HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA77-036 J ' MAPS
I �
�
BEGINNING
OF FILE
FILE TITLE =pECIAL PERMIT SP - 03Co - 77
MEDICAI. - DENTRI. CLINIC SW 413 RQ d-
SPRInIGRR00K P0, S .
\ _
pF 4 R�,�
�i 0 THE CITY OF RENTON
. MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055
• CHARLES J. DELAURENTI, MAYOR • LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER
O Q` L. RICK BEELER . 235-2593
SEP1 .
Mr. W. R. Hanson RE: File No. SP-036-77
10335 Main Street
Bellevue, WA 98004
Dear Mr. Hanson:
This is to notify you that the above referenced request, which was
approved subject to conditions as noted on the Examiner's report of
May 3, 1977, has not been appealed within the time period set by
ordinance, and therefore, this application is considered final and
is being submitted to the. City Clerk effective this date for permanent
filing.
Sincerely,
-11641i:..11
L. Rick Beeler
Hearing Examiner
LRB:mp
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 4th day of May , 19 77 , affiant
deposited in the mails of the United States a sealed envelope
containing a decision or recommendation with postage prepaid,
addressed to the parties of record in the below-entitled
application or petition.
Subscribed and sworn this1k - day of ` 4
19 .11 .
rah If\ ` ' CL1-d
Notary Public in and for the State
of Washington, residing at Renton
Application, Petition or Case: Springbrook Associates SP-036-77
(The minutes contain a .dust the panties o4 necond)
May 3, 1977
OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER
CITY OF RENTON
•
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION,
APPLICANT: Springbrook Associates FILE NO. SP-036-77
•
LOCATION: Located on the southeast corner of Talbot Road
South and S.W. 43rd Street.
, SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicant requests special permit to construct
an additional medical/dental clinic to an
existing campus-type clinic development.
SUMMARY OF Planning Department: Recommend approval subject
RECOMMENDATION: to conditions.
Hearing Examiner: Recommend approval subject
to conditions.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department staff report was received
REPORT: by the Examiner on April 5 , 1977.
PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Planning Department report,
examining available information on file with the
application, and field checking the property and
surrounding area, the Examiner conducted a
public hearing on the subject as follows:
The hearing was opened on April 12 , 1977 , at 9:00 p.m. in the 4th
floor conference room of the Renton Municipal Building by L. Rick
Beeler, recently appointed Hearing Examiner, substituting for Jim
Magstadt, Hearing Examiner., Mr. Magstadt reported that the applicant
had concurred in the substitution.
It was reported that the Hearing Examiner and Mr. W. R. Hanson,
representing the applicant, had received and reviewed the Planning
Department report, and the report was entered into the record as
Exhibit #1.
Michael Smith, Planning Department, reviewed Exhibit #1, and entered
the following additional exhibits into the record:
Exhibit #2 : Master Plan, including
parking and landscaping.
Exhibit #3: Site Plan of Proposed Building
and Related Parking Areas.
Exhibit #4 : Architectural Elevation Plan.
In response to the Examiner' s inquiry, Mr. Smith reported that the
number of stalls in the parking plan had been counted, and that while
the minimum parking requirement for the development was 165 nine-foot
wide stalls, the applicant had provided 169 ten-foot wide stalls.
The Examiner asked if the revisions designated in red on the master
plan were made subsequent to submittal of the plan by the applicant.
Mr. Smith responded that the revisions had been subsequently made
to the general landscaping areas within the parking lot to ensure
visual buffering of the site,. He also reported that revisions had
been made to provide additional access at the south end of the proposed
building to provide suitable circulation and access to the future
expansion area to the east.
SP-036-77 Page Two
The Examiner asked Mr. Smith for 'additional comments or information.
Mr. Smith reported he had no further, information to present.
The Examiner asked Mr. Hanson if.• he concurred with the Planning
Department staff report with the' exception of Exhibit #2. Responding
was:
W. R. Hanson
10335 Main Street
Bellevue, WA 98004
Because of the provision for roadway access at the south end of the
property, Mr. Hanson proposed that the building be shifted 8 to 10
feet to the north to allow for sufficient landscaping in that area.
He emphasized that the parking requirement exceeded the minimum code
requirement in order to providesadequate stalls for patrons. In
response to the Examiner' s inquiry regarding revisions designated in
red on Exhibit #2 , Mr. Hanson indicated that the applicant had no
objection to the revisions due to the large investment in the
development and the desire to enhance the subject property with
sufficient landscaping.
The Examiner askedrfor additional testimony in favor of the application.
There was no response.
The Examiner asked for testimony. in opposition to the application.
Responding was:
Grover Shegrud',.
18216 Talbot Road S.
Renton, WA 98055
Mr. Shegrud reported that his residence is located directly south of
the project. Among his objections were inadequate parking, limited
access from the property, congested traffic, and questioned the
potential need for an additional ',.clinic with existing clinics, not
currently occupied to capacity. '
The Examiner asked Mr. Smith if evaluation of the access plans had
been made by the Planning Department and the Public Works Department •
in developing the total master plan. Mr. Smith' restated the provision
noted in Item #0. 6. of Exhibit #lfor additional access to the south
of the property and noted that existing signing prohibits a left turn
onto Carr Road. Mr. Hanson indicated his willingness to install
additional signing to allow a right turn only from the proposed exit.
The Examiner asked for additional comments . Mr. Hanson reviewed the
parking provisions and reported expectancy of net increase of parking
space with construction of the building. He noted that because of
increased space requirements, occupants in existing adjacent clinics
had requested occupancy in the proposed clinic, and as a result, the
number of practicing physicians would not increase in proportion to
the existing buildings.
The Examiner asked Mr. Smith for additions or corrections to the
report. Mr. Smith indicated concurrence with Mr. Hanson' s request
to shift the building 8 to 10 feet to the north of the present location.
The Examiner questioned Mr. Hanson regarding his intent in continuing
the same character of landscaping from the existing phase of the
development into the future phase.. Mr. Hanson reported the applicant' s
intent to maintain a uniform landscaping plan.
