Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA81-008BEGINNING OF FILE FILE TITLE itCOF1LfBED fojr xrrA. G. & M. INVESTMENTS I 510 RAINIER AVENUE SOUTH • 323.5393 • SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98144 IBECITY®p RE!'1T0,N F OEB5 ]982 February 3 , 1982 BUILD NG ZON111FG p;pT Mr . Roger Blaylock Zoning Administrator Building & Zoning Department City of Rentlon 200 Mill Str1eet Renton, Washington 9805.5 RE : Maplewood Commerical Bldg . 3801 NE 4th Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Mr . Blaylock: We are trying , at this time, to resolve the questions of traffic midigation fees in the amount of S27 , 800 . 00 relative to the above captioned project , and would like to request from the Environment Review Com- mittee a sixty (60) day extension with regards to pay- ment of same . Please advise us , at your earliest convenience, as to whether this request can be granted or not . We do not wish to do anything that might jeapordize our Short Plat . Thank you for your assistance in this matter . Sincerely, M. R. MASTRO MRM: as I OF R4, I 0 ' z THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH.980-5 0 BARBARA' Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • LAND USE HEARING EXA II ER 0 FRED J. KAUFMAN. 235- 112593 09, 4D SEP MO March 10, 1981 Mr. William Tsao 2367 Eastlake Avenue E. Seattle, WA 98102 RE: File No. SA-008-81 ; William S. Tsao & Company; Site Approval . Dear hr. Tsao: This is to notify you that the above referenced request, which was approved subject to conditions as noted on the Examiner's report of February 20, 1981 , has not been appealed within the time period established by ordinance. Therefore, this application is considered final and is being submitted to the Planning Department effective this date for permanent filing. Sincerely, 1;a0u440'—"—" Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner cc: Planning Department City Clerk AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING State of Washington) County of King Marilyn J. Petersen being first duly sworn, upon oath disposes and states: That on the ?Oth day of February 19 81 , affiant deposited in the mails of the United States a sealed envelope containing a decisi n or recommendation with postage prepaid, addressed to the parties of record in the below entitled application or petition. 3 11SubscribedandswornthisAD` day of `68vL. 2 19 CSl • V64 1(1(k • Notary Public in and for tJ e State of _ Washington, residing at FM r51Y1- Application, Petition or' Case: William Tsao; SA-008-81 The m nutez contain a t.izt o4 the paAtiu o6 necond. ) February 20, 1981 OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND DECISION . I APPLICANT: William S. Tsao & Company FILE NO. SA-008-81 I LOCATION: South side of N.E. 4th Street approximately 600 feet est of 1 Union Avenue N.E. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant requests site approval for a +12,000 square foot 1 shopping center to include three stores.i I SUMMARY OF ACTION: Planning Department Recommendation: Approval with conditions. Hearing Examiner Decision: Approval with conditions. I PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department preliminary report was receiv d by the REPORT:Hearing Examiner on February 4, 1981 . 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: i Ike hearing was opened on February 10, 1981 at 9:05 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing o testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The Examiner noted that the Planning Department had recommended that the matter be continued to allow appropriate revisions to the parking plan, and inquired if the applicant objected to a continuance. Responding was: William Tsao 2367 Eastlake Avenue E. Seattle, WA 98102 Mr. Tsao advised that two of the three proposed uses for the three buildings are identified and required parking provided. To alleviate the city's concern regarding parking f r the third building for which the use is uncertain, he suggested that prior to issuance f the ftinal occupancy permit, a use permit be certified to ensure that the parking requir ments are met. Mr. Tsao indicated that because only two egresses are allowed from the site to N.E. 4th Street, the middle lot is landlocked unless joint use of a driveway and parking are allowed. Tie Examiner requested Roger Blaylock, Associate Planner, to proceed with the presentation of the Planning Department report. Mr. Blaylock entered the following exhibits into the record: I Exhibit #1 : Application File containing Planning Dep rtment report and other pertinent documents Exhibit #2: Site Plan Mir. Blaylock noted that the proposed plans show a total of 17-plus compact car parking spaces although only 15 would be allowed under the provisions of the Parking and Loading Ordinance. He indicated the Planning Department's concern that minor design alternatives should be considered such as reduction of building size to meet code requirements, and he objected to Mr. Tsao's suggestion that the building be occupied under a temporary occupancy permit since problems arise if the city is placed in a position to force the oiccupants out at a later date. I The Examiner inquired if provision by the applicant of a reciprocal cross-easement which would merge parking on the three lots would be a solution to the problem. Mr. Blaylock indicated that adequate parking must be provided on each individual lot as well as for the entire shopping center, and the proposal lacks six parking spaces. He noted that either lot lines could be adjusted or the building size reduced. Mr. Tsao indicated concurrence in adjustment of the lot lines since the applicant prefers maintaining eparate lots for the pro osal . The Examiner noted that the matter would be continued for one week to allow revision to the site plan and plot plan. The hearing was subsequently closed at 9:22 a.m. and continued to February 17, 1981 . 008-81 Page Two CONTINUATION: I The hearing was reopened on February 17, 1981 at 9:09 a.m. in the Council Chambers f th Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. Roger Blaylock, Associate Planner, entered the following exhibit into the record: Exhibit #4: Revised Site Plan Utilizing Exhibit #4, Mr. Blaylock explained revisions to lot lines which had been skewe in order to provide the appropriate number of parking spaces on each lot. He noted that although the Subdivision Ordinance would have allowed three accesses onto N.E. 4th Stree the Environment 1 Review Committee had limited the project to two accesses due to h-avy traffic volumes on the arterial . Mr. Blaylock advised that the Planning Department feel Ole proposal me is requirements of the Parking and Loading Ordinance for the indivi •ual lots in providing a total o1 61 parking spaces, although 66 spaces would be require. if proposal were considered as a shopping center. In conclusion, he stated that the preliminary plat should include the fourth lot which contains the existing apartmen com The Examiner requested testimony by the applicant. Responding was: Lyle Kussman 2367 Eastlake E. Seattle, WA 98102 Mr. Kussman indicated concurrence in the revised site plan and had no further comme ts. The Examiner requested testimony in support of the application. Responding was: Lt. Don Persson Renton Police Department Lt. Persson indilcated support of the development of the area, but expressed concern regarding driveway widths onto N.E. 4th Street. He advised that existing narrow drivewa along the arterial are 28 to 30 feet wide which causes drivers to stop in order to urn tightly into parking lots resulting in traffic congestion along N.E. 4th.. He felt hat a width of 40 feet should be provided to allow easy access into the shopping areas. The Examiner requested testimony in opposition to the proposal . There was no respo se. He then requested final comments from the Planning Department. Mr. Blaylock indica ed that if the driveways were widened to 40 feet, the possibility exists that two parking spaces would be eliminated which would result in the necessity to reduce building sl.ze. Mr. Kussman stated that because landscaping strips are proposed on each side of the driveways, uncer •ainty exist regarding accommodation of 40-foot widths. He indica ed vItillingness to r view plans i;th the Planning Department, but he would be reluctant to reduce square footage of the buildings because two of the three are already leased. The Examiner requested further comments. Since there were none, the hearing regard ng File No. SA-008-81 was closed by the Examiner at 9:20 a.m. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the E amine now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1 . The request is for appro al of a site plan for a three-store shopping center. 2. The application file containing the application, SE PA documentation, the Planni g Department report, and other pertinent documents was entered into the record as Exhibit #1 . 3. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the State Environm-ntal Policy Act of 1971 , R.C.W. 43.21 .C. , as amended, a Declaration of Non-Significa ce has been issued for the subject proposal by the Environmental Review Committee, responsible fficial . 4. . Plans for they proposal have been reviewed by all city departments affected, by t e impact of this development. 5. All existing utilities are available and in close proximity. 6. The proposal is compatible with the required setbacks, lot coverage and height requirements of Section 4-711 (B-1 ; Business/Commercial) of Title IV, Ordinance No. SA-uu8-81 Page Three 1628, Code f General 0 dinances. The site is located on he south side of N.E. 4th Street about 600 feet west of Unic Avenue N.E. The site i essentially level , is undeveloped and is covered with grass and some sc tch broom. The site was annexed into the city in 1966. The site is part of the Mastro Short Plat (File No. Sh. Pl. 352-79) . Concurrently with this application the applica t ha proposed further dividing the subject lot into three new lots, and pursuant to Secti 9-1105(8) (B) , the applio ant has applied for a preliminary plat. 9. The subject site is zon d B-1 (Business/Commercial) and the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in hich the property is located as suitable for commercial development. 10. The applicant proposes three stores for the shopping center. The general retail store would contain 5,70IO ;square feet; the tire store would contain 3,800 squar- feet; and the convenienle :market would contain 2,500 square feet. 1 . Pursuant to Section 4-2208(2) (C) these uses require 31 parking stalls, 21 parki g stalls, and 14 parking stalls, respectively. An amended site plan, submitted after a continuance was grant d 'for resubmittal , indicates that parking for these use. is shy two, two and one stall , respectively. 