Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA77-014BEGINNING OF FILE FILE TITLE IC ' OFlLMED SA 1 0 ( 477 v—i`—.0—i ' v u/ sty —Di y— 77 I,. 1,b i i 4'- 4P-\ i, March 30, 1977 Stat of City of Renton 07(" Oc cAl, lAashingon i_aPlanningDepartmentG 200 Mill Avenue S. P' °. g4`` 'L Renton, Washington 98055 L Dear Sir: SUBJECT: KING COUNTY APPLICANT: RENTON WATERFRONT RESTAURANT CORP.SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT #N Construction of a restaurant.1467-17-A-(SM-47-77) The subject Shoreline Management Substantial Development PermitwasreceivedbythisofficeonMarch29, 1977 ThereviewperiodbytheDepartmentofEcologyandtheAttorneyGeneral'sOfficewillterminatethirty (30) days from the above date of receipt. If no Notice of Appeal is received, construction pursuant to thepermitmaycommencefollowingexpirationofthereviewperiodprovided, however, all other federal, state, and local lawsregulatingsuchconstructionhavebeencompliedwith. Sincerely, C,/ I -Lx- 2 l/ NAN REED Resource Management Northwest Regional Office NR:sb cc: Renton Waterfront Restaurant Corporation 1 0 F-Z)N 6S % PECM/N Ito I -0 7 1977 ECY 050-1,28 2 Rev.-Rev. 10/76 4/ 0OFPAR'C Northwest Washington Regional Office 4350 I3Oth Avenue Northeast d-„_.www,.. . ..ew-- r 0 THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 o 2,1 CHARLES J. DELAURENTI , MAYOR o LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER 04 0<( JAMES L. MAGSTADT , 235 2593 4TEO SEP1t March 30 , 1977 RE: File No. SA-014-77 Renton Waterfront Restaurant Corp. Mr. David C. Tallichet, Jr. President, Specialty Restaurants Corp. 2977 Redondo Avenue Long Beach, California 90806 Dear Mr. Tallichet: This is to notify you that the above referenced request, which was approved subject to conditions as noted on the Examiner' s report of March 14 , 1977 , has not been appealed within the time period set by ordinance. Therefore, this application is considered final and is being submitted to the City Clerk, effective this date , for permanent filing. Sincerely, Jame . Magstadt Hea ng Examiner JLM:mg cc : Del Mead, City Clerk Del Bennett, Airport Director Ted Cushman & Associates OF E Affidavit of Publication r 1 1 1 r °\\ i LUV. , r _ . \Pe li STATE OF WASHINGTON I MAR 16 911 COUNTY OF KING ss. E it vParbaraCar^naj na g y N,,/r r,being first duly sworn on oath,deposes and says that she the chief c i c rk of NOTICE OF. PUBLIC HEARINGTHERENTONRECORD-CHRONICLE, a newspaper published four(4) RENTON LAND USEtimesaweek.That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and HEARING EXAMINERhasbeenformorethansixmonthspriortothedateofpublicationreferredRENTON,WASHINGTONto, printed and published in the English language continually as a news- A PUBLIC HEARINGpaperpublishedfour(4)times a week in Kent,King County,Washington, WILL BE.HELD BY THEanditisnowandduringallofsaidtimewasprintedinanofficemaintained RENTON LAND U S Eattheaforesaidplaceofpublicationofsaidnewspaper.That the RentonRecord-Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the HEARING EXAMINER AT Superior Court of the County in which it is published,to-wit,King County, HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAM- BERS, CITY HALL, RE-Washington.That the annexed is a T 1,1b l Y.,.T i ;i r..l.;? NTON,WASHINGTON,ONA MARCH•1,•1977, AT 9:00 A.M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS: 1. WAIVER OF OFF- SITE IMPROVEMENTS as it was published in regular issues(and FOR A TWO LOT SHORTnotinsupplementformofsaidnewspaper) once each issue for a period PLAT; file No. W-013-77; property located in the vicini- ty of 2625 Jones Ave. N.E. of Q'??consecutive issues,commencing on the 2.SITE APP • ;_ p-ile No.SA-014- day of 19 and ending the est corner of the Renton Municipal Airport,off Rainier 1t'7 hrL_ r/ Ave. and adjacent to main . runway and Lake .1 day of 19....7.7 both dates Washington.inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its sub-3. REZONE FROM G- scribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee 6000 TO L-1;file No.R-016- 77; property located on charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of $21.96 which Raymond Ave. S.W. and has been paid in full at the rate pf S.W. 12th St. ap-first insertion and per folio of one hundred words for the Legal descriptions ofperfolioofonehundredwordsforeachsubsequent plications noted above oninsertion. file in Renton Planning De- partment. JC....„. .c..„...44.4 4,a)(2-t- ALL INTERESTED PER- J SONS TO SAID PETITIONS- ARE INVITED TO BE PRE • SENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON MARCH 1,. 1$t} 1977.AT 9:00 A.M.TO EX •Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of PRESS THEIR OPINIONS. GORDON.Y. ERICKSEN February 19 77 RENTON PLANNING DIRECTOR Published in The.Renton - Record-Chronicle FebruaryaC."`' 18, 1977. R4198NotaryPubliciandfortheStateofWington, residing at Kent, g County. Passed by the Legislature,1955,known as Senate Bill 281,effective June9th, 1955. Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures,adopted by the newspapers of the State. March 14 , 1977 OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. APPLICANT: Renton Waterfront FILE NO. SA-0'14-77 Restaurant Corporation LOCATION: The northwest corner of the Renton Municipal Airport, east of Rainier Avenue., west of the main runway, and adjacent to Lake Washington. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicant requests approval of site development plans for construction of a restaurant at the northwest corner of the Renton Municipal Airport. SUMMARY OF Planning Department: Approval subject to RECOMMENDATION: conditions . Hearing Examiner: Approval subject to conditions. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department staff. report was received REPORT: by the Examiner on February 22, 1977. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Planning Department report, examining available information on file with the application, and field checking the property and surrounding area, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows : The hearing was opened on March 1, 1977, at 9 :25 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were sworn. It was reported that the Hearing Examiner and Mr. Del Bennett, Airport Director, representing the applicant, had received and reviewed the Planning Department report, and the report was entered into the record as Exhibit #1 . Michael Smith, Planning Department, summarized and reviewed Exhibit #1, and entered, the following additional exhibits into the record: Exhibit #2: Assessor' s Map. Exhibit #3: Proposed Plot Map - proposed restaurant facility and proposed parking, circulation and landscaping. Exhibit #3b: Airport Restaurant Site Plan. Mr. Smith indicated that a 63-foot setback to the west property line meets requirements of Shoreline Master Program and F.A.A. The Examiner asked Mr. Bennett if he concurred in Exhibit #1 , and requested him to make a brief presentation on the application. Mr. Bennett indicated concurrence and briefly reviewed the history of the development of an airport restaurant. He stated that the Renton Airport Seaplane Base and Restaurant Master Development Plan was prepared in March of 1973, approved by the Airport Board during that same ,month, and approved by the F.A.A. in June of 1973. In 1976, a f E SA-014-77 Page Two new master plan was developed for the outlet at the airport and the proposed restaurant facility was included in the approved plan. Numerous public hearings were held to discuss the master plan and it was determined that the proposed facility is consistent with F.A.A. rules and regulations with building setbacks of 350 feet established from the center line of the airport runway, which exceeded the F.A.A. minimum standard. A restaurant firm, Specialty Restaurants Corporation, of Long Beach, California, signed a lease with the City of Renton in August1,of 197.6 Which stipulated that construction would be completed within 18 months of that time. Mr. Bennett stated that np variances will be required on the development. The Examiner asked Mr. Bennett to describe the master plan and proposed layout. Mr. Bennett indicated that access to the restaurant would utilize the northwest corner from Rainier Avenue. A perimeter road allows access entrances from Rainier Avenue and Airport Way. He reported that the restaurant will occupy the proposed site with ten foot setbacks from the bulkhead of the seaplane base, which has been relocated from the west side of the storage ramp to the east. He also noted that the revised seaplane base development contract was awarded by the Renton City Council on February 28, 1977. He pointed out anion separator which is maintained to the west of the storage ramp and will not interfere with the building structure, and stated that no boating facilities will be available. The Examiner asked for testimony in support of the application. There was no further testimony. The Examiner asked for testimony in opposition of the application. Responding were the following: Mr. Lee Hedin The Boeing Company P.O. Box 3707 M.S . 62-15 Seattle, WA 98118 Mr. Hedin indicated he was an employee of the Boeing Company and expressed concerns regarding exposure of blasts from jet engines and the effect the blast will have on the restaurant windows facing the runway. Other concerns included fence lines relative to clearance , and access of aircraft to Apron C. Mr. Robert Morgan The Boeing Company P .O. Box 3707 M.S . 