 20, 2007, from 9:50 AM -1:-15 PM, at the Conner Homes Company community tract proposed pier project site near the southern end of Lake Washington in Renton. Lynn Goodwin and Grant Ausk used SCUBA to run five transects along the community tract to identify flora, fauna, substrate types, and other qualitative information relative to the Biological Evaluation. The day was overcast and rainy with strong winds and a heavy chop. Water visibility was poor, only about 1 to 4 feet. A coir roll installed as part of the site remediation runs along the community tract shoreline, forrning a baseline from which the five community tract transects (Tl -TS) were measured. AIJ five transects were oriented 70° -250° magnetic, were generally perpendicular to the coir roll baseline, and were 200' long. Tl extended seaward from the baseline at the drainpipe outflow, approximatelv midway along the community tract shoreline and the site of the proposed pier. T2 was 22 102' north of Tl and T4 was located 22 1/2' south of T1; T3 was located on the common property line between the community tract and lot 30; TS was located on the common property line bet;,veen the community tract and lot 31. T3 and TS were approximately 45' north and south of T1 respectively, for a total survey area distance along the shoreline of approximately 90'. The Ordinary High Water (OHW) line for Lake Washington is at the lake elevation of 21.8'. On March 20, 2007, the date of the SCUBA survey, the elevation of Lake Washington was 21.1'. Water depths showing the slope contour were measured from the coir roll baseline every 10' along Tl and every 25' along T2, T3, T 4 and T5. The water depths along all five transects are set out in the following tables and have been corrected to OHW by adding 0.7' to each gauge reading. The water's edge was 10' from the baseline along TL Corrected Tl water depths were as follows: MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns-14 • ---------------- Distance Along Tl Corrected ____ I_r_ansec-=--t ______ lVc1ter_~_th_s __ 10' 0.7' 20' 1.7' ______ __::__:'---····· ··- 30' 2.7' -10' 3.2' 50' 3.7' 60' -1.2' 70' -1 ., ., 80' -1 -· .I 90' 5.7' 100' 8.7' 110' 9-· .I 120' 11.7' 130' P.7' 1-10' 12.7' 130' 12.7' 160' 12.7' 170' 13.7' .. -···--··---l 180' 13.7' 190' 12.7' 200' 12.7' The water's edge was 11 ', 9.5', 10', and 10' from the baseline along T2-T5, respectively. Corrected T2-T3 water depths were as follows: Distance T2 Corrected T3 Corrected T4 Corrected ' T5 Corrected Along Water Water Water Water Transect Depths Depths Depths Depths ')"' _, 2.4' 2.-1' 2.7' 2.2' 50' 3.2' 3.2' '.\ '.>' 2.4' 73' 3.'.>' -1.7' -1.7' 3.9' 100' 7.T 5.7' 6.7' 7.7' p·· _:, 11.7' 12.7' 117' 11.7' 150' 12.7' 12.7' 12.7' 11.7' 175' 12.7' 1-1.7' 13.7' 11.7' --·--··· 200' 13.7' 1-1.7' 13.7' p-· -.I MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 15 • substrate along T, changeJ from the gran'L rocks anJ mud founJ about 100' from the baseline, to sott mud bv 150' and extr<'meiv soft mud bv 200'. Al,mg T-t th<' slope steepened beyond about 80' out and wood debris was noted. Bv 100' along the transect, the substrate was primarily mud, becoming soft mud by 173' from the baseline. Along T3, the substrate was a sand anJ mud mix bv JOO' with roofing metal sheets, sticks and I irnbs noted. By l 10' along the transect, the substrate had changed to mud, becoming very soft mud bv 200' Substrate Slope: The OHW line for Lake Washington is at the lake elevation of 21.8'. The elevation of Lake Washington on the day of the SCUBA survey was 21.1, 0.7' below OH\V. Water depths showing the slope contour were measured from the baseline everv 10' along Tl and even, 25' along T2-TS. The water depths along all five transects are set out in the following tables and have been corrected to OHW by adding 0.7' to each depth gauge reading. n Substrate Slope Table: The water's edge was 10' from the baseline along Tl. Corrected T1 water depths were as follows: MS&A Distance Along Transect 10' Tl Corrected Water Depths 0.7' ' -·---·-·-··--------------- 20' 30' 40' 30' 60' -----................ .. 70' 80' 90' 100' -----=------------ 110' 120' 130' ---~----. --·-t-- 140' 150' 160' 170' 180' 17' 3.2' 3.7' 4.2' 4.5' 4.7' 5.7' 8.7' . -· ----------- 9.7' 1 -'-''-------- 11.7' 12.7' 12.7' 12.7' 12.7' 13.7' B.7' 190' 200' 12.7' ----------'='----- 12.7' Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·16 T2-T5 Substrate Slope Table: The waters edge was 11', 9.5', 10', and 10' from the baseline along T2-T5, respectivelv. Corrected T2-TS water depths were as follows: Distance T2 Corrected T3 Corrected T-1 Corrected TS Corrected Along Water Water Water Water Transect De ths De ths De ths Depths 25' 2.4' 2.-l' 2.7' 2.2' 50' 3.2' ____ _L ___ 3.2~_ 3.2' 2.-l' 75' 5.2' -1.7' -1.7' 3.9' 100' 7.7' 5.7' 6.7' 7.7' r----1-2:,--,--+----1-1_.7_' --+--1-2_.7_' --+--1-1_.7_' -----+--1-1_.7_' -, 150' , 12.7' 12.7' 12.7' 11.7' ' i--, ------+---'-=.:_---+---'=-------l----==-- 175' 12.7' 1-1.7' I 13.7' 11.7' 200' 13. 7' 1-1.7' ! 13.7' 12.7' Macroalgae: The following species of macroalgae was observed within the survey area: Myriophyllum spicatum: Eurasian milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum), an invasive nonnative plant, was found along all five transects. Along Tl, this alga was first noted 110' from the baseline covering about 10% of the area. By 120' and through 130' from the baseline, it covered about 30% of the area; by 1-10' it had decreased to only 10% coverage and by 150' from the baseline, no further milfoil was observed. However, by 160' from the baseline, mil/oil was again observed covering about 10% of the area, with coverage increasing to 40% by 170' -200'. Along T2, this invasive species was first noted 108' from the baseline with coverage increasing to about 20% of the area by 120', to about 30% coverage by 150', and to 40% coverage by 200'. Along T3, This alga was first noted at about 100' from the baseline. Beyond 100', and through about 150', milfoil covered about 30% of the area; by the end of the transect at 200' from the baseline, milfoil covered about 40% of the area. Along T-1, this alga was first noted at about 75' from the baseline covering less than 5% of the area. By 125' from the baseline, and continuing through about 150', ,milfoil covered about 10% of the area along T-1, increasing to about 30% coverage by 175' and to 40% coverage by 200'. Mil/oil was first found along TS 110' from the baseline covering about 10% of the area; coverage increased to about 20% of the area between 120' and 150' from the baseline. By 175' along T3 and through the end of the transect, this alga covered about 30% of the area. In general the milfoil is from last year's growth and is heavily encrusted with filamentous algae. New mil/oil growth is just starting to appear; the plants are up to several feet long. 4 t MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 17 • Other Algae: The following other alga was observed within the survey area: Filamentous Algae: An unidentified filamentous alga was noted along all iive transects, generally first noted approximately 25' from the baseline and often attached to Myriopliyll11m spicntum. Along T1, this alga was observed covering the gravel from about 25' through 80' along the transect, and was noted covering milfoil at about 110' from the baseline. Along T2, this alga covered every solid surface between about 25' and 75' from the baseline. Along T3, it was first noted 25' to 30' from the baseline. Along T 4 and T5 it was first noted abut 25' from the baseline and continued through 75'; at 75' it was noted covering small boulders. Invertebrate I Vertebrate Species: The only invertebrates found within the survey area were two crawdads, one at 125' out along each T3 and T4. No vertebrates were observed within the survey area. 5 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·18 A ttachment 3. S ite p hotograp hy o f c urre nt m it igati o n p lan tin g MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns · 19 .. MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·20 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns ·21 Return Address: Michael and Dorothy Urban 4157 Williams Avenue North Renton WA 98056 Pleii.se orint or type information WASHINGTON STATE RECORDER'S C over Sh t c ee RCW 65.04) Document Title(s) (or transactions contained therein): (all areas applicable to your document !!!!W. be filled in) I. Amended and Restated Easement 2. for Boat Lift 3. 4. Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: Additional reference #'son page ___ of document Graotor(s) Exactly as name(s) appear on document 1.Barbee Mill Community Organization, 2. --. Additional names on page ___ of document. Grantee(s) Exactly as name(s) appear on document I. Michael A. Urban and Dorothy M. Urban Husband ar.d Wife 2. ' Additional names on page of document. Legal description (abbreviated: i.e. lot, block, plat or section, township, range) Lot 34 and Tract 3 5, Renton Lot Line Adjustment #LUA-10-023-LLA; Rec. No. 20120802900003, ir. the plat of Barbee M1-II, vol 248 ,·pp-:-·-2·s·--3-s, records of K:.ng . ----. Additional legal is on page _1_ of document. Assessor's Property Tax Parcel/Account Number D Assessor Tax # not yet assigned 0518500340, 0518500350 The Auditor/Recorder will rely on the information provided on this form. The staff will not read the document to verifv the accuracv or comnleteness of the indexin!! information nrovided herein. "I am signing below and paying an additional $50 recording fee (as provided in RCW 36.18.010 and referred to as an emergency nonstandard document), because this document does not meet margin and formatting requirements. Furthermore, l hereby understand that the recording process may cover up or iotherwise obscu,re some pa7te.r of the original document as a result of this request." ~ • ,-::;/~ Michael A. UrbanSignatureofRequestingParty , Note to submitter: Do not sigo above nor pay additional $50 fee if the document meets margin/formauing requirements AUDITOR/RECORDER'S INDEXING FORM Document Title(s): Amended and Restated Easement for Boat Lift Granton s): I Barbee Mill Communitv Organiz.atioo Grantee( s ): I Michael A. Urban and Dorothv M. Urban, husbwd and wife. Legal Description Lot 34 and Tract 35, Renton Lot Line Adjustment #LUA-10-023-LLA (abbreviated) Rec. No. 20120802900003, in the plat of Barbee Mil~ vol. 248, pp. 25-38, records of King County, Washington -X I Additional le~l descriotioos on na~e I Assessor's Pronertv Tax Parcel/ Account Number I o5t8500340,05l8500350 AMENDED AND RESTATED EASEMENT FOR BOAT LIFT This Amended and Restated Easement for a Boat Lift ("Amendment") is hereby executed between Barbee Mill Community Organization, a Washington non-profit corporation ("Grantor'') and Michael A. Urban and Dorothy M. Urban, husband and wife ("Grantee"). Upon agreement of Grantor and Grantee, this Amendment supersedes and replaces the Easement for Boat Lift recorded in King County at Recording No. 2012121!001516. RECITALS A. Grantor is the owner of property generally located at 4151 Williams Avenue North Street, Renton, WA 98056, legally described as: Tract 35, Renton Lot Line Adjustment #LUA-10-023-LLC Rec. No. 20120802900003, in the plat of Barbee Mill, vol. 248, pp. 25-38, records of King County, Washington. B. Grantee is the owner of property generally located at 4157 Williams Avenue North Street, Renton, WA 98056, legally described as: Lot 34, Renton Lot Line Adjustment #LUA-10-023-LLC Rec. No. 20120802900003, in the plat of Barbee Mill, vol. 248, pp. 25-38, records of King County. Washington. C. Grantee wishes to construct and place boat lift near the seawall adjacent to its southern boundary in an area which is south of the property line between Lot 34 and Tract 35, assuming such lot line was extended into Lake Washington. D. An easement for the construction and placement of this boat lift was previously granted by Grantor to Grantee's predecessor in 2012 ("Prior Easement"), recorded under the title "Easement for Boat Liff' and recorded in King County at Recording No. 201212ll001516. Amended and Restated Easement for Boat Lift -Page I of 5 I .•. E. Grantor and Grantee wish to amend the prior easement to modify the size of the easement area to aJlow Grantee to have the right to construct, place, maintain, repair and use such a boat life pursuant to the terms set forth herein. F. This Amendment is intended to supersede and replace the Prior Easement. EASEMENT In consideration of the mutual benefits and promises set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: l. Grant of Easement: Grantor hereby grants and conveys to Grantee a permanent easement allowing construction, placement, repair, maintenance and operation of a boat lift in the portion of Lake Washington generally located west of Tract 35, subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein ("Easement"). 2. Size and Locational Limitations: The boat lift permitted by this Easement shall not exceed a width of 12 feet or a length of27.5 feet. The boat lift shall be located so that its easternmost side (the 12 foot width) is adjacent to the bulkhead on Tract 35 and its northernmost side (the 27.5 foot length) is adjacent to the bulkhead on Let 3 4. 3. No Moorage Area on Community Dock. Grantor shall not allow any boat to moor within that area on the northern side of the Community Dock on Lot 35 that lies in the easterly 50 feet of the Community Dock. The purpose of this No Moorage Area is to assure that open access to and from the boat lift is maintained at all times for Grantee. 4. Compliance with City Regulations: All construction, maintenance, repair and use of the boat lift shall be done in compliance with adopted laws, rules and regulations of the City of Renton. 5. Cost of Repair Maintenance and Operation: The Grantee shall be solely responsible for all costs of repairs, maintenance and repair of the boat lift. 6. No Liens: Grantee is not authorized to conduct activities which result in liens being filed against Grantor's property. In the event that a lien is filed against Grantor's property as the result of Grantee's construction, use, repair or maintenance of the boat life, Grantee shall immediate[i take all reasonable steps necessary to remove such lien and to protect Grantor against liability resulting from such a lien. 7. Damage to Grantor's Property: Grantee is responsible and shall pay for any damage which occurs to Grantor's property as a result of Grantee's construction, use, repair or maintenance of the boat lift. Grantee shall indemnify, hold harmless, and defend Grantor from any and all claims, demands, losses, liens, liabilities, penalties, fines, lawsuits and other proceedings and costs and expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs) which Grantor may incur or which may be asserted against Grantor or Grantor's property by reason of Grantee's construction, use, repair or maintenance of the boat lift. 8. Attorneys' Fees. In the event oflitigation, including alternative dispute resolution, with respect to the enforcement or interpretation of this Agreement, including appeals, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to recover, from the non-prevailing party, the prevailing party's reasonable attorneys' and expert witm::ss fees, costs and disbursements. 9. Easement Runs with the Land. The benefits, burdens and obligations set forth in this Easement are intended to, and shall, run with Grantor's and Grantee's properties and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of Granter and Grantee, and their respective heirs, assigns, successors, tenants and personal representatives. I 0. Recording. Upon mutual execution, this Easement shaH be recorded. 11. Miscellaneous. This Agreement may be modified, supplemented or amended only by a written instrument signed by Grantor and Grantee, and recorded in the real property records of King County, Washington. Amended and Restated Easement for Boat Lift -Page 2 of 5 ·mis Agreement shall be interpreted and construed under and governed by the laws of the State of Washington. GRANTOR: By:~ Dated: GRANTEE: ommumty Organization '-*~ J..Rd, President S-?'-c2.01y [notarizations on following page] Amended and Restated Easement for Boat Lift -Page 3 of 5 STATE OF W ASHTNGTON COUNTY OF KING }ss. ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Michael A. Urban is the person who appeared before me and signed this instrument, that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledge it to be the free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. DATED: SjiY\l:\ No!ary Seal STATE OF WASHINGTON ) )ss. COUNTY OF KING ) 1Z'Ct'~ TG..lf I IS'C-Opon~i~intName) Notary Public Residing at C \0-( ,K L-Ou..'f\iy I N \/ My appointment expires: A~\A~ \ g,_ ( @.o I s= I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Dorothy M. Urban is the person who appeared before me and signed this instrument, that she was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledge it to be the free and voluntary act for the uses_and purposes mentioned in the instrument. DATED: 5 \ \f /11.1 ~------------------ Notary Seal 'I'! h,_; :·j • ... -----~------------~ icis:/o..Ta.yW--Op,e nbn·ec (Print Name} Notary Public Residing at J:.J(JJ[',t._LJjLJ.d'f; /JV My appointment expires: /:j~(J e,± J:JI cQ Q /,5 Amended and Restated Easement for Boat Lift -Page 4 of 5 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) )ss. COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Jll1. r;:, ,M ;/1,·-c,),d/ is the person who appeared before me and signed this instrument, that he/she is the President of Barbee Mill Community Organization, a Washington nonprofit corporation, that he/she was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledge it to be the free and voluntary act of such corporation for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. DA TED: ~5--"-)---'~'--,/'---'('-'j-'----· --Ye~~«~k.~i~+~.-"="'cc,J,_lr_,:;_/_f-___ (Print Name) Notaly Public Residing at /th ,,.,-µrfl.~1 l,J 4 My appointment expires: .......... .CU / ;2 7 / Z I) I J Amended and Restated Easement for Boat Lift -Page 5 of 5 • LuA to-CC>G LAKE and STREAM STUDY Barbee Mill Community Dock Project For: Conner Homes at Barbee Mill, LLC (Attn: Charlie Conner) 846 108th Ave NE Bellevue, WA 98004 At: Conner Homes at Barbee Mill 4151 and 4125 Williams Ave N Renton, WA 98056 Parcels #051850 0350(4151) and 051850 0360 (4125) Prepared by: Marine Surveys & Assessments 521 Snagstead Way Port Townsend, WA 98368 Phone: (360) 385--4073, Fax: (360) 385-1724 E-mail sea@cablespeed.com January 19,2010 City of Renton Piann1ng Division • Barbee Mill Community Dock Project Lake and Stream Study Assessment Narrative I. PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Project Purpose and Location: The proposed Community Dock will consist of a fully grated 1,592 ft' dock with a 5' -10" x 172' (1,003 ft') main walkway, a 7'-10" x 56' ( 43 7 ft') "T" and a 5' -10" x 26' (152 ft') finger pier (Figures 3-6). The dock will have a 100% grated surface with 46% open space. The dock will be supported by (14) 6" And (14) 8" diameter steel battered piles. Piles will be driven using a vibratory pile driver to practical refusal. A native planting plan will be installed (Figures 7-9). A 6' wide walkway is needed to safely serve the anticipated number of users. The proposed Community Dock will be located adjacent to Lot 35, 4151 Williams Ave N and Lot 36, 4125 Williams Ave. N, Renton, WA 98056, presently owned by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC ( the "applicant" for the requested shoreline substantial development permit). The purpose of the project is to provide water access and transient moorage for 100 property owners from the Barbee Mill community and private moorage for 1 property owner. The proposed Barbee Mill Community Dock would be a day use only structure except for the 5' -1 O" x 26' finger pier, which will provide full time private moorage for Lot 36, 4125 Williams Ave. N. The properties are located within the Barbee Mill Community, a major waterfront subdivision currently under development by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC. The subject property is located along the eastern shore of Lake Washington in the City of Renton in Section 32, Township 24N, Range 5E; Latitude: 47.515745°N/Longitude: 122.206114°W. Two bodies of water are adjacent to, or flow through, the Barbee Mill Community: Lake Washington and May Creek. The subject property is located along Lake Washington, a Shoreline of Statewide Significance as provided in RMC 4-3-090Fl, and a Shoreline of the State under RMC 4-11-190. This Standard Stream or Lake Study is prepared in accordance with the requirements ofRMC 4-8-120D with respect to the Lake Washington shoreline of the subject property and the 100' of abutting lakeshore.lots both to the north and to the south of the subject property (the "study area"). May Creek, a Shoreline of the State (RMC 4-3-090F2), flows through the Barbee Mill Community. The distance from the closest edge of the project site to the OHWL of May Creek is 190'. The project location itself is 345' from the OHWL of May Creek. The community May Creek open space ( a riparian buffer), parking spaces and a street cover the area between the southeastern comer of the subject property and May Creek. Project Description: The Barbee Mill community is being developed by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC on the approximately 22 acre site of the former Barbee Mill Company lumber mill. Upon completion, the Barbee Mill community will have 114 multi-story paired homes, a pond, walking trails and lakefront open space for the use of residents. Lots 23 through 48 are lakefront lots. To restore the former industrial site to a parcel suitable for a residential waterfront subdivision, the mill buildings were demolished; fill soils were removed from behind the bulkhead; asphalt paving, a pier, the wooden bulkhead and piling associated with the mill operation were removed; and extensive shoreline restoration was completed. The subject property is located south of, and was not included in this extensive remediation. The project shoreline is a sheet pile bulkhead with a concrete cap. The substrate immediately waterward of the bulkhead consists of large and small cobble. The proposed Community Dock would be oriented to keep all structures and moorage within the side property setbacks of each property in compliance with all City of Renton zoning and municipal codes (Figure 3 ). As mentioned above, the purpose do the Community Dock is to provide water access and transient moorage for 100 property owners from the Barbee Mill community and private moorage for 1 property owner. Residents and their MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 3 • enhanced. Recently planted riparian vegetation and additional plantings in conjunction with the proposed project will further assist in restoring the ecological functions of Lake Washington. Much of this new vegetation will be overhanging, providing shade and predator protection for fish and aquatic invertebrates. The newly planted riparian vegetation will add significant organic matter to the lake substrate in the form ofleaves and woody debris that fall and wash in; an additional source of food, shelter and shade for aquatic invertebrates and fish. This increased vegetation will also provide food and shelter for terrestrial insects, and in turn provide an additional food source for birds and animals that feed upon them. The addition of riparian vegetation to this formerly near-barren site should also help water quality by filtering pollutants, removing nutrients and reducing sediments in any runoff from the adjacent upland development. The smaller design of the proposed project as compared to the structures removed, together with increased overhanging vegetation, may facilitate the migration of juvenile salmon. 6. FISH OR WILDLIFE USE OF AREA Birds: Birds observed on or near the site include hawks, herons, eagles, quail, osprey, cormorants and songbirds. Before the mill structures were demolished, an osprey nest was successfully relocated from the top of the old mill sawdust collector to a platform built on a 25' pole over the water not far from the original nest site. The osprey have accepted the new nest and.a video camera records their activities for viewing over the Internet. Although the bald eagle is no longer on the list of threatened or endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), bald eagles continue to be protected by the Bald and Golden Eagles Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and are protected as a "sensitive species" within the state of Washington ~ AC 232-12-011 ). The only eagle nests observed near the project site are two nests approximately 0.65 mile from the site on the opposite shore. Mammals: The only wild mammals reported as observed in the area are deer. Fish: Salmonids observed at the site include salmon and trout. Salmonids known to be present in southern Lake Washington include Puget Sound chinook salmon, coho salmon, sockeye salmon, steelhead trout, bull trout and cutthroat trout. Puget Sound chinook, Puget Sound steelhead and bull trout are all listed as threatened under the ESA. Other fish observed at the site include bass, black crappie, bluegill, plllilpkinseed sunfish, tench and yellow perch. The shoreline remediation was designed to be consistent with Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 8 Conservation Plan recommendations. As a result of the remediation, shoreline that was previously unsuitable habitat for fish and other aquatic life due to extensive shoreline modifications and industrial use of the site has been restored. The restored gravel substrate and gently sloping bottom should provide favorable habitat for winter rearing of salmon fry. The new gravel substrate to the north and the existing cobble on the subject property should be suitable habitat for benthic invertebrates which would likely attract juvenile salmonids. 7. MEASURES TO PROTECT TREES AND VEGETATION At the present time, the study area has no living woody plant with a trunk six inches or greater in diameter or any other plant falling within the defmition of "Tree" in RMC 4-11-200. This is likely because of the prior asphalt paving over, and industrial use of, the area and subsequent excavation and regrading in accordance with the approved upland development plan. The proposed Community Dock area has been landscaped pursuant to the general development planting plan. Additional native plants, shrubs and/or trees will be installed in accordance with state and federal project permits. Trees planted in accordance with all landscaping plans will likely have trunks less than six inches in diameter at the time of planting (Figures 7-9). MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 5 DNR WITHDAAWL AR MS&A Figure 2. DNR withdrawal area PROJECT DESIGMED 8\'; Waterfront Constru:tioo loc. lHIS DOC~T IS PROfffEl,l,Ry PROPER'!Y OF 'iATEFIFRONl C:OllfSil<UCTJON I~., /lliO IS ),ICIT TI) 8E USED, 11<1 l'fH)l.E OR Ito! PART, rnR At,/'( OlHER Pff'OJ[CT \tllHOLIT THE '/t'RITTE!'i AIJTHORU:J.TIOf,t Of WATE:Rnto,n CONSTfi\£TION I~ DNR WrTHDRAWL AREA 100· 50' o' 1 DO' --------------~-* I = APPLICANT; CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE M!Ll LLC PROPGSED: INSTALL cm.HAUNrn' DOCK SHEET; J OF; 7 NEAR AT: RENTON DATE: 1-12-10 DWC : 05-3077-A.J-1 Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 7 s: V, >" > 3' a- * [ n @ 3 C J 0 a -u .9. (D 'l '° \ ' \ ' : (----- \ ; \ ' ,-'-,,_ \ \ , , ' ,('-., -,----------- /, '\, ' " ',,, ',,, ---------- r \, ( ;;;; 7 ·IO -,,., '-·· --.,,,., ! ,,/ '•,,J __..,,,,,..-NATIVE PLANTING PLAN ~ ,, ' --------~--' - ',, ! ~ ! 56' j,. -... , , ________ .,.,/PROPOSED FULLY N f ,, , >----~ 5~' Ill\ ~I ,, ::J ,' C}'.'.k' ·--._ ..-r ~------~-: t 1" ! GRATED DOCK \, f (14)/PROPOSED 6" \ I / STEEL/ BATIERED PILING \, ,/ / 5'-10" -j gl ,' " ; '" H I ; " / I-:ii( ( // ,/ / .. -... /,... I ' ( \ \ I \ { OHWL 21.80 (COE)~I , ' ' ', , '_: •.. 18,80 (NAVDBB) \ \ ,' / ,' 1 \. '2Q ·-----...... , ', -,, \,. ' ' I l (1'4) PROPOSED 8" STEEL BATIERED PILING \ '\ I \ \ / / ; I , ,' .' / ri--t" -i -:-- ____ ,. ______ ~_ 10 10 PROPOSED DOCK DETAIL VIEW SCALE: 1 ",,,,30· ,-------------180' ---------------1 EXISTJNG GRADE EXISTING CONCRETE WALKWAY 1-------------172' ------------1 PROPOSED FULLY EXISTING CONCRETE/SHEET PILE GRATED DOCK , BULKHEAD TO REMAIN 2'-6" OHV/L21,BCJ''C...C'fiFi==$:===iF====ii===~=iF====ii==~=i====='ii=c\F===iF===~===": NAVDBB (18.80') ( 14) PROPOSED B~ STEEL MTIERED PILING PROJECT DESIGNED BYt Waterfront Construction Joc . THIS DOCU~NT IS P'l'KJPR€T.ut'I' PROPERTY OF WATERFRONT CONSTRUCTION INC., #,0 IS N07 TO BE USED. IN WHOLE OR IN PARl. fOR ANY OTHER PROJECT 't\'llHOLIT lllE WRITTEN AU1HORl2'AT!ON OF WATERFRONT CONSrRUCTJON INC. PROPOSED 30' ( 14) PROPOSED 5• STEEL BATTERED PILING DOCK ELEVATION 15' o· 30' SCALE; IM=30' VIEW REFERENCE fl: ___ . .. __ _ !APPLICANT: coNNrn HOMES-AT BARBEE ~ILL LLC PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK SHEEL 5 OF:7 NEAR/AT: RENTON OATE: l_-:_12"'.':19 QW_G#: 05-3{]77-A.5-1 20 .,, <2i' C: rD f>-.,, 0 "O 0 "' Cl) C. "O a ::, C ::, C. (I) in < C -o· ::, :s. ~ ~ ;:;; 11<> )> "' §. (1) (1) I () 0 3 3 j SJ () "" --0 ~. Q. • PART PILING CAPS GLU-LA~S JOIST RIM JOIST NAILERS GRATING HARDWARE >------------------7'-10'·-----------------1 TYP. 2"x4" NAILER @ I B" 0/C MAX, 1/4" PROJECT DES1GNED 8Yt Waterfront Constructi011 loc. TH~ DOCUME:NT IS l'RCPAIEl>RY PROPERTY OF 'r';AHRFRONT CONSTRUCTION INC., .AND IS NOT TO 8E USED, lti WHOLE OR IN PART. FOR ANO OTHER PROJECT WllHOlJT nu: WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION OF l\'AT[RFRONT CONSTRUCTION INC. GRATIN.G PIL[ COVER PLATE CAP BEAM ASSEMBLY Bl PROPOSED 8' DOCK SECTION B-B SCALI: 3/4"= I' STAINLESS STEEL DECK SCREWS 2'-6" 7-1/8">:12" GLU-LA/,A BEAM 3/4" GALV, LA.G BOLT 'j"~' OHWL 21.80' {COE) 18.80' (NAVO 88) a• STEEL BATTERED PIUNG f-------------------7'-IO"------------------i 2''x4" NAILER 9 18" 0/C MAX. GRATING 3/4' OALV. THRU ROD STAINLESS STEEL DECK SCREWS 2*x6" RIM JOIST 7-1/8"x12" l~GLU-LAM BEAM , 16d GA.LY. COM~ON NAILS (TYP) J 11 K4-~ LEDGER 2wx6" JOIST @ 2' 0/C W..TERlAL UST PROPOSED 8' SECTION FRAMING WI 1/2"K7" GALV. LAG BOLT @ 16" 0/C 6" .3"' D' 1' NOTE: ALL PILES TO BE DR!VEN TO PRACTICAL REFUSAL 12' TREATMENT SPECS ~ 6 "&a• STD WALL STEEL SCALE: J/4"-1' EPOXY COATED OR HOG '//6x15 "H" BEAM REFERE~CE H: IAPPUCAJiff: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MILL LLC HDC 5 1!_8Rx12'~-~__2____!.LB~x12" DF_(24F-V4£ ACZA 2Hx6R Dr #2 OR BTR ACZA 2",6" or #2 OR BTR ACZA PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK 2"x4" DF #2 OR BTR ACZ4 SUN't!'._ALK POLYPROPYLENE OF; 7 D'r{G#: 05-_~0_7?_-A,7~_1 NONE SHEET: 7 STEEL STAINLESS OR HOG OATE:_1-12-10 NEAR/AT: RENTON .,, ca· C: ~ ro ~ "" a -g "' Cl) a. "' Cl) n -o· :::i 0 :::i a. a 3 5· (Q $' :I: "' tu ' "' Figure 8. Planting legend i I I : I I 1 I . I I jJ ' I I I ! I ' . ' ' ' ' ' • I I ! l I I \ I I I 16' PL;NTIN~ AREAS 16'\\ ~ !---------~------------{ : . ... ,· s ; I I I i : I e' ----------------------~l,_.L ·~·---''---",I GENERAL PU.NTING SEQUENCE, ! I, Native par¢ installation shall oc;;c:w during frost-free periods only. Preferred i months for installation are between Sep!Ember I 5th and April 15, prior to hot, dry weather. Plants may only be Installed during hot weather 1r the contractor~ to i~ irripl:ion of the mtire planting area, derrvering at least '1:' of water peT week. 2. Procure: plants in legend and insure that material meets the minimurri n=quirements outlined In the plant legend and planting details. 3. Loc:ate all existing utilities within the hmit of work. The contractor is responsible for any utility damage as a result of the landscape construction, 1-. Remove all invasive weeds (if encountered) by grubbing out roots. 5. Amend soils :;is: needel:I tQ provide rpin. 20% orp1ic;; material throughout the planting area. Add r:ompost: to Inc-ease orxanlc content, roto[IU Into planting area 6. Note: The contractor is responsible for any advel"$e drainage conditions that may affect proper plant growth and esbbllshrnent. Notify owner of any poor drainage conditions prior to c::omtTOCtion. 7. Layout plant material per plan for inspection by the landscape Architect. Plant substitutions wi11 NOT be allowed without the approval of the Landscape A,d,rr,ct. 8. Install plant$ per planting details, sheet 3. 9. w~ ea,;h plant thoroughly to remove air pockets. l 0. Install a 4" depth. coarse WQOd--chip muldnlog throughout entire pro}ece area. I I. Install :a temporary irrigation system capable of deivering 2" cl w.rter per week to the entire planted area. Maintain irrigation system In working Olnd"ltion for two (2) summers after initial plant inst.dlation. The landsc:a:pe Contractol'" shall maintain all plant material until final lnspecticn and approval by the Owner or Owner's n:presentative. All plantings and 'W'Orkmanshlp shall be guaranteed for one. year following final owner acceptance.. PlANTING DESIGN BY THE WATERSHED COMPANY 750 Sbcd'i Stroot South Kirkim::1 WA 98033 .11~.sn.s242 r-42u21.s136 www.~edco.CI)lll Science & Design MS&A PROJECT DESIGNED BY: Waterfrmt u,,:,l;rud.1"1 Inc . THIS OOCUM(NT IS PROPRIETARY PROPERTY OF WATIRFRONT CONSTRUCTION INC., ANO S NOT TO BE USED, IN Yr'HOLE OR IN PA.:rr. FD~ AN':' OTHER PROJECT WllHOUi H<E WRITTEN AUTHOR!ZA1ION or WATERFRONT CONSTRUCTION INC. PLANTING LEGEND SCJENTlRC I COMMON NAME QD'., SIZE:/cnMMENTS ]:,,,;! AC Al:ERORCINATUH " 2 GAL. WB..l. 9MNOIED ~"'"""' BP BETULA PAPYRIFERA ' 5 GAi., 'Mil BRANo-tEO PAPER BIRCH TP 1l-!UJ,', MJCATA ' s GAL. W8.l. BAANOiEO WES1UrN REC~ """" cs co ..... -... ' l GAL, r-,Jt. 11-STEH ,anw,o DOGWOOO B~~ 7 l GAL FULL & BUSHY 0 ,sno°""'"c.,,,mus ' 2 GAL. A.JU l BUSHY PAOACNINEBAAK 0 fUBESSMIGIJINIUM " 2 GAL, FUU ii, BUSHY RED R.OWERING OJMANT ' , • •= SL SAt..lX LUCID.II .. tA5lANDM I ' PACACWILLOW' e0~~~ ' 2 GAL, FUU. & BUSHY @ \l~C,V~~ " 2 Ci,1\1., FULL & BUSH'f G)-=.:.~" ' l GAL. FUU .I. BUSHY """'"""""' ® ARCTOS'f""l--fYl.OS UVA-U/tSI ,., l.5' ron. 1,r o.c. KINNIICl"-NICX Q ASNn•< CAUOAlU' ... 1..5' f'OU, 1-f' O.C. wnD<aNGE< ~-"""'"' " I GM .. l'f' 0.C. I.CW OIi.EGON GRAPE 0 POI. YSl10M1 ~NlllJl1 " ~= SWQ,U,Fl:RN ~--" PI.ANTATL.EASTlOFTh COMMON """""-USTED SPKIES; CAS11UE}A.MINATA IG.oJ..30"0.C. COMMON IUD PAll>ITBRUSH DEU'HINIUM HENZIBQ MENZIB'l>,FIJ(,SPIJR F'ENSTEMON SERIWLA'r\.lS = '""""""' REFERENCE ff: APPLICANT: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE M!LL LLC PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK SHEET: 2 QF:4 OATF: 1-12-10 INFAR/A-:RCNTON DWG!t: 05 3077 A.2 1 Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 13 ' Figure 10. Tree and shrub planting details NOTES, I. PLANT GROUNDCOVER AT SPECIFIED DISTANCE ON-CENTER (O.C.) USING TRIANGULAR SPACING, TYP. 2. LOOSEN SIDES ANO BOTTOM OF PlANllNG PIT AND REMOVE DEBRIS J. LOOSEN ROOTBOUND PIANTS BEFORE INST ALUNG -4. SOAK PIT BEFORE AND AFTER INST AUJNG PLANT 4' DEEP SPECIAED MULCH LAYER HOLD BACK FROM STEMS 2" HT. WATER BASIN; NATIVE SOIL OR MULQ-i 0 ~OUNDCOVER & PERENNIAL PLANTING DETAIL 2X MIN DIA. ROOTBAU. NOTES: I. PtJ\NT1NG PIT SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN (l) TIMES THE WIDTH OF THE ROOT BAU. DIA.. 2. LOOSEN SIDES AND BOTTOMS OF PLANTING PIT l. SOAK PLANTING PIT AFTER PUWTlNG REMOVE FROM POT & ROUGH-UP ROOT BALL BEFORE INSTAWNG. UNTANGLE AND STRAIGHiEN CIRCLING ROOTS -PRUNE IF NECESSARY. IF PlANT IS EXCEPTIONAU Y ROOT -BOUND, DO NOT PLANT AND RETURN TO NURSERY FORAN ACCEPTABLE AL TERNA Tl 4' MULCH LAYER-HOLD BACK MULCH FROM TRUNK/STl,MS ~--3~ MIN HT. WATER BASIN ANISHGRADE SLOW RELEASE GRANULAR FERTILIZER. OSMOCOTE lrr-~ OR APPROVED EQUIV. (OUTSIDE OF O.H.W.M. ONLY) APPUED ONE YEAAAFTER INITIAL PLANTING 'il±!---REMOVE DEBRIS ANO LARGE ROCKS ANO BACKFILL WITH NATIVE SOIL FIRM UP SOILAAOUND PLANT I THE WATERSHED COMPANY 0 -:!EE & SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL REFERENCE If: 1SO Sixth s«-eet: South Klrtdard WA 98033 t> 425.822.52-42 f 42S.8l7.81)6 www.wauntiedc:o..c::om Science & Design MS&A PROJECT DE'SlGNEO SY: Waterfront; Ccrotrudrn lr.c, THIS OOCU~E.NT IS PROPRIETARY PROPERTY Of WATERflIDNf C016TRUC1'10~ 1~ .• .I.NO IS NOT TO BE USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PA.'!T, FOR. AN!' O"tl-iER PROJECT WITi-OlJT TiiE WRITTE:r,I AIJTI-iOR!ZATION OF WATERfRONT CONSTRUCTION IMC. APPLC/\NT: CONNER HOI.AES AT BARBEE Mill. LLC !PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUllll1Y DOCK ' I 1SHEET:4-OF:4-I iDATF: 1-12-10 NfAR/Al: RENTON DWG : 05 3077 A.2 Barbee Mill Community Dock Project , 15 CITY OF RENTON JUL l 5 2015 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE / ' ;1STRiCT ErlGiNi:ff: 3EATTLE DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINi:i:r.~ CENWS-00-RG (G) PO B0X3755 SEATTLE, WA 98124-3755 City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 S8057::t3232 ·1,: E.'.S ) ) Ii I 11 1 'Ill" lj, I iill jl)llll 1il1 jl' '' l • lJllp, 111 !JI 1111 /l pi• Ii ,1 J DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SEATTLE DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O. BOX 3755 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98124-3755 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF Regulatory Branch Mr. Michael and Ms. Dorothy Urban 4157 Williams Avenue North Renton, Washington 98056 JUL 1 3 2015 Reference: NWS-2013-880 Dear Mr. and Ms. Urban: Urban, Michael and Dorothy We have reviewed your application to install a new ground based boat lift in Lake Washington al Renton, Washington. Based on the information you provided to us, this "Letter of Permission" (LOP) permit authorizes your proposal as depicted on the enclosed drawings dated November 19, 2014, which are made part of this pennit. In order for this LOP authorization to be valid, you must ensure that the work is performed in accordance with the enclosed Letter of Permission General Conditions and the following special conditions: a. You must provide a copy of the permit transmittal letter, the permit form, and drawings to all contractors performing any of the authorized work. b. You must implement and abide by the Endangered Species Act (ESA) requirements and/or agreements set forth in your Appendix A, Application form for RGP-1 you submitted on August 14, 2013. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) concurred with a finding of "may affect, not likely to adversely affect" based on this document on March 25, 2015 (NMFS Reference Number 2014-1237). Failure to comply with the commitments made in this document constitutes non-compliance with the ESA and your U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers permit. The NMFS is the appropriate authority to determine compliance with ESA. c. In order to meet the requirements of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) programmatic letter of concurrence for selected activities in the Lake Washington/Lake Sammamish Basins (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service reference number 13410-2009-I-0386-ROO!) you must comply with the conservation measures in the enclosed document titled Enclosure I, Conservation Measures for Activities Covered under the Lake Washington Programmatic Consultation Letter of Concurrence. If you cannot comply with these conservation measures, you must, prior to commencing constmction, contact the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, Regulatory Branch for an individual consultation in accordance with the requirements of the -2- ESA. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is the appropriate authority to determine compliance withESA d. In order to meet the requirements of the Endangered Species Act you may conduct the authorized activities from July 16 through December 31 in any year this permit is valid. You shall not conduct work authorized by this permit from January 1 through July 14 in any year this permit is valid. e. By accepting this permit, you agree to accept such potential liability for response costs, response activity and natural resource damages as you would have under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq. (CERCLA) or the Model Toxics Control Act, RC. W. 70.105 (MTCA) absent the issuance of this permit. Further, you agree that this permit does not provide you with any defense from liability under the CERCLA or the MTCA Additionally, you shall be financially responsible for any incremental response costs attributable under CERCLA or MTCA to your activities under this permit in the Port Quendall Superfund Site. f. You must implement and abide by the riparian planting plan on sheet 3 of the approved drawings. The plants shall be installed before or concuJTent with the work authorized by this permit. A report, as-built drawing and photographs demonstrating the plants have been installed or a report on the status of project construction must be submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, Regulatory Branch, within 12 months from the date of permit issuance. You can meet this reporting requirement by completing and submitting the enclosed Report for Mitigation Work Completion form. g. You must maintain and monitor the survival of installed riparian plantings for five years after the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers accepts the as-built repo1t. Installed plants shall achieve I 00% survival during monitoring Years I and 2. Installed plants shall achieve at least 80% survival during monitoring Years 3, 4 and 5. Percent survival is based on the total number of plants installed in accordance with the approved riparian planting plan. Individual plants that die must be replaced with native riparian species in order to meet the survival performance standards. h. You must submit annual monitoring reports for five years (Monitoring Years 1-5). Each annual monitoring report shall include written and photographic documentation on plant mortality and replanting efforts and must document whether the performance standards are being met. Photos must be taken from established points and used repeatedly for each monitoring year. In addition to photos at designated points, photo documentation must include a panoramic view(s) of the entire planting area. Submitted photos must be formatted on standard 8 W' x 11" paper, dated with the date the photo was taken, and clearly labeled with the direction from which the photo was taken. The photo location points must be identified on an appropriate drawing. \ J -3- Annual riparian planting monitoring reports must be submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, Regulatory Branch, by October 31 of each monitoring year. You can meet this reporting requirement by completing and submitting the enclosed Mitigation Planting Monitoring Report form. i. You must protect and preserve the riparian plantings and allow the vegetation to grow in a natural state for as long as the permitted project remains in place. j. Your responsibility to implement the riparian planting plan as set forth in Special Condition "a" will not be considered fulfilled 1mtil you have demonstrated planting success/survival and have received written verification from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. We have reviewed your project pursuant to the requirements of the Endangered Species Act and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act in regards to Essential Fish Habitat. The U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers has determined that this project will comply with the requirements of the above laws provided you comply with special conditions "b" through "d" listed above. Lake Washington is a water of the U.S. If you believe this is inaccurate, you may request a preliminary or approved jurisdictional determination (JD). If one is requested, please be aware that we may require the submittal of additional information to complete the JD and work authorized in this Jetter may not occur until the JD has been completed. Any change in the plans for this work will require that you submit revised drawings to this office and receive our written approval of those changes prior to conducting the work. If you object to any terms or conditions of this LOP or the JD, you may request an administrative appeal under our regulations (33 CFR Patt 331) as described in the enclosed Appeal Process Fae! Sheet and the Notification of Administrative Appeal Options and Process and Request/or Appeal form. Your authorization to conduct the proposed work under this permit expires 3 years from the date of this letter. Within 30 days of completing the authorized work, you must fill out and return the enclosed Certificate o/Compliance with Department of the Army Permit form to the address indicated on the form. Your signature on this form is our assurance you have conducted the work and any required mitigation in accordance with the terms and conditions of this LOP, including all special conditions. Please remember that failure to comply with the terms and conditions of this LOP, including any special conditions, will invalidate your authorization and could result in a violation of Federal law. Thank you for your cooperation during the permitting process. We are interested in your experience with our Regulatory Program and encourage you to complete a customer service -4- survey form. This form and information about our program is available on our website at: www.nws.usace.army.mil (select "Regulatory Branch, Permit Information"). While this project will not require further authorization from us, please note that it must comply with all local, State, and other Federal requirements that may apply. A copy of this letter and permit drawings will be furnished to Mr. Evan Wehr, Ecco Design, Inc, 203 North 361h Street, Suite 201, Seattle Washington 98103. If you have any questions about this letter or our regulatory program, please contact Ms. Lori C. Lull at (206) 316-3153 or by email at lori.c.lull@usace.army.mil. BY AUTHORITY OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY: Enclosures JohnG. Buck Colonel, Corps of Engineers District Engineer PROJECT INFORMATION VICINITY MAP OWNER: Chism _~,.: WAM Beach Park" ' P.P!l;:-.:m• MICHAEL & DOROTHY URBAN .• -....... . • • lrnercla1e 9D Ei11,·eis:;o§.r ""Q':-l<rll.amey DRAWINGS BY: ECCO DESIGN INC. 203 N 36TH ST SUITE 201 SEATTLE, WA 98103 206-706-3937 • M18af(er ~ -·~- '"a,,,,. ·, Glen Pack 7 • Bol.Hevard SITE ADDRESS: 4151 & 4157 WILLIAMS AVE N RENTON, WA 98056 PARCEL NUMBER: (4157) 0518500340 & (4151) 0518500350 BODY OF WATER: LAKE WASHINGTON LEGAL DESCRIPTION: (0518500340) TRACT 35, RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LUA 10-023 LLA, REC. NO. 20120802900003 IN PLAT OF BARBEE MILL, VOL 248 OF PLATS, PP. 25-38, R.ECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WA (0518500350) LOT 34, BARBEE MILL, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 246 OF PLATS, PAGES 25 THROUGH 39, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: INSTALL A NEW GROUND BASED BOAT LIFT. PLANT TWO SCOULERS WILLOWS (SCOULERIANA) AND TWO RED-OSIER DOGWOODS (CORUNS SERICEA). PURPOSE: Boat Moorage DATUM: C.O.E. Locks Datum Mercer ... Ll'lle I I • • People Pzwk si rmu :SGenueeli:t C'..(lls,:n,t);.l "" Rainier Valle;• PROJECT SITE: /.,;,t~.,.s LAT: 47.52966° N LON: -122.20505° W NW 1/4 S:32 T:24N R:5E fi." tsf;;.d j G!estPark PROPOSED: Boat Lift IN: Lake Washington AT: Renton Ne· Est. 1919 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: NAME: Michael & Dorothy Urban REFERENCE#: tJwS-z.v13-8'f?D SITE LOCATION ADDRESS: COUNTY: King STATE: WA 4151 &4157WilliamsAve. N SHEET 1 of 6 1. Yinan He & Ma Hong Renton, WA 98056 2. Barbee Mill Waterfront LLC DATE: November 19, 2014 W\LL\AMS AVE. N -.. ,,-. ·, I 0 .=: l . ~ I • • i I i • I . I .,. ' :• --~Q•5'str"E-7i"iw"--· - I I I I x\\ PLEASE 1~0TE THAT THE SHORELINE CONFIGURATION AND PROPERTY LINE LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY. PROPERTY LINES ARE BASED ON AN AUGUST 2012 SURVEY BY CORE DESIGN. z 0 1- Vl 0 a.. 0:: LL.I a.. a.. ::, ::x ' I ' I ,'-'; I I I z I- <( 0 ,:0 (! ;j.?a: I 0~ 1 ~:;! J ZO 1~ ~ ~ ~ Vl ~ 0 ::c Vl ~ LL.I > ~9 >o LL.I ..,. > II z~ <( ~ ..Jj Q.. VI Reference: f,/ vJS-U) /?, -8' 8'D Applicant: Michael & Dorothy Urban Proposed: Boat Lift At: Renton, WA Sheet 2 of6 Date: 11/19/2014 -';s,-·-~----~-- W\LL\AMS AVE. N PLEASE NOTE THAT THE SHORELINE CONFIGURATION AND PROPERTY LINE LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY. PROPERTY LINES ARE BASED ON AN AUGUST 2012 SURVEY BY CORE DESIGN. z 0 1- Vl 0 ll. C UJ a::: UJ 3: 0 ....I z I- ~ a:i Vl 3: 0 I Vl ~ > 3: UJ > z <( ....I ll. o o -st " ~ Lu _J <t u V, Reference: f\ll}IS-2.Dis-i«o Applicant: Michael & Dorothy Urban Proposed: Boat Lift At: Renton, WA Sheet 3 of6 Date: 11119/2014 (/) ::r (I) (I) -... 0 -cr, 0 "' -~ ~ ~ -~ (0 j;:J 0 ~ ... PROPOSED BOAT IS TO BEA SEARAY SELECT 210. THE BOAT SPECIFICATIONS ARE: 21'-0" IN LENGTH AND THE BEAM OF THE BOAT IS 8'-6". (PLEASE NOTE: THE ELEVATION OF THE BOAT JS DIAGRAMATIC ONLY. WE DO NOT HAVE EXACT SPECIFICATIONS OF THE SHAPE HOWEVER THE OVERALL LENGTH OF THE BOAT IS CORRECT) EXISTING BULKHEAD TO REMAIN PROPOSED SUNSTREAM BOAT LIFT-SL6012AR. FOOTPRINT OF THE PROPOSED LIFT rs 12' LONG BUNKS, 12'-5" FRAME LENTH AND 10'-0" FRAME WIDTH. THE FOUR FOOTPADS THAT REST ON THE LAKE BOTTOM ARE APPROXIMATELY 1'X1' SO A TOTAL OF 4 SQUARE FEET WILL SITON THE LAKE BED 21.85' OHW ~ ,; C, ~ ~ ,,I ~ { PROPOSED BOAT LIFT-PLEASE NOTE THAT THESE DIMENSIONS SHOW THE BOAT IN THE LOWERED POSITION. HOWEVER THE BOAT WILL NEVER STAY IN THIS POSITION. ITWILL ONLY BE IN THIS POSITION WHEN GETTING ON AND OFF THE LIFT. THE BOAT WlLL ALWAYS BE IN THE UP POSITION WHEN AT THE SITE. 27'-6" 21'-0" 1111 · 1· -1111 = 111 111111111111 = 1111 1111 ! ------=·-~··1· .... 1····1 ····1 ,, , I ,,,1~1111~ -1111-,rn=1111-1111-. 1111~111-1lTl-1111-1111-11-1111-1111-1111-,111-,111-1111-11,1-1111-1111- II 1111 liil 1111 1111 _ 1111 11113='1111 1111 1111-. Ill .1111 1111 1111 illl 1111 lill , 1111 1111 1111 !Ill 1111 1111~ 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 ii II 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 ~ 11-1111 illl 1111 1111 11!1 1111 1111 1111 1111-lil=IIII 1111 1111 1111 1111· illl 1111 · 1111 > "1J !"'!' 0 ::0 "C (I) 5: ~[ g .. -OJ ~ §l. C: "" > ::0 "C (I) "C it =""'[ n"' "' :, :, (l ~~ ~~ g. ~ ~ v) i; I 0~ o_ 9. (JJ ::r I '< O<:) ~ O<Q O" 0 "' :, APPROX. LOCATION OF LAKE BED ELEVATION VIEW (VIEW SHOWS BOAT IN LOWERED POSITION) SCALE 3/16" = 1'-0" PROPOSED BOAT IS TO BEA SEARAY SELECT J ;,:w. I Ht:. ~UAI ~1-'l::t;lf-lCATIONS ARE: 21'-0" IN '\' LENGTH AND THE BEAM OF THE BOAT IS 8'-6". (PLEASE NOTE: THE ELEVATION OF THE BOAT IS D!AGRAMATIC ONLY. WE DO NOT HAVE EXACT SPECIFICATIONS OF THE SHAPE HOWEVER THE 27'-6" OVERALL LENGTH OF THE BOAT IS CORRECT) ~5'-T' ,. . ~"""°'"""~":-~ REMAIN 21'-0" •• . \ \ , PROPOSED SUNSTREAM BOAT LIFT -SL6012AR. FOOTPRINT OF THE PROPOSED LIFT IS 12' LON,~ BUNKS, 12'-5" FRAME LENTH AND 10'-0" FRAME 'MOTH. THE FOUR FOOTPADS THAT REST ON THE LAKE BOTTOM ARE APPROXIMATELY 1'X1' SO A TOTAL OF 4 SQUARE FEET WILL SIT ON THE LAKE BED 1 '\ ' : 111 1111 21.85' OHW , , "' , mr 1: 11 11 i 1 ~ rn ~ I'\ Ill §illl ,; l, 111 1 =11 11= 0 -'\... '-1 - ' ' t==k 1Tif - 11 1111 11 i I ' Ii 11 " " I i 11 " II ! 111 ' I 1111 ~ ~ 1111 1111 I i 11 1 I 1111 ~11111 111 1111 111 : I 11 I ! 1111 i I Ii 11 111 i 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1 ! WI I: I 1111 11/i 1111 . lill 1111 1111 1111 111 1111 1111 -1111 lill=llll=liil=llll=ll:1=1111=1111=1111=1111= 11 :::: 1111 :::: 1111-:: 1111 :: 1111 :: 1111 :: 1 1 11 111; :: 1111: 1111 :: lllr~llil: 1111 : 11 1 1 :: Ill : llil: jl!I: ~1111 :: lill. LAPPROX. LOCAT!ON "' )> " ~ !"!' a "' :;o ,::, -(1) 0 "' :, ,,, o o[ -::::I •• o, -CD )> ;tJ ,::, "' ,::, it =..., n"' ., :, :, n !""!' ~ s () < ~g Cl --., r iii 'E ;::i ~ Iv? ~ ~ ~ ::;: ;3 0 ~ ./>, Ro \ is' ~ ~ v.l '< \ C o<:, a-O<:) ~ 0 OF LAKE BED ELEVATION VIEW (VIEW SHOWS BOAT IN UPPER POSITION) SCALE 3/16" = 1'-0" FWD H-FRAME FOOT PAD BOAT LIFT DETAIL NO SCALE BOAT LIFT WILL BE A FREE STANDING UNIT. UNIT WILL REST ON LAKEBED ON FOUR FOOT PADS. BUNK REAR H-FRAME HYDRAULIC BEAM CROSS BEAM Reference N\}JS-2,o/;-~1?'0 Applicant: Michael & Dorothy Urban Proposed: Boat Lift At: Renton, WA Sheet 6 of 6 Date: 11/19/2014 Sabrina Mirante From: Sent: To: Subject: Kris Sorensen Wednesday, December 31, 2014 2:25 PM Sabrina Mirante FW: Urban shoreline plantings Hi Sabrina -Please add this email to Urban Boat Lift LUAB-001640. Thank you. Kris x6593 From: troy hussing [mailto:troy@eccodesigninc.com] Sent: Friday, December 26, 2014 10:01 PM To: Kris Sorensen; Michael Urban; Dorothy Urban Subject: Fw: Urban shoreline plantings Kris, .• r1/I · .. ) We were able to get an approval from the board based on Mike and Dorothy's o.k. of the height. Please see below. Let me know if you need any additional information. Thank you, Troy Architecture & Design 203 N 36th Ste. 201 Seattle, WA 98103 206.706.3937 face.book_ .tJQLll.l; -----Forwarded Message----- From: Michael Urban <MUrban@theurbanlawfirm.com> To: Shirley Ely <SEly@morrismanagement.com>; troy hussing <troy@eccodesigninc.com>; Dorothy Urban <dorothymu@gmail.com> Cc: Dorothy Urban <DorothyMU@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 26, 2014 5:49 PM Subject: RE: Urban shoreline plantings Thank you Shirley. That is acceptable. Mike Urban Sent from my T~!\fobi'e 4G LTE Device --------Original message -------- From: Shirley Ely Date:12/26/2014 11 :36 AM (GMT-10:00) To: Michael Urban ,troy hussing ,Dorothy Urban Subject: RE: Urban shoreline plantings 1 Hello there, I just received the decision of the committee and Board regarding your landscape ACC request. They have approved contingent upon keeping the height of the plantings at or below 15 feet. I hope that will work for you and that you and yours have a wonderful weekend!. Warmest regards, 5hirle9 EJ9, 1-\KM. Cf'M, CMCA, AMS, fCAM Association Manager Morris Management, Inc., AAMC 425-283-5858, ext. 119 www.morrismanagement.com From: Michael Urban [mailto:MUrban@theurbanlawfirm.com] Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 5: 12 PM To: Shirley Ely; troy hussing; Dorothy Urban Subject: RE: Urban shoreline plantings Thank you. SC!lt frr>:11 my T-Votl<r::: 4G !.TF Device --------Original message -------- From: Shirley Ely Date:12/18/2014 3:10 PM (GMT-10:00) To: Michael Urban ,troy hussing ,Dorothy Urban Subject: RE: Urban shoreline plantings Hello there Michael, The Board is waiting for the Architectural Control Committee's recommendation and they are still in communication about it. I have forwarded your email note to them for their consideration. Please let me know if there is anything else I can do for you. Warmest regards, 5hirle9 E.J9, Al,M. CTM. CMCA. 1-\M5, !'CAM Association Manager Morris Management, Inc., AAMC 425-283-5858, ext. 119 www.morrismanagement.com 2 From: Michael Urban (mailto:MUrban,-" 1eurbanlawfirm.comJ Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2014 4:54 PM To: Shirley Ely; troy hussing; Dorothy Urban Subject: RE: Urban shoreline plantings Thanks Shirley! I wanted you to know also that we were advised by the government agencies reviewing and approving our boat lift that these plantings should have been done when the property was originally constructed, but they were not planted by Conner Homes. Our apologies for not being able to be at the Board meeting. We are taking Dorothy's mother on a holiday trip to Hawaii with our family. Mike Urban --------Original message -------- From: Shirley Ely Date:12/17/20141:10 PM (GMT-10:00) To: troy hussing ,Michael Urban ,Dorothy Urban Subject: RE: Urban shoreline plantings Hello there, Printed and taking it to the meeting. Warmest regards, Shirley EJy, ARM, (TM. CMCA AMS, f'CAM Association Manager Morris Management, Inc., AAMC 425-283-5858, ext. 119 www.morrismanagement.com From: troy hussing (mailto:troy@eccodesigninc.com) Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2014 1:23 PM To: Shirley Ely; Michael Urban; Dorothy Urban Subject: Urban shoreline plantings Hi Shirley, Thank you for taking my call today. I am re-sending you the drawings we discussed along with a cut sheet that shows a picture of the two shrubs along with a general description. I just discovered that Mike and Dorothy are currently "in the air" on a trip and so I am not sure if they will be able to get back to you with any kind of memo before this evenings meeting or not. I have left them a message and email as well. However, either way, could you please present the information you have at your meeting this evening. Thank you very much for your assistance on this. Please feel free to call with any questions at all. Sincerely, Troy troy hussing 3 ECCO Architecture & Design 203 N 36th Ste. 201 Seattle, WA 98103 206.706.3937 :?5J:0.ctq;;j_;:;_Q.f1.~, _O:/Sl_l_"!: find us on Facebook & Houzz 4 STATE OF.WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY ~VI s Su1™5t11? 's cvp'j Northwest Regional Office 3190 160th SE Bellevue, Washington 98008-5452 (425) 649-7000 January 13, 2015 Michael and Dorothy Urban 4157 Williams Ave N Renton, WA 98056 Re: City of Renton Permit LUA13-001640, ECF, SM -Approved Michael and Dorothy Urban -Applicant Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (SDP) #2015-NW-2632 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Urban: NOISll\10 SNINNv'ld NO!Ni:Uf ~O All:> ~!OZ 9 I N\;11 03J\13J3c} On January 08, 2015, the Department of Ecology received notice that City of Renton approved your application for an SDP. Your permit is to install a freestanding private boat lift adjacent to the Barbee Mill Community dock within shoreline jurisdiction of Lake Washington. By law, local governments must review all SDPs for compliance with: • The Shoreline Management Act (Chapter 90.58 RCW) • Ecology's Substantial Development Permit approval criteria (Chapter 173-27-150 WAC) • The City of Renton Local Shoreline Master Program Local governments, after reviewing SDPs for compliance, are required to submit them to Ecology. Your approved SDP has been received by Ecology. What Happens Next? Before you begin activities authorized by this permit, the law requires you wait at least 21 days from January 08, 2015, the "date of filing." This waiting period allows anyone (including you) who disagrees with any aspect of this permit to appeal the decision to the state Shorelines Hearings Board. You must wait for the conclusion of an appeal before you can begin the activities authorized by this permit. The Shorelines Hearings Board will notify you by letter if they receive an appeal. We recommend that you contact the Shorelines Hearings Board before you begin permit activities to ensure that no appeal has been received. They can be reached at (360) 664-9160 or http://www.eluho.wa.gov/Board/SHB. Urban Boat Lift January 13, 2015 Page2 of2 If you want to appeal this decision, you can find appeal instructions (Chapter 461-08 WAC) at the Shorelines Hearings Board website above. They are also posted on the website of the Washington State Legislature at: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac. Other federal, state, and local permits may be required in addition to this shoreline permit. · If you have any questions about this letter, please contact me at (425) 649-4309. Sincerely, Mii;Ji,~pecialist Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program cc: Kris Sorensen, City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Troy Hussing and Evan Wehr, Ecco Design Inc Shirley Ely, Barbee Mill Community Organization ~ Stau, of\Va~hin~ton DEPART~U. :;-;T OF. EC:.OL()(;y .'3190 lGUtli A,,. C-:E Dd\,., '"'· \\'A '.JS00S-'i4:52 CITY OF RENTON COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPT AITN KRIS SORENSEN 1055 S GRADY WAY RENTON, WA 98057 ~ .. ,,.-;;-::::· .·.·r,,.'"·"·.-,_.... :.:_: -<~ ii ,iii 1i 'i ill ii" Iii' jii, i i\pi pi,,i i\• ;\iii' 'i'" i ,i' 1•iii1i !'1 STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Linda M Mills, being first duly sworn on oath that she is the Legal Advertising Representative of the Renton Reporter a weekly newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continuously as a weekly newspaper in King County, Washington. The Renton Reporter has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the Renton Reporter (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a: Public Notice was published on December 5, 2014. The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is ,,,,~1~ 1~%'',,, the sum of $84.00. ,,,~-..~ ····o··• .. D;::,;'1.-, P. /_./ ~ ~ •• ~:\';>S.1 N ~-r,.;•. ~l';n ~ ~ ' ~ •.-....-,,.,,.., •• v· ., ::: ...;;;;-_:o•· -r~·. 0 ... ... I.ti • (J ul• -z. -:: -., i NOTARY i :. =. u, \ PUBLIC j:.:: : ~~··.. le~ ,.,.,. -~ .... ~ /".,c,.."• •• 0.2.,,.,?.···0 ~ ' ,. 0 ........ ~,.,:. ,, f II I\ ',,, F WASY-,,,, (1~ '-------,,,,,, '"''''' NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMl'iATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMIHEE RENTON, WASHlc'iGTON The Environmental Review Committee has issued a Detenni- nation of Non-Significance Miti- gated (ONS') M) for the follow- ing project under the authority of the Renton municipal code. Urban Boat Lift LUAIJ-001640 Location: 4151 Williams Ave N. The applicant 1s requesting SEPA review and a Shoreline Substantial Development Pennit for the installation of a freestand- ing boat lift adJacent the Barbee Mill Community Dock in Lake Washington. Appeals of the DNS-M musl be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on December 19, 2014. Appeals mu.st be filed in writing together with the re-- quired fee with: Hearing Exam- iner c/o City Clerk, City of Ren- ton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Hear- ing Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-1 IO and more infonna- tion may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk·s Office. 425- 430-6510. Published in the Renton Reporter on December 5. 2014.#11920082 Denis Law Mayor January 7, 2015 State Department of Ecology Northwest Regional Office 3190 160th Ave. SE Bellevue, WA 98008-5452 r, _. City of • J.grrw11 Community & Economic Development Department CE."Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT; Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit for Urban Boat Lift File No. LUA13·001640, ECF, SM Dear Sir or Madam: Enclosed is the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the above referenced project. The permit was issued by the City of Renton on January 7, 2015. A Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated was issued by the City's Environmental Review Committee on December 4, 2014. The appeal period ended on December 19, 2014, and no appeals of the threshold determination were filed. We are filing this action with the Department of Ecology and the Attorney General per WAC 173-14-090. Please review this permit and attachments and contact me at (425) 430-6593 if you have any questions or need additional information. Sincerely, ~f $-,-.M wl P"'w Kris Sorensen Associate Planner Enclosures: Administrative Decision Legal Description Copy of Master Application Project Narrative Neighborhood Detail Map Notice of Application SEPA Checklist SEPA Determination SEPA Determination Mitigation Measures SEPA Determination Advisory Notes cc: Office of Attorney General Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Washington State Department of Ecology Page 2 of 2 January 7, 2015 Karen Walter, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Barbee Mill Community Organization; c/o Shirley Ely-Morris Management Inc/Owner Michael & Dorothy Urban/Applicant Troy Hussing, Ecco Design Inc/Contact Ruth Kidd; Torben & Ginnie Hollinsworth; Allison Peryea; Patti Klink; Vivian Roach, DNR; Lynda Priddy, EPA/ Party(ies) of Record SM cover letter 13-001640 DEPARTMENT OF COn/lMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT !I'' of } .,. PLANNING DIVISION SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1971 PERMIT FOR SHORELINE MANAGEMENT EVALUATION FORM & DECISION DATE OF PERMIT ISSUANCE: LAND USE ACTION FILE NO.: DATE RECEIVED DATE OF PUBLIC NOTICE: January 7, 2015 LUA13-001640, ECF, SM December 2, 2013 December 4, 2013 Pursuant to Chapter 90.58 RCW, staff recommends that the City of Renton grant a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. This action is proposed on the following application: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT MANAGER: OWNER: APPLICANT: CONTACT: PROJECT LOCATION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SEC-TWN-R: WITHIN THE SHORELINES OF: APPLICABLE MASTER PROGRAM: Urban Boat Lift Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner Barbee Mill Community Organization; c/o Shirley Ely -Morris Management, Inc; 325 118th Ave SE, Suite 204; Bellevue, WA 98005 Michael & Dorothy Urban; 4157 Williams Ave N; Renton WA 98056 Troy Hussing & Evan Wehr; Ecco Design Inc; 203 N 36th St #201; Seattle WA 98103 4151 & 4157 Williams Ave N; Renton WA 98056; 4157 is the applicant's home and 4151 is the abutting tract where the boatlift is proposed. BARBEE MILL TGW UND INT IN TRS A,B,C,D,E,F,G, H,l,L,M,N,O & P TR 35 RENTON LLA # LUA-10-023- LLA REC# 20120802900003 SD LLA DAF-LOTS 35 & 36 SD PLAT NW-32-24-5 Lake Washington, Reach C City of Renton City of Renton Department of Cv,,,munity & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 Shoreline Management Permit LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Page 2 of 11 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: The applicant is proposing to install a freestanding boatlift adjacent to an existing community boat dock. The dock extends from the homeowners association-owned parcel addressed 4151 Williams Ave N beyond the inner harbor line into state-owned aquatic lands. The portion of the community dock west of the inner harbor line is located within a Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Lease Area with an agreement between DNR and the Barbee Mill Community Organization. The boat lift would be located on the north side of the community dock, between the uplands and inner harbor line. An easement has been granted to the applicant to use the area for the location of the ground based boat lift. The lift is approximately 175 square feet in area and the boat lift structure would sit on the bottom substrate of the lake on four 1-foot by 1-foot pads. At the deepest point of the lift, it would be approximately 5 feet 10 inches below the waterline. With a boat on the lift, the boat would sit approximately 5 feet above the waterline. The boat lift would provide moorage and facilitate access to Lake Washington for the residents of 4157 Williams Ave N. A planting mitigation plan provides for two Scour's Willows and two Red-Osier Dogwoods to be be planted as close to the lake as possible at the southwest corner of 4157 Williams Ave N property, north of the boat lift location. A monitoring and maintenance plan for the plantings has been provided to evaluate ongoing performance of the plantings over a 5-year period. Installation of the boat lift is anticipated to occur within one day and would occur during the authorized Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) construction window for this location, July 16 through December 31, unless otherwise approved by WDFW. The lift would be delivered by van or truck to the site, and no impacts to existing shoreline vegetation or erosion of uplands are anticipated as part of the project installation. Installation of the lift would be by hand. The subject properties are part of the Conner Homes at Barbee Mill project which includes 114 lots ranging in size from 1,800 square feet to 6,000 square feet. The lots consist of duplexes, tri-plexes, four-plexes, and a single-family residence. The overall site was formerly a lumber mill facility. In order to restore the former industrial site to a site suitable for a residential waterfront subdivision, the mill buildings were demolished, contaminated soils remediated, fill soils were removed from behind the bulkhead, asphalt paving, a pier, a wooden bulkhead and piling associated with the mill operation were removed; and shoreline restoration was accomplished. The shoreline restoration was accomplished by the Barbee Mill Company upon cessation of the mill operation. The cost fair market value of the baot lift is $12,000.00. An Environmental (SEPA) Review Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M) was issued for this project on December 5, 2014, and no appeals were filed. FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The applicant is requesting a Shoreline Substantial Development Permits for the City of Renton Department of Cc, ... munity & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 Shoreline Management Permit WA13-001640, ECF, SM Page 3 of 11 installation of a freestanding boat lift that will not be attached to the nearby community dock or shoreline bulkheads. 2. The site currently is comprised of landscaping and a pedestrian pathway that provides access to the community dock, with properties on either side developed with residential homes. 3. The boat lift would be installed on the north side of the existing Community Dock, 4 feet east of the inner harbor line, and approximately 11 feet 6 inches from the sheetpile and concrete shoreline bulkhead to the west. 4. The boat lift would provide moorage and facilitate access to Lake Washington for singular use by residents of 4157 Williams Ave N. 5. The boat lift dimensions are approximately 175 square feet in area supported on the lake bottom by four 1-foot wide by 1-foot long pads, with a total of 4 square feet sitting on the lake bottom. 6. The boat lift would be approximately 5 feet 10 inches below the waterline at its most easterly and deepest point. 7. The boat on the lift would not cross into the Department of Natural Resources Lease Area for the Barbee Mill Community Dock west ofthe inner harbor line. 8. The subject site has priority habitat, Lake Washington shoreline, and geologic seismic critical areas located on the site. 9. Representatives from various city departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and address issues raised by the proposed development. These comments are contained in the official file, and the essence of the comments have been incorporated into the appropriate sections of this report, the Environmental (SEPA) Review Report, and the Departmental Recommendation at the end of this report. 10. On July 29, 2014, an on-site meeting was scheduled with reviewing agencies and the applicant, where representatives of the Muckleshoot Tribe, developer of Barbee Mill, City of Renton, and applicants were present to discuss the proposal. 11. An Environmental (SEPA) Review Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS- M) was issued for this project on December 5, 2014, with six mitigation measures. No appeals were filed. 12. Two of the six SEPA determination mitigation measures have been met, which are the no net loss to ecological function and value evaluation (Mitigation Measure #6) and the final mitigation planting plan with monitoring (Mitigation Measure #5). The other City of Renton Department of Co, .. munity & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Shoreline Management Permit LUA13-001640, ECF, SM DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 Page 4 of 11 mitigation measures are related to Department of Fish and Wildlife work window, ingress and egress of boat into the boat lift area, fish or water quality impacts during project activities, and the recommendations from the biological assessment. 13. An amended project biological evaluation by Marine Surveys & Assessments, dated December 8, 2014, states that for this project there will be no net loss of ecological functions and values consistent with the City of Renton's Shoreline Master Program. 14. The applicant received approval of the planting plan by the Barbee Mill Community Association for installation of the proposed plantings. 15. A mitigation planting plan provides for installation of two Scouler's Willows and two Red-Osier Dogwoods in the southwest corner of the 4157 Williams Ave N property, near the shoreline. 16. The boat lift would be an accessory to the community dock, where boat lifts are allowed as accessory to a dock and are permitted outright per RMC Table 4-3-090.E.1 Shoreline Use Table. 17. The following table contains project elements intended to comply with the Shoreline Master Program standards and policies, as outlined in RMC 4-3-090: A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE ANO CONSISTENCY, SHORELINE ELEMENT: The site is located in the Shoreline High-Intensity Overlay District. The objective of the High Intensity Overlay is to provide opportunities for large-scale office and commercial employment centers as well as multi-family residential use and public services. This district provides opportunities for water-dependent and water-oriented uses while protecting existing ecological functions and restoring ecological functions in areas that have been previously degraded. Development may also provide for public use and/or community use, especially access to and along the water's edge. The proposal is compliant with the following Shoreline policies: ,/ Objective SH-A. Provide for use of the limited water resource consistent with the goals of the Shoreline Management Act by providing a preference for water-oriented uses. Objective SH-B. Provide that the policies, regulations, and administration of the Shoreline Master Program ensure that new uses, development, and redevelopment within the shoreline jurisdiction do not cause a net loss of shoreline ecological functions. Policy SH-7. Existing and future activities on all Shorelines of the State regulated by the City of Renton should be designed to ensure no net loss of ecological functions. Policy SH-14. Shoreline use and development should be carried out in a manner that prevents or mitigates adverse impacts so that the resulting ecological condition does not become worse than the current condition. This means ensuring no net loss of ecological functions and processes in all development and use. Permitted uses should be designed and City of Renton Department of c...,,,,munity & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Shoreline Management Permit LUA13-001640, ECF, SM DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 Page 5 of 11 conducted to minimize, in so far as practical, any resultant damage to the ecology and environment (RCW 90.58.020). Shoreline ecological functions that should be protected include, but are not limited to, fish and wildlife habitat, food chain support, and water temperature maintenance. Shoreline processes that shall be protected include, but are not limited to, water flow; littoral drift; erosion and accretion; infiltration; ground water recharge and discharge; sediment delivery, transport, and storage; large woody debris recruitment; organic matter input; nutrient and pathogen removal; and stream channel formation/maintenance. B. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: The subject site is classified as Shoreline High Intensity on the City of Renton Shoreline Overlay Map. The following development standards are applicable to the proposal: 1. No Net Loss Required Shoreline use and development shall be carried out in a manner that prevents or mitigates adverse impacts to ensure no net loss of ecological functions and processes in all development and use. Permitted uses are designed and conducted to minimize, in so far as practical, any resultant damage to the ecology and environment (RCW 90.58.020). Shoreline ecological functions that shall be protected include, but are not limited to, fish and wildlife habitat, food chain support, and water temperature maintenance. Shoreline processes that shall be protected include, but are not limited to, water flow; erosion and accretion; infiltration; groundwater recharge and discharge; sediment delivery, transport, and storage; large woody debris recruitment; organic matter input; nutrient and pathogen removal; and stream channel formation/maintenance. Staff Comment: The applicant provided on addendum to the biological assessment, authored by Marine Surveys & Assessments /who alsa authored the biological review of the community dock and this project) stating that the project with associated mitigation measures and proposed plantings provide for no net loss of ecological functions and values consistent with the City of Renton's Shoreline Master Program. 2. Burden on Applicant Applicants for permits have the burden of proving that the proposed development is consistent with the criteria set forth in the Shoreline Master Program and the Shoreline Management Act, including demonstrating all resasonable efforts have been taken to provide sufficient mitigation such that the activity does not result in net loss of ecological functions. 3. View Obstruction and Visual Quality N/A View Corridors Required: Where commercial, industrial, multiple use, multi-family and/or multi-lot developments are proposed, primary structures shall provide for view corridors between buildings where views of the shoreline are available from public right-of-way or trails. Staff Comment: The proposed boat lift is not a primary structure and a boat sitting on the lift bunkers would be approximately 5 feet at the highest point of the boat above the City of Renton Department of Co,,1munity & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Shoreline Management Permit LUA13-001640, ECF, SM DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 Page 6 of 11 waterline. Minimum Setbacks for Commercial Development Adjacent to Residential or Park Uses: All new or expanded commercial development adjacent to residential use and public parks shall N/A provide fifteen feet (15') setbacks from adjacent properties to attenuate proximity impacts such as noise, light and glare, and may address scale and aesthetic impacts. Fencing or landscape areas may be required to provide a visual screen. Lighting Requirements: Display and other exterior lighting shall be designed and operated so as to prevent glare, to avoid illuminating nearby properties used for noncommercial N/A purposes, and to prevent hazards for public traffic. Methods of controlling spillover light include, but are not limited to, limits on the height of light structure, limits on light levels of fixtures, light shields, and screening. Reflected Lights to Be Limited: Building surfaces on or adjacent to the water shall employ N/A materials that limit reflected light. Integration and Screening of Mechanical Equipment: Building mechanical equipment shall be incorporated into building architectural features, such as pitched roofs, to the maximum N/A extent feasible. Where mechanical equipment cannot be incorporated into architectural features, a visual screen shall be provided consistent with building exterior materials that obstructs views of such equipment. Visual Prominence of Freestanding Structures to Be Minimized: Facilities not incorporated into buildings including fences, piers, poles, wires, lights, and other freestanding structures shall be designed to minimize visual prominence. ,I" Staff Comment: The freestanding boat lift without a boat would be below the nearby northerly and easterly shoreline bulkheads at its highest point. With the proposed boat located on the boat lift, the boat at its highest point would be approximately 5 feet above the waterline. Maximum Stair and Walkway Width: Stairs and walkways located within shoreline vegetated buffers shall not exceed four feet in width; provided, that where ADA requirements apply, N/A such facilities may be increased to six feet in width. Stairways shall conform to the existing topography to the extent feasible 4. Community Disturbances: ,I" Noise, odors, night lighting, water and land traffic, and other structures and activities shall be considered in the design plans and their impacts avoided or mitigated. s. Public Access: Physical or visual access to shorelines shall be incorporated in all new development when the development would either generate a demand for one or more forms of such access, would impair existing legal access opportunities or rights, or is required to meet the specific policies and regulations of City of Renton Department of .... ..,,,,munity & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Shoreline Management Permit LUA13-001640, ECF, SM DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 the Shoreline Master Program. Page 7 of 11 ,/ Lake Washington Reach C: The potential for provision of public access from new development will occur after cleanup of the Superfund site with multi-use development, which shall include shoreline access across the entire property, with controlled access to the water's edge, consistent with requirements for vegetation conservation and ecological restoration and provisions for water-dependent use, consistent with standards of this Section. Provision of public access from future redevelopment of the Seahawks and Barbee Mill site shall include a continuous public access trail parallel to the shoreline with controlled public access balanced with provisions for ecological restoration, as well as to shared or commercial docks, consistent with standards of this Section. Staff Comment: The freestanding boat lift will not impact or reduce public access established through the Barbee Mill lumber mill clean-up and redevelopment. 6. Building and Development Location -Shoreline Orientation Shoreline developments shall locate the water-dependent, water-related, and water-enjoyment portions of their developments along the shoreline. Development and use shall be designed in a manner that directs land alteration to the least sensitive portions of the site to maximize vegetation conservation; minimize impervious surfaces and runoff; protect riparian, nearshore and wetland habitats; protect wildlife and habitats; protect archaeological, historic and cultural resources; and preserve aesthetic values ,/ Location of Development: Development and use shall be designed in a manner that directs land alteration to the least sensitive portions of the site. Staff Comment: The applicant's biological habitat evaluation and related addendums provide habitat and shoreline impact analysis. The provided evaluations conclude that the proposed location of the baat lift is the least sensitive portion of the site, as this area is already developed and disturbed. Below, in report subsection 8. a "Use Regulations for Boat Lifts" there is a shoreline code standard that all lifts be located os waterword as feasible and safe. The applicant's evaluation considered this criteria, where the boat lift could have been located further waterward and determined that the proposed location would minimize potential negative impacts. The westerly shoreline on the property to the north has been restored to mimic a more natural shoreline to improve and restore ecological function and values. If the boat lift were placed near the restorated shoreline and further waterward than the proposed location, potential impacts could occur to the restored shoreline habitat instead of the disturbed habitat area where the sheet pile bulkhead is located. During the July 29, 2014 meeting at the project site with the Muckleshoot Tribe, City of Renton, and the applicant, attendees were able to view the substrate and rocks at the bottom of the lake where the boat lift would be located. The bulkheads create a corner in the proposed location, where the water surface and lake bottom receive shading from the Community Dock and bulkhead walls. As a result of observations in the field and review of the applicant's submitted documents, staff concurs with the conclusions in the applicant's Addendum to the Biological Habitat Evaluation, that the proposed location is the least sensitive area. City of Renton Department of C...,.munity & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Shoreline Management Permit LUA13-001640, ECF, SM DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 Page 8 of 11 N/A ,/ ,/ Minimization of Site Alteration: Development shall minimize site alteration in sites with substantial unaltered natural features by applying the following criteria: (a) Vehicle and pedestrian circulation systems shall be designed to limit clearing, grading, and alteration of topography and natural features. (b) Impervious surfacing for parking lot/space areas shall be limited through the use of under-building parking or permeable surfaces where feasible. (c) Utilities shall share roadway and driveway corridors and rights-of-way wherever feasible. (d) Development shall be located and designed to avoid the need for structural shoreline stabilization over the life of the development. Exceptions may be made for the limited instances where stabilization is necessary to protect allowed uses, particularly water- dependent uses, where no alternative locations are available and no net loss of ecological functions will result. Location for Accessory Development: Accessory development or use that does not require a shoreline location shall be located outside of shoreline jurisdiction unless such development is required to serve approved water-oriented uses and/or developments or unless otherwise allowed in a High Intensity designation. When sited within shoreline jurisdiction, uses and/or developments such as parking, service buildings or areas, access roads, utilities, signs and storage of materials shall be located inland away from the land/water interface and landward of water-oriented developments and/or other approved uses unless a location closer to the water is reasonably necessary. Navigation and Recreation to Be Preserved: Shoreline uses shall not deprive other uses of reasonable access to navigable waters. Existing water-related recreation shall be preserved. Staff Comment: The proposed location is in an area of Lake Washington where navigation is limited, as the site dead-ends into a shoreline sheet pile and concrete cap bulkhead to the east, and is between the community dock to the south and shoreline sheet pile and concrete cap bulkhead to the north. As such, the placement of a boat lift at this location would not result in impacts to navigation or recreation. 7. Standards for Density, Setbacks, and Height-Activities Exempt from Buffers and Setbacks The following development activities are not subject to buffers and setbacks; provided, that they are constructed and maintained in a manner that minimizes adverse impacts on shoreline ecological functions; and provided further, that they comply with al lthe applicable regulations in RMC Title IV. ,/ Water-Dependent Development: Those portions of approved water-dependent development that require a location waterward of the OHWM of streams, rivers, lakes, ponds, marine shorelines, associated wetlands, and/or within their associated buffers. Staff Comment: The Barbee Mill Community Dock at the site is a moorage facility that exists primarily far temporary transient moorage and use by residents of the residential subdivision, with a couple permanent moorage locations. The proposed boot lift to be located next to the community dock is accessory. Any impacts would be temporary during City of Renton Department of Cv.,,munity & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Shoreline Management Permit LUAl3-00l640, ECF, SM DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 Page 9 of 11 installation af the lift. Setbacks, Structure Setback from Ordinary High Water Mark: None ./ Staff Comment: There is no setback requirement for the boatlift. Building Height, Maximum -In Water: 35 feet ./ Staff Comment: The boat lift with a boat located on the lift in the upright parked position, will be approximately 5 feet above the waterline. Coverage Standards for Buildings: Maximum of 5 percent impervious area within the buffer and a maximum of 50 percent within 100 feet of OHWM. Lot coverage maximum is 25 percent for buildings within 100 feet of OHWM. N/A Staff Comment: The boat lift will be located within the water, in lands covered by water, and not located an uncovered land. The property where the community dock is located is not proposed to have any impervious or fat coverage changes through this proposal. Therefore the coverage standard is not applicable. 8. Use Regulations: a. Boat Lifts: Boat lifts are permitted outright as accessory to a residential dock, provided that all lifts are ./ placed as far waterward as feasible and safe, and platform lifts are fully grated . Staff Comment: See the above report subsection 6. "Location of Development". Development of this project shall be undertaken pursuant to the following terms and conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures issued as part of the Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated, dated December 5, 2014. 2. Monitoring reports of the mitigation plantings shall be provided to the City of Renton Current Planning Project Manager and Karen Walter of the Muckleshoot Indian Tribes Fisheries Division, annually, over a 5-year period according to the monitoring, maintenance, and contingency plan for the project. This Permit is granted pursuant to the Shoreline Management Action of 1971 and pursuant to the following: 1. The issuance of a license under the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 shall not release the applicant from compliance with federal, state, and other permit requirements. 2. This permit may be rescinded pursuant to Section 14(7) of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 in the event the permittee fails to comply with any condition(s) hereof. City of Renton Department of C.,,,,.munity & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 Shoreline Management Permit LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Page 10 of 11 3. Construction permits shall not be issued until twenty-one (21) days after approval by the Washington State Department of Ecology or until any review proceedings initiated within this twenty-one (21) day review period have been completed. DATE OF DECISION ON LAND USE ACTION: SIGNATURE: Jennifer Henning, AICP, Planning Director Department of Community & Economic Development Date APPEALS: Appeals of Shoreline Substantial Development Permit issuance must be made directly to the Shorelines Hearings Board. Appeals are made by filing a request in writing within the twenty-one (21) days of receipt of the final order and concurrently filing copies of such request with the Washington State Department of Ecology and the Attorney General's office as provided in section 18(1) of the Shorelines Management Act of 1971. All copies of appeal notices shall also be filed with the City of Renton Planning Division and the City Clerk's office. RECONSIDERATION: Within 14 days of the decision date, any party may request that the decision be reopened by the approval body. The approval body may modify his decision if material evidence not readily discoverable prior to the original decision is found or if he finds there was misrepresentation of fact. After review of the reconsideration request, if the approval body finds sufficient evidence to amend the original decision, there will be no further extension of the appeal period. Any person wishing to take further action must file a formal appeal within the 14-day appeal time frame. EXPIRATION: Unless a different time period is specified in the shoreline permit as authorized by RCW 90.58.143 and subsection J1 of RMC 4-9-190, construction activities, or a use or activity, for which a permit has been granted pursuant to this Master Program must be commenced within two (2) years of the effective date of a shoreline permit, or the shoreline permit shall terminate, and a new permit shall be necessary. However, the Planning Division may authorize a single extension for a period not to exceed one year based on reasonable factors, if a request for extension has been filed with the Planning Division before the expiration date, and notice of the proposed extension is given to parties of record and the Washington State Department of Ecology. DEFINITION OF COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES: the construction applications must be submitted, permits must be issued, and foundation inspections must be completed before the end of the two (2) year period. Exhibits/ Attachments: • Urban Boat Lift Plan Sheet, Sheet ALO, prepared by Ecco Design, dated December 4, 2014 City of Renton Department of C~ ... munity & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Shoreline Management Permit LUA13-001640, ECF, SM DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 Page 11 of 11 • Addendum to August 5, 2013 Biological Evaluation, prepared by Marine Surveys & Assessments, dated December 8, 2014 • Biological Evaluation, prepared by Marine Surveys & Assessments, dated August 5, 2013 • Responses to DNR and Muckleshoot Questions, from December 17, 2013 City of Renton on-hold letter, prepared by prepared by Marine Surveys & Assessments cc: Office of Attorney General Karen Walter, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Barbee Mill Community Organization; c/o Shirley Ely-Morris Management Inc/Owner Michael & Dorothy Urban/Applicant Troy Hussing, Ecco Design Inc/Contact Ruth Kidd; Torben & Ginnie Hollinsworth; Allison Peryea; Patti Klink; Vivian Roach, DNR; Lynda Priddy, EPA/ Party(ies) of Record (360) 385-4073 rnarine.surveys.inc@grnail.com ADDENDUM Dated December 8, 2014 To: 521 Snagstead Way Port Townsend WA 98368 Michael Urban Dock and Boat Lift Project Conner Homes, Barbee Mill Community 4151 Williams Avenue N., Renton, WA 98056 Case#: LUAI0-006 Biological Evaluation Addendum August 5, 2013 As per the recommendations in the City of Renton's Environmental Review Committee Report (pages 7- 8, Item B. Mitigation Measures, #5) additional mitigation plantings are proposed for the site. These additional plantings will include two Scouter's Willows and two Red-Osier Dogwoods (see the attached drawing). In response to # 6 (Item B. Mitigation Measures noted above ), Marine Surveys & Assessments has concluded, based on these mitigation measures and those noted in the Biological Evaluation and Addendum for this project, that there will be no net loss of ecological functions and values consistent with the City ofRenton's Shoreline Master Program. After reviewing the appropriate data and surveys, the effect determinations for the impacts of the project, as designed, are: 1. Puget Sound chinook-"May affect, not likely to adversely affect" 2. Bull trout-"May affect, not likely to adversely affect" 3. Puget Sound stee/head -"May affect, not likely to adversely affect" 4. Marbled murrelet-"No effect" Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the comments brought up by the City of Renton's Environmental Review Committee Report. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact our office. Amy Leitman > )> ..... 0 m r m < > ~ 0 z 0 m ~ > ~ r 0 ! ~ g 2: 0 , m r I ~ r C _;~;~:'. Hll-t---t-~~ ,. -_ ----,, !! ;:-~~ ~~1'·-ir-i--t-~i ~-::::..._,_~ :1- -!-. -.--H~ .,;;;::,- =• ~ -1 __ _ ~----:::::. --~ I ,'s=. ;= I ----= .::!--- '"=" I ·11 l I -: _,. _--:_ f ----,,- ,,;=., =,, = ,= :, ::::... ':_:, -.-~,, + ~~~~2 ~:r~~ 1.1:::: -== ,-1~ '~ ! ~ ' / MICHAEL ft DOROTHY URBAN BDAT LIFT """'"'"''"''" ..,.,.,,,_w.,,o,. > ][ JI I! :e CC 0 !desig1 ire ' _,-i 1: I I ·-1 -·-____ ·---L .Jrn ~+ ;n,, . .3!1.:'-___ _J N ·3,W Sl'1V'",11M 2CJ ~ )6•· )· \,J,tPJO' '""''": "''' 0610) 106 706 ]9)7 < ~ ' ' ' ( J \ II ' ! C: :;;o CJ )> z CJ 0 )> -I .-- 'Tl -I ', \ I IT r ' ~lhl', E.EV,\TIOII. PLT,',IL GU•ERAl INfC.'R/.1,\llVr< AMY R. LEITMAN MARINE SURVEYS & ASSESSMENTS 521 SNAGSTEAD WAY PORT TOWNSEND WA 98368 Tel.360.385-4073 Email.marine.surveys.inc@ gm ail. com Michael Urban Dock and Boat Lift Project Conner Homes, Barbee Mill Community 4151 Williams Avenue N., Renton, WA 98056 Case#: LUAl0-006 Biological Evaluation Addendum August 5, 2013 To: City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development From: Marine Surveys & Assessments Subject: Addition of Boat Lift to Project This is an addendum to the Biological Evaluation for the Barbee Mill Community Dock Project (Case#: LUAl0-006) for the addition ofa boat lift to the project. The Biological Evaluation was originally submitted in 2010 and the proposed project has since been completed and the docks built. The primary purpose of this addendum is to proposed the addition of a boat lift to one of the completed docks and address the City ofRenton's municipal code 4-3-090-D.5.b. and 4-3- 090-E.l (CRMC: 4-3-090-D.Sb. and CRMC: 4-3-090-E. l.) "Building and Development Location-Shoreline Orientation" and "Use Regulations", which respectiv_;:ly affects this addition. Marine Surveys & Asses, EXHIBIT 10 Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page 1 Project Location 11. Section NW32, Township 24N, Range 05E. 4151 Williams Avenue N. Renton, WA 98056 Latitude: 47.515745°N/Longitude: 122.206114°W See Figure 1 for project location. Project Information The project location for this boat lift was previously the site of the former Barbee Mill Company lumber mill, which has recently been restored to a residential neighborhood (Barbee Mill community developed by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC). The addition of this proposed boat lift to the already completed dock at the project location is expected to have little to no impact on the aquatic habitat as this area is already heavily developed and disturbed. For a more detailed impact summary please refer to the original Biological Evaluation. In accordance with CRMC: 4-3-090-D.Sb. the proposed boat lift is designed in a manner that directs land alteration to the least sensitive portions of the site. However, CRMC: 4-3-090-E. l. allow boat lifts as accessory to a residential dock: provided, that all lifts are place as far waterward as feasible and safe. This conflicts with CRMC: 4-3-090-D.5b. as the location that is least sensitive is the most landward portion of the dock. Thus on the premise of feasibility and to minimize any potential impact, the location of the proposed boat lift will be at the beginning of the dock next to the . concrete and metal bulkhead, where the area is already developed and disturbed thus being least sensitive. Please see Figure 2 and 3 for the site plan, elevation detail and location of the proposed boat lift, pictures of the proposed boat lift location can be seen in Figures 4 and 5. A Regional General Permit No 1. for this project is will be concurrently filed with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Relevant information from this permit are as follows. The proposed boat lift will be a ground based lift made out of approved steel, where the depth of its most landward end will be 5.5 feet. Construction equipment will be operated from an out-of-water location whenever possible; this equipment will be operated in a manner that minimizes the suspension of particulates. All equipment used in or around water will be clean and inspected daily prior to use to ensure that the equipment has no fluid leaks. Should a leak develop during use, the leaking equipment will be removed from the site immediately and not used again until it has been adequately repaired. No equipment will be stored or fueled so close to a surface water that the activity could adversely affect the waterbody. Work that disturbs the substrate, bank, or shore will occur in the dry whenever practicable. The work window for the proposed boat lift will be from now (August 5'h) to the end of the year (December 31 "). Marine Surveys & Assessments Urban Project: Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page 2 .. Figure 1. Project Iuformation and Location PROJECT INFORMATION 'OWNEI<.: MICHAEL & DOROTHY Ul<.BAN DRAWINGS BY' ECCO DESIGN INC. 'za:i N 36TH ST SUITE 201 SEATTLE; WA98103 206-706-3937 SliE ADDRESS:_ 4151 &. 4157 WILLIAMS AV_E N RENTON, WA 98056 Pl\RCEL NUMBER: ( 4151). 0518500340 & ( 4151) {i51850035b • BODY OF WATER: LAKE WASHINGTON LEGAL DESCRIPTION: (0518500340) TRACT 35, RENTON LOT I..INE ADJUSTMENT LUA 10-023 LL.A. REC, NO. 20120802900003 IN PLAT OF BARBEE MILL, VOL 248 PF PLATS. PP. 25-38. RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WA (0518500350) LOT 34. BARBE_E MILL.ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECO.RDED IN VOLUME 2460FPLATS, PAGES 25 THROUGH 39, IN KING COUNTY; WASHINGTON. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: INSTALL A NEW BOAT LIFT. Marine Surveys & Assessments VICINITY MAP ""'(~i:-;ri·,{_:·._-. ·. -Ch:llfJ!.\•~ -: ~'eeL~-~ . ·:-:,.·, fk'ich Pa~.;}· B.e!'e/.i('l/"; _,. k ( . ·'~:,._}}:,,·.<~:;· I_\\, .J ... ! ,_··l'--{ ·' ~01.eutate ~f~fer.~?~, : · :J,5ili_;;-rrn'y __ -·\ .. Mt F~,(, -, . '~ .. :~~;&"k . :;_.) :~t . ,. ; ·0oi~~~~""f-=I · ,-,--· M~..r..:;.1 ,f;\!.uJi.e ::: .":··· -, · ·. · 1-::;;fa_ nd · ·-' 1-1,o,-;; Piirf •·.· ·,:OJ\m{:ii" -Ci:Y··· PROJECT SITE: LAT: 47.52966' N LON: -12220505' W NW 1/4 S:32 T:24N R:5E ; (_!J :·1_Hiii eslPMK _,_....r .,,-.'} t_-~ I': ·-·IL r ., . '.,: 1 '"'• -~ I :Eh';'" 7-'. :n. t-a·' ·; 1§ -. tA.;w1_"'."$kywav ~' \ · __ .'Hitd..'<;t m~~r.,i.. Ren\0-n , .. .., . .• .,_ :,;i.,·r-. )., r Urban Project: Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page 3 SI TE Figure 2. Site Plan and Proposed Boat Lift Location. OHWM 21.85'@SHORBJNE PROPOSED BOAT LIFT DEPT, OF NATURAL RESOURCES PARC. I< 3224059066 PLAN PLEASE NOTc lH!\T TI-iE SHORELINE CONFIGURATION AND PROPERTY UNE LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY. PROPERTY UNES ARE BASED ON AN AUGUST 2012 SURVEY BY CORE DESIGN. YINAN,HE & MAJ:IQNG 4163 Wlllll\MS AVE N r·---·-·------------------ 1 MICHAEL & DOR01HY URBAN. 15' 4157 WILLIAMS AVE H BARBEE MILL COMMUtfilY ORGANIZATION 4151 WILLIAMS AVE N ----~-·-·-----..--~-- BARBEE MILL WATERFRONT LLC 4125 WILLIAMS AVE H Marine Surveys & Assessment~ Urban Project: Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page 4 Figure 3. Elevation Detail and Proposed Boat Lift Location. EXISTING BULKHEAD TO REMAIN PROPOSED BOAT LIFT 21_85'0HW ELEVATION DETAIL SCALE 1 /8" = 1 '-0" Marine Surveys & Assessments 1S Urban Project: Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page 5 Figu re s 4. Picture of Boat Lift Location (looking waterward). . ·. .. . . ~ .. ·-. _-; ~-' . ::. . .,.. ... ·:~ 1 .• ){,~Liffi:~ •"°: .• • . ,,_. -',..-: .... -. :_)t~~ .. ;;: Marine Surveys & Asses sments Urban Project: Addendum to Biologica l Eva luation Page 6 Figure 5. Picture of Boat Lift Location (looking landward). Marine Surveys & Assessments Urban Proj ect: Ad dendum to Biologica l Evaluation Page 7 • . . MARINE SURVEYS & ASSESSMENTS 521 SNAGSTEAD WAY PORT TOWNSEND WA 98368 Tcl.360.385-4073 E m a i I . m a r i n c . s u r v e y s . i n c @·. g m a i 1 . c o m Gerald Wasser City of Renton Associate Planner Subject: Washington Department of Natural Resources and Muckleshoot Tribe Comments Case LUAB-001640 Michael Urban Boat Lift Project Conner Homes, Barbee Mill Community 4151 Williams Avenue N., Renton, WA 98056 Dear Mr. Wasser, The Michael Urban Boat Lift Project was initially submitted as an addendum to the Biological Evaluation for the Barbee Mill Community Dock Project (Case#: LUAI0-006). The proposed action was to add a boat lift to the already completed dock at the project location. On December 17, 2013, the City of Renton received comment on the proposed Michael Urban Boat Lift project from the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the Muckleshoot Tribe (see Attachment I for correspondence). In brief, DNR was most concerned about the potential impacts of this additional boat lift due to: increased shading impacts on aquatic vegetation, increased vessel wake impacts on natural shoreline processes, scour and sediment erosion through vessel propeller scour, crushing ofbenthic habitat, and a greater risk ofrelease of contaminants into the water column. The Muckleshoot Tribe shared many of these concerns, as well as some additional concerns related to mitigation and shoreline development. Each of these impacts is addressed below. In addition, relevant project details are included to aid in review. Project Location: V. Section NW32, Township 24N, Range 05E. 4151 Williams Avenue North Renton, WA 98056 Latitude: 47.515745°N; Longitude: 122.206114°W Project Information: The proposed location for this boat lift is on the site of the former Barbee Mill Company lumber mill, which has recently been restored and includes a residential neighborhood (the Barbee Mill Community, developed by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC). The addition of this proposed boat lift to the already completed dock at the project location is expected to have little additional impact on the aquatic habitat as this area is already heavily developed and disturbed. For a more detailed impact summary please refer to the original Biological Evaluation. See Figure I for a revised site plan. Pictures of the proposed boat lift location can be seen in Figures 2 and 3. Washington DNR concerns: 1. Location of project in relation to DNR-leased land: MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 1 The proposed location of the lift has been revised. The lift will be located 3' further to the east than the originally proposed location, which places the lift 4' away from state owned aquatic lands. This will ensure that no part of the lift will extend over state owned aquatic lands and that no part of the boat will extend over state owned aquatic lands when it is on the lift (Figure 1 ). The stem of the boat will hang off of the west portion of the lift that is closest to the adjacent state owned aquatic lands. Because of how the boat lift operates, the west side of the bunk supporting the boat will be approximately 6' away from the adjacent state owned aquatic lands when the boat is stored on the lift. When stored on the lift the stem of the boat will overhang the western edge of the bunk by approximately 3'. In the revised proposed location this means that the stem of the boat will be approximately 3' away from the adjacent state owned aquatic lands when the boat is stored on the lift. 2. Increased shading impacts to aquatic vegetation: Although few studies exist in reference to boat lifts, a boat lift can be considered similar to a small pier in its impacts. This is because both are open structures that extend over water. The impacts of piers on aquatic vegetation are well studied, especially in saltwater systems. Unsurprisingly, piers reduce the amount oflight available below the structure (Mulvihill et al 1980, Burdick and Short 1995). However, many factors influence how much light is actually available below an overwater structure. In the current situation, two factors are most relevant: a lower overwater dock height provides greater shading as compared to higher overwater dock height (Burdick and Short 1995), and a considerable amount of light-transmitting grating is needed to minimize shading impacts. For example, Fresh et al. (1995) found that at least 50% grating was needed to allow enough light transmission to significantly benefit eelgrass (Zostera marina). The current proposal features a boat (which, by its nature, is not able to integrate grating or light transmitting structures) stored at a low over-water height, so shading concerns are relevant and must be addressed. There is likely to be very little aquatic vegetation at the project site. A dive survey was conducted by Marine Surveys & Assessments divers on March 20, 2007 near the now-constructed community dock (Attachment 2). This survey observed two types of aquatic vegetation: invasive Eurasian milfoil (Myriophyl/um spicatum) and an unidentified filamentous alga. Eurasian mil foil was first noted approximately 100' waterward of the current bulkhead, and increased in density from 120' -200' waterward. The unidentified filamentous alga was first noted 25' waterward of the current bulkhead. In both cases, impacts to aquatic vegetation from the boat lift would be best avoided by locating it inside (landward) of aquatic vegetation. The current proposal locates the boat lift as landward as possible, keeping it well away from any aquatic vegetation. The boat launch will occupy a small IO' by 27' gap between a vertical bulkhead and an existing pier, ramp, and float structure (Figures 1-3). This small gap is effectively closed in by the existing dock and bulkhead on 3 sides, and this is likely already limiting the available light. While the DNR view-that there will be increased shading impacts to aquatic vegetation-is correct, the extent of this impact depends on the presence of aquatic vegetation at the project site and the siting of the boat lift. In this case, the proposed location of the boat and lift in a shaded "pocket" near shore without appreciable aquatic vegetation will effectively minimize overwater shading impacts. 3. Increased vessel wake impacting natural shoreline processes due to larger and more frequent wave action: There are two major times when this development could increase vessel wake: when the vessel is entering/exiting the boat lift, and once it is underway on Lake Washington. Each impact is considered below. The major shoreline impact from vessel traffic is erosion due to boat-generated wake waves. The extent of this impact will be determined by the intensity of the waves as well as the composition of shoreline banks (Asplund 2000). In the case of entering and exiting the boat lift, wave sizes are likely to be minimal. Because of the location of the proposed lift, speeds will, by necessity, be very low. Maneuvering an 8.3' wide vessel into a IO' gap, along the pre-existing 170' long dock, will require speeds that are unlikely to produce wake. The tight confines of the dock and boat lift effectively enforce a "no-wake zone." Furthermore, the shoreline at and near the proposed boat lift is already bulkheaded. The bulkhead is impounding any sediment above the ordinary water mark (OWM). Because the Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) controls the water depth of Lake Washington at 21.85' above MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·2 Puget Sound mean lower low water (with small variations), the substrate seaward of the bulkhead is continuously submerged to a depth of 5.5'. These two factors-small waves due to low boat speed, and low erosion due to the bulkhead and water depth-make shoreline erosion unlikely. Once the boat is past the existing dock and under way in Lake Washington, it will obviously travel at speeds that result in a wake, and ultimately, shoreline wave action. Recreational motorcraft produce waves that average 1-25 cm in height (Bhowmik et al. 1992). In a study along an Australian river, waves greater than 30 cm were able to cause shoreline erosion (Nason et al. 1994). However, this finding cannot be directly translated to Lake Washington because the erosive potential of waves is dependent not only on the actual size, but the composition of the shoreline itself (Asplund 2000). From the limited research available, it is safe to assume that every recreational motor boat on Lake Washington does have the potential to contribute to shoreline erosion. However, it is not reasonable to assume that the construction of this boat lift will directly add to an increase in shoreline erosion via larger and more frequent waves once underway in Lake Washington. According to Michael Urban, the proponent, the boat is likely to be used twice weekly from the months of June to September. On an already crowded urban lake, the addition of approximately 24 recreational boat trips per year cannot be considered a substantial development. This is especially true because the proponent could add this volume of traffic to the lake independent of the boat lift, simply by using the boat from public launches. Because the project is unlikely to result in larger or more frequent waves while entering/exiting the dock, and is only adding a fractional increase in the total lake traffic while underway, additional shoreline erosion is unlikely. 4. Scour and sediment erosion through prop scour: Propeller scour can affect sediments at depths ofup to 10' (Gusinski 1982, in Asplund 1997). Recreational boat propeller scour can significantly increase turbidity (via sediment resuspension) and can directly impact aquatic plants through eroding sediment and cutting plants (Asplund 1997). It appears that the direct physical impacts of scouring (sediment erosion and cutting plants) are most responsible for reducing aquatic plant biomass, as opposed to indirect impacts from increased turbidity (Asplund & Cook 1997). Clearly, DNR concerns about sediment scour and erosion are valid in the shallow (<IO') environment. However, Lake Washington is a deep lake that quickly drops off at the shoreline. Scour impacts are not likely once in deeper waters. As the 2007 SCUBA survey noted (Attachment 2), water depth was greater than IO' within 125' of the current bulkhead. The current dock extends approximately 170'. It is reasonable to assume that, once near the dock and within the shallow nearshore environment, the boat will be operated at "no-wake" speeds that cause a minimal amount of scour. This is not due to any enforced "best practices" on the part of the boat driver, but to the tight confines of maneuvering to the boat lift. It is simply not possible to travel quickly here, and the low speeds in shallow water will effectively minimize scour and sediment erosion. 5. Crushing of benthic habitat: The water depth at the most landward end of the boat lift, in relation to OHW in Lake Washington, is 5.5'. According to the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the water level in Lake Washington is maintained within a 2' range. Therefore, the "worst case" minimum water depth at the boat lift would be 3.5' (42"). The draft of the Searay 210 boat with the stem drive up for landing is 21" (specifications for this boat are available at: http://www.searay.com/Page.aspx/pageld/I0232/pmid/30910I/210-Select.aspx). Therefore, the closest the boat would come to the sediment, under "worst case" conditions, is 21" above the bottom. This is a reasonable buffer to ensure that there is no direct contact with the benthic habitat. The boat lift will be a free-standing unit that only contacts the sediment on the comer foot pads. The specifications for the proposed Sunstream SL6012AR boatlift are available at http://www.sunstreamcorp.com/sl60l2.htm. While sediment will be crushed under these small footpads, the total area impacted will be small. The siting of the boat lift, in a shaded area with no appreciable aquatic vegetation, minimizes the impact of this crushing. 6. Heightened potential for release of contaminants into the water column: MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·3 There are three potential sources of contamination that must be addressed at this site, two which are inherent to boats and boat lifts: the motor boat and boat lift both have the potential to release fluids that may impact the aquatic environment. The third concern is site-specific, because the proposed action is within the Barbee Mill toxic clean-up site. This site has soil, groundwater, and lake sediment contamination, but only lake sediments will be directly addressed here as these may be returned to the water column as a result of the proposed action. Recreational motor boats do have the potential to release metals (lead, cadmium, and mercury) and hydrocarbons (methane, gasoline, oils) into the water (Asplund 2000). Most studies on the impacts of this exhaust have found that there are minimal effects on aquatic organisms due to dilution as well as the fact that most hydrocarbons disperse quickly in water (Asplund 2000). It is important to note that these studies were done when older 2-stroke motors were common; the modern motor in the Searay 210 boat will have fewer emissions. The boat lift itself will be run using the required USA CE guidelines from Regional General Permit I for watercraft lifts: "All equipment used in or around water will be clean and inspected daily prior to use to ensure that the equipment has no fluid leaks. Should a leak develop during use, the leaking equipment will be removed from the site immediately and not used again until it has been adequately repaired." (USACE 2013). While the boat and lift do not pose substantial risk of releasing contaminants into the water column, the fact that they have the potential to stir up sediments at the Barbee Mill toxic clean-up site must be addressed. The Washington Department of Ecology (WA DOE) has done extensive monitoring of the Barbee Mill toxic clean-up site. In 1999, and again in 2003, offshore sediment was removed from the site for characterization. Though it did have elevated concentrations of wood waste and carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (cPAHs), WA DOE concluded that "No Further Action" was required and that there were no restrictions on sediment use (WA DOE 2008). Since this time, the Barbee Mill Co. Inc. has removed contaminated sediments and wood from Lake Washington along the site (WA DOE 2012). A further contamination concern is arsenic, which has been found in groundwater, porewater (water within the sediment) and sediments at the site. To reduce the ability of arsenic to run off to Lake Washington, a passive attenuation zone (PAZ) was installed at the down-slope property boundary of the former mill site. Since this time, arsenic concentrations in the porewater (10 cm below the mudline) have been measured at levels ranging from non- detectable to 17 µg/L; the WA DOE threshold clean-up value is at 20 µg/L (Patmon! & Porter 2010). Arsenic concentrations in the top 10 cm of the sediment have not exceeded 16 mg/kg, below the WA DOE threshold of20 mg/kg (Patmon! & Porter 2010). Bioassays of this sediment were completed with the benthic macroinvertebrates Hyalel/a and Chironomus, and there were no significant impacts on survival or growth (Patmon! & Porter 2010). It appears that the post-cleanup sediment at Barbee Mill does not pose a danger to benthic macroinvertebrates, an important food source for fish. Even if the boat lift "stirs up" sediment, during construction or use, the resuspension of this sediment will not be likely to introduce dangerous concentrations of contaminants. Muckleshoot Tribe concerns: 1. Scouring effects of the boat lift and watercraft on contaminated sediments at the Barbee Mill site: See points 3, 4 and 6 in the above "Washington DNR concerns" section. 