12. The Environmental ' Revie Committee, in conjunction with the Traffic Engineering, assessment 9f the proposal , conditioned the Declaration of Non-Significance on providing a 'maximum of two driveways for access to minimize interference with traffic on N.E. 4th Street. The Traffic Engineering Division further indicated that turning movements into narrow driveways, defined as driveways under 40 feet in width, generally requir- deceleration by the turning vehicle which interferes with traffic circulation a d flow of through vehicles. A 40-foot driveway is the minimum necessary to reduc- interference with a major arterial . 13. The applicant has submitted plans which would require shared access via two thi , ty foot driveways to serve the three parcels included within the site plan. 14. The site plan shows landscaping along N.E. 4th Street and lot lines have been adjusted to provide each lot with its respective parking, although the joint ac ess will , in fact, mean joint and shared parking. As indicated above, parking is b-low the minimum required by rdinance. 15. Pursuant to Section 4-2.2.4(B) (3) , the applicant must provide 5% internal landsc=ping in the parking area. 1 ' . The applicant has appare tly negotiated agreements for two of the properties an. has indicated that building size changes would be difficult to accommodate. 17. Immediately south of the subject lot is a large residential apartment complex Mastro) . CONCLUSIONS: 1 . The site pla as amended does not provide sufficient parking space for the proposed uses of the -ubject prop-rty. The Parking and Loading Ordinance requires a spe ific number of stalls dependi g on the use of the subject property. The uses proposed by the applicant, consid-red ds a conglomerate shopping center, require 66 parking spaces. Provision for t is number of stalls must be accomplished in order for . ite plan approval. 2. The fact that the applicant has negotiated to provide a certain square footage o future occupants, whether ;purchasers or lessees, cannot override the requiremen s of the City of Renton Parking and Loading Ordinance. Buildings of the size proposed by the appli ant require a set number of spaces and these must be provided. If the required number o spaces cannot be provided, the applicant must scale down the project so that the •arcel can provide 5.5 parking spaces per 1 ,000 square eet of gross leaseable space. 4. Further, the parcel must provide 5% internal landscaping as required by ordinan e to break up the apparent barrenness of the asphalt parking area. Landscaping m st also be provided to buff- r the residential uses located immediately south of th- shopping center from the proposal so as to contribute to the overall attractive ess and desirability of the lty as a place in which to live (Comprehensive Plan La d Y SA-(—-81 Page Four Use Report, Page 18) . This landscaping will at least buffer the residential use from the incompatible business use proposed for the subject site ( Ibid, Page 17) . The rear eight feet may serve this purpose. 5. Sudden deceleration to accommodate turning movements not only impedes traffic flowbutcanleadtoaccidents. Therefore, the driveways should be widened to 40 fet in order to provide for a smooth transition from N.E. 4th Street into the subject site's parking area so that traffic is not slowed and traffic circulation may e maintained on this heavily traveled arterial . DECISION: The site plan is approved subject to the following conditions: 1 . The site plan is revised to provide the 66 parking spaces required for the proposed 12,000 square feet of gross leaseable area or the buildings are modified in scale to provide the proper ratio of floor area and parking. 2. The access shall be limited to two driveways which are each not less than 40 f-et in width and otherwise meeting the requirements of the City of Renton. 3. Internal landscaping of the parking area to consist of not less than 5% of the parking area. 4. Landscaping of the rear of the proposed shopping center to be pot less than eight feet in wid h running the length of the south property line. 5. All landscaping shall be approved by the city's Landscape Architect. 6. Approval of a final plat for the subject property. ORDERED THIS 20th day of February, 1981 . Fred J. K: fman Land Use -aring Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 20th day of February, 1981 by Affidavit of Mailing to the parties of record: William Tsao, 2367 Eastlake Ave. E. , Seattle, WA 98102 Lyle Kussman, 2367 Eastlake Ave. E. , Seattle, WA 98102 Lt. Don Persson, Renton Police Department TRANSMITTED THIS 20th day of February, 1981 to the following: Mayor Barabara Y. Shinpoch Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Richard Houghton, Acting Public Works Director David Clemens, Acting Planning Director Michael Porter, Planning Commission Chairman Barbara Schellert, Planning Commissioner Ron Nelson, Building Official Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Pursuant to Title IV, Section 3015 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before March 6, 1981 . Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at tihe prior hearing may make a written request for review by the Examiner within fourteen 14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific errors relied upon by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review o the record, take further action as he deems proper. Ain appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Section 3016, which requires that s'1uch appeal be fled with the City Clerk accompanying a filing fee of $25.00 and me ting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall , or same may be purchased at cost. PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARYY REPORT TO THE HEARING DINER PUBLIC HEARING FEBRUARY 10, 1981 APPLICANT: WILLIAM S. TSAO & CO. FILE NUMBER: SA-008-81 A. SmplmiokY E PU1IPOS. OF REQUEST: The .pplicant requests site approval for a 112 ,000 square foot shopping center to include three stores. B. GENERAL IU ORMATION: 1 . Owner of Record: RICHARD W. POITRAS 2 . Applicant : WILLIAM ,S. TSAO & CO. 3 . Location: Vicinity ap Attached) South side of N.E. 4th Street approximately 600 feet west of Union Avenue N.E. 4 . Legal Description: A detailed legal description is available on file in the Renton Planning Department. 5. Size of Property: 11. 14 acres 6 . Access :Via N.E. 4th Street 7 . xisting Zoning: B-1, Business Use 8 . xisting Zoning in the Area: B-1, R-3 , Residence Multiple Family, minimum lot size 5, 000 sq. ft. ; G, General Classification District 9 . Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Commercial 10. . Notification: The applicant was notified in writing of the hearing date. Notice was properly published in the Daily Record Chronicle on January 25, 1981 and posted in three places on or near the site as required by City Ordinance on January 28 , 1981. C. mi ISTO,':Y/ KGROOAUlD : The subject sit was annexed into the City by Ordinance 2249 of June 22,, 1966. It was part of the Michael Mastro Short Plat 352-79 approved by the Hearing Examiner on June 13, 1979 . Also, it is part of the Dick Poitras Preliminary Plat 121-80 presently under consideration by the Hearing Examiner. c ! 4 PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: WILLIAM S. TSAO & CO. , SA-108-81 FEBRUARY 10, 1981 PAGE TWO D. P YSICAL ;:ACCGR®UND: 1 . Topography: The subject site is essentially level. 2 . Soils : Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam (AgC) . Permeability is moderately rapid in the surface layer and subsoil and very slow in the substratum. Runoff is slow to medium, and the erosion hazard is moderate. This soil is used for timber, pasture, berries , row crops and for urban development. 3 . Vegetation: The existing vegetation consists of some scotch broom along the northerly frontage of N.E. 4th Street. 4 . Wildlife: The existing vegetation may provide habitat for birds and small mammals. 5. Water: No surface water was observed on the subject site (January 28, 1981) . 6. Land Use: The subject site is presently undeveloped. To the west is a power transmission line and the Greenwood Cemetery. A service station is located to the north and a real estate office and tavern to the east. A 224-unit apartment complex is located to the south and southwest. E. NEI v m:. m x0OD C1 RAC ERISTICS : The area is in transition from scattered single family uses and undeveloped land to multiple family and higher uses. F. ;"ui„LIC SERVICES : 1 . Water and Sewer: An existing 12" water main is located Ialong N.E. 4th Street and an 8" sanitary sewer is situated on the same street. ) 2. Fire Protection: Provided by the Renton Fire Depart- ment per ordinance requirements. 3 . Transite Metro Transit Route #107 operates along Monroe Avenue N.E. approximately a mile west of the subject site. 4 . Schools : The subject site is located within 1 mile to the south of the Honeydew Elementary School and approximately one mile southeast of McKnight Junior High School and one mile south of Hazen High School. 5. Recreation: Kiwanis Park is approximately 4 mile. to the north of the subject site and Windsor Hills Park is approximately 3/4 of a mile to the east. G. SECTIONS OF THE ZONING Coy: : 1 . Section 4-711, B-1, Business Use. t PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPOT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: TiVILLIAM S. TSAO & CO. , SA-108-81 FEBRUARY 10, 1981 PAGE THREE H. PLIC A\mLL sgonoms OF' THE OOF P vie:,,mNSIVE PLAN O+': O'TTE]'., 01 IOAL tCI`7I'xDOCUMENT: 1 . Comprehensive Plan, 1965 , Land Use Report, Objectives , Pages 17-18. I. IMPACT ON THE NATURAL Om mmi'9.\im ILumNivsm iNT. 1. Natural Systems : Development of the site will remove the vegetation, disturb the soils, increase storm water runoff and have an effect on traffic and noise levels in the area. Through proper develop- ment controls and procedures, however, these impacts can be mitigated. 2 . Population/Employment : Construction of the proposed retail uses will .provide some employment opportunities for the area residents. 3. Schools: Not applicable. 4 . Social: ; Minor. 5. Traffic : i The proposed development would. increase traffic on N.E. 4th Street by approximately 1390 trips/day (115.8 trips/1,000 sq. ft. ) based on the ITE standards for a shopping center (0-49 ,999 square feet) . This would represent an increase of approximately 7% over present levels. J. ENVIRONMENTAL I SS;ESSMENTT/ThRESH.LD DETERMINATION: Pursuant to the City of Renton ° s Environmental Ordinance, and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, as amended, RCW 43-21C, the Environmental Review Committee on January 251 1981 issued a final declaration of non-significance for the subj ct proposal based upon the following conditions : 1. The proposal complies with the Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations of Commercial. 