62-15 Seattle, WA 98118 Mr. Mogan emphasized the potential hazard of jet blasts to the building structure and parked vehicles , and requested' a continuance of the hearing to allow review of the latest site plan map. The Examiner asked Mr. Morgan if construction features could be incorporated to shield the potential blast. Mr. Morgan felt it might be possible, but requested a review of the plan. Mr. D. C. Knutson 7528 Lakeridge Drive Seattle, WA 98178 Mr. Knutson reported that as a test pilot utilizing the Renton Airport, his concerns included infringement on taxiway area by building restriction lines and fencing extending beyond the building line. He felt that the remaining area for the seaplane base was limited and would create congestion for airplane usage. He reported that one-half of all airplanes are built by The Boeing Company and emphasized the need to retain space for growth opportunities. Other concerns included setback requirements of the building and access for fuel trucks . He also requested additional time to review the final site plan. a i. SA-014-77 Page Three Mr. Dan O'Connell 11416 Rainier Avenue S.E . Seattle , WA 98178 Mr. O 'Connell reported that he is the resident manager of :the trailer court northwest of the seaplane base ramp and represented residents of the court. He indicated that their concerns were related to noise and increased traffic in the area, and that the residents were generally opposed to the restaurant establishment. The Examiner requested additional opposing testimony. There was no response. The Examiner requested additional comments from Mr. Bennett, applicant representative. Mr. Bennett stated that The Boeing Company had valid concerns , and that potential problems had been discussed with the F.A.A. He indicated that a meeting was scheduled this date with representatives from Boeing to discuss the potential problem of rocks being strewn from airplane blasts . He stated that the proposed setback lines meet all F.A.A. regulations and that the proposal had been in the planning stages for a lengthy period of time involving representatives of The Boeing Company and the F.A.A. He reported that construction of the seaplane base would begin on March 7 , 1977, having been approved by the Renton City Council and the F.A.A. Specific details were not included in the plan at that time, but setbacks are consistent in both plans. He emphasized that the property previously occupied by Dominion Aircraft Company is not a common area of the airport and is under lease. He, expressed no objection to allowing. The Boeing Company the opportunity to review the latest site plan and to continue the hearing for one week. The Examiner inquired whether the Airport Master Plan or the F.A.A. established the location of the proposed building. Mr. Bennett indicated that it was a coordinated effort, that the Master Plan was required by the F.A.A. , paid for in part by the F.A.A. and the State Aeronautics Commission, and that all improvements and building structures require approval from F.A.A. prior to construction. He noted that Mr. O 'Connell ' s windows face north and east and the location of his residence would screen the restaurant facility from other residents in the mobile home park. The Examiner inquired about shielding parking lot lights and the plan for a screening fence or buffer. Mr. Bennett responded that the final design plans would incorporate such a requirement for light shields , and indicated the desire to screen the mobile home park from the view of the proposed restaurant. The Examiner asked for further comments from the audience. Mr. Lee Hedin questioned the need for a Declaration of Non-Significance and an environmental impact statement with consideration of compatibility of the restaurant with neighboring activities . The Examiner asked all parties of record if a one week extension for continuation of the hearing would be sufficient to review the latest site plan . All parties indicated concurrence. Mr. O 'Connell asked Mr. Bennett for an estimate of the number of additional seaplanes that the proposed site would contain without the construction of a restaurant. Mr. Bennett indicated a figure of approximately ten to twelve seaplanes . The hearing on Item #SA-014-77 was closed at 10 :10 a.m. and continued . to March 8, 1977, at 9 :00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. S )14-77! : Page Four The hearing on the Renton Waterfront Restaurant Corporation, File No . SA-014 -77, which was continued from March 1, 1977, was opened at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were sworn. Mr. Del Bennett, Airport Director and representative of the applicant, gave a brief presentation of the application request. He reported that a meeting had been held on March 1, 1977, with Mr. Joe Connors of FAAIto discuss concerns discussed at the previous hearing with regard to potential jet blast damage caused by aircraft entering the runway' and taking off to the south, and indicated that Mr. Connors did not foresee potential hazards from takeoffs . Following this meeting, representatives from The Boeing Company were contacted in order to review the proposed plan and potential problems , and it was the opinion of the representatives of the company that no problem existed with the proposed operation and plan . The Examiner asked for testimony in support of the application. Responding was : Mr. Robert Morgan The Boeing Company P .O. Box 3707 R-6140 M.S . 62-15 Seattle, WA 98118 Mr. Morgan indicated that he was representing The Boeing Company as Property Management Manager for the Boeing Commercial Airplane Group. He reported meeting with Mr. Bennett to discuss concerns of potential problems on the taxiway pertaining to the restaurant site development. He stated that Mr. Bennett had agreed to a protective fence which would be installed on the east side of the development to prevent damage from rocks to vehicles parked in the lot. He also reported that the company is satisfied that Boeing airplanes would have proper access, and that all company concerns had been satisfied. The Examiner asked for further comments in support of the application . There were no further comments . The Examiner asked for comments in opposition to the application. Responding was : Donald C. Knutson 7528 S . Lakeridge Drive Seattle, WA 98178 Mr. Knutson reported that he had reviewed plans for the seaplane base and ramp, was pleased with the improvement, but was not satisfied with the access to the seaplane ramp. He expressed opposition to the construction of the proposed restaurant for the following reasons : restaurant plans not acceptable; noise to local residents; location prevents reasonable operation at north end of the field; location infringes on use of needed space ; hazard of parking lot; infringement on future space requirements; hazard of site location; and extra hazard on Perimeter Road. Mr. Knutson felt that establishment of a restaurant was an encroachment to airplane operations and was a misuse of a portion of airport property. He stated that .the public had elected city officials who have appointed managers who have legal and moral obligations to provide the best use of property for the good of the community. He reported that 4 ,300 airplanes had been flown from Renton Municipal Airport at an average of 14 per month, and that Boeing employment had provided the City of Renton good schools and a rich tax base. He questioned city expenditures of tax monies on the airport, and indicated that Boeing provided all maintenance for the operation of the airport. Among! other concerns expressed by Mr. Knutson was the existing abundance of restaurants in the Renton area, with restaurants having inadeiquate patronage, and causing unwanted disturbances upon residents ; hazards from plane crashes to buildings along runway; dust and debris fromlpropeller airplanes; blasts from jet aircraft; and infringement of fencing on runway for taxi purposes . He also mentioned warning signs to protect people from jet blasts; restaurant parking lot which would be occupied by patrons not aware of dangers of jet blasts; speeding on the Perimeter Road now used by members of Boeing Jogging a q 1 SA-014-77 Page Five Club; drunk drivers; and aborted take-offs of DC-3 ' s taking off in0-0 visibility weather conditions. Mr• Knutson had further concerns about growth opportunities for the airport and indicated that airplanes built in the future will be of a larger dimension. He questioned the method of notifying the public of the proposed construction of a restaurant and felt that the cityandthenewspaperhadbeen. lax in this regard, leaving the public inadequately informed about the project; and the fact tat the- Airport Director was representing the applicant at the hearing. The Examiner asked Mr. Knutson if jet blasts had posed a prior hazard to employees working at the airport operation. Mr. Knutson indicated that people working at the airport were knowledgeable about potential hazards, unlike patrons at a restaurant. The Examiner indicated to Mr. Knutson that a proposed fence would be constructed on the east property line and would provide a barrier. to protect patrons of the restaurant. He also informed Mr. Knutson of the legal requirements for notifying the public of hearings , and indicated that the city has met all legal requirements. Mr. Smith reported that the newspaper is notified of all city public hearings through public notices and the newspaper has the option of