2. The boat lift and boat in the nearshore, where juvenile salmon are likely to be found, can cause them to avoid the nearshore and increase their risk of predation: It is generally accepted that overwater structures can alter migration behavior of juvenile salmon (though the effects may vary depending on the design and orientation of the structure, degree of shading, and the presence of artificial light), and reduce salmon prey resources and refugia by shading aquatic plant life (Simenstad et al. 1999; Nightingale and Simenstad 2001). However, the significance of these effects is not clear. As Simenstad et al. state, "We found no studies that described empirical evidence supporting or refuting that modification of juvenile salmon behavior in shoreline habitats was reflected in changes in survival." Nightingale and Simenstad (2001) state, "Presently, although we know that under some conditions small juvenile salmon will delay or otherwise alter their MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns-4 shoreline movements when encountering an overwater structure, the conditions under which this behavioral modification is significant to the fishes' fitness and survival is relatively unknown." In terms of increased predation risk, some relevant research has been done in the marine environment. At this time, there is no evidence of docks aggregating salmonid predators in the Puget Sound (Ratte & Salo 1985; Cardwell et al. 1980; Nightingale and Simenstad 2001). It might be assumed that birds would be interested in small migrating juveniles, but there is no evidence that docks provide an aggregation site for predatory birds (Taylor and Willey 1997). Based on existing research, it cannot be stated that the presence of this small nearshore structure will increase the predation rates of juvenile salmonids, either through changes in migratory behavior or by providing a predator-aggregation structure. 3. The boat lift will permanently displace benthic habitat: This is true, in that the boat lift will shade approximately 175 ft 2 ofbenthic habitat when the boat is on it (calculated based on the Searay 210, with a 21' length x 8.3' beam). The actual footprint of the lift in the benthic habitat will be much smaller, only encompassing the 4 small footpads it will rest on. However, the location of the lift has been selected to add the least possible impact to the nearshore. By placing it as landward as possible, it is located landward of the known aquatic plants in the area, in a shaded "pocket" that is already bulkheaded (Figures 3 and 4). This area is clearly impacted by pre-existing development, and by placing the structure here it ensures that areas that are relatively un-impacted will be avoided. See points 2-5 in the above "Washington Department of Natural Resources concerns" section. 4. The boatlift and motorized watercraft have the potential to adversely affect the restoration work in the WDNR withdraw] area to the north throngh increased wave action that can adversely affect natural shoreline processes and vegetation growth: See point 3 in the above "Washington DNR concerns" section for a discussion of wave action as a result of proposed the boat lift and watercraft. 5. There is no discussion of the potential for additional boatlifts and other permanent moorage proposed for this community pier: As of this response letter, there are no known proposals for additional boat lifts or permanent moorage at or near the Barbee Mill community pier. 6. There is no mitigation identified for the boatlift: The proposal now includes the addition of two Pacific willow trees (Salix lucida) to the southwest comer of the Urban property. This will place the trees as close as possible to the water. These trees will aid in shoreline bank stabilization and water quality improvement, and may provide sites for future avian roosting. See Figure 1 for the location of the proposed planting. As part of this proposed mitigation planting, the proposal also includes a monitoring and maintenance plan: Monitoring An as-built drawing and report will be submitted to the City of Renton as documentation of the implementation of the approved planting plan within one month of installation. The plan will include vegetation description and photo documentation from established photo stations. Monitoring will take place over a period of 5 years at the end of the growing season (late August or early September) of each monitoring year. The performance standards will be monitored by measuring plots in zones within the planting area that will be established and mapped after planting occurs, on the as-built plan. There will be photo points for each plot and they will be referenced on the as-built plan. Photos will be taken at all points for MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·5 all years as visual documentation of the performance standards progress, or lack of. Collected data and photos will be compiled into a report for City of Renton DCD. The report will address whether the performance standards are being met during each monitoring year and if the final end of monitoring period standards are going to be met. Monitoring results will determine whether or not contingency measures will be needed. Performance Standard# 1 (survival rate): Immediately after planting, all plants will be counted and documented. At the end of each growing season (late Aug-early Sept) plots will be visited and a count of surviving plants will be documented. The percent survival for the plots will be calculated by dividing the total number of plants after planting by the total number of surviving plants at the end of the season. Maintenance Maintenance shall occur at least twice during the growing season to ensure the survival of all native species within the mitigation area. Watering by hand or sprinkler may be necessary during the first year until the plants are established. Water requirements will depend on the timing of planting with the seasons and weather conditions. Once plants are established, extra watering may not be necessary. Hand weeding will be necessary around all plants that are being monitored for survival and coverage. Contingency Plan If the 90% survival rate is not met by the end of any monitoring year, plants lost to mortality will be replaced to achieve the percentage cover performance standard described above. Prior to replacement, an appropriate assessment will be performed to determine if the survival was affected by species/site selection, animal damage, or some other factor. Subsequent contingency actions must be designed to respond directly to the stressor(s), which are increasing mortality of planted native species. If a particular species is shown not to endure site conditions, another, more appropriate species will be selected. If excessive damage is observed, protective measures will be introduced. Monitoring years may be added if significant re-planting becomes necessary. 7. Previous mitigation at Barbee Mill Community Pier may not have been fully implemented: Planting plans are currently being followed on-site. Please see Attachment 3: site photography of current mitigation planting. 8. The city needs to fully evaluate this project and its potential impacts, and require mitigation as necessary. Without these elements, it is premature to issue a Determination of Non-Significance for this project under SEPA: With these additional analyses of impacts from the proposed boat lift, as well as the included mitigation plan, the city now has ample information to fully evaluate this project. MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·6 References: Asplund, T.R. 1997a. Investigations of motorboat impacts on Wisconsin's lakes. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Madison, WI. Asplund, T.R. 2000. The effects of motorized watercraft on aquatic ecosystems. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Madison, WI. Asplund, T.R., and C.M. Cook. 1997. Effects of motorboats on submerged aquatic macrophytes. Lake and Reservoir Management 13: 1-12. Bhowmik, N.G., T.W. Soong, W.F. Reichelt, N.M.L. Seddik. 1992. Waves generated by recreational traffic on the Upper Mississippi River System. Report by the Illinois State Water Survey, Champaign, Illinois, for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Environmental Management Technical Center. Onalaksa, WI. 6 Burdick, D.M., and Short, F.T. 1995. The effects of boat docks on eelgrass beds in Massachusetts Coastal Waters. Waquoit Bay National Research Reserve, Boston MA. Fresh, K.L., B. Williams, D. Penttila. 1995. Overwater structures and impacts on eelgrass in Puget Sound, WA. Puget Sound Research, 1995 proceedings. Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. Seattle, WA. Mulvihill, E.L. C.A. Francisco, J.B. Glad, K.B. Kaster, R.E. Wilson. 1980. Biological impacts of minor shoreline structures in the coastal environment: state of the art review. United States Fish and Wildlife Service Publication FWS/OBS-77/41. Sidell, Louisiana. Nason, G.C., A. von Krusenstierna, E.A. Bryant, M.R. Renilson. 1994. Experimental measurements of river-bank erosion caused by boat-generated waves on the Gordon River, Tasmania. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management 9: 1-15. Nightingale, B. and Charles Simenstad. 2001. Overwater structures: marine issues. Submitted to Washington Department offish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology, and Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, WA, 177 pp. Patmont, C., and Porter, J. 2010. Memoradium from Anchor QEA and Aspect Consulting: Barbee sediment data gaps evaluation. Available: https://fortress. wa.gov /ecy /gsp/CleanupSiteDocuments.aspx?csid=2368 Simenstad, C.A., B.J. Nightingale, R.M. Thom and D.K. Shreffler. 1999. Impacts of ferry terminals on juvenile salmon migration along Puget Sound shorelines. Phase 1: Synthesis of state of knowledge. Report to WSDOT/TJSDOT Research Report T9903, Task A2, 116 pp.+ appendices. Taylor, W.J., and W.S. Willey. 1997. Port of Seattle fish migration studies, Pier 64/65 short-stay moorage facility, qualitative fish and avian predator observations. Beak Consultants Inc., Kirk.land, WA. United States Anny Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2014. Regional General Permit 1 for watercraft lifts. USACE Seattle District, Seattle, WA. Available: http://www.nws.usace.army.mil/Portals/27 /docs/regulatory/RGP _ 1 _Rev_ Text_FINAL _ 201 O.pdf Washington Department of Ecology (WA DOE). 2008. Site hazard assessment summary score sheet: Barbee Mill Company. WA DOE, Olympia, WA. Available: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/gsp/CleanupSiteDocuments.aspx?csid=2368 Washington Department of Ecology (WA DOE). 2012. Amended agreed order for Barbee Mill site. WA DOE, Olympia, WA. Available: https://fortress.wagov/ecy/gsp/CleanupSiteDocuments.aspx?csid=2368 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 7 SIOESl:AM BOAT LIFT DETAIL ~SCA,c BOAT LIFTWILL BE A FREE STANDING UNIT. UN!T WILL REST ON IAKESED ON FOUR FOOT PADS R[AR H,FRAME f-lYDRAUUC CYLrNDH c~oss BEAM URBAN BOAT LIFT ri .---v'-'/·"'~---v-v-~~~~'/-V---~'/--V--·-~ ~~. LEASE NOTE THAT THE SHORELJNE ,.,--", FIGURATION ANO PROPfRTY LINE: v-~ ----= v~ OPERTY UNESAAE BASED 00 AN ,.,,------. /--v·---.. '\ ---v-, >-;""""'"""'"osrnes,o, 7*~-,J • .... / ··\/-\. ,,..,,,~,o,o \,·---V--~ '· ~~~ ~~ "&'""~-"'' ~ j!·-·-----1:-~---~-~~-:ti__---1::;_-1-:-.:_---=---=-~--=--==--=-=----==-=1---i----" ~ ~ ' ~ . i;;,-. M!4m-.& DOROTHY \IRRAN :.:: I HOUSE I ! J,.,,_Q) ~~~~-~ ~ ~ J .d ! ·-\ I I ,!j ··09·31·w ,.,--~\--L__ _____ _J iz I ( i ,,,., --·-·--·--.~~:il: . \/--\ / -, i~ 'i , -----.li.;9...Q41f:yY_15.2._4§"_ V :: := I -------··---~-o 1107/f1' o IJ4:J.3' -------~-------~"'; )> -\ .. / ··v-··-v-> i 1 : 1 :: 111'~1"1 ··--,:;. 111, ~-11 n-•• 6 8ARBffMUlCOfflll!UYORGANlZATION \ ~j::, g v---\_, ~1 , ':' .1 I: . .....w.l.~b,;,, 11 •• 11,,~ I , : , ,11· 1 • 1.1~ I ::;H1,1 ,:,!,1Hn -~UU'!!tl,,!,IAll!S~V_E_!i ) ~ ~ ---".h\ ;::ii I·; : '-----~E.XJSTINGC:OMMUNITY DOCK ' ---------~~:Q:!')2:_.'1'--------\ ' rii j ( w \ \ l TOREMAJN 1<928 ________ _j_ _________ ..J z ,,c;,;,.;c;,,=~7,=~~"\ -"1 ;:;I I J -REVISEOEASEMENTAGREEMENTFORBOAT __,; i ~Y"'>"':t''J'~'J"'J'?'.//J'~MI ::ii 11 LJFT REC.N0.20120a1T1900003.S1ncoFTHE j • o, • 1 I l EASEMENTSHALLNOTEJ<.CEEOAl"/IDfHOf / I 0 j~ ( ~i J;.i:.r DEPT OF NATURA.I RESOURCES 12' OR A L£NGfH OF 21 5 FEET _ _,, , •:c: MCHA TH i .!i·i·l·i·'·' .. '. PARC.iJ3.2:241J-N44"1~'2B""Ec r ! 4157WI A \ ! ;![!!::: I SB6" r..._, _j'-.__~/'---/ 1 I [(\ ( , ;·---· / ~~EE IIIILL WATER~RONT µc i I ,•11,11 ,..._ I 4125fflUlAMSAVEN " ::::::!: '· -\ OHVVM 21 a5'@!c!ULKH~o-• /'---I L '--/\_ ~ / /\ J /'-. / __ / i ---~ -----------""'¥'---~-~--,~_:" --I i VICINITY MAP ,., ... ~?:;·.• .. ;.~. ,~~·· .. , i, PROJECT INFORMATION O\'Vl'olER MICHA.EL 8 DOROTHY URBAN DRAl"IINCS Sf CCCO DESIGN INC 200 N 36TH ST SUI fE 201 SEATTLE. WAQ810J 206-706-J9J7 SffE ADDRESS 4151 g 4157 'ML.LIAM$ AVE N RENTON. WA 00056 PARCEL NUMBER 14157) 0518500340 & 14151) 0518~00350 BODY OF WATER LAKE WASHINGTON LEGAL DESCRIPTION '$ i051a500340) TRACT 35. RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LUA 11).JJ23 LlA REC. NO 20120802900003 IN Pl.A[ Of Bo>.RBEE MILL VOL 246 OF Pl.ATS, PP. 25-:J.6, RECORDS Of KING COI.JNN, WA [051B500050) lOT 34. BARBEE 1'11lL ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 246 OF PL.ATS, PAGES 25 THROUGH 39. IN KING PROJECT DESCRIPTION \ ) fe,,snaGGOMMCMNOOC< ~i .,~,,~I Ac·----=-~-~)< ; • ·-·-·--·---=~~.=~~=·----·----j j TOREMAIN •--- 2 9 11 -\ "'-\ EXIST1NGAD.JACENTDOC~ 4119'MLUAMSAV'EN ~! ~~~IS!~c~~ \ TO REMAIN o,n~~';'m'~"°" Iii / 11 ~::,:::::~;~< ~ --.... ........... J::::f ; INSTAI._LA NEW GROUND BASED BOAT UFT ( PLANT TWO PACIFIC 1"111.lOWS !SALIX LIJCIDA) \ ' ' ~../'-/~..A...~ / ) @ ~,~s~·~,! LA N (with Boat in Lowered Position) 11 \ _ A ./'\ /'-, /"-----_ _,,/""----------_/"-.....__~/'--__ _/'--------' ~ /\ /"-._ A /"---' /' '·-· -·1 /'-._/ _/ --,,.. -. _"--__/',,..../'-s,_/"--...,.A...-/'~. 1"./_v_'-./_'v'_-V-,/· ~~": p__P 1 PROP0SE090ATIST08€ASEARAYSELECT I / v~~--~ ___ M _ I 210. THESOATSPECIFlCATIONSARE 21'·rJ"IN~O: . V V -......... \ LENGTH AND TI,E BEAM OF THE BOAT IS 8'-o"'. /~PROPOSED ~OAT LIFr -_PL~SE NOTEc THAT THESC ). lPI.EASE NOTE THE ELEVATION OF fHE BOAT IS / DIMENSIONSSH0"" IHCB0AT IN THE LD""1cRCD • ~ ( OIAGRAMATICONLY ""1c00NOIHAVEEXACT I POSITION HO\'VlcVEcRTH~~OAll"/ILLN~VErl STA.YIN SPECIFICATlONS OF THE SHAPE HO>l'lfVfR THF.. I THIS POSITlO.N ITWll l ONl Y BE IN THIS PO. SITION WHEN OVERAI.L l ENGTH OF THE ROAT IS CORRECT) I GETTING ON AND OFF THE I.IFT THE BOATV','11..L ALWAYS / BE IN THE UP POSITION WHEN AT fHE SITE / E.XJSTING BULKHEAD T ( REWIJN 21".e ( PROP0SEDSUNSTREA1'1BOATLIFT-SL6012AR--~ ------/ ----- F00TPRINTOFTHEPROP0SEDUFTIS12'L0NG '-T071'i-\ / 21"--0 ~~~t:1~1·;~~~~~~,;::;:~~ \. ,--i THEE.AKE BOITOM ARE APPROXIMATELY n:.T' I'\. 1 SOATOTALOF4SQUAREFEET'MLLSlTONTH~ [ \ . ( lAAE13ED '\.. 1111~·cir1- I ,,.,.,.w I Jl!,1111=1 ~ I ' I :r~i~1 I J 1 1 m!mhll1 < §1111=111-J ~ , = . 1 . . .1... . , . .. . . .. . 111rfil. ,r1 \ ~ ·-,/-'/-·v·--v---v--~'\/·, ~ ---~,~ EOBOATISTOBE:ASEARAYSELECT V V V -- :110 TH1cSQATSPECIFlCAT10NSARE· 21'--0'IN ace'' \/ -" /--------..... } LENGTHANOTHEBEAMOFTHEBOATIS8'-6'" "-V \_.- (PLEASE NOTE. THE ELEVATlON OF THE BOAT IS DIAGRAMATIC ONLY. WE 00 NOT HAVE EXACT SPECIFICATIONS OF THE SHAPE HOWEVER fHE 21"-{;" OVER/oil. L£NCTH Of THE BOAT IS CORRECT) ~ REMAIN 5'-7" n·--0· I PROPOSED SL'NSlREAM BUA T UF f. SL&l12AR --- EXISTING BUlKHF.A0~0 \, FOOlPRINTOF rHEl'ROPOSEDUfTIS 12'LONG \ \l ). BUNKS. 12'-5" FRAM~ lFNTH ANO 10'--0' FRAME I I ( 'MOTH THEFOIJRFOOTl'ADSTHATRESTON THE LAKE BOTTOM ARE APPROXIMATELY 1'X1' SO A TOTAi. OF 4 SQUARE FEET WILL SIT ON THE l\ =ssrn .' lllieellllgll / l I l 1 1 '"ilii='ill" I 2185'01-fV\1 I F =, = · , , , 11=1111=1 > I . , I §ill ;;1111, I " " I'\ .I 1 . . Ill=. 11.1.~II ~ " . ~ 1111~11 1 1; ~ I , 111;.;c1111~1 \ =11, 1111 Ill . 0 111 ... TI. Ill 1111 =rn=am=, 11=1111=11.1= '=' ·= cc = · =111=111, lllblll'==IIII illl~llll==l'll='llll=lill:c..c lll=lli!=l'll=llll=II ;;11'1;;;1111~1!11;;; lll~lll 1 ='l'll~llll!ll!l='I =111[111 ,lil=llli=II' ij'lll~lll~lill~lll;~ll,l····1111~1111~1111~11L~llll==llll="III!= l!l=l'll~llll~lill~ lll=llll=l ll=llli=l'll=llll=lill~llll~III' -1 ""lill~llil-llll~lll=llll~'lll=sll l~l'll~III =1111-111==11 =1111= lll=ll l=l,11=1111~1111~'111==111==1111~111 I 11==1111==1111-'11==1111==11 I= 111==111 == 111'=111 =111==1111==111==111==111,= > ~iii~~!~ii!tif ;1*~~ll!il~~~;!~~i~lilMi!i!l~il!;!il ~ OF LAKE BED I ELEVATION DETAIL (Lower Position) / SCA1._E1/4"-1--0 / ( II ==I 11=111 ==1111=1111==1111=1111:cc•lllcccllll== lllcccllll"" 111""1111;;1111="'111""111-l ll"cllllc"IIII;; lll=llll=:1111=1111=1111:=l ll=II \ WPROX. LOCATlON _/ OF E.AKE BED ( ELEVATION DETAIL (Upper Position) ~ ...; z -o ·->->- I..:< C, '~ zo ~w .. z <- >w w < w~ w ... ,Z Zw <o w ~ w .. ~ -M ~ a a M N -~ Q.1 00 ...., -~ -0 = a vi -<:( f-.. ~ 3:-3 0 q_,-N -5 E ~ . M 0 z- M :a: 0 u Uc C Uoo ~ (]): z <( co 0::: ::) >-I I- ~ 0 0 d:j ...J ~t I ::; U':;; ~g om AUGUST ll, 1013 R.EYISIOHS: Li, HS. lZ, 1014 k, JLILY22. W14 ,1,. SEPT 3.1014 & DEC4,Wl4 ( '-----APPROX. LOC.-A.TIQN I -A...~. __ /\..__,/\..,_~_./\..__/',~_./°"·.../~'-./°"_..A.../\..__./'..-_/'- \ SCALE 114" -1·.,:r '\...___ /"-..._~- \,_/°'..___.A._ . ./'.,_./'.___,.A._~ /'....../'-_~-/~·/\.._/ .• A1 .0 0 !I ~ :~~L & DOROTHY URBAN . ::....-::-...:· )')' H !•a.C'.i' ""'•-"l': ...,.,.,. ,.~ ~,·oJ Figure 1. Revised site plan. Note new, more landward, boat ramp location. C ::0 CD )> z CD 0 )> -t r -,, -t ,, - MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·8 Figure 2 . Proposed boat lift location, looking landward. MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 9 Figure 3. Proposed boat lift location, looking waterward . MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 10 Attachment 1. Correspondence with WA DNR and the Muckleshoot Tribe. ~, WASHINGTON STAT!' O<PARTME.NT OF lnl Natural Resources hiw GQl!drr,.;ri · (:om(ll!~!O~-M" ~ Pub!, t t,nd1 Caring for your natural resources ... now and foreve1 December 17, 2013 Gerald Wasser, Assocuite Planner City of Rene on, CED -Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057-3232 Subject: WA Department of Natural Resources Comments -Urban Boat Lift/ LUAl3-001640 Dear Mr. Wasser: Washington State Department ofNatural Resources ("DNR") bas obtained the Cicy of Renton Notice of Applicntion !Ind Proposed Determination ofNon-Sigoificance (DNS) for the Urban Boal Lift Project. DNR manages the state-owned aquatic lands adjacent to the project proposal location and hereby submits the following comments for the City's record. Tbe project description states the proposed frooitanding boat lift is associated 'l'ith, but not attached to, a c:orrununity dock. DNR administer, Aquatic Lands Lease No. 22-086()4<i (the ~Lease"), authorizing Barbee Mill Community Organization to utilize 11,984 square fed of Lake Washington harbor area for the pu,pose of the said commllllicy doc:t The permitted use authorized by the Lease is to "provide lake access and transient moorage for approximately l 00 upland property owners, with one finger pier to provide privaie moo rage for ooe adj accnt upland property owner" and for no other pwpose. As proposed, the Urban Boat Lift Project footprint will be on privately held aquatic lands. How=, a vessel placed on the boat lift will extend over state-owned aquatic lands, spccitically into the leasehold area of Barbee Mill Community Drgani2ation. This encumbrance of state-owned aquatic lands is not consistent \,ith the term! of the Lease and subsequently is not outhorized. Additionally, ONR worked extensively with Conner Homes and the regulatory agencies regarding the configuration and placement of the community dock and 1eml5 of the Lease in order to avmd and minimize impacts to the adjacent restored nesrshore environment, shorelands and bedlands. As proposed, the Urban Boat Lift Projeet will subject the restoration area and nearshoreenvironmentto: . r,cr<:'.'·. :~:r·, t·,. ' ___ ... ,_; .. '·· . ..,ii MS&A • lnmased shading impacts· to aquatic vegetation Di ': ' :; ,' I:' ' • Increased vessel wake impacting natural shoreline processes due to larger and more frequent wave action ;'' ::-· _ . I" .. I,;. ., " ----------------- SOUTH PUGET $0t.lNO REGION I 950 FARMAff A'.Jt t4 I ENUt.fQ.A.W, WA 9W22-9.(SJ Tfl; {350t 82'5-1631 I F.11,)(: (360) &25-·1£71 I TTY' f36~t 902•112'5 I TP:S 111 I VfWW.DNR.WA.GOV EQUAL OP:?ORTUNllY EM1lt.0YEF;; Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·11 Gerald Wasser, Associme Planner Deccinber 17, 2013 Page2of2 • Scour and sediment erosion through prop s«>ur • Crushing of bemhic habitat • Heightened potential for release of contaminants into the water column As proposed, DNR does not support the Urban Bo'lt Lift Project and will not amend the existing Lease to permit the use of state-owned aquatic lands. If you have comments regarding this correspondence, please feel free to contact me by email at viYill!l.roach@.dnr.wa.gov. Sincerely, Vivian Roach, Aquatic Land Manager Shordioe District, Aquatics Resources Division c: DNR SEPA Cooter District File Aqumic R,,sourees File MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·12 Gerald Wasser From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Karen Walter <KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us> Friday, December 27, 2013 1 :14 PM Gerald Wasser Anderson, Suzanne NWS; Heller, Christa H (DFW); ROACH, VIVIAN (DNR); Tom Sibley; Priddy, Lynda Urban Boat Lift adjacent to Barbee Mill Community Pier, LUA13-001640,ECF, SM, Revised Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Categories: Red Category Gerald, We have reviewed the Revised Notice of Application for the proposed Urban boat 11ft project adjacent to the Barbee Mill Community Dock (4157 and 4151 Williams Avenue N) in Renton referenced above. We have several concerns about this project as noted below: 1. The proposed free standing boatlift is located on the north side of the existing Barbee Mill Community Dock and Just south of the WDNR withdrawn area that contains contaminated sediments from the former mill site at the Superfund site on the WDNR aquatic lands. There is no consideration in either the checklist or the Lake and Stream study sent with the Revised NOA consider the potential impacts from the new boatlift ar.d the operation of a motorized watercraft on U1e north side of the joint pier. A motorized watercraft in this location will likely create scour and erosion from propeller wash that could cause a release of nearby contaminants into the water column adversely affecting fish and benthic vertebrates. Other potential impacts, include, but are not limited to: • The new freestanding boat!ift and a boat in the nearshore where juvenile salmon are likely to be found that can cause them to avoid the nearshore and increase their risk of predation. • The boatlift will permanently displace benthic habitat • The boatlift and motorized watercraft have the potentlal to adversely affect the restoration work in the WDNR withdrawal area to the north through increased wave action that can adversely affect natural shoreline processes and vegetation growth. 2. There is no discussion about the potential for additional baatlifts and other permanent moorage proposed for this community pier. As we noted in previous comments to the Barbee Mill Community Pier project, the Tribe is concerned about this pier providing long term moorage that can create conditions which interfere with the Tribe's fishing access. 3. There is no mitigation identified for the boatltft in tt"te documents we reviewed. Please provide the mitigation details proposed for this new boatlift and the associated watercraft. Please note that any approved mitigation at the Barbee Mill Community Pier site cannot be used to compensate for impacts from this new boatlift and watercraft. 4. We also concerned that previous mitigation at the Barbee Mill Community Pier may not be fully implemented. Therefore, request copies of all of the existing monitoring reports to be completed as part of the shoreline restoration work required for the entire Barbee Mill Plat, including the community dock. 5. The City needs to fully evaluate this project; "its potential impacts and require mitigation as necessary. Without these elements, it is premature to issue a Determination of Non-Significance for this project under SEPA. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to the City's responses. Thank you, Karen. Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·13 Attachment 2. Habitat survey. Conner Homes Company Community Tract Pier Project Substrate Slope Information March 20, 2007 A SCUBA survey was done March 20, 2007, from 9:50 AM -1:45 PM, at the Conner Homes Company community tract proposed pier project site near the southern end of Lake Washington in Renton. Lynn Goodwin and Grant Ausk used SCUBA to run five transects along the community tract to identify flora, fauna, substrate types, and other qualitative information relative to the Biological Evaluation. The day was overcast and rainy with strong winds and a heavy chop. Water visibility was poor, only about 1 to 4 feet. A coir roll installed as part of the site remediation runs along the community tract shoreline, forming a baseline from which the five community tract transects (Tl -T5) were measured. All five transects were oriented 70° -250° magnetic, were generally perpendicular to the coir roll baseline, and were 200' long. Tl extended seaward from the baseline at the drainpipe outflow, approximately midway along the community tract shoreline and the site of the proposed pier. T2 was 221/i' north of Tl and T4 was located 221/i' south of Tl; T3 was located on the common property line between the community tract and lot 30; TS was located on the common property line between the community tract and lot 31. T3 and TS were approximately 45' north and south of Tl respectively, for a total survey area distance along the shoreline of approximately 90'. The Ordinary High Water (OHW) line for Lake Washington is at the lake elevation of 21.8'. On March 20, 2007, the date of the SCUBA survey, the elevation of Lake Washington was 21.1'. Water depths showing the slope contour were measured from the coir roll baseline every 10' along Tl and every 25' along T2, T3, T4 and T5. The water depths along all five transects are set out in the following tables and have been corrected to OHW by adding 0.7' to each gauge reading. The water's edge was 10' from the baseline along Tl. Corrected Tl water depths were as follows: MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·14 I ' ' I DistanceAlong Tl Corrected I Transect Water Depths i 10' 0.7' ! 20' 1.7' i 30' 2.7' ! 40' 3.2' ' 50' 3.7' i 60' 4.2' 70' 4.5' 80' 4.7' 90' 5.7' 100' 8.7' i 110' 9.7' 120' 11.7' I 130' 12.7' I I 140' 12.7' I 150' 12.7' I 160' 12.7' I 170' 13.7' I : 180' 13.7' I 190' 12.7' - 200' 12.7' The water's edge was 11 ', 9.5', 10', and 10' from the baseline along T2-T5, respectively. Corrected T2-T5 water depths were as follows: Distance I T2 Corrected T3 Corrected T4 Corrected T5 Corrected I Along Water Water Water Water ' Transect Depths Depths Depths Depths r• _::, 2.4' 2.4' 2.7' 2.2' 50' 3.2' 3.2' ' 3.2' I 2.4' I I 75' 5.2' 4.7' I 4.7' 3.9' 100' 7.7' 5.7' 6.7' 7.7' p-• _::, 11.7' 12.7' 11.7' 11.7' 150' 12.7' i 12.7' ' 12.7' 11.7' I 175' 12.7' 14.7' 13.7' 11.7' 200' 13.7' 14.7' i 13.7' 12.7' 2 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·15 substrate along T3 changed from the gravel, rocks and mud found about 1()0' from the baseline, to soft mud by 150' and extremely soft mud by 200'. Along T4, the slope steepened beyond about 80' out and wood debris was noted. By 100' along the transect, the substrate was primarily mud, becoming soft mud by 175' from the baseline. Along TS, the substrate was a sand and mud mix by 100' with roofing metal sheets, sticks and limbs noted. By 11 O' along the transect, the substrate had changed to mud, becoming very soft mud by 200' Substrate Slope: The OHW line for Lake Washington is at the lake elevation of 21.8'. The elevation of Lake Washington on the day of the SCUBA survey was 21.l', 0.7' below OHW. Water depths showing the slope contour were measured from the baseline every 10' along TI and every 25' along T2-TS. The water depths along all five transects are set out in the following tables and have been corrected to OHW by adding 0.7' to each depth gauge reading. 11 Substrate Slope Table: The water's edge was 10' from the baseline along Tl. Corrected Tl water depths were as follows: Distance Along Tl Corrected Transect Water Depths 10' 0.7' 20' 1.7' 30' 2.7' 40' 3.2' 50' 3.7' 60' 4.2' 70' 4 -, ·" 80' 4.7' 90' 5.7' 100' 8.7' 110' 9.7' 120' 11.7' 130' I 12.7' 140' 12.7' 150' I 12.7' 160' 12.7' 170' 13.7' 180' 13.7' 190' 12.7' 200' I 12.7' ' ' 3 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 16 MS&A T2-T5 Substrate Slope Table: The water's edge was 11', 9.5', 10', and 10' from the baseline along T2-TS, respectively. Corrected T2-T5 water depths were as follows: Distance T2 Corrected T3 Corrected T 4 Corrected TS Corrected Along Water Water Water Water Transect Depths Depths Depths Deoths 25' I 2.4' 2.4' 2.7' 2.2' 50' 3.2' 3.2' 3.2' ' 2.4' ' 75 1 I 5.2' 4.7' 4.7' 3.9' 100' ' 7.7' 5.7' 6.7' 7.7' i 125' 11.7' 12.7' 11.7' 11.7' 150' 12.7' 12.7' 12.7' 11.7' 175' 12.7' 14.7' 13.7' 11.7' 200' 13.7' 14.7' 13.7' 12.7' Macroalgae: The following species of macroalgae was observed within the survey area: Myriophyllum spicatum: Eurasian milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum), an invasive nonnative plant, was found along all five transects. Along Tl, this alga was first noted 110' from the baseline covering about 10% of the area. By 120' and through 130' from the baseline, it covered about 30% of the area; by 140' it had decreased to only 10% coverage and by 150' from the baseline, no further milfoil was observed. However, by 160' from the baseline, milfoil was again observed covering about 10% of the area, with coverage increasing to 40% by 170' -200'. Along T2, this invasive species was first noted 108' from the baseline with coverage increasing to about 20% of the area by 120', to about 30% coverage by 150', and to 40% coverage by 200'. Along T3, This alga was first noted at about 100' from the baseline. Beyond 100', and through about 150', milfoil covered about 30% of the area; by the end of the transect at 200' from the baseline, milfoil covered about 40% of the area. Along T4, this alga was first noted at about 75' from the baseline covering less than 5% of the area. By 125' from the baseline, and continuing through about 150', milfoil covered about 10% of the area along T4, increasing to about 30% coverage by 175' and to 40% coverage by 200'. Milfoil was first found along T5 110' from the baseline covering about 10% of the area; coverage increased to about 20% of the area between 120' and 150' from the baseline. By 175' along T3 and through the end of the transect, this alga covered about 30% of the area. In general the milfoil is from last year's growth and is heavily encrusted with filamentous algae. New milfoil growth is just starting to appear; the plants are up to several feet long. 4 Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·17 Other Algae: The following other alga was observed within the survey area: Filamentous Algae: An unidentified filamentous alga was noted along all five transects, generally first noted approximately 25' from the baseline and often attached to Myriophyllum spicntum. Along Tl, this alga was observed covering the gravel from about 25' through 80' along the transect, and was noted covering milfoil at about 110' from the baseline. Along T2, this alga covered every solid surface between about 25' and 75' from the baseline. Along T3, it was first noted 25' to 30' from the baseline. Along T4 and T5 it was first noted abut 25' from the baseline and continued through 75'; at 75' it was noted covering small boulders. Invertebrate/Vertebrate Species: The only invertebrates found within the survey area were two crawdads, one at 125' out along each T3 and T4. No vertebrates were observed within the survey area. 5 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 18 Attachment 3. Site photography of current mitigation planting MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 19 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·20 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·21 Easy Peel® Labels Use Avery® Template 5160® Ruth Kidd 1117 N 41st Pl Renton, WA 98056 Michael & Dorothy Urban 4157 Williams Ave N Renton, WA 98056-2171 Torben & Ginnie Hollingsworth 4255 Williams Ave Renton, WA 98056 Etiquettes faciles a peler 11+;1; .. .,. .. , ......... &..~ .. ;+ AHcov® i::.1i:.n® A -Bend along line to expose Pop·up Edge™ Feed Paper - Vivian Roach Department of Natural Resources 950 Farman Ave N Enumclaw, WA 98022 Allison Peryea Leahy Mclean Fjelstad 25 Central Way, Suite 310 Renton, WA 98033 Evan Wehr Ecco Design Inc. 203 N 36th St, #201 Seattle, WA 98103 ... Sens de Repliez a la hachure afin de r6u6l,:,,r I,:,, ,,,,hnni Pnn-11nMC I AVERY@ 5160® : Patti Klink 1126 N 42nd Pl Renton. WA 98056 Lynda Priddy Environmental Protection Agency 1200 6th Ave, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98101 BARBEE MILL WATERFRONT LLC 846108th AVE NE Bellevue, WA 98004 www.avery.com 1-ROO-GO-AVERV J. • . I DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT .. City or PLANNING DIVISION SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1971 PERMIT FOR SHORELINE MANAGEMENT EVALUATION FORM & DECISION DATE OF PERMIT ISSUANCE: LAND USE ACTION FILE NO.: DATE RECEIVED DATE OF PUBLIC NOTICE: January 7, 2015 LUA13-001640, ECF, SM December 2, 2013 December 4, 2013 Pursuant to Chapter 90.58 RCW, staff recommends that the City of Renton grant a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. This action is proposed on the following application: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT MANAGER: OWNER: APPLICANT: CONTACT: PROJECT LOCATION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SEC-TWN-R: WITHIN THE SHORELINES OF: APPLICABLE MASTER PROGRAM: Urban Boat Lift Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner Barbee Mill Community Organization; c/o Shirley Ely-Morris Management, Inc; 325 118th Ave SE, Suite 204; Bellevue, WA 98005 Michael & Dorothy Urban; 4157 Williams Ave N; Renton WA 98056 Troy Hussing & Evan Wehr; Ecco Design Inc; 203 N 36th St #201; Seattle WA 98103 4151 & 4157 Williams Ave N; Renton WA 98056; 4157 is the applicant's home and 4151 is the abutting tract where the boatlift is proposed. BARBEE MILL TGW UNO INT IN TRS A,B,C,D,E,F,G, H,l,L,M,N,0 & P TR 35 RENTON LLA # LUA-10-023- LLA REC# 20120802900003 SD LLA OAF-LOTS 35 & 36 SD PLAT NW-32-24-5 Lake Washington, Reach C City of Renton City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 Shoreline Management Permit LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Page 2 of 11 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: The applicant is proposing to install a freestanding boatlift adjacent to an existing community boat dock. The dock extends from the homeowners association-owned parcel addressed 4151 Williams Ave N beyond the inner harbor line into state-owned aquatic lands. The portion of the community dock west of the inner harbor line is located within a Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Lease Area with an agreement between DNR and the Barbee Mill Community Organization. The boat lift would be located on the north side of the community dock, between the uplands and inner harbor line. An easement has been granted to the applicant to use the area for the location of the ground based boat lift. The lift is approximately 175 square feet in area and the boat lift structure would sit on the bottom substrate of the lake on four 1-foot by 1-foot pads. At the deepest point of the lift, it would be approximately 5 feet 10 inches below the waterline. With a boat on the lift, the boat would sit approximately 5 feet above the waterline. The boat lift would provide rnoorage and facilitate access to Lake Washington for the residents of 4157 Williams Ave N. A planting mitigation plan provides for two Scours Willows and two Red-Osier Dogwoods to be be planted as close to the lake as possible at the southwest corner of 4157 Williams Ave N property, north of the boat lift location. A monitoring and maintenance plan for the plantings has been provided to evaluate ongoing performance ofthe plantings over a 5-year period. Installation of the boat lift is anticipated to occur within one day and would occur during the authorized Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) construction window for this location, July 16 through December 31, unless otherwise approved by WDFW. The lift would be delivered by van or truck to the site, and no impacts to existing shoreline vegetation or erosion of uplands are anticipated as part of the project installation. Installation of the lift would be by hand. The subject properties are part of the Conner Hornes at Barbee Mill project which includes 114 lots ranging in size from 1,800 square feet to 6,000 square feet. The lots consist of duplexes, tri-plexes, four-plexes, and a single-family residence. The overall site was formerly a lumber mill facility. In order to restore the former industrial site to a site suitable for a residential waterfront subdivision, the mill buildings were demolished, contaminated soils remediated, fill soils were removed from behind the bulkhead, asphalt paving, a pier, a wooden bulkhead and piling associated with the mill operation were removed; and shoreline restoration was accomplished. The shoreline restoration was accomplished by the Barbee Mill Company upon cessation of the mill operation. The cost fair market value of the baot lift is $12,000.00. An Environmental (SEPA) Review Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M) was issued for this project on December 5, 2014, and no appeals were filed. FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The applicant is requesting a Shoreline Substantial Development Permits for the City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 Shoreline Management Permit WA13-001640, ECF, SM Page 3 of 11 installation of a freestanding boat lift that will not be attached to the nearby community dock or shoreline bulkheads. 2. The site currently is comprised of landscaping and a pedestrian pathway that provides access to the community dock, with properties on either side developed with residential homes. 3. The boat lift would be installed on the north side of the existing Community Dock, 4 feet east of the inner harbor line, and approximately 11 feet 6 inches from the sheetpile and concrete shoreline bulkhead to the west. 4. The boat lift would provide moorage and facilitate access to Lake Washington for singular use by residents of 4157 Williams Ave N. 5. The boat lift dimensions are approximately 175 square feet in area supported on the lake bottom by four 1-foot wide by 1-foot long pads, with a total of 4 square feet sitting on the lake bottom. 6. The boat lift would be approximately 5 feet 10 inches below the waterline at its most easterly and deepest point. 7. The boat on the lift would not cross into the Department of Natural Resources Lease Area for the Barbee Mill Community Dock west of the inner harbor line. 8. The subject site has priority habitat, Lake Washington shoreline, and geologic seismic critical areas located on the site. 9. Representatives from various city departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and address issues raised by the proposed development. These comments are contained in the official file, and the essence of the comments have been incorporated into the appropriate sections of this report, the Environmental (SEPA) Review Report, and the Departmental Recommendation at the end of this report. 10. On July 29, 2014, an on-site meeting was scheduled with reviewing agencies and the applicant, where representatives of the Muckleshoot Tribe, developer of Barbee Mill, City of Renton, and applicants were present to discuss the proposal. 11. An Environmental (SEPA) Review Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS- M) was issued for this project on December 5, 2014, with six mitigation measures. No appeals were filed. 12. Two of the six SEPA determination mitigation measures have been met, which are the no net loss to ecological function and value evaluation (Mitigation Measure #6) and the final mitigation planting plan with monitoring (Mitigation Measure #5). The other City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOATLIFT Shoreline Management Permit WA13-001640, ECF, 5M DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 Page 4 of 11 mitigation measures are related to Department of Fish and Wildlife work window, ingress and egress of boat into the boat lift area, fish or water quality impacts during project activities, and the recommendations from the biological assessment. 13. An amended project biological evaluation by Marine Surveys & Assessments, dated December 8, 2014, states that for this project there will be no net loss of ecological functions and values consistent with the City of Renton's Shoreline Master Program. 14. The applicant received approval of the planting plan by the Barbee Mill Community Association for installation of the proposed plantings. 15. A mitigation planting plan provides for installation of two Scouler's Willows and two Red-Osier Dogwoods in the southwest corner of the 4157 Williams Ave N property, near the shoreline. 16. The boat lift would be an accessory to the community dock, where boat lifts are allowed as accessory to a dock and are permitted outright per RMC Table 4-3-090.E.1 Shoreline Use Table. 17. The following table contains project elements intended to comply with the Shoreline Master Program standards and policies, as outlined in RMC 4-3-090: A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE AND CONSISTENCY, SHORELINE ELEMENT: The site is located in the Shoreline High-Intensity Overlay District. The objective of the High Intensity Overlay is to provide opportunities for large-scale office and commercial employment centers as well as multi-family residential use and public services. This district provides opportunities for water-dependent and water-oriented uses while protecting existing ecological functions and restoring ecological functions in areas that have been previously degraded. Development may also provide for public use and/or community use, especially access to and along the water's edge. The proposal is compliant with the following Shoreline policies: ,/ Objective SH-A. Provide for use of the limited water resource consistent with the goals of the Shoreline Management Act by providing a preference for water-oriented uses. Objective SH-B. Provide that the policies, regulations, and administration of the Shoreline Master Program ensure that new uses, development, and redevelopment within the shoreline jurisdiction do not cause a net loss of shoreline ecological functions. Policy SH-7. Existing and future activities on all Shorelines of the State regulated by the City of Renton should be designed to ensure no net loss of ecological functions. Policy SH-14. Shoreline use and development should be carried out in a manner that prevents or mitigates adverse impacts so that the resulting ecological condition does not become worse than the current condition. This means ensuring no net loss of ecological functions and processes in all development and use. Permitted uses should be designed and City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Shoreline Management Permit LUA13-001640, ECF, SM DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 Page 5 of 11 conducted to minimize, in so far as practical, any resultant damage to the ecology and environment (RCW 90.58.020). Shoreline ecological functions that should be protected include, but are not limited to, fish and wildlife habitat, food chain support, and water temperature maintenance. Shoreline processes that shall be protected include, but are not limited to, water flow; littoral drift; erosion and accretion; infiltration; ground water recharge and discharge; sediment delivery, transport, and storage; large woody debris recruitment; organic matter input; nutrient and pathogen removal; and stream channel formation/maintenance. B-DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: The subject site is classified as Shoreline High Intensity on the City of Renton Shoreline Overlay Map. The following development standards are applicable to the proposal: 1. No Net Loss Required Shoreline use and development shall be carried out in a manner that prevents or mitigates adverse impacts to ensure no net loss of ecological functions and processes in all development and use. Permitted uses are designed and conducted to minimize, in so far as practical, any resultant damage to the ecology and environment (RCW 90.58.020). Shoreline ecological functions that shall be protected include, but are not limited to, fish and wildlife habitat, food chain support, and water temperature maintenance. Shoreline processes that shall be protected include, but are not limited to, water flow; erosion and accretion; infiltration; groundwater recharge and discharge; sediment delivery, transport, and storage; large woody debris recruitment; organic matter input; nutrient and pathogen removal; and stream channel formation/maintenance. Staff Comment: The applicant provided an addendum to the biological assessment, authored by Marine Surveys & Assessments (who also authored the biological review of the community dock and this project} stating that the project with associated mitigation measures and proposed plantings provide far no net loss of ecological functions and values consistent with the City af Renton's Shoreline Master Program. 2. Burden on Applicant Applicants for permits have the burden of proving that the proposed development is consistent with the criteria set forth in the Shoreline Master Program and the Shoreline Management Act, including demonstrating all resasonable efforts have been taken to provide sufficient mitigation such that the activity does not result in net loss of ecological functions. 3. View Obstruction and Visual Quality N/A View Corridors Required: Where commercial, industrial, multiple use, multi-family and/or multi-lot developments are proposed, primary structures shall provide for view corridors between buildings where views of the shoreline are available from public right-of-way or trails. Staff Comment: The proposed boat lift is not a primary structure and a boat sitting on the lift bunkers would be approximately S feet at the highest point of the boat above the City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Shoreline Management Permit WA13-001640, ECF, SM DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 Page 6 of 11 waterline. Minimum Setbacks for Commercial Development Adjacent to Residential or Park Uses: All new or expanded commercial development adjacent to residential use and public parks shall N/A provide fifteen feet (15') setbacks from adjacent properties to attenuate proximity impacts such as noise, light and glare, and may address scale and aesthetic impacts. Fencing or landscape areas may be required to provide a visual screen. Lighting Requirements: Display and other exterior lighting shall be designed and operated so as to prevent glare, to avoid illuminating nearby properties used for noncommercial N/A purposes, and to prevent hazards for public traffic. Methods of controlling spillover light include, but are not limited to, limits on the height of light structure, limits on light levels of fixtures, light shields, and screening. Reflected Lights to Be Limited: Building surfaces on or adjacent to the water shall employ N/A materials that limit reflected light. Integration and Screening of Mechanical Equipment: Building mechanical equipment shall be incorporated into building architectural features, such as pitched roofs, to the maximum N/A extent feasible. Where mechanical equipment cannot be incorporated into architectural features, a visual screen shall be provided consistent with building exterior materials that obstructs views of such equipment. Visual Prominence of Freestanding Structures to Be Minimized: Facilities not incorporated into buildings including fences, piers, poles, wires, lights, and other freestanding structures shall be designed to minimize visual prominence. ., Staff Camment: The freestanding boat lift without a boat wauld be below the nearby northerly and easterly shoreline bulkheads at its highest point. With the proposed boat located on the baat lift, the boat at its highest point would be approximately 5 feet above the waterline. Maximum Stair and Walkway Width: Stairs and walkways located within shoreline vegetated buffers shall not exceed four feet in width; provided, that where ADA requirements apply, N/A such facilities may be increased to six feet in width. Stairways shall conform to the existing topography to the extent feasible 4. Community Disturbances: ., Noise, odors, night lighting, water and land traffic, and other structures and activities shall be considered in the design plans and their impacts avoided or mitigated. 5. Public Access: Physical or visual access to shorelines shall be incorporated in all new development when the development would either generate a demand for one or more forms of such access, would impair existing legal access opportunities or rights, or is required to meet the specific policies and regulations of City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Shoreline Management Permit LUA13-001640, ECF, SM DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 the Shoreline Master Program. Page 7 of 11 ./ Lake Washington Reach C: The potential for provision of public access from new development will occur after cleanup of the Superfund site with multi-use development, which shall include shoreline access across the entire property, with controlled access to the water's edge, consistent with requirements for vegetation conservation and ecological restoration and provisions for water-dependent use, consistent with standards of this Section. Provision of public access from future redevelopment of the Sea hawks and Barbee Mill site shall include a continuous public access trail parallel to the shoreline with controlled public access balanced with provisions for ecological restoration, as well as to shared or commercial docks, consistent with standards of this Section. Staff Comment: The freestanding boat lift will not impact or reduce public access established through the Barbee Miff lumber miff clean-up and redevelopment. 6. Building and Development Location -Shoreline Orientation Shoreline developments shall locate the water-dependent, water-related, and water-enjoyment portions of their developments along the shoreline. Development and use shall be designed in a manner that directs land alteration to the least sensitive portions of the site to maximize vegetation conservation; minimize impervious surfaces and runoff; protect riparian, nearshore and wetland habitats; protect wildlife and habitats; protect archaeological, historic and cultural resources; and preserve aesthetic values ./ Location of Development: Development and use shall be designed in a manner that directs land alteration to the least sensitive portions of the site. Staff Comment: The applicant's biological habitat evaluation and related addendums provide habitat and shoreline impact analysis. The provided evaluations conclude that the proposed location of the boat lift is the least sensitive portion of the site, as this area is already developed and disturbed. Below, in report subsection 8.a "Use Regulations for Boat Lifts" there is a shoreline code standard that all lifts be located as waterward as feasible and safe. The applicant's evaluation considered this criteria, where the boat lift could have been located further waterward and determined that the proposed location would minimize potential negative impacts. The westerly shoreline on the property to the north has been restored to mimic a more natural shoreline to improve and restore ecological function and values. If the boat lift were placed near the restorated shoreline and further waterward than the proposed location, potential impacts could occur to the restored shoreline habitat instead of the disturbed habitat area where the sheet pile bulkhead is located. During the July 29, 2014 meeting at the project site with the Muckleshoot Tribe, City of Renton, and the applicant, attendees were able to view the substrate and rocks at the bottom of the lake where the boat lift would be located. The bulkheads create a corner in the proposed location, where the water surface and lake bottom receive shading from the Community Dock and bulkhead waifs. As a result of observations in the field and review of the applicant's submitted documents, staff concurs with the conclusions in the applicant's Addendum to the Biological Habitat Evaluation, that the proposed location is the least sensitive area. City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Shoreline Management Permit LUA13-001640, ECF, SM DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 Page 8 of 11 N/A ,/ Minimization of Site Alteration: Development shall minimize site alteration in sites with substantial unaltered natural features by applying the following criteria: (a) Vehicle and pedestrian circulation systems shall be designed to limit clearing, grading, and alteration of topography and natural features. (b) Impervious surfacing for parking lot/space areas shall be limited through the use of under-building parking or permeable surfaces where feasible. (c) Utilities shall share roadway and driveway corridors and rights-of-way wherever feasible. (d) Development shall be located and designed to avoid the need for structural shoreline stabilization over the life of the development. Exceptions may be made for the limited instances where stabilization is necessary to protect allowed uses, particularly water- dependent uses, where no alternative locations are available and no net loss of ecological functions will result. Location for Accessory Development: Accessory development or use that does not require a shoreline location shall be located outside of shoreline jurisdiction unless such development is required to serve approved water-oriented uses and/or developments or unless otherwise allowed in a High Intensity designation. When sited within shoreline jurisdiction, uses and/or developments such as parking, service buildings or areas, access roads, utilities, signs and storage of materials shall be located inland away from the land/water interface and landward of water-oriented developments and/or other approved uses unless a location closer to the water is reasonably necessary. Navigation and Recreation to Be Preserved: Shoreline uses shall not deprive other uses of reasonable access to navigable waters. Existing water-related recreation shall be preserved. Staff Camment: The proposed locotion is in an area of Lake Washington where navigation is limited, as the site dead-ends into a shoreline sheet pile and concrete cop bulkhead to the east, and is between the community dock to the south and shoreline sheet pile and concrete cop bulkhead to the north. As such, the placement of a boat lift at this location would not result in impacts to navigation or recreation. 7. Standards for Density, Setbacks, and Height-Activities Exempt from Buffers and Setbacks The following development activities are not subject to buffers and setbacks; provided, that they are constructed and maintained in a manner that minimizes adverse impacts on. shoreline ecological functions; and provided further, that they comply with al lthe applicable regulations in RMC Title IV. ,/ Water-Dependent Development: Those portions of approved water-dependent development that require a location waterward of the OHWM of streams, rivers, lakes, ponds, marine shorelines, associated wetlands, and/or within their associated buffers. Staff Comment: The Barbee Mill Community Dock at the site is a moorage facility that exists primarily for temporary transient moorage and use by residents of the residential subdivision, with a couple permanent moorage locations. The proposed boat lift to be located next to the community dock is accessory. Any impacts would be temporary during City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Shoreline Management Permit LUA13-001640, ECF, SM DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 Page 9 of 11 installation of the lift. Setbacks, Structure Setback from Ordinary High Water Mark: None ./ Staff Comment: There is no setback requirement for the boatlift. Building Height, Maximum -In Water: 35 feet ./ Staff Comment: The boat lift with a boat located on the lift in the upright parked position, will be approximately 5 feet above the waterline. Coverage Standards for Buildings: Maximum of 5 percent impervious area within the buffer and a maximum of 50 percent within 100 feet of OHWM. Lot coverage maximum is 25 percent for buildings within 100 feet of OHWM. N/A Staff Comment: The boat lift will be located within the water, in lands covered by water, and not located on uncovered land. The property where the community dock is located is not proposed to have any impervious or lot coverage changes through this proposal. Therefore the coverage standard is not applicable. 8. Use Regulations: a. Boat Lifts: Boat lifts are permitted outright as accessory to a residential dock, provided that all lifts are ./ placed as far waterward as feasible and safe, and platform lifts are fully grated . Stoff Comment: See the above report subsection 6. "Location of Development". Development of this project shall be undertaken pursuant to the following terms and conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures issued as part of the Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated, dated December 5, 2014. 2. Monitoring reports of the mitigation plantings shall be provided to the City of Renton Current Planning Project Manager and Karen Walter of the Muckleshoot Indian Tribes Fisheries Division, annually, over a 5-year period according to the monitoring, maintenance, and contingency plan for the project. This Permit is granted pursuant to the Shoreline Management Action of 1971 and pursuant to the following: 1. The issuance of a license under the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 shall not release the applicant from compliance with federal, state, and other permit requirements. 2. This permit may be rescinded pursuant to Section 14(7) of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 in the event the permittee fails to comply with any condition(s) hereof. City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 Shoreline Management Permit LUA13·001640, ECF, SM Page 10 of 11 3. Construction permits shall not be issued until twenty-one (21) days after approval by the Washington State Department of Ecology or until any review proceedings initiated within this twenty-one (21) day review period have been completed. DATE OF DECISION ON LAND USE ACTION: SIGNATURE: Jennifer Henning, AICP, Planning Director Department of Community & Economic Development APPEALS: Appeals of Shoreline Substantial Development Permit issuance must be made directly to the Shorelines Hearings Board. Appeals are made by filing a request in writing within the twenty-one (21) days of receipt of the final order and concurrently filing copies of such request with the Washington State Department of Ecology and the Attorney General's office as provided in section 18(1) of the Shorelines Management Act of 1971. All copies of appeal notices shall also be filed with the City of Renton Planning Division and the City Clerk's office. RECONSIDERATION: Within 14 days of the decision date, any party may request that the decision be reopened by the approval body. The approval body may modify his decision if material evidence not readily discoverable prior to the original decision is found or if he finds there was misrepresentation of fact. After review of the reconsideration request, if the approval body finds sufficient evidence to amend the original decision, there will be no further extension of the appeal period. Any person wishing to take further action must file a formal appeal within the 14-day appeal time frame. EXPIRATION: Unless a different time period is specified in the shoreline permit as authorized by RCW 90.58.143 and subsection J1 of RMC 4-9-190, construction activities, or a use or activity, for which a permit has been granted pursuant to this Master Program must be commenced within two (2) years of the effective date of a shoreline permit, or the shoreline permit shall terminate, and a new permit shall be necessary. However, the Planning Division may authorize a single extension for a period not to exceed one year based on reasonable factors, if a request for extension has been filed with the Planning Division before the expiration date, and notice of the proposed extension is given to parties of record and the Washington State Department of Ecology. DEFINITION OF COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES: the construction applications must be submitted, permits must be issued, and foundation inspections must be completed before the end of the two (2) year period. Exhibits/ Attachments: • Urban Boat Lift Plan Sheet, Sheet ALO, prepared by Ecco Design, dated December 4, 2014 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOATLIFT Shoreline Management Permit LUA13-001640, ECF, SM DATE OF PERMIT: January 7, 2015 Page 11 of 11 • Addendum to August 5, 2013 Biological Evaluation, prepared by Marine Surveys & Assessments, dated December 8, 2014 • Biological Evaluation, prepared by Marine Surveys & Assessments, dated August 5, 2013 • Responses to DNR and Muckleshoot Questions, from December 17, 2013 City of Renton on-hold letter, prepared by prepared by Marine Surveys & Assessments cc: Office of Attorney General Karen Walter, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Barbee Mill Community Organization; c/o Shirley Ely -Morris Management Inc/Owner Michael & Dorothy Urban/Applicant Troy Hussing, Ecco Design Inc/Contact Ruth Kidd; Torben & Ginnie Hollinsworth; Allison Peryea; Patti Klink; Vivian Roach, DNR; Lynda Priddy, EPA/ Party(ies) of Record PROJECT INFORMATION OWNER: MICHAEL & DOROTHY URBAN DRAWINGS BY: ECCO DESIGN INC. 203 N 36TH ST SUITE 201 SEATTLE. \NA 98103 206-706-3937 SITE ADDRESS: 4151 & 4157 VVILLIAMS AVE N RENTON. WA 98056 PARCEL NUMBER: (4157) 0518500340 & (4151} 0518500350 BODY OF VI/ATER: LAKE WASHINGTON LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 10 18500340) TRACT 35, RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LUA 10-023 LLA. REC. NO. 20120802900003 IN PLAT OF BARBEE MILL, VOL 248 OF PLATS, PP. 25-38, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY. vVA (0518500350) LOT 34, BARBEE MILL, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 246 OF PLATS, PAGES 25 THROUGH 39, IN KING ,_.....,.u,..NT;..'i_...,.\f,•,JA.._...,G.;.l_....,__ -----.__\//--~/---~~. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: \ INSTALL A NEW GROUND BASED BOAT LIFT. \ PLANT TWO PACIFIC WILLOWS (SALIX LUCIDA). ·,1 't""" M r--.. 0 0 M N ~ O"- Q) C() M µ O"-'° ·-0 :J V"l <( r---. ~5 '° • 0 µ ~ N V"l Q) ..c ......... µ µ µ '° {,::I M Q) z V"l M 0 N 0 u City of Renton LAND USE PERMIT MASTER APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: NAME: Barbee Mill Community Organization Urban Boat Lift PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: clo Shirley Ely 4151 &4157WilliamsAve. N ADDRESS: Morris Management, Inc. 325 118~ Avenue SE, Suite 204 Renton, WA 98056 Bellevue, WA 98005 Barbee Mill Community Organization is the owner of the tract located at 4151 Williams Avenue N. Michael & Dorothy Urban CITY: Bellevue, WA ZIP: 98005 own the lot located at 4157 Williams Ave. N. KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): TELEPHONE NUMBER: 425 283 5858 ext. 119 0518500350 (4151 Williams Ave. N) 0518500340 (4157 Williams Ave. N) APPLICANT (if other than owner) EXISTING LAND USE(S): NAME: Michael & Dorothy Urban Residential PROPOSED LAND USE(S): COMPANY (if applicable): No Change EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: ADDRESS: 4157 Williams Ave. N COR PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION CITY: Renton, WA ZIP: 98056 (if applicable) EXISTING ZONING: TELEPHONE NUMBER: 702-277-1063 R-10 CONT ACT PERSON PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): SITE AREA (in square feet): NAME: Evan Wehr 6,572 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE COMPANY (if applicable): ecco design inc. DEDICATED: SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: ADDRESS: 203 N 361 " St. #201 696 PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET CITY: Seattle, WA ZIP: 98103 ACRE (if applicable) TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable) Macintosh HD:Users:mitchell:Downloads:Barbcc Mill -Boat Lift-2:Barbee Mill land use master app(revised}.docx -I - 206-706-3937 evan@eccodesigninc.com NUMBER o~,~ .. w DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): Macintosh HD:Users:mitchell:l)ownloads:Barbec Mill -Boat l.ift:-2:Rarbee Mill land use master app(revised).docx -2 - b' • ' .. , ~n.OJECT INFORMATION (corhmued) r-''----'---'----'-"----'===..::...:=-----------~ NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): PROJECT VALUE: 1 $12,000 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (n applicable): IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (n applicable): SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): 3,730 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL D AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE D AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA TWO BUILDINGS (if applicable): SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): D FLOOD HAZARD AREA D GEOLOGIC HAZARD D HABITAT CONSERVATION D SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES D WETLANDS LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY ___ sq.ft. ___ sq.ft. ___ sq.ft. ___ sq.ft. ___ sq.ft. (Attach legal description on seoarate sheet with the following information included) SITUATE IN THE NW QUARTER OF SECTION 32 , TOWNSHIP 24 N , RANGE 5E , INTHE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) / cl-,,e__ { / , as President of the Barbee Mill Community Organization (the Organization), declare under p alty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the Organization is (please check one) _X_ the current owner of the property involved in this application, specifically 4151 Williams Avenue N., Renton, WA 98056, or __ the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authortzation) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are ,n all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. ---::~~ ~ /<{;/~~~--,---D-at_e __ _ STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Mui hf M, Af ;tck/1 signed this instrument and ackno~~eat IG 11Je his/her/their ir!,e and voluntary act for the uses and purpose mentioned ,~Q.'~~-~~~f't-~. Q) It)),,~ /2.011.. :;! "~·{-"'"' ,,, , i.>-.--1, "'.: / Dated ,.u~ ,. ,/ ? :/\)'' ·-;'.'~\ -~""'4~~.;::::_:___c,,,L ______________ _ NOT.1\P.Y ;'.; u~ \ PUBL.IC ; < \~;~'.:/:~'..,:.}:-\~;:{;. Notary (Prtnt): --'J;...,_bs.t,,-~_,_Q_. --'(1=/a,,'-'"------------ '.1 ---·, .. , .,1 rV,, .... ~ '·/i IJ'1 -\,:JI -~,~. I " ''' ' , • 1 •;' My appointment expires: ---"'Ol-i-:2:.,b'-jF2()"')u1c__ ___________ _ Macintosh HD:Users:mitchell:Downloads:Harbee Mill-Boat Lift-2:Barbee Mill land use master app(reviscd).docx -J - , 13 -CCl 33¥ ll:~ i / -t;tJ I ~~R City of Renton LAND USE PERMIT MASTER APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: NAME: Michael & Dorothy Urban Urban Boat Lift PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: ADDRESS: 4157 Williams Ave. N 4151 & 4157 Williams Ave. N Renton, WA 98056 CITY: Renton, VI/A Z!P: 98056 TELEPHONE NUMBER: 702-277-1063 KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): 0518500350 0518500340 APPLICANT (if other than owner) EXISTING LAND USE(S): NAME: Residential PROPOSED LAND USE(S): COMPANY (if applicable): No Change EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: ADDRESS: COR PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION CITY: ZIP: (if applicable) EXISTING ZONING: TELEPHONE NUMBER: R-10 CONT ACT PERSON PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): NAME: Evan Wehr SITE AREA (in square feet): 6,572 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE COMPANY (if applicable): ecco design inc. ' DEDICATED: ADDRESS: 203 N 361 " St. #201 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: 696 PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET CITY: Seattle, WA ZIP: 98103 ACRE (if applicable) ('''"-, r .,--~ ... -~ ! : " . TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applidabie) ·, '' ~ 1 i , 206-706-3937 •.' .... · ~ evan@eccodesigninc.com NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): . C:\U sers\MUrban\AppData\Local\Microsoft\ Windows\T emporary Internet Files\Content. lE5\PL WL0DY8\1and use master app.doc -I - I : ,, _} ... 1--"0JECT INFORMA T..:...:10::..:Nc:_i (c:....:oc:..:n:.::.:ti-n-=--=--=-ue=--=d=.1-I) _______ _ NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): PROJECT VALUE: 1 $12,000 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): 3,730 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL D AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE D AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA TWO BUILDINGS (if applicable): SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): D FLOOD HAZARD AREA D GEOLOGIC HAZARD D HABITAT CONSERVATION D SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES D WETLANDS LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY ___ sq.ft. ___ sq.ft. ___ sq.ft. ___ sq.ft. ___ sq.ft. (Attach legal description on separate sheet with the followina information included I SITUATE IN THE NW QUARTER OF SECTION 32 , TOWNSHIP 24 N , RANGE 5E , INTHE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) ~ , declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I am (please chec one) urrent owner of the property involved in this application or __ the authorized representative to act for a corporation {please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. ~~'!:£___4~ .. ~~~-ofi(J/,3. ;. 10, ;~ Date STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that M icl,a.e. f V r b o"' 1 Do -.r O fl,, '.j ()' b"' " signed this instrument and acknowledge it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. Dated \\\\\ 1\1 I, 11 I I 1)1 1111 ,,,,.,,.,;:.. r. O(s .1,1 ~~~; ...... ,o~,~ Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Date s,""O ,• , •, .. ~ ... I ·QT ...... Ry I ,:. :, . ....... . .. = . . . ; Notary (Print): _C_a_r -e_~_H_o_, s=-o_,,--'------------ =: J·~·~:·t.. ! : ... ,._.,,., ,;z- ~m·, •·0 E ;_;..1 ', Ft.·B' \C ,' /..:.f -:."'?.;,. I .... I 0' ~,~· .. ·~· .. ,' ,,, .... , 0 I I•• o I '(,.\'--...,'- My appointment expires: _G_-_r-_, _,..,.__/ -------------- l1JIIJ1f: 'll.b...~\\\\\'\ C:\Users\MUrbanV\ppData\Local(!J]'j~toM)ft\Windows\Temporary lnternet Files\Contcnt.11::5\PL WL0DY8\1and use master app.doc -2 - PLANNING DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site." should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. . 1 -06109 I\Server\job files\Shoreline\2013\S 1310 Urban\Adm1n\Renton Forms\environrnental checklist.doc A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Urban Boat Lift 2. Name of applicant: Michael and Dorothy Urban 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: Michael and Dorothy Urban 4157 Williams Ave. N Renton, WA 98056 702-277-1063 Contact Person: Evan Wehr -ecco design inc. 203 N 36th Street Suite 201 Seattle, WA 98103 206-706-3937 4. Date checklist prepared: August 13, 2013 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Winter 2013 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. A Biological Evaluation was prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments to assess impacts to listed species and/or critical habitat for the community pier that was constructed at the site in late 2012. Marine Surveys and Assessments has done an addendum to their original BE that addresses the impacts of the proposed lift. 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. None are known. 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. RGP 1 approval from the Army Corps of Engineers. SOP, SEPA review, and building permit from the City of Renton. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. Install a new ground based boat lift. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should 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. 4151 & 4157 Williams Ave. Nin Renton, WA 98056. Section: NWl/4 32 Town: 24N Range: SE B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS -2 -06/09 \\Server\job fi!es\Shoreline\2013\S1310 Urban\Adrnin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist.doc I 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one); flat. rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other ______ _ b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?) The site is relatively flat with the steepest slope along the shoreline being approximately 3%. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The area where the lift is to be installed is mainly angular rocks. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. No filling or grading are proposed. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? There will be no change to the amount of impervious surfaces. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: None proposed. 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. No emissions are to occur. b. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None. 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, Jakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. The work will occur in Lake Washington. -3 -06/09 \\Serverljob files1Shoreline\20131S131 O Urban\Admin\Renton FormslenvironmentaJ checklist.doc 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. The boat lift will be installed in Lake Washington. 3} Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? 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 Water: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals ... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None. c. Water Runoff (including storm water}: 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. N/A 2) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: None. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on th~ site: _X_ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other _x_ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other _X_ shrubs _X_ grass __ pasture __ crop or grain __ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other __ water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other __ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? None. -4- I\Serverljob files\Shoreline\2013\S 131 0 Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist.doc 06109 c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None know. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: None. 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. Chinook salmon, bull trout, and steelhead. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain Juvenile salmonids migrate along the lake shoreline. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Work will take place during the appropriate work window of July lG'h through December 31''. 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. Solar. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. 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: None. 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)? None known. . 5 . 06/09 1\Serverljob f1les\Shorel1ne\2013IS1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist.doc ) ·) 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or 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. Low levels of noise during installation of the lift. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site and adjacent properties are residential. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. An existing house and community pier. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. e. What is the current zoning classification ofthe site? R-10 f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? COR g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Urban h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: None. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. 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: None. 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. A couple feet above the ordinary high water mark. • 6 • 06109 I\Server\job files\Shoreline\2013\S 1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Forms'.environmental checklist.doc ' - b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None. 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: None. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Boating and fishing. 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: None. 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 known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None. 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. The site is accessed by Lake Washington Blvd. N just west of 1-405. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? 8/lOths of a mile. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? None. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private? No. -7 -06109 \\Server\job files\Shoreline\2013\S1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist.doc e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Boat traffic on Lake Washington. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. None. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None. 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. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. 16. UTILITIES a. b. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas. water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. None. C. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true, correct, 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 Signature:~ ~ Name Printed: E VR/;-J weh ;,--- Date: . 8 -06/09 - \\Server\job files\Shoreline\2013\S1 31 O Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist.doc Project Narrative Urban Boat Lift The proposed project is to install a new boat lift for Michael and Dorothy Urban at 4151 Williams Avenue North in Renton Washington. A shoreline substantial development permit and environmental review are required from the City of Renton. The project site and adjacent properties are zoned as Residential I Odu/ac (R-10). The site is on the shoreline of Lake Washington. A portion of the shoreline is armored with a concrete and steel bulkhead while the remaining portion is unarmored. Michael and Dorothy Urban reside at the adjacent parcel to the north, 4157 Williams Avenue North, and have an easement to place a boat lift on the adjacent property to the south, 4151 Williams Avenue North, on which a community dock has been built. 4151 Williams Avenue North is currently owned by the Barbee Mill Community Organization. The lift will be located immediately waterward of the ordinary high water mark between the community dock to the south and the bulkhead to the north. It will be located approximately 3 '-6" away from the community dock. The boat lift will be 10' wide by 12' long. The bunk of the boat lift will extend 18" above the ordinary high water mark and the lift will sit on the lake bed of Lake Washington on foot pads that are 12" by 12". The lake bed consists mostly of large angular rocks where the lift will be located. The estimated fair market value of the boat lift is $12,000. LAKE WASHINGTON N 42ND PL. SITE Renton / I / I ' I oc:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::,343n NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP SCALE 1" = 200' 0 500 FT ,) ' NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-(DNS) A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economk Development (CED) -Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the appltcation and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: LAND USE NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: December 4, 2013 LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Urban Boat Lift PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting approval of a a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Environmental Review for a freestanding boat lift in association with, but not attached to, a community dock. The proposed dock would be located in Lake Washington, a Shoreline of Statewide Significance. The project is within the Residential -10 dwelling units per acre zone (R-10) and shoreline jurisdiction. The proposed dock would be for use of thEl property owners at 4157 Williams Avenue North, but would be located in an easement over the property located at 4151 Williams Avenue North {Barbee Mill Community Dock). The boat lift would be located waterward of the ordinary high water line between the community dock and the bulkhead to the north. The freestanding boat lift would be 10 feet by 12 feet and would rest on 12 inch by 12 inch footpads on the lake bottom. Installation of the boat lift would be accomplished in one to two days and would be conducted during the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife "fish window" of July 16 through December 31. PROJECT LOCATION: 4157 & 4151 Williams Ave N OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS}: As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental Impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS process to give notice that a DNS is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non-Significance (DNS). A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: December 2, 2013 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: December 4, 2013 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Evan Wehr, EML: evan@eccodesignlnc.com; Mail: 203 N 36th Street #201, Seattle, WA 98103 Permits/Review Requested: Other Permits which may be required: Requested Studies: Location where application may be reviewed: Environmental {SEPA) Review, Shoreline Substantial De'tlelopment Permit Building Permit Lake Study Department of Community & Economic Development (CEO) -Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 980S7 If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED-Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No.: Urban Boat lift/LUAB-001640 NAME:------------------------------------ MAILING ADDRESS: ________________ City/State/Zip:----------- TELEPHONE NO.: --------------- .} CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: The subject site is designated Residential Medium Density (COMP-RMD) on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and Residential 10 dwelllng units per acre (R-10) on the City's Zoning Map. Environmental (SEPA) Checklist The project will be subject ta the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-3-090E.1, RMC 4-9-070, RMC 4-9-190 and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner, CED - Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on December 18, 2013. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a p'arty of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project Manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner;-Tel: (425)430-7382; Eml: gwasser@rentonwa.gov PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION December 5, 2014 Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on December 1, 2014: SEPA DETERMINATION: Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated {DNSM) PROJECT NAME: Urban Boat Lift PROJECT NUMBER: LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on December 19, 2014, together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. Please refer to the enclosed Notice of Environmental Determination for complete details. If you have questions, please call me at (425) 430-6593. For the Environmental Review Committee, Kris Sorensen Assistant Planner Enclosure cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division Boyd Powers, Department of Natural Resources Karen Walter, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Melissa Calvert, Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program Gretchen Kaehler, Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Ramin Pazooki, WSDOT, NW Region Larry Fisher, WDFW Duwamish Tribal Office US Army Corp. of Engineers Renton City Hall , 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 , rentonwa.gov t DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE PROJECT NUMBER: APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME: -MITIGATED (DNS-M) LUAB-001640, ECF, SM Michael and Dorothy Urban Urban Boat Lift PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the installation of a freestanding boatlift adjacent the Barbee Mill Community Dock in Lake Washington. The project is located in the Residential -10 dwelling units/acre (R-10) zone and the Shoreline High Intensity Overlay (Lake Washignton Reach C). The lift would be for sole use of one property owner. Studies submitted include Biological Evaluation/Habitat Data Report and Addendum, Lake Study, and Environmental Checklist. PROJECT LOCATION: LEAD AGENCY: 4157 Williams Ave N; Renton WA 98056 City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under their authority of Section 4-9-070D Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. Because other agencies of jurisdiction may be involved, the lead agency will not act on this proposal for fourteen (14) days. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on December 19, 2014. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and more information may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: DATE OF DECISION: SIGNATURES: December 5, 2014 December 1, 2014 Date Date ..... C.E. "Chip" Vince , Administrator Department of Community & Economic Development Date DEPARTMENT OF c .... ..i!uNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNSM) MITIGATION MEASURES AND ADVISORY NOTES PROJECT NUMBER: LUAB-001640, ECF, SM Michael and Dorothy Urban Urban Boat Lift APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the installation of a freestanding boatlift adjacent the Barbee Mill Community Dock in Lake Washington. The project is located in the Residential -10 dwelling units/acre (R-10) zone and the Shoreline High Intensity Overlay (Lake Washignton Reach C). The lift would be for sole use of one property owner. Studies submitted include Biological Evaluation/Habitat Data Report and Addendum, Lake Study, and Environmental Checklist. PROJECT LOCATION: 4157 Williams Ave N The City of Renton LEAD AGENCY: Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. When docking the motorized watercraft on the boat lift, the engine shall be required to be shut off at the westerly end of Community Dock. Once the engine has been shut off the motorized watercraft shall be walked to the boatlift floating the boat into place on the boatlift. The same procedure shall be utilized when launching the watercraft. 2. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Biological Study, prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments, dated January 19, 2010 (Exhibit 8), Addendum to the Biological Study, prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments, dated August 5, 2013, and the recommendations for new plantings monitoring and maintenance provided in the Response to Concerns document, prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments, submitted March 4, 2014 (Exhibit 26). Recommendations included in the documents include but are not limited to the following: o Any construction equipment shall be operated from an out-of-water location whenever possible and will be operated in a manner that minimizes the suspension of particulates. o All equipment used in or around water shall be clean and inspected daily prior to use to ensure that the equipment has no fluid leaks. Should a leak develop during use, the leaking equipment shall be removed from the site immediately and not used again until it has been adequately repaired. o No equipment shall be stored or fueled so close to a surface of water that the activity could adversely affect the waterbody. 3. Construction and/or installation of the boat lift shall take place only during the Department of Fish and Wildlife approved construction window from July 16 through December 31 (Exhibit 35), unless written approval is provided by WDFW with an alternative approved time. 4. If at any time, as a result of project activities, fish are observed in distress, a fish kill occurs, or water quality problems develop (including equipment leaks or spills), operations shall immediately cease and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and the Washington Department of Ecology (DOE) shall be contacted immediately. Work shall not resume until further approval is given by the WDFW and DOE. 5. The applicant shall provide an updated shoreline mitigation planting plan that provides appropriate mitigation plantings, to be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to approval ofthe Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. 6. An Addendum or Memorandum for the submitted Biological and Lake Studies shall be provided by the applicant that identifies no net loss of ecological functions and values consistent with the City's Shoreline Master Program, and the document shall be provided to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to approval of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. ADIVISORY NOTES: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject ta the appeal process for the land use actians. Engineering Review Comments Jan Illian Recommendations: I have no utility comments related to this project Police Review Comments Cyndie Parks Recommendations: N/ A Technical Services Comments Bob MacOnie The site plan purportedly shows the recording number of an easement between the Barbee Mill HOA and the applicant but the number shown has too many digits and in no way represents the actual easement Rec. No. 20121211001516. The Survey of Record for the DNR Lease is not a recorded version of same. Has the survey been recorded? If so please provide the recording number. The Lease itself is supposed to be recorded as well and if it has please provide its recording number as well. Only a portion (pages 2 and 5) of the easement instrument was provided in the materials reviewed and ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 2 of 3 the full document had to be acquired form King County. I have requested a copy of DNR Lease No. 22 086046 from the Aquatic Lands Division of DNR. The easement crosses the inner harbor line and therefore includes a portion of the DNR lease area. It is my understanding that aquatic lands leases carry restrictions on the assignment of rights and thus the easement area may not in fact extend as far as is purports. It should be noted that the area lying westerly of the western boundary of Tracts 35 and 36 is an undesignated Tract on the plat of Barbee Mill and thus may not have been conveyed to the Barbee Mill Community Association. Should that be the case the Community Association does not have the right to grant the easement over that area either, thus, obviating the easement in its entirety. As platted the Tract boundaries do not extend to the Inner Harbor Line as shown on some of the documents reviewed. These are not insurmountable issues but ones that should be remedied. Planning Comments Kris Sorensen 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Commercial, multi-family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 3 of 3 Denis Law Mayor December 31, 2014 Troy Hussing Ecco Design Inc 203 N 36'" Street, #201 Seattle, WA 98103 SUBJECT: "Off Hold" Notice r Cit_r of. l. -V . .. ,, I, r 1·, r/ r(·· ) ·11 n \ ._t~'_;J 1 ~~ Community & Economic Development Department CE. 'Chip"Vincent, Administrator Urban Boat Lift/ LUAB-001640 Dear Mr. Hussing: The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee made a Determination of Non- Significance-Mitigated (DNS-M) on December 1, 2015 as part of SEPA environmental review for the Urban Boat Lift project. Mitigation measures as part of the DNS-M required an updated shoreline mitigation planting plan and addendum to the biological evaluation that evaluates ecological function, and a determination of no-net loss based on the proposal. You provided these two items in an email dated December 9, 2014. A planting plan approval by the homeowners association was requested by City staff on December 19, 2014 to be provided before March 20, 2015. You provided an email from the homeowners association to staff on December 26, 2014 approving the planting plan. At this time, your project has been placed "off hold" and processing of the shoreline substantial development permit will continue. Please contact me at (425) 430-6593 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~t ;. .......... _ Kris Sorensen Associate Planner cc: Morris Management, Inc. c/o Shirley Ely/ Owner Michael & Dorothy Urban/ Applicant Ruth Kidd; Torben & Ginnie Hollinsworth; Allison Peryea; Patti Klink; Vivian Roach, DNR, Karen Walter, Muckleshoot Tribe; Lynda Priddy, EPA/ Party(ies) of Record Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor December 19, 2014 Troy Hussing Ecco Design Inc 203 N 36th Street, #201 Seattle, WA 98103 SUBJECT: "On Hold 11 Notice r Cityo .i. . ··.. P' ·r· ·1; rur .. ,·JJ .. · .. \ . t . "" .i .. · . . -.,,. \ . I .....,. __ -··. Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Urban Boat Lift/ LUAB-001640 Dear Mr. Hussing: The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee made a Determination of Non- Significance-Mitigated (DNS-M) on December 1, 2015 as part of SEPA environmental review for the Urban Boat lift project. Mitigation measures as part of the DNS-M required an updated shoreline mitigation planting plan and addendum to the biological evaluation that evaluates ecological function, and a determination of no-net loss based on the proposal. You provided these two items in an email dated December 9, 2014. The planting plan will need to receive approval of the homeowners association to assure that the proposed and approved planting plan will be installed. I know you are working on this request. A written approval from the association is necessary to review and approve the shoreline substantial development permit. The information will need to be submitted before March 20, 2015. At this time, your project continues to be placed "on hold" pending receipt of the requested information. Please contact me at (425) 430-6593 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~t $-,, l4.. ,, p,.... Kris Sorensen Associate Planner cc: Morris Management, Inc. c/o Shirley Ely/ Owner Michael & Dorothy Urban/ Applicant Ruth Kidd; Torben & Ginnie Hollinsworth; Allison Peryea; Patti Klink; Vivian Roach, DNR, Karen Walter, Muckleshoot Tribe; Lynda Priddy, EPA / Party(ies) of Record Renton City Hall , 1055 South Grady Way , Renton, Washington 98057 , rentonwa.gov Ruth Kidd 1117 N 41st Pl Renton, WA 98056 Michael & Dorothy Urban 4157 Williams Ave N Renton, WA 98056-2171 Evan Wehr Ecco Design Inc. 203 N 36th St, #201 Seattle, WA 98103 Vivian Roach Department of Natural Resources 950 Farman Ave N Enumclaw, WA 98022 Allison Peryea Leahy McLean Fjelstad 25 Central Way, Suite 310 Renton, WA 98033 BARBEE MILL WATERFRONT LLC 846 108th AVE NE Bellevue, WA 98004 Patti Klink 1126 N 42nd Pl Renton, WA 98056 Lynda Priddy Environmental Protection Agency 1200 6th Ave, Suite 900 Seattle. WA 98101 De~:~~:w f . "'{CS . City of,~ . . . __ _::_.__.,,,,,.,,,... i ·/ ce-tr r t·\_;.-t 1 .;.!. ~-'. _,..~ ' Community & Economic Development Department · Clecember 5, 2014 TrbyHussing Eccci Design Inc 203.N 36'h Street, #201 Seattle, WA 98103 SUBJECT: "On Hold" Notice . . · . Urban Boat ·Lift/ LUAB-001640. Dear Mr. HLissing: C.E."Chip"Vincent;Administrator Th~ City of Renton Environmental Review Committee made a Determination of Non~ Significance-Mitigated (DNS-M) on December 1, 2015 as part of SEPA environmental review for the Urban Boat Lift project. The appeal period for the environ~ental decision · begins on December 5, 2014; If there is an appeal to the determination, review of the assocfated Shoreline Substantial DeveloprT)ent Permit w·ould not be processed. Mitigation measures as part of tl:ie DNS-M require that you provide city staff additional information for evaluation of the shoreline permit. To' provide background -for the project, the Planning Division of-the City of Renton accepted the _above master applicai:io·n for review on Octo.ber. 8, 2013:. During the review, staff received comments. from a· Barbee mill 'resident, the Washington State · .. · Department of Natural _Resources (DNR), the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe· Fisheries Divisipn, and the _United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): As requested by the city in response to the com merits, you provided the additional information and responses-with your'Jetter·datedMarch 4, 2014. Your.response-was then forward~d to tommenters,. reviewing agencies arid parties of record of the application. Foilowing distribution of your response, the city received .. additional comments from DNR; Muckleshdot Indian Tribe Flsheries Division, and the attorney representing Barbee .Mill Community Organizatiori. A m·eeting in the field at the project site was coordinated with agencies July 29, 2014 to discuss project concerns and comments. Additional meetings with commenting agencies were attempted although a meeting wasnever realized. The project was taken "off-hold" on October 30, 2014 to provide Environmental (SEPA) Review and the DNS-M was made on December 1, 2014. The niitigation measures of the environmental determination require that you provide the additional information below .. for evaluation of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit required for the project: Renton City Hall ; 1055 South Grady Way' • Renton.Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov · • Mr. Troy Hussing Page 2 (?.f 2 .. December 5, 2014 • . The applicantshall provide an updated shoreline mitigation planting plan that · provides appropriate mitigation pl,mtings, to be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to issuance of the Shoreline. Substantial Development Permit. • An Addendum ~r Memorandum for the submitted Biological and.Lake Studies shall be provided by the applicant that identifies no net loss of ecological functions and values consistent with the City's Shoreline Master Program, and the document shall be provided to and apprnved b_y the Current Plarining Project . Manager, prior tffissuance of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. · At this time, yout project has been pl;ced "onhold" pe~ding receipt of the requested information. Ple>ase contact me at (425) 430~6593 if you have any questions . . Sincerely, ~r b4'J H:i,ol .· n"'"" Kris Sorensen Associate Planner· cc: Mor'ris Management, Inc. c/o Shirley Ety / Owne:r Michael & oOroth·Yurban /Appllcaht_ · Ruth Kidd; Torben & G·ionie Hbilinsworth; Allison Peryea;. Patti" Klink; Vivian Roach, _DNR, Karen Walter, · _MuckleshootTribe; ~ynda·Prfddy, EPA / Part_y{ies)"c,t ~ecdrd Of ENVIRONMENTAL DITTRMINATION ISSUANCE OF~ DmRM1NAT1DN OF. NONSIGNIFICANCE • MmGATED {DNS-M] posnii'ro NOT1Fl",1Nlf.RE5TEO P~NS OF AN EN\l!RONME!HAL AC110M PROJECT NAM!:: L/rban Boat utt ,..C&IECTNUf"BE!l, W"11-<Xi1&40. !O'. SM lDCATlON: ~::~~: REQUESTING EN\l!RONMENTAL [S<PAI REV\[W MO =niC>N, l OEVEI.Ol'MENT PEIIMIT FDR 11-iE !NSTAIJ.AT10N Of A fftEU'fANOING :OSHOR~U~:-~ IWIME MILL CCMMUNrrY DQO(. !N I.AK! WASHINi,;TOlt. ll!E PRO!ECT IS ~~ IM THE RESIOENTIAI. -10 owEWNG UNITS{AtRE (R-101 ?ONE ANO THE SHOREUNE HIGM !Wt!ISll"I' Olll'illAl llAKE WASMIGNTON REACH C). THE UFT WOULD BE fOR SOLE U~E Of ONE PROP£J!l'Y OWNER. ~OIE.I SUBMITTm INO.UOE BIOLOGICAi. (VAI.UAnoN{flABITAT OATA REPOI\T ANO AOOENOUM, lAKE sruov, AND ENVIIIONMENTALOm:KUST. ll!E Cl1Y Of RENTON EN\11RONMENTAL REVIEW C0MMIT1EE (EfCCJ HAS DETER MINEO Tl1ATTHE PROPOSED ACT10N HAS PROMBI.ESlGNIFIU.NT IMPACTS THATU.N Bf MITIG.I.TEDTHROUGH MITIGATION MEASURE..I. A i,, of lhe ""'""'""'"""'I de1om,!nnlcn m~st Hfll•d In ..-rttln1 on or l>efar• S:00 p.m. on O.co.,,l>er i!'.":i.4, toioti,,:r with lh• raq~lrfl 19,, wltti: Hl•rirc enmln•r, City olofR::n::~ S:: ~~ R..,to<I, WA ~8057. AppH\o to tho bamlnor"" eovflTMd by City )-lO teprdlna;tl,eappRl ,roceumav\l• oht>!ned t,omlha Renton 0tyc.n',ot11ai, (4ll • If THE e~RONMENTAL OITTRMINAnoN IS Al'PEAtED. A PUBU( HEARING Wll.\. BE ff! /\NO ALL ~ARTIE5 PLEASE !Na.UDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CAWNG FOR PROl'ER FILE IDENTIFICATION. CERTIFICATION I, kv ,5 Sortuts-e-vi . hereby certify that 3 copies of the above document were posted in l_ conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Date:---'l,_l--+/--"'-5+-/-=--{ y_,_____ __ • I Signed~ ~A--:<-___........, STATE OF WASHINGTON 55 ,,, .... ,.';.\~· , c,'1;.'l P0l1-'. , -. 0~ ~'"'""''' ~,<-. -'!'f'"il .... n.a.i ••• , . r. :: .:(-$.?:_." c~\ u' :: = o1~ ~\ -:,: .. ~ w,,~ ._. iu •i COUNTY OF KING ) ~ 1 4 c. ] 2: ~ '1 \ "•\.' f 0 I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that K r I '5 S O v: f" Sfb, \ "'~•·,~·29· \;_.,.<-<tj-. signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act tt+ri,;:·;-;;~':>·· uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. 111 11111111""'' Dated: Q e,(,/./f/l.£(A S, :J. o 1 '-{ ' lie in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print) :--~-'-'0-'-~ ~rtJ'i'-X<.........,..ac:cw::.:ee:.:fS..L------ My appointment expires: __ __,.A;:r:..i,.J.t'6+1"'li:f::>....J.+_-~:1"-<t-'-,f-' .::::«"'O""I_].___ __ _ Agencies See Attached Michael & Dorothy Urban Owners Evan Wehr Contact Barbee Mill Owner See attached Parties of Record ' (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON Notary (Print): __ ~l-\-o~l-~-+--:p-'--=010~4'.5~---------- My appointment expires: ~ .(-;;z_ t\ 'JOI 1 Urban Boat Lift ; LUA13-001640, ECF, SM template -affidavit of service by mailing Ruth Kidd 1117 N 41st Pl Renton. WA 98056 Allison Pervea Leahy McLean Fjelstad 25 Central Way, Suite 310 Renton, WA 98033 Patti Klink 1126 N 42nd Pl Renton, WA 98056 Evan Wehr Ecco Design Inc. 203 N 36th St, #201 Seattle, WA 98103 ,v'lichael & Dorothy Urban · 4157 Williams Ave N Renton, WA 98056-2171 BARBEE MILL WATERFRONT LLC 846 108th AVE NE BELLEVUE, WA 98004 Dept. of Ecology** Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region • Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) WDFW -Larry Fisher* 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Issaquah, WA 98027 Duwamish Tribal Office* 4717 W Marginal Way SW Seattle, WA 98106-1514 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept.* Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 39015-172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092 Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program* Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert 39015172°d Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 US Army Corp. of Engineers * KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Seattle District Office Environmental Planning Supervisor Attn: Gretchen Kaehler Attn: $EPA Reviewer Ms. Shirley Marroquin PO Box48343 PO Box C-3755 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 Seattle, WA 98124 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Boyd Powers"'*"' Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Tim McHarg Attn: Jack Pace 35030 SE Douglas St. #210 Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director Snoqualmie, WA 98065 12835 Newcastle Way, Ste 200 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle, WA 98056 Kent, WA 98032-5895 · Metro Transit Puget Sound Energy City ofTukwila Senior Environmental Planner Kathy Johnson, Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Gary Kriedt 355 110'" Ave NE 6200 Southcenter Blvd. 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 Mailstop EST llW Tukwila, WA 98188 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, WA 98004 Seattle Public Utilities Jailaine Madura Attn; SEPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 *Note; If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of Application. **Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov ***Department of Natural Resources is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice the following email address: sepacenter@dnr.wa.gov template -affidavit of service by mailing . Denis Law ' ·· · . City o(---=Mayor ______ ... Jj' .JslJtNlJ December 4, 2014 Michael & Dorothy Urban 4157 Williams Ave N Renton, WA 98056 Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chip"Vi ncent, Administrator SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) THRESHOl,D DETERMINATION Urban Boat Lift, LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Dear Mr. & Mrs. Urban: This letter is written on behalf ofthe Environmental Review Committee (ERC) to advise you that they have completed their review of the subject project and have issued a threshold Determination of Non-Significance,Mitigated with Mitigation Measures. Please refer to the enclosed ERC Report, for a list of the Mitigation Measures. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on December 19, 2014, together with the required fee with.: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. If the Environmental Determination is appealed, a public hearing date will be set and all parties notified. If you have any further questions, please call me at (425) 430-6593. For the Environmental Review Committee, Kris Sorensen Associate Planner Enclosure cc: Barbee Mill/ Owner(s) E"'.an Wehr/ Contact Ruth Kidd, Patti Klink, Alison Peryea / Party(ies) of Record Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov ·-0 Cityof. ---------... F~~tIJ:t OJJJ OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS-M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: Urban Boat Lift PROJECT NUMBER: LUA13-001640, ECF, SM LOCATION: 4157 Williams Ave N DESCRIPTION, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) REVIEW AND A SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A FREESTANDING BOATLIFT ADJACENT THE BARBEE MILL COMMUNITY DOCK IN LAKE WASHINGTON. THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE RESIDENTIAL -10 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE (R-10) ZONE AND THE SHORELINE HIGH INTENSITY OVERLAY (LAKE WASHIGNTON REACH C). THE LIFT WOULD BE FOR SOLE USE OF ONE PROPERTY OWNER. STUDIES SUBMITTED INCLUDE BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION/HABITAT DATA REPORT AND ADDENDUM, LAKE STUDY, AND ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION HAS PROBABLE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS THAT CAN BE MITIGATED THROUGH MITIGATION MEASURES. Appeals of the envlronmental determination m1.1st be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on December 19, 20.14, together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE SET AND ALL PARTIES NOTIFIED. • ......... ..... - FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION. Denis Law Mayor r r - City of, ~lttD1l December 5, 2014 Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chi p"Vi ncent, Administrator Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL {SEPA) THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on December 1, 2014: SEPA DETERMINATION: Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated (DNSM) PROJECT NAME: Urban Boat Lift PROJECT NUMBER: LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on December 19, 2014, together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. Please refer to the enclosed Notice of Environmental Determination for complete details. If you have questions, please call me at (425) 430-6593. For the Environmental Review Committee, Kris Sorensen Assistant Planner Enclosure cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division Boyd Powers, Department of Natural Resources Karen Walter, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Melissa Calvert, Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program Gretchen Kaehler, Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Ramin Pazookl, WSDOT, NW Region Larry Fisher, WDFW Duwamish Tribal Office US Army Corp. of Engineers Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton.Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE PROJECT NUMBER: APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME: -MITIGATED (DNS-M) LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Michael and Dorothy Urban Urban Boat Lift PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the installation of a freestanding boatlift adjacent the Barbee Mill Community Dock in Lake Washington. The project is located in the Residential -10 dwelling units/acre (R-10) zone and the Shoreline High Intensity Overlay (Lake Washignton Reach C). The lift would be for sole use of one property owner. Studies submitted include Biological Evaluation/Habitat Data Report and Addendum, Lake Study, and Environmental Checklist. PROJECT LOCATION: LEAD AGENCY: 4157 Williams Ave N; Renton WA 98056 City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under their authority of Section 4-9-070D Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. Because other agencies of jurisdiction may be involved, the lead agency will not act on this proposal for fourteen (14) days. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on December 19, 2014. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and more information may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: DATE OF DECISION: SIGNATURES: December 5, 2014 December 1, 2014 ~ Date C-E.\ I~.~ C.E. "Chip" Vine¥, Administrator Department of Community & Economic Development 1w, (tt Date DEPARTMENT OF COM1vlUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED {DNSM) MITIGATION MEASURES AND ADVISORY NOTES PROJECT NUMBER: LUAB-001640, ECF, SM Michael and Dorothy Urban Urban Boat Lift APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the installation of a freestanding boatlift adjacent the Barbee Mill Community Dock in Lake Washington. The project is located in the Residential -10 dwelling units/acre (R-10) zone and the Shoreline High Intensity Overlay (Lake Washignton Reach C). The lift would be for sole use of one property owner. Studies submitted include Biological Evaluation/Habitat Data Report and Addendum, Lake Study, and Environmental Checklist. PROJECT LOCATION: 4157 Williams Ave N The City of Renton LEAD AGENCY: Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. When docking the motorized watercraft on the boat lift, the engine shall be required to be shut off at the westerly end of Community Dock. Once the engine has been shut off the motorized watercraft shall be walked to the boatlift floating the boat into place on the boatlift. The same procedure shall be utilized when launching the watercraft. 2. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Biological Study, prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments, dated January 19, 2010 (Exhibit 8), Addendum to the Biological Study, prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments, dated August 5, 2013, and the recommendations for new plantings monitoring and maintenance provided in the Response to Concerns document, prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments, submitted March 4, 2014 (Exhibit 26). Recommendations included in the documents include but are not limited to the following: o Any construction equipment shall be operated from an out-of-water location whenever possible and will be operated in a manner that minimizes the suspension of particulates. o All equipment used in or around water shall be clean and inspected daily prior to use to ensure that the equipment has no fluid leaks. Should a leak develop during use, the leaking equipment shall be removed from the site immediately and not used again until it has been adequately repaired. o No equipment shall be stored or fueled so close to a surface of water that the activity could adversely affect the waterbody. 3. Construction and/or installation of the boat lift shall take place only during the Department of Fish and Wildlife approved construction window from July 16 through December 31 (Exhibit 35), unless written approval is provided by WDFW with an alternative approved time. 4. If at any time, as a result of project activities, fish are observed in distress, a fish kill occurs, or water quality problems develop (including equipment leaks or spills), operations shall immediately cease and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and the Washington Department of Ecology (DOE} shall be contacted immediately. Work shall not resume until further approval is given by the WDFW and DOE. 5. The applicant shall provide an updated shoreline mitigation planting plan that provides appropriate mitigation plantings, to be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to approval of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. 6. An Addendum or Memorandum for the submitted Biological and Lake Studies shall be provided by the applicant that identifies no net loss of ecological functions and values consistent with the City's Shoreline Master Program, and the document shall be provided to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to approval of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. ADIVISORY NOTES: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions. Engineering Review Comments Jan Illian Recommendations: I have no utility comments related to this project Police Review Comments Cyndie Parks Recommendations: N/ A Technical Services Comments Bob MacOnie The site plan purportedly shows the recording number of an easement between the Barbee Mill HOA and the applicant but the number shown has too many digits and in no way represents the actual easement Rec. No. 20121211001516. The Survey of Record for the DNR Lease is not a recorded version of same. Has the survey been recorded? If so please provide the recording number. The Lease itself is supposed to be recorded as well and if it has please provide its recording number as well. Only a portion (pages 2 and 5) of the easement instrument was provided in the materials reviewed and ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 2 of 3 the full document had to be acquired form King County. I have requested a copy of DNR Lease No. 22 086046 from the Aquatic Lands Division of DNR. The easement crosses the inner harbor line and therefore includes a portion of the DNR lease area, It is my understanding that aquatic lands leases carry restrictions on the assignment of rights and thus the easement area may not in fact extend as far as is purports. It should be noted that the area lying westerly of the western boundary of Tracts 35 and 36 is an undesignated Tract on the plat of Barbee Mill and thus may not have been conveyed to the Barbee Mill Community Association. Should that be the case the Community Association does not have the right to grant the easement over that area either, thus, obviating the easement in its entirety. As platted the Tract boundaries do not extend to the Inner Harbor Line as shown on some of the documents reviewed. These are not insurmountable issues but ones that should be remedied. Planning Comments Kris Sorensen 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Commercial, multi-family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 3 of 3 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITIEE REPORT ERC MEETING DATE: Project Name: Project Number: Project Manager: Owner: Applicant: Contact: Project Location: Project Summary: Site Area (2 parcels}: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: December 1, 2014 Urban Boat Lift LUAB-001640; ECF, SM Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner Barbee Mill Community Organization; c/o Shirley Ely-Morris Management, Inc; 325 1181h Ave SE, Suite 204; Bellevue, WA 98005 Michael & Dorothy Urban; 4157 Williams Ave N; Renton WA 98056 Troy Hussing & Evan Wehr; Ecco Design Inc; 203 N 36 1h St #201; Seattle WA 98103 4151 & 4157 Williams Ave N; Renton WA 98056 4157 is the location of the applicant's home and 4151 is the abutting tract where the boatlift would be located. The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the installation of a freestanding boatlift adjacent the Barbee Mill Community Dock in Lake Washington. The project is located in the Residential -10 dwelling units/acre (R-10) zone and the Shoreline High Intensity Overlay (Lake Washignton Reach C). The lift would be for sole use of one property owner. Studies submitted include Biological Evaluation/Habitat Data Report and Addendum, Lake Study, and Environmental Checklist. 