2. Access to N.E. 4th Street is to be limited to two (2) locations as indicated in the site pl n dated January 13 , 1981. K. AGENCIES/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED: 1. City of Renton Building Department. 2 . City of Renton Engineering Division. 3 . City of Renton Traffic Engineering Division. 4 . City of Renton Utilities Division. 5 . City of Renton Fire Department. L. PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1. The proposed shopping center is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and zoning designation of Commercial and B-1 respectively for the site and surrounding area. 2. The proposed development of three stores consists of : a. Retail Space - 5 ,700 square feet b. Tire Store - 3 ,800 square feet c . Convenience Market 7-11 Store) 2 ,500 square feet TOTAL: 12 , 000 square feet I uc I PLANNING' DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORTTO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING: WILLIAM S. TSAO & CO. , SA-108-81 FEBRUARY 10 , 1981 PAGE FOUR 3 . In addition to the insufficient number of stalls provided (based upon a shopping center) as noted in #2 above, the applicant is unable to show that required parking can be provided on individual lots as per the individual uses proposed. The following table reflects this situation: Required \Provided Sq. Footage Parking ' Parking Retail Space 5700 28. 5 25* Tire Store 3800 19 13* Convenience Store (7011) 2500 12. 5 22* 60 60 These lots do not meet the required standards as per individual lots. 4 . A possible solution to the problems described in 2 and #3 is to reduce the overall square footage of the shopping center. This would necessitate trimming the proposed space by f1100 square feet with some other adjustments possible to comply with the 25% compact stall ratio) . M. DEPARTMENTAL EC D \`IONS: Based on the above analysis , it is recommended that the Hearing Examiner continue the subject request to a time and date certain and require the applicant to submit a revised application with a site plan which can comply with the requirements of the Parking & Loading Ordinance as noted above. n 100 yr,,q" i u ••< J 1 _j a Iu' J•. 1 ,.ram _ I ir($, E I l r, Zr '1 it'''''' . . t f' l y • b4, * 4 t r 1, 5, .r .J 1 F». J '.!.'ol I.1 $°,•.^ !_: * A f'° n"8 t• r I tlii a rt ° a w . • r # v 1 d•,,<.I II ' Q r 1 z 't5•• . 3" _ ' "I 16 I i I6A1 I#IF .,1.J:# 1; 7 ,_,. f. z' T • {e :{n-.; - lo1... x.. .w ._ ». _ . . . A I •le J , ti a:.`.,._ `t..p1 ._,._ R_ _. - 3 }' Q r} J n 4-7, , 1tl R-3 LJ, za ; i 1 z r J ..: , t Ja I h" i GREENWOOD fi h 1 :0) G r a CEMETERY : 0 E N t 1 j r a, C D 4,, I y, 1 1 I 0 WILLIl4 S. TSAO & CO. SITE APPROVAL APPLICANT WILLIAM S. TSAO_ TOTAL AREA ±1.14 acre• PRINCIPAL ACCESS Via N.E. 4th Street EXISTIN ZONING B-1, Business Use EXISTIN ' USE Undeveloped PROPOSE USE +12, 000 sq. ft. shopping center ( 3 stores) i COMPREHENSIVE LANE USE PLAN Commercial COMMENTS Planning, 12-4979 RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT , DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application : SITE APPROVAL (SA-008-81) 12 ,000+ sq. ft . Shopping Center in three buildings on 1. 14 acre site Location : South side of N.E. 4th St . /approx. 600 feet west of Union Ave. N.E. Applicant : WILLIAM TSAO COMPANY TO Parks Department SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : 2/10 Police Department A. R. C. MEETING DATE : Public Works Department Engineering Division i Traffic Engineering Building Division XX Utilities Engineering XX Fire Department Other) : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING FOR THE APPLICATION REVIEW CONFERENCE (ARC) TO BE HELD ON AT 9 : 00 A.M. IN THE THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM. IF YOUR DEPARTMENT/DIVISION REPRESENTATIVE WILL NOT ABLE TO AITEND THE ARC, PLEASE PROVIDE THE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5:0U P .M. ON I . REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : FIRE DEPARTMENT Approved pproved with Conditions Not Approved 1 Site plan approval only. Pre-construction conference required with7Fire Marshal' s Office. C 6 1 ; Ed41 Wooten 1/20/81 Signature of Director 'or Authorized Representative Date REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : ty,Lrr'j Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved 0 5 3.)C-LT Ft'2.E- n6/a2T--16'tr 2ce4tl/ -1.64 z$' 01SQ t. Svs OEv. ICC wfrrCet. 1 7 L____ v (D 747J ! FeotiT FT wb/E4._ Lin( iJ .O LArT6Cr)—E'S3IL Signatur of Directorior Authorized Representative ' Date REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION ; Traffic Engineering Division Approved X j Approved with Conditions Not Approved See attachment . (See below) 77-1 -- 1 , c---------:', 1 /28/81 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date I I RE: Shopping Cen er Site Approval (SA-008-81) South Side o NE 4th St./Approx. 600 ft. west of Union Ave. NE Approved with Conditions 1 . Align easterly driveway entry to future driveway entry on the north side of NE 4th Street which is to be an entry to a future apartment complex. 2. D veloper agrees to participate in the future LID which involves 5 foot widening of NE 4th Street to accommodate a center lane left turn movement.' lt- 3. Tlhe developer is to be advised that the left turn movement from NE 4t, Street may be restricted to centerline ' C' curbing until future cente-- • lane left turn' facilities are installed. Gary A., 'Norris, P.E. Traffid' Engineer CEM:ad I v . .., rl, 1 1 I L IY 1 V d V 1 J 1 V I\ , 4--\ a\ Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved Signatu o D rector or Au orized Representat ve Dat REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : X. Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved Signature of D rector or Authorize Reprejen ative Date REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : POLICE To: Planning Dent. From: Lt; D.R. Persson Re: Site Plan Approval for SA-008081 Commerical Development for Dick' Poitras .__ The on .y problem that: I find with -the' prcopasa2- is 'the driveways are _. .. not wide .enough. Due to the heavy volumes of traffic on N.E.' 4th it is imperative) that the traffic flow in and ;out of the' developmentdoesnot, slow.&jor ,stop traffic .on NE.4th muxumkxy when _cars ,enterintothesite. Therefore * the development phoutd be required tohaveforty(40) feet wide driveways not the -proposed RR thirty(30) . feetdriveways . The 4partment complex directly behind this development at presenttimedoesnothavewideenoughdrivewaysand ;at peak traffic hours vehicles entering the site stop traffic. tie can not chance another situation like htis to develon thus the absolute sa *ky necessity ,for wide driveways. r FINAL 'ECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICACE Application No (s) : SA-008-81 Environmen al Checkl st No: ECF-005-81 Descriptio of Propo al: Construction of a 12 , 000 square foot shopping' center including three stores . Proponent : William Tsao and Company ,(Poitras) Location of Pro opsal: South side of N.E. 4th Street approximately 600° west of Union Avenue N.E. Lead Agenc : Planning Department This propo al was reviewed by the ERC on January 21 , 1981 , following presentation by Roger J. Blaylock of the Planning Department. Incorporat d by reference in the record of the proceedings of the ERC on applic tion ECF-005-81 are the following: 1 ) Environmental C ecklist Review Sheet, prepared by: Roger J. Blaylo k, Associate Planner DATED: January 21 , 1981 2) Applications : A-008-81 Acting as the Responsible Official, the ERC has determined this development does not have significant adverse impact on the en ironment. An EIS is not required under RCW 43. 21C. 030 (2) (c) . This decision was made after review by the lead agen y of a complete environmental checklist and other informati n on file with the lead agency. Reasons for declaration of environmental non-significance: 1 . Proposal complies with the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning designations of Commercial. 2 . Acce s to N.E. 4th Street is limited to two (2) points as s own in site, plan dated January 13, 1981 . . Signature. : i• _.) .' Ron Nelson, Buildin ' Director vid R. 1 mens, Acting Planning Director R'c and C1 Hougzton Acting Public Woks Direct DATE OF P BLICATION , January 25 , 1981 EXPIRATIO OF APPEA 'PERIOD: February 8 , 1981 i P anning 1 , - 1979 RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application : d . y M E Aerfrov 4 ( - © 0c)8.: 1) ' o o r i; _ Slag P, cbit!k e lop;i4.1 a a Opt se., ;A, 3 4 'it- . .,,, 000 /kV cice.16., f s Location . Slag o, . '. 1 eetS9P, . 4 0 e . ' cow_ Applicant . 1AM.12CA- Co 961 PA-W A', y TO: Pa ks Department SCHEDULED 'HEARING DATE : I116 1611 air Police Department A. R. C. MEETING DATE : PublicWorks Department Engineering Division Traffi Engineering I Building Division Utilities Engineering Fire Department Other) : I COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IIN WRITING FOR THE APPLICATION REVIEW CONFERENCE (ARC) TO BE HELD ON AT 9 :00 A.M. IN THE THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM. IF YOUR DEPARTMENT/DIVISION REPRESENTATIVE WILL NOT ABLE Tp ATTEND THE ARC, PLEASE PROVIDE THE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY D:00 P .M. ON 1 1 REVIEWING DEPA TMENT/DIVISION : X Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved I sSFC/1-?-v\-----04- 42/?, Signature of Director or Authorizec Repregen ative I Date k . REEVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION :POLICE To e Planning Dept. i From: Lt . D.R. Persson Re : Site Plan Approval for SA-008081 Commer&Eal Development for Dick Poitras 1 The only problem that I find with the proposal is the driveways are not wide enough. 1Due to the heavy volumes of traffic on N.E. 4th it is imperative that the traffic flow in and out of the development does not slow &/or stop traffic on NE.4th :xxmnilxz when cars enter into the site. Therefore i the development should be required to have forty(40) feet wide driveways not the proposed IR thirty(30) feet driveways . Planning 12-1979 RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application : SITE APPROVAL (SA-008-81) 12,000+ sq. ft . Shopping Center in three bui dings on 1. 14 acre site Location : outh side of N.E. 4th St . /approx. 