writing an article if they desire . Speaking in opposition: Mr: Robert L. Jones 18174 S.E. 141st Place Issaquah, WA 98027 Mr. Jones reported that he was retired from the F.A.A. where he had the responsibility of investigating accidents, and had flown from the Renton airport for 32 years. He reported that five aircraft had crashed within the boundaries of the airport during the last 30 years and objected to the minimum setbacks required for clearance to the proposed restaurant site which he felt jeopardized public safety. He also expressed concern regarding limited space on the airport and indicated he had waited for three years for hangar space, and felt that space for hangars and tiedown space should take precedence over a restaurant site. Clarence Opsahl 1609 121st S.E. Bellevue, WA 98005 Among Mr. Opsahl ' s concerns were plane crashes involving buildings on airports, odors from restaurant, pilots mistaking lights of the restaurant for runway lights, space requirement for hauling airplanes from the present facility, and felt that utilizing space for a restaurant parking lot instead of for airplanes was a misuse. He inquired if a stoplight would be required for additional traffic and asked the Examiner if the City of Renton would provide such a service. The Examiner indicated that the city would provide a signal if one were warranted. William Cook 875 S.E. Shoreline Drive Bellevue, WA 98004 Mr. Cook expressed concern about the availability of future tiedown space for aircraft. He reported that the proposed restaurant is utilizing two acres of property and Renton Municipal Airport is presently at 60% capacity. He felt that the F.A.A. should have a long term comprehensive plan that would protect the number of potential airplanes for growth purposes with future space requirements for airplane modifications which may be required on the field. The Examiner asked Mr. Cook if he was opposed to the restaurant. Mr. Cook responded that potential hazards near the edge of the field and the runway were his concern. i a I SA-014-77 Page Six Mr. Dan O'Connell 11416 Rainier Avenue S.E. Seattle, WA 98178 Mr. O'Connell reported that he resides next to the proposed airport restaurant site and is concerned about noise at late hours. The Examiner requested further testimony in opposition. There was no further testimony. The Examiner asked Mr. Bennett for additional comments. Mr. Bennett responded that numerous comments had been made regarding potential hazard from jet aircraft. He reported that one j.et aircraft takes off from the field every two days and 99% of the time the take-off is to the south and over the East Channel, the hazard is minimized by this effort, and is the main reason that Boeing has not voiced opposition to the proposal. He clarified the location of the proposed restaurant and stated that it is not located at the end of the runway but its centrally located parallel to the east taxiway. He indicated that the comment regarding minimum F.A.A. requirements for setbacks was not true, that Renton Municipal Airport is not a General Aviation Airport, and F.A.A. would not authorize a facility of this nature if they Melt it was a potential hazard. Regarding the statement of misuse of taxpayers funds, Mr. Bennett indicated that the airport is not supported from tax monies, but is self-sustaining from revenue received from lease-holders on the airport. Boeing leases 600 of the property with the remaining 400 leased to other operators for tiedown of aircraft. Growth provisions have been• met for 100 additional aircraft over the next 10 years. He refuted Mr. Knutson' s statement that 75 aircraft could utilize the two acre parcel of land which the restaurant will occupy by estimating that 20 aircraft would be the maximum number. The Examiner asked Mr. Bennett to reiterate on the review process utilized by F.A.A. Mr. Bennett stated that the Airport Master Plan was developed in cooperation with F.A.A. and the Washington State Aeronautics Commission during a period of one year. Numerous public heari-igs were held with good response from the public, and the restaurant development and seaplane base were discussed in detail . The hearings were advertised in Renton newspapers and in the Seattle Times to comply with the legal publication requirement. He indicated that most of the turnout from the public was related to opposition to the expansion of the seaplane base, and consequently, the proposed plan was eliminated in lieu of a plan to increase efficiency of the existing operation. He reported that the amphibian ramp is located at the westerly edge of the restaurant site and cannot be seen from the tower. The proposed plan entails moving the ramp to the east side in order to be under control of the tower. Mr. Bennett indicated that the fence presently occupying the area was constructed three years ago to prevent fishermen and pedestrians from crossing the field and will be moved 10 feet to the west of the present location. He responded to Mr. Knutson' s comment about traffic creating a hazard to joggers by stating that the road was installed specifically for vehicular traffic. He also stated that most airports have restaurants to allow the community the opportunity to observe and enjoy air traffic activity. Mr. Bennett reported that the restaurant plan was presented to the Washington State Aeronautics Commission and the response was extremely favorable. He indicated that the proposed restaurant had received a great deal of publicity over the past three years with articles appearing on the front pages of the newspaper at least six to ten times. The Examiner asked Mr. Bennett about various blast forces from aircraft turning on the field, and inquired if F.A.A. takes this matter into consideration. Mr. Bennett reported that these conditions would be reviewed before F.A.A. approved the proposed construction. The Boeing Company, primary user of the airport, has reviewed the plan in detail, he stated, and is satisfied that no hazards are involved. r///.: SA-014-77 Page 'Seven The Examiner asked Mr. Morgan' if 'he officially represented The Boeing Company. Mr. Morgan indicated that he did. The Examiner asked Mr. Smith if he had any additions to submit to the Planning Department report. Mr. Smith stated that he would require a condition that both F.A.A. and Boeing review and approve specification site plans before construction would begin. He indicated a necessity for provision of' a blast control fence on the east side of the restaurant facility. The Examiner asked for additional comments. Mr. Knutson stated that he did not agree with the number of airplanes which could be parked on the proposed restaurant site. He indicated that an airport facility at Kenmore at the north end of Lake Washington has, although they are packed in tightly, an estimated 75 planes utilizing the area. He felt Mr. Bennett' s estimate of 20-25 airplanes was not accurate. As a test pilot for Boeing for 28 years, he felt his viewpoint was not in agreement with Facilities Division representatives of Boeing. The Examiner asked Mr. Knutson if he had visited other restaurants at airports in his experience. Mr. Knutson indicated that he had visited 75 to 100 countries and had flown all over the United States and had never seen a restaurant located this close to an active runway. The Examiner asked Mr. Knutson if he felt the review by F.A.A. regarding setback clearance to the proposed restaurant facility was sufficient. Mr. Knutson felt that it was a minimum because the eastern point of the building is 18 feet high, and although the setback was considered legal it should be considered a hazard. The Examiner asked for either comments or information that had not been previously presented. Mr. Cook reported that he had contacted Mr. Hamilton from the Washington Aeronautics Commission because he was concerned about infringement on tiedown space. Mr. Hamilton was unfamiliar with the restaurant site and indicated that he had been under the impression that the location was elsewhere. Mr. Cook felt that it would be useful to obtain a statement regarding projected airport requirements from the Washington Aeronautics Commission. The Examiner asked for additional comments. Mr. Bennett refuted Mr. Knutson' s statement regarding the capacity of aircraft at the Kenmore facility and indicated that in speaking of 75 versus 20 aircraft, he was not speaking of float planes. The Renton Airport presently has 26 float planes. At the facility at Kenmore, planes are picked up by fork lift and placed for storage purposes. He indicated that jet aircraft are controlled by the tower, and in the event of a problem the tower directs the traffic as they deem necessary for safety. He noted that he did not say that the Washington Aeronautics Commission had approved the proposed restaurant plan, but they were made aware of the plan during a presentation for a proposal to obtain state funds to provide the Airport Master Plan, and funding was received by both F.A.A. and the Washington Aeronautics Commission. All information regarding projected need for eventual aircraft and tiedown areas, and all projected growth are included in the City of Renton Airport Master Plan which is concerned about future needs and growth not unlimited from tiedown but from air traffic situations. The Examiner requested Mr. Bennett to explain the structure of the operation of the airport. Mr. Bennett explained that the Airport Director reports to the Mayor, and is responsible for negotiating leases and maintaining the Renton Municipal Airport. He works directly with the Aviation Committee, a subcommittee of the Renton City Council. All decisions are reviewed by the Aviation Committee which in turn reports to the entire City Council. Mr. Bennett reported that The Boeing Company does not maintain the Renton Municipal Airport, that F.A.A. controls traffic, and the city is responsible for maintaining and leasing space, and managing space operations on the airport. He stated that anyone has the right to request space on the airport as long as it is considered a compatible use, and F.A.A. must adhere to the Airport Master Plan and approve any construction that is begun on the airport and issue the necessary permit. 