4151 Williams Ave N: 2,684 sf (0.06 acres) 4157 Williams Ave N: 6,572 sf (0.15 acres) Building Area ta remain: Building Area ta be demolished: New building construction: Building Area ta remain: Building Area ta be demolished: Dock over water N/A 175 sf area Single family home None New building construction: None Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M}. ,,, U~t-'.JkN ~otif-' \ l f-t u f Ju~J vJ Iv {Alf\£, s sc.i. s c~r,.V\~e. Project Location Map City of Renton Deportment of Community"' Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Report of December 1, 2014 PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ BACKGROUND Env,. _ .mental Review Committee Report LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Page 2 of 19 Introduction: The applicant has requested approval of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Environmental (SEPA) Review to allow installation of a freestanding boat lift structure within the shoreline of Lake Washington, a shoreline of the state (Exhibit 3, SMP map). The boat lift would be located adjacent an existing community boat dock (Exhibit 4) within 12 feet of the shoreline bulkhead. The bulkhead surrounding the subject location is a vertical metal sheetpile with a concrete cap (Exhibit 5, photo}. The applicants own the property abutting the subject site to the north, 4157 Williams Ave N, and have been granted an easement on a Home Owners Association community-owned tract abutting their property to the south. The same community-owned tract is where the Community Dock is located. The City is working with the subdivision project surveyor to update the plat to clearly identify the area as a tract as it was not properly identified as part of plat recording (Exhibit 34). The boat lift would be located on the northside of the community dock, between the uplands and inner harbor line. At the inner harbor line (Exhibit 2) state- owned aquatic lands are west of the line and community-owned land covered by water are east oft he line to the bulkhead (Exhibit 6). Beyond the inner harbor line, the state-owned aquatic lands are restricted through a 'Withdraw! Area' in front of the applicant's residence and a 'Lease Area' where the Community Dock is located (Exhibit 23).The subject properties are within the Barbee Mill residential subdivision and the R-10 residential zone designation (Exhibit 7). The applicants have two differing shorelines fronting their property. The shoreline in front of their home at the west is a more natural shoreline, without a bulkhead, and was restored as part of the Barbee Mill lumber mill restoration and development of the residential subdivision. At the applicant's southern shoreline as shared with the community-owned tract is the bulkhead made up of the sheetpile and concrete cap. As part ofthe land use application submittals, the applicant provided the following studies; Biological Evaluation/Habitat Report (Exhibit 8), Lake and Stream Study (Exhibit 9), and Addendum to Biological Study, (Exhibit 10). The two primary studies were written specifically for the Barbee Mill Community Dock project in 2010 and the Addendum was recently written for this application. The studies were forwarded to reviewing agencies and available for public to review. Staff received multiple comments as part of the public review period (Exhibit 11-18). Subsequently, City staff requested that the applicant provide additional information in response to received comments. The applicant provided responses to the concerns identified by public and agency comments (Exhibit 19) including responses from Marine Surveys and Assessments who authored the biological evaluations submitted with the project application. Following distribution of the applicant's additional information, additional comments were received from the public and reviewing agencies (Exhibits 20-22). Review and approval by the Environmental Review Committee is required prior to issuance of building permits. Beyond City of Renton approvals, the applicant would need to receive additional state and federal approvals, including an HPA from state Department of Fish and Wildlife if required and federal Army Corps of Engineers approval. Zoning: The property is located at the Barbee Mill residential subdivision designated Residential Medium Density (RMD} on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use map. Goals, objectives, and policies of the RMD are Final ERC Report_LUAlJ-001640_ Urban Boat Lift City of Renton Department af Community 0< Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT En ... _nmental Review Committee Report WAH-001640, ECF, SM Report of December l, 2014 implemented by the regulations and standards of the Residential-10 zone (R-10) (Exhibit 7). The subdivision was rezoned to R-10 in 2011 from the zoning designation COR (Commercial/Office/ Residential). Page 3 of 19 Boat lift and Boat: The lift would be constructed off-site and delivered to the site. The project includes installation into Lake Washington. The boat lift would hold one boat and would be limited for the sole use of the property owners to the no.rth, the applicants Michael and Dorothy Urban, at 4157 Williams Ave N. The boat lift would not have a cover and would be marine grade metal frames with an upper bunk where the boat sits (Exhibit 4, Boatlift Detail). The lift is approximately 175 square feet in area. The boat lift structure would sit on the bottom substrate of the lake on four 1-foot by 1-foot pads (Exhibit 4). At the deepest point of the lift, it would be approximately 5 feet 10 inches below the waterline (Exhibit 4, Elevation Detail). The boat on the lift would sit approximately 5 feet above the waterline, extending above the shoreline bulkhead and may block some visibility from the uplands towards the lake. For installation, the assembled lift would be hand carried to its location. The boat lift would be operated by a hydraulic motor run by a solar powered battery. Installation would take place within the construction window established by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife, July 16-December 31, 2014 unless otherwise approved by the state agency. No off-site improvements, excavation or fill are proposed except for installation of additional plantings along the shoreline on the applicant's property. No existing trees or other vegetation are proposed to be removed and no modifications are requested. The applicant provided a detail of the exact boat that would be located on the boatlift (Exhibit 24). When stored, the boat would overhang the western edge of the bunk by approximately 3 feet (Exhibit 25 Site Plan Band Exhibit 26, pl-2, #1). The overhanging boat would be approximately 3 feet landward from the state-owned aquatic lands and inner harbor line and not intrude into the state owned lands. Shoreline at Project Location: The boat lift project location is within the Shoreline Jurisdiction, specifically Lake Washington -Reach C (Exhibit 3). The area is within the shoreline high intensity overlay district (RMC 4-3-090.c.4). As previously mentioned, there are two different shoreline environments at the project site. The shoreline surrounding the proposed boat lift is a cement bulkhead atop metal sheetpiles (Exhibit 5). Just north ofthe location is a more natural beach shoreline area that was restored and improved through the Barbee Mill subdivision. The subdivision was created from a 22-acre site that was previously the location of the Barbee Mill Company lumber mill. To restore the former industrial site to a parcel suitable for residential development, the mill buildings were demolished; fill soils were removed from behind the bulkhead; asphalt paving, a pier, the wooden bulkhead and piling associated with the mill operation were removed (Exhibit 9, page 3, "Project Description") to create the development you see today. To protect the shoreline restoration area just north of the subject site and limit the activities and uses waterward of the Barbee Mill site, DNR placed a portion of Lake Washington into a "Withdraw Area" fronting the northern section ofthe Barbee Mill development. The Withdraw! Area is located between the northern property line oft he Community Dock site and the northern property line of the most northern lake front lot of the Barbee Mill subdivision (4267 Williams Ave N). Community Dock/Pier: The Dock was originally intended to be located north of the subject site where the Barbee Mill community center is located. The purpose of the Community Dock is to provide transient moorage for 100 property owners from the Barbee Mill community, including those along the Withdraw! Final ERC Report_ LUA13-001640 _ Urban Boat Lift City of Renton Deportment of Community"' Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Report of December 1, 2014 Env1 mental Review Committee Report LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Page 4 of 19 Area, and private moorage for 1 property owner at 4125 Williams Ave N. In addition to a landing and day moorage facility for watercraft, the proposed community dock would be a suitable place for launching canoes and kayaks, sunbathing, swimming, fishing, water skiing and any number of other water sports and activities. The proposed lift would be located on the northside of the Community Dock. The Dock extends waterward from the community-owned parcel addressed 4151 Williams Ave N, through the community- owned tract, and into state-owned aquatic lands. The portion of the Community Dock west of the inner harbor line is located within a DNR Lease area with an agreement made between Department of Natural Resources and the Barbee Mill Community Organization (Exhibit 27, Lease No. 22-086046). Conditions of the Lease (Lease No. 22-086046) include the permitted and restricted uses and operations, term period, rent, improvements, subletting, financial security and insurance, maintenance, damage, and other elements. The proposed boat lift would not be located in the state-owned Lease Area. Shoreline Restoration Area North of the Site: As previously mentioned, the shoreline just north of the subject site was restored as part of the Barbee Mill residential development. Prior to restoration of the beach, the Lake Washington shoreline north of the subject property was heavily bulkheaded, back-filled and covered with impervious paving; numerous piling and substantial quantities of concrete rubble and other shoreline debris were on the site. Pursuant to the general development site remediation for the Barbee Mill residential subdivision, upland and in-water structures including the timber bulkhead and piling were removed, shoreline rubble was removed, fill soil was excavated to subgrade elevations, toe rock and a temporary quarry spa II erosion control berm was installed, and sand, gravel and rock materials were used to construct a beach to mimic natural conditions. Although the area of extensive remediation did not encompass the subject proposal site, a planting buffer of native vegetation was installed along all the lakefront lots, including the subject property. To provide enhanced habitat and improve shoreline function this portion of the shoreline in Barbee Mill was restored. The restored beach north of the subject site was placed in a DNR Withdraw! Area (Exhibit 23). This area is conditioned by DNR to limit disturbances. The Withdraw! Area does not allow residential docks or boatlifts to reduce potential impacts to the restored shoreline area with a goal that the restoration area mimic a natural environment and provide natural ecological function. Mitigation: A mitigation plan was provided with the project application that includes two Pacific Willow trees to be planted as close to the water as possible. The trees would be planted at the southwest corner of 4157 Williams Ave N property, just north ofthe boat lift location (Exhibit 26, pages 5-6, #6). The trees are proposed to assist in shoreline bank stabilization and water quality improvements, and possibly provide future bird roosting area. A monitoring and maintenance plan has also been provided to evaluate ongoing performance of the plantings over a 5 year period. Hand watering and hand weeding is proposed. Public and Agency Comments: Staff received comment letters from the public and agencies during the public comment period. Comments were received from a Barbee mill resident, the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR), the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) {Exhibits 11-18). The comments received have a range of concerns, from the Community Dock potentially becoming a permanent moorage facility, to the possible environmental impacts to the shoreline and habitat area, and that the subject location is bounded by the Withdraw! area to the north and Community Dock Lease area to the west to limit activities nearby. Following City staff's receipt of the public concerns, the project was placed on hold and the applicant was asked to provide responses. The applicant provided responses to comments (Exhibits 19 and 26). Final ERC Report_LUA13-001640_Urban Boat Lift City of Renton Department of Community°' Economic Development URBAN BOATLIFT Report of December 1, 2014 Envr. _ .mental Review Committee Report LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Page 5 of 19 Responses to each of the concerns were provided by the applicant with the response letter dated March 4, 2014 (Exhibit 19). The applicant's response to the outstanding concerns was provided to the commenters, reviewing agencies, and parties of record of the application. Following City staff's distribution of the March 4, 2014 applicant's response, the City received additional comments from DNR, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division, and the attorney representing Barbee Mill Community Organization (Exhibits 20-22). A meeting in the field at the project site was coordinated for July 29, 2014 to provide DNR, EPA, the Muckleshoot Tribes, Army Corps of Engineers, and City of Renton an opportunity to discuss project concerns and comments. It was understood that the majority of invitees were going to attend. On July 29'h, the attendees that arrived were limited to the Muckleshoot Tribes and City of Renton staff, who met with the applicants and representative of Connor Homes, the developer of Barbee Mill. The applicant provided notes from the on-site meeting (Exhibit 28). At this meeting the Tribes suggested a second meeting with only the Agencies to discuss the outstanding concerns. As such, staff attempted to setup a follow up meeting with the commenting agencies to discuss their concerns and identify potential resolutions. Following many attempts to bring the Agencies together, a meeting was never realized. It is the City's responsibility to process the subject application as required by the RCW (Revised Code of Washington) Regulatory Reform Act. Therefore, the City has chosen to move forward to the application review process. Continued concerns ofthe commenters are briefly listed below. Comment letters are provided as exhibits to this report (Exhibits 11-18 and Exhibits 20-22). Barbee Mill Resident (Exhibit 11): • The proposal would set precedence for permanent moorage along the Community Dock. The HOA established rules that only transient moorage is allowed at the Community Dock and whether the proposal ties up to the dock or not is irrelevant as it would be parallel to the dock and occupy water next to the dock. • Boatlift would block access to the space along the dock and is limited to one residence where the dock is intended for use by many. State Department of Natural Resources {Exhibits 12 and 22): • Access to the proposed boatlift area would cross through the Withdraw! Area and Community Dock aquatic lease agreement areas. Access is very limited in the two agreements. • Placement of the boat on the boat lift could encumber/cross into state-owned aquatic lands and is not consistent with the permitted use of state-owned aquatics lands under the DNR Lease. • The proposal would subject the restoration Withdraw! Area to the north and shorelands to potential environmental impacts {including increased shading impacts to aquatic life, increased vessel wake impacting natural shoreline processes due to larger and more frequent wave action, scour and sediment erosion through prop scour, crushing of benthic habitat, and heightened potential for release of contaminants into the water column). • DNR does not support the project for approval. Muckleshoot Tribes (Exhibits 13 and 21): • Proposal location is near With drawl area that contains contaminated sediment, studies need to consider impacts to contaminated area through motorized watercraft and operation of boatlift. Final ERC Report_LUA13-001640_ Urban Boat Lift City of Renton Department of Community"' Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Report of December 1, 2014 Env .. _ .. mental Review Committee Report LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Page 6 of 19 • The boat motor has potential to adversely affect restoration area through increased wave action that can adversely affect natural shoreline processes and vegetation growth. • New freestanding boatlift and boat in the nearshore could cause juvenile salmon to avoid area and increase their risk of predation. • Boatlift would permanently displace benthic habitat. • Permanent moorage could create conditions that interfere with Tribe fishing access. • Provided comments during Community Dock review process to condition the project to allow only one permanent moorage spot for a boatlift or jetski, in regards to the potential for permanent and increased moorage at the dock. Community Dock conditioned to only allow one permanent moorage location, transient limited moorage for other subdivision property owners, and the DNR lease states there is no other use beyond that. The proposal represents part of a larger effort to create permanent moorage at the Community Dock through piecemeal approvals. • The easement is new information for the HOA and Tribes. • Applicant responses are inadequate and inconsistent with studies about juvenile salmon. • Two willows for mitigation plantings may not be sufficient and contingency plan is needed. If approved, monitoring reports for project should be sent to Tribes. Federal Environmental Protection Agency (Exhibit 14): • EPA review will be coordinated with the Army Corps of Engineers. • Immediate concern of proposal is the nature and extent of the impact of water skiing or any other aquatic activities, that could occur within the near shore area of the Quendall Terminals Superfund site [to the north] or, that could cause contaminated sediments to be deposited in sediments at the Superfund Site. Federal Army Corps of Engineers (Exhibit 30): • Navigation is concern for proposed location. • Corps will work with EPA due to contamination and NMFS due to concerns for salmon id impacts in the nearshore, and work to address tribal concerns. Historical Background: Action Land Use File No. Ordinance No. Date Comprehensive Plan N/A 5100 11/01/04 Zoning, COR to R-10 5626 9/19/2011 Annexation N/A 1791 09/09/1959 Lot Line Adjustment; LUAl0-023 N/A 03/23/10 4151 Williams Ave N Community Dock/Pier LUAl0-006 N/A 03/31/12 Public Services: 1. Utilities a. Water: Water service would be provided by the City of Renton. Final ERC Report_LUA13-001640_Urban Boot Lift City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Envir.., .. mental Review Committee Report LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Report of December 1, 2014 Page 7 of 19 b. Sewer: Sewer service would be provided by the City of Renton. 2. Surface/Storm Water: There is an existing storm conveyance system. 3. Streets: Williams Ave N is a paved, two-lane, public street with curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. 4. Police and Fire Protection: City of Renton Police and Fire Departments provide service. PART TWO: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In compliance with RCW 43.21C.240, the following environmental (SEPA) review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. A. ENVIRONMENTAL THRESHOLD RECOMMENDATION Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials: Issue a DNS-M with a 14-day Appeal Period. B. MITIGATION MEASURES 1. When docking the motorized watercraft on the boat lift, the engine shall be required to be shut off at the westerly end of Community Dock. Once the engine has been shut off the motorized watercraft shall be walked to the boatlift floating the boat into place on the boatlift. The same procedure shall be utilized when launching the watercraft. 2. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Biological Study, prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments, dated January 19, 2010 (Exhibit 8), Addendum to the Biological Study, prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments, dated August 5, 2013, and the recommendations for new plantings monitoring and maintenance provided in the Response to Concerns document, prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments, submitted March 4, 2014 (Exhibit 26). Recommendations included in the documents include but are not limited to the following: o Any construction equipment shall be operated from an out-of-water location whenever possible and will be operated in a manner that minimizes the suspension of particulates. o All equipment used in or around water shall be clean and inspected daily prior to use to ensure that the equipment has no fluid leaks. Should a leak develop during use, the leaking equipment shall be removed from the site immediately and not used again until it has been adequately repaired. o No equipment shall be stored or fueled so close to a surface of water that the activity could adversely affect the waterbody. 3. Construction and/or installation of the boat lift shall take place only during the Department of Fish and Wildlife approved construction window from July 16 through December 31 (Exhibit 35), unless written approval is provided by WDFW with an alternative approved time. 4. If at any time, as a result of project activities, fish are observed in distress, a fish kill occurs, or water quality problems develop (including equipment leaks or spills), operations shall immediately cease and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and the Final ERC Report_LUA13-001640_Urban Boat Lift City of Renton Deportment of Community & "-,mic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Report of December 1, 2014 En :.1nmental Review Committee Report LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Page 8 of 19 Washington Department of Ecology (DOE) shall be contacted immediately. Work shall not resume until further approval is given by the WDFW and DOE. 5. The applicant shall provide an updated shoreline mitigation planting plan that provides appropriate mitigation plantings, to be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to approval of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. 6. An Addendum or Memorandum for the submitted Biological and Lake Studies shall be provided by the applicant that identifies no net loss of ecological functions and values consistent with the City's Shoreline Master Program, and the document shall be provided to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to approval of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. Final ERC Report_LUA13-001640_Urban Boat Lift City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Env,, .... nmental Review Committee Report LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Report of December 1, 2014 Page 9 of 19 c. EXHIBITS: Exhibit 1: Exhibit 2: Exhibit 3: Exhibit 4: Exhibit 5: Exhibit 6: Exhibit 7: Exhibit 8: Exhibit 9: Exhibit 10: Exhibit 11: Exhibit 12: Exhibit 13: Exhibit 14: Exhibit 15: Exhibit 16: Exhibit 17: Exhibit 18: Exhibit 19: Exhibit 20: Exhibit 21: Exhibit 22: Exhibit 23: Exhibit 24: Exhibit 25: Exhibit 26: Exhibit 27: Exhibit 28: Exhibit 29: Exhibit 30: Exhibit 31: Exhibit 32: Exhibit 33: Exhibit 34: Exhibit 35: Environmental Review Committee Report There is no exhibit Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Vicinity Map Site Plan, Revised: "Al.O and Figure 1. Revised site plan" Pictures of subject site and bulkhead area Barbee Mill Plat; Subject site location Zoning Map Biological Evaluation/Habitat Data Report, prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments, dated January 19, 2010 Lake and Stream Study, prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments, dated January 19, 2010 Addendum to Biological Evaluation, prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments, dated August 5, 2013 Public Comment; Patti Klink Public Comment; Department of Natural Resources #1 Public Comment; Muckleshoot Tribes #1 Public Comment; Environmental Protection Agency Public Comment; Attorney for Barbee Mill Homeowners Association #1 Public Comment; Ruth Kidd Public Comment; Torben Hollingsworth Public Comment; Gary Sanford Applicant Responses to "On-hold" letter, dated March 4, 2014 and includes additional biological evaluation responses from Marine Surveys and Assessments Public Comment; Attorney for Barbee Mill Homeowners Association #2 Public Comment; Muckleshoot Tribes #2 Public Comment; Department of Natural Resources #2 Site Survey, CORE Engineers Boat Specifications Site Plan "B", with mitigation plantings Marine Surveys and Assessments responses to public comments (also in Exhibit 19) lease Area "Aquatic Lands lease" between DNR and Barbee Mill Community Organization Applicant's notes from July 29, 2014 meeting Lally Consulting Memo, dated November 2, 2011 Army Corps of Engineers email, July 18, 2014 Advisory Notes to Applicant Construction Mitigation Plan Environmental Checklist Plat and Community Tract Affidavit for Correction Request, email dated July 30, 2014 Installation Time Window, email dated November 17, 2014, from Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Final ERC Report_LUA13-001640_Urban Boat Lift City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOATLIFT Report of December 1, 2014 D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Envi, v .. mental Review Committee Report WAH-001640, ECF, SM Page 10 of 19 The Proposal was circulated and reviewed by various City Departments and Divisions to determine whether the applicant has adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to occur in can junction with the proposed development. Staff reviewers have identified that the proposal is likely to have the following probable impacts: 1. Earth Impacts: The Shoreline Master Program standards require that "all lifts are placed as far waterward as feasible and safe" (RMC 4-3-090E, Table Note 6). Previously approved boat lifts to the south of the subject site have been located in a similar distance from the bulkhead as the proposed boat lift (Exhibit 4, associated with 4119 Williams Ave N). The boat lift could be proposed further into the water, however it would then be located within the DNR Lease Area for the Community Dock and would be in conflict with the Lease's allowed activities. According to the submitted Addendum (Exhibit 10, page 2) the applicant has proposed the boat lift at the subject location due to the requirement by the Shoreline Master Program that "development and use shall be designed in a manner that directs land alteration to the least sensitive portions of the site" (RMC 4-3-090D.5.b.i). The Addendum to the Biological Habitat evaluation (Exhibit 10, p2 "Project Information") analyzes the two city code sections and states the premise of the proposed location is to minimize any potential impact. The Addendum states the proposed location at the beginning of the Community Dock next to the concrete and metal bulkhead is because the area is already developed and disturbed and therefore is the least sensitive portion ofthe site. During the July 29, 2014 meeting at the project site, attendees were able to view the substrate and rocks at the bottom of the lake where the boatlift would be located. The bulkheads create a corner in the proposed location, where the water surface and lake bottom receive shading already from the Community Dock and bulkhead walls. As a result of observations in the field and review of the applicant's submitted documents, staff concurs with the conclusions in the applicant's Addendum to the Biological Habitat Evaluation, that the proposed location is the least sensitive area. As already mentioned, the applicant provided required studies as part of the application -a Biological Evaluation/Habitat Data Report (Exhibit 8), a Lake and Stream Study (Exhibit 9), and Addendum to the Biological Evaluation (Exhibit 10). Both the Biological Evaluation/Habitat Report and Lake and Stream Study are reports submitted previously for the Barbee Mill Community Dock Project (LUAl0-006) in 2010. The Addendum is a new document for this project specifically, written by the same authors of the community dock biological studies (Exhibit 4). The general project area is located at the former Barbee Mill lumber mill site which is now the Barbee Mill residential subdivision. The proposed lift would be located within Lake Washington along the subdivision's shoreline, which is a Shoreline of the State and falls under the City's regulated Shoreline Jurisdiction (Exhibit 3). The lift would be specifically located just south of Lot 34 (4157 Williams Ave N) where the applicants reside and just west of the community-owned tract at 4151 Williams Ave N. The shoreline surrounding the proposed boatlift area consists of a sheet pile and concrete bulkhead. The land is continuously below water through the maintained lake water level. On the uplands side of the mentioned bulkhead, native vegetation along the shoreline has been planted through the residential subdivision development and as part of the Community Dock construction. The substrate or lake bottom where the subject boat lift would be located consists of small angular rock and cobble. The Final ERC Report_LUA13-001640_Urban Boat Lift City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Report of December 1, 2014 Env,, vnmental Review Committee Report LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Page 11 of 19 boat lift would be located on the northside of the community dock and south of the sheet pile and concrete bulkhead (Exhibit 5). Starting on the westerly portion of the northern bulkhead wall, the shoreline was improved as mentioned in the background section above, through the shoreline remediation that occurred as part of the Barbee Mill residential development. This improved shoreline is identified as the shoreline area of the DNR With drawl area, starting in front of the applicant's home and going to the northern edge of the Barbee Mill development where it shares a common property line with the Quendall Terminals site. The submitted Addendum to the Biological Evaluation states that "the addition of this proposed boat lift to the already completed dock at the project location is expected to have little or no impact on the aquatic habitat as this area is already heavily developed and disturbed" (Exhibit 10, page 2). The study also concludes that the specific siting of the lift in the corner area of the bulkhead is designed to minimize any potential impact to the shoreline as the lift is proposed in the most landward and least sensitive area along the community dock. The Community Dock project consisted of a barge being brought to the subject site to drive pilings into the lake bottom and build a fully grated structure 170 plus feet waterward from the shoreline. That project was much larger in scale in regards to potential impacts to the subject site than the proposed addition of a freestanding boatlift that would not require a barge and the driving of pilings. The Addendum mentions the Community Dock Biological Evaluation details potential impacts for that project that can be used for the proposed subject boat lift project (Exhibit 10, page 2). Potential impacts identified in the Community Dock project Biological report (Exhibit 8) and Lake and Stream report (Exhibit 9) include impacts to vegetation, erosion, endangered and state protected species, overwater structures and shading. Conservation and mitigation measures were recommended and required as part ofthe dock project. Vegetation and Species impacts identified in the report are discussed in their respective Environmental Elements subsections. Specific to Earth, there was no clearing, grading, fill, or excavation associated with the dock and none are associated with the proposed boat lift (Exhibit 8, page 4). The applicant has indicated that the proposed boat lift would be brought to the site pre-constructed. The applicant's construction mitigation plan (Exhibit 32) states that no erosion would occur as part of construction. The Environmental Checklist (Exhibit 33, page 3 "Earth") identifies that there would not be impacts to the earth. The submitted reports and Addendum were forwarded to public agencies and available for general public review. The reviewing agencies identified areas of concern related to potential impacts to the Earth. Earth related comments and concerns received from the reviewing agencies and public following their review, identified potential impacts to the area through scour and sediment erosion, the boat's causing of increased wave action that could impact the substrate lake bottom, contaminated lands nearby and movement of contaminants, crushing of benthic habitat (vegetation in the lake), and impacts to the restored shoreline. City staff put the subject project on-hold following receipt of the public comments and outstanding concerns and asked the applicant to provide response. The applicant provided a response (Exhibit 19) and the authors of the submitted biological evaluations and addendum provided additional biological responses to the outstanding concerns (Exhibit 26). The following bullets provide details as to each of the Earth related concerns: Final ERC Report_LUA13-001640_Urban Boat Lift City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Report of December 1, 2014 Envi, v .. menta/ Review Committee Report LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Page 12 of 19 • Contaminants: The Quendall Terminals site north of the Barbee Mill residential area is a Superfund site with known contaminants. Barbee Mill redevelopment also went through extensive remediation overseen by the Department of Ecology through the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) to remove contaminants from the shoreline area. The Tribes continue to comment that there is no consideration in the application's submitted Environmental Checklist or Lake and Stream study about the potential impacts from the new boatlift and the operation of a boat to the remediated sediment. There is concern that either a boat or water activity near the site could disturb those contaminants or that watercraft and related activities could cause other contaminated sediments from outside the area to be deposited in sediments at the Quendall Superfund Site. The Quendall site is located approximately 500 feet north of the subject site. The response from the applicant (Exhibit 26) states that there would not be any impact on the nearshore of the Quendall site from the proposal, where the water near the site is not conducive for water activities due to its shallow depth and physical obstructions. The applicant states that "the fact that they [boat and lift] have the potential to stir up sediments at the Barbee Mill toxic clean-up site must be addressed" (Exhibit 26, p3-4, "6. Heightened potential for release of contaminants into the water column"). The applicant response continues to state that: "DOE has done extensive monitoring of the Barbee Mill toxic clean-up site. In 1999, and again in 2003, offshore sediment was removed from the site for characterization. Though it did have elevated concentrations of wood waste and carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, DOE concluded that "No Further Action" was required and that there were no restrictions on sediment use. Since this time, the Barbee Mill Co. Inc has removed contaminated sediments and wood from Lake Washington along the site ... A further contamination concern is arsenic, which has been found in groundwater, porewater (water within the sediment) and sediments at the site. To reduce the ability of arsenic to run off to Lake Washington, a passive attenuation zone was installed at the down-slope property boundary of the former mill site ... Bioassays of this sediment were completed with the benthic macroinvertebrates and there were no significant impacts on survival or growth. It appears that the post-cleanup sediment at Barbee Mill does not pose a danger to benthic macroinvertebrates, an important food source for fish. Even ifthe boat lift "stirs up" sediment, during construction or use, the resuspension of this sediment will not be likely to introduce dangerous concentrations of contaminants." • Scour and Erosion: Multiple comments were received that stated a motorized watercraft in the subject location will likely create scour and erosion from propeller wash that could cause a release of nearby contaminants into the water column adversely affecting fish and benthic vertebrates. Also, the Muckleshoot Tribes comment (Exhibits 13 and 21) identifies that scour impacts were considered as part of the Community Dock project. For the Dock project, Lally Consulting provided scour mitigation measures (Exhibit 29) and the Tribes state that the mitigation measures were required for obtaining federal Army Corps permits for the Community Dock. • Shoreline impacts: Department of Natural Resources and the Muckleshoot Tribe state concerns that the increased vessel wake from the boat accessing the boatlift could impact natural shoreline processes at the restored beach to the north of the subject site, due to larger and more frequent wave action. The motorized watercraft could cause larger and more frequent Final ERC Report_LUA13-001640_Urban Boat Lift City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Report of December 1, 2014 Envtrunmenta/ Review Committee Report LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Page 13 of 19 wave action in its entering and exiting of the site and as it is underway in Lake Washington. The applicant's response to these concerns states that the major shoreline impact from vessel traffic is erosion due to boat generated wake waves. Although at the subject site there is limited potential for shoreline erosion. The shoreline characteristics in the proposed boat lift location consist of bulkheaded shoreline and a community dock. The applicant states that there is limited potential for impact to natural shoreline processes due to the physical constraints of the site, with the bulkhead and community dock confining the space and boat maneuvering (Exhibit 26, p2-3 #3). The lake bottom, or substrate, in the proposal location is continuously submerged underwater. The applicant's responses to public and agency concerns (Exhibit 26, p2-3, #3) states that due to the low boat speeds necessary to access to the boatlift area and that there is no natural shoreline at the subject site would make shoreline erosion unlikely. Further, in regards to both shoreline types at the subject site and to the north, the applicant's report states that (Exhibit 26, p2-3, #3): "Once the boat is past the existing dock and under way, it will obviously travel at speeds that result in a wake, and ultimately, shoreline wave action ... From the limited research available, it is safe to assume that every recreational motor boat on Lake Washington does have the potential to contribute to shoreline erosion ... However, it is not reasonable to assume that the construction of this boat lift will directly add to an increase in shoreline erosion via larger and more frequent waves once underway ... Because the project is unlikely to result in larger or more frequent waves while entering/exiting the dock, and is only adding a fractional increase in the total lake traffic while underway, additional shoreline erosion is unlikely." Crushing of Benthic Habitat: Both DNR and the Muckleshoot Tribes identify concern for the crushing of the benthic habitat and sediments layers below the proposed lift. The applicant provides a response (Exhibit 26, page 3, #5) to the concerns, where the pads ofthe proposed lift would contact benthic habitat and the bottom of the lake with its four corner foot pads. The submitted materials states that the total area impacted will be small due to the small footprint of the lift's foot pads. Further, the applicant's report states that the boat would not touch the benthic habitat and sediment on the lake bottom at the lowest level of the lake, with the closest the boat would come to sediment at approximately 21 inches above the lake bottom in a worst case condition (Exhibit 26, page 3, #5). Based on the above applicant's responses to comments and staff evaluation, it is determined that limited impact is expected, to sediment and the lake bottom at the subject site, beyond normal use of the lake by other boaters and boats that would utilize the community dock. However, to ensure that near shore engine usage is avoided to the extent feasible to reduce any potential impact to stir up sediment beyond normal boater activity, staff recommends mitigation measures that have been discussed with the applicants. The identified concerns and potential mitigation measures were discussed at the on-site meeting on July 29, 2014 (Exhibit 28). Staff recommends that the engine of the watercraft that would locate on the subject boatlift turn off its engine at the furthest point from the shore and boatlift as feasible to not potentially stir up sediments and limit the wave action along the bulkhead and shoreline. Once the engine is cut, the watercraft would be walked to the boatlift location for parking and reverse the order when leaving the boat lift area, walking the watercraft out to the furthest point of the dock where the engine would be started. Final ERC Report_LUA13-001640_Urban Boat Lift City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Report of December 1, 2014 Mitigation Measures: Env1. vnmental Review Committee Report LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Page 14 of 19 • When docking the motorized watercraft on the boat lift, the engine shall be required to be shut off at the westerly end of Community Dock. Once the engine has been shut off the motorized watercraft shall be walked to the boat lift floating the boat into place on the boatlift. The same procedure shall be utilized when launching the watercraft. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, Shoreline Master Program, MTCA. 2. Water (Streams/Lakes) Impacts: The possibility of sediment being stirred up and possible contaminated sediments being stirred up is analyzed in the previous Earth subsection. The evaluation below covers fluids used as part of construction and by the proposed lift and boat that would use the lift, where there are potential impacts from leaking fluids and boat exhaust into the water. As mentioned previously, the Addendum to the biological reports (Exhibit 10) mentions the biological evaluation and lake and stream study from the Community Dock project provide a discussion of impacts for this proposal. The Addendum states, on page 2, that any construction equipment would be operated from an out-of-water location whenever possible and operated in a manner that minimizes the suspension of particulates in the water. Staff understands that the boat lift would be delivered to the site or constructed off-site. The Addendum also states that there could be impact to water through fluids used by the lift. The Addendum suggests a recommendation that all equipment used as part of construction and that the boat lift with its hydraulic fluids, be inspected daily prior to use to ensure that the equipment has no fluid leaks and that any leaking equipment be removed from the site immediately and not used again until it has been adequately repaired. The Addendum also recommends that no equipment shall be stored or fueled so close to a surface water that the activity could adversely affect the waterbody {Exhibit 10, page 2). As mentioned in the Earth subsection, the submitted reports were sent to reviewing agencies. The applicant provided response {Exhibit 19) and the authors of the submitted biological evaluations and addendum provided additional biological responses to the outstanding concerns (Exhibit 26). The following provides analysis of the Water related concerns: The applicant response included additional biological evaluation from Marine Surveys and Assessments company {Exhibit 26), that states the motor boat and boatlift use fluids and those fluids could be released into the water. The report also provides details of the possible stirring and movement of contaminants near the site into the water, given the location at the remediated Barbee Mill site. Additionally, the report reiterates what was mentioned in the Addendum, that the boat lift uses fluids to function. The boat also uses gasoline and fluids to function. The Exhibit 26 report states they inherently could release fluids into the water. Additional potential impact to the water would be through the boat's emissions and exhaust as the motor functions. The applicant's report {Exhibit 26, p3-4, #6) states that recreational motor boats have the potential to release metals and hydrocarbons into the water through exhaust and that most studies have found there are minimal effects on aquatic organisms due to dilution and that most hydrocarbons disperse quickly in water. Based on the above applicant's responses to comments and staff evaluation, it is determined that limited impact is expected, to water, beyond normal boater use of the lake by other boaters and boats that would utilize the Community Dock. However, to ensure that water impacts are avoided to the extent feasible to reduce any potential impact, staff would recommend Marine Surveys and Assessments' recommended mitigation measures, where any construction equipment and the boat lift Final ERC Report_LUA13-001640_Urban Boat Lift City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Report of December 1, 2014 Envt,vnmental Review Committee Report LUAl3-00l640, ECF, SM Page 15 of 19 be inspected on a daily basis for leakage and that equipment and fuel or liquids be stored so close to the surface of the lake that the activity could adversely affect the water. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Biological Study, prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments, dated January 19, 2010 (Exhibit 8), Addendum to the Biological Study, prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments, dated August 5, 2013, and the recommendations for new planting monitoring and maintenance provided in the Response to Concerns document, prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments, submitted March 4, 2014 (Exhibit 26). Recommendation included in the documents include but are not limited to the following: • Any construction equipment shall be operated from an out-of-water location whenever possible and will be operated in a manner that minimizes the suspension of particulates. • All equipment used in or around water shall be clean and inspected daily prior to use to ensure that the equipment has no fluid leaks. Should a leak develop during use, the leaking equipment shall be removed from the site immediately and not used again until it has been adequately repaired. • No equipment shall be stored or fueled so close to a surface of water that the activity could adversely affect the waterbody. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, Shoreline Master Program. 3. Plants Impacts: The proposed project would take place primarily in-water and no disturbance of the restored upland vegetation would occur although discussion of the upland plants are analyzed below. Also discussed is the shading of aquatic vegetation is a possibility by the boat lift structure and boat located on the lift which could cause impacts to aquatic plants. As mentioned previously, the Addendum (Exhibit 10) to the biological reports states that the original Community Dock studies provide review of the subject proposal's potential impacts. The Lake study identifies that upland restoration of the overall Barbee Mill site involved planting along the Lake Washington shoreline including plantings on the subject property (Exhibit 9). The Lake study concludes existing planted riparian vegetation and additional plantings from the Community Dock project would assist in restoring the ecological function of Lake Washington (Exhibit 9, pages 4-5). The Lake study further identifies that the plantings would be overhanging, providing shade and predator protection for fish and aquatic invertebrates; concluding that the planted riparian vegetation will add significant organic matter to the lake substrate in the form of leaves and woody debris that fall and wash into the Lake (Exhibit 9, page 5). Vegetation planted as part of the subdivision and Community Dock projects are to provide additional source of food, shelter and shade for aquatic invertebrates and fish and also provide food and shelter for terrestrial insects which become a food source for birds and animals. The application did not initially provide for any additional plantings as part of the proposed project. As mentioned previously, the submitted reports and application were sent to reviewing agencies. The reviewing agencies provided comments and concerns about the potential impacts of the boat lift and boat accessing the site, including concerns about the plants along the shoreline and impacts to existing aquatic vegetation. The applicant provided response to the concerns (Exhibit 19) and the authors of the submitted Biological evaluations and Addendum provided additional biological responses to the Final ERC Report_WA13-001640_Urban Boat Lift City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Report of December l, 2014 Env,, v,,mental Review Committee Report LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Page 16 of 19 outstanding concerns {Exhibit 26). Additionally, at the on-site meeting with the applicant, city staff and Muckleshoot Tribe, mitigation plantings were discussed. The lift and boat could cause impacts to aquatic vegetation through shading. The applicant's additional responses to concerns {Exhibit 26, p2, #2) provides analysis of the potential impacts from a boat lift and a description of the actual vegetation that is near the project site. The study recognizes that there will be increased shading impacts to aquatic vegetation, but the extent of the impact depends on the presence of aquatic vegetation, and in this specific location the site is a shaded "pocket" near shore without "appreciable aquatic vegetation." The report references a dive survey performed at the site in March 2007. The dive found two types of aquatic vegetation, invasive Eurasian milfoil, and an unidentified filamentous alga. The milfoil was first noted approximately 100 feet waterward of the current bulkhead and the alga was first noted 25 feet waterward of the current bulkhead {Exhibit 26, p2, #2). The proposed location of the boatlift is landward of the noted aquatic vegetation by the dive study. Based on the documented aquatic vegetation in the area and field observations by staff, limited impacts, if any, are anticipated from the placement of the proposed boatlift to aquatic vegetation. For non-aquatic vegetation, the applicant updated their proposal to include mitigation plantings in the form of two Willow trees. The proposed vegetation would assist with shoreline stabilization, water quality, and potential future use by birds (Exhibit 26, page 5). At this time, the Barbee Mill Community Association objects to the proposed trees {Exhibit 20) where any plantings in the subdivision have to be approved by the association. The applicant has provided a more recent letter stating the plantings would be allowed (Exhibit 28) although the community association has possibly not reviewed the letter. Recently planted riparian vegetation through the subdivision development and Community Dock in combination with the proposed project would benefit fish by assisting in restoration of the ecological function of Lake Washington. The two Willows could provide shading, leaves, and woody debris overtime that could contribute to the restoration efforts along the shoreline just north of the boatlift. The proposed Willow trees may also provide roosting areas for birds overtime. Staff recommends, as a mitigation measure, that he applicant provide an updated shoreline mitigation planting plan that provides appropriate mitigation plantings. The plan is to be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to submittal of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. Staff also recommends to the applicant that the Home Owners Association approval of the updated mitigation planting plan be provided prior to issuance of the required Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. The mitigation planting plan includes monitoring and maintenance, with performance standards and a contingency plan (Exhibit 26, p5-6) as required by RMC. The plantings for this project would most likely be monitored by the Army Corps, as an Army Corps permit would be required for the installation of the boatlift. The Muckleshoot Tribes have requested that whatever monitoring reports are generated for this project need to be provided to the Tribes as a condition of a Shoreline permit. Staff will likely include a condition that the monitoring reports be provided to the Muckleshoot Tribes as part of any Shoreline permit. Based on the above applicant's responses to comments and staff evaluation, it is determined that limited impact is expected, to plants in water and in the uplands with the proposed location of the boatlift and addition of mitigation plantings along the shoreline. As mentioned above, the HOA would Final ERC Report_WA13-001640_Urban Boat Lift City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Report of December 1, 2014 Envirvnmental Review Committee Report LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Page 17 of 19 need to provide approval of the planting plan prior to issuance of the Shoreline permit and monitoring reports of the mitigation plantings would be required to be provided to the Muckleshoot Tribes as a condition of approval of the Shoreline permit. Mitigation Measures: • The applicant shall provide an updated shoreline mitigation planting plan that provides appropriate mitigation plantings, to be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to submittal of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, Shoreline Master Program. 4. Animals Impacts: As mentioned previously, the Addendum (Exhibit 10) to the biological reports states that the original Community Dock studies review the potential shoreline impacts. The Lake and Stream Study (Exhibit 9) and the Biological Evaluation/Habitat Data Report (Exhibit 8) submitted for the proposed project have identified the following bird species observed on or near the project site: hawks, herons, eagles, quail, osprey, cormorants and songbirds. In addition, the studies indicate that salmonids observed at the site include salmon and trout. Salmonids known to be present in southern Lake Washington include Puget Sound Chinook salmon, Coho salmon, sockeye salmon, steelhead trout, bull trout and cutthroat trout. Puget Sound Chinook, Puget Sound steelhead and bull trout are all listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Previous shoreline remediation accomplished in conjunction with the development of the Barbee Mill plat was designed to be consistent with Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 8 Conservation Plan recommendations (Exhibit 9, page 5). As a result of remediation, shoreline that was previously unsuitable habitat for fish and other aquatic life due to extensive shoreline modifications and industrial use of the site has been restored. The restored gravel substrate and gently sloping bottom should provide favorable habitat for winter rearing of salmon fry. The new gravel substrate to the north and the existing cobble on the subject site should be suitable habitat for benthic invertebrates which would likely attract juvenile salmon ids. Protected wildlife in Washington State present from time to time within the general Barbee Mill community area includes the marbled murrelet and the bald eagle (Exhibit 8, page 4). The marbled murrelet is classified as a "threatened species," a species likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout a significant portion of their range within the state without cooperative management or removal ofthreats. The bald eagle is no longer on the list ofthreatened or endangered species under the Endangered Species Act but continues to be protected by the Bald and Golden Eagles Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and is protected as a "sensitive species" in Washington. The submitted reports were sent to public agencies as previously mentioned for review. Public and agency comments identified concerns (Exhibits 11-18) about the potential impacts of the boat lift and boat accessing the site, including concerns about the fish and aquatic life in the area. Following receipt of the concerns, the applicant provided response to the concerns (Exhibit 19) and the authors of the submitted biological evaluations and addendum provided additional biological responses to the outstanding concerns (Exhibit 26). The concerns from the Muckleshoot Tribes identified potential impact to juvenile salmon in the area of the lift. A boatlift in the proposed location and a boat accessing the proposed location could cause juvenile salmon to avoid the nearshore area and increase their risk of predation according to concerns identified the Muckleshoot Tribes (Exhibit 13). The applicant provided response to this concern (Exhibit Final ERC Report_LUA13-001640_Urban Boat Lift City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOATLIFT Report of December 1, 2014 Envirunmental Review Committee Report LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Page 18 of 19 26, p4, #2), stating that "based on existing research, it cannot be stated that the presence of this small nearshore structure will increase the predation rates of juvenile salmon." The Muckleshoot Tribes indicated in an e-mail (Exhibit 21) response to the applicant's March 4, 2014 responses to outstanding questions that the applicant's response to their initial comments was inadequate and inconsistent with Lake Washington specific research. The Tribe's email further states that some of the scientific references found in the applicant's reports are based on marine waters and not fresh water lakes like Lake Washington. In review of the scientific literature used for the Community Dock Biological Evaluation, a number of Lake Washington specific studies (Exhibit 8, page 13) are referenced, although the additional biological responses by the applicant in Exhibit 26 do not include Lake Washington specific studies (page 7). To provide clarification of the proposal's mitigation and impacts to the shoreline, staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the applicant provide an Addendum or Memorandum identify whether there is a no net loss to ecological function and values to be consistent with the City's Shoreline Master Program. Based on the above applicant's responses to comments and staff evaluation, it is determined that limited impact is expected, to fish, in the proposed location of the boatlift and through use of the boat to access the location. Further, if at any time, as a result of project activities, fish are observed in distress, a fish kill occurs, or water quality problems develop (including equipment leaks or spills), operations shall immediately cease and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and the Washington Department of Ecology (DOE) shall be contacted immediately. Work shall not resume until further approval is given by the WDFW and DOE. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife has established an in water construction window for this portion of Lake Washington. The construction window allows for installation of a boat lift between July 16 and December 31 (Exhibit 35). Staff recommends that the applicant be required to adhere to this established construction and/or installation window, unless alternative dates are approved by WDFW. Mitigation Measures: • Construction and/or installation shall take place only during the Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) approved construction window from July 16 through December 31 (Exhibit 35), unless written approval is provided by WDFW. • If at any time, as a result of project activities, fish are observed in distress, a fish kill occurs, or water quality problems develop (including equipment leaks or spills), operations shall immediately cease and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and the Washington Department of Ecology (DOE) shall be contacted immediately. Work shall not resume until further approval is given by the WDFW and DOE. • An Addendum or Memorandum for the submitted Biological and Lake Studies shall be provided by the applicant that identifies no net loss of ecological functions and values consistent with the City's Shoreline Master Program, and provided to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to submittal of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the boat lift. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, Shoreline Master Program. 5. Environmental Health Impacts: The proposed location is in the approximate location of a previously functioning industrial lumber mill site. Extensive restoration and removal of lumber mill fill soils was conducted as part of the Final ERC Report_LUA13-001640_Urban Boat Lift City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development URBAN BOAT LIFT Report of December 1, 2014 Env,, ..,, ,mental Review Committee Report LUA13-001640, ECF, SM Page 19 of 19 site development for Barbee Mill residential community through the MTCA clean-up process. Greater detail about the mill clean-up is provided in the submitted and Lake Study (Exhibit 9, subsection "3. Shoreline Restoration," page 4) and was mentioned above in this report's "Project/Background" subsection. Also within the general vicinity of the subject site, there is a Superfund Site to the north, approximately 500 feet to the north, known as the Quendall Terminals site (PID #292405-9002). The Quendall site's shoreline begins directly north of the previously mentioned DNR Withdraw! Area. Potential movement of sediments and contaminants are analyzed in the first section "1. Earth". The applicant provided related responses to environmental health concerns in their submitted studies including Exhibit 26. The mitigation measures required above under "1. Earth" is expected to reduce the potential for stirring up any contaminated soils that could result in environmental health impacts as such no further mitigation is needed. Mitigation Measures: N/A Nexus: N/A E. COMMENTS OF REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS The proposal has been circulated to City Department and Division Reviewers. Where applicable, their comments have been incorporated into the text of this report. ,/ Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File and may be attached to this report. The Environmental Determination decision will become final if the decisions are not appealed within the 14-day appeal period (RCW 43-21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-680). Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing together with the required fee to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, on or before 5:00 p.m. on December 19, 2015. RMC 4-8-110 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner and additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall-J'h Floor, (425) 430-6510. Final ERC Report_LUA13-001640_ Urban Boat Lift ' . Urban Boat Lift Project -Shoreline m >< ::c .... 0:, .... """ w 107 0 54 107 WGS_ 1964_ Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Feet I I f i I j J ' 1 jZ ·o h- j 'lz .w I Cl'. i J ! 1 ' • I \ ,i \,-~ ! 1. ! ! 4217 4211 4205 4175 4169 4163 L VI' -\.., 4157 4151 4125 4119 l J l • I " )\ ;' \ 3 . \fl I, I \ 10021008 -· ,_ \. / ,19:(~, "' 4122 1032 1026 1104 1038 1014 ,...-/,s\,~--- /',...,.,/ ~ ~ 1020 ./ 1015 1009 1003 1033 1021 MlilY Cr ' ! I \ 4113 4118 4112 i j ' i i I i;//: lE i~ lQf i I \ \ \ Information Technology -GIS RentonMapSupport@Rentonwa.gov 1110712014 I I 4107 / i 4101 .1 • 4063 .1 1 • / 4057 4051 4106 ft l C · A f .... ,./ ~ A.,,;'-; ,.· n0'' .. L• h •• :;: ·' / 4103 4083 4079 4075 This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION Legend City and County Boundary Other c:J City of Renton Addresses Parcels 1st Floor 1st Floor 2nd Floor 1st Floor Other Buildings Buildings Sites Other Municipal Government Facility Community I Recreation Center Library Museum ii Fire StaUon I EMS Station Airport Runway I Airfield Pa~ Openspace Goll Course Greenhouse I Nursery Undeveloped ParK Parking Lot Structure I Garage Environment Designations O Natural I] Shoreline High Intensity D Shoreline Isolated High Intensity 0 Shoreline Res1denUal D Urban Conservancy D Jurisdictions Notes None 0 City of D ~Qfl ,>;;:; -~-lllUlltt:~> Finance & IT Division l> _. 0 .f~ { 111=~ titi !i§f {ii! !·1 ('" -y""V"""'-.r ~-"' t,, .l19IHX3 J~v --... ----,,,. ,.,-...,_,.---v-v~./ "·~v-·\·----v -,,,..---...,,) I • ,---""'n•~-----!1111 < ( I i! : .,, • l) \ _ i, --------i =u~i ( · , , C ________ ~ ; i ~!Jii I \ f I : :51f1 ( i .11 · i:~;:; ' • I !•'•' '-. I I l ~~1ii ( ' --I I • ' ', '----, i_ ~ ( ~ i Ji / j.. ' I ~ i .} I I .} ' '~'i/i"' \ ( i: 111 1:1r .1 -< ! I I I ,, I ' i < o'!; ! i i ~i j • • 7 I! 1; '/''' 1!! ! > ' • li~_. ! i~ .Ii l ! • I ' , ! i t ' I \ t . 1 , I I I-~ .• ,. I " • ,I; \ ]Ii L--'l!.°9.".t..l,UI' __ -f · J ' ~ / : I fn , ( IK t1, :::, ! J) > ~ J ~ . l ; ! ' . v-z I ') : i ~ s f l ~ i{ ' I ! l j I ~ --· i 5 ·_, 11 ~ ~ ;· ~-7--'I I ~ I I · ~ ! I 1 < ! ;, I I I i! ~-t ! / / i I < ~ . I I I / \ j ! ! \ . I I . -, I ~ J I l ' - -I I ! ____________ i....ll!"..,~;J5~-.B..11....---:-J ) N ~ .. _,.,.,,. ' ,, ! { ,, ) '-~\,\_ . ) !! } -\.~ ,_ /' _./ .. /...____,. '-g~ "-. _,"---;z 1 --~-/'-,./ ': . s ~ _) \, ;--../ '---""\.,___..,"--.____.,"..._,_, '-A, __ ,r-J__, ~n ~ :,,~~L & DOROTHY URBAN ... __ .... ~ = ·---- Qj,,. , .. ,., 11 ,i m ''''I ,1 ~ Jl!~:11 l'I ' I' •. ,,, 1,: i. !i1•-c\1J1'l •!.!11 l i_i ,'i• -ill, i ( 'I I ' i:!.j ' : I ,,, ' Cl1 )1! 11:!j ; j ' l ( ,1 . I , !0 I , 1'· ""I '•" ' \ .,~~ trt ' . ( b ., \....__, ./ ~ ecco d I , , ~ 'l I i1 L /01 ~ )~C" •' <.ost~;i'I • ...,,.,1~ w~ I!':'' .'Hf H\f. ts' Figure 1. Revised site plan. Note new, more landward, boat ramp location. C ::0 OJ )> z OJ 0 )> -f r -,, -f MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns ·8 EXHIBIT 5 MS&A .ift Project: Response to Concerns·21 Figures 4. Picture of Boat Lift Location (looking waterward). Marine Surveys & Assessments Urban Project: Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page 6 Figure 5. Picture of Boat Lift Location (looking landward). Marine Surveys & Assessments Urban Project: Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page 7 BARBEE MILL VO!.../PG PORTION OF OOVT. LOT 1, SECTION 32, T.24 ~ R.5 E, W.M. CrTY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHNGTON APPROVALS mr.Qf:~~ WOfkS [Ff>ARREN[ c:,;.o.1111·;rn >.N~,,£;PRo~· rH:s ~ o...-:~. F~. P4J;.(, .. J!teti ~; 'j ; ~ i . I HEREBY C(Rnf"Y rHAl Th[ll[ Aq( ~G J£UNQ.JE~l SPECAL ASSCSSWEt,TS M'O A~ SPlcCIAI. ASSESS~El<TS Cl', AHY OF ""HE 0ACl'E'lT'< ~ER£1N COtHAIHW. CWICA"C.0 AS S'IRCETS. ALLE'r'S O'< -~ OTHER PUS.IC lSt. AN~ PAIO fN F\!LL [X""l~EO AN) A~PRO\'rn T"IS ~ DAY QC r,v.(Jix,,G FlNANCE 0:RECCO'! \ KHJCOLNTYOEPARJWITa= • ;:.,,: ..... '.,;,{IS ACCOONT ~Ul!BER ~ -~,-f~':r.''9o~'f-oo :: '" . KN:. ca..NTY Ftf"ttc1{~~~lE•--C---- 1 IIERE;BY CE~T1'"1" T~AT All-".'l'C<'E'lT''.o""~~lES ARE::i>°A1D. THA-·i}lG,£ ')l>C"~t<ll~WNOlJENl Sl'(CIAI. ASSESSME~TS ~'1EO TO lHS CHlCE fQfl. co __ ,c:oo,., "':'tr HAl AU. SP).~AL ASSESS,,,Et. TS CERTl'l(D .ro rl-'S ""~ "Of< C0LL-:CTI3N 0 .. 'A~Y !If" ""l"E ~ROPERT'r··.. -,. r; ~ .._ !-,[REIN CO~IAINEO~Al[O A~ >j,!.tYS OR 'Olf,fY."bn,rn PURU~ JS[, A~E ~· i ;..;,, u~-,j., PAI~ N FULL THIS .}Y Of" =---~· ... ~ •. ?_-.",,>f J'\°,,·,·~ ... :: ,J~hL~ti<u~ /~ 1/j'f"T ti, ..... ,~ .-··'\?)i;--Iii(:(fct ~::r,~·:. ····· .. . c.-'1fltl_~·ii.J···.·· .. ·. f>wr,.,,J·., RES'TRCTIONS . / •. :~::::~:; M<C Tl-IE -rn .. s A'lf: C0~1:TIONS THE'lEO'" TO PC!GCT SOUND POWtR /\l'ID rmtt· FOR [l.ECTRI~ ":?ANSMISSIO~ AN:l/CR 0ST~10Ull0N UN( Pm REC t.lO. <85D6/H. 2. EASEMENT AND 1rlC TEllMS ANO CO~OIT'ONS 1HF"R(0' TO crrv o, RC'fTCN FOR PVSUC <!T,c!T ES PCR REC. NO. n·21go.3go J. ~E~ ANO ~~, TmMS Al<) CONDITIONS THi'.RDF" ,CR INCRCSS, "GRESS mo UllUllES PCR RCC HO. 9eo2,~o!-1!9. 4. EXCEF110~S MO RESERVAT!Ot,S C0,£1A'N[0 IN DITO rno ... TH[ STATE Of" WAS~IN~. WHERcBY Cl!E GRl,NTI)R ElKEl'TS MD R[SfMS Al. 0 c. (;AS[S, CO<c. Olli'S, u,MERAcS, FOSSILS, cTC .• MD THE Rl~l-!T ()f [~~sr m~ OP[~l~G. DE\lf"LD"iNC MD WORKING fl.E """E A.~O P:;:cv,O:hG THAT S,JCH R1G,.f!S SIW.l NOT 8[ D:r'l<::Sro UNTIi PRO,,'ISIDN w..; ~!'[N ""'" '"" 'JLl "IYWf'<l as /J.l D ...... G[S SUSTAINED BY R[AS()N or SUCH ENT'l'r": R£CORJ1"D IJNDnl Rrc NO «17141 ~-RELcASE Of" C/11,W;E AC.REEl,ffNT Al,Jll THE TERWS Al<D CDI\DITICNS THFR<Of" HR AFC. HD. 41S~9!1. S,O;D OOCUM[~T RE!.D.SING .t.JTEO S-~TES Of" A~rRICA F"ROM 111.L FUTURE CL>JMS FOR r:i;.w.GES RCSU-TtNG f"RQ\/: co'IST,UC-:-<ON, OPERATIDN, Al<O 1,WNTEl,A~c, or CANoJ. LOC~s. SHP\l'A'i!;, WATrRWl,'1!; ANO lHl a.,..,SIN~ A~D LOWER NG J• THE WAJ[R LI',1:l OF Lo.KE W"5HIN::l0N 6 i;ASfr.lENT ""o ]1;£ TERMS .>.NO CONOrllONS rnEREOF FJ.S: N:;RESS AND EG~[S5 Al<D OlH[II PU~f'OSlS "l~ ~lC. NJ. <006Dii9003~29 7, (JLEfW) 8 ;;.,sc..,,,rr mo l~E r::~ .. ~ mo CCNOrTrONS 'rlENlOI' f()-.: A;;CESS ~lVCNl AGl,tcc.Va~• "lR RCC. ~o. 23<Jf,O\l29:JO.J4J' EASEMENT PROVISIONS .o.N E>SEMENT !S ll[R:BY ~hAIITD 7~ THE CIT'r OF Ht.'llON, PUGt.1 SOJ~O E~[RGY, 0Wr5T COl,llolUNJC,,.TIC~s. C:Jw;ASI CAH"E mo o·~cR PJru ,c ANO PRIVATE IIUNICIPAL SE'{\'IC[ L'II..IIILS, I~~·, RES~:= SJCr.FSS:)!;'S At.D •.SSIG'IS. FOR PUBLIC A'ID ~R•~ATL UTIL./T'l', .>.NOSCAPINC, IRRIGl,Tl()N, W"I.KWAYS, IMILBOXES, f'l!NATr :liWMGE PURPOSES ,,,.r:, f'l<IVAlt. SAN~ ... ~ SEWCR s=crs Jt,,Df'~ AND UP<'.lN ') TH~ OXIERIOH ~.00 F1:CT (AS GRAPIIIOcl Y n;p GTUl ::,~ Sl-cE"S 4 THR:JUGH 15) PAAALLil ll!TJI MD "l'JOl'IING THC STNC~~ FRONT...-..[ ;JF <LL LOTS AN:) TAACT:S, 2) lHACT "J" .... o lfW:l -~·.))TH[ PRVATE >CCC£5S AND lffiL"'° £.o.sE .. E>IT "rTHN LOI 2~. ~) THE PRIVATE AC:ESS !IND UTl 0 JT'r c,0,5,E~C~T .. ,:~,~ LCT ~7 """~ LOT ~. """~ 5) T~E PRIVATE ~C£$S AIQ u·:, TY E>SE:.tE'll W,THIN LOT 69 m(I .OT 70 ,-WH,CH TCl r~,11_:.., L'.Y, CD'ISffi~CT, RFNEW, OPER,o.TE ... ~o ..... ,NT~'~ UND£F!CR0~M: CO'IOU'~S, C .. ILE, FIP'U~E AID "'RES ... rn. TI-E NECE!;S,0,/fi FAC1l/Tll:S .:.o o-~cR EOU<F'IA[NT 'O'l THE P<)RPOSE OF SE~l:E ·o -~is 5U80MS10N AND OTH£~ P~Ol't'RTY lllrH !l..EC-:RIC, T£LfPHO'IE, =. CA8LE T\/ sc,t,,c:: •NO OlH~ ~ lll/llES. T(){;[rnER Yl''lH rnE R1G~T TO E~CR UPO~ THE CASD,l[NTS AT AL. Tlr.lES l'OR 1'1lE "t.RPOSES STATCO VP(!!< 1'fE CDCATJ:)N 3c /Hi POOT"11; o; n-,s £"5Er.lENi NI.EA "5 A "LBUC R>GHT-Qf"-W,,,Y, ,,,.,~ PORllON Of" TH:S cl\5Et,f{~'T Sfi.l...L Al!IOMATICALLY TE:Rw, ..... , AND SEl.F ElllNQJl;t,. :~r~-~~~5Ci~;~~l~Wr£ ¥i~lE'~£tl~:r?~1;7~f91ci1;t i~~ri [~';; ~r;r M<D SIJRVEYOR'S NOTES "·i a,.s,s Cf" ff.AAIN3Sc S 81:'<7'06" E BElWEE~ C""" .lf RE\/rON CONTROi. =~TS ~OS \B]4 AND 18~.J. J. (;P!:-·~~~= WEsl: WJl( JS~~-'1iti~9L[ 5700 R[~EM:RS •••mr/\lNEQ lC· l,IA.WfAC",Uiff'S SP[CJF"ICAllON PER W/oc :.:'ll-1.lC-lCD,. ·· ., ---~ Sl)l!V[V IN5TRUM~~ CONVE~11Q~ FIEJ 1/E,l,SWR[M[NTS wrRt: WJlF vr~ A c~oo:iwETES &1U lOIAL STATION (3" H:>RllONT/J. ACCU'lAC'i) .. lH:S .,,sn,uut,,a-k,.o rrs .O.:CE.SSO~IES Wl.~[ IAAINT/\INQ m ~-.CACTlJAE"S S"EO nCAT,ON '-S RCOUIREJ,•s',:-w;.c ~;~·]0-10Q. THE P'l(CISION Of l~l ~c.•·•·mo'. 11'.'.\IERS[ ~[ETS OR r.:<~[[OS THOSE <S REQJl~t.O PER lf\:(c 33~ 1 J0-090: · ··' · 5)TJ--lr 1Wl90R Ll~~:·~rRl'di:. A'l[ ..,s· $HO~ OH THE ~F"FCIAL ¥A.OS OF U,,KE W.l..'lHNGTON SHORELANOS, FLED I~ -,E Qf'Fle£ OF TH[ cm,.,ussto~R o• P~UC .... ~~-"""'l:,O\.¥MPA. WASHIN~"ON. 5E"TE~BCR 19, 19:01 i.i.ic. COQ.1DI .... E VALL'ES;.~~wt,, oi,· ""-J .I/A~ 'I/GE -~Sfu,,10 CST"9J5H THE l~_mo OJlrR w.~00, LNES THE 0Al1\ • ....S·:,OTATED A•D.:TFWJSU..pl ro v,'[ [lJY 0' RENTO~·:_+;ORIZO'<T/11. DATU~ '<AD :ll_~/91 MSIS OF" PiP'ioN: ~~Jr.l(NT;fou,w Al\l'!~. ~,YIH,,SlUiOICCR···giRNER o; ~~b10N i (NE CO'lNC' wv·,. ~c-,:. D8)tC,4fED~ -OP'WAY IOliO.!. AAEA. = 1~7.J~: SOJAA~\E:T (~:~~-9r,l;· 7-··-- SHEETJNDEX lOZ!O :io::··~~ :." ··,·. ~ .. ·· .....• 4 .:r,im rQ':._sCALE EXHIBIT 6 • corporot~d Kirlclond, 1" .. buigloo ~ PhODe ('25) 822-44« ril:l~)IIZ7-957'! hlWDtl: Ill.Ohl.COIi CITY OF RENTON LUA-07-109-FP CITY 0' RENTON LNJ-10-0397 JOB NO 30935.001 SHi::ET 2 OF 15 ""' "" '" "' "' 1-14 "' "' '" " = ~ CM ~ ~· cc m "' "' "' en = ,. m = --~· •••• .:· /~· 1"=5!! lit£ TABLE --~-.. '" ~· QTY OF RENTON LUA-07-109-FP CITY OF RENTON LND-10-0397 LI I ltu«Af I _s VOL/PG POR1DN OF GOVT. LOT 1, SECTION 32. T24 N, R5 E, W.M. ;2tj 1./030 CfTY OF AENTON, KMl COU!ffi', WASHNGToN n. 41 5;11~ ..... CUR',11;'. TIJI..£ CUR\IE DUO. ~S l.1:H~"I'< .. NOTE: -PR!ll'EJITY ~ M'$f;f5 41<( T,00,. ti I.E'IO f'll,I!; Wl'l1, ~ ST11Wf'£P V moi-. SET Ill TOP [lf cum OR J<J a<O< Of' SIOEWJJ( ··~ •w~s AYE. ~ · '"WAMS Al't.. 'I. l¥\UAlo5 A,"[_ >I.. \IOWAMS A>£ >,I YoWAWS A'L...!!L, .. AMS A',{ ,; \IOWAI.ISA~. >I... vow.ws .... : ... ; .. :S A'oE. N.; "' /IMS A~~; WWAMi"oc°"N.1 "'!llAMS ,_,..- \IIW A.N ll\ AW AYf.. II ~ .. .:: S'l1lU1 "llll'IESSl~G OUiGul STRET i,(l'; JI. 41ST ?L. lilt >!. 41ST ~L. ;;n JI 41ST .•L H2J __ !'., 4!._S.!..!h.._ 1;29 !/, 41~T Pl.- 1701 ~-4tST j&( 1)75 II. 41ST ?L. 1'.Z2 !/. 41ST Pl.. 1t!8 r<. 41ST PL. ;;~ :: ;;!~ ~- 10JI II. 4SST PL 10~2 r<. 41~1 Pl 1025 11 .• ,sr P<. :02~ I 1'. 41ST P~ 101• !/. •u•r PL f-~,~:~,~~r~ = /r,--~~~~~~ .. ,~~~;_""tfllf'~) o -·=:·,/l" ~ w~cw i'U;!,11C e,.p ST~<!). '\S 29'951" .:·OR:= IN,,i.b(t_.11/,us><m ~"ls<~;.,···,. (~).;:. IWllAI.. 11r-'!'fl•c ~';i: !::St~~·:;':!;··'' ~~,,,/ UJ<.ll,-~t'I0>1W,.UJ!/ N.~.0.1,. -i;.l.-r,oE·~ PRwt'i~:),RtA P.S.C£. -PRll' .... C. ST~OR<itW.:E:.~(1;7:·_:· JOB NO 30935.001 SHEET 6 OF 15 ~ S'E1~TH.-<z 'ii ~ ~ ~-r,sr w 15 ss-1' ? $ SE SQTH 51 PRIVATE RD ! ;,/?\. J ! ':,,,r:::; i .;.>' ~/ ! I @-c~ I I i" ,,o'' ~t,.\..o ZONING MAP BOOK PLANNING· TECHNICAL SERVICES PRINTED DATE: 10/02/2013 1-\s",e~·~. This document is a g-aphic represen131:ion, no! guiranteed to $Ul'l8y ac,;;1.Jacy, and is based on the best 1nformation available as of the date shown. This map Is intended 1<7 Cit:, display purposes on I'{. Community & Economic Development C. C. "Chlp. l'tn(..,I A1"'"'"·*~'"' ,.,..,,--r-~··•·\ ,,, "' ' -----.:'~L'.[ J ill£+·~~ ,b,w I _.;. ... ~...; _ _), ~~""';.,..t I I ~·r,00•r"™ ! , ..... ,. 5(11=. I INNeR. I ~B~"-I ' u~e. ~/ N 39TH PL I I I I R-8 R-8 I PRIVATE RD R-8 I I I I I I I I I / R- // D3E 06 T23N R5E E 1/2 0 420 ~o ~ ----I Feet 1:9,520 R-8 C3E 31 T24N R5E E 1/2 Page 3 of 80 :v) C€1nler Village D (R--8) Residential Bdulac i) Industrial Heavy c:J (RC) Resource Conser.ation EXHIBIT 7 .)lndustrialUght c:J(RM-F)Res1dential~H1-.Famity .1) Industrial Medium D (RM-T) Resi. Multi-Family Traditional -1) ResidBntial 1dulac D (RM-U) ResL Multi-Family 1.kba-1 Center -10) Residential 10dulac D [RMH) Residential Manufactured Homes -14) Rtisidential 14dulac D (UC-N1) Urbai Center Nath 1 L....J 11;uK) 1;ommemavun1ce1ResidenLial L.J [R-4) Residential 4du/ac D (UC-N2J Urban Center No1h 2 r . ·' j' 29 5428 5428, 54.d 5427 ;·54~'t 5426 5425 5425 r 6 . B1W B1E I B2W B2E • B3W B3E B4W • 4E B5W B5E 'B6W I B6E 'B7W '137E B8W B8E B i 26 T24N 26 T24N ( 25 T24N ; 25 T24N 30 T23N -~4N : 24N 28 T24N 28 T24N 27 T24N , 27 T24N ! 2ti T24N 2ij T24N 25 T24N 25 T24N ; 30 R4E W '..~ ... f. , .. ~~~LEafe .. l .~~-w 112 ><> .. ,~:~ •• ~"~2 R5E W '..'2 .r.~.~.~:2_ L ... ,E.1'.~--R5E W112 / RSE E 112 RSE W1/2 i RSE E 112 [ RSE W 112 i RSE'S-112 . RSEW 112 RSE E 112 A6E Washington Jr'" '. . , , 4435 1 4435 I 4435 4436, 5431 5431 /5432~ s4h2 [ 5433 1 5433 5434 .. 5434 5435 5435 ' 5436 1 5435 I 54 'C1W I C1 E C2W C2E C3W c3rl C4W1i C~j C5W' Q5E C6W · C6E . C7W C7E CBW i CBE C 35T24N · 35T24N 36T24N 36T24N 31T24N 31T~; 32T24N ( 32T2~N 33T24N / )!3'1°24N,w~ 34T24N ! 34T24N : 35T24N 35T24N i 36T24N . 36T24N 31T R4EW1/2 I R4E!;:1/2 R4EW1/2 R4EE112 R5EW1/2 RSE(_112 R5EW112 ;-R5E°'E'1J:11.r,IR5.E\~.-iii,,;.'~Ja1~~.t_,,,~ R5EE1/2: RSEW112 RSEEt/2 R5EW112 ! R5EE1/2 R6E ~::~~!~~1~1~; ~:i~ ;:/;Tit; ~;~ ~ ~~::~ •. -R4EW112 .i.;.-~~:Jx. E. :1:2 ~'e'i'~EW1/2 ~E;_.: .. ~.2i~W1" • .. RSEE 112 .• ~EW.1/21 RSEE 112 R5EW112 ~~~~E:112 RSE!l/12 ! R5EW112 ;. RSE. E .. 112 R6E r : L_J r 1 . · i :-::-1 "'~-:.""2~ , 431114311 4312, 4312 5 • 5,307 5308 i 5308. 5309 5309 5310.53101~11 · 5311 5312 5312'6~ ' E2W E2E E I E3E E4W ' E4E E5W , ESE E6W · E6E • E7iilt1 E7E EBW EBE E · · 12 T23N t2 T23N, 07 23N i • 07, t23N 08 T23N 08 T23N 09 T23N ' 00 T23N 10 T23N 10 T23N 11 rz;J f 11 T23N 12 T23N . 12 TZ3N 0712 \ R4EE1" R4EW112. R4EEff 112• R5E\"' • R5EW1/2 R5EE1/2 R5EW1/2 R5EE112 R5EW1/2 R5EE112··!·R5EW·~:_'12 RSEW.112 i ~E.E1/2 ! R6EW 14314 14 ~3 5318 s31iis3~7! 5317 5316 5316 5315 5315 s~=s313 5313~. r~1~~ ~~~~~e'i'~ ~E~~· i~·~ ~J:~~ ff,~~£':~;~,~~~0~I.~,'f~. ~~'~',~~~~~~~ E,~"!;~,1~ 4323 4323 '~\~ ;4324 5319 5319 5320 5320 5321 '53~.~ ! 5322~i2t53~53'£3~.. :1~1 G1 W G1 E G2 G2E G3W, G3E G4W G4E • G5W' G5E 1:J'!w:..c..N;, JSi3 GBE.I GQ 23 T23N 23 T23N 24 T23N 24 123 N\ 19 rnN 19 T23N 20 TZJN ; 20 nm 21 T23N 21 T23N f 22 r2 . 23 T23N ~ 9li 24 T23N 24 T23N :--1?r't R4EW112 R4EE1/2. R4EW11 R4EE R5EW1/2, R5EE112 R5EW112 R5EE1/2 R5EW1/2 R5EE1/2. RSEW\ RSE 2 R5EW1/2 •R5EW112 RSEE1/2, R6EW --· --l r "' .... _ -; · \ i -)-;;/ =-f--r. I 4326 4326 431 432s ls330 5330 5329 5329 5328 5328 f,327 5327 5326 5326'o325 5325 633 ~!:tf ~,k~ ~~' ~~3~ IH3W ~~'~ ~1,,\Y ~!~ ~~,,'{v ~'~~ ' 23'{v r ~,?,~ , ~;,~ !:,;,~ "~~ ~~~ ~~' R4EW1/2 R4EE1/2 R4EW1 R4EE11?'.1 R$_EE112 R5EW112 RSEE1/2~~J-i;:.~1/2 R5EE1/2 l112 R5EE1/2 R5EW1/2 RSEE1/2 f~n'112 l R5EE112 I R6EW1 "" -_/_',.J .,..,"~ M • .... -... ~(~/ J"lo --~""~_.,,,J --{ 4335 4335 433~53TI"il!J3,"\;, 5332 53;,';,, 53l5334 53_31._5~fa.36 53361633 JUY ,!t~ L~~. Jf,~ H~ I ,\~~ , t~! [ ,!~~ !,~! ! c ~23~ L~xt • J~,,~ n1r~ ' R~ i ~~}' !~,~ I m,, ; A4E W 112 R4E E 112 R4E W11:! R4E EJ1.?._ __ ;,_R5E W 1'1: R5E E 112 : ASE W 1)f i R5E E 1/2 R5E W 112 EE 1/2 R5E W 1/2 R5E E 112 ; R5E W 112 ASE E 112 R5/i;3,\: R5E E 112 ·, ·-R6E W 1 . . '·~--,-> -· r----'. . r··············· take -· \[.. T ! 4202 4202 ,,+201 4201 5206l~Q§.·..2,~sJs~Q5. 5204 ~~ea. 5203 ! 5201/ 5202 t2cl2 5201 \zo~J 620 •J1W J1E/J2W J2E J3WiJ3E J4W.J4E,,J5W J5E)6 r-JS' ' ! f ' ' Residenfial LJ (RC) Resource Conservation LJ (R-1) Residential 1du/ac LJ (R-4) Residential 4du/ac LJ (R-8) Residential 8du/ac LJ (R-10) Residential 10du/ac LJ (R-14) Residential 14du/ac LJ (RM-F) Residential Multi-Family LJ (RM-T) Res Multi-Family Traditional LJ (RM-U) Res Multi-Family Urban Center LJ (RMH) Res Manufactured Homes Mixed Use Centers LJ (CV) Center Village LJ (CD) Center Downtown LJ (UC-N1) Urban Center North 1 LJ (UC-N2) Urban Center North 2 Commercial LJ (CA) Commercial Arterial LJ (CN) Commercial Neighborhood LJ (CO} Commercial Office LJ (COR) Commercial/Office/Residential Industrial LJ (IL) Industrial Light LJ (IM) Industrial Medium LJ (IH) Industrial Heavy [-::.1 RENTON r-----, l_ ___ J Potential Annexation Area PAGE INDEX Page Number Sect/Town/Range Barbee :Mill Community Dock Proje~t . Anny Corps of Engineers Reference # City of Renton Planning Division JAN 2 .2 2DiU Biological Evaluation/Habitat Data Report January 19, 2010 For: Conner Homes at Barbee Mill, LLC (Attn: Charlie Conner) 846 108th Ave NE Bellevue, WA 98004 At: Conner Homes at Barbee Mill 4151 fr 4125 Williams Ave N Renton, WA 98056 Parcels #051850 0350 (4151) and 051850 0360 (4125) , .. Prepared by: Marine Surveys fr Assessments 521 Snagstead Way PortTownsend, WA98368 Phone: (360) 385-4073, Fax: (31 E-mail: sea@cablespeed.com EXHIBIT 8 .;t of Figures and Affac1..11e Figure Number Page l. Vicinity and area maps .................................................................... 14 2. DNR withdrawal orea ............•........................................................... 15. 3. Plot plan .............................................................................................. 16 4. Proposed pier pion and elevation views ..........•........................... 17 5. Proposed section and framing views A-A. ..................................... 18 6. Proposed section and framing views B-B ....................................... 19 7, Planting areas .................................................................................... 20 8. Planting legend ................................................................................. 21 9. Planting plan ...................................................................................... 22 l 0. Tree and shrub planting detail ........................................................ 23 Attachment Number Page l. Photograph of the site ................................................................ 24-25 2. Species list for King County ........................................................ 26-27 3. Essential Fish Habitat Assessment .............................................. 28-29 4. Assessment of Impacts to Critical Habitat for Puget Sound Chinook ........................................................... 30-3 T 5. Assessment of Impacts to Critical Habitat for Coastal -Puget Sound Bull Trout .......................................... 32-33 MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 2 b..Jlo..,.cal Evaluation/Habitat ,_,Jfc._ --~port Barbee Mill Community Dock Project I . .PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Project Locatton: · \4 Section NW32, Township 24N, Range 05E. 4151 and4125 WilliamsAvenueN. Renton, WA 98056 Latitude: 4 7 .5157 4 5 °N/Longitnde: J 22.206114 ·w See Figure 1 for project location. B. Project Description: The proposed project is the construction of a community use dock intende<;I to facilitate access to Lake Washington for Barbee Mill conuuunity residents (Figures 1, 3 and 4). The Barbee Mill community is being developed by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC on the approximately 22 acre site of the former Barbee Mill Company lumber mill. To restore the former industrial site to a parcel suitable for a residential waterfront subdivision, the mill buildings were demolished; fill soils were removed from behind the bulkhead; asphalt paving, a pier, the wooden bulkhead and piling associated with the mill operation were removed; and extensive shoreline restoration was completed pursuant to sale of the site to Conner Homes. The shoreline restoration was completed by the Barbee Mill Company in conjunction with vacation of the land. The proposed community dock is adjacent to one vacant lot (36) (4125) scheduled for residential development and located at the vacant lot (Lot 35) (4151) recently reallocated to the Barbee Mill Community as a result of DNR disallowing the Community Dock to be constructed over a withdrawal area (Figure 2). This north property (Lot 35) has been reallocated to the community to provide lake access for all upland owners and those waterfront owners located north of the site adjacent ta the DNR withdrawal area. In addition to a landing and day moorage facility for watercraft, the proposed community dock would be a suitable piace for launching canoes and kayaks, for sun- bathing, for swimming, fishing, water skiing and any number of other water sports and activities. Bath properties are currently vacant but Lot 36 is planned for a single-family residence. The shoreline consists of a sheet pile/concrete. Additional native riparian plantings on both parcels will be offered as part of this project The substrate consists of small angular rock and cobble. C. Habitat Data: As mentioned above, the general project area is located at the former Barbee Mill Company lumber miH site. As a former industrial site, the general development area, including the subject property, was subject to decades of disturbance and degradation by human activity. The Lake Washington shoreline was heavily bulkheaded, back- filled and covered with impervious asphalt paving. Numerous piling and substantial quantities of concrete rubble and other shoreline debris were on site. To restore this former industrial site to a parcel suitable for a residential waterfront subdivision, upland and in-water structures including the mill buildings, timber bulkhead and piling were removed, shoreline rubble was removed, fill soil was excavated to subgrade. elevations, and toe rock and a temporary quany spall erosion control berm were installed. In addition, extensive shoreline restoration was completed which included using sand, gravel and rock materials to construct a beach to mimic natural conditions MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 3 and installing coir rolls along 1 .Jke Washington ordinary high water r fo additional excavation, grading, clearing or fill material will be required for the proposed pier project. The subject property is located south of, and was not included in, the area requiring the most extensive rs'mediation. The study area includes no wetland or flood hazard areas but it does include Lake Washington riparian areas. Prior to the site restoration, riparian vegetation was found to be generally absent in the Barbee Mill community development area due to extensive paving. In unpaved areas, vegetation noted included Juncus ejfusus (soft tush) and Iris pseudocaris (a non-native iris). In accordance with the general development mitigation planting plan, native plants were installed along the entire Barbee Mill community Lake Washington shoreline, including the subject property shoreline. In conjunction with construction of the proposed community doQk, additional native plants, shrubs and/or trees will be planted as specified in applications to, and as approved by, the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers (Figures 7-9). Until the extensive site restoration was completed, the industrial use of the property limited the ecological functions that would otherwise have been provided by Lake Washington and its adjacent riparian area. As a result of the extensive remediation, beach reconstruction and plantings, the ecological functions of the Lake Washington shoreline within the study area should be greatly enhanced. The addition of riparian vegetation to this formerly near-barren site should help water quality by filtering pollutants, removing nutrients and reducing sediments in any runoff from the adjacent upland development while helping to stabilize and protect the shoreline from erosion. The riparian vegetation planted and to be planted should increase the habitat available for aquatic invertebrates and fish; the addition of organic matter to the lake substrate from fallen and washed in leaves and woody debris will provide them with food, shelter and shade. Increased overhanging vegetation will also provide shade and predator protection for fish and aquatic invertebrates and may facilitate the migration of juvenile salmon. Terrestrial insects will benefit from the food and shelter provided by newly planted vegetation, which in tum will provide· an additional food source for the birds and animals that feed upon them. The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitat and Species database (http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/phslist.htrn) identifies habitats and species considered to be priorities for conservation and management. Listed species observed in the general Barbee Mill community development area include bull trout, Puget Sound chinook salmon, Puget Sound steelhead, and marbled murrelet, all of which are discussed below, Protected wildlife in Washington State shall not be hunted or fished (Y{AC 232-12-011). Protected wildlife noted from time to time within the general Barbee Mill community development area include the marbled murrelet and the bald eagle. The marbled murrelet is classified as a "threatened species," a species likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout a significant portion of their range within the state without cooperative management or removal of threats. The bald eagle is no longer on the list of threatened or endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) but continues to be protected by the Bald and Golden Eagles Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and is protected as a "sensitive species" in Washington. Sensitive species are vulnerable or declining and likely to become endangered or threatened in a significant portion of their range within the state without cooperative management or removal of threats. The only eagle nests observed near the subject property are two nests approximately 0.65 mile from the site on the opposite shore. D. Project Description: The proposed community dock will consist of a fully grated 1,592 ft 2 Community Dock with a 5'-10" x 172' (1,003 ft2) main walkway, a 7'-10" x 56' (437 ff') "T" and a 5'-10" x 26' (152 ft2 ) finger pier (Figures 3-6). The dock will have a 100% grated surface with 46% open space. The dock will be supported by (14) 6" And (14) 8" diameter steel battered piles. Piles will be driven using a vibratory pile driver to practical refusal. A native planting plan will be installed (Figures 7-9). A 6' wide walkway is needed to safely serve the anticipated number of users. MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 4 E. Construction Sequer. . ... : 1. Mobilize. construction barge to the site with all construction materials and equipment on board. Moor the barge as to prevent grounding on the lake bottom at any time during construction. 2. Install silt containment curtain around work area to contain any debris that may fall into lake waters. In the event any materials enter lake waters they will be retrieved immediately and placed in debris containers on the barge. 3. Using the barge-based crane and vibratory insertion/extraction system, install (14) 6", (14) 8" diameter steel batter piles practical refus;,.1. 4. Cut steel piling as necessary at the appropriate elevation. 5. Install pre-fabricated dock, "ELL" and finger sections onto pipe collar assemblies and secure to piling. 6. Demobilize and dispose of all debris at approved upland disposal site. General Notes: L All treatments will be applied and fully cured prior to delivery to the site. 2. Ramp and pier section will be prefabricated at contractor's Lake Union Facility and delivered to the site via construction barge. 3. Native riparian planting plan will be installed by others following construction. AITENTION: Fisheries alert! If at any time, as a result of project activities, fish are observed in distress, a fish kill occurs, or water quality problems develop (including equipment leaks or spills), operations shall cease and the WDFW at (360) 534-8233 and Washington Department of Ecology at (425) 649-7000 shall be contacted immediately. Work shall not resume until further approval is given by the WDFW. F. Action Area: The action area should include the area within a one-mile radius of th!) project lo.cation. This area includes potential turbidity and noise impacts from the construction process. II. SPECIES AND HABITAT INFORMATION A. Species Information: In the project area, the Puget Sound chinook ( Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) is listed under the Endangered Species Act as a threatened species according to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)(Federal Register, Vol. 64, No. 56). On May 11, 2007, NMFS also listed the Puget Sound steelhead {Oncorhynchus mykiss) as a threatened species under the BSA (Federal Register I Vol. 72, No. 91 / Friday, May I I, 2007 / Rules and Regulations). Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) were listed as threatened by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in October of 1999. On September 2, 2005, NMFS issued the final rule designating critical habitat for 12 Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESUs) of West Coast salmon, including the Puget Sound Chinook Salmon ESU and the Hood Canal Summer-run Chum ESU. The project site is in an area designated as critical habitat for the Puget Sound Chinook ESU (Federal Register /.Vol 70, No.170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 Rules and Regulations). USFWS has MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 5 designated critical habitat in Lale _ ..shington for Coastal-Puget Sound bull t . \Federal Register/ Vol. 70, No. 185 / September 26, 2005 I Rules and Regulations). Puget Sound Chlnook: Puget Sound chinook, also called the king salmon, are distinguished from all other Pacific salmon by their large size. Most chinook in the Puget Sound are "ocean-type" and migrate to the marine environment during their first year (Myers et al. J 998). They may enter estuaries immediately after emergence as fry from March to May at a length of 40 mm., or they may enter the estuaries as fingerling smolts during May and June of their first year at a length of 60-80 mm. (Healey 1982). Chinook fry in Washington estuaries feed on emergent insects and epibenthic crustaceans (gammarid amphipods, mysids, and cumaceans). As they grow and move into neritic habitats, they feed on decapod larvae, larval and juvenile fish, drift insects, and euphausiids (Simc;,nstad et al. 1982). These ocean-type chinook use estuaries as rearing areas and are the most dependent of all salmon species on estuaries for survival. In the Lake Washington system, adult chinook salmon usually arrive at the Chittenden Locks in July, although there are some arrivals before and after July (Synthesis of Salmon Research and Monitoring. 2008). According to Fresh et al. (2000), the total time for salmon migration from the Locks to arrival at their tributary spawning grounds "can take up to 55 days, but averages less than 30." During much of this time, salmon hold in the upstream area from the Locks before moving through the Ship Canal and Lake Union. Fresh et al. (2000) found the average holding time to be from 17 to 19 days. After reach their spawning streams between September and November, spawning occurs from October to December. According to Tabor et al. (2006), "Fry emerge from their redds from January to March. Juvenile Chinook salmon appear to have two rearing strategies: rear in the river and then emigrate in May or June as pre-smolts, or emigrate as fry in January, February, or March and rear in the south end of Lake Washington or Lake Sammamish for three to five months." In the project area vicinity, juvenile chinook salmon from the Cedar River enter Lake Washington and rear in the south end of the lake primarily from January to May. Tabor et al. (2006) also reported that: Similar to results of2002,juvenile Chinook salmon were concentrated in the south end of Lake Washington from February to May ..... Therefore, it appears that the lake shore area near the natal stream is an important nursery area for juvenile Chinook salmon. In Lake Washington, the major part of this nursery area appears to be roughly from Pritchard Beach on the west shoreline and the mouth of May Creek on the east shore and the south part of Mercer Island. The distance from the mouth of the Cedar River to the edge of the nursery area is around 6 km. North of this area, the number of Chinook salmon would be expected to be relatively low until mid-May or June. In the same study cited above, it was found that marked chinook did not move far from their release, site at Gene Coulon Park (approximately 1.5 miles south of the current project site). Marked juveniles were observed 1, 7, 15, and 21 days after release at Gene Coulon Park. All of the marked salmon that the investigators observed had moved less than 150 m from their release site at the park. After moving slowly away from the Green River and south Lake Washington, juveniles reach the Chittenden Locks during the period between May and August, with peak migration through the Locks taking place in June. According to Kerwin (200 !) chinook, coho, sockeye and winter steelhead use May Creek near the project site for spawning, rearing and migration. However, volunteers from the Volunteer Salmon Watchers Program have been observing salmon in May Creek since 2000. They have reported that only sockeye are seen consistently, while chinook, coho, cutthroat trout and kokanee .salmon are less commonly seen. Bull Trout: Coastal-Puget Sound bull trout have ranged geographically from northern California (at present they are extinct in California) to the Bering Sea coast of Alaska, and northwest along the Pacific Rim to northern Japan and Korea. Bull trout are members of the char subgroup of the salmon family. Spawning occurs typical!y from August to November in streams and migration to the open sea (for anadromous populations) takes place in the spring. Eggs and juveniles require extremely cold water for survival. Temperatures in excess of about 15 MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 6 degrees Care thought tL ~nit . 1 trout distribution (Rieman and M, ,yre 3). They live both in fresh and marine waters. Some migrate to larger rivers ( fluvial),. Jakes ( adfluvial), or saltwater ( anadrornous) before returning to smaller streams to spawn. Others (resident bull trout) complete all of their life in the streams where they were reared. Habitat degradation, darns and diversions, and predation by non-native fish threaten the Coastal-Puget Sound population. The Coastal-Puget Sound bull trout population is thought to contain the only anadromous forms of bull trout in the contiguous United States (Federal Register, Vol. 64, No. 210, 1999). Two subpopulations of bull trout (also known as "native char") are considered within the Lake Washington area: the Chester Morse Reservoir population and the Issaquah Creek-Sammamish River population (Federal Register, Vol. 64, No. 210, 1999). "Only two 'native char' have been observed during the past 10 years in the Issaquah Creek drainage and none have been observed in the Sammamish River system. It is questionable whetlier a viable subpopulation remains." (Federal Register, Vol. 64, No. 210, 1999). Puget Sound Steelhead: Wild winter steelhead enter the Lake Washington system in mid-December with peak spawning taking place in May. There have been high rates of predation by California sea lions at the Ballard Locks, which is one of the leading factors in the declining steelliead production in the Lake Washington system (1992 Washington State Salmon and Steelliead Stock Inventory. Appendix One -Puget Sound Stocks. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, WA.). According to Kerwin (200 I): The Lake Washington system supports one native winter steelhead stock but not a summer steelhead stock (SASSI 1994). The winter steelhead stock was listed in SAS SI as "Depressed" but has recently shown some evidence of rebounding. A limited hatchery program utilizing the native winter steelhead stock was initiated in 1997 as a supplementation type program to assist in recovery of winter steelheactpopulations in the north Lake Washington tributaries. The sharp decline in Lake Washington winter steelhead was noted as a reason for concern by NMFS in their stock status review (Busby 1996). However, in a more recent analysis, between 1986 and 2004 escapement for the Lake Washington winter-run steelhead ranged from 1,816 (1986) to 44 (2004) (WDFW 2004). Based on the chronically low escapement and short-term severe decline in escapements, the stock status has decreased from its 1992 "depressed" status to "critical" ih 2002. Marbled Murrelets: Marbled rnurrelets are small marine birds in the alcidae family. They spend most of their time at sea and only use old growth areas for nesting. In the critical nesting areas, fragmentation and loss of old growth forest has a significant impact on the survival and conservation of the species (WDW, 1993). Adult birds are found within or adjacent to the marine environment where they dive for sand lance, sea perch, Pacific herring, surf smelt and other small schooling fish, and feed on invertebrates. The project site is located in an urban environment adjacent to a major highway. There is a high level of ambient noise in the project vicinity. There is no nesting habitat near the site. Therefore it is unlikely that murrelets will be present in the project vicinity. Ill. EFFECTS OF THE ACTION The status of each of the listed species in the action area has been provided. The proposed project has been described and the action area defined. When reviewing all the data, the potential direct and indirect effects of the proposed action on the listed species and their critical habitat should be considered. A. Direct Effects: When considering the direct effects of the proposed project, one must determine if the proposed project will MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 7 immediately reduce or destroy t ,ed species and/or their habitat. The pot ., direct impacts caused by the construction process include increased noise and turbidity. Pile driving noise: A vibratory pile driver will be used to drive the piles to practical refusal. Feist et al. (1992) reported that salmonids could be expected to hear pile driving noise approximately 2,000' from the source. Based on the studies at the Everett Homeport, these researchers concluded that pile driving di<! alter the distribution and behavior of juvenile pink and chum sahnon. However, the Everett Homeport results may not be entirely applicable to the proposed project, because a diesel powered compression hammer was used in that study. As stated in the Feist report, "It would be reasonable to say that juvenile salmonids might respond differently to the sounds of a vibratory hammer, compared to that of a diesel compression hammer." As noted above, It is unlikely that murrelets will be present in the action area. Therefore, the construction process should have little or no impact on marbled murrelets. Turbidity: Increased turbidity caused by pile driving could, under certain circumstances, have adverse effects on sahnon and bull trout. The effects depend on duration of exposure, concentration of turbidity and the life stage of the sahnon during the increased exposure. The effects can be discussed in terms of lethal, sublethal or behavioral (Nightingale and Simenstad 2001a and Simenstad, editor, 1988). A silt containment curtain will be installed in the project area to contain and minimize turbidity impacts. To minimize the adverse effects of increased turbidity and noise on migrating salmonids and bull trout, inwater construction work will take place during the approved work window from July 16 to December 31. Overwater work can proceed outside of the inwater work window. 8. Indirect Effects: Indirect effects are effects of the project that occur later in time. For this project, indirect effects might include alteration of juvenile sahnon migratory pathways, increase in salmonid predation and reduction in prey resources and refugia due to shading of the epibenthic substrate by the structure. Migratory pathway alteration: MS&A Freshwater: There were no studies specifically investigating the effects of piers on salmonid migration in lakes cited by Kahler et al. (2000) in their review of piercrelated impacts in lakes. Concerning the lake environment, Kahler et al. (2000) state, "The question remains whether juvenile salmonids in lakes migrate under, or otherwise utilize, piers, or if they avoid them and/or traverse their perimeter." However, more recent reports have provided additional information concerning sahnon responses to overwater structures. Tabor and Piaskowski (2002) noted that, "In February and March, chinook sahnon were found using overhead structures (piers, docks, and overhanging vegetation) during the day but in April and May, no chinook sahnon were ever observed using overhead structures. At night, chinook sahnon rarely used overhead structures." The authors hypothesized that the overhead structures v,'ere being used as a substitute for natural overhead cover during the days in February and March. In a later study, Tabor et al. (2006) noted slightly different results. They state that, "When migrating Chinook salmon approach a pier they appeared to move to slightly deeper water and either pass directly under the structure or swim around the pier. Most likely they move to deeper water as a way of reducing their predation risk." The pier where these findings we made is approximately 7.8' wide, 138' long and had solid decking. The dimensions of the piers in the earlier study are not known. The results from the later study were noted in May and July, whereas the 2002 study results were for the earlier months of February and March. Barbee_Mill Community Dock Project • 8 The results of Celedon. ,t al. 08) were similar to those of Tab01 al. 0). Celedonia et al. stated, "Juvenile Chinook salmon generally avoided areas directly beneath overwater structures. However, areas along the edges of structures (within about 2 m horizontal distance) were sometimes used for prolonged periods (up to 2 hours in one case)." However, these authors offered the following qualifying statement These observations may be representative of holding fish near structures in general, but may not be an accurate indication of how untagged Chinook salmon would generally behave upon volitionally entering these specific areas. Actively migrating fish (i.e,, most fish released off-site and observed at the Seattle Tennis Club site) often appeared to change course as they approached a structure. Structure width and water depth appeared to influence degree of avoidance. Fish appeared less hesitant to pass beneath narrow structures. Fish also appeared to move into deeper water to travel beneath or around structures. These authors also observed: Behavior at structures differed (i.e., swim beneath or travel around perimeter), and may have been related to such interrelated factors as: fish size, light levels beneath the structure, degree of contrast at the light-dark edge, width ofthe structure, height of the structure above the water surface, and water column depth beneath the structure, Further study is needed to conclusively determine how these and other factors interact to influence Chinook salmon behavior. Marine Waters: In the marine environment, it is generally accepted that overwater structures can alter migration behavior of juvenile salmon (though the effects may vary depending on the design and orientation of the structure, degree of shading, and the presence of artificial light), and reduce salmon prey resources and refugia by shading aquatic plant life (Sirnenstad et al. 1999; Nightingale and Simenstad 2001b). However, the significance of these effects is not clear. As Sirnenstad et al. state, "We found no studies that described empirical evidence supporting or refuting that modification of juvenile salmon behavior in shoreline habitats was reflected in changes in survival." Nightingale and Simenstad (200 lb) state, ''Presently, although we know that under some conditions small juvenile salmon will delay or otherwise alter their shoreline movements when encountering an overwater structure, the conditions under which this behavioral modification is significant to the fishes' fitness and survival is relatively unknown." A study by Williams et al. (2003) at the Mukilteo ferry terminal, found that, "Salmon fry were observed in all nearshore habitats during each transect sampling period ( day and night). The fry were observed under a wide range of PAR values (0.0 µmo! m-2 s-1 to 2370 µmo! m-2 s-1). Fry were observed both outside the terminal and underneath the terminal at all times, and shadows produced by the l 0-m-wide terminal structure did not appear to act as barriers to fry movement at this location." There is no question that underwater structures may alter migration patterns -that is not in dispute. As seen in the study by Williams and in many other studies (see the literature review by Weitkamp -2003), there are studies that indicate that salmon migration is not affected by the presence of overwater structures. Of course, there are other studies indicating migration patterns are altered by overwater structures. The issue is that no one has shown that these migration changes lead to increased mortality or decreased fitness. None of the studies that report changes in salmonid migration patterns caused by overwater structures in the marine environment have reported that these changes have a negative impact on salmonids. Increased predation: An additional concern about the impacts of overwater structures on migrating salmon is that they will be forced to move out into deeper water, where they will be consumed by predatory fish species. However, in a study conducted in the marine environment, Williams et al. (2003) noted: MS&A We found no evidence that avian, marine mammal, or fish predators consumed more juvenile salmon near WSF terminals than along shorelines without overwater structures. Few species appeared to be targeting abundant fry in nearshore habitats, and we observed only two occasions in which predators ( one tern sp., one staghorn sculpin) had consumed juvenile salmon. Borbee Mill Community Dock Project • 9 The authors also state, Our analysis of fish diets at the Mukilteo ferry terminal provides one piece of conclusive evidence that juvenile salmon were not a major dietary component of predatory fish species during our study. It should be noted that the Williams study was conducted in the marine, not lake, environment. In Lake Washington, smallmouth bass migration into the littoral zone corresponds with the peak occurrence of migrating salmonids in this zone (Fresh et al. 2001 ). Because of these similar migration patterns, salmonids are most at risk of predation from smallmouth bass in Lake Washington. Bass prefer complex, natural cover for their foraging environment. When there is a scarcity of natural cover for foraging, as is the situation in Lake Washington, they tend to use the dominant structures in the environment, such as pilings and piers, for foraging cover (Kahler et al. 2000). There is concern that increasing the number of overwater structures will increase the predation success of smallmouth bass on migrating salmonids. Tabor et al. (2004) investigated predation of juvenile chinook salmon in three areas of the Lake Washington Basin. One of the areas they looked at was the south. end of Lake Washington, an important rearing area. The investigators found that: The only predators observed to consume Chinook salmon were cutthroat trout, prickly sculpin (C. asper), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieui), and largemouth bass (M salmoides ), Consumption of Chinook salmon by cutthroat trout was observed in February, March and early April. Predation by prickly sculpin was only observed in February. Smallmouth bass consumed Chinook salmon in May and June. Few largemouth bass were collected; however, we did document a largemouth bass that had ccnsumed a Chinook salmon in June. We estimated a total of 1,400 Chinook salmon fiy were consumed by littoral predators from February to mid May ..... Based on consumption estimates and expected abundance of juvenile Chinook salmon, predatory fishes probably consumed less than 10% of the fiy that entered the lake from the Cedar River. The investigators in this study did not comment on the impacts of overwater structures on the predation rate found in south Lake Washington. The following design components will reduce foraging cover and allow more light penetration under the proposed pier. I .The dock will have a fully grated surface with 46% open space to allow light to reach the lake waters below. 2. The bottom of the dock will be 18" above the OHWL. 3. The smallest number and diameter steel piles will be used to minimize the amount of structure in the water and disturbance to the substrate. 4. Glu-larn stringers will be used to allow the longest spans possible between piles. C. Interrelated/Interdependent Effects: Completion of this project will not promote future construction or other activities that would not otherwise occur without its completion. Therefore, no additional interrelated or interdependent actions that could affect species regulated under ESA will occur because of this project. D. Take Analysis: "Take" is defined as, "to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, trap, capture, collect or attempt to engage in any such conduct." The USFWS further defines "harm" as "significant habitat modification or degradation that results in death or injury to listed species by significantly impairing behavioral patterns such as breeding, feeding, or MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • Io sheltering." It is likely that. will result from this project. E. Conservation Measures: In order to minimize any direct effects on the listed species caused by this project, inwater work should take place between July 16 and December 31. It is requested that overwater work be allowed to take place outside of this work window. Additional impact reduction and mitigation measures will reduce adverse impacts of the project. They include: I.The dock will have a fully grated surface with 46% open space to allow light to reach the lake waters below. 2. The bottom of the dock will be 18" above the OHWL. 3. The smallest number and diameter steel piles will be used to minimize the amount of structure in the water and disturbance to the substrate. 4. Glu-lam stringers will be used to allow the longest spans possible between piles. 5. The con.struction barge will not be allowed to ground out on the lake bottom at anytime. 6. Piles will be driven using a vibratory pile driver to practical refusal. 7. Construction will take place during authorized inwater work windows design to protect listed species and/or critical habitat. 8. All dock sections-will be prefabricated at the contractor's lake union facility and delivered to the site via construction barge. 9. A native planting plan will be installed. f, Determination of Effect: After reviewing the appropriate data and surveys, the effect determinations for the impacts of the project, as designed, are: I. Puget Sound chinook -"May affect, not likely to adversely affect" 2. Bull trout-"May affect, not likely to adversely affect'' 3. Puget Sound steelhead -"May affect, not likely to adversely affect" 4. Marbled murrelet -"No effect" This is the appropriate conclusion when effects on the species and their critical habitat are expected to be beneficial, discountable or insignificant. Limiting construction work to the approved work window will reduce direct impacts on the listed species. Shading impacts on the benthic environment will be minimized by the conservation measures discussed above. MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 11 Literature Celedonia, M. T., Roger A. Tabor, Scott Sanders, Daniel W. Lantz, and Ian Grettenberger. 2008.Movement and habitat use of chinook salmon smelts and two predatory fishes in Lake Washington and the Lake Washington Ship Canal. 2004-2005 acoustic tracking studies. Final report to Seattle Public Utilities. Federal Register/ Vol. 61, No. I 02 / May 24, 1996 / Rules and Regulations. Federal Register I Vol. 64, No. 56 / March 24, 1999 / Rules and Regulations. Federal Register/ Vol. 64, No. 2IO /November 1, 1999 / Rules and Regulations. Federal Register/ Vol 70, No.170 I Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations. Federal Register/ Vol. 70, No. 185 / September 26, 2005 / Rules and Regulations. Federal Register/ Vol. 72, No. 91 / Friday, May 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations. Feist, Blake E., J.J. Anderson and R. Miyamota. 1992. Potential impacts of pile driving on juvenile pink (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha) and chum (0. keta) salmon behavior and distribution. FRI-UW-9603, Fish. Res. Inst., UW, Seattle, WA. Fresh, K.L, E. Warner, R. Tabor, and D. Houck. 2000. Migratory behavior of adult Chinook salmon spawning in the Lake Washington watershed in 1998 and 1999 as determined with ultrasonic telemetry. Extended abstract and presentation prepared for the Washington Chinook Salmon Workshop, November. Fresh, K. L., D. Rothaus, KW. Mueller and C. Mueller. 2001. Habitat utilization by predators, with emphasis on smallmouth bass, in the littoral zone of Lake Washington (draft). WDFW. Healey, M. C. 1982. Juvenile Pacific salmon in estuaries: the life support system, pp. 315 -341. In: V.S. Kennedy (ed.), Estuarine comparisons. Academic Press, New York, NY. Kahler, T., M. Grassley and David Beauchamp. 2000. A summary of the effects of bulkheads, pier and other artificial structures and shorezone development on ESA-Jisted sa!monids in lakes. City of Bellevue. Kerwin, J., 2001. Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Limiting Factors Report for the Cedar-Sammamish Basin (WRIA 8). Washington Conservation Commission. Olympia.WA. Myers, J.M., R. G. Kope, G. J. Bryant, D. Teel, L. J. Lierheimer, T. C. Wainwright, W. S. Grand, F. W. Wakni1z, K. Neely, S. T. Lindley, and RS. Waples. 1998. Status review of Chinook salmon from Washington, Idaho, Oregon, and California. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA Tech Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-35, 443 pp. Nightingale, Barbara and Charles Simenstad. 2001a. Dredging activities: marine issues. Submitted to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology, and Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, WA, 144 pp. Nightingale, B. and Charles Simenstad. 2001 b. Overwater structures: marine issues. Submitted to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology, and Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, WA, 177 pp. Rierunan, B. E. and J. D. McIntyre. 1993. Demographic and habitat requirements for conservation of Bull Trout. Gen. Tech. Rpt. U. S. Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, Uf. 38 pp. Simenstad, C. A., K. L. Fresh and E. 0. Salo. 1982. The role of Puget Sound and Washington coastal estuaries in the life history of Pacific salmon: an unappreciated function. Pp. 343-364. In: V. S. Kennedy, (ed.), Estuarine comparisons. Academic Press, New York, NY. Simenstad, C. A., (ed.). 1988. Effects of dredging on anadromous Pacific coast fishes, Workshop proceedings, MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 12 Washington Sea Grant, ,att A, September 8-9, 1988_ Simenstad, CA., B.J. Nightingale, R.M. Thom and D_K_ Shreffler. 1999. lmpacts offerry terminals on juvenile salmon migration along Puget Sound shorelines. Phase 1: Synthesis of state of knowledge. Report to WSDOT/fJSDOT Research Report T9903, Task Al., 116 pp. + appendices. Synthesis of salmon research and monitoring. Investigations conducted in the Western Lake Washington Basin. December 31, 2008. Seattle Public Utilities and the Army Corps of Engineers. Contributors: Mike Cooksey Peter N. Johnson, Paul De Vries, Michele Koehler, Charles J. Ebel, Lynne Melder, Frederick A. Goetz, Jim Muck, Julie Hall Eva Weaver Tabor, RA. and Richard M. Piaskowski. 2002. Nearshore habitat use by juvenile chinook salmon in lentic systems of the Lake Washington Basin. Annual Report, 2001. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Western Washington Fish and Wildlife Office, Fisheries Division. 510 Desmond Drive SE, Suite 102, Lacey, Washington 98503. Tabor, R. A., M. T. Celedonia, F. Mejia, R. M. Piaskowski, D. L. Low, B. Footen and L. Park. 2004. Predation of juvenile chinook salmon by predatory fishes in three areas of the Lake Washington Basin. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Muck:leshoot Indian Tribe and Northwest Fisheries Science Center, J Tabor, R. A. Howard A. Geams, Charles M. McCoy ill, and Sergio Camacho. 2006. Nearshore habitat use by juvenile chinook salmon in lentic systems of the Lake Washington Basin. Annual Report, 2003 and 2004. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Western Washington Fish and Wildlife Office, Fisheries Division. 510 Desmond Drive SE, Suite 102, Lacey, Washington 98503 Washington Department offish and Wildlife (WDfW). 2004. Salmonid Stock Inventory (SaSI). Washington Department offish and Wildlife, Olympia, WA Weitkamp, Don E. September 2003. Young Pacific Salmon in Estuarine Habitats. Review Draft. Parametrix, Inc. Kirkland, WA. Williams, G.D., R. M. Thom, D. K. Shreffler, J. A. Southard, L. K. O'Rourke, S. L. Sergeant, V. L Cullinan, R. MS&A Moursund, and M. Stamey. Assessing Overwater Structure -Related Predation Risk on Juvenile Salmon: Field Observations and Recommended Protocols. September 2003. Prepared for the Washington State Department of Transportation Under a Related Services Agreement With the U.S. Department of Energy Under Contract DE- AC06-76RLO 1830. . Barbee Mill Community Dock Projec! • 13 MS&A Figure 1. Vicinity map PROJECI'" D!;SK:tiID SY; Waterfront Constroction Irr:. THIS l>OO.NOO ts p~ PRDP(Rr'I' ~ IV.4TERF~r CONS1RUCTI~ "IC-AtiC IS NQY 10 8( us:ro, ltf 'f}tDU: OR it,/ PAAT, l"OR A).O' OTHER PROJECT 'YflTHOIJT TH( W/ilTIOI AuTHORIV,TIOl't Of" '/(il,f[ftraONf CONS1RUCtOil NC. VICINITY MAP /NO SCALE LEGAL DESCRIPTION 1/4 SEC: NW J2-24N-05E TAXLOT I: 051850 0350 (-4151) & 0516500360 (4125) BARBEE Mill TG't'i UND INT IN TRS A, 8,C,D,E,F, G,H, 1,L, 1.1,N ,O&P LAT: 4751574~N LDNG; -l2Z.206114W PROJECT NA E: .-;. t~; \'~~---· .J~ •. --~ PURPOSE:PROVIDE. COMI.AVN!TY ACCESS AND PRIVAT( MOORAG( DATUI.A: COE o.o' EST 1919 BARBE€ ),till COf.JMUNITY DOCK ADJACENf OWNERS: G) CONNtR HOlvlES AT BARBEE !,,l!ll LLC 4157 WILLIAMS AVE N RENTON. WA. 98056 0 CONNER ttOMES AT BARBEE !JILL LLC 41 l 9 WILUA~S AVf. N RENTON, WA. 98056 REFERENCE f: SITE LOCATIOt-1 AOOR£55: 4125 & 4151 WIWAl.iS AV( N RENTON, WA. 9B056 WG#: 05-3077-A.1-1 * ! CAKE FOREST PARK w _J I= <t: w CJ) Kt!iMGRE JUANITA ·.·,•.','• RENTON AREA MAP/ 3 t.il!LES 0 1 t.ilLE KIRKLAND PROPOSED: !NSTAU. COIJMUN1TY DOCK 1N; LAKE: WASHINGTON ~R;RENTON COUNT'!'; KING STATE: WA MtL£S APPL 8'(: COt.lNER HOMES Al BARBEE ~ILL LLC SHEET; 1 OF: 7 DATE: 1-12-10 Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 14 ONR WITHDRAWL A DNR 100· MS&A Figure 2. DNR withdrawal a. , WITHDRAWL AREA 50· 100· ... ' "-·---._:::.:=..:=...---,~i ~~~---~:j_{~~:-_-_:-_-_-_-_-_-_ .... -_-_-..-_:_:--- ··-·-·--(' ·--........ , ,' ------- REfERENCE APPLlCAfH~ CONNER HO!.iES AT BARBEE MILL LLC PROP0Sfth INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK SH[ET;3 OF:7 NEAR AT: R'ENTO~ DATE: 1-12-10 D G : 05-30n-A.J-1 * I Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 15 MS&A Figure 3. Plot plan PROJE.CT DESIGNED B'Y: Waterfront Constructioo In;. lHIS DOCU~T IS PROPREJ.ARY f'ROPEl?TY OF lt'AITRFROtil COtGmUCllOt.l INC... .AAIO !S t,fOT TO BE USED, IN Y{tOL.E CR IN PAAl. FOR AW OTHER PROJECT W!THOlJl lHE "#RrTl[t,i i'UTl-tDRIZATION OF WATOUltONl COl'ISTRUCt!()l,j INC. Pl""OSAL ( CONSTRUCT A FULLY GRATED 1,S92SOFTCOMMUN!TY DOCK WITH A S-1J'X172'!1.(ll3S{JFT}W.N WALKWAY, 7'-10' X 56' (437SQFTJ 'r AND5',t0'X:S(152SCf1}FN3ERPffi ( THE DOCK Will HAVE A 100,:. GRATED SUf'ACEWJJJ-lfflWEN5PACE ( THE DOCK Will BE SUPPORTED BY (14} 6' AND (1-4)8"~STERBA11E1HlPlES ( PlfS WU. BE ORI\IEN USING A VIBRATORY Plf rnlVERTOPRACTUJ.FUIJSA.t ( A NATIVE Pt.ANTING PLANWU.BEl'ISTAl.lED " l eo .. , -~.=1.:-33 --·· L~ ( I'\ \ [n;_[J ' ' ----,~ ' ' 'I : ·-----·----------Y@-------·-· .. ----·-·---1 I }q \ ... ,"", I 41o7/CONNER HOMES 34 1:1 OITJ ,I -----------1' NATIVE PWfllNG PLAN JOB SITE <151/CONNER HOMES 35 3, 1 '·,,, . [][I] -. -· - / JOB SITE 412~/CONNER HO~ES 36 ': OE] ___ \_.:~~~ ------- 1, ;@ 4119/,LONNER HOMES 3] } / ----/ 28.4 / / / 4113/CDNNER HOMES _[ 3'-s· 38 _I 28.8 l 4107/KESKAR 39 .. (_,,,- 4101/CONNER HOMES : 40 D[O' ~--,. •' ' ; ,. _________ PLOT PLAN so· zs' o' REF[R(NCE 60' APPUCi\NT; CONNER HOI.AES AT BARBIT !JILL LLC PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK SH[ET;4 Of;7 NEAR AT: R(NTON DAT: 1-12-10 DC :05-.3077-A.4-1 * ' Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 16 s: "' 9<> )> "' ~ ([) ([) ~ () 0 3 3 C :, ~ 0 8 "' -0 .Q. ([) 'l '.J \ ' ' ' ' \ \ \ ·,, \ ,' \ .~·-· --··=*-1r-~ -------------- _,-. ',, ... ~'l __.-,r NATIVE PLANTINC PLAN ,, ',, _________ -----..... '•, ', ',,__ ',,,,, ··.,, \ ·. .._f ---: ..... ______ --~/ WI 5r iro1r, I ',,. f 'j ',. ' i ,,.. , ' Z I \ ; j, ,------\-·/ PROPOSED FULLY 26• ::i / \ -' 1' / GRATED DOCK 9;/i / N : ,.--· l .; , / \ / (14)/PROPOSED 6" I / / '\ 1 / STEE'.L/ BATIERED P!UNG ~/ / / / / / / \ / -·' 5'-10" -I I. ~ ', I I I i 1 ,.,, , r-~:;;J, :, 1 , , / '\ ,.-· \ -\ \ '~' ,' / ' ' 1 J I I / \ l \ OHWL 21.80 {COE'.) \ \ / / / / ). \ 18.BD (NAVDBB) I \ \ / i i , , ' \ , I / I . , \ ,. I , ' , . \~. ', ',~,.,',,, ''-.,. '\, // \ \) .... ___ _ / " \ \ I \.' / / (H-) PROPOSED 8 • \. , I \ \• -i-;-------~- OK'//L2t. NAVOBB (18:ao') STEEL BATiERED PIL\NC 10 10 PROPOSED DOCK DETAIL VIEW SCALE: 1"•30' 1-------------180' ------~-------! >-------------172' ------------, 2'-6" (14) PROPOSED 8" STEEL SATIERED PILING PROPOSED F\J LLY tiRATED DOCK f"STING CONCRETE/SHEET PILE BULKHEAD lO REMAIN ( 14) PROPOSED 6" STEE:L BATTERED PILING REFERENCE If: EXISTING CRAOE EXISTING CONCRETE WAJ..KWAY PROPOSED DOCK ELEVATION VIEW PPUCANT: CONNER HOMES AT BAABE:E "t-A1LL LI..C PROJECT DESICNED S't't Waterfront Construction Inc. THIS DOCUMENT IS PAQPAU.wtY PROPERTY or VfAHRF'RONl CONSrRUCT!ON !NC •• #-ID JS NOT TO 8E U5E'.O. IN WHOLE OR fN PART, f'OR At,/Y OTHER PROJECT ',\'11HQUT ll1E WRITTEN AUTI-IORIZATION OF ;tArtRrRONi CONSTRUCTION !NC. 30' 15' o· SCALE, I "•30' 30· PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNlfY DOCK ISHEET:5 OF:7 -·-····-···--····· ----tj_EAR/AT, RENTON DATE:1-12-10 'G#: 00-.3077-A.~-1 20 ,~ !>-.,, 0 s ro a. 'O 0 ~ 0 ~ a. ro ~ '-~ .,. "' PART PILING CAPS GLU-1.AMS JOIST RIM JOIST NAILER$ GRATING HARDWARE MS&A Figu., ,. Proposed section and framing vi ;A-A 1--------------s·-10·--------------j GRATING PILE COV'ER PLATE ~ CAP B£AM ASSEIABLY STAINLESS STEEL DECK SCREWS 5-1/B""x12,. GLU-l.AM BEAM 3/4" GAI.V, ~ BOL1 '-.1."----'~0H'//l 21.80' (COE) OH'//l 18.80' (NAVD 88) 6" OR a· STEEL BATTERED PILING PROPOSED 6' DOCK SECTION A-A SCALE, 3/4"=1' t-----~---------5'-10~---------~----I STAINLESS STEEL D£CK SCREWS 2•x6"' JOIST <! 2' 0/C GRATING 3/4" GA.LV. THRU ROD lSd GALV, COMMON NAILS (TYP) 5-1/B",12" GLU-LAM BEA~ .3'•x4~ LEDGER WI ,;r,r CALV. LAG BOLT @ 1 5• 0/C PROPOSED 6' SECTION FRAMING 12· 5· 3· o· I --SCALE: 3/4.=1' lwtATEFML LIST SPECS TREATMENT 6"&8 .. STD WALL STE£L EPDX'I' COATED OR HDG W6,1S "H" BEAM HOG 5 1/B~x12~ &. 7 1/a'"x12" DF (24-F-V4) ACZA 2·,s· or ff2 OR BTR ACZA rx6M DF #2 OR BTR ACZA t''x4M OF #2 DR BTR ACZA SUN'WALK POLYPROPYLENE NONE STEEL STAJNLESS OR HDG PROJECT DESIGNED BY: Waterfront Constroctio~ loc. lHIS DOCIJUE),ff IS PROPRCt'RY PROPE!m' OF WATCRFROtfl CONSfRUClEON r~ •• .&J..10 ts ~ TO OC USED, It-{ WHOL£ OR IN PART, FOR N,('( OTHER PROJECT 'l\'llHOUT THE 1,'RITTE~ AuTHORlZ-ATION or WAltfURON'I CONSfflUCllOH INC. NOTE: ALL Pll(S TO BE DRIVEJ.i TO PRAC11CAL REFUSAL. REFERENCE : APPLICANT; CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MtU LLC PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK SHEET; 6 OF; 7 NEAR AT: RENTON DATE: 1-12-10 D : 05-3077-A..6-1 Barbee Mill Community Dock Projecl • l B s:: V, 9' )> "' 0 er * ~ () 0 3 3 C J 0 0 () 7<' I -• "' PART PILINc;: CAPS CLU-LAMS JOIST R!M JOIST NAILERS GRATING HARDWARE f-----------------7'-IO"----------------< .2"x4" NAJLER 0 18" 0/C !JAX. TYP ) 1/4" -er PROJECT OESIGNro em . Waterfront Construction Ire. 1HJS DOCUMENT IS PRO!'ffETNrl' PRO~RlY OF' WATE:RFRONl CONSTRIJCTION INC .. AND !$ NOT TO 9E l.lSED. IN WHO!..£ OR N. PART, FOR AN'!' OTHCR PROJEC"T WllHOVT THE '/fRITT[N AUrnORIZAlJON OF WATtRrR:Ot·n CONSTRUCTION INC. GRATING P\LE COVER PLATE CAP BEAM ASSE~8LY 6l PROPOSED 8' DOCK SECTION 8-B SCALL 3/4'=1' STAINLESS STEEL DECK SCREWS 2·-e· 1'-6" I 7-1/8",12' GLU-l.Ai.< BEAM .3/4" GALV, LAC BOLT J OHl'/L 21.80' (COE) OHWL 18.80' {NAVD 88) 8' STEEL BATIEREO PILING i----------------7'-IO"----------------l STAINLESS STEEL DECK SCREWS 2'\4' N.'JLER ~ 1 a" 0/C MAX, GRATING 7-1/6"xl2" GLU-LAM BEAM 16d GALV. COMMON 2"~5" JOIST @ 2· 0/C W,TERW. LIST SPECS TREATMENT 6"&8" STD WALL STEEL EPOXY COATED OR HOG W6'15 'H" SEMI HOG 5 1/8'x12" & 7 1/8'<12" OF (2<F-V4) ACZA 2"x6" Of f/2 OR 6TR ACZA 2">:6" DF 1#2 OR BTR ACiA 2Nx4" OF #2 OR BTR ACZA SUNWALK POLYPROPYLENE NONE STEEL STAINLESS OR HOG 3/4~ CA!.V. THRU ROD r:<:6~ RIM JOIST NAJLS (TYP) .3"x4" LEDGER PROPOSED 8' SECTION FRAMING W/ I /2",7" GALV, LAG SOLT C 16" o;c 12· 6" 3" o' 1· I NOTE: ALL PILES TO BE DRIVEN TO PRACTICAL RErUSAL. ~ SCALE: .3/4.~-1· REFERE_tlCE H: PPLICANT: cb"F,fNER HOMES AT BARs-tE -\..,fo.L LLC PROPOSED: !NSTAU COMMUN!TY DOCK SH_EfJ': _1___ __Q_F': 7 .!':!_E:!',!1/_All_ RENfON DATE: 1-12-19 DWC#: 05-3077-A,7-1 co C: ... 1 :::;i 0 "C ~ (1) 0. .. (1) n ::,: 0 :, C :, 0. a ~ I._ :s. I" "' ' "' MS&A Figure 7. Planting areas \, r.. \/ \ \ I l \ / / • l I w ; / / z ; I I _J / L f ---j----I --/ /---/ , / / I !/ ! I ! ~I I / / ,/l ti I / / / ~ \ i/ I./· zll\ \ ( / / Z \, ,I ,,I I -1 \ \ '~' 1 I \\ ,///' \ \ , / r j l \ / / / l \ / : I L_4-_ -+f---+---,L I \ 1./ I : PLANTING AREAS 16' 16' + i •• o' PlANTING DESIGN SY THE WATERSHED COMPANY 750 Sbcdl Street Soud'I IOridlnd WA IJ803l Ji -425..BZ2.Sl42 r .f25...1127.s11& www.wate.sl...Jco..cgrr, Schnee & D,Hlgn \ ! /-------.... _, LOT 35 JOB SITE 4151/CONNER HOMES --------""'-',, \ i / JOB SITE ( 4125/CONNER HOMES \ \ LOT 36 ) \ ___ _ =====:.;;\:==:L --------, " - REFERENCE if: APPLCANT: CONNER HO~ES AT BARBEE MIU.: UC PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNllY DOCK SHEET: 1 OF:4 NfAR/AT: RCNTDN OATF: 1-12-10 OWG : 05 3077 A.2 1 Barbee Mill Communily Docl,_Project • 20 MS&A Figure 8. Planting legenl- ~ -;,- ""'--- PLANTING AREAS 16' 8' o' --------- GENERAL PlANTING SEQUENCE, I I I I I I I I I I I I \ , . ' \ I I I I ' l I I I I I I I I ' ' I I it "'it --1\ : -: t I f, I .-·-,, ... • " -. lW. · ,• -ir ..... - ~ ~ ' '. I. ~ pbrd: Installation shall QCQ.11" during frost-free periods onft. Preferred months for-Enst:a11ation ill"C between September I Sth and April 15, prior to hot. dry weather. ~ may only be installed during hot weather if the contraaor agrees to immediate inigation of the mtiTe planting area. dellYering at least 2" 1;1f water per wed<. 2. ProoJre plants in legend 3l'ld insure that material meets the minimum requirements outlinod In the t>"'>t leg,nd and plantio& detai!L 3. Locate al existing: utilitit1$ within the limit of work. The contractor is responsible for any utillty damage as: a resuh: of the landscape construction. -t. R&move al invasive weeds (if cineounterecf) by grubbing out~. 5. Amend.soils as.heeded tQ pto\'lde-min. 20%, orpiic: materialtlroughoutthe plandng area. Add compost to Increase. organk: cootent,. rotQtid Into pl:amJn-g ,area 6. Nerte: The contractor is responsible for arry advcrw drainage oonditlons that may affect pt'Qper plant growth and~ Notify owner of any poor draf~ conditiom; prior to construction. 7. Layout plant material per plan for inspection by the Landscape Architect. Plant substitvtion$ wi1r NOT be aDo~ without the approval of the Landscape A,-chitect. 8. Install plants per planting details, sheet l. •• --pbnt thorough~ to '"""""' ... pocket,. 10. lnmdla. -4• depth.~ wood-chip mulch ririgthroug.hout entire project area. 11. Ind :a temporwy irrigation .system ap2hle of dewerin.!!: r or water per week to the entin, planted"""-Maintain t,,-tg,<""1 ,y,tem In worl<lng «>ndltion tor rwo (2) summers after initial pbnt installation, The landscape contractor shall maintain all plant material until final lnspecdon and approval by the Owner or Owner's represem::ative. All plantings and workmanship shall be guarantt:ed for one year fotlowlng final owner acceptance. PLANTING DESIGN BY THE WATERSHED COMPANY 750 SIXIh Street South Kirkland WA 98033 p-42S.82l.5'.H2 ( •425.BV,$136 www.~-=m Science & Delign I \ I BP PROJECT OESICNEO B'l': Walerfrmt Con,l:ructlon Inc. 'Of!S DOCUMENT tS PRO.P~ETMY' PROPERTY OF WAlffif'RONT CONSTRI.ICTIOn INC., ANO s NOT TO BE usra. IN WHOL£ OR IN PART, FOR AN'l' OTHER PROJE:c:r Wll'HOllT lHE WRfllU'4 AUTHORIZA"lloN or WATERfT.:()ITT CONSTRUCTION INC . PLANTING LEGEND SOENTIRCI COMMON NAME ro:::r,_ SIZE/ CDMMENn TI!!!e AC ACERCIRCINATIJM " l GAL, WElL Bl'ANCHB) """"""" """"'"""""" ' S GAi.. Wfl.L M>.ANCHEO """""" TP n-lUJ" PUCATA • 5 CAL. 'M:LL BAANOIED """""""' <>OM '"""" cs co,NUS"""" • l CAI.. t-U..'Tl-STEH ...,,..,. """"""° 7 l@L.. FUU. ll llUSHY ®"=.~ 0 ~=,no ' l G.<J.. FUU.l 'IIUSH'f PAOf!C r,(fNEBAAIC G fllSESS,l,,NGUIHILIH " l GAL A.JU.A Bl&ff "" """"""" """""' ' , ' I GAL SL SN.IXLUCIOAap. ~ I 'G==""" 7 2 CAL. FULL Ii W5HY "'""'""' @ V~cri~ERRY " l GAl., F1.JU 18\.JSHY 0==' ' lGAI..FULl&.IIUSH'I' """""""" ® AACTOSTHHYl,OS:UVA-llflSI ,., :2.5" POT!ii, 24'0.C. klNNUONNIOC. a ""'"""'""'''". , .. :U"POT\.laf'O.C. """"""' A @HN«)NLl,.N~ " lGAl..14'0.C lJYH Ol'J;GON QIN'f: 0 """""'"""""""' " <POil """"""' ®1--~ Pt.ANT AT LEMT 2: Of TI-fl ~-umo""""' CASTILLEV,MINATA I GAL; :W a.c. COMHONlll!DP,.IJNTlfl.l,.t$H OB.PHINJUM MENZl£$11 --PE~ON$UCIIULA'T\JS. =•'"'"''°" REFERENCE f: APPLICANT: CONNER HOMES AT 8ARB£E Mill LLC PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK SH£ET:2 OF:4 DATF: 1-12-10 INF AR/A: RCNTON lowGE: OS 3077 A.2 1 Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 21 MS&A Figure 9. Planting plan I FOR PLANTING LEGEND SEE SHEET~ L PLANTING PLAN 16' t 16' s· o' THE WATERSHED COMPANY 750 Souh Street. $Quth Khidaod WA 9903~ Jt.flS..822.5242 f 0.827.8U6 www.,r.il:ei.J1e:oko.axn Science & Desifn I ' . . . PROJCCT DCS Cl-l[D S'f: Wal:erfrwt Cmotrud;io:1 Inc. THIS DOC:UMENT ts PROPR1E1/\RY PRoPfRJY Of WA."JERF'RONT C0!6T'RUC110N 11'¥; •• ANO IS NOT TO BE IJSE:D, IN WHOI . .E OR IN PAAT, FOR >xf Olli[R PROJECT \1/fTHOUT THE: WRITT8-I AtrfHORIZATlON or WATffifROITT COt>"STRUcnON INC. REFERENCE #: I I I I I I ' I 1 1 :: I 1! 1 APPLICANT: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MILL LLC PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK SHEET:3 OF:4 NEAR/AT: RENTON DATF: 1-12-10 OWG : 05 3077 A.2 1 Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 22 MS&A ire 10. Tree and shrub plantir ie NOTES: I. PIANT GROUNDCOVER AT Sl'ECIRED DISTANCE ON-CENTER (O.c.) USING TRIANGULAR SPAONG, TYP. 2. LOOSEN SJDES AND B01TOM OF PLANTING f»IT AND REMOVE DEBRIS 3. ~ ROOTBOUND PlANTS BEFORE INSTAUJNG 4. SOAK PIT BEFORE AND AFTER INSTAUJNG Pl.ANT 4' DEEP SPECIAED MULO< LAYER HOLD BACK FROM STEMS 2" HT_ WATERBASIN;NATIVESOiLORMULOi 0 !!OUNDCOVER& PERENNIALPIANTING DETAIL THE WATERSHED COMPANY 750 Si,t;lh SQ"OOt South ~WA98033 p '42S.82l.Sl'4l f 425.lW.8136 www.~-o=>m Science & Design NOTES: 1. PLANTING PIT SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN (2) TIMES THE WIDTH OF THE ROOT BAl...l. DIA. 2. LOOSEN SIDES ANO BOTTOMS OF PLANTING PIT 3. SOAK Pl.ANTING PIT AFTER PLANTING REMOVE FROM POT & ROUGH-UP ROOT BALL BEFORE INSTAWNG. UNTANGI.£ ANO STRAIGHTEN ORCUNG ROOTS • PRUNE IF NECESSARY. IF Pl.ANT IS EXCEl'TlONALLY ROOT -BOUND, DO NOT PU\NT AND RETlJRN TO NURSERY FOR AN ACCEPTABLE AL TERNA 4' MULO< LAYER-HOLD BACK MULCH FROM TRUNK/STEMS ~--l"MINHT. WATER BASIN FINISH GRADE SLOW REI.EASE GRANULAR FERTILIZER, OSMOCOTE =---ORAPPR.OVEO EQUIV. (OUTSIDE OF O.H.W.M. 2X MIN DblL R00TBALL ONLY)M'PLIED ONEYEARAFTERlNITIAL PLANTING REMOVE DEBRJSAND LARGE ROCKS ANO BACKRLL WITH NATIVE SOIL FIRM UP SOILAROUND PLANT 0 ~E & SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL PROJECT DES!Gtll:;O B'r. W.a!:erfr"11> Ca,~ loc. THIS DQCUl.l.f.N'T IS f>RD?RIErol.R'I' PROPERTY Of' WATERFRONT C01'1STRUCT!ON JNC., ANO IS NOf TO a( U$ED, lhl WHOL.f OR IN PJ.RI", FOR ANY CJTHER PRO..ECT WITHOUT 01( WfttTTEN oWTttORIZATION OF WATERFRONT CONSl'ROCTION. llfC. REFERENCE .i: /\PPL CANT: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MILL LLC PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNl1Y DOCK SHEET:4 OF:4 NrAA/AT; RENTON DATF: 1-12-10 DWG : OS. 3077 A.2 1 Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 23 Attachment 1. Photographs of the site Looking north along the site's bulkhead looking south from the site MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 24 Project site MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 25 .chment 2. Species list for King Co f LISTED AND PROPOSED ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES AND CRITICAL HABITAT; CANDIDATE SPECIES; AND SPECIES OF CONCERN IN KING COUNTY AS PREPARED BY THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFESERVICE WESTERN WASHINGTON FISH AND WILDLIFE OFFICE (Revised November 1, 2007) LISTED Bull trout (Salvelinus co,ifluentus) Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) Gray wolf ( Canis lupus) Grizzly bear (Ursus arctos = U. a. horribilis) Marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) Northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) Major concerns that should be addressed in your Biological Assessment of project impacts to listed species include: 1. Level of use of the project area by listed species. 2. Effect of the project on listed species' primary food stocks, prey species, and foraging areas in all areas influenced by the project. 3. Impacts from project activities and implementation (e.g., increased noise levels, increased human activity and/or access, loss or degradation of habitat) that may result in disturbance to listed species and/or their avoidance of the project area. Castilleja levisecta (golden paintbrush) (historic] Major concerns that should be addressed in your Biological Assessment of project impacts to listed plant species include: 1. Distribution oftaxon in project vicinity. 2. Disturbance (trampling, uprooting, collecting, etc.) of individual plants and loss of habitat. 3. Changes in hydrology where taxon is found. · DESIGNATED Critical habitat for bull trout Critical habitat for the marbled murrelet Critical habitat for the northern spotted owl MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project• 26 PROPOSED None CANDIDATE Oregon spotted frog (Rana pretiosa) Yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) SPECIES OF CONCERN Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) Belier's ground beetle (Agonum bellen) California wolverine ( Gulo gulo luteus) Cascades frog (Rana cascadae) Hatch's click beetle (Eanus hatchl} Larch Mountain salamander (Plethodon larsellz) Long-eared myotis (Myotis evotis) Long-legged myotis (Myotis volans) Northern goshawk (Accipiter gentilis) Northern sea otter (Enhydra lutris kenyoni) Northwestern pond turtle (Emys (= Clemmys) marmorata marmorata) Olive-sided flycatcher (Con/opus cooper,) Pacific lamprey (Lampetra tridentata) Pacific Townsend=s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii townsendii) Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) River lamprey (!,ampetra ayresi) Tailed frog (Ascaphus truei) Valley silverspot (Speyer/a zerene bremeri) Western toad (Bufo boreas) Aster curtus (white-top aster) Botrychium pedunculosum (stalked moonwort) Cimicifuga elata (tall bugbane) MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 27 At ment 3. Essential Fish Habitat Ass, 1enl A. Background The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), as amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act ofl996 (Public law 104-267), requires Federal agencies to consult with NMFS on activities that may adversely affect designated Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) for the relevant species. According to the MSA, EFH means "those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity." For the Pacific West Coast, the Pacific Fisheries Management Council (Council) has designated EFH for federally managed groundfish (PFMC 1998a), coastal pelagic (PFMC 1998b) and Pacific salmon fisheries (PFMC 1999). The purpose of the EFH Assessment is fo determine the effects of the proposed project on the EFH for the relevant species and to recommend conservation measur.es to avoid, minimize or otherwise offset adverse effects on EFH. B. Identification of EFH The designated EFH for groundfish and coastal pelagic species encompasses all waters from the mean high water line, and upriver extent of saltwater intrusion in river mouths, along the coasts of Washington, Oregon and California, seaward to the boundary of the U.S. exclusive economic zone (370.4 km) (PFMC 1998a, 1998b). The designated EFH in estuarine and marine areas for Pacific salmon species extends from the nearshore and tidal submerged environments within state territorial water out to the full extent of the exclusive .economic wne (370 .4 km) offshore of Washington, Oregon and California north of Point Conception to the Canadian border PFMC, 1999). Freshwater EFH for Pacific salmon includes all those streams, lakes, ponds, wetlands and other water bodies currently, or historically accessible to salmon in Washington, Oregon, Idaho and California, except areas upstream of certain impassable man-made barriers, and longstanding, naturalliimpassable barriers. Chinook salmon and coho salmon are the species with designated EFH that are found in Lake Washington C. Proposed Action The details of the proposed project are presented in Project Description section of the attached BE/Habitat Data Report. D. Effects of the Proposed Action The effects of this project on designated EFH are likely to be similar to the effects described in detail in the Effects Analysis section of the attached BE/Habitat .Data Report. The project is likely to have no permanent, long-term effects EFH designated for chinook and coho salmon. E. EFH Conservation Measures The conservation measures and BMP's mentioned in the attached BE/Habitat Data Report will be implemented to minimize possible adverse effects to EFH. · MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 28 F. Conclusion The project may have temporaiy adverse effects on EFH the salmon species, but will not produce long-term adverse effects on EFH for the above species. The conservation measures and BMP' s mentioned in the attached BF1Habitat Data Report will be implemented to minimize any possible the ternporaiy adverse effects on EFH. G. Additional References PFMC (Pacific Fishery Management Council). 1999. Amendment 14 to the Pacific Coast Salmon Plan. Appendix A: Description and Identification of Essential Fish Habitat, Adverse Impacts and Recommended Conservation Measures for Salmon (August 1999). PFMC, 1998a. Final Environmental Assessment/Regulatory Review for Amendment 11 to the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan (October, 1998). PFMC, 1998b. The Coastal Pelagic Species Fishery Management Plan: Amendment 8 (December, 1998). MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 29 Attachment 4. Asse mt of Impacts to Crilical Habitat I uget Sound Chinook Project description: Construction of a new community-use dock on Lake Washington in Renton, This assessment covers the primary constituent elements (50 CFR Part 226, page 74581-2) determined essential to the conservation of Puget Sound Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha): (1) Freshwater spawning sites with water quantity and quality conditions and substrate supporting spawning, incubation, and larval development. F.xisting Conditions: There are no suitable freshwater spawning sites at the project location. (2) Freshwater rearing sites with water quantity and floodplain connectivity to form and maintain physical habitat conditions and support juvenile growth and mobility; water quality and forage supporting juvenile development; :aid natural cover such as shade, submerged and overhanging large wood, log jams and beaver dams, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut banks. r ,i•,ling Conditions: Native vegetation has been planted immediately landward of the bulkhead in conjunction ,•,1th the upland development. There is a concrete/sheet pile bulkhead along the shoreline of both properties. No side channels or undercut banks were noted. (3) Freshwater migration corridors free of obstruction with water quantity and quality conditions and natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut banks supportingjuvenile and adult mobility and slll'Vival. Existing Conditions: See (2) above. (4) Estuarine areas free of obstruction with water quality, water quantity and salinity conditions supporting juvenile and adult physiolugical transitions between fresh-and saltwater; natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, and side channels, and juvenile and adult forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation. Existing Conditions: See (2) above. (5) ,\/earshore marine areas free of obstruction with water quality and quantity conditions and forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation; and natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulder and side channels. f,isting Conditions: The site is in a freshwater area. (6) Offshore marine areas with water quality conditions and forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation. Existing Conditions: The site is in a freshwater lake area. MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 30 Effects Analysis: A comp" di sion of the effects of this project fr ·n i • BE/Habitat bata Reporl Construction will produce bnef and localized increased turbidity, which will be contained by a silt curtain. The project will have no long-term impacts on water quantity, salinity conditions or water temperature. Construction during work windows will prevent impacts to the listed fish species. Shading impacts on the benthic environment will be reduced by design components of the proposed project. The entire dock will be fully grated. The smallest number and diameter steel piles will be used to minimize the amount of structure in the water and disturbance to the substrate. Gin-lam stringers will be used to allow the longest spans possible between piles. The construction barge will not be allowed to ground out on the lake bottom at anytime. A native planting plan will be installed. Determination of Effect: "May affect, not likely to adversely affect'' MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 3 \ Attachment 5. Assessment of Impacts to Critical Habitat for Coastal -Puget Sound Bull Trout COE reference: Unknown at this time Applicant: Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC (Attn: Charlie Conner). The primary constituent elements determined essential to the conservation of bull trout (Salvelinus conjluentus) are; (1) Water temperatures that support bull trout use. Bull trout have been documented in streams with temperatures from 32 to 72 °f (0 to 22 °C) but are found more frequently in temperatures ranging from 36 to 59 °f (2 to 15 °C). These temperature ranges may vary depending on bull trout life history stage and form, geography, elevation, diurnal and seasonal variation, shade, such as that provided by riparian habitat, and local groundwater influence. Stream reaches that preclude bull trout use are specifically excluded from designation. Existing Conditions: The project will take place in Lake Washington, a large body of fresh water. Effects to PCE: The project is not expected to have any influence ou the water temperature of Lake Washington. (2) Complex stream channels with features such as woody debris, side channels, pools, and undercut banks to provide a variety of depths, velocities, and in stream structures. Existing Conditions: Project will take place in Lake Washington -not in a stream environment Effects to PCE: No effect (3) Substrates of sufficient amount, size and composition to ensure success of egg and embryo overwinter survival, fry emergence, and young-of-the year and juvenile survival. This should include a minimal amount of fme substrate less than 0.25 in (0.63 cm) in diameter. Existing Conditions: No spawning activity at the site Effects to PCE: No effect (4) A natural hydrograph, including peak, high, low, and base flows within historic ranges or, ifregulated, currently operate under a biological opinion that addresses bull trout, or a hydrograph that demonstrates the ability to support bull trout populations by minimizing daily and day-to-day fluctuations and minimizing departures from the natural cycle of flow levels corresponding with seasonal variation: This rule finds that reservoirs currently operating under a biological opinion that addresses bull trout provides management for PCEs as currently operated. Existing Conditions: Project will take place in Lake Washington Effects to PCE: The project does not involve any alteration in the lake level; therefore it will have no impact on this PCE. MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 32 (5) Springs, seeps, ground, r s :es, and subsurface water to contril to er quality and quantity as a cold- water source. Existing Conditions: See 4 above Effects to PCE: This project will have no impact on springs, seeps, groundwater sources or subsurface water (6) Migratory corridors with minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments between spawning, rearing, overwintering, and foraging habitats, including intermittent or seasonal barriers induced by high water temperatures or low flows. Existing Conditions: Native vegetation has been planted along the site shoreline. Effects to PCE: The proposed dock will incorporate design components that will decrease negative impacts on foraging habitat and migratory corridors. The proposed dock will be fully grated and supported by the smallest number and diameter steel pilings, which will cause minimal physical, biological or water quality impediments. (See the BE/Habitat Data Report for details). (7) An abundant food base including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic macro invertebrates, and forage fish. Existing Conditions: Native vegetation has been planted along the site shoreline. Effects to PCE: See 6 above (8) Permanent water of sufficient quantity and quality such that normal reproduction, growth and survival are not inhibited. Existing Conditions: See 4 above. Effects to PCE: Pile driving may produce temporary turbidity impacts. These are expected to be short term and are not expected to have a significant impact on critical habitat. Any debris associated with the project construction phase will be <Xmtained by a silt containment curtain. Determination of Effect: ''No destruction or adverse modification" Conservation Measures: Conservation measures for this project are seen in the BE/Habitat Data Report. MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 33 uA. to-cor:; LAKE and STREAM STUDY Barbee Mill Community Dock Project For: Conner Homes at Barbee Mill, LLC [Attn: Charlie Conner) 8461081hAveNE Bellevue, WA 98004 At: Conner Homes at Barbee Mill 4151 and4125 Williams Ave N Renton. WA 98056 Parcels #051850 0350(4151) and 0518500360 (4125) Prepared by: Marine Surveys & Assessments 521 Snagstead Way Port Townsend, WA 98368 Phone: (360) 385-4073, Fax: (360) 385-1724 E-mail sea@cablespeed.com January 19. 2010 City of Renton Planning Division f""", _,,-·, .. ,., !'- )":, EXHIBIT 9 List of Figures Figure Number Page 1. Vicinity and area maps ...................................................................... 6 2. DNR withdrawal area .......................................................................... 7 3. Plot plan ............................................................................................... .8 4. Proposed pier plan and elevation views ........................................ 9 5. Proposed section and framing views A-A. ..................................... l O 6. Proposed section and framing views B-B ....................................... 11 7, Planting areas ............................................. , ...................................... 12 8. Planting legend ........•........................................................................ 13 9. Planting plan ...................................................................................... 14 10. Tree and shrub planting detail ........................................................ 15 MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 2 Ja ___ e Mill Community Doc._ Pre_ :t Lake and Stream Study Assessment Narrative I. PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Project Purpose and Location: The proposed Community Dock will consist of a fully grated 1,592 ft2 dock with a 5'-lO"x 172' (1,003 fP) main walkway, a 7'-1 O" x 56' ( 437 ft2) "T" and a 5' -1 O" x 26' (152 JP) finger pier (Figures 3-6). The dock will have a 100% grated surface with 46% open space. The dock will be supported by (14) 6" And (14) 8" diameter steel battered piles. Piles will be driven using a vibratory pile driver to practical refusal. A native planting plan will be installed (Figures 7-9). A 6' wide walkway is needed to safely serve the anticipated IIUIDber of users. The proposed Community Dock will be located adjacent to Lot 35, 4151 Williams Ave N and Lot 36, 4125 Williams Ave. N, Renton, WA 98056, presently owned by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC ( tbe "applicant" for the requested shoreline substantial development permit). The purpose of the project is to provide water access and transient moorage for I 00 property owners from tbe Barbee Mill community and private moorage for I property owner. The proposed Barbee Mill Community Dock would be a day use only structure except for tbe 5'-10" x 26' finger pier, which will provide full time privatemooragefor Lot 36, 4125 Williams Ave. N. The properties are located within tbe Barbee Mill Community, a major waterfront subdivision currently nuder development by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC. The subject property is located along tbe eastern shore of Lake Washington in tbe City of Renton in Section 32, Township 24N, Range 5E; Latitude: 47.515745"N/Longitude: 122.206114°W. Two bodies of water are adjacent to, or flow through, tbe Barbee Mill Community: Lake Washington and May Creek. The subject property is located along Lake Washington, a Shoreline of Statewide Significance as provided in RMC 4-3-090Fl, and a Shorel_ine oftbe State under RMC 4-11-190. This Standard Stream or Lake Study is prepared in accordance witb tbe requirements ofRMC 4-8-120D witb respect to tbe Lake Washington shoreline of the subject property and the 100' of abutting lakeshorelots both to tbe norfh an_d to the south of the subject property - (the "study area"). May Creek, a Shoreline of the State (RMC 4-3-090F2), flows through the Barbee Mill Community. The distance from the closest edge of the project site to the OHWL of May Creek is 190'. The project location itself is 345' from the OHWL of May Creek. The community May Creek open space (a riparian buffer), parking spaces and a street cover the area between the southeastern comer of the subject property and May Creek. Project Description: The Barbee Mill community is being developed by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC on the approximately 22 acre site of the former Barbee Mill Company lumber mill. Upon completion, the Barbee Mill community will have 114 multi-story paired homes, a pond, walking trails and lakefront open space for the use of residents. Lots 23 through 48 are lakefront lots. To restore the former industrial site to a parcel suitable for a residential waterfront subdivision, the mill buildings were demolished; fill soils were removed from behind the bulkhead; asphalt paving, a pier, the wooden bulkhead and piling associated witb the mill operation were removed; and extensive shoreline restoration was completed. The subject property is located south of, and was not included in this extensive remediation. The project shoreline is a sheet pile bulkhead with a concrete cap. The substrate immediately waterward of the bulkhead consists oflarge and small cobble. The proposed Community Dock would be oriented to keep all structures and moorage within the side property setbacks of each property in compliance with all City of Renton zoning and municipal codes (Figure 3 ). As mentioned above, the purpose do tbe Community Dock is to provide water access and transient moorage for 100 property owners from the Barbee Mill community and private moorage for 1 property owner. Residents and their MS&A Borbee Mm Community Dock Project • 3 guests would have use of the Doc ; swimming, fishing, water skiing and an mber of other water sports and activities. In establishing design parameters for the proposed project, the applicant required that the proposed structure does not interfere with the general public's use and enjoyment of Lake Washington, that no structure pose a navigation hazard to boaters, and that no structure interfere with_the use of existing or future neighboring docks or piers. The location of the proposed Community Dock also removes it entirely for the DNR withdrawal area to the north. 2. LAKE AND STREAM CLASSIFICATIONS As a Shoreline of Statewide Significance (RMC 4-3-090Fl), Lake Washington is included in the definition of a Shoreline of the State (RMC 4-11-190). Lake Washington is a Class I lake as it is a perennial salmonid-bearing body of water classified as a Shoreline of the State (RMC 4-l l-l 90S I). May Creek is an important salmonid stream that is classified by the City ofRenton and the State of Washington as Class 1 waters and included within the definition of a Shoreline of the State (RMC 4-3-090F2). -3. SHORELINE RESTORATION AND OHW MARK Shoreline Restoration: Prior to restoration of the beach in conjunction with vacation of the land, the Lake Washington shoreline north of the subject property was heavily bulkheaded, back-filled and covered with impervious asphalt paving; numerous piling and substantial quantities of concrete rubble and other shoreline debris were on the site: Pursuant to the general development site remediation, upland and in-water structures including the timber bulkhead and piling were removed, shoreline rubble was removed, fill soil was excavated to sub grade elevations, toe rock and a temporary quarry spall erosion control berm were installed, and sand, gravel and rock materials were used to construct a beach to mimic natural conditions. Although the area of extensive remediation did not encompass the subject property, a planting buffer of native vegetation was installed along all the lakefront lots, including the subject property, to environmentally and functionally enhance the entire development shoreline. There would be no clearing or grading associated with the proposed. Community Dock. OHWMark: The Ordinary High Water (OHW) mark for Lake Washington is the line of mean high water (RMC 4-11-150 Definitions O). The Lake Washington water depth is controlled by the Army Corps of Engineers at the Hiram M. Chittenden Locks and is at 21.8' oflake elevation. The OHWL at the project site is seen in Figure 4. 4. VEGETATIVE COVER OF THE SITE The study area includes no wetland or flood hazard areas; it does include Lake Washington riparian areas. Prior to the Barbee Mill Beach Restoration project, riparian vegetation was found to be generally absent within the study area as the shoreline behind the bulkhead was paved. In unpaved areas, vegetation noted included Juncus ejfusus (soft rush) and Iris pseudocaris (a non-native iris). The upland redevelopment required extensive regrading and clearing; a mitigation planting plan was agreed upon that includes planting along the Lake Washington shoreline. In accordance with this mitigation plan, plantings on the subject property have been installed. In conjunction with construction of the proposed Community Dock; additional native plants, shrubs and/or trees will be planted as specified in applications to, and as approved by, the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (Figures 7-9). · 5. ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS OF LAKE WASHINGTON ALONG STUDY AREA Until relatively recently, the industrial structures and use of the site limited the ecological functions that would otherwise have been provided by Lake Washington and its adjacent riparian area As a result of the extensive general site restoration work completed north of the subject property, including removal of the wooden bulkhead, large pier and numerous pilings, excavation of fill soil from behind the bulkhead, and reconstruction of the beach to mimic its natural state, the ecological functions of the portion of the lake within the study area should be greatly MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 4 enhanced. Recently plantec. _,ari1 getation and additional plantings . ,onj1 on with the proposed project will further assist in restoring the ecological functions of Lake Washington. Mnch ofthis new vegetation will be overhanging, providing shade and predator protection for fish and aquatic invertebrates. The newly planted riparian vegetation will add significant organic matter to the lake substrate in the form ofleaves and woody debris that fall and wash in; an additional source of food, shelter and shade for aquatic invertebrates and fish. This increased vegetation wilI also provide food and shelter for terrestrial insects, and in turn provide an ad<litional food source for birds and animals that feed upon them. The addition of riparian vegetation to this formerly near-b= site should also help water quality by filtering pollutants, removing nutrients and reducing sediments in any runoff from the . adjacent upland development Tue smaller design of the proposed project as compared to the structures removed, together with increased overhanging vegetation, may facilitate the migration of juvenile salmon .. 6. FISH OR .WILDLIFE USE OF AREA Birds: Birds observed on or near the site include hawks, herons, eagles, quail, osprey, cormorants and songbirds. Before the mill structures were demolished, an osprey nest was successfully relocated from the top of the old mill sawdust collector to a platform built on a 25' pole over the water not far from the original nest site. The osprey have accepted the new nest and.a video camera records their activities for viewing over the Internet. Although the bald eagle is no longer on the list of threatened or endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), bald eagles continue to be protected by the Bald and Golden Eagles Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and are protected as a "sensitive species" within the state of Washington (YI AC 232-12-011 ). The only eagle nests observed near the project site are two nests approximately 0.65 mile from the site on the opposite shore. Mammals: The only wild mammals reported as observed in the area are deer.· Fish: Salmonids observed at the site include salmon and trout. Salmonids known to be present in southern Lake Washington include Puget Sound chinook salmon, coho salmon, sockeye salmon, steelbead trout, bulI trout and cutthroat trout. Puget Sound chinook, Puget Sound steelbead and bull trout are all listed as threatened under the ESA. Other fish observed at the site include bass, blac_k crappie, bluegill, pumpkinseed sun.fish, tench and yeliow perch. The shoreline remediation was designed to be consistent with Water Resource Inventory Area (WR!A) 8 Conservation Plan recommendations. As a result of the remediation, shoreline that was previously unsuitable habitat for fish and other aquatic life due to extensive shoreline modifications and industrial use of the site bas been restored. The restored gravel substrate and gently sloping bottom should provide favorable habitat for winter rearing of salmon fry. The new gravel substrate to the north and the existing cobble on the subject property should be suitable habitat for benthic invertebrates which would likely attract juvenile salmouids. 7. MEASURES TO PROTECT TREES AND VEGETATION At the present time, the study area bas no living woody plant with a trunk six inches or greater in <liameter or any other plant falling within the definition of "Tree" in RMC 4-11-200. This is likely because of the prior asphalt paving over, and industrial use of, the area and subsequent excavation and regrading in accordance with the approved upland development plan. The proposed Community Dock area bas been landscaped pursuant to the general development planting plan. Additional native plants, shrubs and/or trees will be installed in accordance with state and federal project permits. Trees planted in accordance with all landscaping plans will likely have trunks less than six inches in diameter at the time of planting (Figures 7-9). MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 5 figure 1. Vicinity map PROJ£CT DESCNED BY: Waterfront Constru:tim lri:. lHIS: D00,11,l(liJ IS ~ PROPCRTY Cf" l'f~~ C0NS1'RUC1l0N f.lC"., ,l,kt> IS NOT lO SE USED. ~ 1,>i,iDt£ OR IN PARf, f"OR ANY OTHER PROJEC.T \liOHOL.IT THE ~ AUTHORIZATION 0( W4TEl'tfHDN'f CONSlli.UC'U'.>l,~ t,iC. VICINITY MAP /NO SCALE LEGAL DESCRIPTION 1/4 SEC: NW 32-24N-05E TAXLOT f: 051850 0350 (4151) &: 0518500360 {4125) BARBEE MIU.. TGW UND INT lht TRS A,B.C,0,E,F.G,H,I.,L.hi,N,O&.P t I LAKE fOREST PARK w -' ~ w en AREA MAP/ JUANITA KIRKLAND RENTON LAT· 47.515745N _ LDN~ -122.206114W 3 MILE 0 Mus PURPOSE~PROVIDE COMMUNITY ACCESS ANO PRNAT( MOORACE DATIJM; C:OE o.o· EST 1919 AOJACENr OWNERS:: Q) CONNER HOIJEs AT BARBEE l<Jlll UC 4157 WJUIMtS AVE N RENTO"I, WA. 98056 @ CONNER HO~ES AT BARBEE t.llll LLC 4119 W1l.l1A1JS AVE N RENTON, WA. 98056 MS&A PROJECT NAME; REFERENCE f BARBEE ~ILL COMMUNITY DOCK SITE LOCATION ADDRESS: 4125 &: 4151 'MLUAIAS AVE N RENTON, WA. 98056 WG#: 05-3077-A.1-I 1Mu PROPOSED: INSTALL COIJf,JUNITl' DOCK It{; U.KE 'NASHlNCTON NEAR: RENTON COUNTY: KJNG STATE: WA APPL B'f: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE Mill. LL.C SHECT: 1 OF: 7 D.A.T(; 1-12-10 Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 6 MS&A --·-~'\~ '\ .-~~I ,,,, ... \ ' ' ' --- ----' Figure 2. DNR withdrawal ai. t I ,' DNR WITHDRAWL AREA PUCANT; CONNER 1-tOl.4ES AT BARBEE Mru. LLC 100' oa' o' PROPOSED: INSTAU CDM1.4UNITT DOCK HEET;.3 OF;7 NEAR AT: REITTON Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 7 Figure 3. Plot plan PROJEC"I DESIGNED ~ Waterfront CollStroctioo llx:. Tl-1!5 DOCut.ENT 15 PRCPR£llRI' PROPERT'f_ af" WAITRFRONT CONSffilCTlON INC., AND IS t>tO'I TO 5£ US£D, IN l'IHO(.£ Off IN PART. FOR #ff OTHER PROJEC'l '1/l'Tl·IOl.ll THE 'ffRJTlHi AUTHORIZAT!Oti OF 1fATERrRC)l,IT C0"1STfi'I..IGTION 1~ ·--( CONSTRUCT A FULlY GRATED1,592SQFT COMMUNITY DOCK WITH A S-11TX1n(t00350"T)PAAN WALKWAY, 7'-W X 56' (437SOFT) "T" ANO 5'-10"X26'(152SCfT}Ft..GERPER ( TKE DOCK WU HA.VE A 100% GRATED SlffACEWr!tt<$Cff»SPACE ( n!E DOCK WILL BE SUPPORTED BY {14) 6" AND (14)8'~STEB..8ATTEREDPlES < PllES Wl\.18E DRIVEN USING A VIBRATORY Pl.EDRIYERTOPAACOCAL~ < A NA Tl"/E PLANTING PLAN Wll.BE NST~D MS&A " N'TNE PlANTING PlAN 35 , JOB SOE 2q 4151/CONNER HOMES ·--3: 1 ·· ... ~~- / JOB SITE 412p/CONN£R HG~ES i DITJ ·-- 28.4 36 ------' 4113/CONNER HO~ES 38 ___ I ZM l_ 4107 /KESKAR 39 .. _[ 3"-9" IBIJ 4101/CoNNER HOMES ) Dill' ,,'/ ___ _ -----' ------ PLOT PLAN 50' 25' o· REF[R[NCE ~ 40 so· APPLICANT; CONNER HOl.tES AT BARBEE f..lU LLC PROPOSED: INSTALL coMMUNJTf DOCK SHEET;4 OF;7 NEAR AT: RENTON DATE: 1-12-10 DWG : 05-3077-AA-1 Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 8 ~ fl' )> ~ m ;;:. = () ~ ~ CJ a 4' .Q. Q -0 \ I ' I I ' \ \ \ \ \ \ ,r~"'-.. :I \ ....... ''-·.,,, \,,,, __ .. ---------·,,.,.,,::~'··,q, ,, '•,,, \ ,~ \ -~-.:-,.~---.... --.,---~t -~ -------------- ,., '',,,.,~') _.,/'/ NATIVE PLANTING PLAN /~L 7'-to~ ',,_ ,, ________ ,; 56' \ '•,, '-$> \ l \ ',,_,, ,' ' , "\ \ 1 ,, _______ / PROPDSf:D FULLY \ -' 1' ;' GRATED DOCK ,' N I .,--· / \ ' ( (14)/~ROPOSED 8" / \ / STEEL/ BATTERED PILING ,' \ / __ , . 5'-10' -j J ,/,,, ( ! '\ ,-' / \ { \ 1---...J ;~-fi'i\ z'.! ,' ::, / o::I" gl . ; , =-IL I ,,, ,,.,,, ,., ,I :' / / / / I-ei'"'' !~\ \ i!.---1---f- OHWL 21.BO (COE)~I , -/ /, / ,' 1 B.80 (NAVOea} \ ~ / / / '2 ~-•, ,, ___ _ '-., '',,,_ '-, \ I ( \ / / \ 't. \ 1 \ .. ' \ (11 1 +) PROPOSED 8" \ '\ \ STEEL 8AnrnED PILING I l \ ; ,, r !---+.i -,L __J_ ' ' ' -----:.---., ,, - 10 10 PROPOSED DOCK DETAIL VIEW SCALE: 1 "•JO' 160' ----------------1 \-------------172' ____________ , EXISTING GRADE EXISTING CONCRETE WALK.WAY OHWL21.B· NAVD88 (1 B.BD') (14) PROPOSED 8~ STEEL BATTERED PILING PROJ!CT OES1GNE"O IJ'r"c Waterfront Constructioo loc. THIS OOCU~NT 1$ PR(]~l[.1"""' PROPERTY OF 'MTER~ON"J CONSTRUCllON INC.. N-10 IS NOT TO BE. USED, IN \ltl-lOLE OR IN P.AFfT. FOR ANY OTHER PROJEl:.'T W°ITHOVT n-tt. WRITTEN AUTI-IOR!Z-'110),.j Df l\'ATERFRON1 CONSTRUCTION INC. PROPOSED FULLY GRATED DOCK PROPOSED EXISTING CONCRETE/SHEET PILE BULKHEAD TO REMAIN ( 14) PROPOSED 6" STCEL BATTERED PILING DOCK ELEVATION VIEW REFERENCE If; ___ __ _ _ _______ _ iAPPOCANT: CONNER HOMES AT l:JARBEE MILL LLC 30' 15' o· 30' PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK SCALE: I "• 30' SHl;:ET:5 OF:7 OA.TErl-12-IQ NE;AR/A1:_ f\ENTDN "ruJi;JJ;-oe.-3077-A.5 1 20 c; iii !>-.,, 0 "O 0 "' (1) a. "O 0 :, 0 :, a. (1) iii ~ '- ! P,-.RT PILING CAPS GlU-LAMS JOIST RI~ JOIST NAIL£RS GRATING HARDWARE MS&A Fl . Proposed section and framlni A-A f-------------s·-10--------------1 GRATING PILE COVER PLUE CM' BEAM A5SE~8L'1' Sf-'JNL.£SS Sf££L DECK SCREWS 5-1/B'":icl2'" GLU-1..AM HEAM" 3/4'" GALV. LAG BOLT ""'"--'"-OK/IL 21.80' {CO£) OH'IIL 18.80' (NA\'D 88) 5· DR a-STEEL 8ATI£RED PILING PROPOSED 6' DOCK SECTION A-A SCALE, 3/4"=1' >--------------5'-10·-------------~ GRATING STAINLESS STEEL DECK SCREWS 15d GALV. COMMON NAILS (TYP) 5-1/B'"xlr GLU-LAJA BEAIJ 3/4" G"-V. THRU ROD 2" x6" RIM JOIST 3-,.x4" LEDGER WI 1/2"x7" CAf.V. LAG BOLT O 16'" 0/C PROPOSED 6' SECTION FRAMING 12· ,. I SCAL.£: 3/4'=1' >'ATERIA!. LIST SPECS TR£ATIAENT 5"a,a• Slll WAU. STEEL EPOXY COATED OR HDG W6x15 ""H-BEAM HOG 5 1/8 .. 11(12~ &-7 1/e'"x12'" DF (24-f-V4) ACZA. 2 .. x6" DF #2 DR BTR ACZA Z-x5· DF f2 OR Bffi ACZA 2""x4" DF lf2 OR BTR ACZA SUN'/IALK POLYPROPYLENE NON£ STEEL STAINLESS OR HOG PROJECT DESIGli(D BY'! Waterfront Constnd:ion lie; lHS DOCUUDir IS PROPRCUiln' PROPERTY or WATt:RfRONT CONSlRUGTIDN 1tf;::... /IND IS NOT TO BE USU), JJ,,j YI~ OR IN PART. FOR ANt 01HER PRO.ffct Wm-10UT fH( WRITTEN AuTHOR!Z"ATION OF '/iATERrnQt,n CDNS'TRUCllDN INC. NOT(: ALL PILES 10 BE ORNrn TD PRAC'TICAl REfUSAL REFERENCE ~ .t>.PPUCANT; CONNER HOMES AT DARBEE MILL LlC PROPOSED: INSTAU COhl\,WNfTY DOCK SHEET; 6 OF; 7 NEAR AT: RENTON DATL 1-12-10 D C : 05-3077-A..6-1 Barbee Mill Communily Dock Project • 10 ?; g: "' g. ~ ~ () 0 '~ § ~ SJ R- 4' ~· Q. PART PILING CAPS GLU-LAMs JOIST RIM JOIST NAILERS GRATING HARDWARE i-----------------7'-10'-----------------., 2")(4~ NAILER ~ 18" 0/C !;t,x, PFIOJEC"! DESIONCO S'l'! GRATING P1Lt COVER PLATE CAP BEAM ASSEMBLY al STAINLESS STEEL DECK SCRt.WS 2'-6" ,·-o· 1 7-1(8",\2" OLU-lAM BEAM 5/4" GALV. LAG BOLi . ,JOHWL 21.BO' (COE) OHWL I B.BO' (NAVO 66) 8" STEEL BATTE:RED PILING Waterfront Construction loc. THIS DOCUMENT !S PftOPRCI.AR'I' PROPERT'f OF' WA1'tRFMNT CONSTRUCT!Ol'ol !NC., >NO IS NOT TO 9E USED. JN 'f!HQL! OR Iii ~,i,RT, f"OA A~ OTHER P'ROJEC1 WITHOUT mr '/il'lrm:N AUTllORIZ,\TION OF j,t,lUl:rROIH CONSTRUCTION !NC.. PROPOSED 8' DOCK SECTION 8-B SCALE. 3/4"= 1' '/ 7'-10" 2 ",," WJLER @ GRMING 18" 0/C MAJ<. 3/4" OALV. THRlJ RD:D STAINLESS STEEL or:CK SCR,:Ws 2"~6" RIM JOIST 7-1/8''>112· GLU-LAM BEAM 16d CALV. COWON NAILS (IYP) 2s~6" JOIST @ 2' 0/C ~TEALi<. UST PROPOSED 8' SECTION FRAMING J"x4-" LEDGCR W/ 1/2"x7" GALV. LAG BOLT O 16" o/c SPECS I TREATMENT 12· 6"&8~ STD WAJ..L STEEL !EPOXY COATED OR HDG W6i15 "H" BEAM I HOG 5 1/8",12" !<~8",12" or (24F-V4)1 ACZA 2"x6" Of #2 OR BrR I ACZA 2",6" OF #2 OR BlR I ACZA 2",•" DF #2 OR BlR I ACZA SUNl'(ALK POLYPROPYLENE NON£ STEEL STAINLESS OR HOG 6" :s'" a• ~ 5CALE: ~/4"-1' \' l NOTE: ALL PUS 10 BE DRIVEN TO PRACTICAL REFUSAL. REFERENCE K: PPLICANT; CONNERHOUES AT 6ARBt:E t-J!LL LLC !PROPOSED: INSTALL coiJMUNITY DOCK SHgEI, 7 Oi:':7 _t,i~/ATi RENTON DATE: 1-12-10 DWC#: 0:5-J077-A.7-1 '" ?' a g CD a. .. ~ 0 :, a :, a. a' ;l. ~ ... • ... \ / / \ I :l w ... i I I z ,,/ ;· __j/ 'l -r---I --I l I g§l !! /,! ,./ fr ,1 1 / / 1 / 1 1 : \ I ; / ,...\ i / / / / lll'\ ,, : ' w \ // , ,, .. / Z[\ \ ' ' ,/ z \ \ / -1\ \ \J / / , 1\ \ / / / 1\\ / l.,/ I \ \ / / l i \ I : I L1 \/ / / , t-v--1-r 16' PLANTING AREAS a· o· 16' {, i PLANTING DESIGN BY THE WATERSHED COMPANY 750 Shat,~ Soud1 IOrldarid WA 98033 f1-42l.821..5242 f42S.827.8136 www.~.com Science & Design MS&A figure 7. Planting areas \ / LOT 35 JOB SITE 4151/CONNER HOMES ', ',,, \ } / JOB SITE ( 4125/CONNER HOMES I \ LOT 36 \ l I \_ _______ _ . ..., ...... REFERENCE ff: APPL CANT: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MlU.. l..LC PROPOSED: INSTALL COl,OJUNnY DOCK SHEIT~ 1 OF"; ,4. N[AR/AT: R(NTON DATF: 1-12-10 DWG : 05 3:077 A.2 1 Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 12 Figure 8. Planting legend ~ ->· -- PLANTING AREAS 16' B' o· i I I I I I I I I I I I ! . I I ' • I I . , ' ' , I ' ! l I I I I I I I I I 1.1 , •. ,\ T ------------------i\ : -. ' I .· • • ::-r:: .... \ I I I I 1----------------IL:. ~!~-->L-~.,,,, GENERAi. Pl.ANTING SEQUENCE, I. Native plant lnstallatlon shall oca.-during ---period, only. prafem,d morrthsforir!5tallationare between September 15th ;mdApril 15, priorwhot, dry wea<her. Pbnts ""f only be """11ed durlng hot weather K the comroaor,g,-eos m Immediate irrigllrion of the emire planting area. delivering at least 2• of w.ner per week. 2. Proa.tf'e plant$ in legend and i~ that material me¢; the minimum ~ems outlined a\ the pbnt legend and pbntlng detaik.. .3.. Loc3te all existing lKl1ities within the tmit of work. The contractor is responsble for any utllity ~ a :a rc:.ult of the landscape constructiQn. '4. Remove al invasive weeds (If encounmrad) by grubbmg Out t'OOB. S. Amend w.1& :as needed to provide min. 20% organic: materral throughout: the planting area Add tompoSt to increase orpdc: content, rottPdll Into planting area li. Nate: The CDntractor is responsible for any adverse~ conditions that may affea: proper plant grQWth ;ind ~erTt. Notify IJWT1Sf" of any pool" drainage conditions prior to ~ 7. layout pJam: material pe,-plan for ins:pectlon by the Landscape Architect. Plant ,ubmtutx"" w;II NOT be aDowed -the approv,l of the Land=pe A,d,iteu. 8. lnsadl plant$ per-panting details, sheet 3. 9. --pl>nt-oughly to"""""',;-pod<= 10. Install a ,4• depth, c,arse wood-chtp mulc:h·ring throughout entire proiect area. 11. Install a temporary irrigation~ capable of delivering2• olwater pttweekto the endn: planted aroa.. M:aimln irrigation systJ:m in Wtlrking cond"rtlon fo. two (2) smnmers after initial plant: insbllmon.. "The bndsape i:ontrxar shall JJ'l3H1t3ln ::ill pbrit rnaterRI until final lnspectiotl .md approval by the Owner or Owner's ~resentatlve.. AR pbntlngs and workmanship shall be guaranteed for one year foDowing final owner acceptance.. PLANTING DESIGN BY THE WATERSHED COMPANY 750 Sheth Street South K.l~WA98033 p-OS.822.S242 r-OS.n1.sm. www.~.com Science & Des;gn MS&A PROJECl DESIGNED 8'1~ Waterfront~ Ire. THIS DOCUMENT ts PROPRIETIIR!' PROPOOY OF WAlERFRONT CONSTilUCTION INC.. AND S NOT lO BE US£0. IN' ~E OR 1N PART. fOl!' AN'f OTHER PRO.fi:T YmHOUT THE WRITTE."1 Alffi!ORfZATION Of WATERfRONT CONSTRUCllON INC . PLANTING LEGEND ~ SIZE/COMMENTS " lGAl..,WEU.~ ' ~ CW. WB.l.. BAANDIED ' 5 G-'t,. ¥iS.1. WNOiED ' iCM...~Tl-5lffl ' 2 GM.. FUU & aus»Y ' l GAt.., FUU. "BUSHr " 2:G.IIE.,R.111.&WSH'I' • '°"" ' 1 r;l,l. FlJU • SUSHY " 1 Git, R.ll.L& B\.5lff ' 2 GIil., AA.L & BUSlfi >M 2..5' POTS, U' O.C. ,~ 25' POTS. H' O.C. " lc,J...24'0.C. " ~= " rv.Nf /&.T LE/&.:5T 2 OFTHI us-rm $1'EQES; lc.o.l:..llr-0.C. RffERENCE B: V',PPUCANT: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MILL LLC PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK SHEET:2 Of:4 DATF"; 1-12-10 INF AR/A-: R[NTON OWG!J: 05 3077 A.2 1 Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 13 Figure 9. Planting plan [FOR PLANTING LEGEND SEE SHEET 2[ PLANTING PLAN 16' a· o· THE WATERSHED COMPANY 750 SIXth Saeet Soudl IOridNid WA 98033 p.flS.822.52"1 fffi.827.8136 www.watu ::J d o,rn Science & Design MS&A PROJCCT DC5 GNCD BY: Wa!:.erfrom Ul15tructm lr.o, lHIS oocuw:rnr IS PROPRlETAR'I' PROPOO,-Of WAT(Rfl'l()l,,'T CONSJ'RUC110!\l INC~ ANO IS NOT TO 6€ IJSal, 1"11 WHOLE OR IN PART, fOR AN1' OTHER PROJECT WITHOLIT THE WRITTEN AUlttOR11AllON OF WA'TER.<RoNT C:OOSTIWCTION I~. REFERENCE ff: I I I ' I ' ' I ' ' ?, I ' 1 APPUCANT: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MIU. LLC PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK SHEET: 3 OF:4 NEAR/ AT: RENTON DATF: 1-12-10 DWG : 05 3077 A.2 1 Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 14 igure 10. Tree and shrub plantir. ifs NOTES, I. PIANTGROUNOCOVERATSPECIAEDDISTANCEON-CENTEJl(O.c.)USING TRIANGULARSPACING, rtP. 2. LOOSEN SIDES AND BOTTOM OF PLANllNG Prr AND REMOVE DEBRtS l. LOOSEN R00'1130UND PIANTS BEFORE INSTALLING 4. SOAK PrTBEFOREANDAFTER INSTAl...lJNG PLANT ,4• DEEP SPECIRED MUI....Ol LAYER HOl.D BACK FROM STEMS T HT. WATER BASIN; NATIVE SOIL ORMULa-t SOIL AMENDMENTS >S SPEOFJED 0 ~OUNDCOVER & PERENNIAL PLANTING DETAIL THE WATERSHED COMPANY 2X Mlt,,l DlA.. l«>OTBAU. NOTES, I. PlJWTING PIT SHALL NOT BE LESS l,;AN (2) TIME5 THE WIDTH OF THE ROOT BALL DIA l. LOOSEN SIDES AND B01TOMS OF PLANTING PIT 3. SOAK MANTING PIT AFTER P!ANTlNG REMOVE FROM POT & ROUGH-UP ROOT BAU. BEFORE INSTALUNG. UNTANGLE ANO STRAIGHTe< ORCUNG ROOTS -PRUNE If NECESSARY. IF PLANT IS EXCEPTIONALLY ROOT-BOUND, DO NOT PlANT AND RETURN TO NURSERY FORANACCEPTABL£AI.TERNA 4' MULCJ-1 LAYER· HOLD BAO< MULCH FROM TRUNK/STEMS 3"' HIN HT. WATER. BASIN RNISHGRADE SLCY# RELEASE GRANULAR FERTILIZER. OSMOCOTE [In'---OR APPROVED EQUIV. (ovrnoE OF 0.H.W.M. ONL'Y)APPUEDONEYEAAAFTERINmALPlANTING !H---REMOVE DEBRIS AND LARGE ROQ(S AND BACKFILL WITH NATIVE SOIL RRM UP SOIL AROUND PLANT 0 ~REE & SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL REFERENCE #: APPLC,,.NT: CONNER HOMES A.T B,11,RSEE Mill. LLC 750 Seem 5'reet: Soush Kirldand WA 98033 PROPOSED: INSTALL COl,A~Ur,IITY DOCK p.ofl:S.m.s142 f.QS..8:27.8136 www ... At-d .,,..mcom Science & Design MS&A SHEET: 4 OF: 4-NfAR/Al: RENTON DATF: t-12-10 DWG : 05 3077 A.2 i Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 1 S AMY R. LEITMAN MARINE SURVEYS & ASSESSMENTS 521 SNAGSTEAD WAY PORT TOWNSEND WA 98368 Tel.360.385-4073 E m a i I . mar i n e . s u r v e y s . i n c @ g rn a i I. c o m Michael Urban Dock and Boat Lift Project Conner Homes, Barbee Mill Community 4151 Williams Avenue N., Renton, WA 98056 Case#: LUAI0-006 Biological Evaluation Addendum August 5, 2013 To: City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development From: Marine Surveys & Assessments Subject: Addition of Boat Lift to Project This is an addendum to the Biological Evaluation for the Barbee Mill Community Dock Project (Case#: LUAI0-006) for the addition ofa boat lift to the project. The Biological Evaluation was originally submitted in 2010 and the proposed project has since been completed and the docks built. The primary purpose of this addendum is to proposed the addition of a boat lift to one of the completed docks and address the City ofRenton's municipal code 4-3-090-D.5.b. and 4-3- 090-E.l (CRMC: 4-3-090-D.Sb. and CRMC: 4-3-090-E.1.) "Building and Development Location -Shoreline Orientation" and "Use Regulations", which respectiv~ly affects this addition. -,1' Marine Surveys & Asses: EXHIBIT 10 Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page I · ___ ) Project Location 11. Section NW32, Township 24N, Range 05E. 4151 Williams Avenue N. Renton, WA 98056 Latitude: 47.515745°N/Longitude: 122.206114°W See Figure 1 for project location. Project Information The project location for this boat lift was previously the site of the former Barbee Mill Company lumber mill, which has recently been restored to a residential neighborhood (Barbee Mill community developed by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC). The addition of this proposed boat lift to the already completed dock at the project location is expected to have little to no impact on the aquatic habitat as this area is already heavily developed and disturbed. For a more detailed impact summary please refer to the original Biological Evaluation. In accordance with CRMC: 4-3-090-D.Sb. the proposed boat lift is designed in a manner that directs land alteration to the least sensitive portions of the site. However, CRMC: 4-3-090-E. l. allow boat lifts as accessory to a residential dock: provided, that all lifts are place as far waterward as feasible and safe. This conflicts with CRMC: 4-3-090-D.Sb. as the location that is least sensitive is the most landward portion of the dock. Thus on the premise of feasibility and to minimize any potential impact, the location of the proposed boat lift will be at the beginning of the dock next to the concrete and metal bulkhead, where the area is already developed and disturbed thus being least sensitive. Please see Figure 2 and 3 for the site plan, elevation detail and location of the proposed boat lift, pictures of the proposed boat lift location can be seen in Figures 4 and 5. A Regional General Permit No I. for this project is will be concurrently filed with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Relevant information from this permit are as follows. The proposed boat lift will be a ground based lift made out of approved steel, where the depth of its most landward end will be 5.5 feet. Construction equipment will be operated from an out-of-water location whenever possible; this equipment will be operated in a manner that minimizes the suspension of particulates. All equipment used in or around water will be clean and inspected daily prior to use to ensure that the equipment has no fluid leaks. Should a leak develop during use, the leaking equipment will be removed from the site immediately and not used again until it has been adequately repaired. No equipment will be stored or fueled so close to a surface water that the activity could adversely affect the waterbody. Work that disturbs the substrate, bank, or shore will occur in the dry whenever practicable. The work window for the proposed boat lift will be from now (August 5'h) to the end of the year (December 31 "). Marine Surveys & Assessments Urban Project: Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page 2 Figure 1. Project Information and Location PROJECT lNFORMATION OWNER: MICHAEL & DOROTHY URBAN DRAWINGS BY: ECCO DESIGN INC. 203 N 36TH ST SUITE 201 SEATILE, WA 98103 206-706-3937 SITE ADDRESS: 4151 &4157WILLIAMSAVEN RENTON, WA 98056 PARCEL NUMBER: (4157) 0518500340 & (4151) 0518500.350 BODY OFWATER LAKE WASHINGTON LEGAL DESCRIPTION: (0518500340) TRACT 35, RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LUA 10-023 LLA,REC. NO. 20120802900003 IN PLAT OF BARBEE MILL, VOL 248 .OF PLATS, PP. 25-38, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WA (0518500350) LOT 34, BARBEE MILL, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 246 OF PLATS, PAGES 25 THROUGH 39, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: INSTALL A NEW BOAT LIFT Marine Surveys & Assessments VICINITY MAP Ri!~niet Vatfey . PROJECT SITE: LAT: 4752966" N LON:-122.20505" W NW 1/4 S:32 T:24N R:5E Bf'.i·r-. M.;wr-:ikY'n'av · ... :j1C{':•;'r · ~_;s\t'l'- Ren\0-ri Urban Project: Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page 3 Ne Figure 2. Site Plan and Proposed Boat Lift Location. PLEASE NOTE THAT TliE SHORELINE CONFIGURATION AND PROPERTY LINE LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY. PROPERTY LINES ARE BASED ON AN AUGUST 2012 SURVEY BY CORE DESIGN. YINANJ-IE & MA.J-!QllG 4163 Will.IA.MS AVE N r·---------·-·-·-·-·-·---- OHWM 21.85'@ SHORELINE PROPOSED BOAT LIFT ~~~g ~~~N[r( ~ DEPT, OF NATURAL RESOURCES PARC. 113224059066 1 OHWM 21.85'@ BULKHEAD • ·-----·-----·---------·--_J EXlSTING ADJACENT DOCK~ TO REM/I.IN ---~ E:'3 --"1.----------;== ======-==:i:Fl -==-=== SITE PLAN sell.LE , • -4a--0· MICHAEL & DOROTHY URBAN 4157W1LUA1dSAVE ll BARBEE Mill COMMUIJllY ORGANIZATION 4151 WILLIAMS AVE.N ---·---·---------~-· BARBEE Mill WATERFRONT LLC 4125 WILLIAMS.AVE H GARY & BRENDA BEEM 4119 WILLIAMS AVE 1,1 Marine Surveys & Assessment~ Urban Project: Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page 4 Figure 3. Elevation Detail and Proposed Boat Lift Location. EXJSTING BULKHEAD TO REMAIN PROPOSED BOAT LIFT 21.85'0HW ELEVATION DETAIL SCALE 1/8" = 1'-D" Marine Surveys & Assessments 15' APPROX. LOCATION Of LAKE BED Urban Project: Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page 5 Figures 4. Picture of Boat Lift Location (looking waterward). Marine Surveys & Assessments Urban Project: Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page 6 Figure 5. Picture of Boat Lift Location (looking landward). Marine Surveys & Assessments Urban Project: Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page 7 December 16, 2013 Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner CED Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton,WA 98057 RE: LUAB-001640, EDF, SM -Urban Boat Lift REr-· n11:::o Dr. CnY 1,.>~ ,\<'.'·L'f)\'·J PU-hif\!:i\!G Oil/fS:ON I'm writing to strongly voice my opposition to the installation of the above referenced boat lift for the following reasons: 1. Because the proposed boat lift is not in front of the Urban's property but located within Barbee Mill common area and accessed from the community dock; once the lift is installed, no other homeowner will have access to that dock space for their own boat. Tne public notice states the lift will only be for the use of the homeowners of 4157 Williams Avenue. 2. There are cleats on the north bulk head for tie up of small watercraft: These cleats will not be accessible for others to use after the boat lift is installed. 3. The Barbee Mill Homeowners Association (HOA) established use rules for the dock and a homeowner can only keep their boat at the dock for a maximum of 72 hours. Whether the boat is physically tied up to the dock is irrelevant, the lift is parallel to the dock and tile "water space" will always be occupied and no longer be available to other homeowners. 4. It's my understanding that the HOA was told the boat lift would be installed in front of their property. The public notice acknowledges it is accessed from the community dock. 5. Placement of a boat lift in the community dock/marina area should be decided by the HOA since it also has financial implications (liability concerns, dock ownership and maintenance, taxes, and HOA fees) as well as use issues. 6. This installation would establish a precedent and conceptually, the entire length of the dock could be lined with privately owned boat lifts. This is a community dock and not a portal for privately ~wned boat lifts. I am_glad I stopped to read this public notice. With the pending construction at the adjoining Quendall Terminal property, I thought it pertained to that site. Thank you for considering these relevant points in your review of the project. I am available for additional comment. TulJy!'.;Jo:tu,::.· .}--1:'.-'W"-"'-. __ ...- Patti Klink 1126 N 42"d Pl Renton, WA 98056 cc Barbee Mill HOA Board EXHIBIT 11 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF Natural Resources Peter Gold mark-Commissioner of Public Lands Caring for your natural resources ... now and forever December 17, 2013 Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner City of Renton, CED -Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057-3232 Subject: WA Department of Natural Resources Comments -Urban Boat Lift/ LUA13-001640 Dear Mr. Wasser: · Washlngton State Department of Natural Resources ("DNR") has obtained the City of Renton Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the Urban Boat Lift Project. DNR manages the state-owned aquatic lands adjacent to the project proposal location and hereby submits the following comments for the City's record. The project description states the proposed freestanding boat lift is associated with, but not attached to, a community dock. DNR administers Aquatic Lands Lease No. 22-086046 (the "Lease"), authorizing Barbee Mill Community Organization to utilize 11,984 square feet of Lake Washlngton harbor area for the purpose of the said community dock. The permitted use authorized by the Lease is to "provide lake access and transient moorage for approximately 100 upland property owners, with one finger pier to provide private moorage for one adjacent upland property owner" and for no other purpose. As proposed, the Urban Boat Lift Project footprint will be on privately held aquatic lands. However, a vessel placed on the boat lift will extend over state-owned aquatic lands, specifically into the leasehold area of Barbee Mill Community Organization. Thls encumbrance of state-owned aquatic lands is not consistent with the terms of the Lease and subsequently is not authorized. Additionally, DNR worked extensively with Conner Homes and the regulatory agencies regarding the configuration and placement of the community dock and terms of the Lease in order to avoid and minimize impacts to the adjacent restored nearshore environment, shorelands and bedlands. As proposed, the Urban Boat Lift Project will subject the restoration area and nearshore environment to: G? E (: ,:: \ \/ F: [) • • Increased shading impacts to aquatic vegetation [) [ C ' 0 Increased vessel wake impacting natural shoreline processes due to larger and more frequent wave action C;T·' · SOUTH PUGET SOUS TEL, (360) 825-1631 I FAX EXHIBIT 12 98022-9282 /W.ONR.WA.GOV fl;_:,.i i,\ -<" '~·,··-~ 'l ' > ! -' RECYCLED PAPER 0 Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner December 17, 2013 Page2 of2 • Scour and sediment erosion through prop scour • Crushing ofbenthic habitat • Heightened potential for release of contaminants into the water column As proposed, DNR does not support the Urban Boat Lift Project and will not amend the existing Lease to permit the use of state-owned aquatic lands. If you have comments regarding this correspondence, please feel free to contact me by email at vivian.roach@dnr.wa.gov. Sincerely, Vivian Roach, Aquatic Land Manager Shoreline District, Aquatics Resources Division c: DNR SEPA Center District File Aquatic Resources File Gerald Wasser From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Karen Walter <=KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us> Friday, December 27, 20131:14 PM Gerald Wasser Anderson, Suzanne NWS; Heller, Christa H (DFW); ROACH, VIVIAN (DNR); Tom Sibley; Priddy, Lynda Urban Boat Lift adjacent to Barbee Mill Community Pier, LUA13-001640,ECF, SM, Revised Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Categories: Red Category Gerald, We have reviewed the Revised Notice of Application for the proposed Urban boat lift project adjacent to the Barbee Mill Community Dock (4157 and 4151 Williams Avenue N) in Renton referenced above. We have several concerns about this project as noted below: 1. The proposed free standing boatlift is located on the north side of the existing Barbee Mill Community Dock and just south of the WDNR withdrawn area that contains contaminated sediments from the former mill site at the Superfund site on the WDNR aquatic lands. There is no consideration in either the checklist or the Lake and Stream study sent with the Revised NOA consider the potential impacts from the new boatlift and the operation of a motorized watercraft on the north side of the joint pier. A motorized watercraft in this location will likely create scour and erosion from propeller wash that could cause a release of nearby contaminants into the water column adversely affecting fish and benthic vertebrates. Other potential impacts, include, but are not limited to: • The new freestanding boatlift and a boat in the nearshore where juvenile salmon are likely to be found that can cause them to avoid the nearshore and increase their risk of predation. • The boatlift will permanently displace benthic habitat. • The boatlift and motorized watercraft have the potential to adversely affect the restoration work in the WDN R withdrawal area to the north through increased wave action that can adversely affect natural shoreline processes and vegetation growth. 2. There is no discussion about the potential for additional boatlifts and other permanent moorage proposed for this community pier. As we noted in previous comments to the Barbee Mill Community Pier project, the Tribe is concerned about this pier providing long term moorage that can create conditions which interfere with the Tribe's fishing access. 3. There is no mitigation identified for the boatlift in the documents we reviewed. Please provide the mitigation details proposed for this new boatlift and the associated watercraft. Please note that any approved mitigation at the Barbee Mill Community Pier site cannot be used to compensate for impacts from this new boatlift and watercraft. 4. We also concerned that previous mitigation at the Barbee Mill Community Pier may not be fully implemented. Therefore, request copies of all of the existing monitoring reports to be completed as part of the shoreline restoration work required for the entire Barbee Mill Plat, including the community dock. 5. The City needs to fully evaluate this project; its potential impacts and require mitigation as necessary. Without these elements, it is premature to issue a Determination of Non-Significance for this project under SEPA. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to the City's responses. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader EXHIBIT 13 MuckJeshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 2 Gerald Wasser From: Sent: To: Priddy, Lynda <Priddy.Lynda@epa.gov> Friday, December 27, 20131:38 PM Karen Walter; Gerald Wasser Cc: Subject: Anderson, Suzanne NWS; Heller, Christa H (DFW); ROACH, VIVIAN (DNR); Tom Sibley RE: Urban Boat Lift adjacent to Barbee Mill Community Pier, LUA13-001640,ECF, SM, Revised Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Categories: Red Category Mr. Wasser, I am the EPA Remedial Project Manager for the Quendall Superfund Site. My official review and comment will be coordinated with the Seattle District of the USACE upon the event that the permit applicant submits an application to the USACE. Whenever new activiti.es, that require permits, are proposed in the vicinity of a Superfund Site, EPA reviews the permit application to determine whether the implementation and use of the proposed project (boat lift) may have adverse impacts on the Superfund Site. At present, my immediate concern is the nature and extent of the impact of water skiing or any other aquatic activities that could occur within the near shore area of the Quendall Superfund Site or cause contaminated sediments to be deposited in sediments at the Superfund Site. Lynda '.E Priday Environmental Scientist US Environmental Protection Agency 1200 6th Ave, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98101 206-553-1987 priddy.lynda@epa.gov From: Karen Walter [mailto:KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Sent: Friday, December 27, 2013 1:14 PM To: Gerald Wasser Cc: Anderson, Suzanne NWS; Heller, Christa H (DFW); ROACH, VIVIAN (DNR); Tom Sibley; Priddy, Lynda Subject: Urban Boat Lift adjacent to Barbee Mill Community Pier, LUA13-001640,ECF, SM, Revised Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance Gerald, We have reviewed the Revised Notice of Application for the proposed Urban boat lift project adjacent to the Barbee Mill Community Dock (4157 and 4151 Williams Avenue N) in Renton referenced above. We have several concerns about this project as noted below: ·1. The proposed free standing boatlift is located on the north side of the existing Barbee Mill Community Dock and just south of the WDNR withdrawn area that contains contaminated sediments from the former mill site at the Superfund site on the WDNR aquatic lands. There is no consideration in either the checklist or the Lake and Stream study sent with the Revised NOA consider the potential impacts from the new boatlift and the operation of a motorized watercraft on the north side of the joint pier. A motorized watercraft in this location will likely create scour and erosion from propeller wash that could cause a release of nearby contaminants into the water column adversely affecting fish and benthic vertebrates. Other potential impacts, include, but are not limited to: • The new freestanding boatlift and a boat in the nearshore where juvenile salmon are likely to be found that can cause them to avoid the nearshore and increase their risk of predation. • The boatlift will permanently displace benthic habitat. 1 EXHIBIT 14 • The boatlift and motorized watercraft have the· potential to adversely affect the restoration wmk in the WDNR withdrawal area to the north through increased wave action that can adversely affect natural shoreline processes and vegetation growth. 2. There is no discussion about the potential for additional boatlifts and other permanent moorage proposed for this community pier. As we noted in previous comments to the Barbee Mill Community Pier project, the Tribe is concerned about this pier providing long term moorage that can create conditions which interfere with the Tribe's fishing access. 3. There is no mitigation identified for the boatlift in the documents we reviewed. Please provide the mitigation details proposed for this new boatlift and the associated watercraft. Please note that any approved mitigation at the Barbee Mill Community Pier site cannot be used to compensate for impacts from this new boatlift and watercraft. 4. We also concerned that previous mitigation at the Barbee Mill Community Pier may not be fully implemented. Therefore, request copies of all of the existing monitoring reports to be completed as part of the shoreline restoration work required for the entire Barbee Mill Plat, including the community dock. 5. The City needs to fully evaluate this project; its potential impacts and require mitigation as necessary. Without these elements, it is premature to issue a Determination of Non-Significance for this project under SEPA. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to the City's responses. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckieshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 2 Leahy McLean Fjelstad Mr. Gerald Wasser Associate Planner City of Renton Planning Division 1055 Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 December 16, 2013 Send by U.S. Mail and by email to gwasser@rentonwa.gov RE: Urban Boat Lift Project (4157 & 4151 Williams Avenue N) Land Use # 13-001640, ECF, SM Dear Mr. Wasser: This law firm provides general counsel services for the Barbee Mill Community Organization. This proposed Boat Lift Project is located on property owned by the Organization pursuant to an easement. My client would like to be made a party of record and receive additional notices on this project. The Organization has no comments to make on the project at this time, except to note that the plans appear to comply with the terms of the recorded easement. Sincerely, Leahy McLean Fjelstad !l/A?J·~~ Allison N. Peryea cc: Barbee Mill Community Organization; Shirley Ely, Association Manager. EXHIBIT 15 25 Central Way, Suite 310, Kirkland, WA ',auoo '+L::HH::i'::H:i 1~ l fax 425-889-4794 www.leahyps.com Gerald Wasser From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Categories: Good morning, Tara Ladwig <tara.ladwig@leahyps.com> Monday, December 16, 2013 10:30 AM Gerald Wasser Allison Peryea Urban Boat Lift Project (4157 & 4151 Williams Avenue N) 12.16.13 Ur to City of Renton.PDF Follow up Flagged Red Category Please see the attached letter regarding the above matter. Hard copy to follow in today's mail. Regards, Tara Ladwig I Legal Assistant IE Leahy McLean Fjelstad 25 Central Way Ste. 310 Kirkland, WA 98033-6157 t. 425.889.8191 x122 f. 425-889-4794 ta ra. ladwig@leahyps.co m www.leahyps.com CONFIDENTIALITY AND DISCLOSURE. lnformaf1on in this private email message may be privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. lf you are not the intended recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. In case of erroneous delivery, please notify the sender at tara.ladwig@leahyps.com. Thank you in advance for your courtesy and cooperation. This communication is from a law firm that, in some cases, may be acting as a debt collector. I Gerald Wasser From: Sent: To: Subject: Hi Mr. Wasser, Ruth/Mike Kidd <ruthkidd@me.com> Friday, December 27, 2013 11 :54 AM Gerald Wasser Boa) lift ft Barbe<'l_!.1)11: ~I Mt SEN~ITf-flT l,;,-b,-,A~ t::::2::, .. <--i L \ -\:--+. I I am a resident at Barbee Mill and I have comments about the Urban boat lift project that has been posted here. I do not have the project number, as the poster has been taken down My comments: 1. I do not fee this project has been given sufficient time to be evaluated by the homeowners at Barbee Mill. 2. The posting took place at a very busy time of year for many folks. Some homeowners are away and unaware of this posting due to the holiday season. 3. The posting was done during a very dark time of year, and some homeowners, leaving while still dark and arriving home after dark, have not yet seen the signs in spite of the neon pink color. 4. I only saw three posters and do not feel this was adequate. 5. Two of the three posters I saw have been taken down. The one remaining is only the bottom portion, without the project number and other info listed on the top portion. For myself, I do not know whether or not I support this project, but feel I need more time and information to make a reasonable decision. Respectfully, I ask that you give this project more notice and more time before granting the request. Thank you so much for you attention to this. I am very aware that the deadline for comments is today at 5 PM. Ruth Kidd cell: 425 681 8305 EXHIBIT 16 1 Gerald Wasser From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Categories: Hello Mr. Wasser, Torben Hollingsworth <torbenhol@me.com> Friday, December 27, 2013 1:53 PM Gerald Wasser Urban Boat lift Follow up Flagged Red Category We live at 4255 Williams Ave, Renton 98056. We were made aware of this project last Friday and have not seen any plans or even the posters that we were told about. Can you give us any information about this boat lift? Will it impact our lake view, or our ability to access the community dock? We are advised that we cannot build a dock on our water frontage, is this true? can we also build a boat lift based upon this application being successful. We understand the deadline for comments is 5pm today, please note this email is sent to you at 2.53 pm Thank you in advance for your response, Torben and Ginnie Hollngsworth. Sent from my iPad EXHIBIT 17 1 Gerald Wasser From: Sent: To: Subject: Gary Sanford <garys@loziergroup.com> Friday, December 06, 2013 10:41 AM Gerald Wasser RE: Barbee Mill/ Urban boat lift Thanks Jerry ... I will try to get down there this next week -will contact you prior GRS From: Gerald Wasser [mailto:GWasser@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Friday, December 06, 2013 10:32 AM To: Gary Sanford Subject: RE: Barbee Mill / Urban boat lift Hello Mr. Sanford: The Urban Boat Lift project number is LUAB-001640. The application and associated documents are not posted online. However, descriptions of land use projects are posted on the City's website; the website has not yet been updated to include this project. The project file is available for your review in the in the Planning Division Office which is located on the 61h floor of Renton City Hall. Should you want to review the file, I would happy to make it available to you. Please let me know when you want to come in. Jerry Gerald C. Wasser, Associate Planner Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 (425) 430-7382 FAX (425) 430-7300 gwasser@rentonwa.gov From: Gary Sanford [mailto:garys@loziergroup.com] Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 4:07 PM To: Gerald Wasser Subject: Barbee Mill / Urban boat lift Good afternoon ... I live in Barbee Mill and saw the posting the Urban's boat lift application and was wondering if the application and most specifically the access agreements/ right to the community dock easement are on-line? Sorry I didn't write down the application number ... if needed I can go back tonight and get it Thanks for the help and/or direction on this Gary S Gary R. Sanford Lozier Homes Corporation Executive Vice President Dir Phn 425-635-3943 e-mail qarys@lozierqroup.com 1 EXHIBIT 18 March 4, 2014 Kris Sorensen, Planner CED Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Re: LUA13001640, EDF, SM-Urban Boat Lift CITY OF RENTON RECEIVED MAr< U 6 c.0'.4 au1LDING DiVISIOM The following is a response to the "On Hold" notice letter from Gerry Wasser dated January 7, 2014 regarding the Urban boat lift project. The following items are being submitted as requested by Mr. Wasser. 1. A line item response of Patti Klink's concerns. 2. A line item response to DNR's comments prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments. 3. A line item response to the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division environmental concerns prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments. 4. A response to the environmental concerns raised by the EPA. We are also submitting revised plans for the project. The proposed location of the lift has been revised by placing it 3' further to the east in order to alleviate DNR's concerns that the lift may extend over state owned aquatic lands. Two pacific willows have been proposed to be planted along the shoreline as mitigation in response to the Muckleshoot's concerns of the project. I hope that all of the above items have been addressed satisfactorily. Please feel free to contact me if you have . any questions, or if you require any additional information. Sincerely, G,n lM--- Evan Wehr Ecco Design Inc. 206-706-3937 EXHIBIT 19 March 4, 2014 Kris Sorensen, Planner CED Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Re: LUAl3001640, EDF, SM-Urban Boat Lift The following are responses to a letter from Patti Klink dated December 16, 2013. 1. The proposed boat lift will be placed in the location indicated on the permit application within the easement granted by Conner Homes to the Urbans with the purchase of their property. The boat lift will be within the easement space in an area that is NOT available for use by other residents and is excluded from users of the community dock by posted signs installed by the Barbee Mill Community Organization ("BMCO"). 2. The cleats on the North bulkhead are within the easement area and are not available for use by other homeowners. See response to paragraph 1 above. 3. The BMCO has already approved and signed off on the permit application and the easement provided by Conner Homes. The community dock rules are not applicable to the boat lift within the easement space. Boats of other homeowners are not allowed nor will they be tied in the easement space. See response to paragraph I above. 4. The BMCO and their legal counsel were provided with all of the relevant information prior to their approval of the permit application. The boat lift was never stated to be accessible from the community dock and it will not be accessible from the community dock. Conner Homes already installed steps and a path from the Urban property to the easement area. 5. The BMCO and their counsel have already reviewed and approved the permit application and the location of the boat lift. 6. There are only two possible boats allowed with permanent access near the community dock. They are the Urban boat lift pursuant to the easement from Conner Homes and the finger boat slip South of the community dock believed to be purchased with the home to the South of the Urban residence located on Lot #36. I hope that all of the above items have been addressed satisfactorily. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions, or if you require any additional information. Sincerely, ~~ Evan Wehr Ecco Design Inc. 206-706-3937 March 4, 2014 Kris Sorensen, Planner CED Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Re: Urban Boat Lift/ LUA13-001640 The following is a response to comments in an email from Lynda Priddy of the Environmental Protection Agency dated December 27, 2013. The installation of the boat lift will not have any impact on the near shore area of the Quendall superfund site. While boats using the community dock, the proposed lift, and Lake Washington in the Renton area do engage in water skiing and other water activities, none of those activities are conducted near the Quendall Superfund site for the following reasons: 1. The water near the site is shallow and not conducive or safe for these activities. 2. The water in front of the site is full of underwater obstacles and floating platforms that make any boating activities in that area unsafe. The application is currently being processed by the USA CE under reference number NWS-2013-880. The USA CE should be sending out the permit application for review by the EPA in the near future. I hope that all of the above items have been addressed satisfactorily. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions, or if you require any additional information. Sincerely, Evan Wehr Ecco Design Inc. 206-706-3937 MARINE SURVEYS & ASSESSMENTS 521 SNAGSTEAD WAY PORT TOWNSEND WA 98368 Tel.360.385-4073 E m a i I. m a r i n e , s u r v e y s . i n c @ g m a i l . c o m {\~ -JI. 'l,b Gerald Wasser ~~ • City of Renton Associate Planner ()av, tJ,.,'<e '"' JJect: Washington Department of Natural Resources and Muck!eshoot Tribe Comments ~{\ ':.0\0 Case LUAB-001640 i~~ ~~ Michael Urban Boat Lift Project Conner Homes, Barbee Mill Community 4151 Williams Avenue N., Renton, WA 98056 Dear Mr. Wasser, The Michael Urban Boat Lift Project was initially submitted as an addendum to the Biological Evaluation for the Barbee Mill Community Dock Project (Case#: LUAI0-006). The proposed action was to add a boat lift to the already completed dock at the project location. On December 17, 2013, the City of Renton received comment on the proposed Michael Urban Boat Lift project from the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the Muckleshoot Tribe (see Attachment 1 for correspondence). In brief, DNR was most concerned about the potential impacts of this additional boat lift due to: increased shading impacts on aquatic vegetation, increased vessel wake impacts on natural shoreline processes, scour and sediment erosion through vessel propeller scour, crushing ofbenthic habitat, and a greater risk of release of contaminants into the water column. The Muckleshoot Tribe shared many of these concerns, as well as some additional concerns related to mitigation and shoreline development. Each of these impacts is addressed below. In addition, relevant project details are included to aid in review. Project Location: V. Section NW32, Township 24N, Range 05E. 4151 Williams Avenue North Renton, WA 98056 Latitude: 47.515745°N; Longitude: 122.206114°W Project Information: The proposed location for this boat lift is on the site of the former Barbee Mill Company lumber mill, which has recently been restored and includes a residential neighborhood (the Barbee Mill Community, developed by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC). The addition of this proposed boat lift to the already completed dock at the project location is expected to have little additional impact on the aquatic habitat as this area is already heavily developed and disturbed. For a more detailed impact summary please refer to the original Biological Evaluation. See Figure I for a revised site plan. Pictures of the proposed boat lift location can be seen in Figures 2 and 3. Washington DNR concerns: 1. Location of project in relation to DNR-Ieased land: MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·1 Kris Sorensen From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Dear Kris: Allison Peryea <allison.peryea@leahyps.com> Wednesday, April 02, 2014 6:25 PM Kris Sorensen Lisa Marie McElrea RE: Urban Boat Lift Project (4157 & 4151 Williams Avenue N) Land Use# 13-001640, ECF, SM As you may recall, my law firm represents the Barbee Mill Community Organization. On behalf of the Organization, I wanted to file an objection to the modified plan, which the Organization did not approve. The new plan calls for the planting of two pacific willows. This was not in the original plan. The reason the Organization has concerns about this plan modification is that the willows may result in blocked views, erosion, or damage to the bulkhead, since they are intended to be planted very close to the shoreline. Further, the owner has not applied to the Organization for approval of the willows, as required under the Organization covenants, including the Declaration. Owners, by virtue of their ownership of a lot, are automatically subject to the covenants. Section 5.1 of the Declaration states that no "substantial landscaping ... or other improvement" shall be added without ACC (Architectural Control Committee) request. Section 5.9(b) also states that lot owners may "personalize their in- ground landscaping, subject to prior review and written approval of the ACC." The ACC must consider "the impact of the proposed changes on the overall aesthetic appearance of the community, view blockage issues, compatibility with other landscaping on the lot and nearby lots and Common Areas." The Committee may impose limitations on such landscaping, including but not limited to restrictions related to "size, mature height and width, and shadow creation." The Organization's ACC has not had an opportunity to evaluate the potential impact of the addition of the two willows, since the owner has not provided information about them to the Organization. It may be that the willows would be ultimately be approved, but their proximity to the shoreline and the potential height of the trees could create a number of problems that the Organization has not had an opportunity to investigate. I sent this objection by email to save time. I can write a formal letter if needed. I do understand that those who objected needed to provide input by Monday, March 31, but we just received the new proposal on Thursday, the 27'h. It took a few days for the Organization's Board to review it and come to a decision about whether to object. Please feel free to contact me if you need more information. Sincerely, Allison N. Peryea I Attorney ~ Leahy McLean Fjelstad 25 Central Way Ste. 310 Kirkland, WA 98033-6157 t. 425.889.8191 x121 f. 425-889-4794 allison.peryea@leahyps.com www.leahyps.com 1 EXHIBIT 20 CONFIDENTIAUlY. Information in this private email message may be privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disseminati.on, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. In case of erroneous delivery, please notify the sender at allison.peryea@leahyps.com. Thank you in advance for your courtesy and cooperation. From: Kris Sorensen [mailto:KSorensen@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 8:35 AM To: Allison Peryea Cc: Lisa Marie McElrea Subject: RE: Urban Boat Lift Project (4157 & 4151 Williams Avenue N) Land Use# 13-001640, ECF, SM Thank you Allison for the request. We will send the information to you. Jerry Wasser no longer works at the city so thank you for contacting me. Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner, Planning Division, Community & Economic Development, City of Renton, 425-430-6593 ---------- From: Allison Peryea [mailto:allison.peryea@leahyps.com] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 10: 13 AM To: Gerald Wasser; Kris Sorensen Subject: Urban Boat Lift Project (4157 & 4151 Williams Avenue N) Land Use# 13-001640, ECF, SM Dear Ms. Wasser and Mr. Sorensen: My law firm represents the Barbee Mill Community Organization. We sent a letter asking for notice of materials submitted in the matter listed in the subject line in mid-December. See attached. We did not, however, receive the attached materials, which I believe were sent to Organization manager Shirley Ely. I just want to ensure that our firm is obtaining the notices we requested so the Organization does not miss anything. Also, I noted that the attached notices mention a "line-item" response from the designer of the boat lift. Could we get a copy of those responses? I do not anticipate that we will provide further input, but I do think the Organization would like to see the responses to these environmental and other concerns. Sincerely, Allison N. Peryea I Attorney I] Leahy McLean Fjelstad 25 Central Way Ste. 310 Kirkland, WA 98033-6157 t. 425.889.8191 x121 f. 425-889-4794 2 Kris Sorensen From: Karen Walter <KWalter@muckleshoot:nsn.us> Monday, March 31, 2014 3:11 PM Sent: To: Kris Sorensen Cc: Jennifer T. Henning Subject: Urban boat lift, LUAB-001640, follow-up comments Attachments: Lally scour mitigation memo for Barbee Mill Community pier Nov 2 2011.pdf Kris, Thank you for sending us the applicants' responses to our December 27, 2013 comments to the proposed Urban Boat Lift project at the Barbee Mill Community Dock site, 4125 and 4151 Williams Avenue Non Lake Washington. We have reviewed these responses and offer follow-up comments: 1. Generally, the responses do not adequately address the concerns we have raised (and continue to raise in the case of mitigation plantings). We provided comments consistently throughout the Barbee Mill Community dock project regarding the potential for permanent and increased moorage at this dock site, including a February 22 201 O email in response to the Notice of Application for that project to the City of Renton which we can provide again if needed. Specifically we said: "the project should be conditioned to allow only one boa/lift or jetski per owner for the private finger dock. If only one owner is using the private dock (page 6 of the checklist), then only on·e watercraft should be allowed". The MONS from the City (dated 3/31/2010) states that "the community dock would provide transient moorage only" and "the finger dock would be for the sole use of a proposed future residence located at 4125 Williams Avenue N'. We never received a direct response from the City to this comment and request. However, one of the applicant's consultant, Waterfront Construction, sent a response to us and City staff in an email dated 3/10/201 O: RESPONSE. Under the RGP0 1, the Army Corps allows up to 3 lifts for a residential pier on Lake Washington and Lake Sammamish. Currently, there is no type of lift planned for the private portion of the dock. If the future owner does decide to install any boat or jet ski lifts they would align with those typical of any other small residential piers on Lake Washington. There is nothing in the City issued MONS for the Barbee Mill Community Dock II to suggest there would be any additional moorage at this location beyond what was described in the SEPA and Permit documents. For example, as noted in the Corps' and Ecology's Joint Public Notice for the Barbee Mill Community Pier project (NWS,-2010-140), the purpose of this pier was "lo provide water access for·100 property owners in the Barbee Mill community and private moorage for one property owner'. There is nothing in our files for the Barbee Mill Community Dock to indicate there would ever be any additional moorage on or near this structure for anyone beyond the one owner at 4125 Williams Avenue N. With the responses for this proposed boatlift, we now find out from the applicants' consultants that there is an easement that was provided by Conner Homes (the plat developer) to allow for this· boatlift which was shared with at least the Barbee Mill Community Organization since the City issued its NOA. This is brand new information for us and we would like to know when this easement was conveyed and why this information was not communicated during the permitting of the Community pier. We would also like to know of any other pending easements, agreements or potential pier modifications to accommodate additional and/or permanent moorage at this community pier with responses directly from Conner Homes·and the City. Our concern remains that this project represents part of a larger effort to create permanent and increased moorage beyond transient moorage at this location that will occur over time and in a piecemeal fashion without adequate consideration of site-specific and cumulative impacts to salmon and their habitat. 2. The proposed free standing boatlift is located on the north side of the existing Barbee Mill Community Dock and just south of the WDNR withdrawn area that contains contaminated sediments from the former mill site at the Superfund site on the WDNR aquatic lands. As we noted in our previous comments, there is no consideration in either the checklist or the Lake and Stream study sent with the Revised NOA consider the potential impacts from the new boatlift and the operation of a motorized watercraft on the north side of the joint pier. A motorized watercraft in this location will likely create scour and erosion from propeller wash that could cause a release of nearby contaminants into the water column adversely affecting fish and benthic vertebrates. Scour impacts were EXHIBIT 21 analyzed with the Barbee Mil 1munity Pier project. Specifically, Lally ulting identified an area and lakebed sediment size and other actions to provide scour mitigation measu,es (see attached November 2, 2011 memo). As far as we know, these mitigation measures were required to obtain the Corps permit for the Community Dock. The boatlift on the north side of the pier (and any other future boatlifts, watercraft lifts, plane lifts, etc) has the potential to cause additional scour impacts to the WDNR withdrawal and capped area to the north were not considered sufficiently in the responses. This is an outstanding issue as water depths are less than 10 feet in the boatlift location and beyond (see sheet M-1 in Lally memo) and the proposed boatlift is immediately adjacent to known contaminated sediments. The responses regarding the new freestanding boatlift and a boat in the nearshore where juvenile salmon are likely to be found that can cause them to avoid the nearshore and increase their risk of predation are inadequate and inconsistent with Lake Washington specific research completed by Roger Tabor (USFWS) and others. Some of this research is available at http://www.govlink.org/watersheds/8/pdf/LWGI SalmonSyn123108.pdf/. Please note that the majority of the scientific papers reference regarding piers and impacts to juvenile salmon cited in the responses were for areas in marine waters, not Lake Washington, where there has been extensive research with tagging and tracking of juvenile salmon, predators, shoreline conditions, and piers/docks. 3. We maintain our concern that previous shoreline planting mitigation for both the plat and that which was to mitigate for the Barbee Mill Community Pier has not be fully implemented. In our previous comments, we requested copies of all of the existing monitoring reports to be completed as part of the shoreline restoration work required for the entire Barbee Mill Plat, including the community dock. We would also like copies of the "as-built" drawings for these planting plans as known have been provided to date. A photo of the site is not sufficient to address these concerns. 4. The proposal to plant two Pacific Willows on the southwest corner" of the Urban property as mitigation for this project may not be sufficient. Part of the adequacy analysis depends on the details from the previous planting plans and work requested in item 3 above. There also needs to be a mitigation plan for the two willows, including contingency if they do not survive and how they will be protected in perpetuity to serve as mitigation for the boatlift, assuming it is permitted. Finally, whatever monitoring reports are generated for this project need to also be sent to us as a permit condition. We would appreciate if Renton could respond to these concerns as several of them have been made over the years for other piers and docks in this area and have not been sufficie_ntly addressed to date. If you would like to meet to discuss before sending responses, please let me know. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muck/eshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 2 lq[/9@ MEMORANDUM 2811 Fairview Ave., East Suite 1004 Seattle, Washington 98102 Mobile: +1 206 :ki9 2478 Olfice: •1206 325 0274 Fax: -t-1206325 0252 john.la!ly@lallyconsu!Ung.com To: Todd Sherman, Charlie Conner, Conner Homes at Barbee Mill Inc. Ted Burns, Seaborn Piled riving From: John Lally, Lally Consulting LLC Date: November 2, 2011 Subject: Responses to Outstanding Agency Questions Per the request of the Conner Homes at Barbee Mills LLC (Conner Homes), Lally Consulting (Lally) has developed responses to outstanding agency questions on USACE permit application no. NWS-2010-140, submitted October 20, 2011. The issues related to scour mitigation measures originally presented in the report Conner Homes at Barbee Mill, Renton, Washington, Community Dock Scour Analyses, (Lally, 2011), and further developed in a memorandum to the USEPA, Region 10 dated October S, 2011, are addressed here. Questions related to the dock location and dimensions, planting plan, joint use agreement and other · agreements are not included in this response. Placement of Scour Mitigation Cap/Habitat Mix Additional resea.rch and evaluation was performed to refine the proposed scour mitigation cap / habitat mix based on agency questions and concerns. To clarify, with the proposed signs and buoys installed at the Community dock, the worst-case design vessel size is reduced from a 59-ft. Grand Banks type trawler to a 30-ft cruiser type vessel. The Oct. 5 memo re~ evaluated the scour potential for this smaller worst-case design vessel. Results of the particle stability analyses, using two different methods (Shield's and Maynard), for both the typical and worst-case vessel scenarios, are provided in the table below. Table 1 Stable-Particle Sizes@ Estimated Maximum Velocities -Typical and Worst-Case Vessel Scenarios Shields Method {Vanoni, 1975) USEPA Method (Maynard, 1998) Maximum Stable Stable Stable Engine Velocity Particle Particle Sediment Particle Stable Sediment Vessel Scenario RPM Near-bed Particle Size Size Type Stze Type (ft/sec.I {D,o, (Dso, {USCS) (Dso, Size (USCS) mm) in.) mm) (D 5o, in.) Typical Case 800 1.9 4.5 0.18 course 21 course Vessel {ZO ft.} sand 0.8 gravel Worst Case 1000 3.3 14 0.6 fine course Vessel (30 ft.) 63 2.S gravel gravel Based on these scour analyses, it is estimated that to prevent movement under the maximum propeller wash velocities, the lakebed sediment grain size would need to be course sand -course gravel (0.2 in. -0.8 in.} in the case of typical vessel operations, and fine gravel -course gravel (0.6 in. -2.5 in.} course for the worst case vessel (30-ft, 1000 rpm} scenario. The 4-in minus rounded gravel described in the Oct. 5, 2011 memo was suggested as a conservative gradation and one that may be suitable as salmonid habitat substrate based on prior project experience on Lake Washington. As estimated using the new worst-case vessel (30 ft.) and related sediment stability calculations, a 2-1/2 inch minus rounded gravel will be adequate to prevent scour at the community dock site. A standard gradation for this material is as follows; Table 2 Proposed Community Dock Scour Mitigation Cap/ Habitat Mix Sieve Size Percent Passing (by Weight) 2-1/2 inch 95 -100 2inch 70-100 1-1/2 inch 40-90 1inch 3-30 3/4 inch 0-15 I #200 Sieve (fines) 0-3 The shallow water restoration site, and DNR Withdrawal Area details, were provided as new information to Lally, in order to respond to agency questions posed in the Oct. 20, 2011 letter. Two (2) two construction drawings were provided by Conner Homes to identify the aerial extent and cross sections of the shallow water restoration materials, placed in or about 2006. To better integrate with these existing materials and contours, the proposed community dock scour mitigation cap was modified slightly to dovetail with the south end of the existing shallow water habitat, as shown on Figure M-1. The proposed community dock scour mitigation cap coverage area is approximately 11,075 sq. ft. A surface layer of the gravel cover mix, with a minimum thickness of 1 ft. (12-in.) is recommended to account for the existence of potentially contaminated sediments, inaccuracy of the cap placement process, and scouring/grounding du,: to potential vessel impacts. The resulting placement volume would be approximately 440 cubic yards (cy). In depths greater than 10 ft. at and in the vicinity of the community dock, some movement of bed surface sediments is predicted to occur as a result of low (i.e. 0.4 ft/sec), propwash velocties. However, based on the analyses I would classify the materials in this area to be 'dynamically stable' under the influence of the lower propwash velocities, and not susceptible to being transported more than a few feet at any one time. 2 Caring tor your natural resources ... now and forever March 31, 2014 Kris Sorenson, Associate Planner City of Renton, CED -Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Subject: Wa~hington State Department ofNatural Resources Comment Review of Applicant Responses -Urban Boat Lift/ LUAl3-001640 Dear Ms. Sorenson: Washington State Department of Natural Resources ("DNR") has reviewed the packet provided by the City of Renton regarding the applicant's response to outstanding questions for the Urban Boat Lift Project/LUA13-001640. DNR submits the following comments for the City's record. In December 2013, DNR commented on the City's Revised Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance. In comment, DNR stated the proposed use was not consistent with the permitted use of adjacent state-owned aquatic lands for the purpose of a community dock with transient moorage and one finger pier for private moorage, as defined in Barbee Mill Community Organization's (BMCO) Aquatic Lands Lease No. 22-086046 (the "Lease"). In response, the applicant has proposed a location 3 feet landward. Relying on precise placement, the applicant states the revised location will position the lift 4 feet from state- owned aquatic land:, -vv·ith th.e sten1 of the applicant's current \Vatercraft {l,vhen stored on the proposed lift) approximately 2-3 feet from state-owned aquatic lands. DNR remains opposed to the proposed placement of the boat lift given lifting and lowering, along with ingress and egress will encumber state-owned aquatic lands. Additionally, DNR's review of"Easement for Boat Lift" (noted on the Urban Boat Lift project drawing) indicates a permanent easement has been conveyed by Barbee Mill Community Organization to a portion of state-owned aquatic lands which are not owned by the Grantor. Ownership of state-owned aquatic lands commences at the "Inner Harbor Line" which is clearly depicted on the drawing associated with the easement. Note the Easement is recorded under Instrument No. 20121211001516, not 20121112145613258 as indicated on the Urban Boat Lift project drawing. SOUTH PUGET SOUi TEL: (360) 825-1631 I FAX EXHIBIT 22 > 98022-9282 il/W.DNR.WA.GOV •.:CYCLD p,:..Frn Ci) Kris Sorenson, Associate Planner City of Renton, CED -Planning Division March 31, 2014 Page 2 of3 In December 2013, DNR also presented concerns of potential environmental impacts to the adjacent state-owned aquatic lands of the Barbee Mill Beach restoration and withdrawal area and the existing BMCO's leasehold to include: • Increased shading impacts to aquatic vegetation • Increased vessel wake impacting natural shoreline processes due to larger and more frequent wave action • Scour and sediment erosion through prop scour • Crushing of benthic habitat • Heightened potential for release of contaminants into the water column In response, the applicant states the proposed boat lift is "expected to have little additional impact on the aquatic habitat as this area is already heavily developed and disturbed". The applicant presents: • Limited available light at the proposed site • Necessity for low speeds and existing bulkhead make shoreline erosion unlikely • Low speeds in shallow water will minimize scour and erosion • Small boat lift footpads yield a small impact area to benthic habitat • Levels of contaminants introduced into the water column will not be at dangerous concentration levels In 2005, DNR authorized the restoration of state-owned aquatic lands known as the Barbee Mill Beach, north and adjacent to the proposed site of the Urban boat lift. The restoration provides components that create functional salmon habitat conditions, such as a reduction of over water structures, naturally sloped shoreline, native vegetation, large woody debris and appropriate sized substrates. In 2006, in accordance with RCW 79.105.210, the Commissioner of Public Lands issued a Withdrawal Order for Barbee Mill Beach. Protecting this area by withdrawing it from leasing enhances the value of the area as wildlife habitat, representative ecosystem or spawning area in accordance with RCW 79.105.210(3). Prior to authorization in 2012, DNR worked extensively with Conner Homes and City, State and Federal regulatory agencies regarding the configuration and placement of the newly constructed community dock and terms of the Lease in order to avoid and minimize impacts to the adjacent restored nearshore environment, shorelands and bedlands. ( Kris Sorenson, Associate Planner City of Renton, CED-Planning Division March 31, 2014 Page 3 of3 Under management guidelines set forth in RCW 79.105.030, state-owned aquatic lands are managed by DNR for the benefit of the citizens of Washington State to preserve their environmental integrity that is linked to our quality oflife. As steward of Washington's state-owned aquatic lands, DNR regularly researches and identifies practices that better protect the aquatic environment. The applicant's position that the site is already developed and disturbed does not adequately address DNR's concerns regarding potential impacts to the aquatic environment on state-owned aquatic lands. As proposed, DNR does not support the Urban Boat Lift Project and the potential environmental impacts posed to the adjacent state-owned aquatic lands of the Barbee Mill Beach restoration and withdrawal area and the existing BMCO's leasehold. Additionally, placement of the proposed lift is not consistent with the permitted use of state-owned aquatics lands under Barbee Mill Community Organization's DNR Lease No. 22-086046. If you have comments regarding this correspondence, please feel free to contact me by email at vivian.roach@dnr.wa.gov. S!_~e~ly, -7, . . I . . I ~/."',;,,....t c, " .... "'- V;vian RoJch, Aquatic Land Manager Shoreline District, Aquatics Resources Division c: District File Aquatic Resources File fc/UrbanBoatLiftRentonDNR302520 14 LOOOt iL/80 3n•o OH"'""' O"'HH>'. • OH"""'OH• --.. ---><01$a<J~ ---~·---"'""' __ ,,,.,, •'.(J!; i ~ ' ~ ,i i ~ w ~ ~ z ~ N ~ ! " M ~ ~ ..r § ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 z 0 ~ ~ 0 • < ' _, C ~l!l~;i;~ ' §:~!i~ l §1,1,1 i ;;,i!, ' ,1;,i, l ~..,S!ts.t , ...,I ...... t. ~ .. ~~:~ ~~ a;.