600 feet west of Union Ave. N.E. Applicant.: WILLIAM TSAO COMPANY TO: Parks Department SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : 2/10 Police Department A, R, C, MEETING DATE : Public Works Department Engineering Division Traffic Engineering Building Division XX Utilities Engineering XX Fire Department Other) : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN ARC)FOR THE APPLICATION REVIEW CONFERENCE (ARC) TO BE HELD ON AT 9 :00 A.M. IN THE THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM, IF YOUR DEPARTMENT/DIVISION REPRESENTATIVE WILL NOT ABLE TO ATTEND THE ARC, PLEASE PROVIDE THE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P .M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : FIRE DEPARTMENT A pp PProvedIApproved with Conditions Not Approved Site plan approval only. Pre-construction conference requ'red with Fire Marshal' s 0 fice. Edwa d Wooten 1/20/81 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DI VIS,ION : 11TH-fry 0607 Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved SKI)E(.T .F+Q-E- etili.T-"t 't 4041/4(46 -Lem rS, 01 /So: t-r SYS E/. E zE. oil/ /SQ r „5c1"6/L I (0:7471 /FEOPQT FT wA'r&2- Girl (Jan Li9TEC4 Ie2-S Ot/L-- 2/ 61 Signatur of Director it Authorized Representative Date Planni 12-19,] RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application : & TE APPfov44 ( oo8 ) /2, O O A siorrAbl G@ ' i*# :. iik 3, ®M tli 'acute Location : c. Bice of P. E. li w ;. yI fe ertA0044VOMI. 6V0° Oi0 i• ue.alog A?p l i cant : Writ.LI AM A-0 c ei PM 'y Ti : Parks Depart ent SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : Fra IC i Police Department A. R. C. MEETING DATE : Public Works Department Engineering Division Traffic Engineering Building Division Utilities Engineering Fire Department Other) : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING FOR THE APPLICATION REVIEW CONFERENCE (ARC) TO BE HELD ON AT 9:00 A.M. IN THE THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM. IF YOUR DEPARTMENT/DIVISION REPRESENTATIVE WILL NOT ABLE Tp ATTEND THE ARC, PLEASE PROVIDE THE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P .M. ON I . REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : 34-co Approved Approved with Conditions , Not Approved 2_ Si gnatu ,o Di rector or Au on zed Representative Dat i" i REVIEWING 'DEPA1TMENT/DIVISION : Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved Signature :of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIvIJION ' Traffic Engineering Division Approved X Approved with Conditions Not Approved See attachment . (See below) 1 /28/81 Signature of D' rector or Authorized Represent ive Date RE: Shopping Center Site Approval (SA-008-81) South Side of NE 4th St./Approx. 600 ft. west of Union Ave. NE Approved with Conditions 1 . Align easterly driveway entry to future driveway entry on the north side of NE 4th Street which is to be an entry to a future apartment complex. 2. Developer agrees to participate in the future LID which involves 5 foot widening of NE 4th Street to accommodate a center lane left turn movement. 3. The developer is to be advised that the left turn movement from NE 4th Street may be restricted to centerline ' C' curbing until future center- lane left turn facilities are installed. id Gary A. Norris, P.E. Traffi Engineer I CEM:ad OF . R 40 fish-o THE CITY OF RENTON Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE.SO. RENTON,WASH.98055 0 BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR 0 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1.,0 Cr 235- 2550 o Q TEO SEP'1° January 23, 1981 Wm. S. ..Tsao and Company, P.S. (Agent) 2367 Eastlake Avenue East Seattle, W shington 98102 Re: Application for site approval for development of a small shopping center to be situated on three lots, file no. _ SA-00: -81 ; property located on the south side of N.E. 4th Street approximately 600 feet west of Union Avenue N.E. Gentlemen: The Renton Planning Department formally accepted the above mentioned pplicatior on January 15, 1981 . A public hearing before' the City of Renton Hearing Examiner has been set for February 1 , 1981 at 9 :00 a.m. Representatives of th.e' applicant are asked to be present. All interested persons are invited to attend the hearing. If you hav any further questions, please call the Renton ' Planning D partment, 235-2550. Very truly yours , Ifore9 LA Roger ;J. B ay locV , Associate planner RJB:yb Public Notice Public Notice NOTICE OF for the following project: ENVIRONMENTAL 1. NORTHWEST COM- DETERMINATION MERCIAL REAL ESTATE ENVIRONMENTAL COMPANY(AUSTIN COM REVIEW COMMITTEE PANY(ECF-602-80) RENTON,WASHINGTON Application for site ap-The Environmental Re prove'for four two-story of- view C;ommlttee (ERC) hat lice building complexes,fileissuedaflltuideclarationoSA-092-80;property located non-significance for the fol• on the southwest corner of lowing projects: S.W. Lind Ave. and S.W. 1.MT.OLIVEr CEMETERY 16th St. CO.(ECF587-80) Subject to the followingApplicationforspecieconditionsforproposedde- permit to fill and grade 11• daraiion of ncn-signlfi- acre expansion area, file canoe: SP-047430;properly locates a)TPaflc impacts at S.W. north and east of existing Mt 16th St.and Lind Ave.S.W. Olivet Cemetery, east a signal. N.E. 3rd St.in the vicinity a b) Traffic capacity Im-100 Blaine Ave. N.E. provements on S.W. Grady2. PACIFIC NORTHWEST Way and Lind Ave. S.W. BELL(CCF-630-80) c)Pedestrian access from Application for Shoreline S.W. Grady Way and Lind Management Substantia Ave.S.W. Development Permit, file d) Contribution to 1-405 SM-86-80, to install 18 inch bridge improvement. steel OD casing pipe within o)Appropriate open drain- the Bronson Way Bridge, age and wetland preserve- property located on the tion. Cedar River immediately f) Perimeter off-site im- west of City of Renton provements. Municipal Building. g)Plans to mitigate recre- 3. RENTON VILLAGE atibnal impacts. VETERINARY SUPPLY Further information re- COMPANY(ECF-646-80) parting this action is avail- Application for rezone able in the Planning Depart-from GS-1 and R-4 to B-1 to ment, Municipal Building, permit parking for commer- Renton, Washington, 235- clal uses,file R-137-80;pro- 2550. Any appeal of ERC party located on east side of action must be filed with the Talbot Road South,south of Hearing Examiner by Feb-FAI-405 and north of Puget ruary 8, 1981. Drive South. Published in the Daily Re-4. DURWOQD BLOOD cord Chronicle on JanuaryiCF-001-81) 25, 1981. R6346 Application for rezone from R-1 to R-2 to permit future construction of ten townhouse condominium units,file R-001-81;property located on the south side of N.E. 14th St. approximately 130 feet west of Edmonds Ave. N.E. 5.CITY OF RENTON(ECF- 001-81) Application for exemption from the Shoreline Manage- ment Substantial Develop- ment Permit, file SME-002- 82, to allow maintenance dredging of 1.2 miles of the Cedar River (75,000 cubic yards); property located from the mouth of the River to the Logan Street bridge. 6.WILLIAM TSAO AND CO. POITRAS)(ECF-005-81) Application for site ap- proval to allow construction of a 12,000 square foot shopping center including three stores,file SA-008-81; property located on the south side of N.E. 4th St. approximately 600 feet west of Union Avenue N.E. rho Environmental Re- view Committee (ERC) has further Issued a proposed declaration of significance Public Notice Sunset Blvd. S.W.and Bur- lington Northern Railroad Right-of-way. 6.CF/CHG ASSOCIATES Application for commer- cial and office use portion of preliminary planned unit de- velopment (P U.t).) (Phase II), flit; PPUD-133-80; pro- perty located on the west side of Hardie Ave. S.E., north of Burlington Northern NOTICE OF PUBLIC Railroad Right-oi-way, east HEARING of proposed Maple Ave. RENTON LAND USE S.W. HEARING EXAMINER Legal descriptions of flies RENTON,WASHINGTON noted above are on file in the A PUBLIC HEARING Renton Planning Depart- WILL BE HEW BY THE ment. RENTON LAND USE ALL INTERESTED PER- HEARING EXAMINER AT SONS YO SAID PETITIONS HIS REGULAR MEETING ARE INVITED TO BE PRE- ii1 THE COUNCIL CHAMB- SENT A'1 THE PUBLIC EPS, CITY HALL, RE- HEARING ON FEBRUARY NTON,WASHINGTON.ON 10 t981, AT 9:Ci1 P.M.TO FEB1 UARY 10, 1981, AT EXPRESS THEi t OPIN- 9:4J A.M. TO CONSIDER IONS. THE FOLLOWING PETI- DAVID R.CLEMENS THUNS: ACTING PLANNING 1.POITRAS PRELIMINARY DIRECTOR PLAT (REPLAT, DICK Published in the Daily Re- POITRAS) cord Chronicle on January Continued from January 25, 1981. R6346 21, 1981, Public Hearing. Application for preliminary plat approval of three-lot commercial subdivision (re- plat of existing Mastro Short Plat, Short Plat 35279),file PP-121-80;r. °party located on the south side of N.E.4th Street approximately e.00 feet west of Union Avenue N.E. 2. WILLIAM S. TSAO AND COMPANY(POITRAS) Application for site ap- proval for development of a email shopping center to be situated on three lots, file SA-008-81;property located on the south side of N.E.4th Street approximately 600 feet west of Union Ave.N.E. 3. LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY, INC. Application for special permit to allow grading of existing stock pile of fill material, file SP-134-80; property located east of Benson Road South, adja- cent to Eagle Ridge Drive. 4. FANCHER FLYWAYS, INC. Application for site ap- proval to allow construction of aircraft hangar building to consist of 13 units of the"I' type hangar,fie SA-136-80; property located on the east side of the West Perimeter Road scut' of the control tower at the Renton Mucicip- al Airport. 5. CF/CHG ASSOCIATES Application for residential use portion of preliminary planned unit development P.U.D.)ile P Phase PUD-132-80; property f lo- cated on the west side of Hardie Ave. S.W. between Public Notice Sunset Blvd. S.W. and Bur- lington Northern Railroad Right-of-way. 6.CF/CHG ASSOCIATES Application for commer- cial and office use portion of preliminary planned unit de- velopment (P.U.D.) (Phase II), file PPUD-133-80; pro- perty located on the west side of Hardie Ave. S.E., north of Burlington Northern NOTICE OF PUBLIC Railroad Right-of-way, east HEARING RENTON LAND USE of proposed Maple Ave. S W HEARING EXAMINER Legal descriptions of files RENTON,WASHINGTON noted above are on file in the A PUBLIC HEARING Renton Planning Depart- WILL BE HELD BY THE ment. RENTON LAND USE ALL INTERESTED PER- HEARING EXAMINER AT SONS TO SAID PETITIONS HIS REGULAR MEETING ARE INVITE)TO BE PRE- IN THE COUNCIL CHAMB- SENT AT THE PUBLIC ERS, CITY HALL, RE- HEARING ON FEBRUARY NTON,WASHINGTO1i,ON 10, 1981, AT 9:00 A.M.TO FEBRUARY 10, 1181, AT EXPRESS THEIR OPIN- 9:00 A.M. TO CONSIDER IONS. THE FOLLOWING PETI- DAVID R.CLEMENS TIONS: ACTING PLANNING 1.POITRAS PRELIMINARY DIRECTOR PLAT (REPLAT, DICK Published in the Daily Re= - POITRAS) cord Chronicle on January Continued from January 25, 1981. R6346 21, 198 Public Hearing: Application for preliminary plat approval of three-lot commercial subdivision (re- ptat of existing Mastro Short Plat,Short Plat 352-79),file PP-121-80;property located on the south side of N.E.4th Street approximately 600 feet west of Union Avenue N.E. 2. WILLIAM S.TSAO AND COMPANY(POITRAS) Application for site ap- proval for development of a small shopping center to be situated on three lots, file SA-006-81;property located on the south side of N.E.4th Street approximately 600 feet west of Union Ave.N.E. 3. LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY, INC. Application for special permit to allow grading of existing stock pile of fill material, file SP-134-80; property located east of Benson Road South, adja- cent to Eagle Ridge Drive. 