1 SA-014-77 Page Eight The Examiner summarized by stating that the Airport Master Plan shows the location of all existing and future structures for the airport and any building would be required to conform to the plan. The Airport Master Plan is an official document of the City of Renton having been approved by the Renton City Council, and contains all projections for future needs and increased accommodations. The Examiner asked Mr. Smith if he had additional comments. Mr.. Smith requested that special consideration be given along the north area of the restaurant for noise control and screening for the residents north of the restaurant. The hearing on Item #SA-014-77 was closed by the Examiner at 10: 30 a.m. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS : 1. A Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued by Gordon Y. Ericksen, responsible official , for the application. 2 . The Hearing Examiner has the authority to review and make recommendations to all building structures located in" a P-1 zone and initiated or undertaken by the Aviation Committee or any other municipal department. This authority is granted under Ordinance No. 2823. 3 . The Airport Director is requesting a review of construction plans for a 9, 896 square foot restaurant located in the northwest corner of the Renton Municipal Airport on a site formerly occupied by the Dominion Aircraft Corporation. This restaurant will have approximately 126 adjacent parking spaces. Lake Washington is directly adjacent to the north line of the subject site. 4 . The airport surrounds the site directly to the east and south; Lake Washington and Wiley Post Seaplane Base are directly north of the site; and a mobile home park exists directly to the west. There are also several single family residences and an apartment building located to the west of the airport access road. These uses are situated on a bank above the subject site with an elevation of approximately 8 to 15 feet above the site. 5. Water and sewer facilities are directly available. 6. The proposal meets all requirements of Section 4-710:P-1, Public District. It also meets the parking and loading requirements of Ordinance No. 2887. 7 . The proposal is compatible with the following official documents: a.. Airport Master Plan, adopted October 27, 1976, C.A.G. No. 022 . b;. Land Use Report, 1965, Objectives: 6 . Page 18 . c. Comprehensive Plan for Urban Beautification, Waterfront areas, Public Buildings. d,. Shoreline Master Program, City of Renton. e,. F:A.A. Regulations. 8 . Potential impacts to Lake Washington from storm water runoff will be controlled by on-site retention and oil water separation facilities. 9 . The application has been reviewed and approved by the following agencies : a. City of Renton Airport Department. b. City of Renton Airport Committee (City Council) . c. City of Renton Fire Department. d. City of Renton Engineering Division. e. City of Renton Utilities Division. SA-014-77 Page Nine I 9 . f. City of Renton Building Division g. City of Renton Traffic Engineering Division. h. King County Land Use Management Division. i. A Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit is presently being reviewed and processed. 10. The maximum height of the proposed structure is approximately 21 feet. The elevation of the mobile home park and apartment buildings adjacent to this proposal are approximately 8 to 15 feet. The proposed restaurant structure will set back approximately 65 feet from the west property line of the site. 11. A detailed landscape plan has been submitted and has been reviewed with comments by the City of Renton Planning Department. 12. The March 1, 1977 , hearing was continued at the request of several members of the audience, including Mr. Robert Morgan, representative of The Boeing Company, so that these people would have an opportunity to review the site plans in order to prepare their comments and recommendations . 13 . There was some opposition to the restaurant from citizens who were concerned with potential problems of rocks being thrown as a result of airplane blasts, the effects that jet blasts would have on restaurant patrons, and possible infringement that this building would have on taxiway areas. 14. It•was pointed out by Del Bennett, Airport Director, that the master plan was reviewed and approved by the F.A.A. It was also stated that the plan meets all the requirements and restrictions imposed on the airport by F.A.A. 15. Mr. Robert Morgan, representing The Boeing Company, stated that he had an ,opportunity to review the plans and to discuss potential problems that the restaurant location may present to aircraft utilizing the adjacent taxiway. He stated that Mr. Bennett had agreed to installation of a protective fence which would be installed on the east side of the development to prevent rocks from hitting vehicles parked in the restaurant parking lot. With this stipulation, Mr. Morgan indicated that the company is satisfied that Boeing airplanes would have proper access and that the concerns that they had regarding the restaurant and its location have been satisfied. 16. Some of the other concerns expressed by the opposition relate to the lack of adequate public notice regarding the construction of a restaurant, potential noise to local residents, infringement on potential tiedown space, hazardous site location and additional hazard increased traffic would have on the Perimeter Road surrounding the airport. It was also noted that the customers of the restaurant may be unaware of the potential hazards created from jet blast and dust and debris that may be thrown by airplanes taxiing in this area. There was also concern that the lights of the airport restaurant may be mistaken for runway lights by approaching aircraft and there was also concern that the establishment of a restaurant on an airport may be a misuse of airport property. An adjacent neighbor also expressed concern about potential increase in noise created by a location of a restaurant. CONCLUSIONS : 1. This plan is a part of the official Airport Master Plan, a document adopted by the City Council on October 27, 1976. This plan was adopted only after numerous public hearings were held, published in the city' s legal newspaper, advertised in the Seattle newspaper, and were posted on the city' s bulletin board. The location and construction of a restaurant was a part of this master plan and was concurred in by the City Council and F.A.A. SA-014-77 Page Ten 2. It is my duty to determine not whether the restaurant should or should not be built, but to comment on the appropriateness of the site and to review the construction plans to determine whether the. structure would infringe on adjacent land uses. 3. It was pointed out several times in the hearing that there may be a potential hazard result of. jet blast. Mo m Be withrocktordebthrwnumatn The Boeing Company, that a fence would be constructed on the east side of the proposed restaurant to protect patrons and vehicles parked in the restaurant parking lot from potential hazards that may result from jet blast debris. 4 . The effect of the restaurant on adjacent property owners would be minimal from the standpoint of noise or visual obstruction. The restaurant building will occupy a space formerly utilized by a Dominion Aircraft building. There will be a certain amount of additional traffic created as a result of the airport restaurant; however, a majority of this traffic will exit onto Rainier Avenue, a major four-lane arterial equipped to handle al large volume of traffic. 5 . The proposed location of the restaurant is situated on the northwest corner of the airport at the edge of the taxi runway. This location is not in conflict with approaching aircraft that do not land or infringe on taxiway areas. The location would provide maximum exposure to restaurant patrons to view Lake. Washington, the lights of Seattle, and a certain amount of Commercial and small, fixed-wing airport traffic. 6. Tlhe landscape plan as provided is very adequate and will provide a pleasant entrance to this facility and will be in keeping with the beautification program undertaken by the airport officials during the last several years. Any potential hazard that the restaurant would create by its location will be regulated( and monitored by the F.A.A. and The Boeing Company. 7 . The setbacks are adequate in that they meet the minimum requirements of F.A.A. and are in keeping with the Shoreline Master Program. 8. The conditions stipulated in the City of Renton Planning Department report are in the public interest and are reasonable requirements. These conditions, along with the fence required by The Boeing Company, are additional requirements of the Examiner' s approval. Warning signs should also be installed on the fences adjacent to the runway warning potential viewers and restaurant patrons of the dangers of jet blasts, etc. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the requested site location of the restaurant as shown on the submitted plans together with the Planning Department final recommendation and additional conditions imposed in conclusion no. 7. ORDERED THIS 14th day of March, 1977 . IS I/ _ 2 A Apr -s stadt rand Use zaring Examiner SA-014-77 Page Eleven TRANSMITTED THIS 14th day of March, 1977 by certified mail to the parties of record: Mr. Lee Hedin Mr. Robert Morgan Mr. Donald C. Knutson Mr. Dan O'Connell Mr. Robert L. Jones Mr. Clarence Opsahl Mr. William Cook TRANSMITTED THIS 14th day of March, 1977 to the following: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti Council President George J. Perry Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director Don J. Smith, Renton Record-Chronicle Pursuant to Ordinance No. 3071, Section 4-3015, request .for reconsideration or notice of appeal must be filed in writing on or before March 22 , 1977. Any aggrieved person feelint that the decision of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedures, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for review by the Examiner within fourteen 14) days of the conclusion of the hearing. This request shall set forth the specific errors relied upon by such, appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER . PUBLIC HEARING MARCH 1 , 1977 APPLICANT: RENTON WATERFRONT RESTAURANT •CORPORATION FILE NO. : SA-014-77 , Site Plan Approval in P- 1 Zone A, SUMMARY OF RE(IUEST: Applicant requests approval of site development plans for construction of a restaurant at the northwest corner of the Renton Municipal Airport . B. GENERAL INFORMATION : 1 . Owner of Record : CITY OF RENTON 2 . Applicant : RENTON WATERFRONT RESTAURANT CORPORATION 3 . Location : The northwest corner of the Renton Municipal Airport , east of Rainier Ave . , west of the main runway , and adjacent to Lake Washington . 4 . Legal Description : Beginning at a point located on the Renton Airfield run- way centerline referred to as Station 0+00 ; thence N 4°49 ' 43"W along the runway centerline a distance of 5103 . 13 feet ; thence S. 85°10 ' 17 " W a distance of 375 feet to the true point of beginning ; thence S 85°20 ' 29" W a distance of 171 . 16 feet; thence N 43°25 ' 41 " W a distance of 79 . 14 feet ; thence N 40°49 ' 49" E a distance of 60 . 92 feet ; thence N 1°11 ' 57" E a 'distance of 59. 82 feet; ,thence N 27°54 ' 07" W a distance of 197. 07 feet ; thence S 87°20 ' 55" E a distance of 326 : 10 feet ; thence S 4°49 ' 43" E a distance of 143 . 98 feet to the beginning of a curve to the left hav- ing a radius of 251 . 37 feet , thence along said curve through a central angle of 20°25 ' 34" an arc distance of 89 . 61 feet ; thence S 15°50 ' 19" W a. distance of 87 . 46 feet to the true point of beginning . Area : 81 , 914 . 45 sq . ft . 5 . Size of Property : 2 acres ± 6 . Access : Rainier Ave . and the Airport RECEIVED Perimeter Road . CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER MR 11977 EXI-IIBIT PTO. AM PM 7,8t'D,IO,IIi12i1,2i3,4a5,C ITEM NO. 5 -0/4/- 77 A PLANNPNG DEPARTMEI f PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC; HEARING O . MARCH 1 , 1977 PAGE TWO RE : RENTON WATERFRONT RESTAURANT CORPORATION 7 . Existing Zone : P- 1 ( Public Use District ) 8 . Existing Zoning in Area : King County RM-900 , Multiple Family Residential 9 . Comprehensive Land Use Plan : Public Use and Medium Density Multiple Family . • 10 . Notification : The applicant was notified in writing of the hearing date . Notice was properly published in the Record Chronicle and posted in three places on or near the site as required by City ordinance . C. PURPOSE OF REQUEST : To allow construction of a 9 ,896 square foot restaurant with 126 adjacent parking spaces . Do HISTORY/BACKGROUND: The site is within the boundaries of the Renton Municipal Airport . It was previously a portion of the Dominion Aircraft Corporation lease area. E. PHYSICAL BACKGROUND: 1 . Topography : The subject site is relatively level with a slight rise at the southwest corner of the site . 2 . Soils : Urban land ( Ur) . The subject site has been previously filled as part of the airport development . Fill material has a wide range of characteristics but is normally used to accommodate large buildings and structures . 3 . Vegetation : Very little vegetation exists on the site . Some scrub grass exists in certain areas of the site . 4 . Wildlife : No significant wildlife exists on the site . 5 . Water : Lake Washington is directly adjacent to the north line of the subject site . 6 . Land Use : The subject site consists primarily of open airport tie-down area . A building previouslyusedbyDominionAircraftCorporationwasremoved from the northwesterly portion of the subject site . The airport surrounds the site directly to the east and south . Lake Washington and the Wiley Post Sea- plane Base are directly north of the site . A mobile home park exists directly to the west . Several single family residences and an apartment building exist to the west of the airport access road . These uses are situated above the subject site . The access road will provide ingress/egress from Rainier Ave . So . to the proposed development . F. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS : Primarily public use on three sides with residential adjacent to the west . The residential area consists of an older mobile home park , single family residences ,and an apartment building . .The elevation of this area ranges from 8 - 15 feet above the level of the subject site . PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF MARCH 1 , 1977 PAGE THREE RE : RENTON WATERFRONT RESTAURANT CORPORATION G. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1 . Water and Sewer: There is an existing 8" water main on the airport south of the subject site . Sanitary sewer will be provided by an 8" main west of the subject site within the Bryn Mawr Sewer District . 2 . Fire Protection : Provided by the Renton Fire Depart- ment as per ordinance requirements . 3 . Transit: Metro Transit is available along Rainier Avenue . 4 . Schools : Not applicable 5 . Parks : Kiwanis Air Park and various parks along the Cedar River are in close proximity approximately one to two miles from the subject site . H o APPLICABLE SECTIONS CF THE ZONING CODE: 1 . Section 4-710 ; P- 1 Public District . The subject proposal meets all the requirements of this zone classification and the Parking and Loading Ordinance . I . APPLICABLE SECTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENTS: The subject proposal is compatible with the following : 1 • The preliminary draft of the Airport Master Plan . 2 . Land Use Report , 1965 , Objectives , 6 . , page 18 . 3 . A comprehensive plan for : a . Urban Beautification b . Waterfront Areas c . Public Buildings 4. Shoreline Master Program, City of Renton 5 . F. A. A. Regulations - This project has been approved by the F . A. A. and the Airport Committee of the City Council . J . IMPACTS ON NATURAL SYSTEMS : The proposed project will have minimal impacts on the natural system. Potential impacts to Lake Washington from storm water runoff will be controlled by on-site retention and oil /water separation facilities . The appli — cant will be required to comply with all state and federal requirements . Km SOCIAL IMPACTS : Minor social impacts could occur as a result of the interface between the proposed use and the adjacent residential area . However , a portion of the lakefront and airport will be exposed to greater public use as a result of the project . PLANNIN.G DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF MARCH 1 , 1977 PAGE FOUR RE : RENTON WATERFRONT RESTAURANT CORPORATION L. EMVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/THRESHOLD DETERMINATION°! Pursuant to the City of Renton Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , as amended RCW43 . 216 ) , a Declaration of Non-significance has been issued for the subject proposal (see attached ) . This is based upon the utilization of landscaping/screening of the project and suitable storm drainage controls . M. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION : A vicinity map and site map are attached . N, AGENCIES/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED: 1 . City of Renton Airport Department - approved . 2 . City of Renton Airport Committee (City Council ) - approved . 3 . City of Renton Fire Department - approved . 4 . City of Renton Engineering Division - approved . 5 . City of Renton Utilities Division - approved . 6 . City of Renton Building Division - approved . 7 . City of Renton Traffic Engineering Division - approved . 8 . King County Land Use Management Division 9 . A Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit is presently being reviewed and processed . Oa DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS : 1 . The proposed project is compatible with the City ' s Comprehensive Land Use Plan goals and policies , Zoning Ordinance requirements , and the Airport Master Plan . 2 . The proposed_ development is a desirable utilization of the subject site and will provide an area for increased public utilization of the waterfront and airport areas . 