~b~F8 ~5i1ip z l~ !"''"!j lj ;§ 1~ "'!" I!;~ i;j;;: ~ :f~ ::i•L,;;: ... ~ ij~ ~~ai'.•\;§ . "' g\;!~i!a~i5 0 0 i!ii':3r~,j (,D ~ t)li £ z ~i f.'ia :?~I f-'i'i "'!!;:5 co~ =~ ~!!~;;; 9 :E g:. ~ N8 ffi/c' lil;t;~ -NO l§ 6: di; ,,h,j! ~ i5 ~ ~ 8~ ',1 ., V'lc::V'la:~i3'. ·'!',,, ~ <( ~ ~ @ffi ,,.. i!I ... Ow ....1 w !"' 1······ z VIC::"' 0.15 ~za;~;!; 5 :;I z iil ,, U~i~i~ ....1 C _, if.o •0086 'IM '3M3T138 3N '3/1\/ H.1901 -9t9 S3MH ~3NNO'.J J_ -------1i'iLf.IA1iS A VE N. • ~,. ,!0~1i.1, i' ' .. i (I) • I ; ; ~~ I / ' d , cal I'" l,IOQI I! ! p I ~0/;".UJ.J:) OIM -JNr," __ _ S3l'IOH ~JNNO'.J -------JO /•Mi», • ., /0 J.:>~ !J.'II/JaroJ/1 ,(.J,ti#',S '"' JO ""'"'-'",,_, '"' .,,. """'""'ll"'' ,~ "'""''"P ,r,., ""'"".., •"-' ,(q """"' .,_,..-" ,,-,d,,, £11,_,...-,., dow "'ll S//Ot1J3ll :P SIJW:J:Ni-"' 'IO/'i~m "'.JNI 'N!HSJG 31i0cl JO ,,.,,,,.,, .. ,, /0 ----.bod /0 '>'.J<&i< !" ------~ " n-----,o --U --------,,, ,fop --,-,, px,;.,, ,,,. i>"U 3.l.VOl::ILU::130 S,UOA3/U::1nS 3.l.VOl::ll.l.U30 !::>NIOU0::>3U ..,,.,,s·,,-~ ,,,. __ ,. ,,11 ~ ' NO.LDNil:ISV.M. :DJV'"I --i>·, C ~c ____ J 0 "' :~ II w _J < u {/) EXHIBIT 23 SPECIFICATIONS OVERALL LENGTH: w/sro. INTEGRAL/EXTENDED SWIM PLATFORM 21' 6.40 M BEAM: 8' 6" 2.59 M DRAFT: STERNDRIVE DOWN 35" 88.9 CM DRAFT: STERNDRIVE UP 21" 53.5 CM DRY WEIGHT: 3,694 LBS 1,676 KG FUEL CAPACITY: 40 GAL 151 L DEAD RISE: 20° 20° MAX PERSONS/WEIGHT: 8/1,100 LBS 499 KG WC) MAX WEIGHT PERSONS/GEAR: 1,200 LBS 544 KG specifrcauom mea1uremem5 are approx1muriom and wbjec( iO variance. e equipment 5hown may be opc,0110/. Oµciom and colors shown may 1,ot vaJ/able. P/ea,;e see your ouchonzed Sea Ray dealer for w/or options. m >< :::c 1-1 C:1 1-1 -4 N .1:1,. Standard Layout (ii!;, Optional Layout A Optional Layout B Upscale helm features power- assisted tilt steering with integrated Vessel Control System (VCS) and rich-wood accents. MORE INFORMATION SPECS PG. 79 COLORS/GRAPHICS PG. 56 CANVAS PG. 58 ENGINE PG. 64 Optional cockpit layout includes an aft seat that folds up to provide a comfortable back rest for extra- large sun pad. WWW.SEARAY.COM Bow area includes molded-in arm rests and optional filler cushion to create a forward sun pad. 15 Specit,a:atians .~~-:un:: Sun/..;/,>: ,1>!: .. l :upacity (pounds) 2,000 2,000 3,000 4,500 6,'.J()'.j 8,000 10,000 12,000 18,000 24,000 ! i!ling Ranges' 36"/48"/6()" ;Jfi'/48'/60' .48" 36"/@"/60' /(72'1 ,J!J :0":'b'J I.:.: fil)"/(72""1 fill'/(72' .. I fil)'/(72"'1 !lQ'/172" .. I fill"/(72""1 ( :apacity at Max. Lifting Range 1,800 1,800 3,000 4,000 ., ')[11_> 8,000 9,500 9,500 14,250 19,000 Hunk Length 6' 8' 10' 10' '2 12' 14' 18' 20' 22' I rume Length 95' 95' 10'5" 10'5" 1 t'':.," 12'5' 14'5" 18'5' 20'5" 24' I rrnneWid!h 5'6" 5'6" 9'6" 9'6" il• 11' 11' 11' 12'6' 12'6" Weight (pounds) 200 210 450 550 :.:,:, 1,000 1,050 1,500 2.000 2,500 Lilting Speed (Typ.) 15 sec 15 sec 15 sec 25sec :-.~ "''' 50 sec 50 sec 50 sec 55 sec 60 sec Min. Water Depth Required (Typ.) 18' 18" 23' 25' -· 36' 40' 44" so· 62' Min. Depth w/Shallow Water Roller (Typ.) N/A N/A NIA 16' ,, 30' 34" 38' N/A N/A Remote Control Opt. Opt. Opt. std. ~.;·~ Std. Std. Std. Std. Std. Leg Lengths Available 2'-6' 2'-6' 2'-24' 2'-24' ;(-,:_~ 2'-24' 2'-24'· 2'-24' 2'-24' 2'-14' Available Canopies P1260t P1260t P22108 P2210B i:--'."" ~ '. '.! P27126 P27126 P27126 Custom Custom P30126 P30126 P30126 P36126 P36126 P36126 P42126 P42126 ' P42126 · Some h'fting ranges reqwre opt/Ona/ arm extensions. Standard ranges are s/Jown with underline (example: Jfi"). .. Spec,aJ order Model XR 72" Range. Special model numbers: S1'...8012XR, S1'...9514XR, SL9518XR, SL 14220XR ond SL 19022XR. t Special order ONLY. :--Jun:~~: i.; ;:w2.0fl:.- C.Jpacity (pounds) 6,000 10,500 13,000 lJunk Length 12' 14' 18' l i1t Length 20' 24' 29' I ii! Width UP Position 10'6" 11 '11" i i'i i" Woight (pounds) 1,300 2,500 2,900 I aunching Speed (Typ.) 18sec 18 sec 40 sec W;-11m Depth Required draft+ 12" draft+ 12" draft+ 12" l!u111olc Std. Std. Std. Mi11illlUm Slip Width 12' 14" 14" Mil)(irnum Boat Beam 8'6' 10'6" 10'6' /\U1iwnble Draft for V-Hull t 20-22" 34" 34' /\v; 1ibblc Canopies FA-H24108 FA-H30144 FA-H30144 · W1, Ir.~-slip required fo,· beams over 9'6' "Wide( Slip required tor beams over 10'6' t For Cat Hull allowable dr;1f/ subtracl 12' 13,000 15,000 18' 23' 29' 34' 13'4' 11 ·11" 3,100 3,812 40 sec 40 sec draft+ 12' draft+ 12" Std. Std. 15··· 14" 12' 10'6' 34' 34" NIA FA-H30144 24,000 20' 38' 16' 8,000 60Sec 7' Std. 18-22' 13'9" 36' N/A Nate: Specifications are subject ta change without notice. ~ k m X ::c .... c:, .... -I t-J U1 ~EXISTING COMMUNITY DOCK ,;-i TO REMAIN Jo\ f ;o DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES PARC. # 32Z40§906G YtNAN HE & MA HONG 4163 WILLIAMS AVE N T--------J:l~:~·.;v __ Fi-~~----:-~ ~ ~ Pt-...,. I I ,F~ -N19"09'31~W I ~ j 1 O 20 MICHAEL & DOROTHY URBAN I iJ HOUSE ~ 4167WILLIAMSAVEN 1 ~ 1-..,.,,.,. I ft ~---L ___ _J lz 11'-6' bi ~· ·~ ---~·-,:..:w~L.. ii 13433' -----------' ' ~ BARBEE MILL COMMUNITY ORGANIZAT)ON 4151 W)LLJAMS AVE N · \-• -~'Om..tJ _J ~9'04'39"W ~ • 1°29.2B' •---------•-• . /~ ~ f '.._-REVISED EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR BOAT '1 ~, I LIFT: REC. NO. 20120802900003. SIZE OF THE l"' //// EASEMENT SHALL NOT EXCEED A WOTH OF 12' OR A LENGTH OF 27.5 FEET. 1 -N 44"15'28' E I I 6.86' • 4125 WILLIAMS AVI; N J ; I BARBEE MILL WATERFRONT LLC I OHIIVM 21.as·@ BULKHEA I I L -;,c-~ ' I ...L.. -· -· -· -• __ N...§EQ4J9.:.:::._0 _J I ~1• ---·-·-·-• ! ' _____________________ _j ~ ACENT DOCK-.."-.. ~ EXISTING ADJ TO REMAIN ~ -• ---t='-::j _ -- ,---------[: _________ _ ~---'. ___________ ,Fl SITE PLAN ~ GARY & BRENDA BEEM 4119 WILLIAMS AVE N MARINE SURVEYS & ASSESSMENTS 521 SNAGSTEAD WAY PORT TOWNSEND WA 98368 Tcl.360.385-4073 E m a i I . m a r i n e . s u r v e y s . i n c (~-, g m a i I . c o m Gerald Wasser City of Renton Associate Planner Subject: Washington Department of Natural Resources and Muckleshoot Tribe Comments Case LUA13-001640 Michael Urban Boat Lift Project Conner Homes, Barbee Mill Community 4151 Williams Avenue N., Renton, WA 98056 Dear Mr. Wasser, The Michael Urban Boat Lift Project was initially submitted as an addendum to the Biological Evaluation for the Barbee Mill Community Dock Project (Case#: LUA!0-006). The proposed action was to add a boat lift to the already completed dock at the project location. On December 17, 2013, the City of Renton received comment on the proposed Michael Urban Boat Lift project from the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the Muckleshoot Tribe (see Attachment 1 for correspondence). In brief, DNR was most concerned about the potential impacts of this additional boat lift due to: increased shading impacts on aquatic vegetation, increased vessel wake impacts on natural shoreline processes, scour and sediment erosion through vessel propeller scour, crushing of benthic habitat, and a greater risk of release of contaminants into the water column. The Muckleshoot Tribe shared many of these concerns, as well as some additional concerns related to mitigation and shoreline development. Each of these impacts is addressed below. In addition, relevant project details are included to aid in review. Project Location: Y.. Section NW32, Township 24N, Range 05E. 4151 Williams Avenue North Renton, WA 98056 Latitude: 47.515745°N; Longitude: 122.206114°W Project Information: The proposed location for this boat lift is on the site of the former Barbee Mill Company lumber mill, which has recently been restored and includes a residential neighborhood (the Barbee Mill Community, developed by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC). The addition of this proposed boat lift to the already completed dock at the project location is expected to have little additional impact on the aquatic habitat as this area is already heavily developed and disturbed. For a more detailed impact summary please refer to the original Biological Evaluation. See Figure 1 for a revised site plan. Pictures of the proposed boat lift location can be seen in Figures 2 and 3. Washington DNR concerns: 1. Location of project in relation to DNR-leased land: MS&A EXHIBIT 26 Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 1 The proposed location of the lift has been revised. The lift will be located 3' further to the east than the originally proposed location, which places the lift 4' away from state owned aquatic lands. This will ensure that no part of the lift will extend over state owned aquatic lands and that no part of the boat will extend over state owned aquatic lands when it is on the lift (Figure I). The stem of the boat will hang off of the west portion of the lift that is closest to the adjacent state owned aquatic lands. Because of how the boat lift operates, the west side of the bunk supporting the boat will be approximately 6' away from the adjacent state owned aquatic lands when the boat is stored on the lift. When stored on the lift the stern of the boat will overhang the western edge of the bunk by approximately 3'. In the revised proposed location this means that the stern of the boat will be approximately 3' away from the adjacent state owned aquatic lands when the boat is stored on the lift. 2. Increased shading impacts to aqnatic vegetation: Although few studies exist in reference to boat lifts, a boat lift can be considered similar to a small pier in its impacts. This is because both are open structures that extend over water. The impacts of piers on aquatic vegetation are well studied, especially in saltwater systems. Unsurprisingly, piers reduce the amount of light available below the structure (Mulvihill et al 1980, Burdick and Short 1995). However, many factors influence how much light is actually available below an overwater structure. In the current situation, two factors are most relevant: a lower overwater dock height provides greater shading as compared to higher overwater dock height (Burdick and Short 1995), and a considerable amount of light-transmitting grating is needed to minimize shading impacts. For example, Fresh et al. (l 995) found that at least 50% grating was needed to allow enough light transmission to significantly benefit eelgrass (Zostera marina). The current proposal features a boat (which, by its nature, is not able to integrate grating or light transmitting structures) stored at a low over-water height, so shading concerns are relevant and must be addressed. There is likely to be very little aquatic vegetation at the project site. A dive survey was conducted by Marine Surveys & Assessments divers on March 20, 2007 near the now-constructed community dock (Attachment 2). This survey observed two types of aquatic vegetation: invasive Eurasian milfoil (Myriophy/lum spicatum) and an unidentified filamentous alga. Eurasian milfoil was first noted approximately I 00' waterward of the current bulkhead, and increased in density from 120'-200' waterward. The unidentified filamentous alga was first noted 25' waterward of the current bulkhead. In both cases, impacts to aquatic vegetation from the boat lift would be best avoided by locating it inside (landward) of aquatic vegetation. The current proposal locates the boat lift as landward as possible, keeping it well away from any aquatic vegetation. The boat launch will occupy a small 1 O' by 27' gap between a vertical bulkhead and an existing pier, ramp, and float structure (Figures 1-3). This small gap is effectively closed in by the existing dock and bulkhead on 3 sides, and this is likely already limiting the available light. While the DNR view-that there will be increased shading impacts to aquatic vegetation-is correct, the extent of this impact depends on the presence of aquatic vegetation at the project site and the siting of the boat lift. In this case, the proposed location of the boat and lift in a shaded "pocket" near shore without appreciable aquatic vegetation will effectively minimize overwater shading impacts. 3. Increased vessel wake impacting natural shoreline processes dne to larger and more frequent wave action: There are two major times when this development could increase vessel wake: when the vessel is entering/exiting the boat lift, and once it is underway on Lake Washington. Each impact is considered below. The major shoreline impact from vessel traffic is erosion due to boat-generated wake waves. The extent of this impact will be determined by the intensity of the waves as well as the composition of shoreline banks (Asplund 2000). In the case of entering and exiting the boat lift, wave sizes are likely to be minimal. Because of the location of the proposed lift, speeds will, by necessity, be very low. Maneuvering an 8.3' wide vessel into a 10' gap, along the pre-existing 170' long dock, will require speeds that are unlikely to produce wake. The tight confines of the dock and boat lift effectively enforce a "no-wake zone." Furthermore, the shoreline at and near the proposed boat lift is already bulkheaded. The bulkhead is impounding any sediment above the ordinary water mark (OWM). Because the Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) controls the water depth of Lake Washington at 21.85' above MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·2 Puget Sound mean lower low water (with small variations), the substrate seaward of the bulkhead is continuously submerged to a depth of 5.5'. These two factors-small waves due to low boat speed, and low erosion due to the bulkhead and water depth-make shoreline erosion unlikely. Once the boat is past the existing dock and under way in Lake Washington, it will obviously travel at speeds that result in a wake, and ultimately, shoreline wave action. Recreational motorcraft produce waves that average 1-25 cm in height (Bhowmik et al. 1992). In a study along an Australian river, waves greater than 30 cm were able to cause shoreline erosion (Nason et al. 1994). However, this finding cannot be directly translated to Lake Washington because the erosive potential of waves is dependent not only on the actual size, but the composition of the shoreline itself (Asplund 2000). From the limited research available, it is safe to assume that every recreational motor boat on Lake Washington does have the potential to contribute to shoreline erosion. However, it is not reasonable to assume that the construction of this boat lift will directly add to an increase in shoreline erosion via larger and more frequent waves once underway in Lake Washington. According to Michael Urban, the proponent, the boat is likely to be used twice weekly from the months of June to September. On an already crowded urban lake, the addition of approximately 24 recreational boat trips per year cannot be considered a substantial development. This is especially true because the proponent could add this volume of traffic to the lake independent of the boat lift, simply by using the boat from public launches. Because the project is unlikely to result in larger or more frequent waves while entering/exiting the dock, and is only adding a fractional increase in the total lake traffic while underway, additional shoreline erosion is unlikely. 4. Scour and sediment erosion through prop scour: Propeller scour can affect sediments at depths of up to IO' (Gusinski 1982, in Asplund 1997). Recreational boat propeller scour can significantly increase turbidity (via sediment resuspension) and can directly impact aquatic plants through eroding sediment and cutting plants (Asplund 1997). It appears that the direct physical impacts of scouring (sediment erosion and cutting plants) are most responsible for reducing aquatic plant biomass, as opposed to indirect impacts from increased turbidity (Asplund & Cook 1997). Clearly, DNR concerns about sediment scour and erosion are valid in the shallow (<IO') environment. However, Lake Washington is a deep lake that quickly drops off at the shoreline. Scour impacts are not likely once in deeper waters. As the 2007 SCUBA survey noted (Attachment 2), water depth was greater than 10' within 125' of the current bulkhead. The current dock extends approximately 170'. It is reasonable to assume that, once near the dock and within the shallow nearshore environment, the boat will be operated at "no-wake" speeds that cause a minimal amount of scour. This is not due to any enforced "best practices" on the part of the boat driver, but to the tight confines of maneuvering to the boat lift. It is simply not possible to travel quickly here, and the low speeds in shallow water will effectively minimize scour and sediment erosion. 5. Crushing of benthic habitat: The water depth at the most landward end of the boat lift, in relation to OHW in Lake Washington, is 5.5'. According to the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the water level in Lake Washington is maintained within a 2' range. Therefore, the "worst case" minimum water depth at the boat lift would be 3.5' ( 42"). The draft of the Searay 210 boat with the stem drive up for landing is 21" ( specifications for this boat are available at: http://www.searay.com/Page.aspx/pageld/10232/pmid/309101/210-Select.aspx). Therefore, the closest the boat would come to the sediment, under "worst case" conditions, is 21" above the bottom. This is a reasonable buffer to ensure that there is no direct contact with the benthic habitat. The boat lift will be a free-standing unit that only contacts the sediment on the comer foot pads. The specifications for the proposed Sunstrearn SL6012AR boatlift are available at http://www.sunstrearncorp.com/sl6012.htrn. While sediment will be crushed under these small footpads, the total area impacted will be small. The siting of the boat lift, in a shaded area with no appreciable aquatic vegetation, minimizes the impact of this crushing. 6. Heightened potential for release of contaminants into the water column: MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·3 There are three potential sources of contamination that must be addressed at this site, two which are inherent to boats and boat lifts: the motor boat and boat lift both have the potential to release fluids that may impact the aquatic environment. The third concern is site-specific, because the proposed action is within the Barbee Mill toxic clean-up site. This site has soil, groundwater, and lake sediment contamination, but only lake sediments will be directly addressed here as these may be returned to the water column as a result of the proposed action. Recreational motor boats do have the potential to release metals (lead, cadmium, and mercury) and hydrocarbons (methane, gasoline, oils) into the water (Asplund 2000). Most studies on the impacts of this exhaust have found that there are minimal effects on aquatic organisms due to dilution as well as the fact that most hydrocarbons disperse quickly in water (Asplund 2000). It is important to note that these studies were done when older 2-stroke motors were common; the modern motor in the Searay 210 boat will have fewer emissions. The boat lift itself will be run using the required USA CE guidelines from Regional General Permit I for watercraft lifts: "All equipment used in or around water will be clean and inspected daily prior to use to ensure that the equipment has no fluid leaks. Should a leak develop during use, the leaking equipment will be removed from the site immediately and not used again until it has been adequately repaired." (USACE 2013). While the boat and lift do not pose substantial risk of releasing contaminants into the water column, the fact that they have the potential to stir up sediments at the Barbee Mill toxic clean-up site must be addressed. The Washington Department of Ecology (WA DOE) has done extensive monitoring of the Barbee Mill toxic clean-up site. In 1999, and again in 2003, offshore sediment was removed from the site for characterization. Though it did have elevated concentrations of wood waste and carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (cPAHs), WA DOE concluded that "No Further Action" was required and that there were no restrictions on sediment use (WA DOE 2008). Since this time, the Barbee Mill Co. Inc. has removed contaminated sediments and wood from Lake Washington along the site (WA DOE 2012). A further contamination concern is arsenic, which has been found in groundwater, porewater (water within the sediment) and sediments at the site. To reduce the ability of arsenic to run off to Lake Washington, a passive attenuation zone (PAZ) was installed at the down-slope property boundary of the former mill site. Since this time, arsenic concentrations in the porewater (10 cm below the mudline) have been measured at levels ranging from non- detectable to 17 µg/L; the WA DOE threshold clean-up value is at 20 µg/L (Patmon! & Porter 2010). Arsenic concentrations in the top 10 cm of the sediment have not exceeded 16 mg/kg, below the WA DOE threshold of20 mg/kg (Patmon! & Porter 2010). Bioassays of this sediment were completed with the benthic macroinvertebrates Hyalella and Chironomw;, and there were no significant impacts on survival or growth (Patmont & Porter 2010). It appears that the post-cleanup sediment at Barbee Mill does not pose a danger to benthic macroinvertebrates, an important food source for fish. Even if the boat lift "stirs up" sediment, during construction or use, the resuspension of this sediment will not be likely to introduce dangerous concentrations of contaminants. Muckleshoot Tribe concerns: L Scouring effects of the boat lift and watercraft on contaminated sediments at the Barbee Mill site: See points 3, 4 and 6 in the above "Washington DNR concerns" section. 2. The boat lift and boat in the nearshore, where juvenile salmon are likely to be found, can cause them to avoid the uearshore and increase their risk of predation: It is generally accepted that overwater structures can alter migration behavior of juvenile salmon (though the effects may vary depending on the design and orientation of the structure, degree of shading, and the presence of artificial light), and reduce salmon prey resources and refugia by shading aquatic plant life (Simenstad et al. 1999; Nightingale and Simenstad 2001). However, the significance of these effects is not clear. As Simenstad et al. state, "We found no studies that described empirical evidence supporting or refuting that modification of juvenile salmon behavior in shoreline habitats was reflected in changes in survival." Nightingale and Simenstad (2001) state, "Presently, although we know that under some conditions small juvenile salmon will delay or otherwise alter their MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns-4 shoreline movements when encountering an overwater structure, the conditions under which this behavioral modification is significant to the fishes' fitness and survival is relatively unknown." In terms of increased predation risk, some relevant research has been done in the marine environment. At this time, there is no evidence of docks aggregating salmonid predators in the Puget Sound (Ratte & Salo 1985; Cardwell et al. 1980; Nightingale and Simens tad 200 I). It might be assumed that birds would be interested in small migrating juveniles, but there is no evidence that docks provide an aggregation site for predatory birds (Taylor and Willey 1997). Based on existing research, it cannot be stated that the presence of this small nearshore structure will increase the predation rates of juvenile salmonids, either through changes in migratory behavior or by providing a predator-aggregation structure. 3. The boat lift will permanently displace benthic habitat: This is true, in that the boat lift will shade approximately 175 ft 2 ofbenthic habitat when the boat is on it (calculated based on the Searay 210, with a 21' length x 8.3' beam). The actual footprint of the lift in the benthic habitat will be much smaller, only encompassing the 4 small footpads it will rest on. However, the location of the lift has been selected to add the least possible impact to the nearshore. By placing it as landward as possible, it is located landward of the known aquatic plants in the area, in a shaded "pocket" that is already bulkheaded (Figures 3 and 4). This area is clearly impacted by pre-existing development, and by placing the structure here it ensures that areas that are relatively un-impacted will be avoided. See points 2-5 in the above "Washington Department of Natural Resources concerns" section. 4. The boatlift and motorized watercraft have the potential to adversely affect the restoration work in the WDNR withdraw! area to the north through increased wave action that can adversely affect natural shoreline processes and vegetation growth: See point 3 in the above "Washington DNR concerns" section for a discussion of wave action as a result of proposed the boat lift and watercraft. 5. There is no discnssion of the potential for additional boatlifts and other permanent moorage proposed for this commnnity pier: As of this response letter, there are no known proposals for additional boat lifts or permanent moorage at or near the Barbee Mill community pier. 6. There is no mitigation identified for the boatlift: The proposal now includes the addition of two Pacific willow trees (Salix lucida) to the southwest comer of the Urban property. This will place the trees as close as possible to the water. These trees will aid in shoreline bank stabilization and water quality improvement, and may provide sites for future avian roosting. See Figure 1 for the location of the proposed planting. As part of this proposed mitigation planting, the proposal also includes a monitoring and maintenance plan: Monitoring An as-built drawing and report will be submitted to the City of Renton as documentation of the implementation of the approved planting plan within one month of installation. The plan will include vegetation description and photo documentation from established photo stations. Monitoring will take place over a period of 5 years at the end of the growing season (late August or early September) of each monitoring year. The performance standards will be monitored by measuring plots in zones within the planting area that will be established and mapped after planting occurs, on the as-built plan. There will be photo points for each plot and they will be referenced on the as-built plan. Photos will be taken at all points for MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·5 all years as visual documentation of the performance standards progress, or lack of. Collected data and photos will be compiled into a report for City of Renton DCD. The report will address whether the performance standards are being met during each monitoring year and if the final end of monitoring period standards are going to be met. Monitoring results will determine whether or not contingency measures will be needed. Performance Standard# 1 (survival rate): Immediately after planting, all plants will be counted and documented. At the end of each growing season (late Aug-early Sept) plots will be visited and a count of surviving plants will be documented. The percent survival for the plots will be calculated by dividing the total number of plants after planting by the total number of surviving plants at the end of the season. Maintenance Maintenance shall occur at least twice during the growing season to ensure the survival of all native species within the mitigation area. Watering by hand or sprinkler may be necessary during the first year until the plants are established. Water requirements will depend on the timing of planting with the seasons and weather conditions. Once plants are established, extra watering may not be necessary. Hand weeding will be necessary around all plants that are being monitored for survival and coverage. Contingency Piao If the 90% survival rate is not met by the end of any monitoring year, plants lost to mortality will be replaced to achieve the percentage cover performance standard described above. Prior to replacement, an appropriate assessment will be performed to determine if the survival was affected by species/site selection, animal damage, or some other factor. Subsequent contingency actions must be designed to respond directly to the stressor(s), which are increasing mortality of planted native species. If a particular species is shown not to endure site conditions, another, more appropriate species will be selected. If excessive damage is observed, protective measures will be introduced. Monitoring years may be added if significant re-planting becomes necessary. 7. Previous mitigation at Barbee Mill Community Pier may not have been fully implemented: Planting plans are currently being followed on-site. Please see Attachment 3: site photography of current mitigation planting. 8. The city needs to fully evaluate this project and its potential impacts, and require mitigation as necessary. Without these elements, it is premature to issue a Determination of Non-Significance for this project under SEPA: With these additional analyses of impacts from the proposed boat lift, as well as the included mitigation plan, the city now has ample information to fully evaluate this project. MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·6 References: Asplund, T.R. 1997a. Investigations of motorboat impacts on Wisconsin's lakes. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Madison, WI. Asplund, T.R. 2000. The effects of motorized watercraft on aquatic ecosystems. Wisconsin Department of Natural · Resources. Madison, WI. Asplund, T.R., and C.M. Cook. 1997. Effects of motorboats on submerged aquatic macrophytes. Lake and Reservoir Management 13: 1-12. Bhowmik, N.G., T.W. Soong, W.F. Reichelt, N.M.L. Seddik. 1992. Waves generated by recreational traffic on the Upper Mississippi River System. Report by the Illinois State Water Survey, Champaign, Illinois, for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Environmental Management Technical Center. Onalaksa, WI. 6 Burdick, D.M., and Short, F.T. 1995. The effects of boat docks on eelgrass beds in Massachusetts Coastal Waters. Waquoit Bay National Research Reserve, Boston MA. Fresh, K.L., B. Williams, D. Penttila. 1995. Overwater structures and impacts on eelgrass in Puget Sound, WA. Puget Sound Research, 1995 proceedings. Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. Seattle, WA. Mulvihill, E.L. C.A. Francisco, J.B. Glad, K.B. Kaster, R.E. Wilson. 1980. Biological impacts of minor shoreline structures in the coastal environment: state of the art review. United States Fish and Wildlife Service Publication FWS/OBS-77/41. Sidell, Louisiana. Nason, G.C., A. von Krusenstiema, E.A. Bryant, M.R. Renilson. 1994. Experimental measurements of river-bank erosion caused by boat-generated waves on the Gordon River, Tasmania. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management 9: 1-15. Nightingale, B. and Charles Simenstad. 200 I. Overwater structures: marine issues. Submitted to Washington Department offish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology, and Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, WA, 177 pp. Patmon!, C., and Porter, J. 20 I 0. Memoradium from Anchor QEA and Aspect Consulting: Barbee sediment data gaps evaluation. Available: https://fortress. wa.gov / ecy / gsp/CleanupSiteDocuments.aspx?csid=23 68 Simenstad, C.A., B.J. Nightingale, R.M. Thom and D.K. Shreffler. 1999. Impacts offerry terminals on juvenile salmon migration along Puget Sound shorelines. Phase 1: Synthesis of state of knowledge. Report to WSDOT/TJSDOT Research Report T9903, Task A2, 116 pp.+ appendices. Taylor, W.J., and W.S. Willey. 1997. Port of Seattle fish migration studies, Pier 64/65 short-stay moorage facility, qualitative fish and avian predator observations. Beak Consultants Inc., Kirkland, WA. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2014. Regional General Permit I for watercraft lifts. USACE Seattle District, Seattle, WA. Available: http://www.n ws. usace.army .mil/Portals/27 /docs/regulatory /RGP _I_ Rev_ Text_FINAL _ 20 IO. pdf Washington Department of Ecology (WA DOE). 2008. Site hazard assessment summary score sheet: Barbee Mill Company. WA DOE, Olympia, WA. Available: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/gsp/CleanupSiteDocuments.aspx?csid=2368 Washington Department of Ecology (WA DOE). 2012. Amended agreed order for Barbee Mill site. WA DOE, Olympia, WA. Available: https:/ /fortress.wa.gov/ecy/gsp/CleanupSiteDocuments.aspx?csid=2368 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 7 \ t I )> ...... 0 Ii!~ :~~L & DOROTHY URBAN I•---• ~: ----''"' "'" ~M'il! ,sl,-/r,,.,s,- C :::0 OJ )> z OJ 0 )> -t r -,, -t .•. Figure 1. Revised site plan. Note new, more landward, boat ramp location. MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·8 Figure 2. Proposed boat lift location, looking landward. MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·9 Figure 3. Proposed boat lift location, looking waterward. MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·10 Attachment 1. Correspondence with WA DNR and the Muckleshoot Tribe. Caring for your narural r=urces ... now and foreve1 December 17, 2013 Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner City of Renton, CED -Planning Division 1055 S Grady W•y Renton, WA 98057-3232 Subject: WA DepartmentofNatural Resources Comments -Urban Boat Lift/ LUAB-001640 Dear Mr. Wasser: Washington State Department ofNarural Resources ("DNR") has obtained the City of Renton Notice of Application and Proposed Determination ofNon-Sigoificance (DNS) for the Urban Boat Lift Project. DNR manages the sta1e-owned aquatic lands adjacent to the project proposw location· and hereby submits the following comments for the City's record. The project description stmes the proposed freestanding boat lift is associated v.ith, but not attached to, a community dock. DNR admini;aers Aquatic Lands Lease No. 22-08604ti (the "Lease"), authorizing Barbee Mill Community Organization to utiliz,e 11,984 square fed ofl..tke Washington harbor area for the purpose of the said communlcy dock_ The permitted use authorized by the Lease is to "provide Jake access and traosi ent mooroge for approximately I 00 upland property owners, with one finger pier to provide privaie moorage for one adj11eent upland property owner" and for no other purpose. As proposed, the Urban Boat Lift Project footprint \\~ll be on privately held aquatic lands. However, a vessel placed on the boat lift will exrend over stare-owned aquatic lands, ~ifically into the leasehold area of Barbee Mill CornmWJity Organization. 1bis encumbrance of state-owned aquatic lands is not consistent ,,.,,th the term:! of the Le= and subsequently is n01 authorized. Additionally, DNR worked extensively with Conner Homes and the regulatOry agencies regarding the configuration and placement of the community dock and tenns of the Lease in order to avoid and minimize impacts to the adjacent restored nearshorc environment, shorclands and bedlands. As proposed, the Urban Boat Lift Project will subject the restoration area and nearshore environment to: i-! !~'.(~-: ;~} '· 1( [: () MS&A • Increased shading impacts to aquatic vegetation D ;: '; • Increased ve,;sel wake impacting natural shoreline processe$ due to larger and more freqqent wave action · ,.. : ·: ... F,. I,;. ----------··--- SOIJTH PUGET SOtfNC REGION I 950 FAAMA~ A~ N I ENUMO..A.W, WA 980'22.-9.(8;;1 TR: (3&QJ 8Z5-Hi31 I F./1.X: (360) &2S·1E•72 I TTY: ,36.Ctt 90J•11l'5 I TP.S ?11 I VfWW.DNR.WA..GOV EQU,lll 'OP?Olm.JNJTI E~1'1.0YEF! Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 11 Gerald Wasser, Associme Planner December 17, 2013 Page2of2 • Scour and sediment erosion through prop s«>ur • Crushing ofbenthic habitat • Heighieoed potential tor release of contaminants into the water column As proposed, DNR does not support the Urban Boat Lift Project and will not amend the existing Lease to pennit the use of state-owned aquatic lands. If you have comments regarding this correspondence, pleE1Se feel free to contact me by email at vivian.roachf@.dnr.wa.gov. Sincerely, Vivian Roach, Aquatic Land Manager Shoreline District, Aquatics Resources Division c: DNR SEPA C<0tor D!.aict file Aqumic Resources file MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 12 Gerald Wasser From: Karen Walter <KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us> Friday, December 27, 20131:14 PM Sent: To: Cc: Gerald Wasser Anderson, Suzanne NWS; Heller, Christa H (DFW); ROACH, VIVIAN (DNR); Tom Sibley; Priddy, Lynda Subject: Urban Boat Lift adjacent to Barbee Mill Community Pier, LUA 13--001640,ECF, SM, Revised Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Categories: Red Category Gerald, We have reviewed the Revised Notice of Application for the proposed Urban boat lift project adjacent to the Barbee Mill Community Dock {4157 and 4151 Williams Avenue N) in Renton referenced above. We have several concerns about this project as noted below: 1. The proposed free standing boatlift is located on the north side of the existing Barbee Mill Community Dock and just south of the WDNR withdrawn area that contains contaminated sediments from the former mill site at the Supcrfund site on the WDNR aquatic !ands. There is no consideration in either the checklist or the Lake and Stream study sent with the Revised NOA consiCer the potential impacts from the new boatlift and the opera:ion of a motorized watercraft on the north side of the joint pier. A motorized watercraft in this location will likely create scour and erosion from propeller wash that could cause a release of nearby contaminants into the water column adversely affecting fish and benthic vertebrates. Other potential impacts, include, but are not limited to: • The new frees1anding boatlift and a boat in the nearshore where juvenile salmon are likely to be found that can cause them to avoid the nearshore and increase their risk of predation. • The boaUift will permanently displace benthic habitat. The boatlift and motorized watercraft have the potential to adversely affect the restoration work in the WDNR withdrawal area to the north through increased wave action that can adversely affect natural shoreline processes and vegetation growth. 2. There is no discussion about the potential for additional boatlifts and other permanent moorage proposed for this communify pier. P-s we noted in previous comments to the Barbee Mm Community Pier project, the Tribe is concerned about th[s pier providing long term moorage that can create conditions which interfere with the Tribe's fishing access. 3. There is no mitigation fdentified for the boat!ift in the documents we reviewed. Please provide the mitigation detalls proposed for this new boatlift and the associated watercraft. Please note that any approved mitigation at the Barbee Mill Community Pier site cannot be used to compensate for impacts from this new boatlift and watercraft. 4. We also concerned that previous mitigation at the Barbee Mill Community Pier may not be fully implemented. Therefore, request copies of all of the existing monitoring reports to be completed as part of the shoreline restoration work requtred for the entire Barbee Mill Plat, including the community dock. 5. The City needs to fully evaluate this project; its potential impacts and require mitigation as necessary. Without these elements, it Is premature to issue a Determination of Non-Significance for this project under SEPA. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward ta the City's responses. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 13 Attachment 2. Habitat survey. Conner Homes Company Community Tract Pier Project Substrate Slope Infonnation March 20, 2007 • A SCUBA survey was done March 20, 2007, from 9:50 AM -1:45 PM, at the Conner Homes Company community tract proposed pier project site near the southern end of Lake Washington in Renton. Lynn Goodwin and Grant Ausk used SCUBA to run five transects along the community tract to identify flora, fauna, substrate types, and other qualitative information relative to the Biological Evaluation. The day was overcast and rainy with strong winds and a heavy chop. Water visibility was poor, only about 1 to 4 feet. A coir roll installed as part of the site remediation runs along the community tract shoreline, forming a baseline from which the five community tract transects (Tl-TS) were measured. All five transects were oriented 70° -250° magnetic, were generally perpendicular to the coir roll baseline, and were 200' long. T1 extended seaward from the baseline at the drainpipe outflow, approximately midway along the community tract shoreline and the site of the proposed pier. T2 was 221/z' north of Tl and T4 was located 221/z' south of Tl; T3 was located on the common property line between the community tract and lot 30; TS was located on the common property line between the community tract and lot 31. T3 and TS were approximately 45' north and south of T1 respectively, for a total survey area distance along the shoreline of approximately 90'. The Ordinary High Water (OHW) line for Lake Washington is at the lake elevation of 21.8'. On March 20, 2007, the date of the SCUBA survey, the elevation of Lake Washington was 21.l'. Water depths showing the slope contour were measured from the coir roll baseline every 10' along T1 and every 25' along T2, T3, T4 and TS. The water depths along all five transects are set out in the following tables and have been corrected to OHW by adding 0.7' to each gauge reading. The water's edge was 10' from the baseline along Tl. Corrected Tl water depths were as follows: MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns-14 I i I l I I I i I I ' ' ' Distance Along Tl Corrected I Transect Water Depths I 10' 0.7' ! 20' 1.7' 30' 2.7' ! 40' 3.2' i 50' 3.7' 60' 4.2' ' I 70' 4.5' I 80' 4.7' ' 90' I 5.7' . 100' 8.7' ' 110' 9.7' i i 120' 11.7' ' ' i ! 130' 12.7' ! I 140' 12.7' I 150' 12.7' 160' 12.7' I ' ' 170' 13.7' i i 180' 13.7' ' 190' 12.7' I ' 200' I 12.7 ' The water's edge was 11 ', 9.5', 10', and 10' from the baseline along T2-TS, respectively. Corrected T2-T5 water depths were as follows: Distance T2 Corrected T3 Corrected T4 Corrected TS Corrected Along Water Water Water Water Transect Depths Depths Depths Depths r• _::, 2.4' 2.4' I 2.7' 2.2' 50' 3.2' I 3.2' 3.2' ' 2.4' I 75' 5.2' 4.7' 4.7' 3.9' 100' 7.7' 5.7' 6.7' 7.7' 125' 11.7' 12.7' 11.7' 11.7' 150' 12.7' I 12.7' 12.7' 11.7' 175' 12.7' 14.7' 13.7' 11.7' 200' 13.7' 14.7' 13.7' 12.7' 2 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 15 substrate along T3 changed from the gravel, rocks and mud found about 100' from the baseline, to soft mud by 150' and extremely soft mud by 200'. Along T4, the slope steepened beyond about 80' out and wood debris was noted. By 100' along the transect, the substrate was primarily mud, becoming soft mud by 175' from the baseline. Along TS, the substrate was a sand and mud mix by 100' with roofing metal sheets, sticks and limbs noted. By 110' along the transect, the substrate had changed to mud, becoming very soft mud by 200' Substrate Slope: The OHW line for Lake Washington is at the lake elevation of 21.8'. The elevation of Lake Washington on the day of the SCUBA survey was 21.l ', 0.7' below OHW. Water depths showing the slope contour were measured from the baseline every 10' along TI and every 25' along T2-T5. The water depths along all five transects are set out in the following tables and have been corrected to OHW by adding 0.7' to each depth gauge reading. TI Substrate Slope Table: The water's edge was 10' from the baseline along TI. Corrected Tl water depths were as follows: Distance Along Tl Corrected Transect Water Depths 10' 0.7' 20' 1.7' 30' 2.7' 40' 3.2' 50' 3.7' 60' 4.2' 70' 4 "' ,:, 80' 4.7' 90' 5.7' 100' ' 8.7' 110' ' 9.7' 120' ! 11.7' 130' I 12.7' 140' 12.7' 150' 1 12.7' 160' 12.7' 170' I 13.7' I 180' ' 13.7' I i ! 190' I 12.7' 200' I 12.7' 3 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·16 MS&A 12-TS Substrate Slope Table: The water's edge was 11', 9.5', 10', and 10' from the baseline along T2-TS, respectively. Corrected T2-TS water depths were as follows: Distance T2 Corrected T3 Corrected T4 Corrected TS Corrected Along Water Water Water Water Transect Depths Depths Depths Depths 25' I 2.4' 2.4' 2.7' i 2.2' 50' ! 3.2' 3.2' 3.2' 2.4' 75' ! 5.2' 4.7' 4.7' 3.9' 100' ' 7.7' 5.7' 6.7' 7.7' 125' 11.7' 12.7' 11.7' 11.7' 150' 12.7' 12.7' 12.7' 11.7' 175' 12.7' 14.7' 13.7' 11.7' 200' 13.7' 14.7' 13.7' 12.7' Macroa lgae: The following species of macroalgae was observed within the survey area: Myriophyllum spicatum: Eurasion milfoil (Myriophyllurn spicatum), an invasive nonnative plant, was found along all five transects. Along Tl, this alga was first noted 110' from the baseline covering about 10% of the area. By 120' and through 130' from the baseline, it covered about 30% of the area; by 140' it had decreased to only 10% coverage and by 150' from the baseline, no further milfoil was observed. However, by 160' from the baseline, milfoil was again observed covering about 10% of the area, with coverage increasing to 40% by 170'-200'. Along T2, this invasive species was first noted 108' from the baseline with coverage increasing to about 20% of the area by 120', to about 30% coverage by 150', and to 40% coverage by 200'. Along T3, This alga was first noted at about 100' from the baseline. Beyond 100', and through about 150', milfoil covered about 30% of the area; by the end of the transect at 200' from the baseline, milfoil covered about 40% of the area. Along T4, this alga was first noted at about 75' from the baseline covering Jess than 5% of the area. By 125' from the baseline, and continuing through about 150', milfoil covered about 10% of the area along T4, increasing to about 30% coverage by 175' and to 40% coverage by 200'. Milfoil was first found along TS 110' from the baseline covering about 10% of the area; coverage increased to about 20% of the area between 120' and 150' from the baseline. By 175' along T3 and through the end of the transect, this alga covered about 30% of the area. In general the milfoil is from last year's growth and is heavily encrusted with filamentous algae. New milfoil growth is just starting to appear; the plants are up to several feet long. 4 Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 17 Other Algae: The following other alga was observed within the survey area: Filamentous Algae: An unidentified filamentous alga was noted along all five transects, generally first noted approximately 25' from the baseline and often attached to Myriophyllum spicntum. Along Tl, this alga was observed covering the gravel from about 25' through 80' along the transect, and was noted covering milfoil at about 110' from the baseline. Along T2, this alga covered every solid surface between about 25' and 75' from the baseline. Along T3, it was first noted 25' to 30' from the baseline. Along T4 and TS it was first noted abut 25' from the baseline and continued through 75'; at 75' it was noted covering small boulders. Invertebrate/Vertebrate Species: The only invertebrates found within the survey area were two crawdads, one at 125' out along each T3 and T4. No vertebrates were observed within the survey area. 5 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns-18 Attachment 3. Site photography of current mitigation planting MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·19 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns-20 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·21 When recorded, return to: CONFORMED COPY Barbee Mill Community Organization c/o Charles F. Conner, President 846 108'11 Ave NE 20130313001499 Bellevue, WA 98004-4304 JOHNS MOROE MI LE 103.00 PAGE-001 OF 032 03/13/2013 13:52 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF Natural Resources Peter Goldmark · Commissioner of Public Lands AQUATIC LANDS LEASE Lease No. 22-086046 Grantor: Washington State Department of Natural Resources Grantee(s): Barbee Mill Community Organization Legal Description: Section 32, Township 24 North, Range 5 East, W.M. Assessor's Property Tax Parcel or Account Number: 322405-9066 Assessor's Property Tax Parcel or Account Number for Upland parcel used in conjunction with this lease: 051850-0350 THIS LEASE is between the STATE OF WASHINGTON, acting through the Department of Natural Resources ("State"), and BARBEE MILL COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION, a Washington Corporation ("Tenant"). BACKGROUND Tenant desires to lease the aquatic lands commonly known as Lake Washington, which is a harbor area located in King County, Washington, from State, and State desires to lease the property to Tenant pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Lease. State has authority to enter Lease under Chapter 43.12, Chapter 43.30 and Title 79 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW). THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows: Aquatic Lands Lease Page I of32 Lease No. 22-086046 EXHIBIT 27 SECTION! PROPERTY 1.1 Property Defined. (a) State leases to Tenant and Tenant leases from State the real prope1iy described in Exhibit A together with all the rights of State, if any, to improvements on and easements benefiting the Property, but subject to the exceptions and restrictions set forth in this Lease ( collectively the "Property"). (b) This Lease is subject to all valid interests of third parties noted in the records of King County, or on file in the office of the Commissioner of Public Lands, Olympia, Washington; rights of the public under the Public Trust Doctrine or federal navigation servitude; and treaty rights oflndian Tribes. (c) This Lease does not include a right to harvest, collect or damage natural resources, including aquatic life or living plants; water rights; mineral rights; or a right to excavate or withdraw sand, gravel, or other valuable materials. ( d) State reserves the right to grant easements and other land uses on the Property to others when the easement or other land uses will not interfere unreasonably with the Permitted Use. 1.2 Survey and Property Descriptions. (a) Tenant prepared Exhibit A, which describes the Prope1iy. Tenant warrants that Exhibit A is a true and accurate desc1iption of the Lease boundaries and the improvements to be constructed or already existing in the Lease area. Tenant's obligation to provide a true and accurate description of the Property boundaries is a material term of this Lease. (b) State's acceptance of Exhibit A does not constitute agreement that Tenant's property description accurately reflects the actual amount of land used by Tenant. State reserves the right to retroactively adjust rent if at any time during the tenn of the Lease State discovers a discrepancy between Tenant's property desc1iption and the area actually used by Tenant. ( c) State accepts a preliminary Exhibit A upon the Commencement Date of this Lease. Tenant shall submit a final Exhibit A for State's approval within one (I) year of the Commencement Date. Upon State's written approval, the final Exhibit A supersedes the preliminary Exhibit.A. Until superseded, the preliminary Exhibit A has full legal effect. 1.3 Inspection. State makes no representation regarding the condition of the Property, improvements located on the Property, the suitability of the Property for Tenant's Pe1mitted Use, compliance with governmental laws and regulations, availability of utility rights, access to the Property, or the existence of hazardous substances on the Property. Tenant inspected the Property and accepts it "AS IS." Aquatic Lands Lease Page 2 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 SECTION 2 USE 2.1 Permitted Use. Tenant shall use the Property for purpose of constructing, maintaining and repairing a new community dock to provide lake access and transient moorage for approximately I 00 upland property owners, with one finger pier to provide private moorage for one adjacent upland property owner (the "Permitted Use") and for no other purpose. This is a water-dependent use. Exhibit B describes the Permitted Use in detail. The Permitted Use is subject to additional obligations in Exhibit B. 2.2 Restrictions on Permitted Use and Operations. The following limitations apply to the Property and adjacent state-owned aquatic land. Tenant's compliance with the following does not limit Tenant's liability under any other provision of this Lease. (a) Tenant shall not cause or permit: (I) Damage to natural resources, (2) Waste, or (3) Deposit of material, unless approved by State in writing. This prohibition includes deposit of fill, rock, eaiih, ballast, wood waste, refuse, garbage, waste matter, pollutants of any type, or other matter. (b) Tenant shall not cause or permit scour or dainage to aquatic land and vegetation. This prohibition includes the following limitations: (I) Tenant shall not use or allow use of a pressure washer to clean underwater surfaces unless the water is deeper than seven (7) feet at the time. ( c) Unless approved by State in writing, Tenant shall not cause or permit dredging on the Property. State will not approve dredging unless (I) required for flood control, maintenance of existing vessel traffic lanes, or maintenance of water intakes and (2) consistent with State's management plans, if ai1y. Tenant shall maintain authorized dredge basins in a manner that prevents internal deeper pockets. 2.3 Conformance with Laws. Tenai1t shall, at all times, keep current and comply with all conditions and terms of permits, licenses, certificates, regulations, ordinances, statutes, and other government rules ai1d regulations regarding Tenant's use or occupai1cy of the Property. 2.4 Liens and Encumbrances. Unless expressly authorized by State in writing, Tenant shall keep the Property free and clear ofliens or encumbrances arising from the Permitted Use or Tenant's occupancy of the Property. SECTION 3 TERM 3.1 Term Defined. The term of this Lease is twelve (12) years (the "Tem1"), beginning on the !st day of October, 2012 (the "Commencement Date"), and ending on the 30th day of September, 2024 (the "Termination Date"), unless terminated sooner under the terms of this Lease. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 3 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 3.2 Renewal of the Lease. This Lease does not provide a right of renewal. Tenant may apply for a new lease, which State has discretion to grant. Tenant must apply for a new lease at least one ( 1) year prior to Termination Date. State will notify Tenant within ninety (90) days of its intent to approve or deny a new Lease. 3.3 3.4 End of Term. (a) Upon the expiration or termination of this Lease, Tenant shall remove Improvements in accordance with Section 7, Improvements, and surrender the Property to State in the same or better condition as on the Commencement Date, reasonable wear and tear excepted. (b) (c) Definition of Reasonable Wear and Tear. (!) (2) Reasonable wear and tear is deterioration resulting from the Permitted Use that has occurred without neglect, negligence, carelessness, accident, or abuse of the Prope1iy by Tenant or any other person on the premises with the permission of Tenant. Reasonable wear and tear does not include unauthorized deposit of material prohibited under Paragraph 2.2 regardless of whether the deposit is incidental to or the byproduct of the Permitted Use. If Property is in worse condition, excepting for reasonable wear and tear, on the smTender date than on the Commencement Date, the following provisions apply. (I) Staie shall provide Tenant a reasonable time to take all steps necessary to (2) remedy the condition of the Prope1iy. State may require Tenant to enter into a right-of-entry or other use authorization prior to the Tenant entering the Property if the Lease has terminated. If Tenant fails to remedy the condition of the Property in a timely manner, State may take steps reasonably necessary to remedy Tenant's failure. Upon demand by State, Tenant shall pay all costs of State's remedy, including but not limited to the costs ofremoving and disposing of material deposited improperly on the Property, lost revenue resulting from the condition of the Property, and administrative costs associated with the State's remedy. Holdover. (a) If Tenant remains in possession of the Property after the Termination Date, the occupancy will not be an extension or renewal of the Term. The occupancy will be a month-to-month tenancy, on terms identical to the terms of this Lease, which either Party may terminate on thirty (30) days' written notice. (I) The monthly rent during the holdover will be the same rent that would be due if the Lease were still in effect and all adjustments in rent were made in accordance with its terms. (2) Payment of more than the monthly rent will not be construed to create a periodic tenancy longer than month-to-month. If Tenant pays more than the monthly rent and State provides notice to vacate the property, State shall refund the amount of excess payment remaining after the Tenant ceases occupation of the Property. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 4 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 (b) If State notifies Tenant to vacate the Property and Tenant fails to do so within the time set forth in the notice, Tenant will be a trespasser and shall owe the State all amounts due under RCW 79.02.300 or other applicable law. 3.5 Adjustment of Term Resulting from Tenant's Possession. (a) If, for any reason whatsoever, State cannot deliver possession of the Property to Tenant on the Commencement Date, this Lease will not be void or voidable, nor will State be liable to Tenant for loss or dan1age resulting from the delay in delivery of possession. In such event, the date of delivery of possession will be the Commencement Date for all purposes, including the payment of rent. (b) If Tenant takes possession before the Commencement Date, the date of possession will be the Commencement Date for all purposes, including the payment of rent. If the Lease Tenn commences earlier or later than the scheduled Commencement Date, the Tem1ination Date adjusts accordingly. SECTION 4 RENT 4.1 Annual Rent. (a) Until adjusted as set forth below, Tenant shall pay to State an annual rent of Sixteen Thousand One Hundred Fourteen Dollars and Ten Cents ($16,114.10). (b) The annual rent, as it currently exists or as adjusted or modified (the "Annual Rent"), is paid in monthly installments, each of which is equal to one-twelfth (1/12) of the then-current Annual Rent. The first installment, in the amount of One Thousand Three Hundred Forty-two Dollars and Eighty-four Cents ($1,342.84), is due and payable on or before the Commencement Date, and subsequent installments are due and payable on or before the same day of each month thereafter. Any payment not paid by State's close of business on the date due is past due. 4.2 Payment Place. Tenant shall make payment to Financial Management Division, 1111 Washington St SE, PO Box 47041, Olympia, WA 98504-7041. 4.3 Adjustment Based on Use. Annual Rent is based on Tenant's Permitted Use of the Property, as described in Section 2 above. If Tenant's Permitted Use changes, the Arnmal Rent shall be adjusted as appropriate for the changed use. 4.4 Rent Adjustment Procedures. (a) Notice of Rent Adjustment. State shall provide notice of adjustments to the Annual Rent allowed under Paragraphs 4.5(b) to Tenant in writing no later than ninety (90) days after the anniversary date of the Lease. (b) Procedures on Failure to make Timely Adjustment. If the State fails to provide the notice required in Paragraph 4.4(a), State shall not collect the adjustment amount for the year in which State failed to provide notice. Upon providing notice of adjustment, State may adjust and prospectively bill Annual Rent as if missed or waived adjustments had been implemented at the proper interval. This includes the implementation of any inflation adjustment. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 5 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 4.5 Rent Adjustments for Water-Dependent Uses. (a) Inflation Adjustment. State shall adjust water-dependent rent annually pursuant to RCW 79.105 .200-.360, except in those years in which State revalues the rent under Paragraph 4.S(b) below. This adjustment will be effective on the anniversary of the Commencement Date. (b) Revaluation of Rent. At the end of the first four-year period of the Term, and at the end of each subsequent four-year period, State shall revalue the water-dependent Annual Rent in accordance with RCW 79.105.200-.360. (c) Rent Cap. State shall increase rent incrementally in compliance with RCW 79.105 .260 as follows: If application of the statutory rent formula for water-dependent uses would result in an increase in the rent attributable to such uses of more than fifty percent (50%) in any one year, State shall limit the actual increase implemented in such year to fifty percent (50%) of the then-existing rent. In subsequent, successive years, State shall increase the rental amount incrementally until the State implements the full amount of increase as determined by the statutory rent formula. SECTION 5 OTHER EXPENSES 5.1 Utilities. Tenant shall pay all fees charged for utilities required or needed by the Permitted Use. 5.2 Taxes and Assessments. Tenant shall pay all taxes (including leasehold excise taxes), assessments, and other governmental charges applicable or attributable to the Property, Tenant's leasehold interest, the improvements, or Tenant's use and enjoyment of the Property. 5.3 Right to Contest. If in good faith, Tenant may contest any tax or assessment at its sole cost and expense. At the request of State, Tenant shall furnish reasonable protection in the form of a bond or other security, satisfactory to State, against loss or liability resulting from such contest. 5.4 Proof of Payment. If required by State, Tenant shall furnish to State receipts or other appropriate evidence establishing the payment of amounts this Lease requires Tenant to pay. 5.5 Failure to Pay. If Tenant fails to pay amounts due under this Lease, State may pay the amount due, and recover its cost in accordance with Section 6. SECTION 6 LATE PAYMENTS AND OTHER CHARGES 6.1 Failure to Pay Rent. Failure to pay rent is a default by the Tenant. State may seek remedies under Section 14 as well as late charges and interest as provided in this Section 6. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 6 of 32 Lease No. 22-086046 6.2 Late Charge. If State does not receive full rent payment within ten (I 0) days of the date due, Tenant shall pay to State a late charge equal to four percent (4%) of the unpaid amount or Fifty Dollars ($50), whichever is greater, to defray the overhead expenses of State incident to the delay. 6.3 Interest Penalty for Past Due Rent and Other Sums Owed. (a) Tenant shall pay interest on the past due rent at the rate of one percent (I%) per month until paid, in addition to paying the late charges determined under Paragraph 6.2. Rent not paid by the close of business on the due date will begin accruing interest the day after the due date. (b) If State pays or advances any amounts for or on behalf of Tenant, Tenant shall reimburse State for the amount paid or advanced and shall pay interest on that amount at the rate of one percent (I%) per month from the date State notifies Tenant of the payment or advance. This includes, but is not limited to, State's payment of taxes of any kind, assessments, insurance premiums, costs of removal and disposal of materials or Improvements under any provision of this Lease, or other amounts not paid when due. 6.4 Referral to Collection Agency and Collection Agency Fees. If State does not receive full payment within thirty (30) days of the due date, State may refer the unpaid amount to a collection agency as provided by RCW 19.16.500 or other applicable law. Upon referral, Tenant shall pay collection agency fees in addition to the unpaid amount. 6.5 No Accord and.Satisfaction. If Tenant pays, or State otherwise receives, an amount less than the full amount then due, State may apply such payment as it elects. State may accept payment in any amount without prejudice to State's right to recover the balance of the rent or pursue any other right or remedy. No endorsement or statement on any check, any payment, or any letter accompanying any check or payment constitutes accord and satisfaction. 6.6 No Counterclaim, Setoff, or Abatement of Rent. Except as expressly set forth elsewhere in this Lease, Tenant shall pay rent and all other sums payable by Tenant without the requirement that State provide prior notice or demand. Tenant's payment is not subject to counterclaim, setoff, deduction, defense or abatement. SECTION 7 IMPROVEMENTS 7.1 Improvements Defined. (a) "Improvements," consistent with RCW 79.105 through 79.145, are additions within, upon, or attached to the land. This includes, but is not limited to, fill, structures, bulkheads, docks, pilings, and other fixtures. (b) "Personal Property" means items that can be removed from the Prope1iy without (I) injury to the Property or Improvements or (2) diminishing the value or utility of the Property or Improvements. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 7 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 (c) "State-Owned Improvements" are Improvements made or owned by State. State- Owned Improvements includes any construction, alteration, or addition to State- Owned Improvements made by Tenant. (d) "Tenant-Owned Improvements" are Improvements authorized by State and (I) made by Tenant or (2) acquired by Tenant from the prior tenant. (e) "Unauthorized Improvements" are Improvements made on the Property without State's prior consent or Improvements made by Tenant that do not conform to plans submitted to and approved by the State. 7.2 Existing Improvements. On the Commencement Date, the following Improvements are located on the Property: None. 7.3 Construction, Major Repair, Modification, and Demolition. (a) This Paragraph 7 .3 governs construction, alteration, replacement, major repair, modification, demolition, and deconstruction oflmprovements ("Work"). Section 11 governs routine maintenance and minor repair. (b) All Work must conform to requirements under Paragraph 7.4. Paragraph 11.3, which applies to routine maintenance and minor repair, also applies to all Work under this Paragraph 7.3. (c) Except in an emergency, Tenant shall not conduct Work, without State's prior written consent, as follows: (I) State may deny consent if State determines that denial is in the best interests of the State or if proposed Work does not comply with Paragraphs 7.4 and 11.3. State may impose additional conditions reasonably intended to protect and preserve the Property. If Work is for removal of Improvements at End of Term, State may waive removal of some or all Improvements. (2) Except in an emergency, Tenant shall submit to State plans and specifications describing the proposed Work at least sixty (60) days before submitting permit applications to regulatory authorities unless Tenant and State otherwise agree to coordinate permit applications. At a minimum, or ifno permits are necessary, Tenant shall submit plans and specifications at least ninety (90) days before commencement of Work. (3) State waives the requirement for consent if State does not notify Tenant of its grant or denial of consent within sixty (60) days of submittal. (d) Tenant shall notify State of emergency Work within five (5) business days of the start of such Work. Upon State's request, Tenant shall provide State with plans and specifications or as-builts of emergency Work. (e) Tenant shall not commence or authorize Work until Tenant has: (I) Obtained a performance and payment bond in an amount equal to one hundred twenty-five percent (125%) of the estimated cost of construction. Tenant shall maintain the performance and payment bond until Tenant pays in full the costs of the Work, including all laborers and material persons. (2) Obtained all required permits. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 8 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 (f) Before completing Work, Tenant shall remove all debris and restore the Property to an orderly and safe condition. If Work is intended for removal of Improvements at End of Term, Tenant shall restore the Property in accordance with Paragraph 3.3, End of Term. (g) Upon completing work, Tenant shall promptly provide State with as-built plans and specifications. (h) State shall not charge rent for authorized Improvements installed by Tenant during this Term of this Lease, but State may charge rent for such Improvements when and if Tenant or successor obtains a subsequent use authorization for the Property and State has waived the requirement for Improvements to be removed as provided in Paragraph 7.5. 7.4 Standards for Work. (a) Applicability of Standards for Work (b) (I) The standards for Work in Paragraph 7.4(b) apply to Work commenced in the five year period following the Conunencement Date and to Proposed Facilities described in Exhibit B. Work has commenced if State has (2) (3) approved plans and specifications. If Tenant undertakes Work five years or more after the Commencement Date, Tenant shall comply with State's then current standards for Work. At Tenant's option, Tenant may ascertain State's current standards for Work as follows: (i) Before submitting plans and specifications for State's approval as required by Paragraph 7.3 of the Lease, Tenant shall request State to provide Tenant with then current standards for Work on State-owned (ii) Aquatic Lands. Within thirty (30) days of receiving Tenant's request, State shall provide Tenant with current standards for Work, which will be effective for the purpose of State's approval of Tenant's proposed Work provided Tenant submits plans and specifications for State's approval within two (2) years of Tenant's request for standards .. (iii) If State does not timely provide cu1Tent standards upon Tenant's request, the standards under Paragraph 7.4(b) apply to Tenant's Work provided Tenant submits plans and specifications as required by Paragraph 7.3 within two (2) years of Tenant's request for standards. (iv) If Tenant fails to ( 1) make a request for current standards or (2) timely submit plans and specifications to State after receiving cwTent standards, Tenant shall make changes in plans or Work necessary to confmm to current standards for Work upon State's demand. Standards for Work (I) (2) Tenant shall not install skirting on any overwater structure. Tenant shall not conduct in-water Work during time periods prohibited for such work under WAC 220-110-271, Prohibited Work Times in Saltwater, as amended, or as otherwise directed by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). Aquatic Lands Lease Page 9 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 (3) Tenant shall install unobstructed grating over at least 50 percent of the surface area of all new floats, piers, fingers, docks, and gangways; grating material must have at least 60 percent unobstructed open space. 7.5 Tenant-Owned Improvements at End of Lease. (a) Disposition (I) Tenant shall remove Tenant-Owned Improvements in accordance with Paragraph 7.3 upon the expiration, termination, or cancellation of the Lease unless State waives the requirement for removal. (2) Tenant-Owned Improvements remaining on the Property on the expiration, termination or cancellation date shall become State-Owned Improvements without payment by State, unless State elects otherwise. State may refuse or waive ownership. If RCW 79.125.300 or 79.130.040 apply at the time this Lease expires, Tenant could be entitled to payment by the new tenant for Tenant-Owned Improvements. (3) If Tenant-Owned Improvements remain on the Property after the expiration, termination, or cancellation date without State's consent, State may remove all Improvements and Tenant shall pay State's costs. (b) Conditions Under Which State May Waive Removal of Tenant-Owned Improvements. (I) State may waive removal of some or all Tenant-Owned Improvements whenever State determines that it is in the best interests of the State and regardless of whether Tenant re-leases the Property. (2) If Tenant re-leases the Property, State may waive requirement remove Tenant-Owned Improvements. State also may consent to Tenant's continued ownership of Tenant-Owned Improvements. (3) If Tenant does not re-lease the Property, State may waive requirement to remove Tenant-Owned Improvements upon consideration of a timely request from Tenant, as follows: (i) Tenant must notify State at least one (I) year before the Termination Date of its request to leave Tenant-Owned Improvements. (ii) State, within ninety (90) days ofreceiving Tenant's notification, will notify Tenant whether State consents to some or all Tenant-Owned Improvements remaining. State has no obligation to grant consent. (iii) State's failure to respond to Tenant's request to leave Improvements within ninety (90) days is a denial of the request. (c) Tenant's Obligations if State Waives Removal. (I) Tenant shall not remove Improvements if State waives the requirement for removal of some or all Tenant-Owned Improvements. (2) Tenant shall maintain such Improvements in accordance with this Lease until the expiration, termination, or cancellation date. Tenant is liable to State for cost ofrepair if Tenant causes or allows damage to Improvements State has designated to remain. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 10 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 7.6 Disposition of Unauthorized Improvements. (a) Unauthorized Improvements belong to State, unless State elects otherwise. (b) State may either: (I) Consent to Tenant ownership of the Improvements, or (2) Charge rent for use of the Improvements from the time of installation or construction and (i) Require Tenant to remove the Improvements in accordance with Paragraph 7.3, in which case Tenant shall pay rent for the Improvements until removal, or (ii) Consent to Improvements remaining and Tenant shall pay rent for the use of the Improvements, or (iii) Remove Improvements and Tenant shall pay for the cost of removal and disposal, in which case Tenant shall pay rent for use of the Improvements until removal and disposal. 7. 7 Disposition of Personal Property. (a) Tenant retains ownership of Persona! Property unless Tenant and State agree otherwise in writing. (b) Tenant shall remove Personal Property from the Property by the Termination Date. Tenant is liable for damage to the Property and Improvements resulting from removal of Personal Property. (c) State may sell or dispose of all Personal Property left on the Property after the Termination Date. (I) If State conducts a sale of Personal Property, State shall apply proceeds first to the State's administrative costs in conducting the sale, second to payment of an1ount that then may be due from the Tenant to the State. State shall pay the remainder, if any, to the Tenant. (2) If State disposes of Personal Property, Tenant shall pay for the cost of removal and disposal. SECTION 8 ENVIRONMENTAL LIABILITY/RISK ALLOCATION 8.1 Definitions. (a) "Hazardous Substance" means any substance that now or in the future becomes regulated or defined under any federal, state, or local statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, or other law relating to human health, environmental protection, contamination, pollution, or cleanup. (b) "Release or threatened release of Hazardous Substance" means a release or threatened release as defined under any law described in Paragraph 8. l(a). (c) "Utmost care" means such a degree of care as would be exercised by a very careful, prudent, and competent person under the same or similar circumstances; the standard of care applicable under the Washington State Model Toxics Control Act ("MTCA"), Chapter 70.105 RCW, as amended. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 11 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 8.2 8.3 (d) 'Tenant and affiliates" when used in this Section 8 means Tenant or Tenant's subtenants, contractors, agents, employees, guests, invitees, licensees, affiliates, or any person on the Property with the Tenant's permission. (e) "Liabilities" as used in this Section 8 means any claims, demands, proceedings, lawsuits, damages, costs, expenses, fees (including attorneys' fees and disbursements), penalties, or judgments. General Conditions. (a) Tenant's obligations under this Section 8 extend to the area in, on, under, or above (b) (I) The Property and (2) Adjacent state-owned aquatic lands if affected by a release of Hazardous Substances that occurs as a result of the Pennitted Use. Standard of Care. (I) (2) Tenant shall exercise the utmost care with respect to Hazardous Substances. Tenant shall exercise utmost care for the foreseeable acts or omissions of third parties with respect to Hazardous Substances, and the foreseeable consequences of those acts or omissions, to the extent required to establish a viable, third-party defense under the law. Current Conditions and Duty to Investigate. (a) State makes no representation about the condition of the Property. Hazardous Substances may exist in, on, under, or above the Property. (b) This Lease does not impose a duty on State to conduct investigations or supply information to Tenant about Hazardous Substances. (c) Tenant is responsible for conducting all appropriate inquiry and gathering sufficient information about the existence, scope, and location of Hazardous Substances on or near the Property necessary for Tenant to meet Tenant's obligations under this Lease and utilize the Property for the Permitted Use. 8.4 Use of Hazardous Substances. (a) Tenant and affiliates shall not use, store, generate, process, transport, handle, release, or dispose of Hazardous Substances, except in accordance with all applicable laws. (b) Tenant shall not undertake, or allow others to undertake by Tenant's permission, acquiescence, or failure to act, activities that result in a release or threatened release of Hazardous Substances. (c) If use of Hazardous Substances related to Tenant's use or occupancy of the Property results in violation oflaw: (1) Tenant shall submit to State any plans for remedying the violations, and (2) Tenant shall implement any remedial measures to restore the Property or natural resources that State may require in addition to remedial measures required by regulatory authorities. ( d) At a minimum, Tenant and affiliates shall observe the following Hazardous Substances operational standards. If the Washington Department of Ecology, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or other regulatory agency establishes different standards applicable to Tenant's activities under the Pennitted Use, Tenant shall meet the standard that provides greater protection to the environment. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 12 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 8.5 (1) Tenant shall not allow work on overwater structures or vessels without protective measures to prevent discharge of toxins to the water, including: (i) Tenant shall not cause or allow underwater hull scraping and other underwater removal of paints. (ii) Tenant shall not cause or allow underwater refinishing work from boats or temporary floats unless permitted by an industrial National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. (iii) Tenant shall not cause or allow above the waterline boat repairs or refinishing in-water except if limited to decks and superstructures and less than 25 percent of a boat is repaired or refinished in-water per year. (iv) Tenant shall use and require others to use tarps and other dust, drip . and spill containment measures when repairing or refinishing boats in water. (2) Tenant shall not store or allow others to store fuel tanks, petrolewn products, hydraulic fluid, machinery coolants, lubricants and chemicals not in use in locations above the water surface. (3) Tenant shall inspect all equipment using petroleum products, hydraulic fluids, machinery coolants, chemicals, or other toxic or deleterious materials on a monthly basis and immediately make all repairs necessary to stop leakage. Tenant shall submit to State an annual report documenting inspections and repair. (4) Tenant shall maintain a supply of oil spill contairunent materials adequate to contain a spill from the largest vessel in use on the Property. (5) Tenant shall not use or allow use of a pressure washer at any location above the water surface to clean any item that uses petroleum products. Management of Contamination, if any. (a) Tenant and affiliates shall not undertake activities that: (1) (2) Damage or interfere with the operation of remedial or restoration activities, if any; Result in human or environmental exposure to contaminated sediments, if any; (3) Result in the mechanical or chemical disturbance of on-site habitat mitigation, if any. (b) If requested, Tenant shall allow reasonable access to: (I) Employees and authorized agents of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Washington State Department of Ecology, health department, or other similar environmental agencies; and (2) Potentially liable or responsible parties who are the subject of an order or consent decree that requires access to the Property. Tenant may negotiate an access agreement with such parties, but Tenant may not umeasonably withhold such agreement. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 13 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 8.6 Notification and Reporting. (a) Tenant shall immediately notify State if Tenant becomes aware of any of the following: (1) A release or threatened release of Hazardous Substances; (2) Any new discovery of or new information about a problem or liability related to, or derived from, the presence of Hazardous Substances; (3) Any lien or action arising from Hazardous Substances; ( 4) Any actual or alleged violation of any federal, state, or local statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, or other law pertaining to Hazardous Substances; (5) Any notification from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) that remediation or removal of Hazardous Substances is or may be required at the Property. (b) Tenant's duty to report under Paragraph 8.6(a) extends to lands described in Paragraph 8.2(a) and to any other property used by Tenant in conjunction with the Property if a release of Hazardous Substances on the other property could affect the Property. ( c) Tenant shall provide State with copies of all documents Tenant submits to any federal, state or local authorities concerning environmental impacts or proposals relative to the Property. Documents subject to this requirement include, but are not limited to, applications, rep01is, studies, or audits for National Pollution Discharge and Elimination System Permits; Army Corps of Engineers permits; State Hydraulic Project Approvals (HPA); State Water Quality certification; Substantial Development permit; and any reporting necessary for the existence, location, and storage of Hazardous Substances on the Property. 8. 7 Indemnification. (a) Tenant shall fully indemnify, defend, and hold State harmless from and against Liabilities that arise out of, or relate to: (1) The use, storage, generation, processing, transportation, handling, or disposal of any Hazardous Substance by Tenant and affiliates occurring whenever Tenant occupies or has occupied the Prope1iy; (2) The release or threatened release of any Hazardous Substance resulting from any act or omission of Tenant and affiliates occurring whenever Tenant occupies or has occupied the Property. (b) Tenant shall fully indemnify, defend, and hold State harmless for Liabilities that arise out of or relate to Tenant's breach of obligations under Paragraph 8.5. 8.8 Reservation of Rights. (a) For Liabilities not covered by the indemnification provisions of Paragraph 8.7, the Parties expressly reserve and do not waive any rights, claims, immunities, causes of action, or defenses relating to Hazardous Substances that either Party may have against the other under law. (b) The Parties expressly reserve all rights, claims, immunities, and defenses either Party may have against third parties. Nothing in this Section 8 benefits or creates rights for third parties. Aquatic Lands Lease Page I4of32 Lease No. 22-086046 (c) The allocations of risks, Liabilities, and responsibilities set forth in this Section 8 do not release either Party from or affect the liability of either Party for Hazardous Substances claims or actions by regulatory agencies. 8.9 Cleanup. (a) If Tenant's act, omission, or breach of obligation under Paragraph 8.4 results in a release of Hazardous Substances that exceeds the threshold limits of any applicable regulatory standard, Tenant shall, at Tenant's sole expense, promptly take all actions necessary or advisable to clean up the Hazardous Substances in accordance with applicable law. (b) Tenant may undertake a cleanup of the Property pursuant to the Washington State Department of Ecology's Volw1tary Cleanup Program, provided that Tenant cooperates with the Department of Natural Resources in development of cleanup plans. Tenant shall not proceed with Voluntary Cleanup without the Department of Natural Resources approval of final plans. Nothing in the operation of this provision is an agreement by the Department of Natural Resources that the Voluntary Cleanup complies with any laws or with the provisions of this Lease. Tenant's completion of a Voluntary Cleanup is not a release from or waiver of any obligation for Hazardous Substances under this Lease. 8.10 Sampling by State, Reimbursement, and Split Samples. (a) State may enter the Property and conduct sampling, tests, audits, surveys, or investigations ("Tests") of the Property at any time to determine the existence, scope, or effects of Hazardous Substances. (b) If such Tests, along with any other info1mation, demonstrate a breach of Tenant's obligations regarding Hazardous Substances under this Lease, Tenant shall promptly reimburse State for all costs associated with the Tests, provided State gave Tenant thirty (30) calendar days advance notice in non-emergencies and reasonably practical notice in emergencies. (c) In non-emergencies, Tenant is entitled to obtain split samples of Test samples, provided Tenant gives State written notice requesting split samples at least ten (10) calendar days before State conducts Tests. Upon demand, Tenant shall promptly reimburse State for additional cost, if any, of split samples. (d) If either Party conducts Tests on the Property, the conducting Party shall provide the other with validated final data and quality assurance/quality control/chain of custody information about the Tests within sixty (60) calendar days of a written request by the other party, unless Tests are part of a submittal under Paragraph 8.6(c) in which case Tenant shall submit data and information to State without written request by State. Neither party is obligated to provide any analytical summaries or the work product of experts. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 15 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 SECTION 9 ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLETTING 9.1 State Consent Required. Tenant shall not convey, transfer, or encumber any part of Tenant's interest in this Lease or the Prope1iy without State's prior written consent, which State shall not unreasonably condition or withhold. (a) In detennining whether to consent, State may consider, among other items, the proposed transferee's financial condition, business reputation and experience, the nature of the proposed transferee's business, the then-current value of the Property, and such other factors as may reasonably bear upon the suitability of the transferee as a tenant of the Property. State may refuse its consent to any conveyance, transfer, or encumbrance if it will result in a subdivision of the leasehold. Tenant shall submit information regarding any proposed transferee to State at least thirty (30) days prior to the date of the proposed transfer. (b) State reserves the right to condition its consent upon: (I) changes in the terms and conditions of this Lease, including, but not limited to, the Annual Rent; and/or (2) the agreement of Tenant or transferee to conduct Tests for Hazardous Substances on the Property or on other property owned or occupied by Tenant or the transferee. ( c) Each permitted transferee shall assume all obligations under this Lease, including the payment ofrent. No assignment, sublet, or transfer shall release, discharge, or otherwise affect the liability of Tenant. (d) State's consent under this Paragraph 9.1 does not constitute a waiver of any claims against Tenant for the violation of any term of this Lease. 9.2 Rent Payments Following Assignment. The acceptance by State of the payment ofrent following an assignment or other transfer does not constitute consent to any assignment or transfer. 9.3 Terms of Subleases. (a) Tenant shall submit the terms of all subleases to State for approval. (b) Tenant shall incorporate the following requirements in all subleases: (I) The sublease must be consistent with and subject to all the terms and conditions of this Lease; (2) The sublease must provide that this Lease controls if the terms of the sublease conflict with the tenns of this Lease; (3) The term of the sublease (including any period of time covered by a renewal option) must end before the Termination Date of the initial Term or any renewal term; ( 4) The sublease must terminate if this Lease terminates for any reason; (5) The subtenant must receive and acknowledge receipt ofa copy of this Lease; (6) The sublease must prohibit the prepayment to Tenant by the subtenant of more than the annual rent; (7) The sublease must identify the rental amount subtenant is to pay to Tenant; (8) The sublease must provide that there is no privity of contract between the subtenant and State; Aquatic Lands Lease Page 16 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 (9) The sublease must require removal of the subtenant's Improvements and Personal Property upon termination of the sublease; (10) The subtenant's permitted use must be within the scope of the Permitted Use; and (11) TI1e sublease must require the subtenant to meet all obligations of Tenant under Section 10, Indemnification, Financial Security, and Insurance. 9.4 Short-Term Subleases of Moo rage Slips. Sh01t-term subleasing of moo rage slips for a term of less than one year does not require State's written consent or approval pursuant to Paragraphs 9.1 or 9.3. Tenant shall conform moorage sublease agreements to the sublease requirements in Paragraph 9.3. 9.5 Event of Assignment. If Tenant is a corporation, dissolution of the corporation or a transfer (by one or more transactions) ofa majority of the voting stock of Tenant is an assignment of this Lease. If Tenant is a partnership, dissolution of the pai1nership or a transfer (by one or more transactions) of the controlling interest in Tenant is an assignment of this Lease. Assignments defined in this Paragraph 9.5 require State's consent under Paragraph 9.1. SECTION 10 INDEMNITY, FINANCIAL SECURITY, INSURANCE 10.1 Indemnity. (a) Tenai1t shall indemnify, defend, and hold State, its employees, officers, and agents harmless from Claims ai·ising out of the use, occupation, or control of the Property by Tenant, its subtenants, contractors, agents, invitees, guests, employees, affiliates, licensees, or pe1mittees. (b) "Claim" as used in this Paragraph I 0.1 means any financial loss, claim, suit, action, damages, expenses, fees (including attorneys' fees), penalties, or judgments attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease, death, and dainages to tangible property, including, but not limited to, land, aquatic life, and other natural resources. "Damages to tangible.property" includes, but is not limited to, physical injury to the Prope11y and damages resulting from loss of use of the Property. (c) State shall not require Tenant to indemnify, defend, and hold State harmless for claims that arise solely out of the willful or negligent act of State or State's elected officials, employees, or agents. ( d) Tenant waives its immunity under Title 51 RCW to the extent it is required to indemnify, defend, and hold State and its agencies, officials, agents, or employees harmless. ( e) Section 8, Environmental Liability/Risk Allocation, exclusively shall govern Tenant's liability to State for Hazardous Substai1ces and its obligation to indemnify, defend, and hold State harmless for Hazardous Substances. 10.2 Insurance Terms. (a) Insurance Required. (I) At its own expense, Tenant shall procure and maintain during the Term of this Lease, the insurance coverages and limits described in tl1is Paragraph Aquatic Lands Lease Page 17 of 32 Lease No. 22-086046 (b) (c) (d) (e) (2) (3) (4) 10.2 and in Paragraph 10.3, Insurance Types and Limits. State may terminate this Lease if Tenant fails to maintain required insurance. Unless State agrees to an exception, Tenant shall provide insurance issued by an insurance company or companies admitted to do business in the State of Washington and have a rating of A-or better by the most recently published edition of Best's Reports. Tenant may submit a request to the risk manager for the Department of Natural Resources to approve an exception to this requirement. If an insurer is not admitted, the insurance policies and procedures for issuing the insurance policies shall comply with Chapter48.15 RCWand 284-15 WAC. All general liability, excess, umbrella, property, builder's risk, and pollution legal liability insurance policies must name the State of Washington, the Department of Natural Resources, its elected and appointed officials, agents, and employees as an additional insured. All insurance provided in compliance with this Lease must be primary as to any other insurance or self-insurance progran1s afforded to or maintained by State. Waiver. (I) (2) Tenant waives all rights against State for recovery of damages to the extent insurance maintained pursuant to this Lease covers these damages. Except as prohibited by law, Tenant waives all rights of subrogation against State for recovery of damages to the extent that they are covered by insurance maintained pursuant to this lease. Proof of Insurance. (I) Tenant shall provide State with a certificate(s) of insurance executed by a duly authorized representative of each insurer, showing compliance with insurance requirements specified in this Lease and, if requested, copies of policies to State. (2) The certificate(s) of insurance must reference additional insureds and the Lease number. (3) Receipt of such certificates or policies by State does not constitute approval by State of the terms of such policies. State must receive written notice before cancellation or non-renewal of any insurance required by this Lease, as follows: (1) Insurers subject to RCW 48.18 (admitted and regulated by the Insurance Commissioner): If cancellation is due to non-payment of premium, provide State ten (l 0) days' advance notice of cancellation; otherwise, provide State forty-five (45) days' advance notice of cancellation or non-renewal. (2) Insurers subject to RCW 48.15 (surplus lines): If cancellation is due to non-payment of premium, provide State ten (10) days' advance notice of cancellation; otherwise, provide State thirty (30) days' advance notice of cancellation or non-renewal. Adjustments in Insurance Coverage. (I) State may impose changes in the limits of liability for all types of insurance as State deems necessary. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 18 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 (2) Tenant shall secure new or modified insurance coverage within thirty (30) days after State requires changes in the limits of liability. (f) If Tenant fails to procure and maintain the insurance described above within fifteen (15) days after Tenant receives a notice to comply from State, State may either: (I) Deem the failure an Event of Default under Section I 4, or (2) Procure and maintain comparable substitute insurance and pay the premiums. Upon demand, Tenant shall pay to State the full amount paid by State, together with interest at the rate provided in Paragraph 6.2 from the date of State's notice of the expenditure until Tenant's repayment. (g) General Tenns. (I) State does not represent that coverage and limits required under this Lease are adequate to protect Tenant. (2) Coverage and limits do not limit Tenant's liability for indemnification and reimbursements granted to State under this Lease. (3) The Parties shall use any insurance proceeds payable by reason of damage or destruction to property first to restore the real property covered by this Lease, then to pay the cost of the reconstruction, then to pay the State any sums in aJTears, and then to Tenant. 10,3 Insurance Types and Limits. (a) General Liability Insurance. (b) (I) Tenant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance (CGL) or marine general liability (MGL) covering claims for bodily injury, personal injury, or property damage arising on the Property and/or arising out of Tenant's use, occupation, or control of the Property and, if necessary, commercial umbrella insurance with a limit of not less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) per each occurrence. If such CGL or MGL insurance contains aggregate limits, the general aggregate limit must be at least twice the "each occurrence" limit. CGL or MGL insurance must have products-completed operations aggregate limit of at least two times the "each occurrence" limit. (2) (3) CGL insurance must be written on Insurance Services Office (ISO) Occurrence Form CG 00 01 (or a substitute form providing equivalent coverage). All insurance must cover liability arising out of premises, operations, independent contractors, products completed operations, personal injury and advertising injury, and liability assumed under an insured contract (including the tort liability of another paiiy assumed in a business contract) and contain separation of insured ( cross-liability) condition. MGL insurance must have no exclusions for non-owned watercraft. Workers' Compensation. (I) State of Washington Workers' Compensation. (i) Tenant shall comply with all State of Washington workers' compensation statutes and regulations. Tenant shall provide workers' compensation coverage for all employees of Tenant. Coverage must include bodily injury (including death) by accident Aquatic Lands Lease Page 19 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 (c) (d) (2) (ii) or disease, which arises out of or in connection with Tenant's use, occupation, and control of the Prope1iy. If Tenant fails to comply with all State of Washington workers' compensation statutes and regulations and State incurs fines or is required by law to provide benefits to or obtain coverage for such employees, Tenant shall indemnify State. Indemnity shall include all fines; payment of benefits to Tenant, employees, or their heirs or legal representatives; and the cost of effecting coverage on behalf of such employees. Longshore and Harbor Workers' and Jones Acts. Longshore and Harbor Workers' Act (33 U.S.C. Section 901 et seq.) and/or the Jones Act (46 U.S.C. Section 688) may require Tenant to provide insurance coverage in some circumstances. Tenant shall ascertain if such insurance is required and, if required, shall maintain insurance in compliance with law. Tenant is responsible for all civil and criminal liability arising from failure to maintain such coverage. Employers' Liability Insurance. Tenant shall procure employers' liability insurance, and, if necessary, commercial umbrella liability insurance with limits not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) each accident for bodily injury by accident or One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) each employee for bodily injury by disease. Builder's Risk Insurance. (!) (2) Tenant shall procure and maintain in force, or require its contractor(s) to procure and maintain in force, builder's risk insurance on the entire work during the period construction is in progress and until completion of the project and acceptance by State. Such insurance must be written on a completed form and in an amount equal to the value of the completed building and/or Improvements, subject to subsequent modifications to the sum. The insurance must be written on a replacement cost basis. The insurance must name Tenant, all contractors, and subcontractors in the work as insured. State must be named additional insured as required by Paragraph l0.2(a)(3)). Insurance described above must cover or include the following: (i) All risks of physical loss except those specifically excluded in the policy, including loss or damage caused by collapse; (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) The entire work on the Property, including reasonable compensation for architect's services and expenses made necessary by an insured loss; Portions of the work located away from the Property but intended for use at the Property, and portions of the work in transit; Scaffolding, falsework, and temporary buildings located on the Property; and The cost of removing debris, including all demolition as made legally necessary by the operation of any law, ordinance, or regulation. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 20 of 32 Lease No. 22-086046 (3) Tenant or Tenant'(s) contractor(s) is responsible for paying any part of any loss not covered because of application of a deductible contained in the policy described above. (4) Tenant or Tenant'(s) contractor shall buy and maintain boiler and machinery insurance required by contract documents or by law, covering insured objects during installation and until final acceptance by permitting authority. If testing is performed, such insurance must cover such operations. The insurance must name Tenant, all contractors, and subcontractors in the work as insured. State must be named additional insured as required by Paragraph I0.2(a)(3). l 0.4 Financial Security. (a) At its own expense, Tenant shall procure and maintain during the Term of this Lease a corporate security bond or provide other financial security that State, at its option, may approve ("Security"). Tenant shall provide Security in an amount equal to Thirty-Two Thousand Dollars ($32,000), which is consistent with RCW 79.105.330, and secures Tenant's performance of its obligations under this Lease, with the exception of the obligations under Section 8, Environmental Liability/Risk Allocation. Tenant's failure to maintain the Security in the required amount during the Term constitutes a breach of this Lease. (b) All Security must be in a form acceptable to the State. (I) Bonds must be issued by companies admitted to do business within the State of Washington and have a rating of A-, Class VII or better, in the most recently published edition of Best's Reports, unless State approves an exception. Tenant may submit a request to the risk manager for the Department of Natural Resources for an exception to this requirement. (2) Letters of credit, if approved by State, must be irrevocable, allow State to draw funds at will, provide for automatic renewal, and comply with RCW 62A.5-101, et. seq. (3) Savings account assignments, if approved by State, must allow State to draw funds at will. (c) Adjustment in Amount of Security. (I) State may require an adjustment in the Security amount: (i) At the same time as revaluation of the Annual Rent, (ii) As a condition of approval of assignment or sublease of this Lease, (iii) Upon a material change in the condition or disposition of any Improvements, or (iv) Upon a change in the Permitted Use. (2) Tenant shall deliver a new or modified form of Security to State within thi11y (30) days after State has required adjustment of the amount of the Security. ( d) Upon any default by Tenant in its obligations under this Lease, State may collect on the Security to offset the liability of Tenant to State. Collection on the Security does not (I) relieve Tenant ofliability, (2) limit any of State's other remedies, (3) reinstate or cure the default or (4) prevent termination of the Lease because of the default. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 21 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 SECTION 11 ROUTINE MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR 11.1 State's Repairs. This Lease does not obligate State to make any alterations, maintenance, replacements, or repairs in, on, or about the Property, or any part thereof, dming the Term. 11.2 Tenant's Repairs and Maintenance. (a) Routine maintenance and repair are acts intended to prevent a decline, lapse or, cessation of the Permitted Use and associated Improvements. Routine maintenance or repair is the type of work that does not require regulatory permits. (b) At Tenant's own expense, Tenant shall keep and maintain the Property and all Improvements in good order and repair and in a safe condition. State's consent is not required for routine maintenance or repair. (c) At Tenant's own expense, Tenant shall make any additions, repairs, alterations, maintenance, replacements, or changes to the Property or to any Improvements on the Property that any public authority may require. If a public authority requires work beyond the scope of routine maintenance and repair, Tenant shall comply with Section 7 of this Lease. 11.3 Limitations. The following limitations apply whenever Tenant conducts maintenance, repair or replacement. (a) Tenant shall not use or install treated wood at any location above or below water, except that Tenant may use treated wood for above water structural framing. (b) Tenant shall not use or install tires (for example, floatation or fenders) at any location above or below water. (c) Tenant shall install only floatation material encapsulated in a shell resistant to ultraviolet radiation and abrasion. The shell must be capable of preventing breakup and loss of flotation material into the water. ( d) Tenant shall orient night lighting to minimize the amount of light shining directly on the water. (e) Tenant shall not allow new floating structures to come in contact with underlying bedlands ("ground out"). SECTION 12 DAMAGE OR DESTRUCTION 12.1 Notice and Repair. (a) In the event of damage to or destruction of the Property or Improvements, Tenant shall promptly give written notice to State. State does not have actual knowledge of the damage or destruction without Tenant's written notice. (b) Unless otherwise agreed in writing, Tenant shall promptly reconstmct, repair, or replace the Property and Improvements as nearly as possible to its condition immediately prior to the damage or destruction in accordance with Paragraph 7.3, Construction, Major Repair, Modification, and Demolition and Tenant's additional obligations in Exhibit B, if any. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 22 of 32 Lease No. 22-086046 12.2 State's Waiver of Claim. State does not waive any claims for damage or destruction of the Property unless State provides written notice to Tenant of each specific claim waived. 12.3 Insurance Proceeds. Tenant's duty to reconstruct, repair, or replace any damage or destruction of the Property or any Improvements on the Prope11y is not conditioned upon the availability of any insurance proceeds to Tenant from which the cost of repairs may be paid. The Parties shall use insurance proceeds in accordance with Paragraph 10.2(g)(3). 12.4 Rent in the Event of Damage or Destruction. Unless the Parties agree to terminate this Lease, there is no abatement or reduction in rent during such reconstruction, repair, and replacement. 12.S Default at the Time of Damage or Destruction. If Tenant is in default under the terms of this Lease at the time damage or destruction occurs, State may elect to terminate the Lease and State then shall have the right to retain any insurance proceeds payable as a result of the damage or destruction. SECTION 13 CONDEMNATION 13.1 Definitions. (a) "Taking" means that an entity authorized by law exercises the power of eminent domain, either by judgment, settlement in lieu of judgment, or voluntary conveyance in lieu of formal court proceedings, over all or any portion of the Property and Improvements. This includes any exercise of eminent domain on any portion of the Property and Improvements that, in the judgment of the State, prevents or renders impractical the Permitted Use. (b) "Date of Taking" means the date upon which title to the Prope11y or a portion of the Propetiy passes to and vests in the condemner or the effective date of any order for possession if issued prior to the date title vests in the condemner. 13.2 Effect of Taking. If there is a taking, the Lease terminates propo1iionate to the extent of the taking. If this Lease terminates in whole or in part, Tenant shall make all payments due and attributable to the taken Property up to the date of taking. If Tenant has pre-paid rent and Tenant is not in default of the Lease, State shall refund Tenant the pro rata share of the pre-paid rent attributable to the period after the date of taking. 13.3 Allocation of Award. (a) The Parties shall allocate the condemnation award based upon the ratio of the fair market value of (l) Tenant's leasehold estate and Tenant-Owned Improvements and (2) State's interest in the Property; the reversionary interest in Tenant-Owned Improvements, if any; and State-Owned Improvements, if any. (b) If Tenant and State are unable to agree on the allocation, the Parties shall submit the dispute to binding arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 23 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 SECTION 14 DEFAULT AND REMEDIES 14.1 Default Defined. Tenant is in default of this Lease on the occurrence of any of the following: (a) Failure to pay rent or other expenses when due; (b) Failure to comply with any law, regulation, policy, or order of any lawful governmental authority; (c) Failure to comply with any other provision of this Lease; ( d) Commencement of bankruptcy proceedings by or against Tenant or the appointment ofa trustee or receiver of Tenant's property. 14.2 Tenant's Right to Cure. (a) A default becomes an "Event of Default" if Tenant fails to cure the default within the applicable cure period following State's written notice of default. Upon an Event of Default, State may seek remedies under Paragraph 14.3. (b) Unless expressly provided elsewhere in this Lease, the cure period is sixty ( 60) days for failure to pay rent or other monetary defaults; for other defaults, the cure period is thirty (30) days. (c) For nonrnonetary defaults not capable of cure within sixty (60) days, State will not unreasonably withhold approval of a reasonable alternative cure schedule. Tenant must submit a cure schedule within thirty (30) days of a notice of default. The default is not an Event of Default if State approves the schedule and Tenant works diligently and in good faith to execute the cure. The default is an Event of Default if Tenant fails to timely submit a schedule or fails to cure in accordance with an approved schedule. (d) State may elect to deem a default by Tenant as an Event of Default if the default occurs within six (6) months after a default by Tenant for which State has provided notice and opportunity to cure and regardless of whether the first and subsequent defaults are of the same nature. 14.3 Remedies. (a) Upon an Event of Default, State may terminate this Lease and remove Tenant by surnmary proceedings or otherwise. (b) If the Event of Default(!) arises from Tenant's failure to comply with restrictions on Permitted Use and operations under Paragraph 2.2 or (2) results in damage to natural resources or the Property, State may enter the Property without terminating this Lease to (I) restore the natural resources or Property and charge Tenant restoration costs and/or (2) charge Tenant for damages. On demand by State, Tenant shall pay all costs and/or damages. ( c) Without terminating this Lease, State may relet the Property on any terms and conditions as State may decide are appropriate. (1) State shall apply rent received by reletting: (I) to the payment of any indebtedness other than rent due from Tenant to State; (2) to the payment of any cost of such reletting; (3) to the payment of the cost of any alterations and repairs to the Property; and (4) to the payment ofrent and leasehold excise tax due and unpaid under this Lease. State shall hold and apply any balance to Tenant's future rent as it becomes due. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 24 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 (2) Tenant is responsible for any deficiency created by the reletting during any month and shall pay the deficiency monthly. (3) At any time after reletting, State may elect to terminate this Lease for the previous Event of Default. (d) State's reentry or repossession of the Property under Paragraph 14.3 is not an election to terminate this Lease or cause a forfeiture of rents or other charges Tenant is obligated to pay during the balance of the Term, unless (I) State gives Tenant written notice of termination or (2) a legal proceeding decrees termination. (e) The remedies specified under this Paragraph 14.3 are not exclusive of any other remedies or means of redress to which the State is lawfully entitled for Tenant's breach or threatened breach of any provision of this Lease. SECTION 15 ENTRY BY STATE State may enter the Property at any reasonable hour to inspect for compliance with the terms of this Lease, to monitor impacts to habitat, or survey habitat and species. Tenant grants State permission to cross Tenant's upland and aquatic land property to access the Property. State shall provide at least 24 hours notice before entering Tenant's property. State will inspect the Property annually. State may coordinate the site inspection with Washington State Department of Ecology or other regulatory authorities, if appropriate. Provision for periodic inspection does not preclude State's option to inspect at other times. State's failure to inspect the Property does not constitute a waiver of any rights or remedies under this Lease. SECTION 16 DISCLAIMER OF QUIET ENJOYMENT 16.1 No Guaranty or Warranty. (a) State believes that this Lease is consistent with the Public Trust Doctrine and that none of the third-party interests identified in Paragraph 1.1 (b) will materially or adversely affect Tenant's right of possession and use of the Property, but State makes no guaranty or warranty to that effect. (b) State disclaims and Tenant releases State from any claim for breach of any implied covenant of quiet enjoyment. This disclaimer and release includes, but is not limited to, interference arising from exercise of rights under the Public Trust Doctrine; Treaty rights held by Indian Tribes; and the general power and authority of State and the United States with respect to aquatic lands and navigable waters. (c) Tenant is responsible for determining the extent of Tenant's right to possession and for defending Tenant's leasehold interest. 16.2 Eviction by Third-Party. If a third-party evicts Tenant, th.is Lease terminates as of the date of the eviction. In the event of a partial eviction, Tenant's rent obligations abate as of the date of the partial eviction, in direct proportion to the extent of the eviction; this Lease shall remain in full force and effect in all other respects. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 25 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 SECTION 17 NOTICE AND SUBMITTALS Following are the locations for delivery of notice and submittals required or pe1mitted under this Lease. Any Party may change the place of delivery upon ten (l 0) days written notice to the other. State: DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Shoreline District Aquatics 950 Farman Ave N Enumclaw, WA 98022-9282 Tenant: BARBEE MILL COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION c/o Charles F. Conner, President 846 108'h Ave NE Bellevue, WA 98004-4304 The Parties may deliver any notice in person, by facsimile machine, or by certified mail. Depending on the method of delivery, notice is effective upon personal delivery, upon receipt of a confirmation report if delivered by facsimile machine, or three (3) days after mailing. All notices must identify the Lease number. On notices transmitted by facsimile machine, the Parties shall state the number of pages contained in the notice, including the transmittal page, if any. SECTION 18 MISCELLANEOUS 18.1 Authority. Tenant and the person or persons executing this Lease on behalf of Tenant represent that Tenant is qualified to do business in the State of Washington, that Tenant has full right and authority to enter into this Lease, and that each and every person signing on behalf of Tenant is authorized to do so. Upon State's request, Tenant shall provide evidence satisfactory to State confirming these representations. 18.2 Successors and Assigns. This Lease binds and inures to the benefit of the Parties, their successors, and assigns. 18.3 Headings. T11e headings used in this Lease are for convenience only and in no way define, limit, or extend the scope of this Lease or the intent of any provision. 18.4 Entire Agreement. This Lease, including the exhibits and addenda, if any, contains the entire agreement of the Parties. This Lease merges all prior and contemporaneous agreements, promises, representations, and statements relating to this transaction or to the Property. 