The Examiner reported that because .of the transition period before
commencement of his employment with the city on May 2 , 1977 , a delay
in publishing a recommendation on the application would be probable
and asked Mr. Hanson if May 6, 1977, would be an acceptable date for
receipt of the report. Mr. Hanson indicated that commitment dates
•
4'r
SP-036-77 Page Three
for leases and building occupancy required expediency in the matter,
and indicated his appreciation for timeliness if possible.
, The Examiner asked for additional comments. Since there were none ,
the hearing on Item #SP-036-77 was closed by the Examiner at 9 :35 p.m.
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS: Having reviewed the record
in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following :
FINDINGS:
1. The request is to allow the construction of an additional medical/
dental clinic to an existing campus-type clinic development.
2. Advertisement and posting, of the application was made in three
conspicuous places near the subject site and the applicant was
notified in writing of the public hearing.
3. The applicant has indicated agreement with the staff report and
recommended changes per Exhibit #2 and has suggested moving the
building 8 to 10 feet to the north.
4. All city departments that are affected by the proposal have
reviewed the submitted plans. •
5. The Planning Department report accurately sets forth the issues,
findings, applicable policies and provisions, and departmental
recommendations in this matter, and being uncontested, is hereby
attached as Exhibit #1 and incorporated into this report by
reference as set forth in full herein.
6. All utilities, except storm sewers, are available at the site.
7. Pursuant to the City of Renton Environmental Ordinance and the
State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , as amended (.R.C.W. 43. 216) ,
a Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued for the subject
proposal by Gordon Y. Ericksen, responsible official.
8. The eastern portion of the subject site is undeveloped and an
existing medical/dental clinic is located in the western portion.
Adjacent to the property ; is S.E. Carr Road and Talbot Road South.
9. The existing first phase of the medical/dental clinic complex
complies with the code requirements. The proposed second phase
is similar in design, exterior treatment, and landscaping.
10. The proposed structure is compatible with required setbacks, lot
coverage and height requirements of Section 4-709A.
11. Landscaping, as indicated on the proposed site plan, is in
substantial compliance with code requirements. A few modifications
have been recommended by the Planning Department regarding parking
and circulation control.
12 . Access to Carr Road presents a traffic problem which the applicant
has agreed to control by installing signs.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. After a thorough examination of the application, Planning Department
staff report, Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code', and the record of
the public hearing, it is the conclusion of the Examiner that the
proposed addition to. the medical/dental clinic complex complies
with all applicable provisions, regulations and standards of the
City of Renton.
SP-036-77 Page Four
•
2. The Examiner has reviewed and concurs with the design and location
of the proposal subject to:
a. Revision of the site plan according to the Planning Department
recommendations and applicant' s suggestion on Exhibit #2.
Planning Department review and approval of the revised site
plan.
b. Review and approval of , the landscape plan by the Planning
Department for compliance with Exhibit #2 and similarity to
the existing first phase of the medical/dental clinic.
c. Review and approval oftraffic control signs by the Public
Works Department relative to access onto Carr Road.
d. Review and approval of the drainage plans by the Public Works
Department including suitable storm water retention and oil.
separation facilities.
•
3 . The conditions placed upon the approval of the application make
the application compatible with the existing environment and
consistent with the objectives and goals of the Comprehensive
Plan, Zoning Code, and other codes and ordinances of the City of
Renton.
4. The proposal is an addition to a Special Permit granted by the
Planning Commission on November 27, 1968 , and is a part of a
medical clinic district developing adjacent to and in close
proximity to the Valley General Hospital. This addition will
not be unduly detrimental to adjacent or surrounding properties
or the enjoyment thereof .
RECOMMENDATION:
The Examiner approves the application together with the aforementioned
conditions. •
ORDERED THIS 3rd day of May, 1977.
k eeler
Land Use Hearing Examiner
TRANSMITTED THIS 3rd day of May, 1977 by Affidavit of Mailing '
to the parties of record :
W. R. Hanson
Grover Shegrud
TRANSMITTED THIS 3rd day of May, 1977 to the following:
Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti
• Council President George J. Perry
Councilman Richard M. Stredicke
Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director
Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director
Pursuant to Ordinance No. 3071 , Section 4-3015 , request for
reconsideration of notice of appeal must be filed in writing on or
before May 17 , 1977 . Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision
of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedures, errors of law or
fact, error in judgment, or the 'discovery of new evidence which could
not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written
request for review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the
date of the written report. This request shall set forth the specific
errors relied upon by such appellant , and the Examiner may, after review
of the record, take further action as he deems proper.
RECEIVED
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING DEPARTMENT HEARING EXAMINER
PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER AM Ph1 2 1971
PNd
PUBLIC HEARING 7l8I9IW°',l'12'hi2°31415 6
APRIL 12 , 1977E HI ,IT . 1
APPLICANT: SPRINGBROOK ASSOCIATES, ITEM NO. 5 034- 77
FILE NO. : SP-036-77 ; SPECIAL PERMIT FOR MEDICAL/DENTAL CLINIC
WITHIN R-3 ZONE
A. SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
Applicant requests special permit to construct an additional
medical /dental clinic to an existing campus-type clinic develop-
ment.
B. GENERAL INFORMATION :
1 . Owner of Record : ' SPRINGBROOK ASSOCIATES
2 . Applicant : ; SPRINGBROOK ASSOCIATES
3 . Location : Located on the southeast corner of
Talbot Rd . So . and S . W. 43rd St.
4. Legal Description : Detailed legal description available on
file in Renton Planning Department .
5 . Size of Property : Approximately 42 acres .
6 . Access : Via Talbot Rd . So . and S . W. 43rd St .
7 . Existing Zone : R-3 Multiple Family Residence District .
8 . Existing Zoning R-3 Residence District , R-2 Residence
in Area : District , P- 1 Public Use District ,
King County SR zone , Suburban Residence
District .
9 . Comprehensive Medium Density Multiple Family and Low
Land Use Plan : Density Multiple Family .
10. Notification : The applicant was notified in writing of
the hearing date . Notice was properly
published in the Record Chronicle and
posted in three places on or near the
site as required by City ordinance .