3 . The proposal is generally compatible with surround- ing airport and multiple family residential uses . Negative impacts to the mobile home park (generally permitted within the city only in areas designated for multiple family residential ) adjacent to the west can be mitigated through proper landscaping . and screening of the parking and circulation areas . 4 . Additional traffic control devices may be needed at Rainier Ave . , along the access road., and within_ the site itself. j 5 . Parking spaces required = 99 spaces Parking spaces provided = 126 spaces 6 . The maximum height of the proposed structure is approxi - mately 2.1 feet . The elevation of the mobile home park and apartment building is approximately 8 - 15 feet varies ) above the level of the site . The proposed structure will be set back approximately 65 feet from PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF MARCH 1 , 1977 PAGE FIVE RE : RENTON WATERFRONT RESTAURANT CORPORATION the west property line of the site . These aspects , together with the design of the building and landscap- ing/screening plan , should result in an attractive development with minimal impacts to adjacent proper- ties . The elevation of the mobile home park and apartment building is . approximately 8 - 15 feet varies ) above the level of the site . 7 . The choice of some plant material in the landscape plan may not be suitable for the Northwest area , sun expo- sure , and intended use . Revisions to the plan will be necessary . P. PLANNING DEPARTMENT .RECOMMENDATION Approval of the proposed site plan subject to : 1 . Final Planning Department approval of detailed land- scape plans including , but not limited to , recommended alternative plant types and the provision of suitable landscape screening within the proposed landscape area along the west property line to properly screen and buffer the restaurant and parking area from the adjacent mobile home park . A minimum four foot landscape strip shall be created between the facing parking stall banks in the parking area through a reduction in the stall length to 18 feet with the edge of the planter area used as a curb stop , and berming in landscape areas to be utilized as much as possible . 2 . Final Public Works Department approval of drainage plans including suitable on-site retention and oil /water separation facilities . 3 . Provision of oil and grease traps in sanitary sewer lines . 4. Traffic Division approval oftraffic and circulation. control devices which may be necessary to reduce potential speed and circulation problems within the site . 5 . Fencing may be necessary in certain areas to provide a visual screen and noise control from adjacent properties . 6 . Lighting on-site shall be controlled to reduce impacts on adjacent properties . i N. mi,: g u3'.. 1I1t.1 1, I h--- \ lT:}-•' -: H I l'' lie! ifilpr fl w.,,,, 2.7.: }1 BOWLING gT 137I''Iu11 R / li i < 1 ;1,' n RENTON WATERFRONT sT RESTAURANT CORPORATION Ai % Cji 1 SITE PLAN APPROVAL 0 M IT4,,,E II gT __... _._____J III I II I01II:I11III =`_ q 7I;7 H—I5 i ST ; _.—t o./' ft 5T I a ® j/ 11111 Illlhlile IIIII- LTT2 gT L. . . 3 el,i° tA- 4 ,'0I110111i s I IIIII N ' f III i urn c,1 II11 I \ \ t 1 un 111E F..-NNI IIIIN Ill,,i,,1 'I d 111121-191E116 ':.-a' l I, L• ems 2 PI W sz. , : u 7A I /` g 4 L 1-Lt 1. ...A u r*.1.1'mor.;':.. „V, n- a , . `° ,la I , — •y m 1 1' 1 ni. y ' s•>s ""1' 1 _,...; ri..,Di „,,, t 1 iir _. _ J' : ri ''a IDI I 1 B.colt" W 1 eie al'Li,• CP" i < - > .3 t> a . .6;., 111-9 k:'?"1 "'MI e 4> L,„°,,,,-)) 7,/, 1 , : - 1E1 : rz 5. s.....„ 4 .5';'' , CIL %.4. 5 1'mri•i 6 °C rpR flA-,'', ,.). fx, im ' v:?.? 4,j-**-------. to a, : I T iQ y 6L II 4. SITE PLAN APPROVAL : RENTON WATERFRONT RESTAURANT CORPORATION ; Appl . SA-014-77 ; request for site approval to construct a restaurant in a P- 1 zone ; property located in the vicinity of the northwest corner of the Renton Municipal Airport , adjacent to Lake Washington . APPLICANT Renton Waterfront Restaurant Corp. TOTAL AREA ±1 . 88 acres PRINCIPAL ACCESS Airport Perimeter Road served by Rainier Ave. No. EXISTING ZONING P- 1 EXISTING USE Former hangar facility - presently cleared of any structures. PROPOSED USE Restaurant and on-site parking COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Public/Quasi -Public COMMENTS A Shoreline Management application has been received and is in the process of being reviewed . IAK - . .. N. • ate 444. •w• 1 N6-Ca N y,4 4, N, 00,1 . 4,,,0 zt., ytow qW VAL. b rIt<si H t$t 476 '\ .71MN:\-IIIi:', :/,..i:.:Mr,.7PatiiiiiiC - -. - = - '-. , i f ii It-Iris To ion i sk.:: .:.:,:,..:„.:„,,,,sa„,iiiiii!!.:i, EZO/ .4effta-:;.:.iii: aV• y 'rt° {r —150- 7.7 / 5,f%c::i. i:::::::v:s5'7.:i:?.j,t4f li .. 0 . . %cry: 'liM% MoPSILe N•o' g •. I 1 4 !writ yr.; i I Iq1 DO '7 14C -1 L_ ' _ Q D s 6714 terry Pe ZOO. 6• Hem pal, Du AIiZhDic1' Q D D O D i; 0,3 ,i 11Dc, . . 11 4. ttnH art D Q sir 1 D• j Q 1 / t' ' i l I 0. Imo' pli+E- plat DON 1 1111IIIn .III,IIIIIIPH 4G I°Z t11zoo/ 1,!I. 4ua-SKI ;, Aepiav tr:gOVTDN W*ct zg . Rgolt ti+Rwkt Zoserauram Orig.Asiovg- 014-77 PROPOSED/FINAL DECLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE/NON-SIGNIFICANCE Application No . SA-014-77 AND SM-47-77 PROPOSED Declaration Environmental Checklist No . ECF-211-77 0 FINAL Declaration Description of proposal Site plan approval and shoreline substantial development permit to construct a restaurant and related parking and landscaping at the Renton Municipal Airport. Proponent RENTON WATERFRONT RESTAURANT CORPORATION Location of Proposal Northwest corner of Renton Municipal Airport Lead Agency City of Renton Planning Department This proposal has been determined to ® have ® not have a significant adverse impact upon the environment . An EIS ® is Ellis not required under RCW 43 . 21C . 030 ( 2 ) (c ) . This decision, was made after review by the lead agency of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency . non- Reasons for declaration of environmental/ significance : Suitable mitigating measures will be provided in the development to reduce potential impacts . These include , but may not be limited to , suitable storm water retention and oil /water separation facilities and provision of suitable landscape/screening plan . Measures , if any , that could be taken to prevent or mitigate the environmental impacts to such an extent that the lead agency would withdraw its declaration of significance and issue a ( proposed/final ) declaration of non-significance : Responsible Official Gordon Y . Ericksen Title Planning it for Date February 17 , 1977 Signature City of Renton Planning Department 5-76 r oc REN?, CITY OF RENTON APPLICATION 4 Vi SITE APPROVAL F 8 FOR r CE USE 0 2 File N NNE D e y7 Filing Date APPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS J. THROUGH 6 : 1. Name RENTON WATtLhr"hagI' RESTAURANT CORPORATION Phone 2i 3) 4.56 0 1 Address 2977 Redondo Ave, Long Beach, Calife 90806 • 2. Property location North West corner of the Renton Municipal, rirnort o f ._ of Rainer A_ve. and adjacent to the main runway and Lake Washii10'ton 3. Legal description (attach additional sheet if necessary) . • SEE ATTACHED Number of acres or sq. ft. 81 ,914.45 sg.ft.Present zoning 5. What do you propose to develop on this property? A restaurant with on site parking for 126 cars 6 . The following information shall be submitted with this application: Scale A. Site and access plan (include setbacks , existing structures , easements, and other . factors limiting development) 1"=l0 ' or 20 ' B. Parking, landscaping and screening plan. . l"=l0 ` C. Vicinity map (include land use and zoning on adjacent parcels) l"= 200 ' - 800 ' D. Building height and area (existing and proposed) 7. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:.,, Date approved_ Date denied Date appealed Appeal action Remarks Planning Dept. 2--73 LEGAL DESCRIPTION . Beginning at a point located on the Renton Airfield runway centerline referred to as Station 0+00; thence N 4°49'43"W along the runway centerline a distance of 5103,13 feet; thence S 85°1 O.'17" W .a distance of 375 feet to the true point of beginning; thence S 85°20'2.9" err a distance of 171 .61 feet; thence N 43°25' 41" W a distance of 79,14 feet; thence N 40°49'49" E a distance of 60.92 feet; thence N 1°11 '57" E a distance of 59.82 feet; thence N 27°54'07" W a distance of 197,07. feet; thence S 87°20'55" E a distance of 326.10 feet; thence S 40 49' 43" E a distance of 1Q3.98 feet to the beginning of a curve to the left having a radius of 251.37 feet, thence along said curve through a central angle of 20°25'34" an arc distance of 89.61 feet; thence S 15°50'19" W a distance of 87.46 feet to the true point of beginning. Area: 81 ,914.45 sq. ft. g , 1 CITY of RENTON/ WASHINGTON i•-•-• g ENVIROt'i1ENTAL CHECKLIST FORM o -, eQ FOR LY /5'iT4 Appied ra [ APP!