18.5 Waiver. (a) The waiver of any breach or default of any term, covenant, or condition of this Lease is not a waiver of such term, covenant, or condition; of any subsequent breach or default of the same; or of any other term, covenant, or condition of this Lease. State's acceptance of a rental payment is not a waiver of any preceding or Aquatic Lands Lease Page 26 of 32 Lease No. 22-086046 existing breach other than the failure to pay the particular rental payment that was accepted. (b) The renewal of the Lease, extension of the Lease, or the issuance of a new lease to Tenant, does not waive State's ability to pursue any rights or remedies under the Lease. 18.6 Cumulative Remedies. The rights and remedies under this Lease are cumulative and in addition to all other rights and remedies afforded by law or equity or otherwise. 18.7 Time is of the Essence. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE as to each and every provision of this Lease. 18.8 Language. The word 'Tenant" as used in this Lease applies to one or more persons and regardless of gender, as the case may be. If there is more than one Tenant, their obligations are joint and several. The word "persons," whenever used, shall include individuals, foms, associations, and corporations. The word "Paiiies" means State and Tenant in the collective. The word "Paiiy" means either or both State and Tenant, depending on the context. 18.9 Invalidity. The invalidity, voidness, or illegality of any provision of this Lease does not affect, impair, or invalidate any other provision of this Lease. 18.10 Applicable Law and Venue. This Lease is to be interpreted and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. Venue for any action arising out of or in connection with this Lease is in the Superior Comi for Thurston County, Washington. 18.11 Statutory Reference. Any reference to a statute means that statute as presently enacted or hereafter amended or superseded. 18.12 Recordation. At Tenant's expense and no later than thirty (30) days after receiving the fully-executed Lease, Tenant shall record this Lease in the county in which the Prope1iy is located. Tenant shall include the parcel number of the upland property used in conjunction with the Property, if any. Tenant shall provide State with recording infonnation, including the date of recordation ai1d file number. If Tenant fails to record this Lease, State may record it and Tenant shall pay the costs of recording upon State's demai1d. 18.13 Modification. No modification of this Lease is effective unless in writing ai1d signed by both Parties. Oral representations or statements do not bind either Paiiy. 18.14 Survival. Any obligations of Tenant not fully performed upon termination of this Lease do not cease, but continue as obligations of the Tenant until fully performed. 18.15 Exhibits. All referenced exhibits are incorporated in the Lease unless expressly identified as unincorporated. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 27 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 THIS AGREEMENT requires the signature of all Parties and is effective on the date of the last signature below. Dated: -~ 2-b ,2012. Dated: ----=D_cJ--=--_Y___,___, 20 \ L--- Approved as to form this 12 day of March, 20 I 0 Janis Snoey, Assistant Attorney General BARBEE MILL COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION ~1~ By: CHARLES F. CONNER Title: President Address: 846 I 08'11 Ave NE Bellevue, WA 98004-4304 Phone: 425-646-44 l ] STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Title: Address: Shoreline District Aquatics 950 Farman Ave N Enumclaw, WA 98022-9282 Aquatic Lands Lease Page 28 of32 Lease No. 22-0 86046 REPRESENTATIVE ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF WASHINGTON) -k ) ss County of ) ( ~~ ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that CHARLES F. CONNER is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the PRESIDENT of BARBEE MILL COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. (Seal or stamp) Aquatic Lands Lease ,3i1tU1tm (G -0u::rwvl.11__. (Signature) (Print Name) Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at My appointment expires ;o/g/11-\~- • I Page 29 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 ST A TE ACKNOWLEDGMENT ST A TE OF WASHINGTON ) C+-,; ) ss County of {)-l:ws~ ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that MEGAN DUFFY is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that she signed this instrument, on oath stated that she was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the DEPUTY SUPERVISOR FOR AQUATICS AND GEOLOGY of the DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: -'o"'-'· ~'-"'--'='--4.________, 20 / 2, (S~ A . /iA&:fJe-tz_ (Print Name) Notary Public in and for the State of w~h~ My appointment expires '1-/ /.t, -/(f- Aquatic Lands Lease Page 30 of 32 Lease No. 22-086046 EXHIBIT A SURVEY AND PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Agreement Number: 22-086046 Recording number of final DNR approved survey in King County: Tenant shall submit a final, as-built Record of Survey for DNR's approval within one year of the Commencement Date and upon receiving DNR's approval, Tenant shall record the survey with the King County Recorder's Office. Legal description of the Property: THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT I, OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TRACT 35 OF BARBEE MILL - LOTS 35 & 36 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT, RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 20120802900003; THENCE N89°04'39"W 29.11 FEET TO A POINT ON THE INNER HARBOR LINE AS SHOWN ON SAID LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT, SAID POINT BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT; THENCE S01°06'32"W, ALONG SAID INNER HARBOR LINE, 47.18 FEET; THENCE N89°04'39"W 166.19 FEET; THENCE N00°55'21 "E 72.06 FEET; THENCE S89°04'39"E 166.43 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID INNER HARBOR LINE; THENCE S0!0 06'32"W, ALONG SAID INNER HARBOR LINE, 24.88 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. Square footage of each of these Use classifications: Water-dependent Non water-dependent Public Access Total square feet Aquatic Lands Lease 11,984 NA NA 11,984 Page 31 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 EXHIBITB PLAN OF OPERATIONS 1. DESCRIPTION OF PERMITTED USE A. Existing Facilities. None. B. Proposed Facilities. Tenant has submitted to State plans and specification for the construction of a new overwater structure for use as a community dock. The detailed project drawings are on file and available from the State under Aquatic Lands Lease Number 22-086046. State grants its consent to this Work as provided under Paragraph 7.3(b) of the Lease, except that Tenant shall conform all Work to all limitations, standards and obligations in this Exhibit B. 2. ADDITIONAL OBLIGATIONS A. Tenant shall post clearly the location of the nearest sewage pumpout facility. B. Tenant shall post the Property with no-wake advisories. Aquatic Lands Lease Page 32 of32 Lease No. 22-086046 e C C -0 design inc. Architects July 31, 2014 Lori Lull -USACE " Karen Walter -Muckleshoot ~ Vanessa Dolbee -City of Renton 7 Kris Sorensen -City of Renton Jennifer Henning -City of Renton Lynda Priddy -EPA '1 Vivian Roach -DNR S Charlie Conner -Conner Homes Michael & Dorothy Urban -Owners Subject: Urban Boatlift Good afternoon, I wanted to contact everyone in regard to our site meeting this past Tuesday at the Urban Residence Shoreline. I am sorry that not everyone was able to attend the meeting but I appreciate those who were able to make it. I feel like we made good progress and I appreciate everyone's willingness to think outside the box in order to come up with a creative solution that may benefit all. As everyone is aware, the Urban's recently purchased their home with the understanding they were granted an easement that would allow them to place the boatlift in the location that is on the current drawings. There was some confusion as to the actual size of the easement however that has been amended and the new lease has been recorded with King County and has been approved by Barbee Mill Community Organization. The current easement area is properly shown on the current drawings. We did confirm at our meeting that no other easements or agreements are in place for this site at the community pier. The community pier has one permanent moorage space at the finger pier as was originally pennitted and the only other easement on this parcel is for the Urban Residence. There will be no future permanent moorage proposed at this parcel. At our meeting we discussed the previous studies and fmdings that have been conducted as well as the ongoing monitoring that is happening at the site. A majority of the historical contamination was upland from the shore where the current pond/fountain now resides. On-going monitoring of the wells continues with Barbie Mill and that monitoring is being posted with Department of Ecology. It was confirmed at our meeting that the shoreline within the immediate vicinity of the Urban Residence known as the Barbee Mill Beach does not have contaminants. It is our understanding that any contaminant concerns within Lake Washington are further to the North by more than 550 feet. 203 North 36th Stree EXHIBIT 28 063937 FX 2067065276 The lakebed was relatively clear at our site visit and we were able to observe that the substrate at the proposed location is a sand/silt mixture. There is no evidence of any aquatic vegetation and the comer of the proposed boatlift site is being held in place by a steel sheet pile bulkhead with a concrete cap. At our site visit we were able to view the posted "no boat" signage that is in place on the North side of the community pier. Those signs extend from the shoreline and continue waterward for approximately 68' -0". At our meeting the Urban's did confirm that they have no intention of driving their boat into the proposed boatlift location. To get the boat to the lift location they will turn the engine off when they reach North side of the pier and they plan on walking the boat into position on the lift. This would aid in the concerns of wake impact and would ensure there would not be the potential for boat scour through prop wash within the first 70'-0" to 80'-0" of the shoreline. This distance could be increased if it was found necessary by the agencies. We did discuss the possibility of adding a scour mitigation cap/habitat mix within the area below the boatlift. The owners are willing to add this if the agencies think this is something that will benefit the nearshore environment. Given that there will be no motorized use within this area I am not sure how substantial the benefit will be but we are willing to discuss this and add it to the mitigation plan. We understand that Karen is still waiting on as-builts of the planting plans from the original platting and the community pier. There has been some confusion as to who has that information due to the original permitees, however I will follow up with Lori and Susan on this matter to see if the monitoring reports and as-builts have been completed. At our meeting Michael and Dorothy emphasized that they are more than willing to add plantings to the shoreline in order to help mitigate for the added boatlift at their site. In walking the shoreline in front of the Urban's residence there appears to be ideal locations for possibly two Scoulers Willows (Scouleriana) and two Red-Osier Dogwoods (Coruns Sericea). These plants will need to be approved by the Homeowners Association but we have received assurances that this can be achieved. The additional item that was discussed was the length of the easement terms for the boatlift. The Urban's are very aware of the concerns that the agencies have with the boatlift and its location. They understand what is necessary in order to aid in protecting the area and they understand the precautions they must take in order to minimize impacts to the adjacent restored nearshore environment and shorelands. They also understand that the agencies are concerned with the fact that the Urban's are aware of the concerns but future users may not be. The Urban's are willing; even though they paid a substantial amount of money for the ability to have an easement at their property, to have that easement be removed once they sell their property. In essence the length of the easement will only be for the length of time the Urban's own the property. The boat and boatlift 2 will permanently be removed at the end of their ownership. They are willing to write this amendment into their easement terms that will be sold with the property. In summary, the existing conditions at the boatlift location as well as the overall site allow us the ability to mitigate some of the concerns of wake, wave action, scour and sediment erosion and no crushing ofbenthic habitat. The owners are aware of the concerns and were already planning on having no motor power near shore. They are willing to add to the shoreline plantings to aid in in the shoreline restoration. It was confirmed at our meeting that no other easements are associated with this community pier. The Urban's are willing to give up the future easement rights that run with the property. Given each of these factors it is our opinion that this project could move forward and still address the concerns of the agencies. In light ofthis information we ask that all the agencies review this material and evaluate your support for the project. The owners have been very cooperative and continue to want to reach out to make this a successful project for everyone involved. At our site meeting; Kris, Vanessa and Jennifer mentioned they would be willing to host a conference call to discuss this project given our findings. The project is currently "On- Hold" with the City of Renton. The work window for this area is from July 16th - December 31 ". We would like to try to resolve this matter as soon as possible and we would ask that the City of Renton try to hold this conference call during the Week of August 18th so that we can move forward with our permitting efforts. We appreciate everyone's effort with this project. If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contract us. Sincerely, Troy Hussing ecco design inc. 3 lqf/Y@ MEMORANDUM 2811 Fairview Ave., Easl Suite 1DD4 Seat1[:, Washington 98102 Mobi~: +1206 3692478 Olfice: -1-1206 325 0274 Fax; +1 206 325 0252 johnJally@la!lyconsulting.com To: Todd Sherman, Charlie Conner, Conner Homes at Barbee Mill Inc. Ted Burns, Seaborn Piled riving From: John Lally, Lally Consulting LLC Date: November 2, 2011 Subject: Responses to Outstanding Agency Questions Per the request of the Conner Homes at Barbee Mills LLC (Conner Homes), Lally Consulting (Lally) has developed responses to outstanding agency questions on USACE permit application no. NWS-2010-140, submitted October 20, 2011. The issues related to scour mitigation measures originally presented in the report Conner Homes at Barbee Mill, Renton, Washington, Community Dock Scour Analyses, (Lally, 2011), and further developed in a memorandum to the USEPA, Region 10 dated October 5, 2011, are addressed here. Questions related to the dock location and dimensions, planting plan, joint use agreement and other · agreements are not included in this response. Placement of Scour Mitigation Cap/Habitat Mi< Additional research and evaluation was performed to refine the proposed scour mitigation cap/ habitat mix based on agency questions and concerns. To clarify, with the proposed signs and buoys installed at the Community dock, the worst-case design vessel size is reduced from a 59~ft_ Grand Banks type trawler to a 30-ft cruiser type vessel. The Oct. 5 memo re- evaluated the scour potential for this smaller worst-case design vessel. Results of the particle stability analyses, using two different methods (Shield's and Maynard), for both the typical and worst-case vessel scenarios 1 are provided in the tab!e below. Table 1 Stable.Particle Sizes@ Estimated Maximum Velocities -Typical and Worst-Case Vessel Scenarios Shields Method (Vanoni, 1975) USEPA Method {Maynard, 1998) Maximum Stable Stable Stable Engine Velocity Particle Particle Sediment Particle Stable Sediment Vessel Scenario RPM Near-bed Particle Size Size Type Size Type (ft/,ec.) {Dso, (DsDr (USCS) {Ds11, Size (USCS) mmJ in.) mmJ (D 5a, in.) Typical Case 800 1.9 4.S 0.18 course course Vessel (20 ft.) sand 21 0.8 gravel Worst Case 1000 3.3 14 fine course Vessel (30 ft.) 0.6 gravel 63 z.s gravel EXHIBIT 29 Based on these scour analyses, it is estimated that to prevent movement under the maximum propeller wash velocities, the lakebed sediment grain size would need to be course sand -course gravel (0.2 in. -0.8 in.) in the case of typical vessel operations, and fine gravel -course gravel (0.6 in. -2.5 in.) course for the worst case vessel {30-ft, 1000 rpm) scenario. The 4-in minus rounded gravel described in the Oct. 5, 2011 memo was suggested as a conservative gradation and one that may be suitable as salmonid habitat substrate based on prior project experience on Lake Washington. As estimated using the new worst-case vessel (30 ft.) and related sediment stability calculations, a 2-1/2 inch minus rounded gravel will be adequate to prevent scour at the community dock site. A standard gradation for this material is as followsj Table 2 Proposed Community Dock Scour Mitigation Cap/ Habitat Mix Sieve Size Percent Passing (by Weight) 2-1/2 inch 95 -100 2 inch 70 -100 1-1/2 inch 40-90 1 inch 3-30 3/4 inch 0-15 #200 Sieve (fines) 0-3 The shallow water restoration site, and DNR Withdrawal Area details, were provided as new information to Lally, in order to respond to agency questions posed in the Oct. 20, 2011 letter. Two (2) two construction drawings were provided by Conner Homes to identify the aerial extent and cross sections of the shallow water restoration materials, placed in or about 2006. To better integrate with these existing materials and contours, the proposed community dock scour mitigation cap was modified slightly to dovetail with the south end of the existing shallow water habitat, as shown on Figure M-1. The proposed community dock scour mitigation cap coverage area is approximately 11,075 sq. ft. A surface layer of the gravel cover mix, with a minimum thickness of 1 ft. (12-in.) is recommended to account for the existence of potentially contaminated sediments 1 inaccuracy of the cap placement process 1 and scouring/grounding du,: to potential vessel impacts. The resulting placement volume would be approximately 440 cubic yards (cy). In depths greater than 10 ft. at and in the vicinity of the community dock, some movement of bed surface sediments is predicted to occur as a result of low (i.e. 0.4 ft/sec), propwash velocties. However, based on the analyses I would classify the materials in this area to be 'dynamically stable' under the influence of the lower propwash velocities, and not susceptible to being transported more than a few feet at any one time. 2 Kris Sorensen From: Sent: To: Subject: Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Hi Mr. Hussing, Lull, Lori C NWS <Lori.C.Lull@usace.army.mil> Friday, July 18, 2014 4:50 PM troy hussing; Dorothy Urban; Michael Urban; Evan Wehr; Lynda Priddy; Kris Sorensen; Karen Walter; Vivian Roach; Vanessa Dolbee Urban Boatlift NWS-2013-880 (UNCLASSIFIED) Sorry that I won't be able to make it to the site visit on the 29th of July. Since we didn't actually talk on the phone, only exchanged a voicemail, I do want to express a primary concern of the Corps of Engineers for this project, which is navigation. The proposed structure is right next to a community use structure that would be used by over 100 households. It seems to be that issuance of a permit here could cause problems for navigation. I am working on the application and will need some additional information at this time. I need you to provide an "existing conditions" plan sheet that shows the existing mitigation plantings on the applicants' property as well as the Community Use property with the easement for the proposed boat lift. As far as federal projects, these parcels have mitigation plantings for the Community Use Pier (NWS-2010-140) and there are also plantings that are being monitored an maintained as part of the shoreline restoration project on the Urban property and further north (Corps reference number NWS-2005-981). I also understand that there should be locally required plantings already on site. I also understand that the easement has been revised, but I did not receive a new map. Please provide a new map of the easement area so that we can use the appropriate map for coordination. Also, as part of the federal review, we will be working with EPA due to contamination concerns, National Marine Fisheries due to concerns for salmonid impacts in the nearshore, and working to address tribal concerns. Please provide the information described above within 30 days or the application will be cancelled. Thank you and I look forward to hear about the discussions on the site visit. Lori Lull Lori C. Lull Project Manager, Regulatory US Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District Ph:206-316-3153 Note: Starting August 4th, I will be working a part time schedule and will be in the office on Mondays and Tuesdays only. Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE EXHIBIT 30 Plan Review Comments (LUAB-001640) ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions. Planning: 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Commercial, multi-family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. Engineering Review: l. No utility comments related to this project. Technical Services: The site plan purportedly shows the recording number of an easement between the Barbee Mill HOA and the applicant but the number shown has too many digits and in no way represents the actual easement Rec. No. 20121211001516. The Survey of Record for the DNR Lease is not a recorded version of same. Has the survey been recorded? If so please provide the recording number. The Lease itself is supposed to be recorded as well and if it has please provide its recording number as well. Only a portion (pages 2 and 5) of the easement instrument was provided in the materials reviewed and the full document had to be acquired from King County. I have requested a copy of DNR Lease No. 22-086046 from the Auquatic Lands Division of DNR. The easement crosses the inner harbor line and therefore includes a portion of the DNR lease area. It is my understanding that aquatic lands leases carry restrictions on the assignment of rights and thus the easement area may not in fact extend as far as is purports. It should be noted that the area lying westerly of the western boundary of Tracts 35 and 36 is an undesignated Tract on the plat of Barbee Mill and thus may not have been conveyed to the Barbee Mill Community Association. Should that be the case the Community Association does not have the right to grant the easement over that area either, thus, obviating the easement in its entirety. As platted the Tract boundaries do not extend to the Inner Harbor Line as shown on some of the documents reviewed. Police Review: Recommendations: Not applicable. EXHIBIT 31 Construction Mitigation Description Urban Boat Lift Construction Dates : The date of construction will depend on when the necessary government approvals for the lift are issued. Installation of the lift will only take one day to complete. The in water work window at the site is open from July l 6'h through December 31 ''. The lift will be installed during the work window opening in either December 2013 or July 2014. Hours and Days of Operation: The work will take place during the City ofRenton's typical hours of construction which are 7:00 am through I 0:00 pm Monday through Friday and 9:00 am through 10:00 pm Saturday and Sunday. Proposed Hauling/Transportation Routes: The lift will be brought to the site by van that will access the site via Williams Avenue North. Measures to be implemented to minimize dust, traffic and transportation impacts, erosion, mud, noise, and other noxious characteristics: Work will take place only during allowed hours of operation. Only one vehicular trip is required to install the lift. Erosion will not be caused by the installation of the lift. Noise levels from installation are very low. Special Hours Proposed for Construction: No special hours are proposed for construction. Preliminary Traffic Control Plan: Traffic control is not necessary for the project. EXHIBIT 32 PLANNING DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 42S-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NON PROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans ancf.~~.i;;;s), the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as 11 proposal,° 11propn<:Or II -:1nrl ll'.::lffo.rf-.arl CT.C:H)graphic area," respectively, ~' ~ 06/09 \\Server\job flles\Shoreline\2013\S1310 C .. ~ .• i ' A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Urban Boat Lift 2. Name of applicant: Michael and Dorothy Urban 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: Michael and Dorothy Urban 4157 Williams Ave. N Renton, WA 98056 Contact Person: 702-277-1063 Evan Wehr -ecco design inc. 203 N 36'h Street Suite 201 Seattle, WA 98103 206-706-3937 4. Date checklist prepared: August 13, 2013 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Winter 2013 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. A Biological Evaluation was prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments to assess impacts to listed species and/or critical habitat for the community pier that was constructed at the site in late 2012. Marine Surveys and Assessments has done an addendum to their original BE that addresses the impacts of the proposed lift. 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. None are known. 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. RGP 1 approval from the Army Corps of Engineers. SDP, SEPA review, and building permit from the City of Renton. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. Install a new ground based boat lift. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should 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. 4151 & 4157 Williams Ave. N in Renton, WA 98056. Section: NWl/4 32 Town: 24N Range: SE B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS -2 -06/09 \\Serverljob files\Shoreline\2013\S1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Forrnslenvironmentat checklist.doc 1 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one); flat. rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other ______ _ b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?) The site is relatively flat with the steepest slope along the shoreline being approximately 3%. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The area where the lift is to be installed is mainly angular rocks. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. No filling or grading are proposed. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? There will be no change to the amount of impervious surfaces. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: None proposed. 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. No emissions are to occur. b. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None. 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 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. The work will occur in Lake Washington. -3 -06/09 \\Server\job files\Shore\ine\2013\S1 31 O Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checldist.doc ' 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. The boat lift will be installed in Lake Washington. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? 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 Water: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals ... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 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. N/A 2) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: None. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: _X __ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other _X __ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other _x_ shrubs _X __ grass __ pasture __ crop or grain __ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other __ water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other __ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? None. -4- \\Server\job files\Shoreline\2013\S1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist.doc 06109 ' c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None know. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: None. 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. Chinook salmon, bull trout, and steelhead. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain Juvenile salmonids migrate along the Jake shoreline. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Work will take place during the appropriate work window of July 16th through December 31''. 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. Solar. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. 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: None. 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)? None known. -5. 06/09 \\Server\job files\Shoreline\2013\S1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist.doc 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or 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. Low levels of noise during installation of the lift. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site and adjacent properties are residential. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. An existing house and community pier. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. e. What is the current zoning classification ofthe site? R-10 f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation ofthe site? COR g. _ If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Urban h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: None. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. 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: None. 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. A couple feet above the ordinary high water mark. -6-06109 \\Server\job files\Shore!ine\2013\S 131 O Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist.doc b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None. 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: None. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Boating and fishing. 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: None. 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 known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None. 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. The site is accessed by Lake Washington Blvd. N just west of 1-405. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? 8/lOths of a mile. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? None. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private? No. • 7 • 06/09 \\Server\job files\Shoreline\2013\S1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Farms\environmental checklist.doc e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Boat traffic on Lake Washington. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. None. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None. 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. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. 16. UTILITIES a. b. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. None. C. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true, correct, 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 Signature: 6!,.,,, L(,~ Name Printed: Ev,qn l.veh,---- Date: -8 -06/09 \\Server\job files\Shoreline\2013\S1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist.doc Kris Sorensen From: Sent: To: Bill Lawrence < bill.lawrence@otak.com > Wednesday, July 30, 2014 11:27 AM Bob MacOnie Cc: Subject: Kris Sorensen; Vanessa Dolbee; Jennifer T. Henning RE: Barbee Mill Plat Bob, I will see that any discrepancies are addressed and will resolve this ASAP. Bill Bill f.:nvrence I K.irkLmd Office Survey :>Ianager 102.10 '-:E Points Drive, Suite 400 I Kirkland, W,~ 98033 v: 425.739.4216 I c: 425.890.2379 I f 42s.sn.9sn \V\1.rw.otak.com From: Bob MacOnie [mailto:bmaconie@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 7:42 AM To: Bill Lawrence Cc: Kris Sorensen; Vanessa Dolbee; Jennifer T. Henning Subject: Barbee Mill Plat Good morning Bill, This is a follow-up to our phone conversation of yesterday afternoon. The City of Renton is requesting that you file an affidavit of correct for the subject recorded in Volume 246, pages 25 -39 under recording number 20080208000182 (copy attached). The problem is the area lying between the inner harbor line and the westerly boundaries of lots 35 - 48 as shown on sheets 14 & 15 of 15 of the plat. The area at issue is shown as being within the plat boundary but unlike the area of the May Creek Delta (Tract 'A')as shown on sheet 7 of 15 it lacks a specific Tract designation. The affidavit should assign a Tract ID (perhaps 'Z') to the area in question and note that it should have been included in the Dedication where the Tracts are conveyed to the owners of Lots 1 through 114, second paragraph of the DEDICATION/CERTIFICATION on sheet 1 of 15. Below is a copy of the king County Assessor's map highlighting the area in question. EXHIBIT 34 I ' ' ......... ~<t j I I C; ~ '" , .• " '? n; ,. ;g 0 " " ,. "' 2 < 2 (!) ~ ~ ~ A~e.A ~ ... .~ q "'U;;.,\--. Cl.\ 3 2 •. J;: ?5 32 \ ' i 1;_•,.>:. , ..... 11..: -=j~~~r !!;}.'"· - .:,.<!, I.H' ~ 5-'r'.i~~ ·,·.,1 ~ -· ~ ... ,:;::.,.,;,,c !:: ;:,~,, Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Respectfully, Bob ROBERT T. MAC ONIE JR., PLS Mapping Coordinator CED/Planning -6th Floor 1055 5 Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7369 bmaconie@rentonwa.gov 3 Kris Sorensen From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Kris, troy hussing <troy@eccodesigninc.com> Monday, November 17, 2014 2:18 PM Kris Sorensen Michael Urban; Evan Wehr Fw: City of Renton; freestanding boatlift & HPA requirement; FW: FYI on HPA Approval I was able to finally connect with Christa on the phone today and she followed up our conversation with this email below. The July 16th to December 31st is the basic recommendation but in general she has no timing restrictions. Best, Troy troy hussing ECCO Architecture & Design 203 N 36th Ste. 201 Seattle, WA 98103 206.706.3937 eccodesigninc.com find us on Facebook & Houzz -----Forwarded Message----- From: "Heller, Christa H (DFW)" <Christa.Heller@dfw.wa.gov> To: troy hussing <troy@eccodesigninc.com> Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 2:08 PM Subject: FW: City of Renton; freestanding boatlift & HPA requirement; FW: FYI on HPA Approval Hi Troy, Please find general guidance regarding HPA requirements for boatlifts in Lake Washington in the e-mail below. For the boatlift proposed to be installed at 4151 Williams Ave N in Renton, no HPA is required for this project. This site is not located in a documented sockeye spawning area, nor is it located within direct influence of May Creek. Therefore WDFW cannot place a timing restriction on your project, but we can recommend the standard project timing for this area of the lake, July 16 to December 31. Please let me know if you have any additional questions. Best, Christa Heller Habitat Biologist Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 4 -Issaquah Field Office il' (425) 313-5681 (office) 30J christa.heller@dfw.wa.gov EXHIBIT 35 From: Kris Sorensen (mailto:KSorensen@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 10:15 AM To: Heller, Christa H (DFW) Subject: RE: City of Renton; freestanding boatlift & HPA requirement; FW: FYI on HPA Approval Thank you Christa. Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner, Planning Division, Community & Economic Development, City of Renton, 425-430-6593 From: Heller, Christa H (DFW) (mailto:Christa.Heller@dfw.wa.gov] Sent: Monday, November 10, 2014 8:46 AM To: Kris Sorensen Cc: Fisher, Larry D (DFW) Subject: RE: City of Renton; freestanding boatlift & HPA requirement; FW: FYI on HPA Approval Hi Kris, Under the current Hydraulic Code rules, WDFW does not require an HPA for a freestanding boat lift installation (per the attached guidance document), provided it meets the following criteria: Portable boat hoists may be installed or removed without HPA, provided they are: • Installed or removed entirely by hand in lakes without the use of equipment stationed on the bank below ordinary high water line, or mounted to a barge; • Not installed at the mouth of any watercourse; • Not associated with dredging, filling, pile driving, or other modifications of the bed conducted as part of the project; • Not modified during or after installation by the addition of docks, ramps, floats, or other structures that add surface area to the hoist or allow for moorage of additional watercraft. • The addition of a canopy no larger than the dimensions of the hoist is allowed • Installed in, or removed from the following sockeye-bearing lakes only during the time periods authorized by the Area Habitat Biologist: Baker, Osoyoos, Ozette, Pleasant, Quinault, Sammamish, Washington, Wenatchee WDFW recommends that the installation and removal of boat lifts in Lake Washington and Lake Sammamish only occur between July 16 and September 30 (to avoid disturbing spawning sockeye). If you have questions about whether a specific project meets the above criteria, feel free to e-mail me a plan set for review. Please note that this rule may change with the adoption of the revised Hydraulic Code in early 2015. Best, 2 From: Kris Sorensen [mailto:KSorensen@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 10:15 AM To: Heller, Christa H (DFW) Subject: RE: City of Renton; freestanding boatlift & HPA requirement; FW: FYI on HPA Approval Thank you Christa. Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner, Planning Division, Community & Economic Development, City of Renton, 425-430-6593 From: Heller, Christa H (DFW) [mailto:Christa.Heller@dfw.wa.gov] Sent: Monday, November 10, 2014 8:46 AM To: Kris Sorensen Cc: Fisher, Larry D (DFW) Subject: RE: City of Renton; freestanding boatlift & HPA requirement; FW: FYI on HPA Approval Hi Kris, Under the current Hydraulic Code rules, WDFW does not require an HPA for a freestanding boat lift installation (per the attached guidance document), provided it meets the following criteria: Portable boat hoists may be installed or removed without HPA, provided they are: • Installed or removed entirely by hand in lakes without the use of equipment stationed on the bank below ordinary high water line, or mounted to a barge; • Not installed at the mouth of any watercourse; • Not associated with dredging, filling, pile driving, or other modifications of the bed conducted as part of the project; • Not modified during or after installation by the addition of docks, ramps, fl.oats, or other structures that add surface area to the hoist or allow for moorage of additional watercraft. • The addition of a canopy no larger than the dimensions of the hoist is allowed. • Installed in, or removed from the following sockeye-bearing lakes only during the time periods authorized by the Area Habitat Biologist: Baker, Osoyoos, Ozette, Pleasant, Quinault, Sammamish, Washington, Wenatchee WDFW recommends that the installation and removal of boat lifts in Lake Washington and Lake Sammamish only occur between July 16 and September 30 (to avoid disturbing spawning sockeye). If you have questions about whether a specific project meets the above criteria, feel free to e-mail me a plan set for review. Please note that this rule may change with the adoption of the revised Hydraulic Code in early 2015. Best, 2 Christa Heller Habitat Biologist Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 4 -Issaquah Field Office a (425) 313-5681 (office) :sJ christa.heller@dfw.wa.gov 3 Denis Law Mayor October 30, 2014 Troy Hussing Ecco Design Inc 203 N 36th Street, #201 Seattle, WA 98103 SUBJECT: "Off Hold" Notice Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Urban Boat Lift/ LUAB-001640 Dear Mr. Hussing: The Planning Division of the City of Renton is taking the Urban Boat Lift application off-hold. The project will be reviewed for the requested Substantial Shoreline Development Permit and Environmental (SEPA) review. The Planning Division accepted the above master application for review on October 8, 2013. During the review, staff received comments from a Barbee mill resident, the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR), the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). As requested by the city in response to the comments, you provided additional information and responses with your letter dated March 4, 2014. Your response was then forwarded to commenters, reviewing agencies and parties of record of the application. Following distribution of your response, the city received additional comments from DNR, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division, and the attorney representing Barbee Mill Community Organization. You requested additional time beyond August 22, 2014 for further coordination of the project. An extension of the on-hold was provided until November 21, 2014. A meeting in the field at the project site was coordinated with agencies July 29, 2014 to discuss project concerns and comments. Further coordination with the commenting agencies has been attempted through a meeting to discuss the application and not come to fruition. At this time, your project is now "off hold." Please contact me at (425) 430-6593 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~t 6-,-. ....... .... Kris Sorensen Associate Planner cc: Morris Management, Inc. c/o Shirley Ely/ Owner Michael & Dorothy Urban/ Applicant Ruth Kidd; Torben & Ginnie Hollinsworthi Allison Peryea; Patti Klink; Vivian Roach, DNR1 Karen Walter; MuckleshootTribe; Lynda Priddy, EPA / Party(ies) of Record Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov PLANNING DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and -programs), the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. · -1 -06/09 \\Server\job files\Shoreline\2013\$1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Formslenvironmental checklist.doc A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Urban Boat Lift 2. Name of applicant: Michael and Dorothy Urban 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: Michael and Dorothy Urban 4157 Williams Ave. N Renton, WA 98056 702-277-1063 Contact Person: Evan Wehr -ecco design inc. 203 N 361h Street Suite 201 Seattle, WA 98103 206-706-3937 4. Date checklist prepared: August 13, 2013 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Winter 2013 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. A Biological Evaluation was prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments to assess impacts to listed species and/or critical habitat for the community pier that was constructed at the site in late 2012. Marine Surveys and Assessments has done an addendum to their original BE that addresses the impacts of the proposed lift. 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. None are known. 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. RGP 1 approval from the Army Corps of Engineers. SOP, SEPA review, and building permit from the City of Renton. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. Install a new ground based boat lift. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should 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. 4151 & 4157 Williams Ave. Nin Renton, WA 98056. Section: NWl/4 32 Town: 24N Range: SE B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS -2 -06109 \\Server\job fi!es\Shoreline\2013\S1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist.doc 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one); flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other ______ _ b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?) The site is relatively flat with the steepest slope along the shoreline being approximately 3%. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The area where the lift is to be installed is mainly angular rocks. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. No filling or grading are proposed. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? There will be no change to the amount of impervious surfaces. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: None proposed. Z. 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. No emissions are to occur. b. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None. 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 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. The work will occur in Lake Washington. -3 -06/09 \\Server\job files\Shoreline\2013\$1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist.doc 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. The boat lift will be installed in Lake Washington. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? 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 Water: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 2} Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals ... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 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. N/A 2} Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: None. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: _X_ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other _X_ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other _x_ shrubs _x_ grass __ pasture __ crop or grain __ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other __ water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other __ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? None. -4- \\Server\job files\Shoreline\2013\S1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist.doc 06109 c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None know. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: None. 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. Chinook salmon, bull trout, and steelhead. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain Juvenile salmon ids migrate along the lake shoreline. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Work will take place during the appropriate work window of July 16'h through December 31". 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. Solar. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. 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: None. 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)? None known. -5 -06109 \\Server\job files\Shoreline\2013\S 1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Formslenv1ronmental checklist.doc 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or 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. Low levels of noise during installation of the lift. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site and adjacent properties are residential. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. An existing house and community pier. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? R-10 f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? COR g. _ If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Urban h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: None. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. 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: None. 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. A couple feet above the ordinary high water mark. -6-06/09 \\Server\job fi!es\Shoreline\2013\S1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist.doc b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None. 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: None. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Boating and fishing. 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: None. 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 known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None. 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. The site is accessed by Lake Washington Blvd. N just west of 1-405. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? 8/lOths of a mile. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? None. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private? No. . 7. 06109 \\Server\job files\Shorelinel2013IS1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist.doc e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of} water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Boat traffic on Lake Washington. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. None. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None. 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. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. 16. UTILITIES a. b. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. None. C. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true, correct, 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 Signature: ~b 4µ_ Name Printed: CVt:iYI l,y'e,hy- Date: -8 -06/09 \\Server\job files\Shorelme\2013\S131 O Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist.doc Denis Law Mayor October 30, 2014 Troy Hussing Ecco Design Inc 203 N 36'hStreet, #201 Seattle, WA 98103 SUBJECT: "Off Hold" Notice Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Urban Boat Lift/ LUAB-001640 Dear Mr. Hussing: The Planning Division of the City of Renton is taking the Urban Boat Lift application off-hold. The project will be reviewed for the requested Substantial Shoreline Development Permit and Environmental (SEPA) review. The Planning Division accepted the above master application for review on October 8, 2013. During the review, staff received comments from a Barbee mill resident, the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR), the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). As requested by the city in response to the comments, you provided additional information and responses with your letter dated March 4, 2014. Your response was then forwarded to commenters, reviewing agencies and parties of record of the application. Following distribution of your response, the city received additional comments from DNR, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division, and the attorney representing Barbee Mill Community Organization. You requested additional time beyond August 22, 2014 for further coordination of the project. An extension of the on-hold was provided until November 21, 2014. A meeting in the field at the project site was coordinated with agencies July 29, 2014 to discuss project concerns and comments. Further coordination with the commenting agencies has been attempted through a meeting to discuss the application and not come to fruition. At this time, your project is now "off hold." Please contact me at (425) 430-6593 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~t b'" .. ,,, • ·~ Kris Sorensen Associate Planner cc: Morris Management, Inc. c/o Shirley Ely/ Owner Michael & Dorothy Urban/ Applicant Ruth Kidd; Torben & Ginnie Hollinsworth; Allison Peryea; Patti Klink; Vivian Roach, DNR, Karen Walter, MuckleshootTribe; Lynda Priddy, EPA / Party(ies) of Record Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Ruth Kidd 1117 N 4ist Pl Renton, WA 98056 Allison Pervea Leahy McLean Fjelstad 25 Central Way, Suite 310 Renton, WA 98033 Patti Klink 1126 N 42nd Pl Renton, WA 98056 Evan Wehr Ecco Design Inc. 203 N 36th St, #201 Seattle, WA 98103 Michael & Dorothy Urban 4157 Williams Ave N Renton, WA 98056-2171 BARBEE MILL WATERFRONT LLC 846 108th AVE NE BELLEVUE, WA 98004 Kris Sorensen From: Sent: To: Subject: troy hussing <troy@eccodesigninc.com> Thursday, August 14, 2014 10:00 AM Kris Sorensen; Michael Urban; Dorothy Urban On Hold Extension folr LUA13-:001~~~ , , •., ,_ ' Good morning Kris, Our file is officially "On Hold" and it was requested that information be submitted before August 22, 2014. As you are aware, we have been proceeding with the various agencies and progress is being made but we will not have all material officially submitted by the deadline. We request that the application be extended as we work through the next steps with the agencies. Please let me know if you need any additional items in order to extend. Thank you, Troy troy hussing ecco design inc architects 203 N 36th St., Seattle, WA 206.706.3937 eccodesigninc.com find us on facebook & Houzz 1 . ' r f !! , /V',(,. ,.,'-'/ I / I / ' i i Denis Law Mayor August 22, 2014 Troy Hussi.n.g - Ecco Design Int - 203 N 36'h Street, #201 Seattle, WA 98103 . •_SUBJECT: ·"on Hold" Notice .-Community& Economic Development Department · · C.E,"Chip"Vincent,Administrator Urban BoatU1't/ LUA13-001640 Dear Mr, Hussing: . . . . . .. . . .. . ,, -. . The Planning. Division of the City of Renton accepted the ab~v~ master application for · review on October 8; 2013. During the r~view, staff receii~ed comments from ·a Barbee _ mill resident,· the Washington. State Department of Natural Resou~ces (DNR), the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe· ~isheriesDivision, .-and the. United States Environmental · Protection Agency (EPA). As requested by th.e city in response. to the comments, you provided the additional information and responses with your letter. dated March 4, 2014 .. Your r~sponse was then forwarded to comm enters, reviewing agencies and parties of . record of the applkation. Following distribution of your response, the city received addition.a.I comments from [)NR, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division, and the _ attorney representing · Barbee Mill ·Community. ·organization.·· You have requested additional time beyond August 22, 2014 for further coordination of the project in ,answering the above agencies questions and providing add.itional details .. . . . . The infor~ation wili need to be submitted before November 21, 2014. · - At this time, your project continues to be ,;on hold." Please contact me at (425) 430-. · 6593 if you have any questions. Sincerely, -·~;.. ......... , .. _. · Kris Sorensen .• . Associate Planner cc: Morris Manage~ent,:i~C. c/0 ShirlE!y_ Ely/ Own~r Michael & Dorothy Urban/ Applicant · .-. . · -. Ruth ·Kidd; Torben. &. Ginnie HOiiinsworth;_-Allison· Peryecl; ·Patti Kl}rlk; Vivian ROcich, ·oNR, _karen Walter, MuckleshootTribe; Lynda Priddy, EPA ./ Party(ies) of Record . , . . '·, . . Henton City Hair• 1055 South G;,,dyWay • Renton'.Washington ~8~57 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor May 30, 2014 Evan Wehr Ecco Design Inc 203 N 36'h Street, #201 Seattle, WA 98103 SUBJECT: "On Hold" Notice JI .'.@ft]mru Community & Economic Development Department C.E. 'Chi p"Vincent, Administrator Urban Boat Lift/ LUAB-001640 Dear Mr. Wehr: The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for review on October 8, 2013. During the review, staff received comments from· a Barbee mill resident, the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR), the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). As requested by the city in response to the comments, you provided the additional information and responses with_ your letter dated March 4, 2014. Your response was then forwarded to commenters, reviewing agencies and parties of record of the application. Following distribution of your response, the city received additional comments from DNR, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division, and the attorney representing Barbee Mill Community Organization. On May 2, 2014, city staff met with your client and a representative of your firm to discuss the application and outline concerns to be addressed to move the project forward. The information will need to be submitted before August 22, 2014. At this time, your project continues to be "on hold." Please contact me at (425) 430- 6593 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~t ~"al M., ro;,... Kris Sorensen Associate Planner cc: Morris Management, Inc. c/o Shirley E!y /.Owner Michael & Dorothy Urban/ Applicant Ruth Kidd; Torben & Ginnie Hollins,worth; Allison Peryea; Patti Klink; Vivian Roach, DNR, Karen Walter, Muckleshoot Tribe; Lynda Priddy, EPA / Party(ies) of Record Renton City Hall-• 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Kris Sorensen From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Dear Ms. Sorenson, ROACH, VIVIAN (DNR) <VIVIAN.ROACH@dnr.wa.gov> Monday, March 31, 2014 4:07 PM Kris Sorensen DNR Comment_Review of Applicant Responses_Urban Boat Lift/ LUAB-001640 UrbanBoatLift_DNRComment03312014.pdf Attached please find Washington State Department of Natural Resources {DNR) comments regarding the applicant's response to outstanding questions. Best regards, VIVIAN ROACH Aquatic Land Manager Shoreline District -Aquatic Resources Division Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Cell 253.341.7564 I Fax 360.825.1672 vivian. roach@d n r. wa .gov www.dnr.wa.gov 1 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF Natural Resources Peter Goldmark -Commis~ioner of Public Lands Caring for your natural resources ... now and forever March 31, 2014 Kris Sorenson, Associate Planner City of Renton, CED -Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Subject: Washington State Department of Natural Resources Comment Review of Applicant Responses -Urban Boat Lift/ LUA13-001640 Dear Ms. Sorenson: Washington State Department of Natural Resources ("DNR") has reviewed the packet provided by the City of Renton regarding the applicant's response to outstanding questions for the Urban Boat Lift Project/LUA13-001640. DNR submits the following comments for the City's record. In December 2013, DNR commented on the City's Revised Notice of Application and Proposed Determination ofNon-Significance. In comment, DNR stated the proposed use was not consistent with the permitted use of adjacent state-owned aquatic lands for the purpose of a community dock with transient moorage and one finger pier for private moorage, as defined in Barbee Mill Community Organization's (BMCO) Aquatic Lands Lease No. 22-086046 (the "Lease"). In response, the applicant has proposed a location 3 feet landward. Relying on precise placement, the applicant states the revised location will position the lift 4 feet from state- owned a4uatic land:, ·w'ith the stern of the applicant~s current ~.vater:::raft {,vhen stored on the proposed lift) approximately 2-3 feet from state-owned aquatic lands. DNR remains opposed to the proposed placement of the boat lift given lifting and lowering, along with ingress and egress will encumber state-owned aquatic lands. Additionally, DNR's review of"Easement for Boat Lift" (noted on the Urban Boat Lift project drawing) indicates a permanent easement has been conveyed by Barbee Mill Community Organization to a portion of state-owned aquatic lands which are not owned by the Grantor. Ownership of state-owned aquatic lands commences at the "Inner Harbor Line" which is clearly depicted on the drawing associated with the easement. Note the Easement is recorded under Instrument No. 20121211001516, not 20121112145613258 as indicated on the Urban Boat Lift project drawing. SOUTH PUGET SOUND REGION I 950 FARMAN AVE N I ENUMCLAW, WA 980n9282 TEL: (360) 825-1631 I FAX, (360) 825-1672 I ITY: (360) 902-1125 I TRS 711 I WWW.DNR.WA.GOV EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 11LlYULll P,WlK e Kris Sorenson, Associate Planner City of Renton, CED-Planning Division March 31, 2014 Page2 of3 In December 2013, DNR also presented concerns of potential environmental impacts to the adjacent state-owned aquatic lands of the Barbee Mill Beach restoration and withdrawal area and the existing BMCO's leasehold to include: • Increased shading impacts to aquatic vegetation • Increased vessel wake impacting natural shoreline processes due to larger and more frequent wave action • Scour and sediment erosion through prop scour • Crushing of benthic habitat • Heightened potential for release of contaminants into the water column In response, the applicant states the proposed boat lift is "expected to have little additional impact on the aquatic habitat as this area is already heavily developed and disturbed". The applicant presents: • Limited available light at the proposed site • Necessity for low speeds and existing bulkhead make shoreline erosion unlikely • Low speeds in shallow water will minimize scour and erosion • Small boat lift footpads yield a small impact area to benthic habitat • Levels of contaminants introduced into the water column will not be at dangerous concentration levels In 2005, DNR authorized the restoration of state-owned aquatic lands known as the Barbee Mill Beach, north and adjacent to the proposed site of the Urban boat lift. The restoration provides components that create functional salmon habitat conditions, such as a reduction of over water structures, naturally sloped shoreline, native vegetation, large woody debris and appropriate sized substrates. In 2006, in accordance with RCW 79.105.210, the Commissioner of Public Lands issued a Withdrawal Order for Barbee Mill Beach. Protecting this area by withdrawing it from leasing enhances the value of the area as wildlife habitat, representative ecosystem or spawning area in accordance with RCW 79.105.210(3). Prior to authorization in 2012, DNR worked extensively with Conner Homes and City, State and Federal regulatory agencies regarding the configuration and placement of the newly constructed community dock and terms of the Lease in order to avoid and minimize impacts to the adjacent restored nearshore environment, shorelands and bedlands. Kris Sorenson, Associate Planner City of Renton, CED -Planning Division March 31, 2014 Page 3 of3 Under management guidelines set forth in RCW 79.105.030, state-owned aquatic lands are managed by DNR for the benefit of the citizens of Washington State to preserve their environmental integrity that is linked to our quality oflife. As steward of Washington's state-owned aquatic lands, DNR regularly researches and identifies practices that better protect the aquatic environment. The applicant's position that the site is already developed and disturbed does not adequately address DNR's concerns regarding potential impacts to the aquatic environment on state-owned aquatic lands. As proposed, DNR does not support the Urban Boat Lift Project and the potential environmental impacts posed to the adjacent state-owned aquatic lands of the Barbee Mill Beach restoration and withdrawal area and the existing BMCO's leasehold. Additionally, placement of the proposed lift is not consistent with the permitted use of state-owned aquatics lands under Barbee Mill Community Organization's DNR Lease No. 22-086046. If you have comments regarding this correspondence, please feel free to contact me by email at vivian.roach@dnr.wa.gov. ~ce~ly, ! N\J I ·" /.~ Vivian Roach, Aquatic Land Manager Shoreline District, Aquatics Resources Division c: District File Aquatic Resources File fc/UrbanBoatliftRentonDN R302520 14 Kris Sorensen From: Karen Walter <KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us> Monday, March 31, 2014 3:11 PM Sent: To: Kris Sorensen Cc: Jennifer T. Henning Subject: Urban boat lift, LUAB-001640, follow-up comments Attachments: Lally scour mitigation memo for Barbee Mill Community pier Nov 2 2011.pdf Kris, Thank you for sending us the applicants' responses to our December 27, 2013 comments to the proposed Urban Boat Lift project at the Barbee Mill Community Dock site, 4125 and 4151 Williams Avenue N on Lake Washington. We have reviewed these responses and offer follow-up comments: 1. Generally, the responses do not adequately address the concerns we have raised (and continue to raise in the case of mitigation plantings). We provided comments consistently throughout the Barbee Mill Community dock project regarding the potential for permanent and increased moorage at this dock site, including a February 22 2010 email in response to the Notice of Application for that project to the City of Renton which we can provide again if needed. Specifically we said: "the project should be conditioned to allow only one boa/lift or jetski per owner for the private finger dock. If only one owner is using the private dock (page 6 of the checklist), then only one watercraft should be allowed". The MDNS from the City (dated 3131/2010) states that "the community dock would provide transient moorage only" and "the finger dock would be for the sole use of a proposed future residence located at 4125 Williams Avenue N''. We never received a direct response from the City to this comment and request. However, one of the applicant's consultant, Waterfront Construction, sent a response to us and City staff in an email dated 3/10/2010: RESPONSE: Under the RGP-1, the Army Corps allows up to 3 lifts for a residential pier on Lake Washington and Lake Sammamish. Currently, there is no type of lift planned for the private portion of the dock. If the future owner does decide to install any boat or jet ski lifts they would align with those typical of any other small residential piers on Lake Washington. There is nothing in the City issued MDNS for the Barbee Mill Community Dock II to suggest there would be any additional moorage at this location beyond what was described in the SEPA and Permit documents. For example, as noted in the Corps' and Ecology's Joint Public Notice for the Barbee Mill Community Pier project (NWS,2010-140), the purpose of this pier was "to provide water access for100 property owners in the Barbee Mill community and private moorage for one property owner'. There is nothing in our files for the Barbee Mill Community Dock to indicate there would ever be any additional moorage on or near this structure for anyone beyond the one owner at 4125 Williams Avenue N. With the responses for this proposed boatlift, we now find out from the applicants' consultants that there is an easement that was provided by Conner Homes (the plat developer) to allow for this boatlift which was shared with at least the Barbee Mill Community Organization since the City issued its NOA. This is brand new information for us and we would like to know when this easement was conveyed and why this information was not communicated during the permitting of the Community pier. We would also like to know of any other pending easements, agreements or potential pier modifications to accommodate additional and/or permanent moorage at this community pier with responses directly from Conner Homes and the City. Our concern remains that this project represents part of a larger effort to create permanent and increased moorage beyond transient moorage at this location that will occur over time and in a piecemeal fashion without adequate consideration of site-specific and cumulative impacts to salmon and their habitat. 2. The proposed free standing boatlift is located on the north side of the existing Barbee Mill Community Dock and just south of the WDNR withdrawn area that contains contaminated sediments from the former mill site at the Superfund site on the WDNR aquatic lands. As we noted in our previous comments, there is no consideration in either the checklist or the Lake and Stream study sent with the Revised NOA consider the potential impacts from the new boatlift and the operation of a motorized watercraft on the north side of the joint pier. A motorized watercraft in this location will likely create scour and erosion from propeller wash that could cause a release of nearby contaminants into the water column adversely affecting fish and benthic vertebrates. Scour impacts were 1 analyzed with the Barbee Mi mmunity Pier project. Specifically, Lally suiting identified an area and lakebed sediment size and other actions to provide scour mitigation measu,es (see attached November 2, 2011 memo). As far as we know, these mitigation measures were required to obtain the Corps permit for the Community Dock. The boatlift on the north side of the pier (and any other future boatlifts, watercraft lifts, plane lifts, etc) has the potential to cause additional scour impacts to the WDNR withdrawal and capped area to the north were not considered sufficiently in the responses. This is an outstanding issue as water depths are less than 10 feet in the boatlift location and beyond (see sheet M-1 in Lally memo) and the proposed boatlift is immediately adjacent to known contaminated sediments. The responses regarding the new freestanding boatlift and a boat in the nearshore where juvenile salmon are likely to be found that can cause them to avoid the nearshore and increase their risk of predation are inadequate and inconsistent with Lake Washington specific research completed by Roger Tabor (USFWS) and others. Some of this research is available at http://www.govlink.org/watersheds/8/pdf/LWGI SalmonSyn123108.pdf/ . Please note that the majority of the scientific papers reference regarding piers and impacts to juvenile salmon cited in the responses were for areas in marine waters, not Lake Washington, where there has been extensive research with tagging and tracking of juvenile salmon, predators, shoreline conditions, and piers/docks. 3. We maintain our concern that previous shoreline planting mitigation for both the plat and that which was to mitigate for the Barbee Mill Community Pier has not be fully implemented. In our previous comments, we requested copies of all of the existing monitoring reports to be completed as part of the shoreline restoration work required for the entire Barbee Mill Plat, including the community dock. We would also like copies of the "as-built" drawings for these planting plans as known have been provided to date. A photo of the site is not sufficient to address these concerns. 4. The proposal to plant two Pacific Willows on the southwest corner' of the Urban property as mitigation for this project may not be sufficient. Part of the adequacy analysis depends on the details from the previous planting plans and work requested in item 3 above. There also needs to be a mitigation plan for the two willows, including contingency if they do not survive and how they will be protected in perpetuity to serve as mitigation for the boatlift, assuming it is permitted. Finally, whatever monitoring reports are generated for this project need to also be sent to us as a permit condition. We would appreciate if Renton could respond to these concerns as several of them have been made over the years for other piers and docks in this area and have not been sufficiently addressed to date. If you would like to meet to discuss before sending responses, please let me know. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckle shoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 2 lq[/Y@ MEMORANDUM 2811 Fairview Ave., Easl, Sui(e 1004 Seattle, Washington 98102 Mobile: +1 206 369 2478 Office: +1206325 0274 Fax: -i-1 206 325 0252 john.lally@lallyconsutting.com To: Todd Sherman, Charlie Conner, Conner Homes at Barbee Mill Inc. Ted Burns, Seaborn Piledriving From: John Lally, Lally Consulting LLC Date: November 2, 2011 Subject: Responses to Outstanding Agency Questions Per the request of the Conner Homes at Barbee Mills LLC (Conner Homes), Lally Consulting (Lally) has developed responses to outstanding agency questions on USACE permit application no. NWS-2010-140, submitted October 20, 2011. The issues related to scour mitigation measures originally presented in the report Conner Homes at Barbee Mill, Renton, Washington, Community Dock Scour Analyses, (Lally, 2011), and further developed in a memorandum to the USEPA, Region 10 dated October 5, 2011, are addressed here. Questions related to the dock location and dimensions, planting plan, joint use agreement and other agreements are not included in this response. Placement of Scour Mitigation Cap/Habitat Mix Additional research and evaluation was performed to refine the proposed scour mitigation cap / habitat mix based on agency questions and concerns. To clarify, with the proposed signs and buoys installed at the Community dock, the worst-case design vessel size is reduced from a 59-ft. Grand Banks type trawler to a 30-ft cruiser type vessel. The Oct. 5 memo re- evaluated the scour potential for this smaller worst-case design vessel. Results of the particle stability analyses, using two different methods {Shield's and Maynard), for both the typical and worst-case vessel scenarios, are provided in the table below. Table 1 Stable Particle Sizes@ Estimated Maximum Velocities -Typical and Worst-Case Vessel Scenarios Shields Method (Vanoni, 1975) USEPA Method (Maynard, 1998) Maximum Stable Stable Stable Engine Velocity Particle Particle Sediment Particle Stable Sediment Vessel Scenario Particle RPM Near~bed Size Size Type Size Type {It/sec.) . (Dso, (Dso, {USCS) (Dso, Size {USCS) mm) in.) mm) {Dso, in.) Typicar Case 800 1.9 4.5 0.18 course 21 0.8 course Vessel (ZO ft.} sand gravel Worst Case 1000 3.3 14 0.6 fine 63 2.5 course Vessel (30 ft.) gravel gravel Based on these scour analyses 1 it is estimated that to prevent movement under the maximum propeller wash velocities, the lakebed sediment grain size would need to be course sand -course gravel (0.2 in. -0.8 in.) in the case of typical vessel operations, and fine gravel -course gravel (0.6 in. -2.5 in.) course for the worst case vessel (30-ft, 1000 rpm) scenario. The 4-in minus rounded gravel described in the Oct. 5, 2011 memo was suggested as a conservative gradation and one that may be suitable as salmonid habitat substrate based on prior project experience on Lake Washington. As estimated using the new worst-case vessel (30 ft.) and related sediment stability calculations, a 2-1/2 inch minus rounded gravel will be adequate to prevent scour at the community dock site. A standard gradation for this material is as follows; Table 2 Proposed Community Dock Scour Mitigation Cap/ Habitat Mix Sieve Size Percent Passing (by Weight) 2-1/2inch 95 -100 2 inch 70-100 1-1/2 inch 40-90 1 inch 3-30 3/4inch 0-15 #200 Sieve (fines) 0-3 The shallow water restoration site, and DNR Withdrawal Area details, were provided as new information to Lally, in order to respond to agency questions posed in the Oct. 20, 2011 Jetter. Two (2) two construction drawings were provided by Conner Homes to identify the aerial extent and cross sections of the shallow water restoration materials, placed in or about 2006. To better integrate with these existing materials and contours, the proposed community dock scour mitigation cap was modified slightly to dovetail with the south end of the existing shallow water habitat, as shown on Figure M-1. The proposed community dock scour mitigation cap coverage area is approximately 11,075 sq. ft. A surface layer of the gravel cover mix, with a minimum thickness of 1 ft. (12-in.) is recommended to account for the existence of potentially contaminated sediments, inaccuracy of the cap placement prncess 1 and scouring/grounding du~ to potential vessel impacts. The resulting placement volume would be approximately 440 cubic yards (cy). In depths greater than 10 ft. at and in the vicinity of the community dock, some movement of bed surface sediments is predicted to occur as a result of low (i.e. 0.4 ft/sec), propwash velocties. However, based on the analyses I would classify the materials in this area to be 'dynamically stable' under the influence of the lower propwash velocities, and not susceptible to being transported more than a few feet at any one time. 2 Kris Sorensen From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Dear Kris: Allison Peryea <allison.peryea@leahyps.com> Wednesday, April 02, 2014 6:25 PM Kris Sorensen Lisa Marie McElrea RE: Urban Boat Lift Project (4157 & 4151 Williams Avenue N) Land Use# 13-001640, ECF, SM As you may recall, my law firm represents the Barbee Mill Community Organization. On behalf of the Organization, I wanted to file an objection to the modified plan, which the Organization did not approve. The new plan calls for the planting of two pacific willows. This was not in the original plan. The reason the Organization has concerns about this plan modification is that the willows may result in blocked views, erosion, or damage to the bulkhead, since they are intended to be planted very close to the shoreline. Further, the owner has not applied to the Organization for approval of the willows, as required under the Organization covenants, including the Declaration. Owners, by virtue of their ownership of a lot, are automatically subject to the covenants. Section 5.1 of the Declaration states that no "substantial landscaping ... or other improvement" shall be added without ACC (Architectural Control Committee) request. Section S.9(b) also states that lot owners may "personalize their in- ground landscaping, subject to prior review and written approval of the ACC." The ACC must consider "the impact of the proposed changes on the overall aesthetic appearance of the community, view blockage issues, compatibility with other landscaping on the lot and nearby lots and Common Areas." The Committee may impose limitations on such landscaping, including but not limited to restrictions related to "size, mature height and width, and shadow creation." The Organization's ACC has not had an opportunity to evaluate the potential impact of the addition of the two willows, since the owner has not provided information about them to the Organization. It may be that the willows would be ultimately be approved, but their proximity to the shoreline and the potential height of the trees could create a number of problems that the Organization has not had an opportunity to investigate. I sent this objection by email to save time. I can write a formal letter if needed. I do understand that those who objected needed to provide input by Monday, March 31, but we just received the new proposal on Thursday, the 27th. It took a few days for the Organization's Board to review it and come to a decision about whether to object. Please feel free to contact me if you need more information. Sincerely, Allison N. Peryea I Attorney Leahy McLean Fjelstad 25 Central Way Ste. 310 Kirkland, WA 98033-6157 t. 425.889.8191 x121 f. 425-889-4794 allison.peryea@leahyps.com www.leahyps.com 1 CONFIDENTIALITY. Information in this private email message may be privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. In case of erroneous delivery, please notify the sender at a!lison.peryea@leahyps.com. Thank you in advance for your courtesy and cooperation. From: Kris Sorensen [mailto:KSorensen@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 8:35 AM To: Allison Peryea Cc: Lisa Marie McElrea Subject: RE: Urban Boat Lift Project ( 4157 & 4151 Williams Avenue N) Land Use # 13-001640, ECF, SM Thank you Allison for the request. We will send the information to you. Jerry Wasser no longer works at the city so thank you for contacting me. Kris Sorensen, Associate Planner, Planning Division, Community & Economic Development, City of Renton, 425-430-6593 From: Allison Peryea [mailto:allison.peryea@leahyps.com] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 10:13 AM To: Gerald Wasser; Kris Sorensen Subject: Urban Boat Lift Project ( 4157 & 4151 Williams Avenue N) Land Use # 13-001640, ECF, SM Dear Ms. Wasser and Mr. Sorensen: My law firm represents the Barbee Mill Community Organization. We sent a letter asking for notice of materials submitted in the matter listed in the subject line in mid-December. See attached. We did not, however, receive the attached materials, which I believe were sent to Organization manager Shirley Ely. I just want to ensure that our firm is obtaining the notices we requested so the Organization does not miss anything. Also, I noted that the attached notices mention a "line-item" response from the designer of the boat lift. Could we get a copy of those responses? I do not anticipate that we will provide further input, but I do think the Organization would like to see the responses to these environmental and other concerns. Sincerely, Allison N. Peryea I Attorney 13] Leahy McLean Fjelstad 25 Central Way Ste. 310 Kirkland, WA 98033-6157 t. 425.889.8191 x121 f. 425-889-4794 2 Denis Law -· C"t f - _.:Ma:yor -------~-1 tt) (~')•1_.ry~l<ID'•~i ·c· : r·r-: ·1 : \_ ··.t":" : \.·' i ~._~, -.· -··· ., ,J ,1-; ) Department of Community and Economic Development March 14, 2014 Evan Wehr Ecco Design Inc 203 N 36th Street, #201 Seattle, WA 98103 CE "Chip"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: Review of Applicant Responses to Outstanding Questions Urban Boat Lift/ LUA13-001640 Dear Mr. Wehr: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has received your line item responses to outstanding questions from Patti Klink, Department of Natural Resources, the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division, and the Environmental Protection Agency which were raised in response to your comment letter. We are requesting review of your responses from the contacts above to determine if it satisfies concerns raised in your comment letter. I have asked that comments be provided to me by Monday, March 31, 2014. I am asking that the people reviewing the responses provide any comments to me directly, but in case you receive any comments, please provide to me for the official record. At this time, your project is still "on hold" pending the above review period. Please contact me at (425) 430-6593 or email ksorensen@rentonwa.gov if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~t ~ a4. .. w6 a tr.,.. Kris Sorensen Associate Planner cc: Morris Management, Inc. c/o Shirley Ely/ Owner Michael & Dorothy Urban/ Applicant Patti Klink Vivian Roach, DNR Lynda Priddy, EPA Karen Walter, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 , rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor March 14, 2014 Karen Walter Department of Community and Economic Development · C.E."Chip"Vincent,Administrator Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 ·SUBJECT: Review of Applicant Responses to Outstanding Questions Urban Boat Lift/ LUA13-001640 Dear Ms. Walter: The Planning Division of the City of Renton received line item responses from the applicant to outstanding questions from Patti Klink, Department of Natural Resources, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division, and the Environmental Protection Agency. These line item responses are enclosed. We are requesting a review by the above mentioned agencies and individuals with comments requested from the above mentioned agencies and individuals by Monday, March 31, 2014. Thank you for providing any comment or response addressed to me by March 31, 2014. At this time, the project is still "on hold" pending the above review period. Gerald Wasser is no longer the city staff contact. Please contact me at (425) 430-6593 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~t ~ .• 4-. .. S'w Kris Sorensen Associate Planner cc: Mor,ris Management, Inc. c/o Shirley Ely/ Owner Michael & Dorothy Urban/ Applicant Evan Wehr, Contact Enclosures Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov March 14, 2014 Department of Community and Economic Development C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Lynda Priddy, Environmental Scientist US Environmental Protection Agency 1200 61h Ave, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98101 SUBJECT: Review of Applicant Responses to Outstanding Questions Urban Boat Lift / LUA13-001640 Dear Ms. Priddy: The Planning Division of the City of Renton received line item responses from the applicant to outstanding questions from Patti Klink, Department of Natural Resources, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division, and the Environmental Protection Agency. These line item responses are enclosed. We are requesting a review by the above mentioned agencies and individuals with comments requested from the above mentioned agencies and individuals by Monday, March 31, 2014. Thank you for providing any comment or response addressed to me by March 31, 2014. At this time, the project is still "on hold" pending the above revie_w period. Gerald Wasser is no longer the city staff contact. Please contact me at (425) 430-6593 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~t~ .... ., ,,.. Kris Sorensen Associate Planner cc: Morris Management, Inc. c/o Shirley Ely/ Owner Michael & Dorothy Urban/ Applicant Evan Wehr, Contact Enclosures Renton City Hall , 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 , rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor March 14, 2014 Patti Klink 1126 N 42°d Pl Renton, WA 98056 Department of Community and Economic Development C.E. "Chi p"Vi ncent, Administrator SUBJECT: Review of Applicant Responses to Outstanding Questions Urban Boat Lift/ LUAB-001640 Dear Ms. Klink: The Planning Division of the City of Renton received line item responses from the applicant to outstanding questions from Patti Klink, Department of Natural Resources, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division, and the Environmental Protection Agency. These line item responses are enclosed. We are requesting a review by the above mentioned agencies and individuals with comments_ requested from the above _mentioned agencies and individuals by Monday, March 31, 2014. Thank you for providing any comment or response addressed to me by March 31, 2014. At this time, the project is still "on hold" pending the above review period. Gerald Wasser is no longer the city staff contact. Please contact me at (425.) 430-6593 if you have any questions. Sincerely, /!:-s ~,. •v Kris Sorensen Associate Planner cc:· Morris Management, Inc. c/o Shirley Ely/ Owner Michael & Dorothy Urban/ Applicant Evan Wehr, Contac~ Enclosures Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor March 14, 2014 Department of Community and Economic Development C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Vivian Roach, Aquatic Land Manager Shoreline District, Aquatics Resources Division Washington State Dept. of Natural Resources, South Puget Sound Region 950 Farman Ave N Enumclaw, WA 98022-9282 SUBJECT: Review of Applicant Responses to Outstanding Questions Urban Boat Lift/ LUAB-001640 Dear Ms. Roach: The Planning Division of the City of Renton received line item responses from the applicant to outstanding questions from Patti Klink, Department of Natural Resources, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division, and the Environmental Protection Agency. These line item responses are enclosed. We are requesting a review by the above mentioned agencies and individuals with comments requested from the above mentioned agencies and individuals by Monday, March 31, 2014. Thank you for providing any comment or response addressed to me by March 31, 2014. At this time, the project is still "on hold" pending the above review period. Gerald Wasser is no longer the city staff contact. Please contact me at (425) 430-6593 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Kris Sorensen Associate Planner cc: · Morris Management, Inc. c/o Sh_irley Ely/ Owner Michael & Dorothy Urban/ Applicant Evan Wehr, Contact Enclosures Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton,Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov ., . , .. ·! • MARINE SURVEYS & ASSESSMENTS 521 SNAGSTCAD WAY PORT TOWNSEND WA 98368 Tcl.360.385-4073 E m a i I . m a r i n c . s u r v c y s . i n c (t!,' g m a i I , c o m Gerald Wasser City of Renton Associate Planner Subject: Washington Department of Natural Resources and Muckleshoot Tribe Comments Case LUAl3-001640 Michael Urban Boat Lift Project Conner Homes, Barbee Mill Community 4151 Williams Avenue N., Renton, WA 98056 Dear Mr. Wasser, The Michael Urban Boat Lili Project was initially submitted as an addendum to the Biological Evaluation for the Barbee Mill Community Dock Project (Case#: LUAI0-006). The proposed action was to add a boat lift to the already completed dock at the project location. On December 17, 2013. the City of Renton received comment on the proposed Michael Urban Boat Lili project from the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the Muckleshoot Tribe (see Attachment 1 for correspondence). ln brief, DNR was most concerned about the potential impacts of this additional boat lili due to: increased shading impacts on aquatic vegetation, increased vessel wake impacts on natural shoreline processes, scour and sediment erosion through vessel propeller scour, crushing of benthic habitat, and a greater risk of release of contaminants into the water column. The Muckleshoot Tribe shared many of these concerns, as well as some additional concerns related to mitigation and shoreline development. Each of these impacts is addressed below. ln addition, relevant project details are included to aid in review. Project Location: V, Section NW32, Township 24N, Range OSE. 4 I 51 Williams Avenue North Renton, WA 98056 Latitude: 47.5 I 5745°N; Longitude: I 22.206114°W Project Information: The proposed location for this boat lift is on the site of the former Barbee Mill Company lumber mill, which has recently been restored and includes a residential neighborhood (the Barbee Mill Community, developed by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC). The addition of this proposed boat lift to the already completed dock at the project location is expected to have little additional impact on the aquatic habitat as this area is already heavily developed and disturbed. For a more detailed impact summary please refer to the original Biological Evaluation. See Figure I for a revised site plan. Pictures of the proposed boat lili location can be seen in Figures 2 and 3. Washington DNR concerns: 1. Location of project in relation to DNR-leased land: MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns-1 " .. The proposed location of the lift has been revised. The lift will be located 3' further to the east than the originally proposed location, which places the lift 4' away from state owned aquatic lands. This will ensure that no part of the lift will extend over state owned aquatic lands and that no part of the boat will extend over state owned aquatic lands when it is on the lift (Figure I). The stem of the boat will hang off of the west portion of the lift that is closest to the adjacent state owned aquatic lands. Because of how the boat lift operates, the west side of the bunk supporting the boat will be approximately 6' away from the adjacent state owned aquatic lands when the boat is stored on the lift. When stored on the lift the stem of the boat will overhang the western edge of the bunk by approximately 3'. In the revised proposed location this means that the stern of the boat will be approximately 3' away from the adjacent state owned aquatic lands when the boat is stored on the lift. 2. Increased shading impacts to aquatic vegetation: Although few studies exist in reference to boat lifts, a boat lift can be considered similar to a small pier in its impacts. This is because both are open structures that extend over water. The impacts of piers on aquatic vegetation are well studied, especially in saltwater systems. Unsurprisingly, piers reduce the amount of light available below the structure (Mulvihill et al 1980, Burdick and Short 1995). However, many factors influence how much light is actually available below an overwater structure. In the current situation, two factors are most relevant: a lower overwater dock height provides greater shading as compared to higher overwater dock height (Burdick and Short 1995), and a considerable amount of light-transmitting grating is needed to minimize shading impacts. For example, Fresh et al. (1995) found that at least 50% grating was needed to allow enough light transmission to significantly benefit eelgrass (Zostera marina). The current proposal features a boat (which, by its nature, is not able to integrate grating or light transmitting structures) stored at a low over-water height, so shading concerns are relevant and must be addressed. There is likely to be very little aquatic vegetation at the project site. A dive survey was conducted by Marine Surveys & Assessments divers on March 20, 2007 near the now-constructed community dock (Attachment 2). This survey observed two types of aquatic vegetation: invasive Eurasian milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) and an unidentified filamentous alga. Eurasian milfoil was first noted approximately 100' waterward of the current bulkhead, and increased in density from 120'-200' waterward. The unidentified filamentous alga was first noted 25' waterward of the current bulkhead. In both cases, impacts to aquatic vegetation from the boat lift would be best avoided by locating it inside (landward) of aquatic vegetation. The current proposal locates the boat lift as landward as possible, keeping it well away from any aquatic vegetation. The boat launch will occupy a small IO' by 27' gap between a vertical bulkhead and an existing pier, ramp. and float structure (Figures 1-3). This small gap is effectively closed in by the existing dock and bulkhead on 3 sides, and this is likely already limiting the available light. While the DNR view-that there will be increased shading impacts to aquatic vegetation-is correct, the extent of this impact depends on the presence of aquatic vegetation at the project site and the siting of the boat lift. In this case, the proposed location of the boat and lift in a shaded ·'pocket" near shore without appreciable aquatic vegetation will effectively minimize overwater shading impacts. 3. Increased vessel wake impacting natural shoreline processes due to larger and more frequent wave action: There are two major times when this development could increase vessel wake: when the vessel is entering/exiting the boat lift, and once it is underway on Lake Washington. Each impact is considered below. The major shoreline impact from vessel traffic is erosion due to boat-generated wake waves. The extent of this impact will be determined by the intensity of the waves as well as the composition of shoreline banks (Asplund 2000). In the case of entering and exiting the boat lift, wave sizes are likely to be minimal. Because of the location of the proposed lift, speeds will, by necessity, be very low. Maneuvering an 8.3' wide vessel into a 10' gap, along the pre-existing 170' long dock, will require speeds that are unlikely to produce wake. The tight confines of the dock and boat lift effectively enforce a "no-wake zone." Furthermore, the shoreline at and near the proposed boat lift is already bulkheaded. The bulkhead is impounding any sediment above the ordinary water mark (OWM). Because the Army Corps of Engineers (USA CE) controls the water depth of Lake Washington at 21.85' above MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·2 -.. • Puget Sound mean lower low water (with small variations), the substrate seaward of the bulkhead is continuously submerged to a depth of 5.5'. These two factors-small waves due to low boat speed, and low erosion due to the bulkhead and water depth-make shoreline erosion unlikely. Once the boat is past the existing dock and under way in Lake Washington, it will obviously travel at speeds that result in a wake, and ultimately, shoreline wave action. Recreational motorcraft produce waves that average 1-25 cm in height (Bhowmik et al. 1992). In a study along an Australian river, waves greater than 30 cm were able to cause shoreline erosion (Nason et al. 1994). However, this finding cannot be directly translated to Lake Washington because the erosive potential of waves is dependent not only on the actual size, but the composition of the shoreline itself(Asplund 2000). From the limited research available, it is safe to assume that every recreational motor boat on Lake Washington does have the potential to contribute to shoreline erosion. However, it is not reasonable to assume that the construction of this boat lift will directly add to an increase in shoreline erosion via larger and more frequent waves once underway in Lake Washington. According to Michael Urban, the proponent, the boat is likely to be used twice weekly from the months of June to September. On an already crowded urban lake, the addition of approximately 24 recreational boat trips per year cannot be considered a substantial development. This is especially true because the proponent could add this volume of traffic to the lake independent of the boat lift, simply by using the boat from public launches. Because the project is unlikely to result in larger or more frequent waves while entering/exiting the dock, and is only adding a fractional increase in the total lake traffic while underway, additional shoreline erosion is unlikely. 4, Scour and sediment erosion through prop scour: Propeller scour can affect sediments at depths ofup to 10' (Gusinski 1982, in Asplund 1997). Recreational boat propeller scour can significantly increase turbidity (via sediment resuspension) and can directly impact aquatic plants through eroding sediment and cutting plants (Asplund 1997). It appears that the direct physical impacts of scouring (sediment erosion and cutting plants) are most responsible for reducing aquatic plant biomass, as opposed to indirect impacts from increased turbidity (Asplund & Cook 1997). Clearly, DNR concerns about sediment scour and erosion are valid in the shallow (<IO') environment. However, Lake Washington is a deep lake that quickly drops off at the shoreline. Scour impacts are not likely once in deeper waters. As the 2007 SCUBA survey noted (Attachment 2), water depth was greater than 10' within 125' of the current bulkhead. The current dock extends approximately 170'. It is reasonable to assume that, once near the dock and within the shallow nearshore environment, the boat will be operated at "no-wake" speeds that cause a minimal amount of scour. This is not due to any enforced "best practices" on the part of the boat driver, but to the tight confines of maneuvering to the boat lift. It is simply not possible to travel quickly here, and the low speeds in shallow water will effectively minimize scour and sediment erosion. 5. Crushing of benthic habitat: The water depth at the most landward end of the boat lift, in relation to OHW in Lake Washington, is 5.5'. According to the United States Arrny Corps of Engineers, the water level in Lake Washington is maintained within a 2' range. Therefore, the "worst case" minimum water depth at the boat lift would be 3.5' (42"). The draft of the Searay 210 boat with the stem drive up for landing is 21" (specifications for this boat are available at: http://www.searay.com/Page.aspx/pageld/10232/pmid/30910 l/210-Select.aspx). Therefore, the closest the boat would come to the sediment, under "worst case" conditions, is 21" above the bottom. This is a reasonable buffer to ensure that there is no direct contact with the benthic habitat. The boat lift will be a free-standing unit that only contacts the sediment on the corner foot pads. The specifications for the proposed Sunstream SL6012AR boatlift are available at http://www.sunstreamcorp.com/s16012.htm. While sediment will be crushed under these small footpads, the total area impacted will be small. The siting of the boat lift, in a shaded area with no appreciable aquatic vegetation, minimizes the impact of this crushing. 6. Heightened potential for release of contaminants into the water column: MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·3 There are three potential sources of contamination that must be addressed at this site, two which are inherent to boats and boat lifts: the motor boat and boat lift both have the potential to release fluids that may impact the aquatic environment. The third concern is site-specific, because the proposed action is within the Barbee Mill toxic clean-up site. This site has soil, groundwater, and lake sediment contamination, but only lake sediments will be directly addressed here as these may be returned to the water column as a result of the proposed action. Recreational motor boats do have the potential to release metals (lead, cadmium, and mercury) and hydrocarbons (methane, gasoline, oils) into the water (Asplund 2000). Most studies on the impacts of this exhaust have found that there are minimal effects on aquatic organisms due to dilution as well as the fact that most hydrocarbons disperse quickly in water (Asplund 2000). It is important to note that these studies were done when older 2-stroke motors were common; the modern motor in the Searay 210 boat will have fewer emissions. The boat lift itself will be run using the required USA CE guidelines from Regional General Permit 1 for watercraft lifts: "All equipment used in or around water will be clean and inspected daily prior to use to ensure that the equipment has no fluid leaks. Should a leak develop during use, the leaking equipment will be removed from the site immediately and not used again until it has been adequately repaired." (USACE 2013). While the boat and lift do not pose substantial risk of releasing contaminants into the water column, the fact that they have the potential to stir up sediments at the Barbee Mill toxic clean-up site must be addressed. The Washington Department of Ecology (WA DOE) has done extensive monitoring of the Barbee Mill toxic clean-up site. In 1999, and again in 2003, offshore sediment was removed from the site for characterization. Though it did have elevated concentrations of wood waste and carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (cPAHs), WA DOE concluded that "No Further Action" was required and that there were no restrictions on sediment use (WA DOE 2008). Since this time, the Barbee Mill Co. Inc. has removed contaminated sediments and wood from Lake Washington along the site (WA DOE 2012). A further contamination concern is arsenic, which has been found in groundwater, porewater (water within the sediment) and sediments at the site. To reduce the ability of arsenic to run off to Lake Washington, a passive attenuation zone (PAZ) was installed at the down-slope property boundary of the former mill site. Since this time, arsenic concentrations in the porewater (10 cm below the mudline) have been measured at levels ranging from non- detectable to 17 µg/L; the WA DOE threshold clean-up value is at 20 µg/L (Patmon! & Porter 2010). Arsenic concentrations in the top 10 cm of the sediment have not exceeded 16 mg/kg, below the WA DOE threshold of 20 mg/kg (Patmon! & Porter 2010). Bioassays of this sediment were completed with the benthic macroinvertebrates Hyalella and Chironomus, and there were no significant impacts on survival or growth (Patmon! & Porter 2010). It appears that the post-cleanup sediment at Barbee Mill does not pose a danger to benthic macroinvertebrates, an important food source for fish. Even if the boat lift "stirs up" sediment, during construction or use, the resuspension of this sediment will not be likely to introduce dangerous concentrations of contaminants. Muckleshoot Tribe concerns: 1. Scouring effects of the boat lift and watercraft on contaminated sediments at tbe Barbee Mill site: See points 3, 4 and 6 in the above "Washington DNR concerns" section. 2-Tbe boat lift and boat in the nearshore, where juvenile salmon are likely to be found, can cause them to avoid the nearshore and increase their risk of predation: It is generally accepted that overwater structures can alter migration behavior of juvenile salmon (though the effects may vary depending on the design and orientation of the structure, degree of shading, and the presence of artificial light), and reduce salmon prey resources and refugia by shading aquatic plant life (Simenstad et al. 1999; Nightingale and Simenstad 2001). However, the significance of these effects is not clear. As Simenstad et al. state, "We found no studies that described empirical evidence supporting or refuting that modification of juvenile salmon behavior in shoreline habitats was reflected in changes in survival." Nightingale and Simenstad (2001) state, "Presently, although we know that under some conditions small juvenile salmon will delay or otherwise alter their MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns-4 • · .. shoreline movements when encountering an overwater structure, the conditions under which this behavioral modification is significant to the fishes' fitness and survival is relatively unknown." In terms of increased predation risk, some relevant research has been done in the marine environment. At this time, there is no evidence of docks aggregating salmon id predators in the Puget Sound (Ratte & Salo 1985; Cardwell et al. 1980: Nightingale and Simenstad 2001 ). It might be assumed that birds would be interested in small migrating juveniles, but there is no evidence that docks provide an aggregation site for predatory birds (Taylor and Willey 1997). Based on existing research, it cannot be stated that the presence of this small nearshore structure will increase the predation rates of juvenile salmonids, either through changes in migratory behavior or by providing a predator-aggregation structure. 3. The boat lift will permanently displace benthic habitat: This is true, in that the boat lift will shade approximately 175 ft 2 ofbenthic habitat when the boat is on it ( calculated based on the Searay 210, with a 21' length x 8.3' beam). The actual footprint of the lift in the benthic habitat will be much smaller, only encompassing the 4 small footpads it will rest on. However, the location of the lift has been selected to add the least possible impact to the nearshore. By placing it as landward as possible, it is located landward of the known aquatic plants in the area, in a shaded "pocket" that is already bulkheaded (Figures 3 and 4). This area is clearly impacted by pre-existing development, and by placing the structure here it ensures that areas that are relatively un-impacted will be avoided. See points 2-5 in the above "Washington Department of Natural Resources concerns" section. 4. The boatlift and motorized watercraft have the potential to adversely affect the restoration work in the WDNR withdraw) area to the north through increased wave action that can adversely affect natural shoreline processes and vegetation growth: See point 3 in the above ''Washington DNR concerns'' section for a discussion of wave action as a result of proposed the boat lift and watercraft. 5. There is no discussion of the potential for additional boatlifts and other permanent moorage proposed for this community pier: As of this response letter, there are no known proposals for additional boat lifts or permanent moorage at or near the Barbee Mill community pier. 6. There is no mitigation identified for the boatlift: The proposal now includes the addition of two Pacific willow trees (Salix lucida) to the southwest corner of the Urban property. This will place the trees as close as possible to the water. These trees will aid in shoreline bank stabilization and water quality improvement, and may provide sites for future avian roosting. See Figure I for the location of the proposed planting. As part of this proposed mitigation planting, the proposal also includes a monitoring and maintenance plan: Monitoring An as-built drawing and report will be submitted to the City of Renton as documentation of the implementation of the approved planting plan within one month of installation. The plan will include vegetation description and photo documentation from established photo stations. Monitoring will take place over a period of 5 years at the end of the growing season (late August or early September) of each monitoring year. The performance standards will be monitored by measuring plots in zones within the planting area that will be established and mapped after planting occurs, on the as-built plan. There will be photo points for each plot and they will be referenced on the as-built plan. Photos will be taken at all points for MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·5 ·r 1 all years as visual documentation of the performance standards progress, or lack of Collected data and photos will be compiled into a report for City of Renton DCD. The report will address whether the performance standards are being met during each monitoring year and if the final end of monitoring period standards are going to be met. Monitoring results will determine whether or not contingency measures will be needed. Performance Standard # 1 (survival rate): Immediately after planting, all plants will be counted and documented. At the end of each growing season (late Aug-early Sept) plots will be visited and a count of surviving plants will be documented. The percent survival for the plots will be calculated by dividing the total number of plants after planting by the total number of surviving plants at the end of the season. Maintenance Maintenance shall occur at least twice during the growing season to ensure the survival of all native species within the mitigation area. Watering by hand or sprinkler may be necessary during the first year until the plants are established. Water requirements will depend on the timing of planting with the seasons and weather conditions. Once plants are established, extra watering may not be necessary. Hand weeding will be necessary around all plants that are being monitored for survival and coverage. Contingency Plan If the 90% survival rate is not met by the end of any monitoring year, plants lost to mortality will be replaced to achieve the percentage cover performance standard described above. Prior to replacement, an appropriate assessment will be performed to determine if the survival was affected by species/site selection, animal damage, or some other factor. Subsequent contingency actions must be designed to respond directly to the stressor(s), which are increasing mortality of planted native species. If a particular species is shown not to endure site conditions, another, more appropriate species will be selected. If excessive damage is observed, protective measures will be introduced. Monitoring years may be added if significant re-planting becomes necessary. 7. Previous mitigation at Barbee Mill Community Pier may not have been fully implemented: Planting plans are currently being followed on-site. Please see Attachment 3: site photography of current mitigation planting. 8. The city needs to fully evaluate this project and its potential impacts, and require mitigation as necessary. Without these elements, it is premature to issue a Determination of Non-Significance for this project under SEPA: With these additional analyses of impacts from the proposed boat lift, as well as the included mitigation plan, the city now has ample information to fully evaluate this project. MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·6 ,. References: Asplund, T.R. 1997a. Investigations of motorboat impacts on Wisconsin's lakes. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Madison, WI. Asplund, T.R. 2000. The effects of motorized watercraft on aquatic ecosystems. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Madison, WI. Asplund, T.R., and C.M. Cook. 1997. Effects of motorboats on submerged aquatic macrophytes. Lake and Reservoir Management 13: 1-12. Bhowmik, N.G., T.W. Soong, W.F. Reichelt, N.M.L. Seddik. 1992. Waves generated by recreational traffic on the Upper Mississippi River System. Report by the Illinois State Water Survey, Champaign, Illinois. for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Environmental Management Technical Center. Onalaksa, WI. 6 Burdick, D.M., and Short, F.T. 1995. The effects of boat docks on eelgrass beds in Massachusetts Coastal Waters. Waquoit Bay National Research Reserve, Boston MA. Fresh, K.L., B. Williams, D. Penttila. 1995. Overwater structures and impacts on eelgrass in Puget Sound, WA. Puget Sound Research, 1995 proceedings. Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. Seattle, WA. Mulvihill, E.L. C.A. Francisco, J.B. Glad, K.B. Kaster, R.E. Wilson. 1980. Biological impacts of minor shoreline structures in the coastal environment: state of the art review. United States Fish and Wildlife Service Publication FWS/OBS-77/41. Sidell, Louisiana. Nason, G.C., A. von Krusenstierna, E.A. Bryant, M.R. Renilson. 1994. Experimental measurements of river-bank erosion caused by boat-generated waves on the Gordon River, Tasmania. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management 9: 1-15. Nightingale, B. and Charles Simenstad. 200 I. Overwater structures: marine issues. Submitted to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology, and Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, WA, 177 pp. Patmon!, C., and Porter, J. 2010. Memoradium from Anchor QEA and Aspect Consulting: Barbee sediment data gaps evaluation. Available: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/gsp/CleanupSiteDocuments.aspx?csid=2368 Simenstad, C.A., B.J. Nightingale, R.M. Thom and D.K. Shreffler. 1999. Impacts of ferry terminals on juvenile salmon migration along Puget Sound shorelines. Phase I: Synthesis of state of knowledge. Report to WSDOT/TJSDOT Research Report T9903, Task A2, 116 pp.+ appendices. Taylor, W.J., and W .S. Willey. 1997. Port of Seattle fish migration studies, Pier 64/65 short-stay moorage facility, qualitative fish and avian predator observations. Beak Consultants Inc., Kirkland. WA. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USA CE). 2014. Regional General Permit 1 for watercraft lifts. USA CE Seattle District, Seattle. WA. Available: http://www.nws.usace.army.mil/Portals/27 /docs/regulatory/RGP _I_ Rev_ Text_FlNAL _ 20 I O.pdf Washington Department of Ecology (WA DOE). 2008. Site hazard assessment summary score sheet: Barbee Mill Company. WA DOE, Olympia, WA. Available: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/gsp/CleanupSiteDocuments.aspx?csid=2368 Washington Department of Ecology (WA DOE). 2012. Amended agreed order for Barbee Mill site. WA DOE, Olympia, WA. Available: https://fortress. wa.gov/ecy/gsp/CleanupSiteDocuments.aspx?csid=2368 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·? ... • \ ' ' ( ', l> ...... 0 ..----,. , r l ' ' '! : i -l - ., .,..:;; 1! ~a ' I ' . ' ;1 ~ :.~~l &: DOROTHY URBAN ---... --- \ I \ i ( ·, \, ][ JI -·--,- ' ' ' ' ' I l - ' I' 'I ii : l i I j ! ("_ii i ' ' ' I I I I ' I I ' ,. ~ e i :J I ! I ! ' I I ) C :::0 OJ )> z OJ 0 )> -I r - 'Tl -I I I I [._ _____ -·----·-L..•L,.-.*J,lf~-•'-'-·-~I ecco j ,. ' ' ~ ,. 1 ' 'I L•,q .r ·~,,k."''' ..... ,,.. ;,_. '"'(' ,._ /' / ~ ti~~ 1,tf--~""~ ' :t~ -~ ' ; i~ ""~, r .. ~,: "'41!::,,.;,,,,...,_,J..rl , .. , Figure 1. Revised site plan. Note new, more landward, boat ramp location. MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns-8 ... • ·, Figure 2. Proposed boat lift location, looking landward. MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns ·9 V ,. , Figure 3. Proposed boat lift location , looking waterward. MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 10 , • Attachment 1. Correspondence with WA DNR and the Muckleshoot Tribe. Dc-ccmber 17, 2013 GcraW V.'asscr. As~>ei.:itc 1•1tumer City of Renton. CH) Planning Oi,ision 1055 S Grady Way Renton. WA 9805 7-3232 Subject: WA Department of Natural Resources Comments· Lrban llo,~ Lili' LL'A13-00l640 Dear Mr. Wasser: Washington State Department ofNarural Resources ("Dt-.'R") has obtained the City -,fRenton Notice of Applkarion and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the L:rban Boat I.it\ Project. DNR manages the sta1c--0><ncd aquatic lands adjacent to the project rrnpv,al loc<1tion and herehy ,ubmits the following comments for the City's record. The project dcscripticn states the prapo"'-'<.l frc,;:standing boat lift is associated "1th. but not arucheJ l<>, a community Jock. DKR admim,t~rs Aquatic Lands Lease N,, 22-0%04{; trhc ··Lease"), authori,ing Barbee !\-!ill Community Organization to utiliz.e 11. 98-t square feet nf lA1ke lliashington harbor area for the pUiposc of the said comnnmity dock. The permitted use authorized by the Lease is to '·provide lake access and transient moorage for approximately IO(> upland property O'-nCrs, with one finger pier to provide pri\aJc moorage for one adJaccnt up]and property 0"11er" and for no other rurpose. As propused, the Lrban Boat Lit\ Project footprint ,'111 Ix on privately held aquatic lands. However, a vessel placed on the boat lift will extend over state-owned aquatic lands, specifically into the leasehold area of Barb«: Mill Communit) Organi7alion. This encumbrance of statc-n\.\ncd aquatic lands is not t'Onsistcnl \Vllh tht.' lt:rm"> of the [•=and subsequently is not authoriz.:d. Additionally, DNR worked ext.,n,ively with Conner Homes and the rcgulawry agencies regarding the configuration and plact:tnt"nt of the community dock and tcnu • .;; of the Le.a:,;-.; in order to avoid and minimi1e impacL..; to the adjacent reston.~d nearshurc environment. shorelanJ,.. and bedlands. As proposeJ, the !Jrhan Boal l.ilt Proiect will subject the restoration area and nearshore environment to: r, ;- MS&A • Increased shading impacts to aquatic vegetation • Inc..Tcascd ves..~l ·wake imp.acting n;.nuraJ shoreline processes due to larger and more: fre-quent wave al·tion · SOUTH PUGET SOUND R£GION I '15il fA.FMt-11 ,:.,.; NI P•Uf,L(LA.Y. WA ').;!C.11-nai r:=, ll~t s..n:-''i.:' 1 I ;t./{' (350) s1•, !f,/1 I r-.; •)hG•.' 30.i-n2s I T~<; '! l I WWW.DNR.WA.GOV ~QU;:..:. •:,c,~·k"''./N:l' d.t"t(f(E'·: Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·11 , • Gerald Wasser. Associme Planner Decemb<.--r I 7. 2013 Page 2 of2 • Scour and sediment erosion through prop ,cour • Crushing of benthic habiwt • Heightened potential for release of contaminants into the water wlumn As proposed, DNR does not support the L'rban Boat Lift Prnject and will not amend the cxi.sting Lease to permit the use of state-owned aquatic land,;. If you have cummenls regflfdmg this correspondence, please feel free to conwet me by email at vivian.roacb~i~nr,!