C. PURPOSE OF REQUEST:
Subject request is to attain City approval of site plans and design
of an additional clinic structure to an existing clinic development .
D. HISTORY/BACKGROUND:
,The subject site was rezoned from G to R-3 on September 16 , 1968 ,
by Ordinance No . 2431 . A special permit was granted by the Plan-
ning Commission on November 27 , 1968 , for construction of the
existing clinic complex . The subject proposal is a portion of
anticipated expansion of that existing clinic complex .
E. PHYSICAL BACKGROUND:
1 . Topography : The subject site is relatively level , , gently
sloping upward from west to east.
2. Soils : Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam (AgC ) - permeability is
moderately rapid in the surface layer and sub-soil . Runoff
is slow to medium and hazard of erosion is moderate . The soil
I �
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER
PUBLIC HEARING OF APRIL 12 , 1977
PAGE TWO
RE : SPRINGBROOK ASSOCIATES SPECIAL PERMIT
is used for timber , pasture , row crops , and for urban develop-
ment .
3 . Vegetation : The site consists primarily of brush and scrub
grass .
4 . Wildlife : The existing vegetation may provide some habitat
for birds and small mammals .
5 . Water : Surface water and streams are not apparent on the
subject site .
6 . Land Use : The existing clinic complex is located west of the
subject building site . The Valley Convalescent Center is
located south of the subject site . An existing surface min-
ing operation is located east of the property . The Valley
General Hospital is situated north and . west of the subject
site , and other clinics a.nd general residential uses are
located within the general area .
7 . Neighborhood Characteristics : The area is in a transition
from residential to hospital support type facilities .
G. PUBLIC SERVICES :
1 . Water and Sewer : An existing 24 water main and existing 8"
sewer main are located along Talbot Rd . So . Storm sewers
are not available in the area .
2 . Fire Protection : Fire protection provided by the Renton Fire
Department as per ordinance requirements .
3 . Transit : Transit Route No . 155 operates along S . W. 43rd St .
4 . Schools : Not applicable !
5 . Parks : Not applicable .
H. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE:
1 . 4-709A , R-3 Residence District.
2 . Chapter 22 , Parking and Loading .
I . APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENTS :
1 . Land Use Report , 1965 , Objectives , pages 17 and 18 .
J . IMPACTS ON NATURAL SYSTEMS :
Development of the site will disturb soil and vegetation , increase
water runoff, and have an effect on water and noise levels in the
area . However , through proper development techniques , these
impacts can be mitigated .
K. SOCIAL IMPACTS :
Not applicable .
L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/THRESHOLD DETERMINATION :
Pursuant to the City of Renton Environmental Ordinance and the
State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , as amended (RCW 43 . 216 ) ,
a Declaration of 'Non-significance has been issued, for the subject
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER
PUBLIC HEARING OF APRIL 12 , 1977
PAGE THREE
RE : SPRINGBROOK ASSOCIATES SPECIAL PERMIT
proposal (see attached ) . This is based upon utilization of proper
drainage control methods and site development techniques .
M. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION :FORMATION :
A vicinity map and site map are attached .
N. AGENCIES/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED:
1 . City of Renton Engineering Division
2 . City of Renton Utilities Division
3 . City of Renton Building. Division
4. City of Renton Traffic Engineering Division
5 . City of Renton Fire Department
0. PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS:
1 . The subject site is presently zoned R-3 multiple family , which
permits clinic uses by special permit .
2 . One two-story building is proposed at the present time as an
addition to an existing clinic campus-type development . Fur-
; ther development of the same building types is proposed as
subsequent phases .
3 . All of the proposed additional structures are similar in design
and exterior treatment to the existing buildings .
4. The site plan , as proposed , provides sufficient parking ( 169
stalls ) to exceed the parking requirement ( 165 stalls ) for the
proposed two-story building . Future parking is indicated for
future phases . However , the number indicated does not appear
to meet code requirements .
5. Additional interior landscaping should be provided as indicated
in red on the plans to control circulation and provide suitable
visual buffering of the parking lot area .
6 . An additional access should be provided at the south end of the
proposed building as indicated in red on the plans to provide
suitable circulation and access to the future expansion area
to the east.
7 . Proper drainage control measures will be needed in conjunction
with site development .
8 . The site is proximate to the hospital and other clinics and is
directly adjacent to a convalescent center . No residential
structures are adjacent to the site . Given these and other
criteria , the site is well suited for the proposed clinic
development.
P. PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION :
Recommend approval of special permit request for the proposed two
story clinic , subject to the following conditions :
1 . Final Planning Department approval of detailed landscape plans
to be submitted at the time of the building permit application ,
including , but not limited to , additional interior landscaping
in the parking areas to facilitate proper circulation and
visual. relief.
2. Final Public Works Department approval of detailed drainage
plans , including suitable storm water retention and oil
water separation facilities .
' I
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER
PUBLIC HEARING OF APRIL 12 , 1977
PAGE FOUR
RE : SPRINGBROOK ASSOCIATES SPECIAL iPERMIT
3 . Provision of a driveway access at the southeast corner of the
proposed two story building for better circulation and ingress/
egress to anticipated future expansion area . Eliminating the
two parking stalls will not effect compliance with the required
parking ratio .
ti I
a SR-I T -
{ rf re 15 1. n •9 „ , I)I e a .5.;.1 .L' L.
s+ se .14(;
sy-—
t I. e I-2' II ;
}ao 39 je e960L ' ; Aal
'%w _ '
`_I
id • • •
2 ' • s
' . I....Ti ',
•
tr .
—1 '• I
—
. I'. .jeo I 1
1
iF / '
L� � SF 111^•°1 II:lat/Li„
!0
I 1 II r E `gam 1ilo°5 •
1 / )
•
I Pz2F a:le ?4.22G ,\,. 1 _ .-- /4, ! , �ts 16 IL 20 27 L_45i11il, .
- I I L.__ GPQ/
ao
/ ' ' Pr/lirlir Z N. I • COI
r IIIICIH
. R_2
, G . . .