- ,Sdp_ o/4/-77 Application No. _ :,1/i,o, J,'NN_e4MTfJem'. P5l- 4/7-77; Environmental Checklist No. Fd,,c- 211- 77 PROPOSED, date: FINAL , date: 0 Declaration of Significance Declaration of Significance 0 Declaration of Non-Significance ri Declaration of Non-Significance COMMENTS: Introduction The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, Chapter 43.21C, RCW, requires aTT-1 state and local governmental agencies to consider environmental values both for their own actions and when licensing private proposals . The Act also requires that an EIS be prepared for all major actions significantly affecting the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to help the agencies involved determine whether or not a proposal is such a major action. Please answer the following questions as completely as you can with the information presently available to you. Where explanations of your answers are required, or where you believe an explanation would be helpful to government decision makers , include your explanation in the space provided, or use additional pages if necessary. You should include references to any reports or studies of which you• are aware and which are rele- vant to the answers you provide. Complete answers to these questions now will help all agencies involved with your proposal to undertake the required environmental review with- out unnecessary delay. The following questions apply to your total proposal , not just to the license for which you are currently applying or the proposal for which approval is sought. Your answers should include the impacts which will be caused by your proposal when it is completed , even though completion may not occur until sometime in the future. This will allow all of the agencies which will be involved to complete their environmental review now, with- . out duplicating paperwork in the future. NOTE : This is a standard form being used by all state and local agencies in the State of Washington for various types of proposals . Many of the questions may not apply to your proposal . If a question does not apply, just answer it "no" and continue on to the next question. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I . BACKGROUND 1. Name. of Proponent RENTON WATERFRONT RESTAURANT CORPORATION 2. Address and phone number of Proponent: 2977 Redondo Ave. Long Beach,' Calif, 90606 (213) 426-0451 3. Date Checklist submitted 4. Agency requiring Checklist City of Renton Planning Department 5. Name of proposal , ' if applicable: ' NA 6. Nature and brief description of the, proposal (including but not limited to its size, general design elements , and other factors that will give an accurate understanding of its scope and nature) : A low profile rustic waterfront restaurant of approximately 9,700 sq. ft. including dining and cocktail bar with on site parking for 126 cars. There will extensive landscaping throughout the project. Materials to be used in the restaurant include, heavy cedar shakes and walls of textured plaster, glass, and poles. 7. Location of proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal , as wellastheextentofthelandareaaffectedbyanyenvironmentalimpacts , includinganyotherinformationneededtogiveanaccurateunderstandingoftheenvironsmentalsettingoftheproposal ) : The project is located in the Northwest corner of the Renton Municipal Airport adjacent to thema.:Cn runway and Lake Washington. The site was previously used as a hangar facility with adjacent paved aircraft tie-. down areas. The site is presently cleared of any structures. 8. Estimated date for completion of the proposal : November, 1977 9. List of all permits , licenses or government approvals required for the proposalfederal, state and local --including rezones) : Site'Approval - Planning Department City of Renton, Building Permit, Fire Permit, Health Permit 10. Do you have any plans for future additions , expansion, or further activityrelatedtoorconnectedwiththisproposal ? If yes , explain: NO 11. Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered byyourproposal? if yes , explain: NO 12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the pro-posal ; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at some futuredate, describe the nature of such application form: II. ENVIRONMENTAL 'IMPACTS Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) 1) Earth. Will the proposal result in: a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? X YES MAYBE NO b) Disruptions , displacements , compaction or over covering of the soil?X YES MAYBE NO c) Change in topography or ground surface relief X• features? YES MAYBE N- d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? . X, YES . RITE NO e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? X YES MBE NO f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? . X YES MAYBE Explanation: . Chapges in soji m a +inn ; will naturally.result from site grading for the restaurant and parking 1 areas. Topography around the restaurant will also be altered with landscaped berms. 2) Air. Will the proposal result in : a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? YES MAYBE NO b) The creation of objectionable odors? •X ' Yam. MAYBE NO c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate , either locally or regionally? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: __Any odors will be those_tyTical of a restauraI t ti_on, ie discharge—from the kitchen exhaust hoods 3) Water. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in currents , or the course of direction of water movements , in either marine or fresh waters? X YES MAYBE NO b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns , or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? X YES MAYBE NO c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? . X YES MAYBE NO d) - Change in the amount of surface water in any water Xbody? YES MAYBE NO e) Discharge into surface waters , or in any alteration surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X YES - MAYBE NU— f) Alteration of: the direction or rate of flow of . ground waters? X YES MAYBE NO g) Change in the quantity of ground waters , either through direct additions or withdrawals , or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? X YES MAYBE NO h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through direct injection , or through the seepage of leachate, phosphates , detergents , waterborne virus or bacteria, or other substances into the ground waters? X YES MAYBE NO i ) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available Xforpublicwatersupplies? YES MAYBE NO Explanation : Ther will be an increase'in surface water runoff with the additional paving of the parking areas. This will be handled per the . Public Works Department's requirements, 4) Flora. Will the proposal result in: a) Change in the diversity of species , or numbers of any - species of flora (including trees , shrubs , grass , crops , microflora and, aquatic plants)? YES MAYBE ND b) Reduction of the 'numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of flora? YES MAYBE NO c) Introduction 'of new species of flora into an .area, or - in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? YES MTYBE N-0 d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X YES MAYBE NO . I Explanation: There is presently no significant flora on the site. There will however be a substantial increase with the extensive land- soaping proposed for the restaurant and site. 4- 5) Fauna. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in the diversity of species , or numbers of any species of fauna (birds , land animals including reptiles , fish and shellfish , benthic organisms , insects or microfauna)? X 1 S MAYBE NO b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique , rare or endangered species of fauna? X YES MAYBE NO c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area , or result in a barrier to the migration or movement Xoffauna? YES )^AYBE NO d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 6) Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? X• YES MAYBE NO Explanation: The inc e-.se in nei.se will result from tha tyllical opera®' • tion of a restaurant, ie customer traffic and kitchenhouipment. The r noise will however be minimal as compared to that generated by the airport. 7) Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light Or glare? g YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Ther will be the introduction of new lighting for the park- ing area illumination and the re .taurant illumination at night 8) Land Use. Will the proposal result in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area?X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: - 9) Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in : f a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? X YES. MAYBE NO b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural 'resource? 2._. IYES . MAYBE NO e.: .. Explanation: 10) Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil , pesticides , chemicals or radibtion) in the. event of an accident or upset conditions? X YET- MAYBE NO Explanation: 11) Population. Will the proposal alter the location. distri- • . i .S bution, density, or growth rate -of the human population of an area?- X MAYBE NO ' Explanation: 12) housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 13) Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? X YES MAYBE NO b) Effects on existing parking facilities , or demand Xfornewparking? YES MAYBE NO c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? X YET— MAYBE NO d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? X YES MAYBE NO e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? X YES MAYBE NO f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles , bicyclists or pedestrians? X YE- MAYBE NO Explanation: The traffic generated will be that of customers and employees of the propoeed restaurant. It is estimated there will be approximately 20 employees and 300 customers per day during the operating hours .of 10 AM to 2 M'I. Parking for these will be provided on site with 126 spaces. 