~.!...~ Sincerely, Vivian Roach, Aquatic Land I\·1anagcr Shoreline District. Aquatics lksources Di,i,ion c DNR SEP.,\ Cmt<r Diffi'ict Fiic: MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns-12 ' Gerald Wasser From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Karen Walter <KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us> Friday, December 27, 2013 1:14 PM G era Id Wasser Anderson, Suzanne NWS; Heller, Christa H (DFW); ROACH, VIVIAN (DNR); Tom Sibley; Priddy, Lynda Urban Boat Lift adjacent to Barbee Mill Community Pier, LUA13·001640,ECF, SM, Revised Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Categories: Red Category Gerald, We have reviewed the Revised Notice of Application for the proposed Urban boat lift project adjacent to the Barbee Mill Community Dock (4157 and 4151 Williams Avenue N) in Renton referenced above We have several concerns about this project as noted below: 1. The proposed free standing boatlift is located on the north side of the existing Barbee Mill Community Dock and just south of the WDNR withdrawn area that contains contaminated sediments from the former miH site at the Superfund site on the WDNR aquatic lands. There is no consideration in either the checklist or the Lake and Steam study sent with the Revised NOA consider tr.e potential impacts from the new boatlift and the operation of a mmorized watercraft on tr.e north side of the joint pier. A motorized watercraft in this location will likely create scour and erosion from propeller wash that could cause a release of nearby contaminants into the water column adversely affecting fish and benthic vertebrates. Other potential impacts, include, but are not limited to: .. The new freestanding boatlift and a boat in the nearshore where juvenile salmon are likely to be found that can cause them to avoid the nearshore and increase their risk of predation. • The boaUift will permanently displace benthic habitat .. The boatlift and motorized watercraft have the potential to adversely affect the restoration work in the WDNR withdrawal area to the nor:h through increased wave action that can adversely affect natural shoreline processes and vegetatlon growth. 2. There is no discussion about the potential for additional boatlifts and other permanent moorage proposed for this community pier. As we noted in previous comments to the Barbee Mill Community Pier project, the Tribe is concerned about this pier providing long term moorage that can create conditions which interfere with the Tribe's fishing access. 3. There ls no mitigation identified for the boatlift in the documents we reviewed. Please provide the mitigation details proposed for this new boatlift and the associated watercraft. Please note that any approved mitigation at the BarboG Mil! Community Pier site cannot be useC ta compensate for impacts from this new boatlift and watercraft. 4. We also concerned that previous mitigation at the Barbee Mill Community Pier may not be fully implemented. Therefore, request copies of all of the existing monitoring reports to be completed as part of the shoreline restoration work required far the entire Barbee Mill Plat, including the community dock. 5. The City needs to fully evaluate this project; its potential impacts and require mitigation as necessary. Without these elements, it is premature to issue a Determination of Non-Significance for this project under SEPA. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to the City's responses. Thank you, Karen Waiter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 13 ,/ ' Attachment 2. Habitat survey. Conner Homes Company Community Tract Pier Project Substrate Slope Information March 20, 2007 A SCUBA survey was done March 20, 2007, from 9:50 AM -1:45 PM, at the Conner Homes Company community tract proposed pier project site near the southern end of Lake Washington in Renton. Lynn Goodwin and Grant Ausk used SCUBA to run five transects along the community tract to identify flora, fauna, substrate types, and other qualitative information relative to the Biological Evaluation. The day was overcast and rainy with strong winds and a heavy chop. Water visibility was poor, only about 1 to 4 feet. A coir roll installed as part of the site remediation runs along the community tract shoreline, forrning a baseline from which the five community tract transects (Tl -T5) were measured. All five transects were oriented 70° -250° magnetic, were generally perpendicular to the coir roll baseline, and were 200' long. Tl extended seaward from the baseline at the drainpipe outflow, approximately midway along the community tract shoreline and the site of the proposed pier. T2 was 22W north of Tl and T4 was located 221/,' south of Tl; T3 was located on the common property line between the community tract and lot 30; TS was located on the common property line between the community tract and lot 31. T3 and TS were approximately 45' north and south of Tl respectively, for a total survey area distance along the shoreline of approximately 90'. The Ordinary High Water (OHW) line for Lake Washington is at the lake elevation of 21.8'. On March 20, 2007, the date of the SCUBA survey, the elevation of Lake Washington was 21.1'. Water depths showing the slope contour were measured from the coir roll baseline every 10' along Tl and every 25' along T2, T3, T4 and TS. The water depths along all five transects are set out in the following tables and have been corrected to OHW by adding 0.7' to each gauge reading. The water's edge was 10' from the baseline along Tl. Corrected Tl water depths were as follows: MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·14 , -~ ., 1 ' ; I I I ' I ' Distance Along T1 Corrected Transect Water Depths 10' 0.7' 20' 1.7' 30' 2.7' 40' 3.2' 50' 3.7' 60' 4.2' 70' 4 -, .:, 80' 4.7' 90' 5.7' 100' 8.7' 110' 9.7' 120' 11.7' 130' 12.7' 140' 12.7' 150' 12.7' 160' 12.7' 170' 13.7' 180' 13.7' 190' 12.7' 200' 12.7' The water's edge was 11', 9.5', 10', and 10' from the baseline along T2-T5, respectively. Corrected T2-T5 water depths were as follows: Distance I T2 Corrected i ' T3 Corrected I T 4 Corrected TS Corrected Along Water ' Water ! Water Water Transect Depths ' Depths Deoths Deoths i -,-, 2.4' ' 2.4' 2.7' ' 2.2' _:, I I 50' 3.2' I 3.2' 3.2' ' 2.4' I 75' I 5.2' 4.7' 4.7' 3.9' ' 100' 7.7' 5.7' 6.7' I 7.7' I I 125' 11.7' 12.7' 11.7' 11.7' 150' 12.7' 12.7' 12.7' 11.7' 175' 12.7' 14.7' ' 13.7' ' 11.7' 200' 13.7' 14.7' I 13.7' 12.7' 2 I MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 15 ,I . ., . # substrate along T3 changed from the gravel, rocks and mud found about 100' from the baseline, to soft mud by 150' and extremely soft mud by 200'. Along T4, the slope steepened beyond about 80' out and wood debris was noted. By 100' along the transect, the substrate was primarily mud, becoming soft mud by 175' from the baseline. Along TS, the substrate was a sand and mud mix by 100' with roofing metal sheets, sticks and limbs noted. By 110' along the transect, the substrate had changed to mud, becoming very soft mud by 200' Substrate Slope: The OHW line for Lake Washington is at the lake elevation of 21.8'. The elevation of Lake Washington on the day of the SCUBA survey was 21.l ', 0.7' below OHW. Water depths showing the slope contour were measured from the baseline every 10' along TI and every 25' along T2-TS. The water depths along all five transects are set out in the following tables and have been corrected to OHW by adding 0.7' to each depth gauge reading. Tl Substrate Slope Table: The water's edge was 10' from the baseline along TI. Corrected TI water depths were as follows: Distance Along TI Corrected Transect Water Depths 10' 0.7' 20' 1.7' 30' i 2.7' ' 40' ' 3.2' 50' 3.7' 60' 4.2' 70' 4.5' 80' 4.7' 90' 5.7' 100' 8.7' 110' 9.7' 120' 11.7' 130' 12.7' 140' 12.7' 150' 12.7' 160' 12.7' 170' 13.7' 180' 13.7' 190' 12.7' 200' 12.7' 3 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·16 -I . ,. ' ' I MS&A 12-TS Substrate Slope Table: The water's edge was 11 ', 9.5', 10', and 10' from the baseline along T2-TS, respectively. Corrected T2-TS water depths were as follows: D istance -orrecte d I T3C orrecte d T C 4 orrecte I ::, orrecte d I Along Water Water Water Water Transect Depths Depths Depths Depths 25' 2.4' 2.4' 2.7' 2.2' 50' 3.2' 3.2' 3.2' 2.4' 75 1 5.2' 4.7' 4.7' 3.9' 100' 7.7' 5.7' 6.7' 7.7' 125' 11.7' 12.7' 11.7' 11.7' 150' 12.7' 12.7' 12.7' 11.7' 175' 12.7' 14.7' 13.7' 11.7' 200' 13.7' 14.7' 13.7' 12.7' Macroalgae: The following species of macroalgae was observed within the survey area: Myriophyllum spicatum: Eurasian milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum), an invasive nonnative plant, was found along all five transects. Along Tl, this alga was first noted 110' from the baseline covering about 10% of the area. By 120' and through 130' from the baseline, it covered about 30% of the area; by 140' it had decreased to only 10% coverage and by 150' from the baseline, no further milfoil was observed. However, by 160' from the baseline, milfoil was again observed covering about 10% of the area, with coverage increasing to 40% by 170' -200'. Along T2, this invasive species was first noted 108' from the baseline with coverage increasing to about 20% of the area by 120', to about 30% coverage by 150', and to 40% coverage by 200'. Along T3, This alga was first noted at about 100' from the baseline. Beyond 100', and through about 150', milfoil covered about 30% of the area; by the end of the transect at 200' from the baseline, milfoil covered about 40% of the area. Along T4, this alga was first noted at about 75' from the baseline covering less than 5% of the area. By 125' from the baseline, and continuing through about 150', milfoil covered about 10% of the area along T4, increasing to about 30% coverage by 175' and to 40% coverage by 200'. Milfoil was first found along TS 110' from the baseline covering about 10% of the area; coverage increased to about 20% of the area between 120' and 150' from the baseline. By 175' along T3 and through the end of the transect, this alga covered about 30% of the area. In general the milfoil is from last year's growth and is heavily encrusted with filamentous algae. New milfoil growth is just starting to appear; the plants are up to several feet long. 4 i I i : I Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 17 ., .,. • ' Other Algae: The following other alga was observed within the survey area: Filamentous Algae: An unidentified filamentous alga was noted along all five transects, generally first noted approximately 25' from the baseline and often attached to Myriophyllum spicatum. Along Tl, this alga was observed covering the gravel from about 25' through 80' along the transect, and was noted covering milfoil at about 110' from the baseline. Along T2, this alga covered every solid surface between about 25' and 75' from the baseline. Along T3, it was first noted 25' to 30' from the baseline. Along T4 and TS it was first noted abut 25' from the baseline and continued through 75'; at 75' it was noted covering small boulders. Invertebrate/Vertebrate Species: The only invertebrates found within the survey area were two crawdads, one at 125' out along each T3 and T4. No vertebrates were observed within the survey area. 5 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 18 ·., Attachment 3. S it e photography of current mitigation planting MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns· 19 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns ·20 MS&A Urban Boat Lift Project: Response to Concerns·21 '" March 4, 2014 Kris Sorensen, Planner CED Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Re: LUA13001640, EDF, SM-Urban Boat Lift C1TY o;: ~E~JTON RFC~:1v~o The following is a response to the "On Hold" notice letter from Gerry Wasser dated January 7, 2014 regarding the Urban boat lift project. The following items are being submitted as requested by Mr. Wasser. I. A line item response of Patti Klink's concerns. 2. A line item response to DNR's comments prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments. 3. A line item response to the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division environmental concerns prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments. 4. A response to the environmental concerns raised by the EPA. We are also submitting revised plans for the project. The proposed location of the lift has been revised by placing it 3' further to the east in order to alleviate DNR's concerns that the lift may extend over state owned aquatic lands. Two pacific willows have been proposed to be planted along the shoreline as mitigation in response to the Muckleshoot's concerns of the project. I hope that all of the above items have been addressed satisfactorily. Please foe! free to contact me if you have any questions, or if you require any additional information. Sincerely, {;;,11 lM-- Evan Wehr Ecco Design Inc. 206-706-3937 .,.. March 4, 2014 Kris Sorensen, Planner CED Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Re: LUA13001640, EDF, SM-Urban Boat Lift The following are responses to a letter from Patti Klink dated December 16, 2013. I. The proposed boat lift will be placed in the location indicated on the permit application within the easement granted by Conner Homes to the Urbans with the purchase of their property. The boat lift will be within the easement space in an area that is NOT available for use by other residents and is excluded from users of the community dock by posted signs installed by the Barbee Mill Community Organization ("BMCO"). 2. The cleats on the North bulkhead are within the easement area and are not available for use by other homeowners. See response to paragraph I above. 3. The BMCO has already approved and signed off on the permit application and the easement provided by Conner Homes. The community dock rules are not applicable to the boat lift within the easement space. Boats of other homeowners are not allowed nor will they be tied in the easement space. See response to paragraph I above. 4. The BMCO and their legal counsel were provided with all of the relevant information prior to their approval of the permit application. The boat lift was never stated to be accessible from the community dock and it will not be accessible from the community dock. Conner Homes already installed steps and a path from the Urban property to the easement area. 5. The BMCO and their counsel have already reviewed and approved the permit application and the location of the boat lift. 6. There are only two possible boats allowed with permanent access near the community dock. They are the Urban boat lift pursuant to the easement from Conner Homes and the finger boat slip South of the community dock believed to be purchased with the home to the South of the Urban residence located on Lot #36. I hope that all of the above items have been addressed satisfactorily. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions, or if you require any additional information. Sincerely, ~~ Evan Wehr Ecco Design Inc. 206-706-3937 · ··March 4, 2014 Kris Sorensen, Planner CED Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Re: Urban Boat Lift/ LUA13-001640 The following is a response to comments in an email from Lynda Priddy of the Environmental Protection Agency dated December 27, 2013. The installation of the boat lift will not have any impact on the near shore area of the Quendall superfund site. While boats using the community dock, the proposed lift, and Lake Washington in the Renton area do engage in water skiing and other water activities, none of those activities are conducted near the Quendall Superfund site for the following reasons: I. The water near the site is shallow and not conducive or safe for these activities. 2. The water in front of the site is full of underwater obstacles and floating platforms that make any boating activities in that area unsafe. The application is currently being processed by the USACE under reference number NWS-2013-880. The USA CE should be sending out the permit application for review by the EPA in the near future. I hope that all of the above items have been addressed satisfactorily. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions, or if you require any additional information. Sincerely, G-~ Evan Wehr Ecco Design Inc. 206-706-3937 'J' Copies of questions applicant is responding to ' . Caring for your natural resources ... now and forever December 17, 2013 . Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner City of Renton, CED-Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057-3232 Subject: WA Department of Natural Resources Comments -Urban Boat Lift/ LUA! 3-001640 Dear Mr. Wasser: Washington State Department of Natural Resources ("DNR") has obtained the City of Renton Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the Urban Boat Lift Project. DNR manages the state-owned aquatic lands adjacent to the project proposal location and hereby submits the following comments for the City's record. The project description states the proposed freestanding boat lift is associated with, but not attached to, a community dock. DNR admirristers Aquatic Lands Lease No. 22-086046 (the "Lease"), authorizing Barbee Mill Community Organization to utilize 11,984 square feet of Lake Washington harbor area for the purpose of the said community dock. The permitted use authorized by the Lease is to "provide lake access and transient moorage for approximately I 00 upland property owners, with one finger pier to provide private moorage for one adjacent upland property owner" and for no other purpose. As proposed, the Urban Boat Lift Project footprint will be on privately held aquatic lands. However, a vessel placed on the boat lift will extend over state-owned aquatic lands, specifically into the leasehold area of Barbee Mill Community Organization. This encumbrance of state-owned aquatic lands is not consistent with the terms of the Lease and subsequently is not authorized. Additionally, DNR worked extensively with Conner Homes and the regulatory agencies regarding the configuration and placement of the community dock and terms of the Lease in order to avoid and minimize impacts to the adjacent restored nearshore environment, shorelands and bedlands. As proposed, the Urban Boat Lift Project will subject the restoration area and nearshore environment to: 1-, '-:-:--- i ~,' --. • Increased shading impacts to aquatic vegetation ! : · • Increased vessel wake impacting natural shoreline processes due to larger and more frequent wave action ·· · · · · SOUTH PUGET SOUND REGION I 950 FARMAN AVE N I ENUMCLAW, WA 98022-9282 TEL: (360) 825-1631 I FAX: (360) 825-1672 I TIY: (360) 902-1125 I TRS 711 I WWW,DNR.WA.GOV EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER RECYCLED PAPER 0 Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner December 17, 2013 Page2 of2 • Scour and sediment erosion through prop scour • Crushing of benthic habitat • Heightened potential for release of contaminants into the water column As proposed, DNR does not support the Urban Boat Lift Project and will not amend the existing Lease to permit the use of state-owned aquatic lands. If you have comments regarding this correspondence, please feel free to contact me by email at vivian.roach@dnr.wa.gov. Sincerely, Vivian Roach, Aquatic Land Manager Shoreline District, Aquatics Resources Division c: DNR SEPA Center District File Aquatic Resources File . ' Decemberl6,2013 Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner CED Planning Division . 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 RE: LUA13-001640, EDF, SM -Urban Boat Lift [ 'i >. Cff'/ (:.~ ~:~.~~('./()M PLAN/\!/tJG OiViS:ON I'm writing to strongly voice my opposition to the installation of the above referenced boat _lift for the following reasons: 1. Because the proposed boat lift is not in front of the Urban's property but located within Barbee Mill common area and accessed from the community dock; once the lift is installed, no other homeowner will have access to that dock space for their own boat. Tne public notice states the lift will only be for the use of the homeowners of 4157 Williams Avenue. 2. There are cleats on the north bulk head for tie up of small watercraft: These cleats will not be accessible for others to use after the boat lift is installed. 3. The Barbee Mill Homeowners Association (HOA) established use rules for the dock and a homeowner can only keep their boat at the dock for a maximum of 72 hours. Whether the boat is physically tied up to the dock is irrelevant, the lift is parallel to the dock and the "water space" will always be occupied and no longer be available to other homeowners. 4. It's my understanding that the HOA was told the boat lift would be installed in front of their property. The public notice acknowledges it is accessed from the community dock. 5. Placement of a boat lift in the community dock/marina area should be decided by the HOA since it also has financial implications (liability concerns, dock ownership and maintenance, taxes, and HOA fees) as well as use issues. 6. This installation would establish a precedent and conceptually, the entire length of the dock could be lined with privately owned boat lifts. This is a community dock and not a portal for privately owned boat lifts. I am. glad I stopped to read this public notice. With the pending construction at the adjoining Quendall Terminal property, I thought it pertained to that site. Thank you for considering these relevant points in your review of the project. I am available for additional comment. Patti Klink 1126 N 42"d Pl Renton,WA 98056 cc Barbee Mill HOA Board Gerald Wasser From: Karen Walter <KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us> Friday, December 27, 2013 1 :14 PM Sent: To: Cc: Gerald Wasser Anderson, Suzanne NWS; Heller, Christa H (DFW); ROACH, VIVIAN (DNR); Tom Sibley; Priddy, Lynda Subject: Urban Boat Lift adjacent to Barbee Mill Community Pier, LUA 13-001640,ECF, SM, Revised Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged _ Categories: Red Category Gerald, We have reviewed the Revised Notice of Application for the proposed Urban boat lift project adjacent to the Barbee Mill Community Dock (4157 and 4151 Williams Avenue N) in Renton referenced above. We have several concerns about this project as noted below: 1. The proposed free standing boatlift is located on the north side of the existing Barbee Mill Community Dock and just south of the WDNR withdrawn area that contains contaminated sediments from the former mill site at the Superfund site on the WDNR aquatic lands. There is no consideration in either the checklist or the Lake and Stream study sent with the Revised NOA consider the potential impacts from the new boatlift and the operation of a motorized watercraft on the north side of the joint pier. A motorized watercraft in this location will likely create scour and erosion from propeller wash that could cause a release of nearby contaminants into the water column adversely affecting fish and benthic vertebrates. other potential impacts, include, but are not limited to: • The new freestanding boatlift and a boat in the nearshore where juvenile salmon are likely to be found that can cause them to avoid the nearshore and increase their risk of predation. • The boatlift will permanently displace benthic habitat. • The boatlift and motorized watercraft have the potential to adversely affect the restoration work in the WDNR withdrawal area to the north through increased wave action that can adversely affect natural shoreline processes and vegetation growth. 2. There is no discussion about the potential for additional boatlifts and other permanent moorage proposed for this community pier. As we noted in previous comments to the Barbee Mill Community Pier project, the Tribe is concerned about this pier providing long term moorage that can create conditions which interfere with the Tribe's fishing access. 3. There is no mitigation identified for the boatlift in the documents we reviewed. Please provide the mitigation details proposed for this new boatlift and the associated watercraft. Please note that any approved mitigation at the Barbee Mill Community Pier site cannot be used to compensate for impacts from this new boatlift and watercraft. 4. We also concerned that previous mitigation at the Barbee Mill Community Pier may not be fully implemented. Therefore, request copies of all of the existing monitoring reports to be completed as part of the shoreline restoration work required for the entire Barbee Mi11 _Plat, including the community dock. 5. The City needs to fully evaluate this project; its potential impacts and require mitigation as necessary. Without these elements, it is premature to issue a Determination of Non-Significance for this project under SEPA. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to the City's responses. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader . 1 Muckle shoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015 172nd Ave SE Aubum, WA 98092 253-876-3116 , '' 2 ' Gerald Wasser From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Categories: Priddy, Lynda <Priddy.Lynda@epa.gov> Friday, December 27, 20131:38 PM Karen Walter; Gerald Wasser Anderson, Suzanne NWS; Heller, Christa H (DFW); ROACH, VIVIAN (DNR); Tom Sibley RE: Urban Boat Lift adjacent to Barbee Mill Community Pier, LUA13-001640,ECF, SM, Revised Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance Follow up Flagged Red Category Mr. Wasser, I am the EPA Remedial Project Manager for the Quendall Superfund Site. My official re_view and comment will be coordinated with the Seattle District of the USACE upon the event that the permit applicant submits an app_lication to the USACE. Whenever new activiti_es, that require permits, are proposed in the vicinity of a Superfund Site, EPA reviews the permit application to determine whether the implementation and use of the proposed project (boat lift) may have adverse impacts on the Superfund Site. At present, my immediate concern is the nature and extent of the impact of water skiing or any other aquatic activities that could occur within the near shore area of the Quendall Superfund Site or cause contaminated sediments to be deposited in sediments at the Superfund Site. Lynaa 'E Pru.fay Environmental Scientist US Environmental Protection Agency 1200 6th Ave, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98101 206-553-1987 priddy.lynda@epa.gov Fr_om: Karen Walter [mailto:KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Sent: Friday, December 27, 2013 1:14 PM To: Gerald Wasser Cc: Anderson, Suzanne NWS; Hellef, Christa H (DFW); ROACH, VIVIAN (DNR); Tom Sibley; Priddy, Lynda Subject: Urban Boat Lift adjacent to Barbee Mill Community Pier, LUA13-001640,ECF, SM, Revised Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance Gerald, We have reviewed the Revised Notice of Application for the proposed Urban boat lift project adjacent to the Barbee Mill Community Dock (4157 and 4151 Williams Avenue N) in Renton referenced above. We have several concerns about this project as noted below: 1. The proposed free standing boat!ift is located on the north side of the existing Barbee Mill Community Dock and just south of the WDNR withdrawn area that contains contaminated sediments from the former mill site at the Superfund site on the.WDNR aquatic lands. There is no consideration in either the checklist or the Lake and Stream study sent with the_ Revised NOA consider the potential impacts from the new boatlift and the operation of a motorized watercraft on the north side of the joint pier: A motorized watercraft in this location will likely create scour and erosion from propeller wash that could cause a release of nearby contaminants into the water column adversely affecting fish and benthic vertebrates. Other potential impacts, include, but are not limited to: • The new freestanding boatlift and a boat in the nearshore where juvenile salmon are likely to be found that can cause them to avoid the nearshore and increase their risk of predation. • The boatlift will permanently displace benthic habitat. 1 • The boatlift and motorized watercraft have the potential to adversely affect the restoration work in the WDNR withdrawal area to the north through increased wave action that can adversely affect natural shoreline processes and vegetation growth. 2. There is no discussion about the potential for additional boatlifts and other permanent moorage proposed for this community pier. As we noted in previous comments to the Barbee Mill Community Pier project, the Tribe is concerned about this pier providing long term moorage that can create conditions which interfere with the Tribe's fishing access. 3. There is no mitigation identified for the boatlift in the documents we reviewed. Please provide the mitigation details proposed for this new boatlift and the associated watercraft. Please note that any approved mitigation at the Barbee Mill Community Pier site cannot be used to compensate for impacts from this new boatlift and watercraft. 4. We also concerned that previous mitigation at the Barbee Mill Community Pier may not be fully implemented. Therefore, request copies of all of the existing monitoring reports to be completed as part of the shoreline restoration work required for the entire Barbee Mill Plat, including the community dock. 5. The City needs to fully evaluate this project; its potential impacts and require mitigation as necessary. Without these elements, it is premature to issue a Determination of Non-Significance for this project under SEPA. .we appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to the City's responses. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muck/eshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 2 l Denis ~aw ;ri . . . City o ./'\ . . . _ _:Mayor~-----! r {a ·ri fl t/(1'1f tl January 7, 2014 Evan Wehr· · Ecco Design Inc · 20.3 N 3p 1h Street, #201 Seattle, WA 98103 ,~\,,:j,~~ . .;j~: ,fl) .. I Department.of Comm.unity and Economic Developme·nt C.E. '.Ch ip"Vi ncent, Ad.mini strator SUBJECT:. "On Hold" Notice Urban. Boat Lift/ LUA13-001640 . . . ~ . Dear Mr .. Wehr: · The Planning Divisior, of the City of .Renton accepted the above master application for review on October 8, 20.13, During our review, staff has determined that additional information is necessary in order. to proceed fur.ther. Specifically, .,.;.e have received . comments from Patti Klink, a Barbee mill resident, the Washington State D~partment of Natural Resources [DNR), the Muckleshoot lndian Trib~ fisheries Divisio·n, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Copies of this correspondence . are enclosed .. The following information will need to be submitted before April 8, 2014 so that we may continue the review of the above .subject application and proceed with the Environmenta.l (SEPA) Review of the ptoject: • . Aline.item response·of Patti Klink'sconcems; . . . . • . A line item response.to DNR's comments concerning the encumbrance ~f state, owned aquatic l~nds and the lease.hold area of Barbee Mill and aiso the · environmental con.cerns raised byDNR; • ·. A line. item response to the Muckleshoot · 1ndian Tribe Fisheries Division .environmental concerns; and • A response to the e~.vironmental concerns raised by the EPA. Please note that the .environmental responses requested should be prepared by a qualified bioloiical consultant. Renton City Hall • 1055 South GradyWay • Renton, Washington 98057 ; rentonwa.gov At this time, your project has been placed "on hold" pending receipt of the requested . information. Please contact me at (425) 430-7382if you have any questions. Me · Gerald Wasser · . Associate Planner . . cc: M6rris Management, Inc. c/o Shirle.y .Ely/ Owner Michael & Dorothy.Urban/ Applicant . Ruth Kidd; Jorben & Ginnie .Hollinswort;h; Allison_ Peryea;·_ Patti Klink;--V.ivian Roac_h, [)NR, Karen Walter; Mucklesh·oot Tribe; Lynda Mddy, EPA; Allison N. Peryea / Party(ies) of Record . . . . Endosures Gerald Wasser From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Karen Walter <KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us> Friday, December 27, 2013 1 :14 PM Gerald Wasser Anderson, Suzanne NWS; Heller, Christa H (DFW); ROACH, VIVIAN (DNR); Tom Sibley; Priddy, Lynda Urban Boat Lift adjacent to Barbee Mill Community Pier, LUA13-001640,ECF, SM, Revised Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Categories: Red Category Gerald, We have reviewed the Revised Notice of Application for the proposed Urban boat lift project adjacent to the Barbee Mill Community Dock (4157 and 4151 Williams Avenue N) in Renton referenced above. We have several concerns about this project as noted below: 1. The proposed free standing boatlift is located on the north side of the existing Barbee Mill Community Dock and just south of the WDNR withdrawn area that contains contaminated sediments from the former mill site at the Superfund site on the WDNR aquatic lands. There is no consideration in either the checklist or the Lake and Stream study sent with the Revised NOA consider the potential impacts from the new boatlift and the operation of a motorized watercraft on the north side of the joint pier. A motorized watercraft in this location will likely create scour and erosion from propeller wash that could cause a release of nearby contaminants into the water column adversely affecting fish and benthic vertebrates. Other potential impacts, include, but are not limited to: • The new freestanding boatlift and a boat in the nearshore where juvenile salmon are likely to be found that can cause them to avoid the nearshore and increase their risk of predation. • The boaUift will permanently displace benthic habitat. • The boatlift and motorized watercraft have the potential to adversely affect the restoration work in the WDNR withdrawal area to the north through increased wave action that can adversely affect natural shoreline processes and vegetation growth. 2. There is no discussion about the potential for additional boatlifts and other permanent moorage proposed for this community pier. As we noted in previous comments to the Barbee MiJI Community Pier project, the Tribe is concerned about this pier providing long term moorage that can create conditions which interfere with the Tribe's fishing access. 3. There is no mitigation identified for the boatlift in the documents we reviewed. Please provide the mitigation details proposed for this new boatlift and the associated watercraft. Please note that any approved mitigation at the Barbee Mill Community Pier site cannot be used lo compensate for impacts from this new boatlift and watercraft. 4. We also concerned that previous rniligation at the Barbee Mill Community Pier may not be fully implemented. Therefore, request copies of all of the existing monitoring reports to be completed as part of the shoreline restoration work required for the entire Barbee Mill Plat, including the community dock. 5. The City needs to fully evaluate this project; its potential impacts and require mitigation as necessary. Without these elements, it is premature to issue a Determination of Non-Significance for this project under SEPA. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to the City's responses. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader 1. Caring for your natural resources ... now and forever December 17, 2013 Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner City of Renton, CED-Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057-3232 Subject: WA Department of Natural Resources Comments -Urban Boat Lift/ LUAl3-001640 Dear Mr. Wasser: Washington State Department of Natural Resources ("DNR") has obtained the City of Renton Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the Urban Boat Lift Project. DNR manages the state-owned aquatic lands adjacent to the project proposal location and hereby submits the following comments for the City's record. The project description states the proposed freestanding boat lift is associated with, but not attached to, a community dock. DNR administers Aquatic Lands Lease No. 22-086046 (the "Lease"), authorizing Barbee Mill Community Organization to utilize 11,984 square feet of Lake Washington harbor area for the purpose of the said community dock. The permitted use authorized by the Lease is to "provide lake access and transient moorage for approximately 100 upland property owners, with one finger pier to provide private moorage for one adjacent upland property owner" and for no other purpose. As proposed, the Urban Boat Lift Project footprint will be on privately held aquatic lands. However, a vessel placed on the boat lit! will extend over state-owned aquatic lands, specifically into the leasehold area of Barbee Mill Community Organization. This encumbrance of state-owned aquatic lands is not consistent with the terms of the Lease and subsequently is not authorized. Additionally, DNR worked extensively with Conner Homes and the regulatory agencies regarding the configuration and placement of the community dock and terms of the Lease in order to avoid and minimize impacts to the adjacent restored nearshore environment, shorelands and bedlands. As proposed, the Urban Boat Lift Project will subject the restoration area and nearshore environment to: • Increased shading impacts to aquatic vegetation • Increased vessel wake impacting natural shoreline processes due to larger and more frequent wave action SOUTH PUGET SOUND REGION I 950 FARMAN AVE N I ENUMCLAW, WA 98022-9282 TEL: (360) 825-1631 I FAX: (360) 825-1672 I TIY: (360) 902-1125 I TRI 711 I WWW.DNR.WA.GOV EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Rt(YCCED PAPER 0 Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner December 17, 2013 Page 2 of2 • Scour and sediment erosion through prop scour • Crushing of benthic habitat • Heightened potential for release of contaminants into the water column As proposed, DNR does not support the Urban Boat Lift Project and will not amend the existing Lease to permit the use of state-owned aquatic lands. If you have comments regarding this correspondence, please feel free to contact me by email at vivian.roach(a)dnr. wa.gov. Sincerely, Vivian Roach, Aquatic Land Manager Shoreline District, Aquatics Resources Division c: DNR SEPA Center District File Aquatic Resources File • December 16, 2013 Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner CED Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 RE: LUAB-001640, EDF, SM -Urban Boat Lift I'm writing to strongly voice my opposition to the installation of the above referenced boat lift for the following reasons: 1. Because the proposed boat lift is not in front of the Urban's property but located within Barbee Mill common area and accessed from the community dock; once the lift is installed, no other homeowner will have access to that dock space for their own boat. The public notice states the lift will only be for the use of the homeowners of 4157 Williams Avenue. 2. There are cleats on the north bulk head for tie up of small watercraft. These cleats will not be accessible for others to use after the boat lift is installed. 3. The Barbee Mill Homeowners Association (HOA) established use rules for the dock and a homeowner can only keep their boat at the dock for a maximum of 72 hours. Whether the boat is physically tied up to the dock is irrelevant, the lift is parallel to the dock and the "water space" will always be occupied and no longer be available to other homeowners. 4. It's my understanding that the HOA was told the boat lift would be installed in front of their property. The public no~ acknowledges it is accessed from the community dock. 5. Placement of a boat lift in the community dock/marina area should be decided by the HOA since it also has financial implications (liability concerns, dock ownership and maintenance, taxes, and HOA fees) as well as use issues. 6. This installation would establish a precedent and conceptually, the entire length of the dock could be lined with privately owned boat lifts. This is a community dock and not a portal for privately owned boat lifts. I am glad I stopped to read this public notice. With the pending construction at the adjoining Quendall Terminal property, I thought it pertained to that site. Thank you for considering these relevant points in your review of the project. I am available for additional comment. T~~y~o1u,:·.)-.-JCL/1"-""~~--- Patti Klink 1126 N 42"• Pl Renton, WA 98056 cc Barbee Mill HOA Board i.n Iii i\l h (\I Fl I'·· I.fl 0 rn U"i 11 Leahy McLean Fjelstad Mr. Gerald Wasser Associate Planner City of Renton Planning Division 1055 Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 December 16, 2013 Send by U.S. Mail and by email ta gwasser@rentonwa.gov RE: Urban Boat Lift Project (4157 & 4151 Williams Avenue NJ Land Use It 13-001640, ECF, SM Dear Mr. Wasser: This law firm provides general counsel services for the Barbee Mill Community Organization. This proposed Boat Lift Project is located on property owned by the Organization pursuant to an easement. My client would like to be made a party of record and receive additional notices on this project. The Organization has no comments to make on the project at this time, except to note that the plans appear to comply with the terms of the recorded easement. Sincerely, Leahy McLean Fjelstad ~~-~~ Allison N. Peryea cc: Barbee Mill Community Organization; Shirley Ely, Association Manager. 25 Central Way, Suite 310, Kirkland, WA 98033 425-889-8191 fax 425-889-4794 www.leahyps.com ..... ,.,.. ml Leahy McLean Fjelstad 25 central Way Suite 310, Kirkland, WA 98033 :.11:::1,_,::::i {:±· .. ::l.::".:·~~.2 Mr. Gerald Wasser Associate Planner City of Renton Planning Division 1055 Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 I, .. JJ I 1• ill·'' Ii' ilJ,/l 11, .. ,J ,J, ,i,,,, "·l'I 11,ll "' I• 11/1'•1!, Agencies Evan Wehr Michael and Dorothy Urban Barbee Mill Waterfront LLC See attached (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING See Attached Applicant Owners Owners 300' surrounding property owners 55 Not ry Public in and for the State of Washington ·, Notary (Print): ___ .1.tl..l.icJl'-'+-_~.1-f c,...c..::'..:i '.c.r' ... , ~,;,.·~-· ------------- My appointment expires: Al• , ~c;J'i ;zc( )C l3 J ( template -affidavit of service by mailing Dept. of Ecology** Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region* Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv.1 MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers * Seattle District Office Attn; SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Boyd Powers*** Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. Attn: SEPA Section 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Attn: SEPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) WDFW -Larry Fisher* 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Issaquah, WA 98027 Duwarnish Tribal Office* 4717 W Marginal Way SW Seattle, WA 98106-1514 KC Wastewater Treatment Division* Environmental Planning Supervisor Ms. Shirley Marroquin 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 City of Newcastle Attn: Steve Roberge Director of Community Development 13020 Newcastle Way Newcastle, WA 98059 Puget Sound Energy Municipal Liaison Manager Joe Jainga PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01 W Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept.* Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 39015 -l 72nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092 Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program * Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert 39015 172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation"' Attn: Gretchen Kaehler PO Box48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Kent Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AlCP Acting Community Dev. Director 220 Fourth Avenue South Kent, WA 98032-5895 City of Tukwila Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 . . *Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of Application. **Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov * **Department of Natural Resources is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: sepacenter@dnr.wa.gov template -affidavit of service by mailing City of R n Department of Community & Economic D, pment ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW_SHEEJ:.n REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMENTS DUE: DECEMBER 27, 2Qil~ C2. ~ APPLICATION NO: LUAB-001640; ECF, SM DATE CIRCULATED: DECEMBER 4, 2013 zo (1 ~ -:i.,..· -111 APPLICANT: Michael & Dorothy Urban PROJECT MANAGER: Jerry Wasser PROJECT TITLE: Urban Boat Lift PROJECT REVIEWER: SITE AREA: 6572 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): n/a LOCATION: 4151 & 4157 Williams Ave N PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) n/a SUMMARY Of PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval of a a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Environmental Review for a freestanding boat lift in association with, but not attached to, a community dock. The proposed dock would be located in Lake Washington, a Shoreline of Statewide Significance. The project is within the Residential -10 dwelling units per acre zone (R-10) and shoreline jurisdiction. The proposed dock would be for use of the property owners at 4157 Williams Avenue North, but would be located in an easement over the property located at 4151 Williams Avenue North (Barbee Mill Community Dock). The boat lift would be located waterward of the ordinary high water line between the community dock and the bulkhead to the north. The freestanding boat lift would be 10 feet by 12 feet and would rest on 12 inch by 12 inch footpads on the lake bottom, Installation of the boat lift would be accomplished in one to two days and would be conducted during the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife "fish window" of July 16 through December 31. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT {e.g. Non-Code} COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water Unht/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transvortotion Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Natural Resources Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000Feet 14,000Feet 1D /1,t/J 14-- B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact ora~:i:o~acitm&;;;;;;;~yassessthisproposa/. 8 -/i -/) Signature of Director or AutHorized Repres.entative Date -------~S1cs·1]1~:t:t)If!l 0 REVISED NOTICE OF APPLICATION.AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) A Maner Appllatl<m has been fl Jed and acc,pted with the Departmtntol Community & Ecc,nomk D•....,lopment (CED)-PlaM1ln1 Olvldon <>I th• Oty of R•nton. The falhrwinJ briefly d.,.cr1bu th• appllcadon and t~e n..,., .. ry Public Approv~ll- OATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: D,mmt>er4, 20B lAND USE NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: lUAl3-0lll641J, ECf, SM Urb•n Bo,tllft PROJECT DESCRIPTION· The applicant ;, roqu .. tlng appm•al of a • St>cireH"" Sub5'antlal O<!Yelopment Pumi: •nd Envlronme~tal Relllew for a freestanding bo•t 11ft In aw,ciat,on wtth, but not ;,ttached to, a com'."unlty clock. The propc1,ed dai:k would be lacate<J In Lake Wa,hinglon, a Shoreline a.I S_tatewlde S1Rn1Hcance. The pro1ect I, within the Residential. 10 dw,,mng un1t, p,,r aero zone (R-101 ,nd ,horehne juci>d,ct"'"· The propo,ed d0<k would be for u"' of1he propt!rty owner, 01 (157 Willi•m• A .. nu• North, but would be located in an u,ement over the pro;,erty loca:ed at 4151 WIiiiam< A""nue North (ilorbu MIii Corr,munity Oo,:kj. The boat 11ft WllUld ~e loc.at<!d wa!e.-w•rtl of ho ordinary high waler line bt~en the community docl< •M the bulkhead t<l the north.~ rreestand_lng boat llfl would b 10 feet by n feet ,nd Wlluld re<t on 11 ,ncl, by 12 inch lootpod, on th• l•ke bonom. ln,tallat,on ol the boat llfl w:uld be ,ccompllshed in one to two d")', ond WllUld b<! conducted during !ho Wnhlngton Stole Oepartment of fl,h and wildl,le "fi,h window" of Jutv 16 throu11h D,;:cember 31 PROJECT LOCATION: 4157 & 41Sl Williams Ave N OPTIONAL OETERMINATIDN Of NDN•SIGNlflCANCE (DNS), A, the lead Agencv, the City of Renton ha, determined that · 'fican! en•i,onmental Impact, ore un!kely to re,ult from the propo,ed project. Therefore. •• pe:"'rtted undor the ~·~ 41 <K.110 the City of Renton I, using the Optional DNS process to give noijce that a ONS is 1,kely to boe Issued Comme~t pe~od'5 for th• project and the propo,od ONS are lr>!egratod ,nto a ,ITl[jle comment period. Thero will be no comment period following th• i,m,ance of the Thre5~old Oete,minatlon ot NQn-51£nlHcance (ONS). A 14-day appeal perfod wrn 10110-.. tMe .,,uanc• ol the ONS. PERMIT APPUCATION OAT!: r,ioncr OF COMP LEH APPLICATION, Al>PUCANT/P"DJECT CONTACT PERSON: P•rmll'I/R .. lew A111uutad: December 2, 2013 December d. 2013 E""n Wehr, EML: ev.an~eccodesl1nlnc.o:im; Mall: lOl N 3&'" 5t.-t #201, S.attle, WA 9810~ En•lranmental (SEPAi Rnlew, Shoreline Sutnt11<11l•I D<t~elopmel\1 Permit Dullclln1 Pumlt Location -..h1'11 application may be ,...1,wod: D1p1rtment Df Community & Econi:nnlc o .... 11opm1nt (CEO) -Plannlna Div Isl on, Sbrth Aoor Renton Oty H;,11, 105S SOI/ti! Grady Way, R1nton, WA ·-· 11 you wO<Jld like to be made a party of "'cord lo ri,a,M! further lnformotion on this propa>ed project, complete this rorm and return to: Ctfy of Rerrton, CED -Planning o;,;sion, 10SS So. Gr.,;fy W•v. Renton, WA 980S7. Name/FIie No., Urban Soat Lift/LUA13-001S40 NAME;--------------------,--,--------- MAILING AOOAESS: _____________ (ity/State/Zip·--------- HlEPHONENO: ------------ CONSISTENCT OVERVIEW: zoning/Landu .. , En"1ronmor>!•I CDCllment:I that Eval ... te tht Proposed Project: Ooeiopmen\ Re1ulatlon, UNd f<1r Project Mitigation, The ,ubject site;, dui:gr.,ted Re5kl,ntlal l'Jttodlum Con,/ty (COMl'..RMC) on the City of Renton compret...n,Ne Land Use Map and Roslllentlal 10 d-ijlni ~nib pocacni (M-10) on the C",tys Zoning Map. Environmental (SEP/>..) Checki,t The project wil be subject to 1he Clty"s SEPA ordlnance, RMC 4-HEOl!.1, Al'JIC 4-9-070, RMC 4.g.190 and oth!!r applicable codes and re1ulatlons ., oppropriato. Comments on t~e abO\OO appllcatton mu<t bo ,ubmlttod In wfldnl ,«, Gtraldn ~::;IH"7;1•;~l;'.•n 1 ~:~uC~~v~ P1onnln1 DIYl,lon, 105S Soulh Gr.ally Wav, Renton, WA 9&05 7, bv s.OO P_M O ddllio al notiHcatkrn b'/ mall contact question, about this propo,al, or wish to be made a party or re,:ord and reco""'" n f d and will be the Project Mana.:er. Al1yone wr>o ,ubm,t, writ!"" comments will autom,Ucalty !><,come • party o recor not,Hed ,of any decision on lhls pfll]ect. CONTACT PERSON: Gerilld Wilsnr, Ano,:late Pl11nner: Tel! (4251430-7382: Eml: JWHSer@rentonwa.gov I, Vt:/Al'/11 fey /1Cf1 VZ.V~reby certify that ;3 copies of the above document were posted in~ conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Signed:~,~} fir6rt{re~ Date: I Z /J If/ U)(~ ____ ,__, --11------ STATE OF WASHINGTON ) COUNTY OF KING ) ss ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that -~.;....,a<2c.1.r.,_,_._,_""-:----'==++>":1---- signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary or the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. \ Notary Publi and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): I. Agencies (Signature of Sender): ' '. t .J ' ':! 'G {( ' STATE OF WASHINGTON ) COUNTY OF KING ) 55 ) See Attached '''""'"''' "" l:; ,,,, -E 4' It>,~ . -:: 1.. · • -z ~ ~ ~ 0 f~--!!i, "i>IS'\,,, 3 .1: o-wt~,~ '·: ,.~ \~ .. "'"'"' "\ J,.:, . . . · ', (fl .. ,:,,,, 8-29-\,<' 0 · I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that /_ i ~<.._ Inc.. C ( re•, . ·"'"' '''''"""'"'''' }:-~. · signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act fo1 Ole l/ll~and purposes mentioned in the instrument. '''"" Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): ___ ...;.;Uci..C."-Ul-4-,ip-·-'t'."""'"')/J""·:a,"':.:;'5;,..· ------------- My appointment expires: k ( :J.<[/,&oi ?- template -affidavit of service by mailing Dept. of Ecology * * Environmental Review Section PO Box47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region * Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers * Seattle District Office Attn: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Boyd Powers*** Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. Attn: SEPA Section 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Attn: SEPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 AGENCY (DOE) LETIER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) WDFW -Larry Fisher* 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Issaquah, WA 98027 Duwamish Tribal Office * 4717 W Marginal Way SW Seattle, WA 98106-1514 KC Wastewater Treatment Division* Environmental Planning Supervisor Ms. Shirley Marroquin 201 s. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 City of Newcastle Attn: Steve Roberge Director of Community Development 13020 Newcastle Way Newcastle, WA 98059 Puget Sound Energy Municipal liaison Manager Joe Jainga PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-OlW Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept.* Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 39015-l 72nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092 Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program * Attn; Ms Melissa Calvert 39015 172°d Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Attn: Gretchen Kaehler PO Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Kent Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AJCP Acting Community Dev. Director 220 Fourth Avenue South Kent, WA 98032-5895 City of Tukwila Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 *Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of Application. **Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov "'**Department of Natural Resources is emailed documents to: sepacenter@dnr.wa.gov template -affidavit of service by mailing r• "'Cityof,,. : ·• 1{sJJ·IDIJ REVISED NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) -Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: LAND USE NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: December 4, 2013 LUA13~001640, ECF, SM Urban Boat Lift PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting approval of a a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Environmental Review for a freestanding boat lift in association with, but not attached to, a community dock. The proposed dock would be located in Lake Washington, a Shoreline of Statewide Significance. The project is within the Residential -10 dwelling units per acre zone (R-10) and shoreHne jurisdiction. The proposed dock would be for use of the property owners at 4157 Williams Avenue North, but would be located in an easement over the property located at 4151 Williams Avenue North (Barbee Mill Community Dock). The boat lift would be located waterward of the ordinary high water line between the community dock and the bulkhead to the north. The freestanding boat lift would be 10 feet by 12 feet and would rest on 12 inch by 12 inch footpads on the lake bottom. Installation of the boat Ii~ would be accomplished in one to two days and would be conducted during the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife "fish window" of July 16 through December 31. PROJECT LOCATION: 4157 & 4151 Williams Ave N OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE {ONS): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS process to give notice that a DNS is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed ONS are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non-Significance (DNS). A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: December 2, 2013 December 4, 2013 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Evan Wehr, EML: evan@eccodesigninc.com; Mail: 203 N 361 h Street #201, Seattle, WA 98103 Permits/Review Requested: Other Permits which may be required: Requested Studies: Location where application may be reviewed: Environmental (SEPA) Review, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Building Permit Lake Study Department of Community & Economic Development (CED)-Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED-Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No.: Urban Boat Lift/LUAB-001640 NAME:------------------------------------ MAILING ADDRESS: ________________ City/State/Zip: __________ _ TELEPHONE NO.: --------------- CONSISTENCY OVE"RVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: The subject site is designated Residential Medium Density (COMP-RMD) on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and Residential 10 dwelling units per acre (R-10) on the City's Zoning Map. Environmental (SEPA) Checklist The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-3-090E.1, RMC 4-9-070, RMC 4-9-190 and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner, CED - Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on December 27, 2013. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project Manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner; Tel: {425)430-7382; Eml: gwasser@rentonwa.gov PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION ;TENCY OVERVIEW: IL;,ndUH: ,mental Docum•nU that • the PropoHd Projec;t, pment Regulations ir Project Mitigation: The subject site Is designated Resldentla( M•dlum Density {COMP-RMD) on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Uie Map and Resl ' 110 dwelling units per acre (R-10) on the Clty's Zoning Map. Environmental (SEPA) Checklist The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-3-D90E.1, RMC 4-a-070, RM( 4-9-190 and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. ,ni. on the above applh;atlon must be submitted In wrltln1 to Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner, CEO - g Division, 1(155 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 980S7, by 5:00 PM on D,ecember 13, 2013. If you have ns about this proposal, or wish to be made~ par!y of record and receiloe additional notiflcat!on by mail, contact ject Manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party ol record and will be ! of any decision on this project. A.CT PERSON: Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner; Tel: !425)430-7382; Emf: rwanrr@rentonwa.gov ____ ...,.,1t®1rJ,t@m, e NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-(DNS) A Master Applkatlon has be•n filed and accepWd with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CEO)-Pl;innln1 DM1lon of !he City of Renton. The followln1 briefly d•scrlbnthoe appllcatlon end the necessary Publ!c Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: December 4, 2013 LAND USE NUMBER: LLl>\13·001640, ECF, SM PROJECT NAME: Urban Boal Lift PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant Is requesting approval of a a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Environment al Review for a freestanding boat lift In association With. but not attached to,;, rommunity dock. The proposed d0<;k wou!d be located in Lake Wa5hlngton, a Shoreline of Statewide Slgnlficance. The pro~ct is within the Residential · 1D dwelHng unit, per acre zone (R-10) and shoreline Jurisdiction. The proposed dock would be for use of the properly owner$ at 4157 WIiiiams Awenue North, but would be located In an easement over the property locat*<l at 4151 Williams Avenue North (Bar~e Mill Community Dode). The boat 11ft would be located wale.ward of the ordinal)' high water Tine between the community dock and the bulkhead to the north. The freestanding boat 11ft would be 10 feet by 12 feet and would rest on 12 tnch by 12 Inch footpads on the lake bottom. IMtallation of the boat lilt would be accomplished Tn one to two days and would be car.ducted during the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife 'fish window• of July 16 through Oe<ember 31. PROJ!CT LOCATION: 4157 & 4151 Williams Ave N OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS): A, the Lead Agency, 1he City of Renton has de1ermined that significant environmental Impacts ne unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS proce.5 to give notice th~! a ONS Is likely to be Issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS are lntegrited Into a single comment period. Toe re will be no comment period following the is5uance of the Threshold Determination of Non-Signif~ance (DNS). A 14-day appeal period will follow the Issuance of the DNS. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: NOTICE Of COMPLETE APPLICATION: APPUCANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Permlts/Rewlew Re'lue1ted: other ~rmlts whkh IT\ilV be required: Requested Studies: December 2, 2013 December 4, 2013 Ewan Wehr, EML: ewan@le.:codeslgnlnc.com; Mall: 203 N :16'" Street #201, Seattle, WA 91103 Environmental jSEPA) Review, Shoreline Substantial Development Pumlt Buildlnc Permit Lake Study Location whr& •ppllcatlan may be reviewed: Department of Community & EtOl\Omk Development (CEO)-Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton ary Hall, 1055 South Graily Way, Ren!on, WA '"'" If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further inform~tion on this proposed project, complete this form and re tum to: City of Renton, CED -Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No.: Urban Boat Llft/lUAB-001640 NAME:--------------------------------- MAILING ADDRESS: ______________ City/State/Zip: _________ _ TELEPHONE NO.: ------------- CERTIFICATION I, j wffl were posted ~)QOLU . hereby certify that j copies of the above document in -3.-conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Date: }tj,) CU. J l 3 ~ . STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss ) Signed::_~cafu~· '_tlr.c,J,.d...,t....=-· __J_rk.1JL.:1.a.;r~( c=·'-::...,.._ ___ _ f NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-(DNS) A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) -Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: December 4, 2013 LAND USE NUMBER: LUAB-001640, ECF, SM PROJECT NAME: Urban Boat Lift PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting approval of a a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Environmental Review for a freestanding boat lift in association with, but not attached to, a community dock. The proposed dock would be located in Lake Washington, a Shoreline of Statewide Significance. The project is within the Residential -10 dwelling units per acre zone (R-10) and ·shoreline jurisdiction. The proposed dock would be for use of the property owners at 4157 Williams Avenue North, but would be located in an easement over the property located at 4151 Williams Avenue North (Barbee Mill Community Dock). The boat lift would be located waterward of the ordinary high water line between the community dock and the bulkhead to the north. The freestanding boat lift would be 10 feet by 12 feet and would rest on 12 inch by 12 inch footpads on the lake bottom. Installation of the boat lift would be accomplished in one to two days and would be conducted during the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife "fish window" of July 16 through December 31. PROJECT LOCATION: 4157 & 4151 Williams Ave N OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS}: A5 the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS process to give notice that a DNS is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non-Significance (DNS). A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: December 2, 2013 December 4, 2013 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Evan Wehr, EML: evan@eccodesignlnc.com; Mail: 203 N 36th Street #201, Seattle, WA 98103 Permits/Review Requested: Other Permits which may be required: Requested Studies: Location where application may be reviewed: Environmental (SEPA) Review, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Buildlng Permit Lake Study Department of Community & Economic Development {CED) -Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 lf you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED-Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No.: Urban Boat Uft/LUA13-001640 NAME:--------------------------------------- MAILING ADDRESS: ________________ City/State/Zip: __________ _ TELEPHONE NO.: --------------- CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: The subject site is designated Residential Medium Density (COMP-RMD) on the City of Renton Comprehensive land Use Map and Residential 10 dwelling units per acre (R-10) on the City's Zoning Map. Environmental (SEPA) Checklist The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-3-090E.1, RMC 4-9-070, RMC 4-9-190 and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. Comments on the above application must be submitted In writing to Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner, CED - Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on December 18, 2013. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a µ·arty of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project Manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Gerald Wasser, Associate Planner; Tel: (425)430-7382; Eml: gwasser@rentonwa.gov PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION PLANNING DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site." 5hou_ld be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. · -1 -06/09 \\Server\job files\Shoreline\2013\S131 O Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist doc A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Urban Boat Lift 2. Name of applicant: Michael and Dorothy Urban 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: Michael and Dorothy Urban 4157 Williams Ave. N Renton, WA 98056 702-277-1063 Contact Person: Evan Wehr -ecco design inc. 203 N 36'h Street Suite 201 Seattle, WA 98103 206-706-3937 4. Date checklist prepared: August 13, 2013 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Winter 2013 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. A Biological Evaluation was prepared by Marine Surveys and Assessments to assess impacts to listed species and/or critical habitat for the community pier that was constructed at the site in late 2012. Marine Surveys and Assessments has done an addendum to their original BE that addresses the impacts of the proposed lift. 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. None are known. 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. RGP 1 approval from the Army Corps of Engineers. SDP, SEPA review, and building permit from the City of Renton. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. Install a new ground based boat lift. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should 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. 4151 & 4157 Williams Ave. N in Renton, WA 98056. Section: NWl/4 32 Town: 24N Range: SE B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS -2 -06109 \\Server\job files\Shoreline\2013\S1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist.doc 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one); flat. rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other ______ _ b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?) The site is relatively flat with the steepest slope along the shoreline being approximately 3%. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay. sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The area where the lift is to be installed is mainly angular rocks. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. No filling or grading are proposed. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so. generally describe. No. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? There will be no change to the amount of impervious surfaces. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: None proposed. 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. No emissions are to occur. b. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None. 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 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. The work will occur in Lake Washington. -3 -06/09 \\Server\job files\Shoreline\2013\S1310 Urbanl.Admin\Renton Forms\environmenta! checklist.doc 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. The boat lift will be installed in Lake Washington. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? 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 Water: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 2) Describe waste material that will be discha~ged 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. None. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 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. N/ A 2) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: None. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on th_e site: _X_ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other _X_ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other _X_ shrubs _X_ grass __ pasture __ crop or grain __ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other __ water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other __ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? None. -4- \\Serverljob files\Shoreline\2013\S1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist.doc 06/09 ' c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None know. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: None. 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. Chinook salmon, bull trout, and steelhead. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain Juvenile salmonids migrate along the lake shoreline. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Work will take place during the appropriate work window of July lG'h through December 31". 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. Solar. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. 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: None. 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)? None known. -5 -06/09 \\Server\Job f11es\Shorehne\2013IS1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Farmslenvironmental checklist.doc 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or 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. Low levels of noise during installation of the lift. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site and adjacent properties are residential. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. An existing house and community pier. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? R-10 f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation ofthe site? COR g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Urban h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: None. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. 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: None. 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. A couple feet above the ordinary high water mark. -6 -06/09 \\Server\job files\Shoreline\2013\S 1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist.doc ' • • b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None. 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: None. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Boating and fishing. 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: None. 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 known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None. 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. The site is accessed by Lake Washington Blvd. N just west of 1-405. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? 8/lOths of a mile. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? None. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private? No. -7 -06109 \\Server\job fi!es\Shoreline\2013\S 1310 Urban\Admin\Renton Forms\environmental checklist.doc e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Boat traffic on Lake Washington. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. None. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None. 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. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity. natural gas. water. refuse service, 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. None. C. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true, correct, 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 Signature:~ ~ Name Printed: E 0"'1n Wehr-- Date: -8 -06/09 - \\Server\job files\Shoreline\2013\S 1310 UrbanlAdmin\Renton Forms\environmental checklistdoc • • ' ' City of Renton LAND USE PERMIT MASTER APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: NAME: Barbee Mill Community Organization Urban Boat Lift PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: c/o Shirley Ely ADDRESS: Morris Management, Inc. 325118" Avenue SE, Suite 204 4151 & 4157 Williams Ave. N Renton, WA 98056 Bellevue, WA 98005 Barbee Mill Community Organization is the owner of the tract located at4151 Williams Avenue N. Michael & Dorothy Urban CITY: Bellevue, WA ZIP: 98005 own the lot located at 4157 Williams Ave. N. KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): TELEPHONE NUMBER: 425 283 5858 ext. 119 0518500350 (4151 Williams Ave. N) 0518500340 (4157 Williams Ave. N) APPLICANT (if other than owner) EXISTING LAND USE(S): NAME: Michael & Dorothy Urban Residential PROPOSED LAND USE(S): COMPANY (if applicable): No Change EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: ADDRESS: 4157 Williams Ave. N COR PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION CITY: Renton, WA ZIP: 98056 (rr applicable) EXISTING ZONING: TELEPHONE NUMBER: 702-277-1063 R-10 CONT ACT PERSON PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): SITE AREA (in square feet): NAME: Evan Wehr 6,572 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE COMPANY (rr applicable): ecco design inc. DEDICATED: ADDRESS: 203 N 36" St. #201 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: 696 PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET CITY: Seattle, WA ZIP: 98103 ACRE (if applicable) TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable) Macintosh Hl):lJsers:mitchell:Downloads:Barbee Mill -Boat Lift-2:Barbee Mill land use master app(revised).docx • I • 206-706-3937 evan@eccodesigninc.com NUMBERO w DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): Macintosh HD:Users:mitchell:Downloads:Barbee Mill -Boat Lift-2:Harbee Mill land use master app(revised).docx -2 - .. -OJECT INFORMATION (coL.-.. 1ued) --~-----~------------ NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): 1 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): 3,730 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): -. ------ PROJECT VALUE: $12,000 IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): D AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE D AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA TWO D FLOOD HAZARD AREA D GEOLOGIC HAZARD D HABITAT CONSERVATION D SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES D WETLANDS ___ sq.fl. ___ sq.fl. ___ sq.ft. ___ sq.ft. ___ sq.ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information included\ SITUATE IN THE NW QUARTER OF SECTION 32 , TOWNSHIP 24 N , RANGE SE , INTHE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) / · cJ.-.-e.. / / , as President of the Barbee Mill Community Organization (the Organization), declare under p ally of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the Organization is (please check one) _x_ the current owner of the property involved in this application, specifically 4151 Williams Avenue N., Renton, WA 98056, or __ the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are 1n all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. ~~ icr;.£~~L-~ -D-at_e __ _ STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that --::!M--'-/Jl.:.,.+--'--',-=---,,u;...J:_c:..:k.::/+1:--::-- signed this instrument and acknowl~e ii lo,qe his/her/their~ uses and purpose mentioned i\t~ ;i,~~r' c ) I .. :~':'--,,o:·::~-:c'.; ·.-:-/:: :/\ lt.l _6 S" 21! 6 2 ;:: • > .. " Dated I I :;; • r~OT:-\P: V ,j : ... ~ PUT. iC \~tr {:f i~: _::: ::::--'0"'0..:.~~,,1~~0-'-~--J_;~=~::.;"' ___________ _ Macintosh HD:Uscrs:mitchell:Oownloads:Barbee Mill -Boat Lift-2:Barbee Mill land use master app(revised).docx • 3 • City of Renton LAND USE PERMIT MASTER APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) NAME: Michael & Dorothy Urban ADDRESS: 4157 Williams Ave. N CITY: Reriton, VVA Z!P: 98056 TELEPHONE NUMBER: 702-277-1063 APPLICANT (if other than owner) NAME: COMPANY (if applicable): ADDRESS: CITY: ZIP: TELEPHONE NUMBER: CONTACT PERSON NAME: Evan Wehr COMPANY (if applicable): ecco design inc. ADDRESS: 203 N 36th St. #201 CITY: Seattle, WA ZIP: 98103 TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: 206-706-393 7 evan@eccodesigninc.com ' PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: Urban Boat Lift PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: 4151 & 4157 Williams Ave. N Renton, WA 98056 KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): 0518500350 0518500340 EXISTING LAND USE(S): Residential PROPOSED LAND USE(S): No Change EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: COR PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable) EXISTING ZONING: R-10 PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): SITE AREA (in square feet): 6,572 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED: SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: 696 PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable) i-·~. r-· _.,.~ •.. ··-~ . ' . ·•-~ '". NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if appliclablef ' ---. ; .J NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): C:\Users\MUrban\J\ppData\Local\Microsoft\ Windows\ Temporary Internet Files\Content. IE5\PL WLOLJY8\land use master app.doc -I - I .• .JJECT INFORMATION (con_ ... ued) ~-~-----~--------------, NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable}: PROJECT VALUE: 1 $12,000 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable}: IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable}: 3,730 IJ AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL IJ AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA TWO BUILDINGS (if applicable}: IJ FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. ft. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): D GEOLOGIC HAZARD sq. ft. NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if D HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. applicable): IJ SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES sq. ft. NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): D WETLANDS sq. ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Attach le information included SITUATE IN THE NW QUARTER OF SECTION 32 , TOWNSHIP 24 N , RANGE 5 E , IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) ~ , declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I am (please chec one) urrent owner of the property involved in this application or __ the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. /~~£--4~~ ~~=--efl0/i-3 ;.10 I/~ Date STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that f'1 icl,,c,.e_ I V r b o llf I Do Y-O f'h ~ CJ.' b"' " signed this instrument and acknowledge it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. ,,\\Iii,' \ 11, IJ)i 111 ,~{'i:,? ri Otso'',,, 9 -10-13> Dated Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Date ,,' r. I • 1 1 ' • • ' t '.iv"',,. $(; •' ..,. • . •, ...... ~ I • 0 1."',.R. Y I 0:, .:: : ~ ·. ': = • Notary (Print): _C_a_l~_6 __ J.t_a_15_0_>1 ________ _ : : J-~· ... ::·t.. ! : • I "':I '11., 1z'" :,.,., . ·o; •"'' • t .. \~_;., Pt.·BL\C ,,'(;-/ ~ .. ,e..', ,,..;:,,;_,~ .... ,,~ 0 I It I I~'('\"~, .. 111,,, I;:: ii.~.::;\\,,, ...... C \Users\MUrban\AppData\LocaHAfllii!rOWft\WmdoY.s\Tcmporary Internet F1les\Content 1E5\PLWL0DY8\land use ma~ter app doc My appointment expires. _b_-_l_·_l_l-(~------------- -2 - Project Narrative Urban Boat Lift The proposed project is to install a new boat lift for Michael and Dorothy Urban at 4151 Williams Avenue North in Renton Washington. A shoreline substantial development permit and environmental review are required from the City of Renton. The project site and adjacent properties are zoned as Residential l Odu/ac (R-10). The site is on the shoreline of Lake Washington. A portion of the shoreline is armored with a concrete and steel bulkhead while the remaining portion is unarmored. Michael and Dorothy Urban reside at the adjacent parcel to the north, 4157 Williams Avenue North, and have an easement to place a boat lift on the adjacent property to the south, 4151 Williams Avenue North, on which a community dock has been built. 4151 Williams Avenue North is currently owned by the Barbee Mill Community Organization. The lift will be located immediately waterward of the ordinary high water mark between the community dock to the south and the bulkhead to the north. It will be located approximately 3 '-6" away from the community dock. The boat lift will be IO' wide by l 2' long. The bunk of the boat lift will extend 18" above the ordinary high water mark and the lift will sit on the lake bed of Lake Washington on foot pads that are 12" by 12". The lake bed consists mostly of large angular rocks where the lift will be located. The estimated fair market value of the boat lift is $12,000. Construction Mitigation Description Urban Boat Lift Construction Dates : The date of construction will depend on when the necessary government approvals for the lift are issued. Installation of the lift will only take one day to complete. The in water work window at the site is open from July 16°1 through December 31 ". The lift will be installed during the work window opening in either December 2013 or July 2014. Hours and Days of Operation: The work will take place during the City of Renton's typical hours of construction which are 7:00 am through 10:00 pm Monday through Friday and 9:00 am through 10:00 pm Saturday and Sunday. Proposed Hauling/Transportation Routes: The lift will be brought to the site by van that will access the site via Williams Avenue North. Measures to be implemented to minimize dust, traffic and transportation impacts, erosion, mud, noise, and other noxious characteristics: Work will take place only during allowed hours of operation. Only one vehicular trip is required to install the lift. Erosion will not be caused by the installation of the lift. Noise levels from installation are very low. Special Hours Proposed for Construction: No special hours are proposed for construction. Preliminary Traffic Control Plan: Traffic control is not necessary for the project. BARBEE MILL COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION Board of Directors Meeting Minutes Tuesday, December 4, 2012 at 7pm at Barbee Mill Community Center {First Meeting of Board) In attendance: Mary Mitchell, Lisa Reshaur, Ron Corbell and Shirley Ely Establishment of a Quorum: All of the Board of Directors were present Shirley Ely, association manager representing Morris Management was on site. Election of Officers/ Terms The Board elected the following officers: President: Mary Mitchell, 3 year term expires December 2015 Vice President/ Treasurer: Lisa Reshaur, 2 year term expires December 2014 Secretary: Ron Corbell, 1 year time expires December 2013 Approval of Minutes The Board reviewed the Connor Homes Board of Directors minutes dated October 8, 2012. Shirley Ely will prepare draft minutes of the 2012 Annual Meeting/ Transitional Meeting held on November 7, 2012 for the Board to review in January 2013. Organizational Matters: The Board approved President Mary Mitchell to be the main contact to Morris Management. Treasurer's Report: The Board reviewed October and November 2012 financial reports. The Board has some ongoing concerns regarding the Reserve Study which were discussed and will continue to be discussed in future board meetings. Committee Reports: Discussion took place regarding the need for Barbee Mill homeowners to step forward for the purpose of providing leadership and advice to the Board in the following areas: Landscaping Committee Architectural Committee Rules/ Regulations Committee including by not limited to Community Dock, Barbee Mill Beach Club Barbee Mill liaison to the City of Renton Having no addition business, President Mary Mitchell adjourned the meeting at 8pm. Next Board Meeting: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 at 6pm. Location: Beach Club Denis Law Mayor December 4, 2013 ·Evan Wehr 203 N 36'h Street #201 Seattle, WA 98103 Department of Community and Econom.ic Development C.E."Chip"Vini::ent, Administrator Subject: Notice of Complete Application Urban Boat Lift, LUA13·001640, ECF, SM Dear Mr. Wehr: The Planning Division of the City of' Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. . . It is tentatively-scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on December 30, 2013. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. Please contact me at (425) 430-7382 if you have any questions. Gerald Wasser Associate Planner cc: Michael and Dorothy Urban; Barbee Mill Waterfrorit LLC / Owner(s) Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • renton;..,,a.gov LAKE WASHINGTON N 42ND PL. SITE Renton oc::::::========================::::i,,,. NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP SCALE 1 " = 200' 0 500 FT AMY R. LEITMAN MARINE SURVEYS & ASSESSMENTS 521 SNAGSTEAD WAY PORT TOWNSEND WA 98368 Tel.360.385-4073 Email.marine.surveys.inc@gmail.com Michael Urban Dock and Boat Lift Project Conner Homes, Barbee Mill Community 4151 Williams Avenue N., Renton, WA 98056 Case#: LUAI0-006 Biological Evaluation Addendum August 5, 2013 To: City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development From: Marine Surveys & Assessments Subject: Addition of Boat Lift to Project This is an addendum to the Biological Evaluation for the Barbee Mill Community Dock Project (Case#: LUA! 0-006) for the addition of a boat lift to the project. The Biological Evaluation was originally submitted in 20 l O and the proposed project has since been completed and the docks built. The primary purpose of this addendum is to proposed the addition of a boat lift to one of the completed docks and address the City ofRcnton's municipal code 4-3-090-D.5.b. and 4-3- 090-E. l (CRMC: 4-3-090-D.Sb. and CR!v!C: 4-3-090-E. l.) "Building and Development Location~ Shoreline Orientation" and "Use Regulations", which respectiv_ely affects this addition. Marine Surveys & Assessments Urban Project: Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page l Project Location \I., Section NW32, Township 24N, Range 05E. 4151 Williams Avenue N. Renton, WA 98056 Latitude: 47.515745°N/Longitude: 122.206114°W See Figure 1 for project location. Project Information The project location for this boat lift was previously the site of the former Barbee Mill Company lumber mill, which has recently been restored to a residential neighborhood (Barbee Mill community developed by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC). The addition of this proposed boat lift to the already completed dock at the project location is expected to have little to no impact on the aquatic habitat as this area is already heavily developed and disturbed. For a more detailed impact summary please refer to the original Biological Evaluation. In accordance with CRMC: 4-3-090-D.5b. the proposed boat lift is designed in a manner that directs land alteration to the least sensitive portions of the site. However, CRMC: 4-3-090-E. l. allow boat lifts as accessory to a residential dock: provided, that all lifts are place as far waterward as feasible and safe. This conflicts with CRMC: 4-3-090-D.5b. as the location that is least sensitive is the most landward portion of the dock. Thus on the premise of feasibility and to minimize any potential impact, the location of the proposed boat lift will be at the beginning of the dock next to the concrete and metal bulkhead, where the area is already developed and disturbed thus being least sensitive. Please see Figure 2 and 3 for the site plan, elevation detail and location of the proposed boat lift, pictures of the proposed boat lift location can be seen in Figures 4 and 5. A Regional General Permit No I. for this project is will be concurrently filed with the U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers. Relevant information from this permit are as follows. The proposed boat lift will be a ground based lift made out of approved steel, where the depth of its most landward end will be 5.5 feet. Construction equipment will be operated from an out-of-water location whenever possible; this equipment will be operated in a manner that minimizes the suspension of particulates. All equipment used in or around water will be clean and inspected daily prior to use to ensure that the equipment has no fluid leaks. Should a leak develop during use, the leaking equipment will be removed from the site immediately and not used again until it has been adequately repaired. No equipment will be stored or fueled so close to a surface water that the activity could adversely affect the waterbody. Work that disturbs the substrate, bank, or shore will occur in the dry whenever practicable. The work window for the proposed boat lift will be from now (August 51h) to the end of the year (December 31 "). Marine Surveys & Assessments Urban Project: Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page 2 ... " Figure 1. Project Information and Location PROJECT INFORMATION OWNER: MICHAEL & DOROTHY URBAN DRAWINGS BY: ECCO DESIGN INC 203 N 36TH ST SUITE 201 SEATTLE, WA 98103 206-70~3937 SITE ADDRESS: 4151 & 4157 WILLIAMS AVE N RENTON, WA 98056 PARCEL NUMBER: (4157) 0518500340 & (4151) 0518500350 BODY OF WATER LAKE WASHINGTON LEGAL DESCRIPTION: (0518500340) TRACT 35, RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LUA 10-023 LLA, REC. NO. 20120802900003 IN PLAT OF BARBEE MILL, VOL 248 OF PLATS, PP. 25-38, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WA (0518500350) LOT 34, BARBEE MILL, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF. RECORDED IN VOLUME 246 OF PLATS, PAGES 25 THROUGH 39, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: INSTALL A NEW BOAT LIFT. Marine Surveys & Assessments VICINITY MAP ----------- Urban Project: Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page 3 Figure 2. Site Plan and Proposed Boat Lift Location. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE SHORELINE CONAGURATION AND PROPERTY LINE LOCATIONSAREAPPROXIMA1EONLY. PROPERTY LINES ARE BASED ON AN AUGUST 2012 SURVEY BY CORE DESIGN. YINAN HE & MA HONG 4163 WILLIAMS AVE N OHWM 21.85'@SH0REUNE r·-·-·-·-----·-·-·-·-·---- PROPOSED BOAT LIFT EXISTING COMMUNITY I.;, DOCK TO REMAIN o, DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES PARC.#3224059066 OHWM 21.85' @ BULKHEAD • ·-----·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·.J ' . EXISTING ADJACENT DOCK~ TO REMAIN I---< -+------------------,. ____ t:"::j __ _ '. __ ---------l=::j SITE PLAN SCALE 1" = 411-0" MICHAEL & DOROlHY URBAN 4151 WILLIAMS AVE N BARBEE MILL COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION 4151 WILUAMSAVEN -·-·---·-·-·-----~-- BARBEE MILL WATERFRONT LLC 4125 WILLIAMS AVE N -·-·-·-·-·---.. -·-4-- GARY & BRENDA BEEM 4119WILUAMSAVEN Marine Surveys & Assessment~ Urban Project: Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page 4 .... • Figure 3. Elevation Detail and Proposed Boat Lift Location. EXISTING BULKHEAD TO REMAIN PROPOSED BOAT LIFT 21_85' OHW ELEVATION DETAIL SCALE 1/8" = 1 '-0" Marine Surveys & Assessments 15" Urban Project: Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page 5 - Figures 4. Picture of Boat Lift Location (looking waterward). Marine Surveys & Assessments Urban Project: Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page 6 Figure 5. Picture of Boat Lift Location (looking landward). Marine Surveys & Assessments Urban Project: Addendum to Biological Evaluation Page 7 LuA. lo -CCJr-, LAKE and STREAM STUDY Barbee Mill Community Dock Project For: Conner Homes at Barbee Mill, LLC (Attn: Charlie Conner) 846 108th Ave NE Bellevue, WA 98004 At: Conner Homes at Barbee Mill 4151 and4125WilliamsAve N Renton, WA 98056 Parcels #051850 0350[4151) and 051850 0360 (4125) Prepared by: Marine Surveys & Assessments 521 Snagstead Way Port Townsend, WA 98368 Phone: (360) 385-4073, Fax: [360) 385-1724 E-mail sea@cablespeed.com January 19,2010 City of Renton Planning Division JAN 2 2 i.t:.i List of figures Figure Number Page 1. Vicinity and area maps ...................................................................... 6 2. DNR withdrawal area ......................................................................... .7 3. Plot plan ................................................................................................ 8 4. Proposed pier plan and elevation views ........................................ 9 5. Proposed section and framing views A-A. ..................................... 10 6. Proposed section and framing views B-B ....................................... 11 7, Planting areas ............................................. , ...................................... 12 8. Planting legend ......................................................................... : ....... 13 9. Planting plan ............ , ......................................................................... 14 l 0. Tree and shrub planting detail ........................................................ 15 MS&A Barbee Mitt Communi1y Dock Project • 2 arbee Mill Community Dot. ,roject Lake and Stream Study Assessment Narrative I. PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Project Purpose and Location: The proposed Community Dock will consist ofa fully grated 1,592 ft' dock with a 5'-10" x 172' (1,003 ft2) main walkway, a 7'-10" x 56' (437 ft') "T'' and a 5'-10" x 26' (152 ft') finger pier (Figures 3-6). The dock will have a 100% grated surface with 46% open space. The dock will be supported by (14) 6" And (14) 8" diameter steel battered piles. Piles will be driven using a vibratory pile driver to practical refusal. A native planting plan will be installed (Figures 7-9). A 6' wide walkway is needed to safely serve the anticipated munber of users. The proposed Community Dock will be located adjacent to Lot 35, 4151 Williams Ave N and Lot 36, 4125 Williams Ave. N, Renton, WA 98056, presently owned by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC ( the "applicant" for the requested shoreline substantial development permit). The purpose of the project is to provide water access and transient moo rage for 100 property owners from the Barbee Mill community and private moo rage for 1 property owner. The proposed Barbee Mill Community Dock would be a day use only structure except for the 5'-10" x 26' finger pier, which will provide full time private moorage for Lot 36, 4125 Williams Ave. N. The properties are located within the Barbee Mill Community, a major waterfront subdivision currently under development by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC. The subject property is located along the eastern shore of Lake Washington in the City of Renton in Section 32, Township 24N, Range SE; Latitude: 47.515745"N/Longitude: 122.206114°W. Two bodies of water are adjacent to, or flow through, the Barbee Mill Community: Lake Washington and May Creek. The subject property is located along Lake Washington, a Shoreline of Statewide Significance as provided in RMC 4-3-090Fl, and a Shoreline of the State under RMC 4-11-190. This Standard Stream or Lake Study is prepared in accordance with the requirements ofRMC 4-8-120D with respect to the Lake Washington shoreline of the subject property and the 100' of abutting lakeshorelots both to the north and to the south of the subject property (the "study area"). May Creek, a Shoreline of the State (RMC 4-3-090F2), flows through the Barbee Mill Community. The distance from the closest edge of the project site to the OHWL of May Creek is 190'. The project location itself is 345' from the OHWL of May Creek. The community May Creek open space (a riparian buffer), parking spaces and a street cover the area between the southeastern comer of the subject property and May Creek. Project Description: The Barbee Mill community is being developed by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC on the approximately 22 acre site of the former Barbee Mill Company lumber mill. Upon completion, the Barbee Mill community will have 114 multi-story paired homes, a pond, walking trails and lakefront open space for the 1Lse of residents. Lots 23 through 48 are lakefront lots. To restore the former industrial site to a parcel suitable for a residential waterfront subdivision, the mill buildings were demolished; fill soils were removed from behind the bulkhead; asphalt paving, a pier, the wooden bulkhead and piling associated with the mill operation were removed; and extensive shoreline restoration was completed. The subject property is located south of, and was not included in this extensive remediation. The project shoreline is a sheet pile bulkhead with a concrete cap. The substrate immediately waterward of the bulkhead consists oflarge and small cobble. The proposed Community Dock would be oriented to keep all structures and moorage within the side property setbacks of each property in compliance with all City of Renton wning and municipal codes (Figure 3). As mentioned above, the purpose do the Community Dock is to provide water access and transient moorage for l 00 property owners from the Barbee Mill community and private moorage for 1 property owner. Residents and their MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 3 guests would have use of the Doc) swimming, fishing, water skiing and an: nber of other water sports and activities. In establishing design parameters for the proposed project, the applicant required that the proposed structure does not interfere with the general public's use and enjoyment of Lake Washington, that no structure pose a navigation hazard to boaters, and that no structure interfere with the use of existing or future neighboring docks or piers. The location of the proposed Community Dock also removes it entirely for the DNR withdrawal area to the north. 2. LAKE AND STREAM CLASSIFICATIONS As a Shoreline of Statewide Significance (RMC 4-3-090F I), Lake Washington is included in the definition of a Shoreline of the State (RMC 4-11-190). Lake Washington is a Class I lake as it is a perennial salmonid-bearing body of water classified as a Shoreline of the State (RMC 4-1 l-190SI). May Creek is an important salmonid stream that is classified by the City of Renton and the State of Washington as Class I waters and included within the defmition of a Shoreline of the State (RMC 4-3-090F2). 3. SHORELINE RESTORATION AND OHW MARK Shoreline Restoration: Prior to restoration of the beach in conjunction with vacation of the land, the Lake Washington shoreline north of the subject property was heavily bulkheaded, back-filled and covered with impervious asphalt paving; numerous piling and substantial quantities of concrete rubble and other shoreline debris were on the site. Pursuant to the general development site remediation, upland and in-water structures including the timber bulkhead and piling were removed, shoreline rubble was removed, fill soil was excavated to subgrade elevations, toe rock and a temporary quarry spall erosion control berm were installed, and sand, gravel and rock materials were used to construct a beach to mimic natural conditions. Although the area of extensive remediation did not encompass the subject property, a planting buffer of native vegetation was installed along all the lakefront lots, including the subject property, to environmentally and functionally enhance the entire development shoreline. There would be no clearing or grading associated with the proposed. Community Dock. OHWMark: The Ordinary High Water(OHW)mark for Lake Washington is the line of mean high water (RMC 4-11-150 Definitions 0). The Lake Washington water depth is controlled by the Army Corps of Engineers at the Hiram M. Chittenden Locks and is at 2 I .8' of lake elevation. The OHWL at the project site is seen in Figure 4. 4. VEGETATIVE COVER OF THE SITE The study area includes no wetland or flood hazard areas; it does include Lake Washington riparian areas. Prior to the Barbee Mill Beach Restoration project, riparian vegetation was found to be generally absent within the study area as the shoreline behind the bulkhead was paved. In unpaved areas, vegetation noted included Juncus ejfusus (soft rnsh) and Iris pseudocaris (a non-native iris). The upland redevelopment required extensive regrading and clearing; a mitigation planting plan was agreed upon that includes planting along the Lake Washington shoreline. In accordance with this mitigation plan, plantings on the subject property have been installed. In conjunction with construction of the proposed Community Dock; additional native plants, shrubs and/or trees will be planted as specified in applications to, and as approved by, the Washington State Department offish and Wildlife and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (Figures 7-9). 5. ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS OF LAKE WASHINGTON ALONG STUDY AREA Until relatively recently, the industrial structures and use of the site limited the ecological functions that would otherwise have been provided by Lake Washington and its adjacent riparian area. As a result of the extensive general site restoration work completed north of the subject property, including removal of the wooden bulkhead, large pier and numerous pilings, excavation of fill soil from behind the bulkhead, and reconstruction of the beach to mimic its natural state, the ecological functions of the portion of the lake within the study area should be greatly MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 4 enhanced. Recently plante arian vegetation and additional plantings onjunction with the proposed project will further assist in restoring the ecological functions of Lake Washington. Much ofthis uewvegetation will be overhanging, providing shade and predator protection for fish and aquatic invertebrates. The newly planted riparian vegetation will add significant organic matter to the lake substrate in the form ofleaves and woody debris that fall and wash in; an additional source of food, shelter and shade for aquatic invertebrates and fish. This increased vegetation will also provide food and shelter for terrestrial insects, and in tum provide an additional food source for birds and animals that feed upon them. The addition of riparian vegetation to this formerly near-barren site should also help water quality by filtering pollutants, removing nutrients and reducing sediments in any runoff from the adjacent upland development. The smaller design of the proposed project as compared to the structures removed, together with increased overhanging vegetation, may facilitate the migration of juvenile salmon. 6. FISH OR _WILDLIFE USE OF AREA Birds: Birds observed on or near the site include hawks, herons, eagles, quail, osprey, cormorants and songbirds. Before the mill structures were demolished, an osprey nest was successfully relocated from the top of the old mill sawdust collector to a platform built on a 25' pole over the water not far from the original nest site. The osprey have accepted the new nest and.a video camera records their activities for viewing over the Internet. Although the bald eagle is no longer on the list of threatened or endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), bald eagles continue to be protected by the Bald and Golden Eagles Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and are protected as a "sensitive species" within the state of Washington (WAC 232-12-011). The only eagle nests observed near the project site are two nests approximately 0.65 mile from the site on the opposite shore. Mammals: The only wild mammals reported as observed in the area are deer.· Fish: Salmonids observed at the site include salmon and trout. Salmooids known to be present in southern Lake Washington include Puget Sound chioook salmon, coho salmon, sockeye salmon, steelhead trout, bull trout and cutthroat trout. Puget Sound chinook, Puget Sound steelhead and bull trout are all listed as threatened under the ESA. Other fish observed at the site include bass, black crappie, bluegill, pumpkinseed sunfish, tench and yellow perch. The shoreline remediation was designed to be consistent with Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 8 Conservation Piao recommendations. As a result of the remediation, shoreline that was previously unsuitable habitat for fish and other aquatic life due to extensive shoreline modifications and industrial use of the site has been restored. The restored gravel substrate and gently sloping boi:tom should provide favorable habitat for winter rearing of salmon fry. The new gravel substrate to the north and the existing cobble on the subject property should be suitable habitat for benthic invertebrates which would likely attract juvenile salmonids. 7. MEASURES TO PROTECT TREES AND VEGETATION At the present time, the study area has no living woody plant with a trunk six inches or greater in diameter or any other plant falling within the definition of "Tree" in RMC 4-11-200. This is likely because of the prior asphalt paving over, and industrial use of, the area and subsequent excavation and regrading in accordance with the approved upland development plan. The proposed Community Dock area has been landscaped pursuant to the general development planting plan. Additional native plants, shrubs and/or trees will be installed in accordance with state and federal project permits. Trees planted in accordance with all landscaping plans will likely have trunks less than six inches in diameter at the time of planting (Figures 7-9). MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 5 figure 1. Vicinity map PRQ.CC:r DESIGNED BY: Waterfront Constru:tim It& lHIS t()()J\IO{T IS PACPAIDNL't PAOP(RTY ~ fiAlERfR()t,fJ CONSTRUCTIOIII file., AAb IS NOr 10 l!I[ USE), IN 'fMJl.( (JR Jf't PJiRT, fOR N,f'f 01'HER PROJECT YrllHOUT TH[ 'ffiJTTE)I ,tu'JHORIZATION Of' ..,.ATERfRDNT ~ NC. MAP /NO SCALE LEGAL DESCRIPTION 1/4-Sf~ NW 32-241i-05E TAXLOT #": D51850 0.350 (4151) a: 051B!:ID0360 (4125} BARBEE MltL TGW UND ltfT IN TRS A,8,C,0,E.f.G,H,~l,f.l,N,O&.P LAT: 47.515745N _ LON~ -l22.206114W PURPOSE: PROVIDE COl•,O,iUNllY ACCESS AND PRNAT( ~OORACE OATUl.f: CO( o.o· [ST 1919 AOJACENT OWNERS: Q) CONNER HOl,,IE5 ,&.T B,!>RBEE IJtLL LLC 4157 WILLW.Js AV£ N RENTON. WA. 98056 @ CONNER HO~ES AT BARBEE MILL LLC 4119 WUIA!Js AVE N RENTON, 'NA. 98056 MS&A PROJECT NAliAL REFERENCE i: BARBEE !JILL C0MUUN11Y DOCK SITE LOCATION ADDRESS; 4125 & 4151 l't'ILUAl.lS AV( N RENTON., WA. 91:1056 WG#: 05-3077-A..1-1 t ' Ii"« FOREST PARK w _J ~ w (J) l<E!iUl:mE Ju>lfTA l<IRK!.AND RENTON AREA MAP/ 0 , 'wu PROPOSED~ INSTALL Cot,0.JUNITY DOCK IH; 1...AK[ WASHINGTON NEAR; RENTD!i COUN~ KING STATE.: WA APPL BY: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE !Jill LLC $HECT: 1 D.l.TE: 1-\2-10 Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 6 DNR WITHDRA°NL AR MS&A Figure 2. DNR withdrawal a ', '· ,, ', PROJfCT PfSICNEO BT": Waterfroot Coostnl:tion lllc lHIS DOCU~ IS ~ PffOf'ERTY or WAIU!UIOW ~tCi1R\ic::TIDl,i IJfC.. ""'Ill IS lilO'T TO 1IE USED. ~ l'!I-IJU CJ! ~ PART. fOR AH( OTHER PRO.l'.Ci *'11-0UT fl.I£ '/r'Rfl"TEN AUTMORl?AJ'IOI( Of W,f,n:Rnta,cl CONSTRUCTION Jtte. DNR WITHDRAWL AREA 100' 50' o· 1oo' I ----· ··~ftD'l'l'I MDffl " -=- " REFERENCE APPLICANT; CONNER HOl.iES AT BARBEE Mill LLC PROPOSED: INSTAU CO~l.4UN!TY DOCK SHEEL3 OF: 7 NEAR~T: RENTON EDA""'rr=-,","-~1"2--c,o="---1',D"eWC:G · 05-..1077-A.J-1 i I Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 7 \ •. \ \ / / MS&A Figure 3. Plot plan PROJEC'J DES«:NEO ~ Waterfront Constroctim loc. THIS ~ IS PAOPRllJfrr PROPOm'_ Of" iNATrRFRONT C0t6Ifft.J(;TION INC.. ANO IS t,,io1 TO et vsttl, Iii YIHCU" OR It>! PAAT. F'OR Mfr OlHER PJIDJ'ECJ 'l\'ITttOUT lHE 'fffl:rrTEli AUTHOltlZATOI OF t.i.:rmrROt.11 CONSfRUCTION I~ Pl<IPOSAL ( CONSTRUCT A FULLY GRATED 1,592SQFT COMMUNITY DOC!< WITH A S-10'X 172 (1.(m:iCf'l)lAAN WALKWAY, 7'-10" X $ (437SQFT) "T" ANO 5'-1Cr X:!i' (152SCFT)ft«RPER ( TH£ DOCK WU.HAVE A 100% GRATED SlffACEWlTHt6!1.Cf'SJSPA<l: ( THE DOCK WU. BE SUPPORTED BY {14) fi' "ND (14}8'CWJETERS1EELBATTEREDPLES ( PILES Will BE ORtvEN USING A VIBRATORY PlECfWERTOPRAClCALIUUSAL ( A NATIVE PlANTtlG PLAN WU.BE NST~D " ' ' NMIVE PLANTING PLAN JOB SITE 35 4151/CONNER HOMES ,., ··,. [][]] --"'-'- / JOB SITE 36 + 12p/CONNER HO~ES \ UM] ', 28.4 ~--,,/ 4113/CONN[R HOMES 36 [ill] ------------- 39 ( 4101/CONNER HO~ES ; I 29! V /,,,-- ---,,--' ,, \ PLOT PLAN 50' 25' o· ~ N ' \\~ ,,., :• ,// ,, 40 oo· APPLICANT; CONNER HDL-lES AT BARBEE f.lU LLC PROPOSED: INSTALL COf.l~UN!TY DOCK SHEET:4 OF; 7 NEAR: AT: RENTON DATE: 1-12-10 G : 05-.3on-A.-4-t Barbee Mill Community Dock. Project • 8 s: V, ,. )> 3' a- re ~ () ~ C J 0 a =I' ! '-0 \ \ \ ! ' ' ' ,,~,\ \ \ \ /"'-.. \, \,,, '\,,, \\,, ' ' ' ' ',, ,./ ,.--,, .~~~;:'.._ L-;;d-¥----,t,, ~,,-------------- /~ 7'-10" ',, ',,,_ ········ ,, ',, ',, '·,,J _,,,// NATIVE PLANTING PLAN I --I 19,:-1--,,(g> 1 ' ' ' " ·' '··- 56' \ : ',, : L-$>----\ i ' ', ) ' '\ ', --., / \ \ ! ~------.-·j PROPOSED FULLY .' ,-:, .' GRATED DOCK /\ N / ,,----/ \ I / (14)/PROPOSED G" / \ / STEE~l BATTERED PIUNG : \ / J s·-10· -I ,I \ ,/./ r' . , ' / \ i \ ! ~/ \ . ' ' ' ' ' ' j!l 5~' ' ' ,\ '.zl ; ::, / aY gl ' , ' ' / / / i f-~i·! ::. /,/ ,./ /'' ~ ' ' OHWL 21.BO (COE) I , , , 1 B.80 (NAVDBB} \ \ ,' / ,' I I I f • '•,, ',, ,, ', '· ', \~· } / ( \ ! \ ' . \ (1'4) PROPOSED 8" \ \ ' I l \ ( ,' : I ' ( I ' ---_\__, -f -+------~---,, ,, - OHWL21.B NAVD66 (18,80') STEEL SATIEREO PIL\NG 2'-6" (14) PROPOSED 8" STEEL 13ATTERED PIUNC PROJECT OESlGNED an Waterfront Constructioo Joc. THIS OOCU~NT IS PFICIPRltlM'I" PROPERN OF WATtRfl'iONl CONSfRUCllON INC., AND IS NOT TO BE USED, !N \l!HOLE OR JN PAl'O. FOi'! ANY OTHER PROJECT l\'nHOIJ1 THE °WRITTEN AUl}IORIZ~TION OF WATERFRONT CONSTRUC"HON INC. lo 10 PROPOSED DOCK DETAIL VIEW SCALE: 1 "=30' 180' ------------ 172' ------------ PROPOSED FULLY GRAT(D DOC!< EXISTING CONCRETE/SHEET PILE BULKHEAD TO REMAIN ( 14) PROPOSED 5• STEEL BATTERED PILING REFERENCE ff-: EXISTING CRADE EXISTING CONCRETE WALKWAY PROPOSED DOCK ELEVATION VIEW !APPLICANT: CONNER HOMES--ATBAR8tElJ1LL LLC 30' 15' o· 30' PROPOSED: INSTALL COM~UNITY DOCK SCALE: I "•30' SHEEL S QF,7 N_~t,,~/AT:_ RENTON DATE: 1-12-10 DWGH: 05-3077-A.5-l 20 ..,, cc· C: iii f", "17 0 "Cl 0 "' 111 C. "Cl a :, C :, C. 111 ~ :, :$. ~ PART PILING CAPS Ct.u-t.AMS JOIST RIM JOIST NAILERS GRATING HARDWARE MS&A flgur Proposed section and framing vh A-A f---------------s·-10----------------< 2"x4" NAILER 0 1a· o/c l,4Ax. CRATING PILE COVER PLATE CAP BEAM ASSE"'4BLY SfA1Nl£SS STEEL DECK SCREWS 5-t/B"JC12'" GLU-l..AM BEAAI 3/4" GALV. I.AG BOl.i '-"'"'---'"-OHWL 2\.ao· (COE) OHWL 16.60' (NAVO 88) 6" OR a· STEEL BATIERED PILING PROPOSED 6' DOCK SECTION A-A SCALE, 3/4"=1' J---------------5'-10·---------------1 GRATING SfA1Nl£SS STEEL DECK SCREWS 16d GALV. COl,,4MON NA'-5 (TYP) 5-1/8',12" GLU-LA~ BEAl.l 3/4" GN.V. THRU ROD 7•,c5'" RIM JOIST 3-")(4" LEDGER 2·x6"' JOIST l!I 2' 0/C WI 1/2",7" GA!.V. LAG BOLT O 16'" 0/C PROPOSED 6' SECTION FRAMING 12" 6"' .;-o· I --SCALE: 3/4"=1' \LI.TERI.IL LIST SPECS TREATMENT 6"&8° STD WAil. STEEL EPO><Y COATED OR HDG W6x15 "'H-SEAM HDG 5 1/8·x12· &' 7 1/e·x12· Of (24-F-V4) ACZA r,s· DF #2 OR BTR ACZA rx£· OF 12 OR BTR AcZA 2-,:4· Df 12 OR BTR AcZA SUNl'/ALK POLYPROPYI.ENE NONE STEEL STAINLESS OR HOG PRMCT OCSIGttEI) Br. Waterfront Constnl:tion In;; THIS 00:UYE"tfT IS PAOPRE11Rf PROPERTY Of 'tATIRFRONT C.Ot(iTRUCTION lt.fC,., .M,/0 IS NOT ft) eE 1JSEO, l"4 WI'~ OR ~ PART, FDR >Jff 01K£R PROJE:Cl ,;rtHOUl lH[ WRrTIEt4 AuTHCfl'IZ'A~ OF '!IATERrl!Qlil C.DN$TRUCTION 111C,. NOT£: ,!,,l.L PILES 10 BE ORr.tEN TO PRACTICAL RHUSAL REFERENCE ~ APPUCANT~ CONNER HOI.AES l>.T BARatE t,,itU LLC PROPOSED: INSTAU. cot-AMUNllY DOCK HfET;6 OF;7 NEAR AT: RENTON DATE,l-12-10 C : 05-3077-A..6-T Barbee Mill Communily Dock Project • 10 ~ 9<> > I CD ~ = ? '3 ~. -<" a :,, ~· !l • PART PILING CAPS GLU-LA~S I 5 JOIST RI'-,( JOIST NAlLERS GRATING HARDWARE i------------------71-10~-----------------a 2"x4~ NAILER Q, I 8" 0/C /.IAX, PflDJECT DE:iltiNEO S'T'1 Waterfront Construction loc. lHIS D0CUI.IEN1 1$ PffCPAltlAR't PROPfRTY OF WAT[RF'RONT CONSrRUCilON INC .. ~a IS NOT TO 9E USED. IN WHOU: OR IN PAR1, !'"OR ANY OTHER PffOJEC'l )tllHOIJ1 THE l\'ArrTtN AUTHORIZA'TION or WATERFRONT CONSTRUCTlON lt,/C. GRATINC CAP BEAM ASSEMBLY el PROPOSED 8' DOCK SECTION 8-B SCALL 3/4"•\' STAINLESS STEEL DECK SCRE.WS 2·-e· 1'-6" 7-1/8",12" GLU-LAM BEAM 5/4" CALV, LAG BOLT _j_ OHWL 21.80' {COE) OHWL \ 6,80' (NAVO 88) a· STEEL BATTERED PILING ,--------------7'-to·---------:=:;-::-::--,----- 2•,,• ""1LER O GRATING""\ .,-STAJNLESS STEE\ 18" 0/C MAX, / DECK SCREWS 7-1/8"id2' GLU-LAl.l BEAM 16d DALY. coM~ON 2•xs" JO!ST @ 2' 0/C \4AT£R""-UST SPECS s"&a .. sro WALL sn:n WM5 "H" BEAM 1/_8_",12"_& 7 1/B',\2" OF (24f'-V4) 2"x6" OF' N2 OR BTR 2"x6' OF #2 OR BTR 2"x4' OF #2 OR BTR SUNl'/ALK POL\'PROPYL!cNE STEEL TREATMENT EPOXY COATED OR HOG HOG ACZA ACZA ACZA ACZA NONE STAINLESS OR HOG J/4" CALV. THRU Rqo 2'\6" R!~ JOIST NAlLS (T'fP) J"k4-" LEDGE'.R PROPOSED 8' SECTION FRAMING W/ 1/2~11"7" GALV. LAG BOLT @ 1611 0/C 12· 6" J" a· 1 • ~ SCALE: J/4"-1' NOTE: ALL PILES TO BE DRIVEN TO PRACTICAL REFUSAL. RErERENCE /t:_ PPLlcANT: ·coNNrn HaMES-Ar aARBcE MILL LLC PROPOSED.: INSTALL coM~UNITY DOCK SHEET: 7 OF:°? OATE:1-12-10 NEAR/AT: RENTON JJ'!if;#.i _ 05-,on-A,_7-_ t c iii !"' a 'O g CD C. .. (b n = 0 :l 0 a a' 3 1· c,, ' "' Figure 7. Planting areas \ \, ~,...-....\ \./ \ . , \ J l I w ) / ;'/ Z I , l / -1/ / 1; 1-r---' -; / ,/ [l'.: .1· , , ,· 0 // ~ / I l I -!:I:' / / / ,,.! X I It ~ ~ (. // / ,.// zr ', ~ / / z\ \ \[ ,,•'/ I -1 \ \ V / I \ \ , / / I \ \ ,/ // I \ \ .. ! I \ \ / f I l \ ' / / I \ / / / L j \/ _J__ f + ----';-+---I -lL.. I \ 1J 1 f PLANTING AREAS 16' o' 16' + i a· Pl.ANTING DESIGN BY THE WATERSHED COMPANY 7'AISl>oh--lOridand WA 98033 ~m..m.5242 f.f2S.827..813' www.www.tf td ..mm Sc:ience & Oeslgn MS&A \ \ LOT 35 JOB SITE 4151/CONNER HOMES NA"TlVE_~NG_~ (-3!(00SF-) ·,\,, \ / / JOB SITE ( 4125/CONNER HOMES \ \ LOT 36 \ I ----\ _________ ' -- ' REFERENCE ff: APPL CANT: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MIU: LLC PROPOSED: INSTALL C01.4MUNIT'f DOCK 5HE£T:1 OF:4 NEAR/AT: R(NTON DATF: 1-12-10 DWG : 05 3077 "'-2 1 Barbee Mm Community Dock Project • 12 Figure 8. Planting legem " -..,_> _,.___ PLANTING AREAS 15· 8' o· I I I I I I I I I I I I ' I ' ' I ' I I I ' ' . I ' ! l 1 I l I I I \ I I I I 1! .. , .. , r ~--·--------~---·-----------~\ : I: l 1 ' ' GENERAL PLANTING SEQUENCE, ~ . ' 1-~-J·:; :~· .. ,· r . ,•. " . ·.; I. Nadvoplant""""""°" ..... oau-dunng lro,t-&ee period, only. Pcelerred months for installation are between September-15th andApn1 15, prior to hot. dry weather. Pbnts may only be instaHed during hot weather 1r the contractor agrees to immediate irrigation of the enti~ planting .r-. dd"wering at least 2• of watel" per w.elc 2. Proo.re plants in legend and Insure that mmrial meet! d1I!! minimum ~ents outlined ;., the plant k,g,,nd and planting de<all,. 3. Locate an existing ub1ities within the limit or work. The contractw is re.sponsible for any utility damage as a result of the landscape construetion. •· R.move all ........, weed, (;f encount2nd) by""'~ out """"· 5. Amend soils as needed to proYide mln. l0% otplk; m.Jtm;dthrwghoutthc planting area. Add cc,mpost: to lni;z-ease organk: content. rotodl Into planting area 6. Note: The contractDr is responsibfe fur any adverse ~ Q:lflditions dliilt may affect proper plant growth and est3bllshrnent. Notify owner of arry poor ~ conditions prior to O)Q$O"U(:tion. 7. l.a)'out plant"""""" pe, plan for lmpoc1ioo by the L>nd""f>" Aroutect. Plant -w;ff NOT be allowed w;d,out the "PP'°""' of the Land,cape /vd,itea. 8. lmall p,-, per planting detail,, sheet l. 9. W-o,,;h plant thoo-oughty tn .-.move,.. pod<et,. to. Install a ,4• depth. coarse wood-chip muk:fning throughout en~ prcJect area. 11. lnstaR a temporary irrigation system capable of defive.ing 2• ol water ~week to the entITT: planted an;,a. Maintain irrigation system in working comfitlon for two (2) ~ aftel" initial plant insbllation. The landscape c:ontraaor shall rnaint::ul all plant material untr1 final Inspection and approval by the Owner or (),.,,,ner's representative. AU planting,; ;and W!:Jf'kma.nship shall be guaranteed for one year following final owner acceptance.. PLANTING DESIGN BY THE WATERSHED COMPANY 75,0 Sbc!h Street Sooth Kirid;n::i WA 98033 pru.m.SZ.f-2 f~2S.ev.s1u www.~.com Science & Design MS&A I \ I PROJECT Df5!CNCD BY: Waterfrll'lt Caiotrud;lcn Ir,;, THIS OOCUMEN'r IS PROPRIETAFn'" PROP(Rl't or WAl(RFROH'f CONSTRUCTION INC.., !<l>O S NOT TO BE USED, lhl WHOLE OR: IN PART. F"OR AN'f OTHER PROJtCT wnHOllT lHE Wf!ITT[N Al!THOR!VillON OF WATERFRONT CONSTRVCTION INC. PLANTING LEGEND SCIBffiRC/COMHONN.I\HE 9"I!!. SIZE/ CX)MMENTS ~ e:~,c ACEllORONAlUt1 " 2 GAL, WEll MANCHED ""'""" BETULAI'~ ' S G't. Wat. BRANDIED p/ """"""' l./yp ll-1.J)',.PUCATA ' SG,l,t.Yl'B..t.BIWCHB) wmaw,mcnWl • lG,l,l.,HUl,..TJ.ttu1 , 2 GAi.. Fl.JU. a BUSI-« ' 26,1,l.RAJ.&BI..G-IY " 2 G,tt. R.ll & ausi-n: • '""" , 1 G.i.L, fUJ.. ~ !ILl$HY " 2 GH.., FUU. & &JSlff" ' 2G,IL,.Fl.t.l.& IIOSl-ff , .. :tS' POTS, li"O.C ,~ 2..5' l'OTS. l-f'O.C " IGN..,2-t' 0.C. " ~= " PI..ANTAT~1QF™1 !.ElRl SPECIES: IG.