4. FANCHER FLYWAYS, INC. Application for site ap- proval to allow construction of aircraft hangar building to consist of 13 units of the"I' type hangar,fie SA-136-80; property located on the east side of the West Perimeter Road south of the control tower at the Renton Mucicip- al Airport. 5. CF/CHG ASSOCIATES Application for residential use portion of preliminary planned unit development P.U.D.) (Phase I), file PPUD-132-80; property 10- sated on the west side of Hardie Ave. S.W. between O . L}`,,c, c'''}-' ' r blic Na 'tic ' ' Public Notice r/ 1'' ' `" NOTICE OF for the followingproject: rrJ` ENVIRONMENTAL 1. NORTHWESTI COM- Affrdavot of P(, blicatioRMINATION MEFICIAL REAL ESTATE v •• ENVIRONMENTALAL ' COMPANY AUUSTINCOM- REVIEW COMMITTEE PANY(ECF-602-80) RENTON,WASHINGTON Application for site ap- STATE OF WASHINGTON The Environmental Re proval for four two-story of- .' COUNTY OF KING ss. r view Committee (ERC) hat fire building complexes,file issued a final declaration o SA-092-80;property located non-significance for the fol• on the southwest corner of lowing projects: S.W. Und Ave. and S.W. 1.MT.OLIVET CEMETERY 16th St. 2'Michele-Roe being first duly sworn on CO.(ECF-567-80) Subject to the following Application for specie conditions for proposed de- permit to fill and grade 11. daratlon of non-signifi- oath,deposes and says thae)..G...is the —Chief-Clerk of acre expansion area, file canoe: THE DAILY RECORD CHRONICLE,a newspaper published six(5)times a SP-047-80;property locate( a)Traffic Impacts at S.W. week.That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and has been north and mefor a:isting Mt gn St. and Lind Ave.S.W. for more than six months prior to the date of publication referred to, Olivet Cemetery, east o' signal. printed and published in the English language continually as a newspaper N.E.3rd St.in the vicinity o' b) Traffic capacity im- published four(4)times a week in Kent,King County,Washington,and it is 100 Blaine Ave.N.E. provements on S.W. Grady now and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained at the 2. PACIFIC NORTHWEST Way and Lind Ave.S.W. aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper.That the Daily Record BELL(ECF-630-80) c)Pedestrian access from' Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Application for Shoreline S.W. Grady Way and LindCourtoftheCountyinwhichitispublished,to-wit,King County, Ma agement Substanta' Ave.S.W. Development Permit,.file d) Contribution to 1-405, g NoticeC® 88-80,to install 18 inch bridge improvement. Washington.That the annexed is a steel OD casing pipe within e)Appropriate open drain RE3' 8 the Bronson Way Bridge; age and wetland preserve-i property located on the tion. Cedar River immediately f) Perimeter off-site im- west of •City of Renton provements. as it was published in regular issues(and Municipal Building. g)Plans to mitigate wore- not in supplement form of said newspaper) once each issue for aperiod V3. RENTONRVILLAGEUPPL atlFurhal r informationVETERINARYSUPPLYFurtherinformation re- COMPANY(ECF-646-80) (purling this action is avail- ' Application for rezone able In the Planning Depart- of consecutive issues,commencing on the from GS-1 and R-4 to B-1 to ment, Municipal Building, pemtlt dal uses,file parking for commer- Renton, Washington, appeal ERC 2 day of Jnu . l 19 .8l.,and ending the perty located on of action met e filed Talbot Road South,south of Hearing Examiner by Feb-' FAl-405 and north of Puget rusty 8, 1981. Drive South. ublished in the Daily Re-day of 19 both dates • 4. DURWOOD BLOOD cord Chronic's on Januaryinclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its sub- ECF-001-81) 25, 1981. Re348 scribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee Application for rezone — from R-1 to R-2 to permit t}.c+ 95 future construction of ter,charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of $ /• which townhouse condominiumhasbeenpaidinfullattherateofperfolioofonehundredwordsfortheunits,file R-001-81;propertyfirstinsertionandperfolioofonehundredwordsforeachsubsequentlocatedonthesouthsideofinsertion. N.E. 14th St approximately 130 feet west of Edmonds 66, , C,.t,./.... L. € Ave.N.E. 5.CITY OF REENTON(EECF,-ao Chief Clerk f-s1) 7,40o for exemption from the Shoreline Manage- 28 ment Substantial Develop-Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of mint Permit,file SME-002- 82, to allow maintenance Jtanuar 19 81 dredging of 1.2 miles of thu Cedar River (75,000 cubic , from the property located2,,ji.Z----e<ci_46/21 the mouth of the River to , ..; , Str .Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, • s residing at K nt King County. ALIijMl p+a t o oodon Passed by the Legislature,1955,known as Senate Bill 281,effective June Of a 12,000 square foot 9th, 1955. shopping center Including thr'e e®torts,file SA-008-81; I Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures, proper* located on theadoptedbythenewspapersoftheState. south side of N.E. 4th St. approximataty S00 feet west' of Union Avenue N.E. The Environmental Re- view Committee(ERC)has ' fur 6 p emit of significanceY.P.C.Form No.87 Rev.7-79 wf10a1 MVO.S.W.and Bur- Affidavit of Publication linRight-of-wgoay. Railroad 6. CF/CHG ASSOCIATES Application for commer- STATE OF WASHINGTON and office use portion of COUNTY OF KING ss. preliminary planned unit do- v nt (P.U.D.) (Phase II)),. filefile PPUD-133-80; pro- perty located on the west side of Hardie Ave. S.E., Michele Roe being first duly sworn on 1.OTiCE OF PUBLIC north of Burlington Northern HEARING Railroad Right-of-way, east RENTON LAND USE of proposed Maple Ave. oath,deposes and says that She is the Chief Clerk of HEARING EXAM?NER S.W. Legal descriptions of files THE DAILY RECORD CHRONICLE,a newspaper published six(6)times a RENTON,WASHINGTON noted above are on file in theweek.That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and has been A PUBLIC HEARING Renton Planning Depart-for more than six months prior to the date of publication referred to, WILL BE HELD BY THE ment. printed and published in the English language continually as a newspaper R EN TON LAND USE ALL INTERESTED PER-published four(4)times a week in Kent,King County,Washington,and it is HEARING EXAMINER AT SONS TO SAID PETITIONSnowandduringallofsaidtimewasprintedinanofficemaintainedattheHISREGULARMEETINGAREINVITEDTOSEPRE-aforesaid place of publication cf said newspaper.That the Daily Record IN THE COUNCIL CHAMB- SENT AT THE PUBLICChroniclehasbeenapprovedasalegalnewspaperbyorderoftheSuperiorERS, CITY HALL, RE- SENT AT THE PUBLIC Court of the County in which it is published,to-wit,King County, NTON,WASHINGTON,ON HEARING ON FEBRUARY FEBRUARY 10, 1981, AT 10, 1981,AT 9:00 A.M.TO 9:00 A.M. TO CONSIDER EXPRESS THEIR OPIN- Washington.That the annexed is a Notio.e....Q . e.R tiX)8 THE FOLLOWING PETI- IONS. TIONS: DAVID R. CLEMENS R6 3h.6 1.POITRAS PRELIMINARY ACTING PLANNING PLAT (REPEAT, DICK. DIRECTOR POITRAS) Published in the Daily Re- Continued from January cord Clrot>ide on January not in supplement form of said newspaper) once each as it was published in r i iue for a period ular issues(and 21 1981, Public-Hearing: 25, 1981. R6346 Application for preliminary plat approval of three-lot commercial subdivision(re- of 1 consecutive issues,commencing on the plat of existing Mastro Short Plat,Short Plat 352-79) file 25 day of January 81 PP-121-80;property located 19 and ending the i on the south Cde of N.E.4th Street approximately 600 feet west of Union Avenue N.E. day of 19 both dates 2. WILLIAM@,.1SAO.ANDinclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its sub- scribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee prowl RN development of a charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of 62 which small sing 0en to be has been paid in full at the rate of per folio of one hundred words for the situated on three lots, file first insertion and per folio of one hundred words for each subsequent cif+ Located insertion. on the south side of N.E.4th Street approximately 600 feet west of Union Ave.N.E. L 'Lr' L f„ (.:% 3. LINCOLNN PROPERTY COMPANY, Chief Clerk Application for special permit to allow grading of existing stook pile of fill Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of material, fib SP-134-80; propertylocated east of Benson Road South, adja- cent to EagleDrive.EiJ'3t 19.... .J. 4. FANCHE Ridge FLYWAYS, gr.....zr. INC. Application for site ap- Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, Mval to allow construction residing at Kent King County. of aircraft hangar building to AL1DllY'Tl consist of 13 units of the"I" type hangar,fie SA-136-80; property located on the east Passed by the Legislature,1955,known as Senate Bill 281,effective June side of the West Perimeter 9th, 1955. Road south of the control tower et the Renton Muciclp-Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures, al airport, adopted by the newspapers of the State. 5.C1=/CHO ASSOCIATES Application for residential use portion of preliminary planned unit development P.U.O.) (Phase I), tile PPUD-132-8Ct property lo- cated an ihr lost aide of V.P.C.Form No.87 Rev.7-79 Hardie Ave. S.W. between 1µ`Y i$ 0,7 ', " ,...? u tin' " x.. M1.".1€a's3 1:4 is `.z 'a , r a k SF A'il s•a I T tLJQ f ' S' t y' + '. s e ' Si n'a, s i' ' at r $ t i • , r it 1"J.' : tom• a.. t:. . k C iM s yn ` Tcr .kl" q GEN. z..,t_. L IATION: 4'' !', 1.• ADDRESS: PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF N.E. 4TH STREET APPROXIMATELY 600 FEET OF U ION AVENU N.E. LEGAL DESC 1P11ON: LEGAL DESCRIP ION ON FI E IN THE RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1 S POSTED TO NOTIFY PR 0 . RTY 0i NEB„*S OF Hy J r T Yy y A lb. kj.Y. ' •• ii 4 t r r-,? z f,;.. Hsu: T • E HELD IN CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, MUNICIP A.L ,UIL, ING N BEGINNING AT q .nn A0 . P.M. CO CERclisL ITEM ri.' I I' D SPECIAL :11' E .,... : . i SITE PPROVAL OR J' siTE rP ..*. } j r` SMALLASHOPPINGF D EVELOPMENT CENTER, LNO. A SA-008-81 1 A AY all 4„ • ., 84 j eA. k+ X 4.1Tor— v. tA, 'vc ? 7 ,.n% c tti ,; :3 4 iga FINAL DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCEAUm F RTHER INFORMATION C . LL 235 2 . 8 IS NOT, •E . .*T TO i 80 V ' WITHOUT . i.•.. .R AUTI4ORIZA 0 N 1 1. t '' 74;*- .4N721,,,'.,, , A 4„4 ,ti, .....,: -4,..' ,4„. ., ; ,;!-:•_,.., A., .:', 7.,,. •L',., il:.,i, 4....t.to..• A.,. 4.,_1 t. 4•11: '., k,.: ;'''Ad." ,....''',. 1,'-'; 701,1 ',/,- ze I, 7.k r,,,,,' *,`7:14,-0,!-- %., , •,', i , , P• ,4. ..,4 ."?.: „,, 5, , -, 71,„,.;„ ., L' If, ,,: . ,tf,:- ,t, fc„'',,,.?„ ,,,7- :.,-.,-7 '; ^.,,,,4, ,,. ''',i.,,,?;•„`', Ri..- ,::,,,,,,,;, ?r, ...:;.:,?: ,,..,,,i-‘,;::',,,a.: 4. 4.4.,;,, ::.;:i ,..,,,, :, 1,...,, ,,,,,, ,,,, ::.,, t,.....i* , t...-,>. ,, ..,, 1_,.i-,,t,l A. ,' -9' ''..? o,,,„,,,- > ',%, ,, -;,"'''' 1." ''..A` : ''' - ... 7., *. '..''"?''', 11 *..,'• '',:.."`''.. .•!S•'2.-...7. , .7."'c r.,,it ''', k ,''').': •i'. P,;:•=i '‘':. i-,,S3 ;:- , ,/:', ,-t,, ,,,,.'"' '-','" f. -°‘' -' ,;'', ,,,,,, 7: 7i.... ' '74,,,P, '';.1' 0.1`" ' ';' ' "' '1t' '1'," ''. IP 4 ... 