. . , • , I' , i, . ,
i� 1 iE
CITY L• IMIT. ; - S Co •
I
I , •
'SPECIAL PERMIT:
1SPRINGBROOK ASSOCIATES; Appl. SP-036-77; special permit to construct
tan additional medical/dental clinic to an existing campus-type clinic
development in. R-3 zone; property located on the southeast corner of
'Talbot Rd. S . and S.W. 43rd St. .
APPLICANT Sp.ringbrook' Associates TOTAL AREA 415 acres
PRINCIPAL ACCESS Talbot Rdi. S. or S. 43rd St.
EXT_S-iING ZONING R-3 Multiple Family Residence District
EXISTING USE Undeveloped
• Extention of Valley Medical Dental Center
PROPOSED USE
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN
Single Family
COMMENTS
'z -'.-.,f-..'--,il ,;',`N,‘-•vti.:44.A., ''......, i
4 . , •
.-0 hid 15 trA•1- , ,,
•
4
pil" 1 c M1 I I r Ii I vnn eSg wP IA.%I(.
18011 1,0,k-4
T1-
11P11)1.1 11'e;i13r 1 ii1 Clog.
. 1.4f.
1 .
400 " . • • .
. , city 1.1,410
. •
3 : 4-3 /tb 57;•1 . 1 ,
worsb vlieb 1 F:ii.. •‘''', !!'"'',;'?.i.,1'$ii.'... ',.:,
HaiStilialt'we 44] ,4,:A,;!. •,f!.: ,..,1,;.,,,,,f;i.,,,,-'4“:i;V;;',,',="11?. .....!,- ,''''..:*.a,"..,1,,Ile,liiV,04',';:i.,1 I
Pfk, 'rr;',1'''.:•••:,..,4;..A. ,,,,,,'..,' .x.4...,,,,,,...: or„: ,,,,,,,,-.4.,c,,, ;'',?,.; („'
.r:r•:' 3'› ::;'.!:d'.:,t•tgY;‘'—.l'•',1;,. '; ,:.f'',Yi71.q,,V.,q4.0..'.,',, ll
,...;.,,,,i.' .• ''', , t. ,P,.,,;;': ,.',:e '' • , :;',::,,.i ;+.1 ,IV
31 ,;',:':,,.1,',-,,- ,..,,,‘i'':c."',''''''z.'-.11:`,‘1,7i.': ... . :, .j'. ';'.;•.'''''.
-". ,,: , f ..;:igl ... , • ...:::. ,;;A...':::'
4,.4,3ATJ' .1.',, .. .'.- ...;' .:'. '; ''''..,,.'. r. '2;'.,:? ;0,
-"• '?:..'.;C:`,', ;; ,;I :.,A1,i1N,,,V ,.., 1;,...,:. ,,..)4 .,:,!,„..i,...,,,i: ,:,::.,,.%., ,,,,.4 le,
v‘ ,,,;:• , ,..,...!..,-.:Y",.z:',.'t),',`4;,...1%.1 •
t Wo t No 4:
.:,-,?,,...,.,f: -.. , 14• : , • ,'-i,... :'i ,,:'01;44!i'Aiv‘, I 41
I ..,
,
',.....,2Z .4...".;,[. .,-").„..,!;::: :'.' '', '••• . , •."' ',...''-:. ', !,.':,.'';'V. I
Ia. • ri ,'' MNIN '.',' ',:,'vi..,;''.'1, .; ,i::....1-:?'.: :, -:::;;,..!;'''.`,-,c::'...•:::'-`P, '..,-,•.• I
, •,,,• ,., ,..:,0',,.'< ' ' ...t,..; :" ^ ' .. :l:.:,,,','''14.1.4.,,i; ,i, I
i::..41:4'I):;i''''.*:,41%;;'1..r5:•//:',r, . ',;'. `<'•••. ,•• .:r:..,`,...,2,i.:‘,..:•.•5:;wil,•,,,,t,..:0,4
5,. , ,....,. •, :„ :::, ''!z..,r.e.ipt.ki,
1 .
1 • . t ' t tie 2 580
I
•
El ' • .
1 I 1
. 444E:1 . ‘"' ' . .
. . . .
' i f
AM •MEM di MEM am um=ow aim-Gm aim ir am in dip
44010 .
1 r-1
itiosp_j asiEl
1
"
$ a let.E3 4------" rl 1.1Miff
. i • .
60 lime
I. 1
1 .
I ,
1 ,
0 1 18E3 .
•
, .
1 .
. 1 .
. .
. te $cfrtg I°.zoo'
*uojscr NIX sem
. .
, •
opmermoost .400c.
. •
1 pawl.. reAmst:
,
i .. . otb „sr- 036-17
, .
, .
. . . .
' .
, .
. .
, .
. .
. , ..
- . . . .. •
. . .
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER
PUBLIC HEARING
APRIL 12 , 1977
APPLICANT: SPRINGBROOK ASSOCIATES
FILE NO. : SP-036-77 ; SPECIAL PERMIT FOR, MEDICAL/DENTAL CLINIC
WITHIN R-3 ZONE
A. SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
Applicant requests special permit to construct an additional
medical /dental clinic to an existing campus-type clinic develop-
ment.
GENERAL INFORMATION :
1 . Owner of Record : SPRINGBROOK ASSOCIATES
2 . Applicant : SPRINGBROOK ASSOCIATES
3. Location : Located on the southeast corner of
Talbot Rd . So.. and S . W. 43rd St.
4. Legal Description : Detailed legal description available on
file in Renton Planning Department .
5 . Size of Property : Approximately 42 acres .
6 . Access : ' Via Talbot Rd . So . and S . W. 43rd St .
7 . Existing Zone : R-3 Multiple Family Residence District.
8 . Existing Zoning R-3 Residence District , R-2 Residence
in Area : District , P-1 Public Use District ,
King County SR zone , Suburban Residence
District .
9 . Comprehensive Medium Density Multiple Family and Low
Land Use Plan : Density Multiple Family .
10 . Notification : The applicant, was notified in writing of
t;he. hearing date . Notice was properly
published in the Record Chronicle and
posted in three places on or near the
site as required by City ordinance.