14) Public Services.. Will the proposal have an effect upon , or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas : a) Fire protection? YES MAYBE NO b) Police protection? X YES MAYBE NO c) Schools? X YES MAYBE NO d) Parks or other recreational facilities? YES MAYBE N e) Maintenance of public facilities , including roads? X YES MAYBE NO f) Other governmental services? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 15) Energy. Will the proposal result in: a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? - YES TOTE NO b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? YE MAYBE 7O— Explanation: There will be the need for additionalenergy due to the operation of,a new restaurant; ie kitchens heating and lighting. 16) Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems,- or alterations to the following utilities : a) Power or natural gas? X • s YES iTTYTE NO b) Communications systems? YES MAYBE NO c) Water? X YES MAYBE NO d) Sewer or septic tanks? X YES MAYBE RO e) Storm water drainage? YES MAYBE NO f) Solid waste and disposal ? X YES • MAYBE NO various Explanation: The utilities required will be those t;,_ica1 of a restaurant operation of this size, 17) Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding Xmentalhealth)? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 18) Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public , or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 19) Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: _ The _rr .C.0c-t Will increase the publicls a.ccessability to the shoveling of Lake Washington, 20) Archeological /Historical . Will the proposal result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? YES_ hAYBE NO Explanation: III . SIGNATURE I , the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any decla- ration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful ./ ck of full discl sure on my part. iy Proponent : i 4r. / sign e,•til ) Gary A . Hann name printed) a . City of Renton Planning Department 5-76 February 1 , 1977 TF;;r) CUS7mAN AT) ASSOCIATES 2669 Myrtle Ave. Suite #111 4: C)- rn /V);',N\ Signal Hill, Calif. 90806 CEI FEB 4 1977 Planning D1epartment 4 City of Renton gti5 4. 200 Hill Ave. South Renton; Washington 98075 Attn: Mr.. Nike Smith Re; Restaurant on Lake Washington for Renton Waterfront Restaurant Corp. Dear Yr. Smith, Enclosed are the necessary application forms and drawings as required for site approval: two application forms, two environmental worksheets and three conies each of the plot plan, vicinitymap, lan_dsoaoe ,plains, floor plans and elevations. I hope all of the above is in order. I would appreciate your notifying us of the date for the scheduled hearing on our application. If you have any questions or need for any further information please let us know. Sincerely, Daniel MacLellan_ encl.; 1100.00 application fee February 1 , 1977 7/0 E11 N 1: CuSImL4.N AND ASSOCIATES 2669 Myrtle Ave. Suite #111 Signal Hill, Calif. 90806 111r!BC7179.-44-\ i ems_/ 1 Planning Department G DE.?i,J/.( City of Renton 200 Hill Ave. South Renton, Washington 98055 Attn: Mr. Nike Smith Re; Restaurant on Lake Washington for Renton .Iaterfront Restaurant Corp. Dear Mr. Smith, Enclosed are the necessary application forms, drawings and fee as required for shoreline development permit: four completed application forms, four completed environmental worksheets, four copies each of the plot plan, vicinity map, landscape plans, floor plans and elevations and the 5'150.00 filing fee. I hope all the above is in order. We will have the notice of our application run in the Renton Record on Monday Feb. 7, 1977 end Monday Feb. 14, 1977. I would appreciate your notifying us of the date for the hearing on our appli- cation. If you have any questions or need any further information please let us know. Sincerely, i Daniel MacLellan 4.02e.. L A62. /Ire T. f- 41M- il7-77 4 ® F RAC z THE CITY OF RENTON C, ve 5 MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 0 a lxelr.a; CHARLES J. DELAURENTI , MAYOR ! PLANNING DEPARTMENT o Q: 235-25500• 94TFD SFPS ® February 22 , 1977 Edward B. Sand, Manager Building and Land Development Division King County Land Use Management Division 450 King County Administration Building Seattle, Washington 98104 RE: RENTON WATERFRONT RESTAURANT CORPORATION; SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR A RESTAURANT FACILITY ON THE RENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, FILE NO. SA-014-77 Dear Mr. Sand: Attached for your review are maps outlining the site. of .the abovementioned site plan approval request. A Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit is also presently being processed by the city. The proposed project consists of a restaurant, related parking area,. and landscaping plan, and is situated on a two acre site at the northwest corner of the Renton Municipal Airport. If you have any comments regarding the subject proposal we would appreciate receiving them by February 28 , 1977 . A public hearing is scheduled for March 1. Very truly yours , Gordon Y. Ericksen Planning - Director Michael L. Smith Associate Planner MLS :ms Attachments 1 544s,c114:1 ON Milk\ N 1LJ s, j 0lill '_t_-. [ I 1 ,, G DT. 1T . S Aljl < ' M il' h. RENTON WATERFRONT 5T RESIAURANTTE CORPORATION /? I % / C MII ' N• T4ORNE AL - _--_-"'---- ROVAL Ld 5111111 (Hill i11111_T-`L e._. I HI allilu llliill.; :::2 -4 P I 'IINI IN IliileIIIIll m J 2 l1- H 5T 11 sioII I 1 - , y lI-1, IIIN Ii Iy, v 1 5 II Ill,,,11004 II i ' l o PL 7 t I 1 i i 'fililll I'I— -{ ° o\ ill / ST I I 1 W i e _A 11— , . 411 1 u u e 4 L 1 9 kite 14tl' 1 ti. ." '', \+ a '. '_ 1 1 "I ¢z AIR Am dt' I Y VAC i 1.1 D .. 1 'CI L• iklii N N r.4ou lI M. PR 0 1 1 4, 1 i F- :'Iiip : ,(A ` Q Z/ i 1 .0 - 7>. j . c. ::, - - ,___T_I -It._ In! _ a TA 's) iL ' . - . V SITE PLAN APPROVAL : RENTON WATERFRONT RESTAURANT CORPORATION ; Appl . SA-014-77 ; . request for site approval to construct a restaurant in a P- 1 zone ; property located in the vicinity of the northwest corner of the Renton Municipal Airport , adjacent to Lake Washington . APPLICANT Renton Waterfront Restaurant Corp. TOTAL AREA ±1 . 88 acres PRINCIPAL ACCESS Airport Perimeter Road served by Rainier Ave. No. EXISTING ZONING P- 1 EXISTING USE Former hangar facility - presently cleared of any structures. PROPOSED USE Restaurant and on-site parking COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Public/Quasi -Public COMMENTS A Shoreline Management application has been received and is in the process of being reviewed . i Y t I E 4 4 WMHtN 'rdNasQ 410itPO°464' tip . CI c a vim. bl trigko otstyEk L-]a 1 toe KY Vl mer4 lf1 1 t f sa Vitlik In itirrf .:....,...,„..., t)f.tie4IT. rz Q r ,1." VCIMQ r 5 I I 'rm . `sl' r7c13 . . ' 1 1 1r • 1 r.: 0 .4 "' itQ11t t1 tarry o z '- II6'rit Pi. I\` ' , ` ZhOi ' anDOn CO Ca it 1', c: 1 tam 4 r.1 _ _ 1 Cl a it I 0 CI . • , , 1;1 i. 1 I tt?*++ ` ..., or a O,IIi,,,1q„gyt SKIS < << A,,,..,..:goyt'om wM rrArt 110,Arrf ZORP rd4t41 SITS Aefiramt.A'a rq-7.7 ROUTING FOR REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORMS_ TO : Finance Department Fire Department11LibraryDepartment Park Department Police Department Public Works Department Building Div . Traffic Engineering Div . Engineering Div . 6 Utilities Engineering Div . 0 Mll;r01 ` Lnekr FROM : Planning Department , (signed by responsible official or his designee) itild 504 O1N -71 SI' d oVAL SUBJECT Review of ECF- gi o-77 Application No . : --47. 77 Sµ®(ai,o#vE Act i on N ame : Revc64. t cttt ce-S4 reK+ Omer, Please review the attached . Review requested by ( date) : /Ail y REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : UTat.ir'CS GAuG. Comments : r-. ND RkLd (3.1SignatureofDirectororAuthorizeRepresentativeDae REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : c2s:`, 'bf ;\-)`C - Comments : 1 i;o Icir , ' . .,._°,v 41 \-- \,(\, C4,-). \ ,c- _ l"j' Signature of ti;crector or Authorized Representative Date 6-76 OVER) REVIEW BY OTHER CITY i/J)ARTMENTS Department Comments gtue o 0:1 rector or Authorized Representati v Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS De p c rtmen t : Comments : Signature of Di rector or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : Signature of Di rector or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : Signature of"---Di rector or Authorized Representative Date q.41 4- TI-D-41, CITY OF R ,NTON7 MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055o 0 '.-- co CHARLES J. DELAURENTI , MAYOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT 235-2550 TfD SFP1 February 8 , 1977 Gary Hann Specialty Restaurants Corporation SRC Future Sites - Renton Waterfront Restaurant Corp . 2977 Redondo Avenue Long Beach , CA 90806 RE : NOTICE OF APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE AND PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR SITE APPROVAL APPLICATION NO . SA-014-77 Gentlemen : The Renton Planning Department formally accepted the above mentioned application on February 4 , 1977 A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing 'Examiner has been set for March 1, 1977, at 9:00 AM . Representatives of the applicant 'are asked to be pre-sent . All interested persons are invited to attend the hearing . If you have any further questions , please call the Renton Planning 'Department , 235-2550 . Very truly yours , Gordon Y . Ericksen Planning Director I 1 By A6sociate Planner wr ENDING . . OF FILE FILE TITLE il: ....„. .. ,6 544.. z 0 d 0.• 1 1 .