<.1:..30"0.C. REF£RENCE ff; APPLICANT: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MILL LlC PROPOSED: INSTALL CO~MUNfTY DOCK SHEET: 2 OF: -4 ,DATF: 1 12 10 INFAR/A-:R[NTO» OWG!i!: 05 3077 A2 l Barbee Mill Communily Dock Project • 13 PLANTING PLAN 16' e· o· -THE ~WATERSHED ..... COMPANY 750 Slxdi Sv1'C:lt South Klndand WA 98033 p 425Jl22.ll42 f 425.827.BI 3'- www.watu sl d crcn Science & Design MS&A Figure 9. Planting plan !FOR PLANTING LEGEND SEE SHEET 21 REFERENCE ff: APPLJC.-.NT: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MILL U.C PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK SHEET: 3 Of:4 NEAR/AT: ROO-ON DATf: 1-l2-10 DWG : 05 3077 A.2 1 Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 14 Figure 10. Tree and shrub planti1 etails NOTES: I. PIANTGR0UNDCOVERAT5PECIAEDDISTANCEON--CENTER(O-c.JUSING TRIANGUI.AR SPACING, 1YP. 2. LOOSEN SIDES AND BOTTOM OF Pl.ANTING PIT AND REMOVE DEBRIS 3. LOOSEN ROOTBOUND PLANTS BEFORE INSTALLING 4. SOAIC PfT BEFC)RE. AND AFTER INST AUJNG Pl.ANT -4' DEEP SPECIAED MUL0-1 U.YER HOLD BACK FROM STEMS l3i!it--2' HT_ WATER BASIN; NATIVE SOIL OR MULCH ,. 0 ~OUNDCOVER& PERENNIAL Pl.ANTING DETAIL THE WATERSHED COMPANY '1X MIN DlA.. ROOTBAU. NOTES: I. PIANTING PIT SHAU NOT BE LESS TI-IAN (2) TIMES nlE WIDnl OFnlE ROOT BALLDIA. 2. LOOSEN SIDES AND BOTTOMS OF PLANTING prf l. SOAK PLANTING PIT AFTER PlANTlNG REMOVE FROM POT & ROUGH-UP ROOT 11ALL BEFORE INSTALUNG-UNTANGLE AND STRAIGHTEN ORCUNG ROOTS -PRUNE IF NECESSARY. lF PlANT ts EXCEPTIONALLY ROOT -BOUND, DO NOT Pl.ANT AND RETURN TO NURSERY FORAN ACCEPTABLE AL TE~ ~ MULCH U.YER-HOLD BACK MULCH FROM llWNK/STEMS ~--3" MIN HT. WATER BASIN RNISHGRADE SLOW RELEASE GRANUu.R FERTILIZER. OSMOCOTE -OR APPROVED EQUIV_ (OVTSIDE Of 0.H. W .M_ ONLY)APPUED ONE YEAR AFTER IN/TIAL PLANTING tt---REMOVE DEBRIS AND l.AJ\GE ROCl<S ANO IIACKFILL WITH NATIVE SOIL ARM UP SOILAROVND Pu.NT 0 :REE & SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL REFERENCE #: APPL CANT: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MlU. U.C 750 Sixth Sct-eec Soulh Klrkland WA 98<Bl PROPOSED: fNSTAL.l. COt.4'-'UNITY DOCK pffl.82U2'42 f.QSJW'.8136 www.w .... :sle+ecom Scienc:~ & Design MS&A SHEE1: 4 OF:-4 NfAR/AT: RENTON DATF: t-12-10 DWG : 05 3077 A.2 1 Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 1 S LUA. to -ooC::> Barbee Mill Community Dock Projec;t . Army Cmps of Engineers Reference# City of Renton Planning Division Biological Evaluation I Habitat Data Report January 19, 2010 For: Conner Homes at Barbee Mill, LLC (Attn: Charlie Conner) 846 108th Ave NE Bellevue, WA 98004 At: Conner Homes at Barbee Mill 4151 Et 4125 Williams Ave N Renton, WA 98056 Parcels #051850 0350 (4151) and 051850 0360 (4125) Prepared by: Marine Surveys Et Assessments 5 21 Snagstead Way Port Townsend, WA 98368 Phone: (360) 385-4073, Fax: (360) 385-1724 E-mail: sea@cablespeed.com List of Figures and Attac 1ents Figure Number Page 1. Vicinity and area maps .................................................................... 14 2. DNR withdrawal area ........................................................................ 15. 3. Plot plan .............................................................................................. 16 4. Proposed pier plan and elevation views ...................................... 1 7 5. Proposed section and framing views A-A ...................................... 18 6. Proposed section and framing views B-B ....................................... 19 7, Planting areas .................................................................................... 20 8. Planting legend ................................................................................. 21 9. Planting plan ...................................................................................... 22 10. Tree and shrub planting detail ........................................................ 23 Attachment Number Page l. Photograph of the site ................................................................ 24-25 2. Species list for King County ........................................................ 26-27 3. Essential Fish Habitat Assessment .............................................. 28-29 4. Assessment of Impacts to Critical Habitat for Puget Sound Chinook ........................................................... 30-31 5. Assessment of Impacts lo Critical Habitat for Coastal -Puget Sound Bull Trout .......................................... 32-33 MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 2 ___ logical Evaluation/Habitat_ ta Report Barbee Mill Community Dock Project I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Project Location: · Y. Section NW32, Township 24N, Range 05E. 4151 and 4125 Williams Avenue N. Renton, WA 98056 Latitude: 4 7 .5157 4 5 °N/Longitude: 122.206114 °W See Figure 1 for project location. B. Project Description: The proposed project is the construction of a community use dock intended to facilitate access to Lake Washington for Barbee Mill community residents (Figures 1, 3 and 4). The Barbee Mill community is being developed by Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC on the approximately 22 acre site of the former Barbee Mill Company lumber mill. To restore the former industrial _site to a parcel suitable for a residential waterfront subdivision, the mill buildings were demolished; fill soils were removed from behind the bulkhead; asphalt paving, a pier, the wooden bulkhead and piling associated with the mill operation were removed; and extensive shoreline restoration was completed pursuant to sale of the site to Conner Homes_ The shoreline restoration was completed by the Barbee Mill Company in conjunction with vacation of the land. The proposed community dock is adjacent to one vacant lot (36) (4125) scheduled for residential development and located at the vacant lot (Lot 3 5) ( 4151) recently reallocated to the Barbee Mill Community as a result of DNR disallowing the Community Dock to be constructed over a withdrawal area (Figure 2). This north property (Lot 35) has been reallocated to the community to provide lake access for all upland owners and those waterfront owners located north of the site adjacent to the DNR withdrawal area_ In addition to a landing and day moorage facility for watercraft, the proposed community dock would be a suitable place for launching canoes and kayaks, for sun- bathing, for swimming, fishing, water skiing and any number of other water sports and activities. Both properties are currently vacant but Lot 36 is planned for a single-family residence. The shoreline consists of a sheet pile/concrete. Additional native riparian plantings on both parcels will be offered as part of this project The substrate consists of small angular rock and cobble. C. Habitat Data: As mentioned above, the general project area is located at the former Barbee Mill Company lumber mil_l site. As a former industrial site, the general development area, including the subject property, was subject to decades of disturbance and degradation by human activity. The Lake Washington shoreline was heavily bulkheaded, back- filled and covered with impervious asphalt paving. Numerous piling and substantial quantities of concrete rubble and other shoreline debris were on site. To restore this former industrial site to a parcel suitable for a residential waterfront subdivision, upland and in-water structures including the mill buildings, timber bulkhead and piling were removed, shoreline rubble was removed, fill soil was excavated to subgrade. elevations, and toe rock and a temporary quarry spall erosion control berm were installed. In addition, extensive shoreline restoration was completed which included using sand, gravel and rock materials to construct a beach to mimic natural conditions MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 3 and installing coir rolls along th ke Washington ordinary high water Jin o additional excavation, grading, clearing or fill material will be required for the proposed pier project. The subject property is located south of, and was not included in, the area requiring the most extensive remediation. The study area includes no wetland or flood haz.ard areas but it does include Lake Washington riparian areas. Prior to the site restoration, riparian vegetation was found to be generally absent in the Barbee Mill community development area due to extensive paving. In unpaved areas, vegetation noted included Juncus effusus (soft tush) and Iris pseudocaris (a non-native iris). In accordance with the general development mitigation planting plan, native plants were installed along the entire Barbee Mill community Lake Washington shoreline, including the subject property shoreline. In conjunction with construction of the proposed community do~k, adwtional native plants, shrubs and/or trees will be planted as specified in applications to, and as approved by, the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (Figures 7-9). Until the extensive site restoration was completed, the industrial use of the property limited the ecological functions that would otherwise have been provided by Lake Washington and its adjacent riparian area. As a result of the extensive remediation, beach reconstruction and plantings, the ecological functions of the Lake Washington shoreline within the study area should be greatly enhanced. The addition of riparian vegetation to this formerly near-barren site should help water quality by filtering pollutants, removing nutrients and reducing sediments in any runoff from the adjacent upland development while helping to stabilize and protect the shoreline from erosion. The riparian vegetation planted and to be planted should increase the habitat available for aquatic invertebrates and fish; the addition of organic matter to the lake substrate from fallen and washed in leaves and woody debris will provide them with food, shelter and shade. Increased overhanging vegetation will also provide shade and predator protection for fish and aquatic invertebrates and may facilitate the migration of juvenile salmon. Terrestrial insects will benefit from the food and shelter provided by newly planted vegetation, which in turn will provide; an additional food source for the birds and animals that feed upon them. The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitat and Species database (http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/phslist.htm) identifies habitats and species considered to be priorities for conservation and management. Listed species observed in the general Barbee Mill community development area include bull trout, Puget Sound chinook salmon, Puget Sound steelhead, and marbled murrelet, all of which are discussed below. Protected wildlife in Washington State shall not be hunted or fished (WAC 232-12-011). Protected wildlife noted from time to time within the general Barbee Mill community development area include the marbled murrelet and the bald eagle. The marbled murrelet is classified as a "threatened species," a species likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout a significant portion of their range within the state without cooperative management or removal of threats. The bald eagle is no longer on the list of threatened or endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) but continues to be protected by the Bald and Golden Eagles Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and is protected as a "sensitive species" in Washington. Sensitive species are vulnerable or declining and likely to become endangered or threatened in a significant portion of their range within the state without cooperative management or removal of threats. The only eagle nests observed near the subject property are two nests approximately 0.65 mile from the site on the opposite shore. MS&A D. Project Description: The proposed community dock will consist of a fully grated 1,592 ft2 Community Dock with a 5'-10" x 172' (1,003 ft2 ) main walkway, a 7'-10" x 56' (437 ft2 ) "T' and a 5'-10" x 26' (152 ft2 ) finger pier (Figures 3-6). The dock will have a 100% grated surface with 46% open space. The dock will be supported by (14) 6" And (14) 8" diameter steel battered piles. Piles will be driven using a vibratory pile driver to practical refusal. A native planting plan will be installed (Figures 7-9). A 6' wide walkway is needed to safely serve the anticipated number of users. Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 4 E. Construction Seque 1. Mobilize construction barge to the site with all construction materials and equipment on board. Moor the barge as to prevent grounding on the lake bottom at any time during construction. 2. Install silt containment curtain around work area to contain any debris that may fall into lake waters. In the event any materials enter lake waters they will be retrieved immediately and placed in debris containers on the barge. 3. Using the barge-based crane and vibratory insertion/extraction system, install (14) 6", (14) 8" diameter steel batter piles practical refusal. 4. Cut steel piling as necessary at the appropriate elevation. 5. lnstall pre-fabricated dock, "ELL" and finger sections onto pipe collar assemblies and secure to piling. 6. Demobilize and dispose of all debris at approved upland disposal site. General Notes: l. All treatments will be applied and fully cured prior to delivery to the site. 2. Ramp and pier section will be prefabricated at contractor's Lake Union Facility and delivered to the site via construction barge. 3. Native riparian planting plan will be installed by others following construction. A TIENTION: Fisheries alert! If at any time, as a result of project activities, fish are observed in distress, a fish kill occurs, or water quality problems develop (including equipment leaks or spills), operations shall cease and the WDFW at (360) 534-8233 and Washington Department of Ecology at (425) 649-7000 shall be contacted immediately. Work shall not resume until further approval is given by the WDFW. F. Action Areo: The action area should include the area within a one-mile radius of the project location. This area includes potential turbidity and noise impacts from the construction process. II. SPECIES AND HABITAT INFORMATION A. Species Information: In the project area, the Puget Sound chinook ( Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) is listed under the Endangered Species Act as a threatened species according to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)(Federal Register, Vol. 64, No. 56). On May 11, 2007, NMFS also listed the Puget Sound steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) as a threatened species under the ESA (Federal Register/ Vol. 72, No. 91 / Friday, May I I, 2007 / Rules and Regulations). Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) were listed as threatened by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in October of 1 999. On September 2, 2005, NMFS issued the final rule designating critical habitat for 12 Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESUs) of West Coast salmon, including the Puget Sound Chinook Salmon ESU and the Hood Canal Summer-run Chum ESU. The project site is in an area designated as critical habitat for the Puget Sound Chinook ESU (Federal Register /,Vol 70, No.170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 Rules and Regulations). USFWS has MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 5 designated critical habitat in Lake hington for Coastal-Puget Sound bull tr . l'ederal Register/ Vol. 70, No. 185 / September 26, 2005 / Rules and Regulations). Puget S-Ound Chinook: Puget Sound chinook, also called the king salmon, are distinguished from all other Pacific salmon by their large size. Most chinook in the Puget Sound are "ocean-type" and migrate to the marine environment during their frrst year (Myers et al. 1998). They may enter estuaries immediately after emergence as fry from March to May at a length of 40 mm., or they may enter the estuaries as fingerling smolts during May and June of their first year at a length of 60-80 mm. (Healey 1982). Chinook fry in Washington estuaries feed on emergent insects and epibenthic crustaceans (gammarid amphipods, mysids, and cwnaceans). As they grow and move into neritic habitats, they feed on decapod larvae, larval and juvenile fish, drift insects, and euphausiids (Simenstad et al. 1982). These ocean-type chinook use estuaries as rearing areas and are the most dependent of all salmon species on estuaries for survival. In the Lake Washington system, adult chinook salmon usually arrive at the Chittenden Locks in July, although there are some arrivals before and after July (Synthesis of Salmon Research and Monitoring. 2008). According to Fresh et al. (2000), the total time for salmon migration from the Locks to arrival at their tributary spawning grounds "can take up to 55 days, but averages less than 30." During much of this time, salmon hold in the upstream area from the Locks before moving through the Ship Canal and Lake Union. Fresh et al. (2000) found the average holding time to be from 17 to 19 days. After reach their spawning streams between September and November, spawning occurs from October to December. According to Tabor et al. (2006), "Fry emerge from their redds from January to March. Juvenile Chinook salmon appear to have two rearing strategies: rear in the river and then emigrate in May or June as pre-smolts, or emigrate as fry in January, February, or March and rear in the south end of Lake Washington or Lake Sammamish for three to five months." In the project area vicinity, juvenile chinook salmon from the Cedar River enter L_ake Washington and rear in the south end of the Jake primarily from January to May. Tabor et al. (2006) also reported that: Similar to results of2002,juvenile Chinook salmon were concentrated in the south end of Lake Washington from February to May ..... Therefore, it appears that the lake shore area near the natal stream is an important nursery area for juvenile Chinook salmon. In Lake Washington, the major part of this nursery area appears to be roughly from Pritchard Beach on the west shoreline and the mouth of May Creek on the east shore and the south part of Mercer Island. The distance from the mouth of the Cedar River to the edge of the nursery area is around 6 km. North of this area, the number of Chinook salmon would be expected to be relatively low until mid-May or June. In the same study cited above, it was found that marked chinook did not move far from their release' site at Gene Coulon Park (approximately 1.5 miles sonth of the current project site). Marked juveniles were observed l, 7, 15, and 21 days after release at Gene Coulon Park. All of the marked salmon that the investigators observed had moved less than 150 m from their release site at the park. After moving slowly away from the Green River and south Lake Washington,juveniles reach the Chittenden Locks during the period between May and August, with peak migration through the Locks taking place in June. According to Kerwin (2001) chinook, coho, sockeye and winter steelhead use May Creek near the project site for spawning, rearing and migration. However, volunteers from the Volunteer Salmon Watchers Program have been observing salmon in May Creek since 2000. They have reported that only sockeye are seen consistently, while chinook, coho, cutthroat trout and kokanee .salmon are less commonly seen. Bull Trout: Coastal-Puget Sound bull trout have ranged geographically from northern California (at present they are extinct in California) to the Bering Sea coast of Alaska, and northwest along the Pacific Rim to northern Japan and Korea. Bull trout are members of the char subgroup of the salmon family. Spawning occurs typically from August to November in streams and migration to the open sea (for anadromous populations) takes place in the spring. Eggs and juveniles require extremely cold water for survival. Temperatures in excess of about 15 MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 6 degrees C are thought t 1it bull trout distribution (Rieman and M ,re 1993). They live both in fresh and marine waters. Some migrate to larger rivers (fluvial), lakes (adfluvial), or saltwater (anadromous) before returning to smaller streams to spawn. Others (resident bull trout) complete all of their life in the streams where they were reared. Habitat degradation, dams and diversions, and predation by non-native fish threaten the Coastal-Puget Sound population. The Coastal-Puget Sound bull trout population is thought to contain the only anadromous forms of bull trout in the contiguous United States (Federal Register, Vol. 64, No. 210, 1999). Two subpopulations of bull trout (also known as "native char") are considered within the Lake Washington area: the Chester Morse Reservoir population and the Issaquah Creek-Sammamish River population (Federal Register, Vol. 64, No. 210, 1999). "Only two 'native char' have been observed during the past 10 years in the Issaquah Creek drainage and none have been observed in the Sammamish River system. It is questionable whether a viable subpopulation remains." (Federal Register, Vol. 64, No. 210, 1999). Puget Sound Steelbead: Wild winter steelhead enter the Lake Washington system in mid-December with peak spawning taking place in May. There have been high rates of predation by California sea lions at the Ballard Locks, which is one of the leading factors in the declining steelhead production in the Lake Washington system (1992 Washington State Salmon and Steelhead Stock Inventory. Appendix One -Puget Sound Stocks. Washington Department offish and Wildlife, Olympia, WA.). According to Kerwin (200 I): The Lake Washington system supports one native winter steel head stock but not a summer steelhead stock (SASS[ 1994). The winter steelhead stock was listed in SASS! as "Depressed" but has recently shown some evidence ofrebounding. A limited hatchery program utilizing the native winter steelhead stock was initiated in 1997 as a supplementation type program to assist in recovery of winter steelheadpopulations in the north Lake Washington tributaries. The sharp decline in Lake Washington winter steelhead was noted as a reason for concern by NMFS in their stock status review (Busby 1996). However, in a more recent analysis, between 1986 and 2004 escapement for the Lake Washington winter-run steelhead ranged from 1,816 (1986) to 44 (2004) (WDFW 2004). Based on the chronically low escapement and short-term severe decline in escapements, the stock status has decreased from its 1992 "depressed" status to "critical" in 2002. Marbled Mnrrelets: Marbled murrelets are small marine birds in the alcidae family. 'Ibey spend most of their time at sea and only use old growth areas for nesting. In the critical nesting areas, fragmentation and loss of old growth forest has a significant impact on the survival and conservation of the species (WDW, 1993). Adult birds are found within or adjacent to the marine environment where they dive for sand lance, sea perch, Pacific herring, surf smelt and other small schooling fish, and feed on invertebrates. The project site is located in an urban environment adjacent to a major highway. There is a high level of ambient noise in the project vicinity. There is no nesting habitat near the site. Therefore it is unlikely that murrelets will be present in the project vicinity. Ill. EFFECTS OF THE ACTION The status of each of the listed species in the action area has been provided. The proposed project has been described and the action area defined. When reviewing all the data, the potential direct and indirect effects of the proposed action on the listed species and their critical habitat should be considered. A. Direct Effects: When considering the direct effects of the proposed project, one must determine if the proposed project will MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 7 immediately reduce or destroy tlu.. ed species and/or their habitat. The pote1 , direct impacts caused by the construction process include increased noise and turbidity. Pile driving noise: A vibratory pile driver will be used to drive the piles to practical refusal. Feist et al. (1992) reported that salmonids could be expected to hear pile driving noise approximately 2,000' from the source. Based on the studies at the Everett Homeport, these researchers concluded that pile driving di<f alter the distribution and behavior of juvenile pink and chum salmon. However, the Everett Homeport results may not be entirely applicable to the proposed project, because a diesel powered compression hammer was used in that study. As stated in the Feist report, "It would be reasonable to say that juvenile salmonids might respond differently to the sounds of a vibratory hammer, compared to that of a diesel compression hammer." As noted above, It is unlikely that murrelets will be present in the action area. Therefore, the construction process should have little or no impact on marbled murrelets. Turbidity: Increased turbidity caused by pile driving could, under certain circumstances, have adverse effects on salmon and bull trout. The effects depend on duration of exposure, concentration of turbidity and the life stage of the salmon during the increased exposure. The effects can be discussed in terms of lethal, sublethal or behavioral (Nightingale and Simenstad 2001a and Simenstad, editor, 1988). A silt containment curtain will be installed in the project area to contain and minimize turbidity impacts. To minimize the adverse effects of increased turbidity and noise on migrating salmonids and bull trout, inwater construction work will take place during the approved work window from July 16 to December 31. Overwater work can proceed outside of the in water work window. 8. Indirect Effects: Indirect effects are effects of the project that occur later in time. For this project, indirect effects might incl.ude alteration of juvenile salmon migratory pathways, increase in salmonid predation and reduction in prey resources and refugia due to shading of the epibenthic substrate by the structure. Migratory pathway alteration: Freshwater: There were no studies specifically investigating the effects of piers on salmonid migration in lakes cited by Kahler et al. (2000) in their review of piercreJated impacts in lakes. Concerning the lake environment, Kahler et al. (2000) state, "The question remains whether juvenile salmonids in lakes migrate under, or otherwise utilize, piers, or if they avoid them and/or traverse their perimeter." MS&A However, more recent reports have provided additional information concerning salmon responses to overwater structures. Tabor and Piaskowski (2002) noted that, "In February and March, chinook salmon were found using overhead structures (piers, docks, and overhanging vegetation) during the day but in April and May, no chinook salmon were ever observed using overhead structures. At night, chinook salmon rarely used overhead structures." The authors hypothesized that the overhead structures were being used as a substitute for natural overhead cover during the days in February and March. In a later study, Tabor et al. (2006) noted slightly different results. They state that, "When migrating Chinook salmon approach a pier they appeared to move to slightly deeper water and either pass directly under the structure or swim around the pier. Most likely they move to deeper water as a way of reducing their predation risk." The pier where these findings we made is approximately 7.8' wide, 138' long and had solid decking. The dimensions of the piers in the earlier study are not known. The results from the later study were noted in May and July, whereas the 2002 study results were for the earlier months of February and March. Barbea..Mill Community Dock Project • 8 The results of Celedon al. (2008) were similar to those ofTabo dl. (2000). Celedonia et al. stated, "Juvenile Chinook salmon generally avoided areas directly beneath overwater structures. However, areas along the edges of structures (within about 2 m horizontal distance) were sometimes used for prolonged periods (up to 2 hours in one case)." However, these authors offered the following qualifying statement: These observations may be representative of holding fish near structures in general, but may not be an accurate indication of how untagged Chinook salmon would generally behave upon volitionally entering these specific areas. Actively migrating fish (i.e., most fish released off-site and observed at the Seattle Tennis Club site) often appeared to change course as they approached a structure. Structure width and water depth appeared to influence degree of avoidance. Fish appeared less hesitant to pass beneath narrow structures. Fish also appeared to move into deeper water to travel beneath or around structures. These authors also observed: Behavior at structures differed (i.e., swim beneath or travel around perimeter), and may have been related to such interrelated factors as: fish size, light levels beneath the structure, degree of contrast at the light-dark edge, width of the structure, height of the structure above the water surface, and water column depth beneath the structure. Further study is needed to conclusively determine how these and other factors interact to influence Chinook salmon behavior. Marine Waters: In the marine environment, it is generally accepted that overwater structures can alter migration behavior of juvenile salmon (though the effects may vary depending on the design and orientation of the structure, degree of shading, and the presence of artificial light), and reduce salmon prey resources and refugia by shading aquatic plant life (Simenstad et al. 1999; Nightingale and Simenstad 2001b). However, the significance of these effects is not clear. As Simenstad et al. state, "We found no studies that described empirical evidence supporting or refuting that modification of juvenile salmon behavior in shoreline habitats was reflected in changes in survival." Nightingale and Simenstad (200 I b) state, "Presently, although we know that under some conditions small juvenile salmon will delay or otherwise alter their shoreline movements when encountering an overwater structure, the conditions under which this behavioral modification is significant to the fishes' fi1ness and survival is relatively unknown." A study by Williams et al. (2003) at the Mukilteo ferry terminal, found that, "Salmon fry were observed in all nearshore habitats during each transect sampling period (day and night). The fry were observed under a wide range of PAR values (0.0 µmo! m-2 s-1 to 2370 µmol m-2 s-1). Fry were observed both outside the terminal and underneath the terminal at all times, and shadows produced by the I 0-m-wide terminal structure did not appear to act as barriers to fry movement at this location." There is no question that underwater structures may alter migration patterns -that is not in dispute. As seen in the study by Williams and in many other studies (see the literature review by Weitkamp -2003), there are studies that indicate that salmon migration is not affected by the presence of overwater structun,s. Of course, there are other studies indicating migration patterns are altered by overwater structures. The issue is that no one has shown that these migration changes lead to increased mortality or decreased fitness. None of the studies that report changes in salmonid migration patterns caused by overwater structures in the marine environment have reported that these changes have a negative impact on salmonids. Increased predation: An additional concern about the impacts of overwater structures on migrating salmon is that they will be forced to move out into deeper water, where they will be consumed by predatory fish species. However, in a study conducted in the marine environment, Williams et al. (2003) noted: MS&A We found no evidence that avian, marine manunal, or fish predators con~umed more juvenile salmon near WSF terminals than along shorelines without overwater structures. Few species appeared to be targeting abundant fry in nearshore habitats, and we observed only two occasions in which predators (one tern sp., one staghom sculpin) had consumed juvenile salmon. Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 9 The authors also state, Our analysis of fish diets at the Mukilteo feny terminal provides one piece of conclusive evidence that juvenile salmon were not a major dietary component of predatory fish species during our study. It should be noted that the Williams study was conducted in the marine, not lake, environment. In Lake Washington, smallmouth bass migration into the littoral zone corresponds with the peak occurrence of migrating salmonids in this zone (Fresh et al. 2001). Because of these similar migration patterns, sa!monids are most at risk of predation from sma!lmouth bass in Lake Washington. Bass prefer complex, natural cover for their foraging environment. When there is a scarcity of natural cover for foraging, as is the situation in Lake Washington, they tend to use the dominant structures in the environment, such as pilings and piers, for foraging cover (Kahler et al. 2000). There is concern that increasing the number of overwater structures will increase the predation success of srnallmouth bass on migrating sa!monids. Tabor et al. (2004) investigated predation of juvenile chinook salmon in three areas of the Lake Washington Basin. One of the areas they looked at was the south end of Lake Washington, an important rearing area. The investigators found that: The only predators observed to consume Chinook salmon were cutthroat trout, prickly sculpin (C. asper), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomiew), and largemouth bass (M salmoides). Consumption of Chinook salmon by cutthroat trout was observed in February, March and early April. Predation by prickly sculpin was only observed in February. Smallmouth bass consumed Chinook salmon in May and June. Few largemouth bass were collected; however, we did document a largemouth bass that had consumed a Chinook salmon in June. We estimated a total of 1,400 Chinook salmon fry were consumed by littoral predators from February to mid May ..... Based on consumption estimates and expected abundance of juvenile Chinook salmon, predatory fishes probably consumed less than 10% of the fry that entered the lake from the Cedar River. The investigators in this study did not comment on the impacts of overwater structures on the predation rate found in south Lake Washington. The following design components will reduce foraging cover and allow more light penetration under the proposed pier. I .The dock will have a fully grated surface with 46% open space to allow light to reach the lake waters below. 2. The bottom of the dock will be 18" above the OHWL. 3. The smallest number and diameter steel piles will be used to minimize the amount of structure in the water and disturbance to the substrate. 4. Gin-lam stringers will be used to allow the longest spans possible between piles. C. Interrelated/Interdependent Effects: Completion of this project will not promote future construction or other activities that would not otherwise occur without its completion. Therefore, no additional interrelated or interdependent actions that could affect species regulated under ESA will occur because of this project. D. Take Analysis: "Take" is defmed as, "to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, trap, capture, collect or attempt to engage in any such conduct." The USFWS further defines "harm" as "significant habitat modification or degradation that results in death or injury to listed species by significantly impairing behavioral patterns such as breeding, feeding, or MS&A BOibee Mill Community Dock Project • 10 sheltering." It is likely that 'take" will result from this project. E. Conservation Measures: In order to minimize any direct effects on the listed species caused by this project, inwater work should take place between July 16 and December 31. It is requested that overwater work be allowed to take place outside of this work window. Additional impact reduction and mitigation measures will reduce adverse impacts of the project. They include: I .The dock will have a fully grated surface with 46% open space to allow light to reach the lake waters below. 2. The bottom of the dock will be 18" above the OHWL. 3. The smallest number and diameter steel piles will be used to minimize the amount of structure in the water and disturbance to the substrate. 4. Glu-lam stringers will be used to allow the longest spans possible between piles. 5. The construction barge will not be allowed to ground out ou the lake bottom at anytime. 6. Piles will be driven using a vibratory pile driver to practical refusal. 7. Construction will take place duriug authorized inwater work windows design to protect listed species and/or critical habitat. 8. All dock sectious will be prefabricated at the contractor's lake union facility and delivered to the site via construction barge. 9. A native planting plan will be installed. F. Determination of Effect: After reviewing the appropriate data and surveys, the effect determinations for the impacts of the project, as designed, are: 1. Puget Sound chinook -"May affect, not likely to adversely affect" 2. Bull trout -"May affect, not likely to adversely affect'' 3. Puget Sound steelhead -"May affect, not likely to adversely affect" 4. Marbled murrelet-"No effect" This is the appropriate conclusion when effects on the species and their critical habitat are expected to be beneficial, discountable or insignificant. Limiting construction work to the approved work window will reduce direct impacts on the listed species. Shading impacts on the benthic environment will be minimized by the conservation measures discussed above. MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • l l Literature Celedonia, M. T., Roger A. Tabor, Scott Sanders, Daniel W. Lantz., and Ian Grettenberger. 2008.Movement and habitat use of chinook salmon smolts and two predatory fishes in Lake Washington and the Lake Washington Ship Canal. 2004-2005 acoustic tracking studies. Final report to Seattle Public Utilities. Federal Register /Vol. 61,No. 102 /May 24, 1996/ Rules and Regulations. Federal Register/ Vol. 64, No. 56 / March 24, 1999 / Rules and Regulations. Federal Register/ Vol. 64, No. 210 /November l, 1999 /Rules and Regulations. Federal Register /Vol 70, No.170 I Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations. Federal Register I Vol. 70, No. 185 / September 26, 2005 / Rules and Regulations. Federal Register/ Vol. 72, No. 91 / Friday, May 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations. Feist, Blake E., J.J. Anderson and R Miyamota. 1992. Potential impacts of pile driving on juvenile pink (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha) and chum (0. keta) salmon behavior and distribution. FRI-UW-9603, Fish. Res. Inst., UW, Seattle, WA. · Fresh, K.L, E. Warner, R. Tabor, and D. Houck. 2000. Migratory behavior of adult Chinook salmon spawning in the Lake Washington watershed in 1998 and 1999 as determined with ultrasonic telemetry. Extended abstract and presentation prepared for the Washington Chinook Salmon Workshop, November. Fresh, K. L., D. Rothaus, K. W. Mueller and C. Mueller. 2001. Habitat utilization by predators, with emphasis on smallmouth bass, in the littoral zone of Lake Washington (draft}. WDFW. Healey, M. C. 1982. Juvenile Pacific salmon in estuaries: the life support system, pp. 315 -341. In: V.S. Kennedy (ed.), Estuarine comparisons. Academic Press, New York, NY. Kahler, T., M. Grassley and David Beauchamp. 2000. A summary of the effects of bulkheads, pier and other artificial structures and shorezone development on BSA-listed salmonids in lakes. City of Bellevue. Kerwin, J., 2001. Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Limiting Factors Report for the Cedar-Sammamish Basin (WRIA 8). Washington Conservation Commission. Olympia. WA. Myers, J.M., R. G. Kope, G. J. Bryant, D. Teel, L. J. Lierheimer, T. C. Wainwright, W. S. Grand, F. W. Waknitz, K. Neely, S. T. Lindley, and R. S. Waples. 1998. Status review of Chinook salmon from Washington, Idaho, Oregon, and California. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA Tech Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-35, 443 pp. Nightingale, Barbara and Charles Simenstad. 200 la. Dredging activities: marine issues. Submitted to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology, and Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, WA, 144 pp. Nightingale, B. and Charles Simenstad. 2001 b. Overwater structures: marine issues. Submitted to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology, and Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, WA, 177 pp. Rienman, B. E. and J. D. McIntyre. 1993. Demographic and habitat requirements for conservation of Bull Trout. Gen. Tech. Rpt. U. S. Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, UT. 38 pp. Simenstad, C. A., K. L. Fresh and E. 0. Salo. 1982. The role of Puget Sound and Washington coastal estuaries in the life history of Pacific salmon: an unappreciated function. Pp. 343-364. In: V. S. Kennedy, (ed.), Estuarine comparisons. Academic Press, New York, NY. Simenstad, C. A., (ed.). 1988. Effects of dredging on anadromous Pacific coast fishes, Workshop proceedings, MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 12 Washington Sea Grant, ,ttle WA, September 8-9, 1988. Simenstad, C.A., BJ. Nightingale, R.M. Thom and D.K. Shreffler. 1999. lmpacts offeriy tenninals on juvenile salmon migration along Puget Sound shorelines. Phase I: Synthesis of state of knowledge. Report to WSDOT/fJSDOT Research Report T9903, Task A2, 116 pp.+ appendices. Synthesis of salmon research and monitoring. Investigations conducted in the Western Lake Washington Basin. December 31, 2008. Seattle Public Utilities and the Anny Corps of Engineers. Contributors: Mike Cooksey Peter N. Johnson, Paul De Vries, Michele Koehler, Charles J. Ebel, Lynne Melder, Frederick A. Goetz, Jim Muck, Julie Hall Eva Weaver Tabor, R. A. and Richard M. Piaskowski. 2002. Nearshore habitat use by juvenile chinook salmon in lentic systems of the Lake Washington Basin. Annual Report, 2001. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Western Washington Fish and Wildlife Office, Fisheries Division. 510 Desmond Drive SE, Suite 102, Lacey, Washington 98503. Tabor, R. A., M. T. Celedonia, F. Mejia, R. M. Piaskowski, D. L. Low, B. Footen and L. Park. 2004. Predation of juvenile chinook salmon by predatory fishes in three areas of the Lake Washington Basin. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe and Northwest Fisheries Science Center. I Tabor, R. A. Howard A. Gearns, Charles M. McCoy III, and Sergio Camacho. 2006. Nearshore habitat use by juvenile chinook salmon in Jentic systems of the Lake Washington Basin. Annual Report, 2003 and 2004. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Western Washington Fish and Wildlife Office, Fisheries Division. 510 Desmond Drive SE, Suite 102, Lacey, Washington 98503 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2004. Salmonid Stock Inventory (SaSI). Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, WA. Weitkamp, Don E. September 2003. Young Pacific Salmon in Estuarine Habitats. Review Draft. Parametrix, lnc. Kirkland, WA. Williams, G.D., R. M. Thom, D. K. Shreffler, J. A. Southard, L. K. O'Rourke, S. L. Sergeant, V. I. Cullinan, R. MS&A Moursund, and M. Stamey. Assessing Overwater Structure -Related Predation Risk on Juvenile Salmon: Field Observations and Recommended Protocols. September 2003. Prepared for the Washington State Department of Transportation Under a Related Services Agreement With the U.S. Department of Energy Under Contract DE- AC06-76RLO 1830. . Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • I 3 MS&A Figure 1. Vlclntty map PROJ[CT DESIGN[!) OY: Waterfront Constru:tion loc. THIS OOCUUOfr .IS P~ PROP[Rr'r' J IY"lD!fltONf OOl'tS'IRUCtlCfil ~C~ AJ./0 IS NOT 10 at USED ... t'HOl.E OR Iii PART, roR ANY O'IHER PROJECT Wf™OUT lHE 'lfl?lnnt AUlHORIZoUltlN Of" WATERP'ROMT caiS'IRUCTOil I«:". ·-----tt . ·1 "- .-); ... · _,_\ /) ·,.;'/,~: ..:'~: (~ _'.:::· VICINITY MAP /NO SCALE LEGAL DESCRIPTION 1/+ SEC: NW 32-24N-05E TAXLOT I: 051850 0350 (4151) & ~18MIDJ60 (4125} 0ARBE[ MILL TGW UND INT IN TRS A,B,C,0,E,F,G,J-1,l,l,t.J,N,0&.P LAT: 47.515745N LONG: -122.2061 14W PURPOSE:PROVIDE CO~WNfTY ACCESS At.10 PRWATE ~OORAG( DATULt: COE o.o· EST 19113 ADJACENT OWNERS: 1 CON.NE:R HOMES AT BAAOCE t,,litL LLC 4157 WILLlAl,,IS /WE N PROJ£Cl NA REfERE:NCE I: BARBEE t.fll.L CO\lMUNITY DOCK SITE LOCATION ADORE~ -.; RENTON. WA. 98056 CONNER HoME:S AT BARBEE twilll LLC 4119 WILLIAMS Alff. N 4-125 & 4151 WILLIAMS AV£ N RENTON, WA. 96056 REt./TON, WA, 98056 WC/; 05-3077-,\.1-1 I.AKE fORESl PARK w _, ~ w if) AREA MAP/ J MILES 1 Mil.£ JUANITA BELLEVUE RENTON 0 PROPOSED~ INSTALL COMMUNITY 00:::K IN: LAKE WASHINCTOti NEAR; RENTON COUNTY: KltiC STATE: 'NA 'MILES .APPL BY: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE t.,ju LLC SHEET: 1 or~ 1 DATE; 1-12-10 Barbee Mill Comn:,unity Dock Project • 14 ONR WJTHORAWL A MS&A / '•, -----.. :\\\ ,· __ ,. ',..._ ''\, ----·' Figure 2. DNR withdrawal c PRO.,IECl OESIG/.fa) !Jr: Waterfront Constroctinn loc. lHrS OOClJl,{1,jf IS f'ROPROAin' PROP(fm' OF '/,'AT£RFR-Otil (:C.Jt(.'.ffll.lCll(l'/,j lliC-, #ID I!. l>O'f n) 9( USEO, It-I 'l'r!'iOI.£ OR IN PART. fOR ~ 01!40: J>ROJ(C'I' ~lH0\11 TH£ V;MlEH AUn10Rll/l.~ or 'fl,t.11':RrROll!T tOICSfflUC:TICI,/ INC. DNR W!THDRAWL AREA 100· 50' o· 100· REfERENCE: APPLICANT; CONNER ttOMES AT BARBEE Mill LLC PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUN11Y DOCK SH[EJ;!i OF:7 NEAR AT: RENTOt-f DATE: 1-12-10 G ·05-3077-A..J-l t I Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 15 MS&A \ \ \ / I Figure 3. Plot plan PROJECT 'DESICNED B't:- Waterfront CoostJ1Jctioo loc. THIS OOCJA£tiT IS PROPR£JART PROPE!lrr OF WA,TtRFRONT COl'IS1RUCTIO"I lliC.., ANO IS tiOT TO BE USCO, IN Wt-CU OR lt,f f>AAt. f"Ofl J.W ono: PROJECT WffiK)Ul 1H£ WRrtTEt.i AIJJHORIZATOI Of WA.1Eftf'AON1' COh!SfR'UCl'I~ INC. PROPos.L i- ( CONSTRUCT A FULLY GRATED 1,592SOFT COMMUNITY OOCKWITHA S-1!iX17ll1JIIBQFT}MVil WALKWAY,T-10" X S6' (437SQfT)T ANO 5',10'X:28{'152SaT)ftaRf>ER ( THE DOCK'IV!lLHAVE A 100,:. GRATEOSl.ffACEWfTHGCf'l:NSf'ACE { THE DOCK W11..L BE SUPPORTED BY (14) fj' ANO (1-4)S'CWEJERSlEELBAmlE>Pl.ES { PlfS Wl.l BE DRfVEN USf,IG A VIBRATORY Pl.f.CJWERTOPAAC'OC>J..FEFUSAL ( ANATIVE PV.NTING PlAN WllBENST.AilEO " . . ' ' .f> N I ~ :._ ---------------y ©---------. ------------ 1 4107/CONNER HOME5 34 1:1 .. \./\ [filJ ·' -----------!' NATIVE PLANTING PLIN JOB SITE 4151/CONNER HOMES 35 ---... . O[I] ~ \ / JOB SITE 36 412~/CONNER HO~ES i D[[J -·-~--'io---- :@ 41l 9f/'.ONNER HOl<ES 3] /}r-,=-,-, ; 28.4 / I / ,.-/ 411:S/CDNNER HOl.lES _ _I 2a.a 1 ___ _ \\~ -4107/KESKAR _[ 3'-9" DITJ 39 /·' 4101/CONNER HOMES / 40 . . _____ ,, ___ ./ 00: /,,----- PLOT PLAN 50' 25' o· REFERENCE APPLIC"-NT: CONNER HOlAES AT BARBEE ~ILL LLC PROPOSED; INSTALL COMMUNITY OOCK [[T;-4 (:£; 7 )iEAR AT: RENTON DAT· 1-12-tO G : 05-JOn-A.-4-1 //' -- Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 16 ~ ()o )> cc 0 a- (1) (I) ~ n 0 3 3 C: :, .z 0 0 () "' ! '-J , i , , ' ' ' ' \ ,,-,\ , .. \, ', .. , .. _~---.. -· ....... . '',,,,_ , ..... , .. ,,_ ',,_ '~---------- '• ' ',.J ~ NATIVE PLANTING PLAN '•, ', ' '•, ,' 4!3>----\ i '\ ' ' I \ -... _,, / \ ', j, ·------_./ PROPOSED FULLY , 1> ,' GRATED DOCK ,.\ N f •• / \ ' / (14)/PROPOSED e· / \ / STEEL/ 8ATTERE0 PILING ,. \ / -·· s'-10· -I / ' ____ / ( I ' r \ : \ J \ ,/ ~ OHWL 21.80 (COE) 1 B.BO (NAVOBB) , ' / ,' / / / ,' J/,/ // ' ' /,/ ' , '' " , / / l '2~. '• ',,~,, ',,, '• \, '\ / I ' ': \) ' ,, / :\ (/4) PROPOSED 8" \ \ STEEL 8ATiEl1ED PILING \ / ; ' ' ' ' ' -:. -,:...._I lo ' ' -____ :~~ - 10 PROPOSED DOCK DETAIL VIEW SCALE: , .. ..,.30· !-------------------180' --------------------! 172' ------------------1 EXISTING GRADE EXISTING CONCRETE WALKWAY OHWL21.6, NAV066 (18.80') 2'--6" (14) PROPOSED Bw STEEL BATTERED PILING PROJl.CT Df.:SlCNEO BY: Waterfront Construction loc. 11-us DOCUI.CNT !S PAOPRCTAltY PROPERTY Of" WATERF'ROl(T CONSTRUCTION I~ .. »ID IS NOT fO BE: USED. lN 1/fHOL.f OR JN PART. F'OR ANY OTHER PROJECT WITHOUT ll-tE WfHTl[t-1 AUTHORIZAllON OF ',ilATtRFOOIH CONSTRUCTION INC. PROPOSED FULLY GRATED DOCK EX1ST1NG CONCRETE/SHEET PILE BULKHEAD 1'0 REMAIN (14) PROPOSED 6~ SfEEL BATTERED PILING PROPOSED DOCK ELEVATION VIEW 30' 15' o· 30' SCALE; I "= 30' REFERENCE tt: PPUCANT: CONNER HOMES AT BMBEE: MILL LL.C PROPOSED: INSTALL COM~UNlTY DOCK !SHEET: 5 OF:7 !!™_/AT, RENTON DATE: 1-12-10 DWG#: 05-."5077-A.5-1 20 5 C ~ '1) !'-.,, 0 "C g '1) a. "C a :) C :) a. '1) ~ :) ~ ~ PART PILING c,\PS GLU-lAMS JOIST RII.A JOIST NAILER$ GRATING HARDWARE MS&A flgu1 . Proposed section and framing vi A-A f--------------s·-10·---------------1 2 .. x4"' NAILER @ 1a" 0/C l!AX. GRATING PILE COVER Pl.ATE '\__ CAP BEAM ASSEl,,iBLY SfAINLESS STEEL DCCK SCREWS PROPOSED 6' DOCK SECTION A-A SCALL 3/4"=1' 5-1;s·x12· GLu-LA>,1 BEAii 3/4" GAI.V. LAG BOLT "'-=:i..OHl'/L 21.80' (COE) OHWL 18.80' (NAVO 88) 6° OR 0" STEEL BATTEREO PILING f--------------s'-10·~----------,-------1 5 GRATING STAINLESS STEEL DECK SCREWS 16d GAf..V. COl.o!MON NAILS (T'l'P) 5-1/B',12" CLU-LA~ BEAM 3/4" GALV. THRU ROD t''x6" RIM JOIST 3 .. x4~ LEDGER W/ 1/2",7" CALV. l.A.G BOLT O 16• 0/C PROPOSED 6' SECTION FRAMING 12· 5• 3" o· 1 · I --SCALE: 3/4°=1' i,(ATERW. UST SPECS TREATMENT 6°&8" STD WALL STEEL EPOXY COATED OR HDC '/16,15 "H" BEAM HOG l/B~x12" & 7 1/8~:ic12" Of (24F-V4) ACZA 2•,5• or 62 OR BTR ACZA 2"x6" OF #2 OR BTR ACZA 2"'x4~ OF #2 OR BTR ACZA SUNWALK POLYPROPYLENE NONE STEEL STAlNlESS OR HOG PROJECl DtSIGt.lto BY: Waterfront Constroction loc. THIS D0CUUOiT IS PROPR£1JRY PROPERTY OF 'kA.T[RFROlt('I COtCifflOCllO~ l"IC., AND IS ~ Ttl BE USED. IN 'r'f)'()LE OR IN PART, FOR ANY" OTHER PROJECT '!mHOUl THE 'WRITTEN AuTHORIZAl'!Ct'I OF 'tt'AIERFRONl CDNSTRUC'ltON INC. NOTE: Al.L PILES 10 BE DRIVEi-i TO PRAC11CA1. REFUSAL PROPOSED: INSTALL coM'MUNllY DOCK SHEET:6 OF;7 N£AR AT: RENlON DATE: 1-12-10 D : 05-3077-A..6-1 Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 18 ~ ~ "' ~ (I) (I) [ n 0 3 3 C 2. ;;z 0 0 n "' -u ], ro 'l • "' PART PlUNG CAPS jGLU-LAMSI 5 \ JOIST i RIM JO!ST NAIL[RS GRATING HAROWARE i-----------7'-10"---------:=~:-:~--- 2"x4" NAILER 0- 18" 0/C I.II,;<, TYP ', 1/4" . ~ PROJECT OESIGNED Ern Waterfront Constroction loc. iHIS OOCUME.Nl IS ~PRE1J.RY l>ROPonY Of VjAT[RN:IONT CONSTRUCTION INC .. ».ID IS NOT TO 9E USED. IN WHO!.£ OR ti PART, FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT WnHOlJT nit WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION OF WATtRrRONT CONSTRUCTI01'1 !NC. GRATING PILE COVER PLATE CAP BEAM A5SEt.18LY &l PROPOSED 8' DOCK SECTION 8-B SCALE: 3/4"•1' STAINLESS STEEL DECK SCREWS 7-1/8'"ic12" GLU-1.Al.< BEAM :;/4" GALV. LAG BOLT 2·-e· l'-6" OHWL 21.80' (COE) ·oHWL 18.80' (NAVO 86) 8" STEEL BATTERED PILING r----------------r-10·----------------< STAINLESS STEEL DECK SCREWS 2"x4" 'NAllER «II 15• 0/C MAx, GRATING 3/4" OALV. THRU ROD 2"x6" Rll.A JOIST 7-1/S"lt!2~ GLU-lAM BEAM 16d GALV. COMMON NAILS (TYP) 3"x4" LEDGEH 2·~5" JOIST @ 2' 0/C 1#,TERIAL LIST PROPOSED 8' SECTION FRAMING W/ I /2",7" GALV. LAG BOLT O 16'' 0/C SPECS 6"&8 .. sro WALL STEEL W6x15. "H" BEA.\J 1;a·,1r & 7 1/8''12" OF (24F-V4) 2"x6" Df #2 OR BTR 2",e;" DF 'U2 OR BTR 2"x4· Of f/2 OR 8TR SUNWALK POLYPROPYLENE STEEL TREATMENT EPOXY COATED OR HOG HOG ACZA ACZA ACZA ACZA NONE STAINLESS OR HOG 12·· s" J" a' 1· ~ I NOTE: ALL PILE:S TO BE DRIVEN TO PRACTICAL REFUSAL. SCALE: 3/4-"-1' REFERE_NCE H: PPLICANT: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MILL LLC PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK 'SHEET: 7 QF,7 NEM/AT: RENTON D,\TE:1-12-10 DWGj: 05-.:5077 1'.7-1 (.. C: ro ?- "'Cl i3 'O 0 ... ID a. .. l'l = 0 :, Q :, a. a :, < iii" ~ .. tD ' tD MS&A \ I I ~ ) /;// , , I _J_L I I w1 --I -// I i ,/ 1~1· II +1 ( I I I ~ \. /! I .1 ~,\ v· 1 1 -, \ \ I I 1\ \ ./ Ii / II \,\ \ , \ ' I .. ,· \ i I l , 1 ! ! / \ i , I L+ _ _\...j_ __ ..1.___L I \ V I ! PLANTING AREAS , •. •• O' 16' + i PI.AN11NG DESIGN BY THE WATERSHED COMPANY 750 __ _ ........iWAll8033 ,P425..m..s242 f.f'l5.127.8i;l6 www.w*-alrcidw.c:vm Science & De.sJgn Figure 7. Planting areas LOT 35 JOB SITE 4151/CONNER HOMES '"'-" NATIVE PLANTING AREAS (-3,IOOSF) ' ------ _ \ \ / JOB SITE (4125/CONNER HOMES \ LOT 36 \ i I \-----... -----~"' - REFERENCE #, PL CANT: CONN£~ HOMES AT BARBEE MILL· UC PROPOSEO: INSTALL COMMUNrr'r' DOCK SHEET: 1 OF:4 NfAR/AT: RCNTON OAlf: 1-12-lO OWG : 05 3077 A..2 1 Barbee Mill Community DocllProject • 20 MS&A PLANTING AREAS 16" a· o· Figure 8. Planting legen, 1 1 I , i I I l I • \ I • ..l..J. . . J·.:: I l , ,. • · ' ' ' . I ' \ \ I I I ' I i I I "'l!! ...• · • .. r,i ~ • • •• ,.·)if I ----------------.. -----\-l-1='==.t-~ltl\ .\ I ·l, i I >--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--' L.c-~~~~'"j•I GENERAL PLANTING SEQUENCE, I. Native pbnt lnstaHation shal CtCQ.lr during frost-free period$ only. Preferred months for instahtion are between September 15th and April IS, pr1of" to hot. dry weather-. P~ may onfy be Installed during hoc weather if the ~or agrees to immediate ir,ig;rt:ion of the ootire planting area, delivering at ll!!aSt 2~ of water per week. 2. Prt)CIJJl!! plants-in legend and insure that material mem the minimum ~irements outlined In the plant legend and plantifll details. 3. Locate all existing udlitfe$. within the /tmit of work. The contractor is ~$role for any utility damaae as a result of the landscape constnKtion. -i. Remove a! invasive weeds (if encountered) by grubbing: out toots. S. Amend soils ill heeded to provide min. 20% organic material throughout the pl3ndng area. Add compost to Increase organic: ~ rototiD 1nto pbntlng area 6. Note: The c;ontr.l(:tor is responsible for any advene drainage condition.s that may .drea ph:lper plant growth and e5tabkshment. Notify O"NJlel" of any poor dralriage conditions prior to construction. 7. layout plant .-rial per plan for m,pectlon by the umdscape Archirect. ~ant substitutions wil NOT be allowed without the approval of the Laodsi:.ipe Architoct. 8. lnstaU plants per pJandng details, sheet l. •. --pbntthocoughlyto-... pocket,. 10. IJ\9tall a i• depth, coarse wood-chip mulch nns throughout entire protect area. 11. Install a temporary irrigation system capable of delivering l" of water per week. to the entire planted area. Malntaln Irrigation system In working <:ondltion for two (2) summers after initial plant~- Th< land=p<, ron1racro< s!,a11 -all plant --until fiml in,pealon and approval by the Owner or O\omer's representative. All }:lbntlngs and workmanship shall be guaranteed for one year following final owner acceptance. PLANTING DESIGN BY THE WATERSHED COMPANY 750 Sba:h Street South IOridar\d WA 98033 p '1:25.822.$242 f 425,827.8136 www.w.lter.inedco.u,m Science & Design PROJECT Df;SIGHEO BY: Wal:erfrait Con5lruc.tJoo Inc, THIS DOCUMOO IS PROPRIETMY PROPERTY Of WA'fERfRONT CONSTRUCTION INC., ANO S r-lOT TO BE USED. IN wt!OLE OR IN P>.RT, FOR mY OTHER PROJEcr Wf1HOUT THE WRrrn:N AUTHORIZATION OF WATLRFllONT CONSTRUCTION INC. PLANTING LEGEND SCIENTIFIC I COMMON NAME -ACBl:OII.C~TUM ""'""" IETULAPAl""l'flll'£M ""'' ""'" THLIY.l'IJCATA """"'"°""" ~ Sl!r,. SIZE l C0MMDm " l liAI.., WEU. m.NOIB} ' S GAl. WEiLMANOIED ' !< GAL. WEil IPANOIEO ' 2 GAi,. MULTI-ST£1'1 1 l GAL. FUU.& ll'USH'( ' 2 GAL. fl.U II: lll.lSH'f " 2 GAl. F\.U I IIUSHY • "''' 1 2(illl.,FULl.&81.JS1,{'f " 1G.tl.,FVU&~ ' 2 ~ FUU. & BUSHY .. 1.5" POTS. 24'0.C. ,., 2E' POn, l,f'O.C .. !tW...24'0.C .. •. ""' " Pl.ANT AT LEAST l OFTH! LlntD sro:rES: I GAi,. lfl"O.C REFERENCE u:- APPUO.NT; CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MILL LLC PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK ~EEr:2 OF:4 OATf: 1_:-12-10 INF AR/A-: R[NTON DWGII: 05 3077 A-2 1 Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 21 MS&A Figure 9. Planting plan I FOR PLANTING LEGEND SEE SHEET 21 L PLANTING PLAN 16' t 16' a' o· THE WATERSHED COMPANY 75!)""11,-- Klrldand WA"'°" ~42S.822.52'42 (425.811.8136 www.,,atu.al,edco.a,rn Science & Df:sign ' . . . f'ROJ(CJ DtS GN(O 8'1': Waterfronr, Ccti~ Ir... Tl1IS OOCUM(lff lS PR(PR!(Tf\RY PROPERTY Of WATERFRONT CONSTRUCTlON INC., ».l 1$ NOT TO BE USED, t~ WHOLE ~ IN PART, fOR Al# olHE'.R PROJECT WITHOUT THE WRIIT£N AUlliORIV.TIOl'I OF WATERFRONT COl'!STRUCTIOW INC. REFERENCE #; I I I I I I I I 1 I :: 1 1! I APPUO.NT: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE Mill UC PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK SHEET: 3 OF":4 NEAR/AT: RENTON DATF: 1-12-10 DWG : 05 3077 A.2 1 Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 22 MS&A Figure 10. Tree and shrub planfi1 letails NOTES: I. PLANT GROUNDCOVERAT SPEORED DISTANCE ON-CENTER (O.C) USING TRIANGUL.ARSPAC!NG, iYP. 2. LOOSEN SIDES ANO BOTTOM OF PtANTING rrf Af'JD REMOVE DEBRIS 3. LOOSEN ROOTllOUND Pl.ANTS BEFORE INSTALLING ... SOAK Prr BEFORE ANO AFfER INSTAUING PLANT 4• DEEP SPECIFIED MULQ-f LAYER HOID BACK FROM STEMS 2:9 HT_ WATER BASIN; NATIVESOJLORMULCH 0 ~OUNDCOVER & PERENNIAL PLANTING DETAIL THE WATERSHED COMPANY 750 $oat\~ South Kh-kland WA 98033 p 425.822.~2"42 f .flS.327.81 )6 www.~..com Science & De.sign 2X. MIN OlA. ROOTaAU. NOTES: t. PIANTING PIT SHAU. NOT BE LESS THAN (2) TIMES THE WIDTH OF THE ROOT BALL DIA 2. LOOSEN SIDES AND·BOTTOMS Of PlANTING PIT 3. SOAK PLANTING PIT AFTER PLANTING REMOVE FROM POT & ROUGH-UP ROOT BALL BEFORE INSTALLING. UNTANGLE AND STRAIGHTEN ORCUNG ROOTS -PRUNE IF NECESSARY. IF PLANT IS EXCEPTIONALLY ROOT ..SOUND, DO NOT PLANT AND RETURN TO NURSERY FORAN ACCEPTABLE AL TERNA ~-MULCH LAYER· HOlD BACK MULCH FROM TRUNK/STEMS ~--l"MINHT. WATER BASIN FINISH GRADE SLOW RELEASE GRANULAR fERTIUZER, OSMOCOTE ;,---~OR APPROVED EQUIV. (OUTSIDE OF 0.H.W.M. ONLY)APPLIED ONEYEARAFTER INITIAL PlANTING H:!---REMOVE DEBRIS AND LARGE I\OCKS AND BACKRLL WITH NATIVE SOIL ARM UP SOJLAROUND PLANT 0 :REE & SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL PROJECT DESIGNl;O SY, Waterfroot Cm,trud.lm Inc. TH~ DOCUMENT IS. PROPRIETAR'l' PROPER1Y OF WAl[RFRONT CONSTRUCTION 11-tC., ANO IS l«'.>f TO BE VS(D. IN Yl110l( OR-IN PART, FOR mY OTHER PROJECT Wl1l-lOUT THt WRITTEN AIJ1HOR!2ATIQN (IF WATERFRONT CONSTRUCTION INC. REFERENCE 0: APPL cmr: CONNER HO~ES AT BARBEE MILL LLC PROPOSED: INSTALL COMMUNITY DOCK SHEET:4 Of:4 N[AR/AT: RENTON DATF: 1-12-10 OWG : 05 3077 A,2 1 Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 23 Attachment 1. Photographs of the site Looking north along the site's bulkhead Looking south from the site MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 24 Project site MS&A Barbee Mill Communfly Dock Projec! • 25 J chment 2. Species list for King Co LISTED AND PROPOSED ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES AND CRITICAL HABITAT; CANDIDATE SPECIES; AND SPECIES OF CONCERN IN KING COUNTY AS PREPARED BY THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE WESTERN WASHINGTON FISH AND WILDLIFE OFFICE (Revised November 1, 2007) LISTED Bull 1rout (Salvelinus conj/uentus) Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) Gray wolf(Canis lupus) Grizzly bear (Ursus arctos = U. a. horrihilis) Marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) Northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) Major concerns that should be addressed in your Biological Assessment of project impacts to listed species include: l. Level of use of the project area by listed species. 2. Effect of the project on listed species' primary food stocks, prey species, and foraging areas in all areas influenced by the project. 3. hnpacts from project activities and implementation ( e.g., increased noise levels, increased human activity and/or access, loss or degradation of habitat) that may result in disturbance to listed species and/or their avoidance of the project area Castilleja /evisecta (golden paintbrush) [historic J Major concerns that should be addressed in your Biological Assessment of project impacts to listed plant species include: 1. Distribution of taxon in project vicinity. 2. Disturbance (trampling, uprooting, collecting, etc.) of individual plants and loss of habitat. 3. Changes in hydrology where taxon is found. · DESIGNATED Critical habitat for bull trout Critical habitat for the marbled murrelet Critical habitat for the northern spotted owl MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project_• 26 PROPOSED None CANDIDATE Oregon spotted frog (Rana pretiosa) Yellow-billed cuckoo ( Coccyzus americanus) SPECIES OF CONCERN Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) Belier's ground beetle (Agonum belleri) California wolverine ( Gulo gulo luteus) Cascades frog (Rana cascadae) Hatch's click beetle (Eanus hatch1) Larch Mountain salamander (P/ethodon /arsell,) Long-eared myotis (Myotis evotis) Long-legged myotis (Myotis volans) Northern goshawk (Accipiter gentilis) Northern sea otter (Enhydra lutris kenyoni) Northwestern pond turtle (Emys (= Clemmys) marmorara marmorata) Olive-sided flycatcher (Contopus cooper,) Pacific lamprey (Lampetra tridentata) Pacific Townsend=s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii townsendii) Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) River lamprey (Lampetra ayresi) Tailed frog (Ascaphus true,) Valley silverspot (Speyeria zerene bremeri) Western toad (Bufo boreas) Aster curtus (white-top aster) Botrychium pedunculosum (stalked moonwort) Cimicifuga elata (tall bugbane) MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 27 rnent 3. Essential Fish Habitat Asse 1ent A. Background The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), as amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 (Public law 104-267), requires Federal agencies to consult with NMFS on activities that may adversely affect designated Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) for the relevant species. According to the MSA, EFH means "those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity." For the Pacific West Coast, the Pacific Fisheries Management Council (Council) has designated EFH for federally managed groundfish (PFMC 1998a), coastal pelagic (PFMC 1998b) and Pacific salmon fisheries (PFMC 1999). The purpose of the EFH Assessment is fo determine the effects of the proposed project on the EFH for the relevant species and to recommend conservation measures to avoid, minimize or otherwise offset adverse effects on EFH. B. Identification of EFH The designated EFH for groundfish and coastal pelagic species encompasses all waters from the mean high water line, and upriver extent of saltwater intrusion in river mouths, along the coasts of Washington, Oregon and California, seaward to the boundary of the U.S. exclusive economic zone (370.4 km) (PFMC 1998a, 1998b). The designated EFH in estuarine and marine areas for Pacific salmon species extends from the nearshore and tidal submerged environments within state territorial water out to the full extent of the exclusive .economic zone (3 70 .4 km) offshore of Washington, Oregon and California north of Point Conception to the Canadian border PFMC, 1999). Freshwater EFH for Pacific salmon includes all those streams, lakes, ponds, wetlands and other water bodies currently, or historically accessible to salmon in Washington, Oregon, Idaho and California, except areas upstream of certain impassable man-made barriers, and longstanding, naturally~impassable barriers. Chinook salmon and coho salmon are the species with designated EFH that are found in Lake Washington C. Proposed Action The details of the proposed project are presented in Project Description section of the attached BE/Habitat Data Report. D. Effects of the Proposed Action The effects of this project on designated EFH are likely to be similar to the effects described in detail in the Effects Analysis section of the attached BE/Habitat Data Report. The project is likely to have no permanent, long-term effects EFH designated for chinook and coho salmon. E. EFH Conservation Measures The conservation measures and BMP's mentioned in the attached BE/Habitat Data Report will be implemented to minimize possible adverse effects to EFH. · MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 28 MS&A F. Conclusion The project may have temporary adverse effects on EFH the sahnon species, but will not produce long-term adverse effects on EFH for the above species. The conservation measures and BMP's mentioned in the attached BE/Habitat Data Report will be implemented to minimize any possible the temporary adverse effects on EFH. G. Additional References PFMC (Pacific Fishery Management Council). 1999. Amendment 14 to the Pacific Coast Sahnon Plan. Appendix A: Description and Identification of Essential Fish Habitat, Adverse Impacts and Recommended Conservation Measures for Salmon (August 1999). PFMC, 1998a. Final Enviromnental Assessment/Regulatory Review for Amendment 11 to the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan (October, 1998). PFMC, 1998b. The Coastal Pelagic Species Fishery Management Plan: Amendment 8 (December, 1998). Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 29 Attachment 4. Asses fnt of Impacts to Critical Habitat f, ,get Sound Chinook Project description: Construction of a new community-use dock on Lake Washington in Renton, This assessment covers the primary constitnent elements ( 50 CFR Part 226, page 7 45 81-2) determined essential to the conservation of Puget Sound Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchw tshawytscha): (1) Freshwater spawning sites with water quantity and quality conditions and substrate supporting spawning, incubation, and larval development. Existing Conditions: There are no suitable freshwater spawning sites at the project location. (2) Freshwater rearing sites with water quantity and floodplain connectivity to form and maintain physical habitat c,.,1ditions and support juvenile growth and mobility; water quality and forage supporting juvenile development; aud natural cover such as shade, submerged and overhanging large wood, log jams and beaver dams, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut banks. l:,isting Conditions: Native vegetation has been planted immediately landward of the bulkhead in conjunction ;,·1tl1 the upland development. There is a concrete/sheet pile bulkhead along the shoreline of both properties. No side channels or undercut banks were noted. (3) Freshwater migration corridors free of obstruction with water quantity and quality conditions and natnral cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut banks supportingjuvenile and adult mobility and survival. Existing Conditions: See (2) above. (4) Estuarine areas free of obstruction with water quality, water quantity and salinity conditions supporting juvenile and adult physiological transitions between fresh-and saltwater; natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, and side channels, and juvenile and adult forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation. Existing Conditions: See (2) above. (5) Nearsbore marine areas free of obstruction with water quality and quantity conditions and forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation; and natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulder and side channels. l:xistiug Conditions: The site is in a freshwater area. (6) Offshore marine areas with water quality conditions and forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation. Existing Conditions: The site is in a freshwater lake area. MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 30 MS&A Effects Analysis: A com1 discussion of the effects of this project i: n in the BE/Habitat Data Report. Construction will produce v.ief and localized increased turbidity, which ,Jill be contained by a silt curtain. The project will have no long-term impacts on water quantity, salinity conditions or water temperature. Construction during work windows will prevent impacts to the listed fish species. Shading impacts on the benthic environment will be reduced by design components of the proposed project The entire dock will be fully grated. The smallest number and diameter steel piles will be used to minimize the amount of structure in the water and disturbance to the substrate. Glu-lam stringers will be used to allow the longest spans possible between piles. The construction barge will not be allowed to ground out on the lake bottom at anytime. A native planting plan will be installed. Determination of Effect: "May affect, not likely to adversely affect'' Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 31 Attachment 5. Assessment of Impacts to Critical HabHat for Coastal -Puget Sound Bull Trout COE reference: Unknown at this time Applicant: Conner Homes at Barbee Mill LLC (Attn: Charlie Conner). The primruy constituent elements determined essential to the conservation of bull trout (Salve/mus confluentus) are: (1) Water temperatures that support bull trout use. Bull trout have been documented in streams with temperatures from 32 to 72 °F (0 to 22 °C) but are found more frequently in temperatures ranging from 36 to 59 °F (2 to 15 °C). These temperature ranges may vary depending on bull trout life history stage and form, geography, elevation, diurnal and seasonal variation, shade, such as that provided by riparian habitat, and local groundwater influence. Stream reaches that preclude bull trout use are specifically excluded from designation. Existing Conditions: The project will take place in Lake Washington, a large body of fresh water. Effects to PCE: The project is not expected to have any influence on the water temperature of Lake Washington. (2) Complex stream channels with features such as woody debris, side channels, pools, and undercut banks to provide a variety of depths, velocities, and in stream structures. Existing Conditions: Project will take place in Lake Washington -not in a stream environment Effects to PCE: No effect (3) Substrates of sufficient amount, size and composition tci ensure success of egg and embryo overwinter survival, fry emergence, and young-of-the year and juvenile survival. This should include a minimal amount of fme substrate less than 0.25 in (0.63 cm) in diameter. Existing Conditions: No spawning activity at the site Effects to PCE: No effect (4) A natural hydrograph, including peak, high, low, and base flows within historic ranges or, if regulated, currently operate under a biological opinion that addresses bull trout, or a hydrograph that demonstrates the ability to support bull trout populations by minimizing daily and day-to-day fluctuations and minimizing departures from the natural cycle of flow levels corresponding with seasonal variation: This rule finds that reservoirs currently operating under a biological opinion that addresses bull trout provides management for PCEs as currently operated. Existing Conditions: Project will take place in Lake Washington Effects to PCE: The project does not involve any alteration in the lake level; therefore it will have no impact on this PCE. MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 32 (5) Springs, seeps, ground· water source. r sources, and subsurface water to contri Existing Conditions: See 4 above to water quality and quantity as a cold- Effects to PCE: This project will have no impact on springs, seeps, groundwater sources or subsurface water (6) Migratory corridors with minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments between spawning, rearing, overwintering, and foraging habitats, including intermittent or seasonal barriers induced by high water temperatures or low flows. Existing Conditions: Native vegetation has been planted along the site shoreline. Effects to PCE: The proposed dock will incorporate design components that will decrease negative impacts on foraging habitat and migratory corridors. The proposed dock will be fully grated and supported by the smallest number and diameter steel pilings, which will cause minimal physical, biological or water quality impediments. (See the BFJHabitat Data Report for details). (7) An abundant food base including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic macroinvertebrates, and forage fish. Existing Conditions: Native vegetation has been planted along the site shoreline. Effects to PCE: See 6 above (8) Permanent water of sufficient quantity and quality such that normal reproduction, growth and survival are not inhibited. Existing Conditions: See 4 above. Effects to PCE: Pile driving may produce temporary turbidity impacts. These are expected to be short term and are not expected to have a significant impact on critical habitat. Any debris associated with the project construction phase will be contained by a silt containment curtain. Determination of Effect: "No destruction or adverse modification" Conservation Measures: Conservation measures for this project are seen in the BE/Habitat Data Report. MS&A Barbee Mill Community Dock Project • 33 \ C. Grantee wishes to construct a boat lift on the seawall adjacent to its southern boundary in an area which is south of the property line betweenLot34 mid Tract 35, assuming such lot line was extended into Lake Washington. D. Grimtor and Grantee wish to create an easement to confirm that Grantee have the right to construct, maintain, repair and use the such a boat lift pursuant to the terms set furth herein. EASEMENT In consideration of the mutual benefits and promises set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Grant of Easement: Granter hereby grants and conveys to Grantee a permanent easement allowing construction, repair, maintenance and operation of a boat lift in the portion of Lake Washington generally located west of Tract 35, subject to the terms and conditions set forth herem. 2. Size and Locational Limitations: The boat lift permitted by this Ea~ement shall not exceed a width of 12 feet or a length of35 feet The boat lift shall be located so that its easternmost side (the 12 foot width)is adjacent to the bulkhead on Tract 35 and its northernmost side (the 35 foot length) is adjacent to the bulkhead on Lot 34. ~ . No Moora e n Comm · ck. Gr 11 no at to moor within on the no em side of the Community Dock on Lot 35 that lies in the easterly 50 feet of the Community Dock. The purpose of this No Moorage Area is to assure that open access to and from the boat lift is maintained at all times for Grantee. 4. Compliance with City Regulations: All construction, maintenance, repair and use of the boat lift shall be done in compliance with adopted laws, rules and regulations of the City of Renton. 5. Cost of Repair, Maintenance and Operation: Grantee shall be solely responsible for all costs ofrepair, maintenance and repair of the boat lift. 6. No Liens: Grantee is not authorized to conduct activities which result in liens being filed against Grantor's property. In the event tbat a lien is filed against Grantor's property as the result of Grantee's construction, use, repair or maintenance of the boat lift, Grantee shall immediately take all reasonable steps necessary to remove such lien and to protect Grantor against liability resulting from such a lien. 7. Damage to Grantor's Property: Grantee is responsible and shall pay for any damage which occurs to Grantor's property as a result of Grantee's construction, use, repair or maintenance of the boat lift. Grantee shall indenurify, hold harmless, and defend Grantor from any and all claims, demands, losses, liens, liabilities, penalties, fines, lawsuits and other proceedings and costs and expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs) Eim=mcm for Boilt Lift-p. 2 of 4 DocuSign Envelope ID: 33EF7586-027C-45E1-B57F-46EOE6FF3693 40 J.HS N')I o. dd~ LOOOt ~ .,, I-.. .J < ~ {... : ~ ~ Ill w t ~ w ~ I ~ ~ z ~ ,: :r-~ " ,l fVI " ~ J " I- § ,:, ~ ~-~ 0 ~ \II 0 z 0 t I ~ 0 Ill !t ~ ~ ~ ..... ~ --l tooRB VM 'JMilT11'1 3N 3AV KLIEI -9tll S3YIOH l,JNl,ICQ A3AHns .:10 01:100::11:1 I,. "" "' I'\ ~ I- ~ f: ' • j e -fWIHI\IP<I ~ -ii ---i---~i' 'I !'' ,li ! • ~ 11 1 . ,! • ,--fJ Ii • ' i! "1:1-11~ """"""""' ,IO/-.... ,,.;.,~ ~.GIMS • ..,,. ·--,...,, --=lf'"l'l_( .. .......,,...,,,,. -,t,,..-• 'JUHM!N/4..,,., -"/\!{ 3.1.'dOl:II..LHBO S',l::IO.A3.M:::tns § ii~ !11 p ' Ril)f/./1!1'11.1;11Jit1Vlf.,r,Ht'),.,,,,,, '0111 ~~JO lllOO ,. innllu•"1 -I"-·" /l.1.- ,. ---.. -W---1" -w --,P.,.., -ffj _-"I/,.!,/ 3.L"9'01;11.L~30 l:)N!Oti003H ' CONFORMED COPY Return Address: Barbee Mill \\laterfront, LLC 846 -1 08th A venue KE Bellevue, WA 98004 20121211001515 JOHN MONROE M QCO 73.00 AUDITOR/RECORDER'S INDEXING FORM PAGE-001 OF 002 12/11/2012 12:00 E2574999 11/19/2012 15:15 TAX SALE $10.00 $0.00 1---~~--~-~-1-·· ------------1·-"---'-'------ Documen_t Title(s): QUJt Claim Deed -/ Li i----~--~-----~-----~ --- ! Grant_or(s/, Barbe_e M1!! W_aterfrrmt, LLC ______ _ ----------- '. Grantee(s) Barbee Mill Community Organization PRGE-001 OF 001 -----------··--·------------- ' Legal Description: (abbreviated) i Tract 35, Renton Lot Lne Adj11stment # LUA-10-023-LLA Rec. No. I. 20120802900003, in the plat of Barb_,_ e Mill, vol. 248,_" ___ p. 25-38, records of King Coumy, Washmgton --~-----------·----------------~ -- X; Additional legal descriptions on page I ----j ------__j -----------_E __ _ I Assessor's Property Tax Parcel/Account Number: 0518500350 ---------------··· '---------------··------ QUIT CLAIM DEED The Grantor, Barbee Mill Waterfront, LLC a Washington limited liability company, hereby quit claims to Grantee, Barbee Mill Community Organization, a Washington non-profit corporation and homeowners association created pursuant to RCW ch. 64.38, all right, title arid interest in the following described real estate, situated in the County of King, State of Washington: Tract 35, Renton Lot Line Adjustment# LUA-10-023-LLA Rec No, 20120802900003, in the plat of Barbee Mill, vol. 248, pp. 25-38, records of King County, Washington DATED this Z. '_:I_ of October 20] 2 GRAJ\TOR: Barbee Mill Waterfront, LLC By~1~S--f Charles F. Conner, managing member QUIT CLAIM DEED -I I STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) ) ss. ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory eYidence that Charles F. Conner is the person who appeared before me and signed this instrument, that he is the managing member of Barbee Mill Wate1front, LLC, a Washington limited liability company, that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledge it to be the free and voluntary act of such limited liability company for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrumen1. QUIT CLAIM DEED -2 _<jyy; ,J;n L-j)(UIOi'.l /I (Print Name) Notary Publi~ Residing at ["'.1/ Ji .cV KL My appointment expires: ~,__/ ~llf-+---- RDepartment ot (,iii evenue '-' Washington Stote This form is your receipt PLEASf·. TYPE QR PRINT CHAPTER 82.45 RCW -CHAPTER 458-61A V/AC when stamped by cashier nus AffJDAVIT WILL NOT BJ: ACCl<:PTED UNLESS ALL AREA.S 0~ ALL P,\GES ARE Fm.LY COMPLETED D Check box 1f-nial sale of oront:rN (See back of last page for instruc1ionsJ If multi le ownn; list =reenta~e-of owncrslu-· nex( lo name . • Name Barbee Mill Waterfront. LLC :slarne Barbee Mill Communi1" or~anizalion " " ffi~ Malling Addnc;:s 846 107th Avenue NE "" B46 107th Avenue NE ~~ ........ Maii<r,g Addre~s ;z City1StatdZ1p Bellevue. WA 98004 =< Belle~ue WA 98004 ~o •• City:Sta1e/Z1p 0 Phone No (indudrng area code) (425) 455-9280 Phone No (1rn:luding area code) {425) 455-9280 Send all property tax wrre,six>ndence lo [2] Same as Buyer1Grantee Lisi all real and peri;onal propeny ta>:. pan;:el ao;count List assc:ssed v~lue(s) ncn1her.s -check bo,:. if personal property Name 0518500350 -D S401.000 Mailing Address n City/State/Zip n Phone No. (includrng area code) n II Streer address of property· 4151 Williams Avenue N. Renton. WA98056 Thi~ properly 1s located 111 Renton D Check. l;,o;,_ if any ()f lhe listerl parcels are heini; segreca1ed trom anothe1 parcel, art: part of a boundary lme a<lJu>!menl or parcels bmng merged. Legal descr1p1rnn ol properly (,f more >pace i, ~ec.Jed, you may a,tach a separate sheer 10 each page uf the affidavi() Tract 35. Renton Lot Line Adjustment LUA 10-023-LLA, Rec No. 20120802900003 in Plat of Barbee Mill. Yol 248 of Plats, pp 25-38, records ot King County, WA • Select Laud Use Code(s): 176 -Parks enter an)' addmonal codes: ____________ _ {See back of last page for instrnct1ons) Cs 1his property exempt from property tax po:r chapter 84.36 RCW (nonprofit orgaruzatmn)'.l • ls this property designated as forest land per chapter 84.33 RCW"l Is this property classified as current use (open space, fum and agncultural. or tlmber) land per chaptt'r 84.34".' [s th1spmperty ll!Ceiving special valurrt:ion as lustoncal prope1ty per chap1er 84.26 RCW? [f .my == .m: yes, complete as mstruct~ below YF:$ NO D YES D D D 0 NO 0 0 0 (1) NOTICEOFCONTf.",;U . .\NCE (FOREST L.\ND OR CURRENT L1SE) NEW OWNER(S): To continue the (..-Urrent desigrrntion as forest land or cl~ssification as current use (open space, frum and agriculture, or timber) land, you must siga on (3) below. The county assessor must then delermme if the land transferred continues to qualif)-· and will indicate by signing below. !fthe land no longer qualities or you do 1101 wish 10 continue the des111,na1ion or classificahon, 11 will be ri:moved and the comp;:nsatmg or additional taxes will be due and payable by the seller or transferor at the: ume of sale. (RCW 84.33.140 or RCW 84.34.108). Prior to signinb (3) below, y,:,u may contact your local county assess.or fur more mfomiation nus land O does D does not qualify for cont:nuance DE:PUTY ASSESSOR Dfl.TE (l) !',OTICE OF COMPLIANCE (IUSTORIC PROPERTY} J\.EW OWKER(S): To contiIJue special valuation as historic property, sign (3) hclow. If the new owner(s) does not wish to continue, all aiidit10nal tax calculated pursuant ta chapter 84.26 RC\V, shall h~ due and payable by the seller or transferor at the time of sale. (3) OWNER(S) SIG~ATURE PRINT NAME List all personal property (tangible and intangible) included 111 sellrng price NDll[) lf claimrng an exemption, hst WAC numher and reason for exemption WAC No. (Sect10n/Suhscction) WAC 456-61A-215(2)(c> Reason ior exemption Trans1er of required open space in plat to homeowners association purusant to terms or plat approval Type of ~ocument _qc'c"c'c"c'm=dc'c"'--------------- Date of Document -'-''°C/209cla12'---------------- Gross Selling Pric~ $ ___________ ~0.00_0 *Personal Property {deducl) $ ___________ _::Oc0::_0 Exemptrnn Claimed (deduct) s ____________ o_._o_o Taxable Sdling Price S ___________ _c.9 c9:_0 Excise Tax _ S1ak S ___________ _c9·c9:_0 0.0050 .J Local s _____________ o 00_0 •Dclmquent Jnterc,t· State S ___________ _co·co:_o Lorn! s ____________ o_.o_o ~Dclmqucm Prnalty Subtotal 0.00 0.00 "'St~k Technology fee 5.00 •Affidavit Processing Fee 5.00 Total Due S, ____________ 1_0._o_o A '.'{Jt,;!MU!VI OF SJ0.00 IS DUE IJ\' FEE{S) AND/OR TAX ~sEE lNSTRUCTlONS I Cl::RTU-Y L.~D}'.R l'Er\ALTY OF PERJUR~ THAl Name (print) Robert D. Johns Date & city of signing· Perjury: Perjury i~ a class C felony which 1; fine in an amount fixed bv the cour. of not rr Rf,V 84 OOOJ ac 16-''.!.H: 12/ Signatur~ of Grantee or Grante,,'s Ag~11t _ _L.!L_!:::C,,c'C__!j ________ _ '!\ame (print) Robert D Johns Date & ci1y of signing: Bellevue. WA 980D4 11/16/2012 CONFORMED COPY 101 more than five years, or by a W020(JC)) TAXJ'AYER E2574999 11/19/2012 15:15 TAX SALE $10.00 $0.00 PAGE-001 OF 001 Your Ref: CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY 701 FIFTH A VENUE, #2300, SEA TILE, WA 98104 PHONE: (206)628-5610 FAX: (206)628-9717 Extended Loan Policy of Title Insurance SCHEDULE A Policy No: 001241234 BARBEEMILL-LOT34/URBAN Address Reference: * * * SEE ATTACHED * * * Amount of Insurance: • Premium: Date of Policy: MARCH 19, 2013 at: 2, 27 PM 1. Name of Insured: MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., AS NOMINEE FOR LEGACY GROUP LENDING, INC. 2. The estate or interest in the Land that is encumbered by the Insured Mortgage is: FEE SIMPLE 3. Title is vested in: MICHAEL A. URBAN AND DOROTHY M. URBAN, HUSBAND AND WIFE 4. The Insured Mortgage, and its assignments, if any, are described as follows: 06LP1SA 11/26/07 bk DEED OF TRUST TO SECURE AN INDEBTEDNESS: GRANTOR, TRUSTEE, BENEFICIARY: AMOUNT, DATED, RECORDED, RECORDING NUMBER, LOAN NUMBER: MICHAEL A. URBAN AND DOROTHY M. URBAN, HUSBAND AND WIFE CHICAGO TITLE MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., AS NOMINEE FOR LEGACY GROUP LENDING, INC. $1,280,000.00 MARCH 12, 2013 MARCH 19, 2013 20130319001021 911301405 THIS POLICY VALID ONLY IF SCHEDULE B IS ATTACHED CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY ( Address Reference of Schedule A Exhibit ) Policy No: 1241234 4157 WILLIAMS AVENUE NORTH, RENTON, WASHINGTON 98056 TAX NO. 051850-0340 4d, h,. ·~ 06LPSAPC 11/20/07 bk CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY Extended Loan Policy of Tille Insurance Schedule A Continued Policy No: 001241234 5. The land referred to in this policy is described as follows: LOT 34, BARBEE MILL, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 246 OF PLATS, PAGES 25 THROUGH 39, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. 6. This policy incorporates by reference those AL TA endorsements selected below: D 4-06 (Condominium) D 4.1-06 D 5-06 ( Planned Unit Development) D 5.1-06 D 6-06 ( Variable Rate) D 6.2-06 (Variable Rate. Negative Amortization) D 8.1-06 ( Environmental Protection Lien) Paragraph b refers to the following state statute(s): O 9-06 ( Restrictions, Encroachments, Minerals ) D 14-06 ( Future Advance· Priority) D 14.3-06 ( Future Advance· Reverse Mortgage) D 22-06 ( Location) The type of improvement is a and the street address is as shown above. D 13.1-06 (Leasehold Loan) D 14.1-06 (Future Advance -Knowledge) THIS POLICY VALID ONLY IF SCHEDULE B IS ATTACHED 06LP1SAC 11/20/07 bK CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY Extended Loan Policy of Title Insurance SCHEDULE B -PART I Policy No: 1241234 Your Ref: BARBEEMILL-LOT34/URBAN EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE Except as provided in Schedule B -Part II, this policy does not insure against loss or damage, and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees, or expenses that arise by reason of: 1. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS, EASEMENTS, NOTES, DEDICATIONS AND SETBACKS, IF ANY, SET FORTH IN OR DELINEATED ON THE PLAT OF BARBEE MILL, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 20080208000182 IN VOLUME 246 OF PLATS, PAGES 24 THROUGH 39, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY. 2. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: COMCAST OF WASHINGTON IV, INC. PURPOSE: BROADBAND COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM AREA AFFECTED: UNDISCLOSED PORTION OF SAID PREMISES RECORDED: RECORDING NUMBER: DECEMBER 24, 2007 20071224000192 3. EASEMENT AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: PURPOSE: RECORDED: RECORDING NUMBER: AREA AFFECTED: BARBEE MILL CO., INC. INGRESS, EGRESS AND OTHER PURPOSES AUGUST 14, 2008 20080814000714 LOT 115, AND TRACTS A~ G SAID EASEMENT IS A RE-RECORDING OF EASEMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 20060929003429. 4. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: PURPOSE: AREA AFFECTED: RECORDED: RECORDING NUMBER: 00LP1SB1 11/26/07 bk BARBEE MILL CO., INC., A WASHINGTON CORPORATION MAINTAIN, MONITOR, REPAIR, REPLACE, INSTALL, REMOVE OR ABANDON COMPLIANCE MONITORING WELLS. THE WESTERLY 35 FEET OF LOTS 24,25,26,27,28,29 AND 30 AND ALL OF TRACT E, AND THE NORTHERLY 10 FEET OF LOTS 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 AND 23 JUNE 27, 2008 20080627001002 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY SCHEDULE B · PART I (continued) Policy No: 1241234 AFFECTS, LOTS 18 THROUGH 30 AND TRACT E SAID EASEMENT IS A RE-RECORDING OF EASEMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 20080519002006. 5. EXCEPTIONS AND RESERVATIONS CONTAINED IN DEED FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, WHEREBY THE GRANTOR EXCEPTS AND RESERVES ALL OIL, GASES, COAL, ORES, MINERALS, FOSSILS, ETC., ANC THE RIGHT OF ENTRY FOR OPENING, DEVELOPING AND WORKING THE SAME AND PROVIDING THAT SUCH RIGHTS SHALL NOT BE EXERCISED UNTIL PROVISION HAS BEEN MADE FOR FULL PAYMENT OF ALL DAMAGES SUSTAINED BY REASON OF SUCH ENTRY; RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 467141. 6. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS, EASEMENTS AND LIABILITY FOR ASSESSMENTS CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT, BUT OMITTING ANY COVENANTS OR RESTRICTIONS, IF ANY, BASED UPON RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, FAMILIAL STATUS, MARITAL STATUS, DISABILITY, HANDICAP, NATIONAL ORIGIN, ANCESTRY, OR SOURCE OF INCOME, AS SET FORTH IN APPLICABLE STATE OR FEDERAL LAWS, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THAT SAID COVENANT OR RESTRICTION IS PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, RECORDED: RECORDING NUMBER: JULY 13, 2010 20100713000747 TOGETHER WITH AMENDMENTS AND MODIFICATIONS THERETO, IF ANY. SAID DOCUMENT IS A RESTATED A.ND AMENDED DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, AND RESTRICTIONS FOR BARBEE MILL, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBERS 20080208000183 AND 20080613001522. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL COVENANT, INCLUDING THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS THEREOF: RECORDED, RECORDING NUMBER: AFFECTS, ENTIRE PLAT JUNE 6, 2008 20080606001208 8. RELEASE OF DA.MAGE AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS A.ND CONDITIONS THEREOF, BETWEEN: AND, RECORDED, RECORDING NUMBER: 06L\S81C i 1 /26/07 bk CLARISSA D. COLMAN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA OCTOBER 24, 1906 429598 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY SCHEDULE B -PART I (continued) Policy No: 1241234 RELEASING UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FROM ALL FUTURE CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES RESULTING FROM: CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION, AND MAINTENNCE OF CANAL LOCKS, SHIPWAYS, WATERWAYS AND THE RAISING AND LOWERING OF THE WATER LEVEL OF LAKE WASHINGTON. 9. AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BETWEEN: AND: RECORDED: RECORDING NUMBER: REGARDING: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MILL, LLC BARBEE FOREST PRODUCTS, INC. SEPTEMBER 29, 2006 20060929003431 ACCESS EASEMENT AGREEMENT (SOUTH PARCEL) AMENDMENT AND/OR MODIFICATION OF SAID AGREEMENT: RECORDED: RECORDING NUMBER: AUGUST 14, 2008 20080814000715 10. AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BETWEEN: AND: RECORDED: RECORDING NUMBER: REGARDING: CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MILL, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY CITY OF RENTON, A NON CHARTER CODE CITY OCTOBER 3, 2011 20111003000168 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 11. AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BETWEEN: AND: RECORDED: RECORDING NUMBER: REGARDING: 06USB1C 11 /28/07 bk BARBEE MILL COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION, A WASHINGTON NON-PROFIT CORPORATION BARBEE MILL WATERFRONT, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY DECEMBER 11, 2012 20121211001516 EASEMENT FOR BOAT LIFT • CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY SCHEDULE B -PART I (continued) Policy No: 1241234 12. ANY PROHIBITION OR LIMITATION OF USE, OCCUPANCY OR IMPROVEMENT OF THE LAND RESULTING FROM THE RIGHTS OF THE PUBLIC OR RIPARIAN OWNERS TO USE ANY PORTION WHICH IS NOW OR HAS BEEN FORMERLY COVERED BY WATER. 13. PARAMOUNT RIGHTS AND EASEMENTS IN FAVOR OF THE UNITED STATES FOR COMMERCE, NAVIGATION, FISHERIES AND THE PRODUCTION OF POWER. 14. NOTWITHSTANDING PARAGRAPH 4 OF THE INSURING CLAUSES OF THE POLICY, THE ACCESS COVERAGE REFERENCED IN SAID PAR.~GRAPH 4 IS LIMITED TO THE ACCESS ALLOWED IN ANY CROSSING PERMIT WHICH MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE OWNER OF THE ADJOINING RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY (OR FORMER RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY), SUBJECT TO THE TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS THEREIN. 15. GENERAL AND SPECIAL TAXES AND CHARGES, PAYABLE FEBRUARY 15, DELINQUENT IF FIRST HALF UNPAID ON MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT IF UNPAID ON NOVEMBER 1 OF THE TAX YEAR (AMOUNTS DO NOT INCLUDE INTEREST AND PENALTIES): YEAR: TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: LEVY CODE: ASSESSED VALUE-LAND, ASSESSED VALUE-IMPROVEMENTS: GENERAL & SPECIAL TAXES: 2013 051850-0340-03 2100 $ 691,000.00 $ BILLED: $ 9,843.29 PAID: $ 4,921.65 UNPAID: $ 4,921.64 •• END OF SCHEDULE B -PART I** 06l\S81C 11 /26/07 bk YOUR REF: CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY Extended Loan Policy of Title Insurance SCHEDULE B -PART II Policy No: 1241234 BARBEEMILL-LOT34/URBAN EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE In addition to the matters set forth in Part I of this Schedule, the Title is subject to the following matters, and the Company insures against loss or damage sustained in the event that they are not subordinate to the lien of the Insured Mortgage: NONE AUTHORIZED SI Loan Policy Endorsements: 9, 22, 8.1, AND PUD Owner's Policy Endorsements: 2696 AND 2697 06LP1S82 11/26/07 bk Your r " ..... rence: BA .LL-LOT34/URBAN ENDORSEMENT Attached to and forming a part of Policy No. 1241234 Issued by CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Dated: March 19, 2013 AL TA ENDORSEMENT FORM 9-06 (Restrictions, Encroachments, Minerals) Loan Policy ( 4-2-12) 1. The insurance provided by this endorsement is subject to the exclusions in Section 5 of this endorsement; and the Exclusions from Coverage, the Exceptions from Coverage contained in Schedule B, and the Conditions in the policy. 2. For the purposes of this endorsement only: a. "Covenant' means a covenant, condition, limitation or restriction in a document or instrument in effect at Date of Policy. b. "Improvement" means an improvement, including any lawn, shrubbery, or trees, affixed to either the Land or adjoining land at Date of Policy that by law constitutes real property. 3. The Company insures against loss or damage sustained by the Insured by reason of: a. A violation of a Covenant that: 1. divests, subordinates, or extinguishes the lien of the Insured Mortgage, ii. results in the invalidity, unenforceability or lack of priority of the lien of the Insured Mortgage, or iii. causes a loss of the Insured's Tille acquired in satisfaction or partial satisfaction of the Indebtedness; b. A violation on the Land at Date of Policy of an enforceable Covenant, unless an exception in Schedule B of the policy identifies the violation; c. Enforced removal of an Improvement located on the Land as a result of a violation, at Date of Policy, of a building setback line shown on a plat of subdivision recorded or filed in the Public Records, unless an exception in Schedule B of the policy identifies the violation; or d. A notice of a violation, recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, of an enforceable Covenant relating to environmental protection describing any part of the Land and referring to that Covenant, but only to the extent of the violation of the Covenant referred to in that notice, unless an exception in Schedule B of the policy identifies the notice of the violation. 4. The Company insures against loss or damage sustained by reason of: a. An encroachment of: i. an Improvement located on the Land, at Date of Policy, onto adjoining land or onto that portion of the Land subject to an easement; or ENOORSH/RDA/rffJg Yo ,rence: BA !MILL-LOT'.l4/URBAN ENDORSEMENT Attached to and forming a part of Policy No. 1241234 Issued by CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Dated: March 19, 2013 ii. an Improvement located on adjoining land onto the Land at Date of Policy unless an exception in Schedule B of the policy identifies the encroachment otherwise insured against in Sections 4.a.i. or 4.a.ii.; b. A final court order or judgment requiring the removal from any land adjoining the Land of an encroachment identified in Schedule B; or c. Damage to an Improvement located on the Land, at Date of Policy: 1. that is located on or encroaches onto that portion of the Land subject to an easement excepted in Schedule B, which damage results from the exercise of the right to maintain the easement for the purpose for which it was granted or reserved; or ii. resulting from the future exercise of a right to use the surface of the Land for the extraction or development of minerals or any other subsurface substances excepted from the description of the Land or excepted in Schedule B. 5. This endorsement does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees, or expenses) resulting from: a. any Covenant contained in an instrument creating a lease; b. any Covenant relating to obligations of any type to perform maintenance, repair, or remediation on the Land; c. except as provided in Section 3.d, any Covenant relating to environmental protection of any kind or nature, including hazardous or toxic matters, conditions, or substances; d. contamination, explosion1 fire, fracturing, vibration, earthquake or subsidence; or e. negligence by a person or an Entity exercising a right to extract or develop minerals or other subsurface substances. This endorsement is issued as part of the policy. Except as it expressly states, it does not (i) modify any of the terms and provisions of the policy, (ii) modify any prior endorsements, (iii) extend the Date of Policy, or (iv) increase the Amount of Insurance. To the extent a provision of the policy or a previous endorsement is inconsistent with an express provision of this endorsement, this endorsement controls. Otherwise, this endorsement is subject to all of the terms and provisions of the policy and of any prior endorsements. Note: This endors until countersignsd by ~n authori~ed signatory ENDORSEC/RDA/0099 Yo .rcnce: BA cMILL-LOT34/URBAN ENDORSEMENT Attached to and forming a part of Policy No. 1241234 Issued by CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Dated: March 19, 2013 AL TA ENDORSEMENT FORM 8.1-06 (Environmental Protection Lien) The insurance afforded by this endorsement is only effective if the Land is used or is to be used primarily for residential purposes. The Company insures against loss or damage sustained by the Insured by reason of lack of priority of the lien of the Insured Mortgage over (a) any environmental protection lien that, at Date of Policy, is recorded in those records established under state statutes at Date of Policy for the purpose of imparting constructive notice of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without knowledge, or is filed in the records of the clerk of the United States district court for the district in which the Land is located, except as set forth in Schedule B; (b) any environmental protection lien provided by any state statute in effect at Date of Policy, except environmental protection liens provided by the following state statutes: The "Mill Tailings Licensing and Perpetual Care Act of 1979", and amendments thereto, codified as RCW 70.121.140. This endorsement is issued as part of the policy. Except as it expressly states, it does not (i) modify any of the terms and provisions of the policy, (ii) modify any prior endorsements, (iii) extend the Date of Policy, or (iv) increase the Amount of Insurance. To the extent a provision of the policy or a previous endorsement is inconsistent with an express provision of this endorsement, this endorsement controls. Otherwise, this endorsement is subject to all of the terms and provisions of the policy and of any prior endorsements. Note: ThJs endorsement shall not be valid or binding until countersignad by an authorized signatory ENDORSEC/ROA/0999 Yo BA ENDORSEMENT Attached to and forming a part of Policy No. Issued by ;rence: • JMILL-LOT34/URRA,'l 1241234 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Dated: March 19, 2013 ALT A ENDORSEMENT FORM 22-06 (Location) The Company insures against loss or damage sustained by the Insured by reason of the failure of a A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE known as 4157 WILLIAMS AVENUE NORTH RENTON, WASHINGTON 980 56 to be located on the Land at Date of Policy. This endorsement is issued as part of the policy. Except as it expressly states, it does not (i) modify any of the terms and provisions of the policy, (ii) modify any prior endorsements, (iii) extend the Date of Policy, or (iv) increase the Amount of Insurance. To the extent a provision of the policy or a previous endorsement is inconsistent with an express provision of this endorsement, this endorsement controls. Otherwise, this endorsement is subject to all of the terms and provisions of the policy and of any prior endorsements. Note; This endorsement shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by an authori~ed signatory ENDORSEC/RDA/0999 Yo ~rence: BA , :M!LL-LOT34/URBAN ENDORSEMENT Attached to and forming a part of Policy No. 1241234 Issued by CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Dated: March 19, 2013 ALT A ENDORSEMENT FORM 5-06 (Planned Unit Development -Priority Over A'isessments) The Company insures against loss or damage sustained by the Insured by reason of: 1. Present violations of any restrictive covenants referred to in Schedule B which restrict the use of the Land. The restrictive covenants do not contain any provisions which will cause a forfeiture or reversion of the Title . As used in this paragraph 1, the words "restrictive covenants" do not refer to or include any covenant, condition or restriction (a) relating to obligations of any type to perform maintenance, repair or remediation on the land, or (b) pertaining to environmental protection of any kind or nature, including hazardous or toxic matters, conditions, or substances, except to the extent that a notice of a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy and is not excepted in Schedule B. 2. The priority of any lien for charges and assessments at Date of Policy in favor of any association of homeowners which are provided for in any document referred to in Schedule B over the lien of any Insured Mortgage identified in Schedule A. 3. The enforced removal of any existing structure on the Land ( other than a boundary wall or fence) because it encroaches onto adjoining land or onto any easements. 4. The failure of the Title by reason of a right of first refusal to purchase the Land which was exercised or could have been exercised at Date of Policy. This endorsement is issued as part of the policy. Except as it expressly states, it does not (i) modify any of the terms and provisions of the policy, (ii) modify any prior endorsements, (iii) extend the Date of Policy, or (iv) increase the Amount of Insurance. To the extent a provision of the policy or a previous endorsement is inconsistent with an express provision of this endorsement, this endorsement controls. Otherwise, this endorsement is subject to all of the terms and provisions of the policy and of any prior endorsements. 1gnatory Note: Th!s endorSi!!Jlent shall not be valid or bind!ng until countersigned by an authorized signatory ENDORSEC/ROA/0999 Yo ;rcnce: BA iMILL-LOT34/URBAN ENDORSEMENT Attached to and forming a part of Policy No. 1241234 Issued by CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Dated: March 19. 2013 ENOORSEC/RDA/0999 RECEIPT EG00016514 - BILLING CONTACT Michael & Dorothy Urban 4157 WILLIAMS AVE N RENTON, WA 98056-2171 REFERENCE NUMBER FEE NAME , """" ------------,,_,,_ ... ·. ·. -- LUA 13-001640 PLAN -Environmental Review • C •• PLAN -Shoreline Substantial Dev Permits Technology Fee Printed On: 12/2/2013 Prepared By: Gerald Wasser """" -----"""""·""" TRANSACTION TYPE ·»·•·-~-·>< Fee Payment Fee Payment Fee Payment Transaction Date: December 02, 2013 PAYMENT METHOD AMOUNT PAID "' """"""'""" o•oo oom """""""""' ~heck #1693 S1 ,000.00 Check #1693 $2,000.00 ~heck #1693 $90.00 SUB TOTAL $3,090.00 TOTAL $3,090.00 Page 1 of 1 FWD H-FRAME~ -,i--.,(;'·' . .. ';, ,, . YINAN HE & MA HONG 4163 WILLIAMS AVE N 1 PLEASE NOTE THAT THE SHORELINE CONFIGURATION AND PROPERTY LINE LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY. PROPERTY LINES ARE BASED ON AN AUGUST 2012 SURVEY BY CORE DESIGN. ' --__ __ __ __ __ __ N 89°04'39" w ~'1 -·-·159,4lr·-·-·-,1...-_-_-:;-·---~ 42' I ~· , I }---·-------+ ',, PIN : I ,-J 1' I, •,, '• OHWM 21.85'@ SHORELINE-, ·,, PLANT TW~~~~~--·-1.--~~ . i; /~~o 1i~?9'31 'W MICHAEL & DOROTHY URBAN i [5 L HOUSE i I I .,,.··.····:..·.···~···~:-· =f-1;·5~0·+ _ .!-4157WILLIAMSAVE N i ~ I I_J ~i PROPOSED BOAT LI FT~ "· I / ! I I -, "···," 1 12· 11'-6" , _______ L ________ _J !2 ;-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·J:!.89°04'39"W • 't,r------f--i lfil 0 166:4y· -· -· -· -· -· -· -· -· -v7r:,7"',,,,~;!:i;;;;;::;::;:::;:::;;:;::;::;:;:h_. -· -· -· -· N 8.9°04:39" W 159.48' ':::, EASEMENTFORBOATLIFT --~// ./p~' ·/ // //Y/• -·-·134:3y·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-lt ,,, . . REC.N0.20121112145613258 . ;;r/,,;~'1 ,~?/;• 'i :,: ,:, , , 1 , , 1 ,: , ,, ,, ,, , : : ,,, ,, 1 ,, , , , , , ,,, , ,,, ,, , , , , . , , , , / / /{ ''/ , / 1,1/// BARBEE MILL COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION ~I ,:,,,,::::·! :: :J :,::'1 '1 ,1:l:1:, :::,::1 1:,:1:1 :::::· ::,:: 1::·::,'!:,:1:,:::::,::·::,,:1::1,: ::·:,,:,:,::,,iii:,·;' ,!,1 1'1 1 ',' .,,,',,,I , •. /!1 ///// ///. 4151WILLIANiSAVEN CD, !111::!:i, ,:,,,:i',:i.:;::::!:!:i:!::::::;i i !;::.'::: l!!'::;;::'!!:i.iLii:1.11i:i!:1 :i:!:':J i:!:!:ffi,!iT!i!:/::!i,!::lili !! i.'!: [:,::'::ii!:;:;'i!{.': :::Iii,,:·: ~:!'::i:,1:,1,;,· ,,.,, ,:,:,: ~-1 1 I I I I I t I I , ! , ' ' · 1 I I . : I , I O , , I I I ' I , I I ! I I , I I I ! I I I I I : 1 I I f I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11 : I r , 1 , ' 1 .J.....:! j I ' 1 I , I ' I ~ ' , i I t I I I L I I I , , , , ' , , I , , , , " ' ' ' 'r',. ''I.I' I,.' I! I '. ! 'r , , , , , N', I I r I I I~',, r I , , I , , . , , ' r I I ' ' I ' I I I "' ' . I ' ' r ' I ' I I I :'i,! 'i :Ji "' I .r-·-----·---·-·----J.i!39°0f39".~ .. -I , •,':,'. · ,, · = Na_·0 04'39"W -~ 129.28' ·---·-·-·------~ !!!Li!: i !:! . --EXISTING COMMUNITY DOCK ~ .1·-·.1· 2"9.11;-· .,·:: :: :1: ! TO REMAIN ',,_N 44015'28" E I : , I : , l 1 : , : I ,,-.. O / < :.:··: :· ,:,: o 1 ; e.86' I r I I I I 1 1 '' • ''I' 11 ,,,,, N ,j :1· ,:,:, I'---/ // :,,: :,:, ,/ // ' , , I I I' ' I I I I/ I I I I' I I I I I , 111·11 I 1 ·1 J W' ! : J ! J ! · '' DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES ~(, /' , : , : : , PARC.# 3224059066 ""I / I , ! : , ! : , ; co / BARBEE MILL WATERFRONT LLC 1 1 , I 1 1 : QI / O i,'i:!1i! // :.-91,,// 4125WILLIAMSAVEN I I I I I I I :: :::r: ,: /Z'I I , , ,, '' / / ,,,,,. V' i, 1 ] ', OHWM 21.85' @BULKHEAD -/ ' 1' I ' I ' I ' ~I -. ~I 0 • 21 Z, I ' I • I I I I ' I I I I : I I 1 I __ =:~-~----· -· -· -· -· ---· ..!:!..~!l:9.1'~.IIY...... __ __ _J0 ·1 1e61e· -·-·---·-·-·-·-·-· I ·· .. SITE PLAN SCALE 1" = 20'-0" BOAT LIFT WILL BE A FREE STANDING UNIT. UNIT WILL REST ON LAKEBED ON FOUR FOOT PADS. ~BUNK REAR H-FRAME ~HYDRAULIC CYLINDER EXISTING ADJACENT DOCK~ TO REMAIN '· ---r-----------~\.._____ Fl ' 1-----------------------~-------------------·--~---------------- • ·-·---·-·-·-·-·-------·-·---------------·-·_J 21.85' OHW GARY & BRENDA BEEM 4119 WILLIAMS AVE N EXISTING BULKHEAD TO-, REMAIN '· PROPOSED BOAT LIFT---, . ' ·-,., ... ,,. ·-'--,. ·--............ ·-.,, -r r -:t> :s::: (/) ~ rn z ~-FOOT PAD ;, ,. SIDE BEAM,-./ BOOT--' LEG~ BOAT LIFT DETAIL NO SCALE '--HYDRAULIC BEAM '--CROSS BEAM ELEVATION DETAIL SCALE 1/4" = 1 '-0" -... =--> --· ··-APPROX. LOCATION OF LAKE BED ' 1 1 11'-6" .. :·> .. 'qq a fiY '. '•• Jl1\1-;f\ifrfoJ,J1: .-, '"·' ,,:1' .J ··-"'-I- '. PROJECT SITE: ,. LAT: 47.52966° N LON -122.20505° W NW 114 S:32 T:24N R;5E PROJECT INFORMATION OWNER: MICHAEL & DOROTHY URBAN DRAWINGS BY: ECCO DESIGN INC. 203 N 36TH ST SUITE 201 SEATTLE, WA 98103 206-706-3937 SITE ADDRESS: 4151 &4157WILLIAMSAVE N RENTON, WA 98056 PARCEL NUMBER: (4157) 0518500340 & (4151) 0518500350 BODY OF WATER: LAKE WASHINGTON LEGAL DESCRIPTION: (0518500340) TRACT 35, RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LUA 10-023 LLA, REC. NO. 20120802900003 IN PLAT OF BARBEE MILL, VOL 248 OF PLATS, PP 25-38, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WA (0518500350) LOT 34, BARBEE MILL, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 246 OF PLATS, PAGES 25 THROUGH 39, IN KING .,_.~UNT WA GT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: INSTALL A NEW GROUND BASED BOAT LIFT PLANT TWO PACIFIC WILLOWS (SALIX LUCIDA). -----------______ ,,, -,, . -. ~ ,. ... , .. ' M 0 N ...J z -o <( - I-1- 1.JJ <( Cl ::E ' ci:: z 00 -u. I-z <( - > ....I IJJ <( ...J 0::: Lu - VI 0 u z <( co Q:'.: ::) >-I l-o Q:'.: 0 0 dj DATE: u AUGUST 13, 2013 REVISIONS: ,1, FEB. 12, 2014 F,VD H-FRAME~ ' ' ' ' YINAN HE & MA HONG 4163 WILLIAMS AVE N PLEASE NOTE THAT THE SHORELINE CONFIGURATION AND PROPERTY LINE LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY. PROPERTY LINES ARE BASED ON AN AUGUST 2012 SURVEY BY CORE DESIGN. OHWM 21.85'@ SHORELINE-~ N 89'04'39" W ~i---------------·-·1s9.43··-·---..-~----,- 1 -------1--~Jc1 ____ 4_2·---------rt ~j~ I ~I ! II • . " HOUSE I I;;; MICHAEL & DOROTHY URBAN u ~ _.. I , N 19"09'31" W 4157 WILLIAMS AVE N w _J ~· I 10.20' : o I I ~I I • 50' : I .• C ....• _.L ________ ..J 1~ ~ II " r-· -· -----· -----· -· ---· -· .!::!._.~91'6061_4.33~" Y'L. -· -· -· ---· -· -· -17""7-;,..,..,,c:.,.. • ---· -· -· N s.9.'.Q:.1'.39" '!'{_J_52.;!~'.._. -· ---· -· -· -· -· -----· --1·:1 := II PROPOSED BOAT LIFT-, 12' 15' 134.33' • " I '< )> , EASEMENT FOR BOAT LIFT -----...1/ I< $ I / REC. NO. 20121112145613258 BARBEE MILL COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION ~. (JJ 4151 WILLIAMS AVE N 18_/ )> I I I 11:11, 111111 1'11 '1'1: I IJ 1:111: 11111111 :1:1 '1 11 I I I 111 1 1 1 I 1 1 111'1'111 I I 1 1 '1 1 1 I 11 t '1'11 I 11 I l I I 111111' ' ,v < ! ii.i!il!i!1i!111iiiili!,/,ii;'iii!/l1 1ii/i1!li/11ii 11iiiil/1!1 :/1i 1i·!ii!iii'i!/i/1!1/i:i1 i·iiii!i!l!111:'ililiil!!1/1 1lii!i/i1ii: iliilii/li!iiil:li1:'ilii!i!i ,ill: !i!ili li:i/1 1:ii! i:i!i!1'i'i · m I I 111 1 1'i'1i 1111 1 ~,------------------.!i?91"2°9~_2.3a~"-~----------------.. _J. I ii? :l:!,1,1 ,1,,:1, l,_N_ 8 '_04'39."W __ .J,~ Z o, 11 1111 1 ''I I'' Ur I r<j i/ il!i, :1,,1,: '----EXISTING COMMUNITY (') I 29.11' I ,- 11 ,!,•, 11111 DOCK TO REMAIN N 44"15'28" E I W 'I :1,,: I,, <O, 6.86' I :111!1:1 ,: [1: -I I . I , ,,,,,1 ,, 'j o"'·/ ''' 1'' j 11 ' , '' I 'L I , , I "'-' I I I F I I ' ' ' I ' ' T""I :1 11,,1 ,11 11 i--, I I 0/ 1111' :!1: 1111, "' 111 1,11 '1'1 w I I 0 • ,,,1,,1 I 11 DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES . • I oo/ ''1'ljl' ' i ''11, Ii I PARC.# 3224059066 ,0 / BARBEE MILL WATERFRONT LLC , z. :: :11:1 ...... I I I 11 1 11:11 o, 4125WILLIAMSAVEN I : '11 I 11 : I I II 1 1 l11lill ,· I I I J 111111 I I I I 11 I I I I ·, 1111,i/!1' OHWM 21.85'@BULKHEADI. I : , I I ' I • , I I I, 1 I l L I I I • I I I I ' I I l ________________________ Ji.~t&1:".'-'L _______________________ _J I EXISTING ADJACENT DOCK-"""- TO REMAIN ~ .I ~-----.•••••••••••••••••••••• , •• 11 ...... . -"k-----------I r------- SITE PLAN SCALE 1" = 20'-0" BOAT LIFT WILL BE A FREE STANDING UNIT. UNIT WILL RES'J" ON LAKEBED ON FOUR FOOT PADS. 1 BtlNK I REAR H-FRAME 1 I '. ....................... !~················ • ___________________________________________ _j 21.85' OHW ---- GARY & BRENDA BEEM 4119 WILLIAMS AVE N EXISTING BULKHEAD TO-, REMAIN PROPOSED BOAT LIFT-, "' ' ' . ; -~ ~:::::.",~ ~~". ./ -:--... , "~"::.::,-.._ '"""-.. -,-HYDRAULIC / CYLINDER ,,, ~-'.. ,, ~"'- '"-FoOT PAD ,:,,~ ~---,, ·" SIDE BtAM1~ B00f ~HYDRAULIC BEAM / LEG~ '-'"'•· ~CROSSBEAM ~-APPROX.LOCATION OF LAKE BED " ELEVATION DETAIL BOAT LIFT DETAIL SCALE 1/4" = 1 '-0" NO SCALE ---··•". •" ~ _.,.~.-• " -'".-• ',.,, ··~-· ,_ ~"·"' ., ,;_ •a•,-.~ -,,-•-•~ .; • . •-,.. ' '• '"'' • •·--• • ',, ' -'·-"''. ', • , "•·' ,-,_ a.,•~ c;_,, t ,• •=' '' '"" a_-, '"' '• . ., ' ' ,-. ' ' ·' ,>•, ;• ',~ '"'"~"' "' ,o· '' -._, "'-' -' 0 ,.~,_. ·-c--,,~ _-• h !•' " . . ''"' ,. 15' ' . '' i: . ' ,· " ·-' , . i, . ' '. -· •. VICINITY MAP PROJECT INFORMATION OWNER: MICHAEL & DOROTHY URBAN DRAWINGS BY: ECCO DESIGN INC. 203 N 36TH ST SUITE 201 SEATTLE, .WA 98103 206-706-3937 SITE ADDRESS: 4151 & 4157 WILLIAMS AVE N RENTON, WA 98056 PARCEL NUMBER: (4157) 0518500340 & (4151) 0518500350 BODY OF WATER: LAKE WASHINGTON LEGAL DESCRIPTION: (0518500340) TRACT 35, RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LUA 10-023 LLA, REC. NO. 20120802900003 IN PLAT OF BARBEE MILL, VOL 248 OF PLATS, PP. 25-38, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WA (0518500350) LOT 34, BARBEE MILL, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 246 OF PLATS, PAGES 25 THROUGH 39, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: INSTALL A NEW GROUND BASED BOAT LIFT. DECO Z2Ui1 crr-t c:: · ---......... ,,_,, ... ,,-,,·ri•·,~·"''-,; --~-.,,-_,, ,,,-,.__.,,, ·-' --.. ,, .... , , • ,,-.•··.1>-' Mv~ ·.' .. ' • ~ -·, , ......... :,, ., ' ,~,-,.,, '' ' '~ hi-.·--,,,,,, z <( ca c:::: ::J >-I l-o c::: 0 C) ct:I .....J ' '*'.&' .---"-" ~ ";.;V ··. -"--= u C 00 . i' -- z ~t I :::::i ~ ti: ~~ DATE: AUGUST 13, 2013 REVISIONS: f A PORTION OF GOV'T. LOT 1, SEC. 32, TWP. 24 N. RGE. 5 E., W.M. LAND DESCRIPTION LEASE AREA DNR LEASE NO. 22-086046 LESSEE: BARBEE MILL COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF lRACT 35 OF BARBEE MILL -LOTS 35 & 36 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT, RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 20120802900003; THENCE N89"04'39"W 29.11 FEET TO A POINT ON THE INNER HARBOR LINE AS SHOWN ON SAID LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT, SAID POINT BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF HEREIN DESCRIBED lRACT; THENCE so1·06'32"W, ALONG SAID INNER HARBOR LINE, 47.18 FEET; THENCE N898 04'39"W 166.19 FEET; THENCE N00"55'21 'E 72.06 FEET; THENCE SB9 8 04'39"E 166.43 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID INNER HARBOR LINE; THENCE S01"06'32"W, ALONG SAID INNER HARBOR LINE, 24.88 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. I I I I I I I I 13' w I ~ PROPOSED DOCK ~ I \ C> co d N IO N88"48'22"W 2198.53 34 SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TRACT 35 -:I';: 0 0) ~ <.O tO N I _,,. I I I ~ (SEE SHffi 2 OF 2 FOR 'jg co z PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT 5 r-; (J1 "-LEASE DETAILS) z ~ L< co 0) :_. co _,,. co i ""--OUTER HARBOR 15' 27' AREA 2 ~ I LINE ~ .--11 :;u 0) 36-A I ~ uoU N86 •45•50 .. E_ _ Ns5·45•50"~ _ f\._ -----'----1 ------1...-~=~:.::-:--:-::-:--:-::-------------II ::e: i'S~m-~ /0'!5: ,t: -Y 3' N891>4'39"W 166.19 o ~ y 2925.94----435 ·16 ~ N89"04'39"W -....1i8 NGS PID I Z / ORDINARY HIGH g::r-----------'-"'";,13i'.4'i,3~9-"------------=·~ SY3587 I / WATER LINE "oovr O / N; 195969.66 I E-t E: 1298015.97 I C, / I Z '"""4 I ~ INNER HARBOR / LINE I I I 00 : ~ I I I I I I I I I I { I I I / ~ N: 195333.85 / E: 1300921.62 REFERENCES I .i.,/ .g,/"" h;J ") / ;:'? ~/.,,. I I d NGS PIO SY3607 "COLEMAN" N; 192307.45 E:1299874.61 I I I I 1. STATE OF WASHINGTON COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC LANDS, MAPS OF LAKE WASHINGTON SHORE LANDS TILES 29 AND 28, DATED AUGUST 15, 1921. 2. PLAT OF BARBEE MILL, RECORDED IN VOULME 246 OF PLATS, PAGES 25-39, UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 20080208000182, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON 3. BARBEE MILL -LOTS 35 & 36 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT, LUA-10-023-LLA, RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 20120802900003 VERTICAL DATUM I I I I I ~ NAVO 88 {CONVERSION FROM LOCKS DATUM: MINUS 3.25 FEET) SCALE: 1 '' -- 0 15 30 60 ~ BENCHMARK ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS LAKE WASHINGTON SHIP CANAL LOCKS DATUM, MEASURED AT 11:00 AM FEBRUARY 1, 2010. BASIS OF BEARINGS WASHINGTON STATE COORDINATE SYSTEM, NORTH ZONE (NAO 83/91) I I I ,i'-' IO N -.,. I") • -,., '° -pN _, OJ z 6.46 z N89'04'39"W ~ ~ NOTES -.JN • (J1 -....J • a,~ I '-1 I ::E: 37 N89.04'39"W 1.65 139.23 38 1. THIS SURVEY WAS MADE AT THE REQUEST OF CONNOR HOMES TO OBTAIN A LEASE FOR DOCK USE, MAINTENANCE AND MOORING PILINGS. 2. THIS SURVEY REPRESENTS VISIBLE PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENT CONDITIONS EXISTING ON JUNE 28, 2010. 3. AREA OF PROPOSED LEASE AREA: 11,984± SQUARE FEET (0.2751± ACRES). 4. ALL DISTANCES ARE IN FEET. 5. THIS IS A COMBINED FIELD lRAVERSE AND GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM SURVEY. A SOKKIA FIVE SECOND COMBINED ELEClRONIC TOTAL STATION AND lRIMBLE 5700 GPS TOTAL STATION WERE USED TO MEASURE THE ANGULAR AND DISTANCE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE CONlROWNG MONUMENTATION AS SHOWN. CLOSURE RATIOS OF THE lRAVERSE MET OR EXCEEDED THOSE SPECIFIED IN WAC 332-130-090. ALL MEASURING INSlRUMENTS AND EQUIPMENT ARE MAINTAINED IN ADJUSTMENT ACCORDING TO MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS. 6. DISTANCES SHOWN HEREON ARE GROUND VALUES. COORDINATES SHOWN HEREON ARE GRID VALUES. TO CONVERT GRID COORDINATES TO GROUND VALUES DIVIDE BY THE COMBINED FACTOR OF 0.99998394 NOTE : NO CORNERS HAVE BEEN SET IN CONJUNCTION WITH THIS SURVEY • I I I I I I I~ I :::::i fl:: ,~ <:' !w ,: 1§ I I I I I I I I I I I I LAKE FOREST PARK \ \ I I I I \ \ \ \ I I I I I I I I I I I I 9 2 NORTH QUARTER CORNER SECTION 3/8" BRONZE PLUG AND PUNCH IN CONC. POST DOWN 0.5' IN MON. CASE PER PLAT OF BARBEE MILL (REF. NO. 2) 32-24-05 N: 196744.54 E: 1303748.21 KENMORE JUANITA MEDINA RENTON VICINITY MAP M .., 0 ~ -" i4'i 1! 8 ., ~ ~ ~ s j ~ ~ b:11 )( Q. £c ~ ~ 1 ~ :z -. ::: ~ :a I'.., • IX! , ii ~ -.. ..,. ~ > 0:: ::J (/) IJ.. 0 C 0:: 0 0 UJ 0:: 0 :z: -).. u., ::. "' ::, "' 0 :z: -:z: :z: "'t ~ ... 0 :z: -"' u., u., :z: -0 :z: ... 0 z J 0 [t 0.. ~ 0 0 [Il co X (/) z 5 0 N ~ Li.. 0 0 0 e 0 T""I I- I (J) N .... " 00 0 w I- { 0 > -:> ~ 0 0 D.. > D.. (/) <(