•
Ca PURPOSE OF REQUEST:
Subject request is to attain City approval of site plans and design
of an additional clinic structure to an existing clinic development .
D. HISTORY/BACKGROUND:
The subject site was rezoned from G to R-3 on September 16 , 1968 ,
by Ordinance No .' 2431 . A special permit was granted by t'he Plan-
ning Commission on November 27 , 1968 , for construction of the
existing clinic complex . The subject proposal is a portion of
anticipated' expansion of that existing clinic complex .
E. PHYSICAL BACKGROUND:
1 . Topography : ' The subject site is relatively level , gently
sloping upward from west to east .
2. Soils : Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam (AgC ) - permeability is
moderately rapid in the surface layer and sub-soil . Runoff
is slow to medium and hazard of erosion is moderate . The. soil
n \�
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER
PUBLIC HEARING OF APRIL 12 , 1977
PAGE TWO
RE : SPRINGBROOK ASSOCIATES SPECIAL PERMIT
is used for timber , pasture , row crops , and for urban develop-
ment .
3 . Vegetation : The site consists primarily of brush and scrub
grass .
4 . Wildlife : The existing vegetation may provide some habitat
for birds and small mammals .
5 . Water : Surface water and streams are .not apparent on the
subject site .
6 . Land Use : The existing clinic complex is located west of the
subject building site . The Valley Convalescent Center is
located south of the subject site . An existing surface min-
ing operation is located east of the property . The Valley
General Hospital is situated north and west of the subject
site , and other, clinics and general residential uses are
located within the general area .
7 . Neighborhood Characteristics : The area is in a transition
from residential to hospital support type facilities .
G. PUBLIC SERVICES:
1 . Water and Sewer : An existing 24" water main and existing 8"
sewer main are located along Talbot Rd . So . Storm sewers
are not available in the area . •
2 . Fire Protection : Fire protection provided by the Renton Fire
Department as per ordinance requirements .
3 . Transit : Transit Route No . 155 operates along S . W . 43rd St .
4. Schools : Not applicable .
5 . Parks : Not applicable .
Ha APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE:
1 . 4-709A , R-3 Residence District.
2 . Chapter 22 , Parking and Loading .
I . APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENTS :
1 . Land Use Report , 1965 ,. Objectives , pages 17 and 18 .
Jo IMPACTS ON NATURAL SYSTEMS:
Development of the site will disturb soil and vegetation , increase
water runoff , and have an effect on water and noise levels in the
area . However , through proper development techniques , these
impacts can be mitigated .
K. .SOCIAL IMPACTS :
Not applicable .
L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/THRESHOLD DETERMINATION :
Pursuant to the. City of Renton Environmental Ordinance and the
State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , as amended (RCW 43 . 216 ) ,
a Declaration of Non-significance has been issued for the subject
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
P ELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER
PUBLIC HEARING OF APRIL 12 , 1977
PAGE THREE
RE : SPRINGBROOK ASSOCIATES SPECIAL PERMIT
proposal (see attached ) . This is based upon utilization of proper
drainage control methods and site development techniques .
M. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
A vicinity map and site map are attached .
N, AGENCIES/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED:
1 . City of Renton Engineering Division
2 . City of Renton Utilities Division
3. City of Renton Building Division
4 . City of Renton Traffic Engineering Division
5 . City of Renton Fire Department
0, PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS:
1 . The subject site is presently zoned R-3 multiple family , which
permits clinic uses by special permit.
2 . One two-story building is proposed at the present time as an
addition to an existing clinic campus-type development. Fur-
ther development of the same building types is proposed as
subsequent phases .
3 . All of the proposed additional structures are similar in design
and exterior treatment to the existing buildings .
4 . The site plan , as proposed , provides sufficient parking ( 169
stalls ) to exceed the parking requirement ( 165 stalls ) for the
proposed two-story building . Future parking is indicated for
future phases . However , the number indicated does not appear
to meet code requirements .
5 . Additional interior landscaping should be provided as indicated
in red on the plans to control circulation and provide suitable
visual buffering of the parking lot area .
6 . An additional access should be provided at the south end of the
proposed building as indicated in red on the plans to provide
suitable circulation and access to the future expansion area
to the east.
7 . Proper drainage control measures will be needed in conjunction
with site development .
8 . The site is proximate to, the hospital and other clinics and is
directly adjacent to a convalescent center . No residential
structures are adjacent to the site . Given these and other
criteria , the site is well suited for the proposed clinic
development .
P. PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION :
Recommend approval of special permit request for the proposed two
story clinic , subject to the following conditions :
1 . Final Planning Department approval of detailed landscape plans
to be submitted at the time of the building permit application ,
including , but not limited to , additional interior landscaping
in the parking areas to facilitate proper circulation and
visual relief.
2 . Final Public Works. Department approval of detailed drainage
plans , including suitable storm water retention and oil
water separation facilities.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER
PUBLIC HEARING OF APRIL 12 , 1977
PAGE FOUR
RE : SPRINGBROOK ASSOCIATES SPECIAL PERMIT
3 . Provision of a driveway access at the southeast corner of the
proposed two story building for better circulation and ingress/
egress to anticipated future expansion area . Eliminating. the
two parking stalls will not effect compliance with the required
parking ratio .
•
•
a ` 1
r • „ II - SR-1 L -
{ t5 r4 r5 x. e •9 5. + ' "t I a e _IL_
ri
x_
•r r- , f'rt- t o r
����,11)�� ➢tiri xx l'e '7
a, I4tl 99 9e e96Y 1 . q~' I '-+ u;
M
/ ' i Ir
it. 51 5B 59 1.. w x ] .5 III �,+�, v / % .
L�_ � � . I� �ak '
I _L. ,yam r i i ' 1;`;. I'
//
er �_—
1 l_i__ . �.:_i . i. L.1 -- '•� I— L'1^�.._ ._ — — —— r
I i
°)i
I2930 31 32, 33 \
j I '
e 9 o
' ' lY,. 9 m
0,IQ I P-I r 1t4 " .