'IC 4 v, c it >. I.'- ' ''';';:ri, '''.4t" ,.,,,; i.A.:1— '-. 1 GENERAL ' LOcATO : A , OR ADDRESS: 11110PERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF N.E. 4TH STREET APPROXIMATELY 600 FEET OF U1iION AVENUE N.E. LEGAL DESC IPTION® LEGAL DESCRIPTION ON FILE IN THE RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1 S POSTE* TO NOTIFY PROPERTY OWNERS OF 0, 1,.-",1':7., ""': :',' ','''';''`.7. • i'A :'''''';e-tt 1...,..;„ . 'A .."•.:'" . l•d'.... •.;,, , r,.. i 7.'7 ,,,, 1 j1V•. 4. lir $. Pt ''7 1111V; P7 '... 'A.,,,,., ,rt, ,,„ 4.•''' • - 1, - .""'. Vi '''''' 6 .k:rl''' .';;;Av. .t g l'. r`" ' ,'1') ;-', A,', .P'S-74::' 7: •. :.:ffiV 1' fib eV .'• r. o ' 7'.." 7' 1.7 'Cr'.,. - • ..M i TO BE HELD IN CITY 'OUNCIL CHAMBE'S, MUNICIPAL BUILDING 0 - •,. , BEGINNING AT q -no • A.hi* 11111111•Mo.eitinMis. P.M. ITEM 0 1 4 14 '',.;, .4. -''' 7 SP e C 1#4:3, 3ielm' t .... . , SITE APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A i„ ,-- 4,..LE SMALL SHOPPING CENTER, FILE NO. SA-008-81 I71 1. . ,. 4 4- %1L't77 R F FURTHER INFORMATI-v- CALL 235 2550 THIS NOTICE NOT TO BE REMDVA* WITHOUT. PROPER AUTHORIZATI.0 N FINAL DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Application No (s) : SA-008-81 Environmental Checklist No: ECF-005-81 Description of Proposal: Construction of a 12 ,000 square foot shopping center including three stores . Proponent : William Tsao and Company (Poitras) Location of Proposal: South side of N.E. 4th Street approximately 600 ' west of Union Avenue N.E. Lead Agency: Planning Department This proposal was reviewed by the ERC on January 21 , 1981 , following a presentation by Roger J. Blaylock of the Planning Department. Incorporated by reference in the record of the proceedings of the ERC on application ECF-005-81 are the following: 1 ) Environmental Checklist Review Sheet, prepared by: Roger J. Blaylock, Associate Planner DATED: January 21 , 1981 2) Applications : SA-008-81 Acting as the Responsible Official, the ERC has determined this development does not have significant adverse impact on the environment. An EIS is not required under RCW 43. 21C. 030 (2) (c) . This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a complete environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. Reasons for declaration of environmental non-significance : 1 . Proposal complies with the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning designations of Commercial. 2 . Access to N.E. 4th Street is limited to two (2) points as shown in site plan dated January 13, 1981 . Signatures : j(; Ron Nelson, Building Director vid R. 1 mens , Acting Planning Director j R 'chard C. Houghton Acting Public Works Direct DATE OF PUBLICATION: January 25 , 1981 EXPIRATION OF APPEAL PERIOD: February 8 , 1981 I NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, RENTON, WASHING'IUN, ON FEBRUARY 10, 1981 , AT 9:00 A.M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS: 1 . POITRAS PRELIMINARY PLAT (REPLAT, DICK POITRAS) Continued from January 21 , 1981 , Public Hearing: Application for preliminary plat approval of three-lot commercial subdivision replat of existing Mastro Short Plat, Short Plat 352-79) , file PP-121-80; property located on the south side of N.E. 4th Street approximately 600 feet west of Union Avenue N.E. 2. WILLIAM S. TSAO AND COMPANY (POITRAS) Application for site approval for development of a small shopping center to be situated on throe lots, file SA-008-81 ; property located on the south side of N.E. 4th Street approximately 600 feet west of Union Ave. N.E. 3, LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY, INC. Application for special permit to allow grading of existing stock pile of fill material, file SP-134-80; property located east of Benson Road South, adjacent to Eagle Ridge Drive. 4. FANCHER FLYWAYS, INC. Application for site approval to allow construction of aircraft hangar building to consist of 13 units of the "I" type hangar, file SA-136-80; property located on the east side of the West Perimeter Road south of the control tower at the Renton Municipal Airport. 5. CF/CHG ASSOCIATES Application for residential use portion of preliminary planned unit development (P.U.D.) (Phase I) , file PPUD-132-80; property located on the west side of Hardie Ave. S.W. between Sunset Blvd. S.W. and Burlington Northern Railroad Right-of-way. 6. CF/CHG ASSOCIATES Application for commercial and office use portion of preliminary planned unit development (P.U.D.) (Phase II) ; file PPUD-133-80; property located on the west side of Hardie Ave. S.W. , north of Burlington Northern Railroad Right-of-way, east of proposed Maple Ave. S.W. Legal descriptions of files noted above are on file in the Renton Planning Department. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON FEBRUARY 10, 1981 , AT 9:00 A.M. TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS. PUBLISHED: January 25, 1981 DAVID R. CLEMENS ACTING PLANNING DIRECTOR CERTIFICATION I, STEVE MUNSON, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENT WERE POSTED BY ME IN THREE CONSPICUOUS PLACES ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW. A'1'1'EST: Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public, in and for the State of Washington residing in King County, on the 23rd day of January, 1981 . SIGNED- Pr NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has issued a final declaration of non-significance for the following projects : 1 . MT. OLIVET CEMETERY CO. (ECF-567-80) Application for special permit to fill and grade 11 -acre expansion area , file SP-047-80; property located north and east of existing Mt. Olivet Cemetery, east of N.E. 3rd St . in the vicinity of 100 Blaine Ave. N.E. 2 . PACIFIC NORTHWEST BELL (ECF-630-80) Application for Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit , file SM-86-80 , to install 18 inch steel OD casing pipe within the Bronson Way Bridge; property located on the Cedar River immediately west of City of Renton Municipal Building. 3 . RENTON VILLAGE VETERINARY SUPPLY COMPANY (ECF-646-80) Application for rezone from GS-1 and R-4 to B-1 to permit parking for commercial uses , file R-137-80 ; property located on east side of Talbot Road South , south of FAI-405 and north of Puget Drive South. 4 . DURWOOD BLOOD (ECF-001 -81 ) Application for rezone from R-1 to R-2 to permit future construction of ten townhouse condominium units , file R-001 -81 ; property located on the south side of N.E. 14th St. approximately 130 feet west of Edmonds Ave. N.E. 5. CITY OF RENTON (ECF-002-81 ) Application for exemption from the Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit, file SME-002-81 , to allow maintenance dredging of 1 . 2 miles of the Cedar River (75 , 000 cubic yards) ; property located from the mouth of the River to the Logan Street bridge. 6 . WILLIAM TSAO AND CO. (POITRAS) (ECF-005-81 ) Application for site approval to allow construction of a 12 , 000 square foot shopping center including three stores , file SA-008-81 ; property located on the south side of N.E. 4th St. approximately 600 feet west of Union Avenue N.E. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has further issued a proposed declaration of significance for the following project : 1 . NORTHWEST COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE COMPANY (AUSTIN COMPANY (ECF-602-80) Application for site approval for four two-story office building complexes , file SA-092-80 ; property located on the southwest corner of S.W. Lind Ave. and S.W. 16th St. Subject to the following conditions for proposed declaration of non-significance : a) Traffic impacts at S.W. 16th St. and Lind Ave. S.W. signal. b) Traffic capacity improvements on S.W. Grady Way and Lind Ave. S.W. c) Pedestrian access from S.W. Grady Way and Lind Ave. S.W. 2 - d) Contribution to I-405 bridge improvement. e) Appropriate open drainage and wetland preservation. I f) Perimeter off-site improvements. g) Plans to mitigate recreational impacts. Further i formation regarding this action is available in the Planning Department, Municipal Building, Renton, Washington, 235-2550. Any appeal of ERC action must be filed with the Hearing Examiner by February 8 , 1981 . Published: January 25 , 1981 li 1 li k. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE JANUARY 21, 1981 PAGE TWO SP-451-79 BURLINGTON NORTHERN, INC. ECF-523-70 Review of Declaration of Significance regarding application for special permit to fill approximately 24. 35 acres; situated between Lind Avenue S.W. and Springbrook Creek and between S.W. 27th and S.W. 30th Streets SM-86-80 PACIFIC NORTHWEST BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY ECF-630-80 Application for Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit to allow installation of steel 18" OD casing pipe within the Bronson Way Bridge that crosses the Cedar River west of City Hall SA-008-81 WM. S. TSAO & CO. (POITRAS) ECF-005-81 Application for site approval for develop- ment of small shopping center to be situ- ated on three lots; property located on the south side of N.E. 4th Street approxi- mately 600 feet, west of Union Avenue N.E. 1 CITY OF RENTON RE NTOf APPLICATION V%,, s,\, ,.) SITE APPROVAL U 1:3 0z FOR OFFICE USE ONLY i 0 e; File No. SA- ;r9O;P-,/ Filing Date '46 o ,'' Application Fee $ Receipt No. __,_NI_!G C) -"- Environmental Review Fee $ , APPLICANT TO CO vIPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 6 : Phone (206) 324-87801. Name Wm. S. Tsao & Co. , P.S. (Agent) Address 367 Eastlake Avenue E. Seattle, WA 98102 2 .1, Property location South' side of N.E. 4th Street approximately 600 feet West of Union Avenue N.E. 3.' Legal description (attach additional sheet if necessary) LOT 2, RENTON, WASHINGTON, SHORT PLAT NO. 352-79, RECORDING, NO. 7908089005 IN THE NE a OF THE NE % OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 23 N, RANGE 5 E, W.M. , IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. 4., Number of acres or square feet 1 . 