• r
!�1:16 t B 20 �e0 u �
/I " ^ 21123 5�' �
.„ 1920 7 .L._4 Si4414! _
/Li/ 1 i
1 i- "4-
d '•�
ZONING CO
G
R 2 i
/ i•
III
1
.1
CITiY ! IMITS CO
' 1 _
SPECIAL PERMIT•
SPRINGBROOK ASSOCIATES;. Appl. SP-036-77; special permit to construct
an additional medical/dental clinic to an existing campus-type clinic
development in R-3 zone; .property located on the southeast corner of
Talbot Rd. S . and S.W. 43rd St.
APPLICANT P g
S rin brook Associates TOTAL AREA 41 acres
PRINCIPAL ACCESS Talbot Rd. S . or S. 43rd St.
EXIS1ING ZONING R-3 Multiple Family Residence District
EXISTING USE Undeveloped
PROPOSED USE Extention of Valley Medical Dental Center
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN ', Single Family
COMMENTS
1
Lt .�q r ,dam n /� —.May
_._ ., \, Y ' 'to'''',--"`
y.r ,
:I a,�+t Op$j`I rnFF �y pl JS[at ; 'Ll;j Ks� q E ti �1':. 'S' ,--"` "?..
/CO%Par{" I.
_ ilUy �V
a0' • t.
„so bIll I 1 1 I r 1
Q1e�17s® ttik
Oiniria xis 1.1).
I
IC I
OO
arc 1
Close17*
,
1
S. t3 Rb 5r.
i`, ' 1:1
�` yL1 C,off; s ,,, 3• '� ;,,.}fv7a,i4`;'�c}', 4,,!,
NN��� NrS i ij,; r .• ;� {tt}bfi ,, 9 ° z,rZ'; 1
,.i; y; .; 4 l f:(gi rt 4
•
{/� ri. '3. 's Ids
r't ,:.siy.. "s•' x:'cl.t5' v i. rf,� • t
SOO
IHL ..' .
•
,a :k}�t �, jp :i..•S,i.'Lc' .. ",d�:::'YA'fi.�y, ..jb':.:..r yy��''• 'tid.1i'Y t,,;1, i --y4`':,:' ,F `'• 1 33:�`'r 7 �rr
':',i,, '�' .e%k1 it >°,ti'• .I'I.. '71:p` ! (r.,z,t j,.;fi;y�tar2. �1
A 1.'' .`•.,,,tj,.t,. 4t. ,•,: y• ,3xj
R ' ‘
.s `i�� � •
'�': 1?' , -(;A:, _�5A',i .,f :
4,i) ,A1,.i`.-1,,,tovA•:144 :::
••,y°X\j jd.. :S7R•l: tS' ., _ {es,','.,... •..,.•s'= S.sa Y.:�•"k� X. ;fl.t
UPC
! sso 1 1
p I I
.,1 Q I
4+4 E1 �- ...
4,5010
mt,E)
' I
p•i It : dirt /...iwii
•
we
G" '
0
la€113
II
. I
,
5efLE !''.too'
40sJscf tlft 1=3
uNbialtoox Ay OC.
opecoi. ?Willi-
0 $P-036-71
1
PROPOSED/FINAL DECLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE/NON-SIGNIFICANCE
•
Application No . SP-036-77 0 PROPOSED Declaration
Environmental Checklist No. ECF-231-77 XO FINAL Declaration
, Description of proposal Applicant requests special permit to rnnstruct
an additional medical /dental clinic to an existing campus-type clinic
. development.
Proponent _ SPRINGBROOK ASSOCIATES
Located on the southeast corner of Talbot Rd . So .
Location of Proposal and S.W. 43rd St.
Lead Agency Renton Planning Department
°, This proposal has been determined to 0 have'-- ® not have a
significant adverse impact upon the environment . An EIS 0 is
Ellis not required under RCW 43 . 21C . 030 (2 ) (c ) . This decision was
mad a after review by the lead agency of a completed environmental
checklist and other information on file with the lead agency .
Reasons for declaration of environmental significance :
•
Measures , if any , that could be taken to prevent or mitigate the
environmental impacts to such an extent that the lead agency would
withdraw its declaration of significance and issue a (proposed/final )
declaration of non-significance :
•
Responsible Official Gordon Y . Ericksen
Title Plan i g Di , ector gate April 5 , 1977
Signature lL11
City of Renton
Planning Department
5-76
PROPOSED/FINAL DECLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE/WN-SIGNIFICANCE
( Application No . SP-036-77 0 PROPOSED Declaration
Environmental Checklist No . ECF-231-77 0 FINAL Declaration
Description of proposal Applicant requests special permit to construct
an additional medical /dental clinic to an existing campus-type clinic
development.
Proponent SPRINGBROOK ASSOCIATES
Located on the southeast corner of Talbot Rd . So .
Location of Proposal and S .W. 43rd St.
Lead Agency Renton Planning Department
This proposal has been determined to 0 have ® not have a
significant adverse impact upon the environment . An EIS ❑ is
[xg is not required under RCW 43 . 21C . 030 (2 ) (c ) . This decision was
made after review by the lead agency of a completed environmental
checklist and other information on file with the lead agency .
Reasons for declaration of environmental significance :
Measures , if any , that could be taken to prevent or mitigate the
environmental impacts to such an extent that the lead agency would
withdraw its declaration of significance and issue a (proposed/final )
declaration of non-significance :
Responsible Official Gordon Y . Ericksen
Title Plate i 9 Di ector sate April 5 , 1977
Signature /i� �� .0 /
. ,.
Ae
City of Renton
Planning Department
5-76
MEMORANDUM
To , Springbrook Associates DATE 4/4/77
FROM Michael L . Smith , Associate Planner , Renton Planning Dept.
SUBJECT PUBLIC HEARING WITH LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER
Please note the change in time (from 9 : 00 a .m . to 7 : 30 p .m . )
and place (from Council Chambers to 4th floor conference
room , Renton Municipal Building ) for your application to
be heard by the Land Use Hearing Examiner . The date remains
the same : TUESDAY , APRIL 12 , 1977 .