14 acres Present zoning B-1 S . What do yot: propose -do develop on this property? The proposal is a commercial subdivision, consisting' of 3 lots. The type of services which will be availablle to the public will be a Seven-Eleven Store, Tire Shop and several other retail/service orientated businesses. : 6 . The following information shall be submitted with this application A. Site and access 41an (include setbacks , Scale existing structures , easements , and other factor limiting development) 1" = 10 ' or 20 ' B. Parkin , landscaping and screening plan 1" = 10 ' C. Vicini y map (include land use and zoning on adj cent parcels) 1" = 200 ' to 800 ' D. Buildi g height ind area (existing and proposed) 7. LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER ACTION : D te Approved D ,te Denied D te Appealed Appeal Action Remarks Planning Dept. Rev, 1-77 If AFFIDAVIT I , Richard W. Poitras being duly sworn, declare that I am the owner of the property involved in this application and that t} e foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to . the best Of my knowledge and belief. Subscribed and sworn before me this 24th day of November 19 80 Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Seattle Name of Notlary Publi ) Helene Schlossberg Signature o Owner Seattle I 3‘ 3 --/c'/ ,r7Ave, Se Address) Address) g L LE-vae:-1---A-5 - City) State) I fM .S. -2S-2 U rvl, e-AS/-r/20 Telephone) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) CERTIFICATION This is to c rtify that t rwig application has been inspected by me and has been found to be r r•u, 4C©• •,complete in every particular and to conform to the rules an q(;' . "t}ons o\f\ the Renton Planning Department governing thia filing o 94, .pplicatior.g4s\ C) ta 1b 1''I-- z Date Received SPN , ,.Z.9 It' By: 4/IV I N G 9F Renton Planning Dept . 2-73 TY OF RENTON) WASH I NGTON ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM t•,' l FOR OFFICE USE ONLY • Application No. i% —00,—cP/ c4piilfP1l`v..`, , C5 ;{ VI; Environmental Environmental Checklist No. -ea/' -C G?.y= / PROPOSED., date:FINAL, date: i!' EjDeclaration o 'Significance Declaration of Significance QDeclaration of Non-Significance 0 Declaration of Non-Significance COMMENTS: y,: 1 Introduction Th State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, Chapter 43.21C, RCW, requires all state and loeal' governmental agencies .to consider environmental values both for their own actions and then licensing private proposals . The Act also requires that an EIS be prepared for all' major actions significantly affecting the quality of the environment.l. The purpose of tnis 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 1,1 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 alll 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 b.e 'caused by your proposal when it is completed, even though com letion may not occur until sometime in the future. This will allow ali of the agencies which will be involved to complete their environmental review now, with- out duplicating paperwork in the future. I NOTE: This is a standard form being used 'by all state and local agencies in th'e State of Washington f r 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.I 7, ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1° I . BACKGROUND 1{; 1. Name! of Proponent William S. Tsao & Co. , P.S. 2. Addy., ss and phone number of Proponent: I, 23E 7 Eastlake Avenue East Settle, Washington 98102 206) 324-8780 3. Date, Checklist suniAtted ' January 15, 1981 4. Agency requiring Checklist City of Renton, Planning 5. Name of proposal ,,' if applicable: Po;itras' Plat 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) : The proposal is a commercial subdivision, consisting of 3 lots for a. total acr-eage of 1 . 14. Each lot' contains approximately 16,000 sq. ft. Lots 1 , 2 .nd 3 will each contain one independent concrete masonry structure with wallsThe exterior height of the buildings is 1 8 feet ' 1 1 moximum. Gross area for the respective lots is 2,500 sq.ft.,, 5,700 sq.ft. and 3,800' sq.ft. The type of services which "will be available to the public ar a Seven-Eleven Store, a Tire Shop and several other service/retail orientated businesses. Parking will be provided one stall,per 200 sq;'.ft. of Toss, area. i" 2-71' 7. Location of proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal , as well as the extent of the, land area affected by any environmental impacts , including any other- information needed to give 4n accurate understanding of the environ- mental setting of the proposal ) : The north property line is abutting the southerly R/W line of N.E. 4th Street in the, City of Renton:- The, east property line is approximately Ik 650 west of the intersection of N.E. 4th Street & Union Avenue N.E. 4th Avenue N.E. is currently heavily traveled by motor vehicles. 8. Estimated date for completion of the proposal : Fall of 1981 9. List of. all permits , licenses or government approvals required for the proposal federal , state ;and local --including rezones) : Approved Formal Subdivision Utility Permit 10. Do you have any plans for future additlions , exp.ansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes , explain: NO JJ I 11: Do you 'know of any plans by others whch may affect the property covered by your proposal? 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 future date, describe the nature of such application form: See attached application for preliminary subdivision. 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 X • substructures? YES MA B NO b) Disruptions, displacements , compaction or over- covering o;f the soil? X YES MAYBE NO c) Change in topography or ground surface relief Xfeatures? ES MAYBE NO d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? X YES MAYBE NO e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils , either on or off the site? . X , YES MAYBE NO f) Changes in deposition or erosion) of beach sands , or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a rive',r or, stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: (B) Minor excavation may be required if existing utilities are required to be extended to tha subdivision and for building foundations. E) During the construction of utilities, if any, and later the buildings and service connections the exposed soils would be susceptible to erosion. i 3- 2) Air. Will the proposal result in: a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X YES MAYBE NO:' b) 1Lhe creation of objectionable odors? X YES MAYBE NO c) 11teration- of,air `'movement, moisture or temperature, Qr any change in climate , either locally or egionally? X' YES MAYBE NO Ex p la ati on: (A & 'B) Machinery that is required for any excavation if necessary will deteriorate the surrounding air quality. This deterinrat-ion wilt be negligible. 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 body? YES MAYBE NO i 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 NO' 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 1eachate, 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 for public water supplies? X YES MAYBE NO Ex 1 nation: (B & G) Driveways, parking lots and buildings will virtually cov r the entire site,, thereby decreasing the amount- of wat-Pr infiltrating to the aquifer. 4) Flora. Wi11 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)? X YES MAYBE NO 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 X species? YES MAYBE NO d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: The existing vegetation is limited to pasture grass and sevral small alder trees. This vegetation will be cleared. I andscaiiing may be required for this subdivision. 3y4- 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 , X insects or ,microfauna)? YES 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 X of fauna? YES MAYBE NO d) Deterioration to existing fish o'er wildlife habitat? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 6) Noise. Will the proposal increase exlisting noise levels? X • YES MAYBE NO Explanation:The commercial businesses which are planned may attract additional trafficover and above what is currently existing. 7) Light and Glare. Will the proposal Produce new light or X glare? YES TOTE NO Explanation: Same as 6 8) Land Use. Will, the proposal result In the alteration of the X present or planned land use 'of an area?YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 1 9) Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a) Increase in the rate of use of Zany natural resources? . X YES MAYBE NO b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? - X YES MAYBE NO Explanation:The construction of the proposed improvements wi 1l raiisP a small depletion of natural resources and nonrenewable resources. 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 radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? X YES MAYBE NO • Explanation: 11) Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, or growth rate of he human population X of an area?YES MBE WO— Explanation: 1 5- 12) Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing , or create a demand for additional housing? YES MAYBE NO Exolanation: 13) Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in : a) ieneration of additional vehicular movement? X YES MAYBE NO . b) Effects on existing parking facilities , or demand for new parking. YES MAYBE NO c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? X YES 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 YES MAYBE NO Ex laiation: (A & F) The proposed commercial businesses will create ad itional turning traffic onto 4th Avenue N.E. as there will be 2 new curb cuts, one each in lots 1 & 3, that are 30' wide. This may cause additional I traffic hazards to both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. This will be mitigated by a new center lane planned for 4th Avenue N.E. which will be used for right 14) Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or and left turning traffic. result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas : a) Fire protection? X YES MAYBE NO, b) Rolice protection? X YES MAYBE NO c) Schools? X YES MAYBE NO d) Parks or other recreational facilities? X YES MAYBE NO e) Maintenance of public facilities , including roads? X YES MAYBE N0. f) Other governmental services? X YES MAYbE NO Explanation': The planned businesses will require both police and fire protection services. Other services may be required depending on the types of businesses which have not been determined at this writing. 15) Energy. Will the proposal result in: a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?X YES MAYBE N0 b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy?X YES MAYBE NO Explanation:. Additional demand will be placed on both elect'ri'cal and gas energy for lighting and heating of the buildings. 16) Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systdms,, or alterations to the following utilities : a) Power or natural gas? YES MAYBE NO. b) Communications systems? X YES MAYBE NO c) Water? X YES MAYBE NO 6- d) Sewer or septic tanks?X YES MAYBE NO e) Storm water drainage? X YES MAYBE NO f) Solid waste and disposal?X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Service connections ill be required. Solid waste disposal will be required after the occupanTcy of the proposed commercial buildings. 17) Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 18) Aesthetics. Will th`e 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: There are those who feel buildings, in general, are aesthetically offensive. 19) Recreation: Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities?X YES MAYBE NO' Explanation: 20) Archeological/Historical . Will the proposal result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? YES MAYBE- 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 lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: signed) name printed) City of Renton Planning Department 5-76 FYtr 1 TY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM TO FOR OFFICE USE ONLY ' Application No. OI"- % i Environmental Che'6kl i st No. C/-; PROPOSED, date:FINAL , date: EiDeclaration of Significance Declaration of Significance ElDeclaration of Non-Significance El Declaration of Non-Significance COMMENTS: I Introduction The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, Chapter 43.21C, RCW, requires all 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 ekplanation would be helpful to government decision makers , include your explanation in tle 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 involveld 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 he impacts which will be caused by your proposal when it is completed, even though comqq'letion, 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 fdr 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. Namel of Proponent William S. Tsao & Co. , P.S. 2. Address and phone number of Proponent: 2367 Eastlake Avenue East Seattle, Washington 98102 06) 324-8780 3. Date Checklist submitted January 15, 1981 4. Agercy requiring Checklist City of Renton, Planning 5. Name of proposal , if applicable: Poitras' Plat 6. Natre 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) : The proposal is a commercial subdivision, consisting of 3 lots for a total areage of 1 . 14. Each lot contains approximately 16,000 sq.ft. Lots 1 , 21 and 3 will each contain one independent concrete masonry stttacture with v4alls of block construction. The exterior height of the buildings is i 18 feet maximum. Gross area for the respective lots is 2,500 sq.ft. . 5.700 sq.ft. and 3,800'sq.ft. The type of services which will be available to the public afire a Seven-Eleven Store, a Tire Shop and several other service/retail orientated businesses. Parking will be provided one stall per 200 s!q.ft. df gross area. 2- L , 7. Location of proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal , as well as the extent of the land area affect' d by any environmental impacts , including any other information needed to give In accurate understanding of the environ- mental setting of the proposal ) : The north property line is abutting the southerly R/W line of N.E. 4th Street in the City of Renton. The east property line is approximately Il 650' west of the intersection of N.E. 4th Street & Union Avenue N.E. 4th Avenue N.E. is-currently heavily traveled by motor vehicles. 8. Estimated date for completion of the propo'sal : Fall of 1981 9. List of all permits , licenses or government approvals required for the proposal federal , state' and local--including rezones) :Approved Formal Subdivision Utility Permit 10. Do you have any plans for future addi 1ions , expansion, or further activity related -to or connected with this proposal? If yes , explain : NO 11. Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by your proposal ? . 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 future date, describe the nature of such application form: See attached application for preliminary subdivision. II 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, comp ction or over- covering of the soil? X YES MAYBE NO c) Change in topography or ground surface relief Xfeatures? ES MAYBE NO d) The destruction, covering ormodlification of any unique geologic or physical features? X YES MAYBE ,NO e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils , X either on or off the site? YES MAYBE 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 R E NO Explanation: (B) Minor excavation may be required if existing utilities are required to be extended to the subdivision and for building foundations. E) During the construction of utilities, if any, and later the buildings and service connections the exposed soils would be susceptible to erosion. i 3- 2) Air. Will the proposal result in: a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X YES MAYBE ' NO!" b) he creation of objectionable odors? X YES MAYBE NO j c) alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any' change in ;climate,' either locally or regionally?X YES MAYBE NO Exp l a ati o'n: (A & B) Machinery that is required for any excavation if necessary will deteriorate the surrounding air quality. This deterioration wijll be negligible. 3) Water. Will the proposal result in: a) Water in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in ei,ther •marine or fresh waters?X 1 YES MAYBE NO. b) Changes in absorption rates , drainage patterns , or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? X YES MAYBE NS, 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 body?X; 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 NO f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? X YES MAYBE Np 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 i'n ground water quality, either through direct injection, or through the seepage of lea.chate, 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 for public water supplies? X YES MAYBE NO, Expl •nation{B & G) Driveways, parking lots and buildings will virtually' cover the entire site, thereby decreasing the amount of water infilhraririg to the aquifer. 4) Flor; . Will ' the proposal result in: a) Change. in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of flora (including trees, shrubs , grass , crops , X microflora and aquatic plants)? YES MAYBE NO b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or X endangered species of flora?YTS— MAYBE Np c) Introduction of new species of flora 'into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing X species? YES MAYBE NO d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? YES MAYBE N0 Ex.l anati on:The existing vegetation is limited to pasture grasp And s-1veral small alder trees. This vegetation will be cleared. Landsc"aping may be required for this subdivision. r 4 >>_ 4- 5) Fauna. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in the diversity of species , or numbers of any species of fauna (birds , landd animals including reptiles , fish and shellfish, benthic organisms , insects or. microfauna)? X YES NA-TEE NO b) Reduction of the numbers of any ' nique, rare or endangered, species of fauna? X YES MAYBE NO c) Introduction of new species of f una into an area , or result in a barrier to the migration or movement IX of fauna? YES MAYBE NO d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 6) Noise. Will the proposal increase a Risting noise levels? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: The commercial businesses which are planned may attract additional traffic over and above what is currently existing. 7) Light and Glare. Will the •proposal produce new light or glare?YES MAYBE , NO Explanation: ; Same as 6 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: a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? X YES MAYBE NO b) Depletion' of any nonrenewable natural resource? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation:The construction of the proposed improvements will, cause a small depletion of natural resources and nonrenewable resources. 10) ' Risk of Upset., Does the proposal inLolve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil , pesticides , chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: , I} j 11) Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? YES MAYBE NU Explanation: , i i j. ' 'a"' I 5- i,. 12) Housin . Will the proposal affect existing housing , or creat a demand for additional housing? X YES. MAYBE NO, Ex la ation: i 9 13) Trans ortation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in :. a) ..eneration of additional vehicular movement? X ' YES MAYBE NO;,, b) Effects on existing parking facilities , or demand for new parking? X YES MAYBE NO':: c) impact upon existing transportation systems?X;C YES MAYBE NO,, I' 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 NOI f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles , bicyclists or pedestrians? X L YES MAYBE NO: Explanation: (A & F) The proposed commercial businesses will create additional turning traffic onto 4th Avenue N.E. as there will be 2 new curb cuts, one each in lots 1 & 3, that are 30'' wide. Thy€s may cause additional traffic hazards to both vehicular and pedestrian traffkc. This will be mitigated by a new center lane planned for 4th Avenue N.E. , which will be used fpr right and left turning traffic. 14) Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or 1 resul'It in a need for new or 'altered governmental services in any of the following areas : a) Fire protection? X II YES MAYBE NNO b) -'olice protection? X H YES MAYBE NO'' c) Schools? X',, YES MAYBE NO;', d) Parks or other recreational facilities?XIII YES MAYBE NO . e) Maintenance of public facilities , including. roads? X, YES MAYBE NO, f) Other governmental, services? X YES MAYBE NO; Explanation: The planned businesses will requite both police and fire protection services. Other services may be required depending on the types of businesses which have not been determined,at this writing. 15) Energy. Will, the proposal result in: I, a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X!, YES MAYBE NO; b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? X YES MAYBE NO, Ex lanation: i' i 16) Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new j„ systems, or alterations to the following utilities : a) Power or natural gas? X C, YES MAYBE NO;i b) Communications systems? X YES MAYBE NO, c) Water? X YES MAYBE NO, 6- d) Sewer or septic tanks?X YES MAYBE NO e) Storm water drainage? X YES MAYBE NO f) Solid waste and disposal? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: ,Service connections 'will be re.uired. Solid waste dis.osal will be required after the occupancy of the proposed commercial buildings. 17) Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: I 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? YES MAYBE NO - Explanation: There are those who feel buildings, in general, are aesthectically offensive.•1. 19) Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities?X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 20) Archeological/Historical . Will the proposal result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure', object or building? ! X YES M YBE NO Explanation: f III. SIGNATURE I , the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above, information is true and' completel. It is understood that -the lead agency may withdraw any decla- ration of non-signiflicance 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: signed) name printed) City of Renton Planning Department 5-76 L.--- - 1: INDING i. F FILE 1 FILE TITLE c., ,•• 2- 2•2. .:, .„...„-- 2,............., t ,,. ,,,, .,-• t.r ' 141 t.". 2 r•e Ar,'. 1 i 1 i 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1