If you have any questions , please do not hesitate to call ,
phone 235-2550.
wr
cc : Land Use Hearing Examiner
i
1
Cpr ,dro o/G nSsoc
f i ,
E OF PUBLIC NEARING
NG a I
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,
WASHINGTON, ON APRIL 12 , 19 77 , AT 9:00 A.M. TO CONSIDER
THE FOLLOWING—PETITIONS:
1. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILL AND GRADE OF CEMETERY PROPERTY
IN GS-1 ZONE ; File No. SP-034-77 ; property located east
of N . E . 3rd St. in vicinity, of 100 Blaine Ave . N . E .
between Blaine Ave . N . E . and powerline right-of-way.
2 . SPECIAL PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT RETAIL SERVICE CENTER
(CONSTRUCTION SUPPLIES SALES SIMILAR TO LUMBER YARD)
IN B-1 ZONE; File No . SP-037-77 ; property located at .
1068 Sunset Blvd. N . E .
3. REZONE FROM R-2 TO B-1 ; File No. ' R-035-77 ; property ; .
located at 1522 No . Brooks St.
4- 4. SPECIAL PERMIT. FOR.. PROFESSIONAL CLINIC IN AN R-3
ZONE ; File No: : SP-036-77 ; property l ocated `on south-".�.:
east-corner of Talbot Rd . S . and S . W. 43rd St
Legal descriptions' of all applications noted above on
file in the Renton Planning Department.
ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT
THE PUBLIC HEARING ON APRIL 12 , 1977 AT 9:00 A.M. TO ,
EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS. '
GORDON V. ERICKSEN
PUBLISHED April 1 , 1977 ,.. , . ,. ::,' RENTON >,PLANNING 'DIRECTOR"
CERTIFICATION
•
I , Michael L. Smith , 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:,
ATTEST: 'Subscribed and sworn
to 'before foe, a Notary Public, '
Inn the k6 day of March ' SIGNE. `
-
• THECITY OF RENTON
2
--- MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055
CHARLES J. DELAURENTI , MAYOR 4 PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Op k� 235-2550
aT`0 SE,,TIA�
March 23 , 1977
Springbrook Associates
4300 Talbot Rd . South
Renton , WA 98055
RE : NOTICE OF APPLICA
TIONACCEPTANCE
SPBRCSOIAGDgTA FOR
RINGOOK ASCIMES SPECIAL PERMIT FOR PROFESSIONAL
CLINIC IN AN R-3 ZONE, File No. SP-036-77
Gentlemen :
The Renton Planning Department formally accepted the
abcve mentioned application on March 21, 1977 A
pu:lic hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner
has been set for April 12, 1977
Representatives of the appli-cant •a-re asked to be pre-
seet . All interested persons are invited to attend the
hearing . If you have any further questions , please call
the Renton Planning Department , 235-2550 .
Very truly yours ,
Gordon Y . Ericksen
Planning Director
B y : 1/6
�= GGL-
M•chae . mit
Associate Planner
MLS:wr •
cc: W. R. Hanson, Inc.
� ?
CITY OF RENTON
/ APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT
� y400p...ry y
y�ya.
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
t- Fee`�40=5 fxh's 4 f. 2V
File No. SP- v•,3 i' 7
Date Rec'd _3-/7- 77 Receipt No . It /(Q3
1
APPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 6 :
Name ;J;:)..eJit./; 3,0vO id- As-jOci/9 r r PhoneZ—
�� //�.l •n s- �v e . c :Su.'/c,
a/a l/LWr4.
Address
2 Property location
3. Legal description (attach additional sheeet if necessary) ___ ________
..._..__ _...-)7'--__r..---t N_/J_,Z�x_c�c?_.. .__/ZZ —
�5'S�L� �►OS__9 .p.E.4os
•
•
•
4. Number of acres or sq. ft.410 ,_ /A u.- Present zoning_ 2 3
5. What do you propose to develop on this property?
6. The
followinginformation shall be submitted with this application:
Scale
•
A. Site and access plan, (include setbacks ,
existing structures , easements , and other
factors limiting development) 1" = 10' or20 '
B. Parking, landscaping and screening plan . . 1" = 10 '
. C. Vicinity map (include land use and zoning
•
on adjacent parcels) 1" = 200' - 800 '
D. Building height and area (existing and proposed)
E . A special permit required by the Renton Mining, Excavation
and Grading Ordinance shall submit the information listed
in Section 4-2307 . 5 in addition to the above .
7. LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER'S ACTION; •
Date approved
Date denied
Date appealed
Appeal action
Remarks
-
I
AFFIDAVIT
' 'i
7µe
. Ili a G. itlogzisbd, MA-A>A6 , SPR,,v6eR K Affcrig7Cs, being duly sworn, declare that 1
Resail the owners of the property involved in this application and that the
foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information
herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of
my knowledge and belief. 1
Subscribed and sworn before me ' '
•this /7 day of .� , l9 7 '?,
•
Notary Public in and for the State of
I
Walhington, residing at fe A- L Lr'
II
S
(Name of Notary Pub i (Sig ature of Ownez
I •
I
1
1 1 �
-7 2 tn-/c-L/ 41-ai.�, r /J,-Y AD, -v`171 vV//(/
// !! Al 1/ / b
(Address) ' Ac rm '-( (Address)
1
1
•
//)
W
(City) G (State)
Of ii--
•
. (Telephone)
(FOR OFFICE USE ONLY)
1
CERTIFICATION
This, is to certify that-the foregoing application has been inspected by me
and has been found Fb atho. ough and complete in every particular and to
conform to the 1.esrr r �rekv kations of the Renton Planning Department
govelrning the k `'in},�Lf1 {gcha ,plication.
/ciDate Received 1 19 By:
_ Fs .
,_ Renton Plannin Dept .
2-73
1
•
I
CITY OF RENTON/ WASHINGTON ="
ice
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Pitt
�� <f;��
4927
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY �2, d""�.,
Application No. %5/;' D" \ 111/ i
Environmental Checklist No. .ee/7-• 31/-77 G®EP�1 ;rf
PROPOSED, date: FINAL , date:
® Declaration of Significance Declaration of Significance
Declaration of Non-Significance ® Declaration of Non-Significance
COMMENTS:
1
Introduction The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, Chapter 43.21C, RCW, Irequires •
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 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 willlhelp all
' agencies involved with your proposal to undertake the required environmental review with-
out unnecessary delay. j
I� I
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. Yourlanswers
should include the impacts which will be caused by your proposal when it is completed,
even though completion may not occur until sometime in the future. This will allow all
of the agencies which will be involved to complete their environmental review now, with-
out duplicating paperwork in the future.
NOTE: This is a standard form being used by all state and local agencies in the State
. of Washington for various types of proposals. Many of the questions may not apply to
your proposal . If a question does not apply, just answer it "no" and continue on to the
next question.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
I . BACKGROUND
1. Name of Proponent S Pre,a..i&i 2ooK f i SSor iP-%ES
2. Address and phone numb r,ppf Proponent:
�-� li-i/i6i.�75 /9v o50.
/
7oAJ Gt/A y�rJ s`s
PNoA)G ; .2 SS- e2 8 9,L
3. Date Checklist submitted -
4. Agency requiring Checklist PL-4- A//Al6 D�7
5. Name of proposal , if applicable:
APirN oLi io Vf}r_trEy /`let./SAL - CENT,=2
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) :
.
Erb S6j ?� 2-- 574rey ME D/CAL ci -' e-g Pig-o6• a 71-E Co 2UG7,0nf
.%;/o_F -E.i,S7,N 6 or 714E Si i / /o C. Pz-qc—..0 CV/7-/i'J ! A.J6„C
A- 4 t/S7t A/6 /009-QAG/n/G l✓/7/4 L.SD D .Sp FT OF ,9SP/.1,44 6472/C/4J6
RX-e-,4 ADPF').
. I
•
-2-
•
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 an accurate understanding of the environ-
mental setting of the proposal ) :
Ay/(lig 6. S/7, /,f A /`9E0/G fYL co"-, o f 3 BU/L/..,/,v S A&ID
PA-e4/4/6 /73 CA2S _DEVELOPED 144III LAn/DSe-,4Pin/6 '
S/ie $or) /b4D By -r&1 SilfZ671/ L} hives/n 6 Ho M F s?�✓D 1 ✓g e* 7
1:42AVEn 4-07.
8. Estimated date for completion of the proposal :
By eit JD OF /9 77
9. List of all permits, licenses or government approvals required for the proposal
(federal , state and local --including rezones) :
C177/ oA SPrc,RL ' PE,PMi7 .i 3ulc.4>r,✓G P&R. -iir
10. Do you have any plans for future additions , expansion, or further activity
related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain:
)/ES. GuR7tfis-R DF.11E1--oP,45)7 cs= IID.JoIA✓ini6 vac AA)7 4.o7
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:
•
II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS j
(Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) I
(1) Earth. Will the proposal result •in: '
(a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes ,in geologic
substructures?
V! ROTE
(b) Disruptions , displacements, compaction or over-
covering of the soil? v/ �.
YES MAYBE NO
(c) Change in topography or ground surface relief
features?
YES MAYBE NU—
(d) The destruction, covering or modification of any
unique geologic or physical features? L �/
vrS' MAYBE NO
(e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of sCils, i >
either on or off the site?
YET- WEE 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? i ✓
• YES- MAYBE
Explanation:
(6) µ (0 — F} 7 im-o/NG. '
•
I —
-3-
(2) Air. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Air emissions or deterioration 'of ambient•air
quality?
YES MAYBE NO
• (b) The creation of objectionable. odors? j
Vt MAYBE FT—
.
(c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature.
or any change in climate, either locally or. /
regionally? •
�/
YES MAYBE NO
Explanation:
•
(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? 1/
YES MI{YBE NO
(b) Changes in absorption rates , drainage patterns , or III
the rate and amount of surface water runoff? l
YES MAYBE NO
(c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters?
YES MAYBE NO
(d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water
body? `/
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? �/
YES MAYBE NS
(f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of 1
ground waters? ✓
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?
YES MAYBE NO
(h) ' Deterioration in ground water quality, either through
direct injection, or through the seepage. of leachate,
phosphates , detergents , waterborne virus or bacteria, /
or other substances into the ground waters? ! 1/
YES MA BE NO
(i ) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available
for public water supplies? ✓
YET— MAYBE WET—
Explanation:
(4) Flora. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any
species of flora (including trees , shrubs , grass , crops ,
microflora and aquatic plants)?
YET— MAYBE NO
(b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or
endangered species of flora?
YES M BE NO
(c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or •
in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing
species? t�
YES MAYBE 3
(d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? j V/
YET— WIT NO
Explanation: (C..) �L}„/pSGFYPIA/, 7o QE togov,QGp
-4-
(5) Fauna. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of
any species of fauna (birds, land animals including
reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, ✓
insects or microfauna)?
Yam- MAYBE Fir
(b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or
endangered species of fauna?
YES MAYBE NO
(c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area,
or result in a barrier to the migration or movement ✓
of fauna?
�ESr— MAYBE NO /
(d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? ✓
YES MAYBE NO
•
Explanation:
(6) Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? I ✓
YES MAYBE NO
Explanation:
(7) Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or
glare? V
YES M ATITt W
Explanation: ADAIijoA/AL-. P4RiColvb Lor 1.-J6N7/1J6 -70 6E
PgV.r.O 12.. FDA ,54FFTy y.
� I
(8) Land Use. Will the proposal result in the alteration of the
present or planned land use of an area? I ✓
TES M YBE NO
Explanation: .
•
(9) Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? ✓
YES MAYBE NO
(b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? ✓
YES ; MAYBES NO
Explanation:
I �
(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) I /
in the event of an accident or upset conditions?
1TES MAYBE NO
Explanation:
(11) Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distri-
bution, density, or growth rate of the human population
of an area?
YES MAYBE ►il
Explanation:
i
I _
n. e
i
-5-
(12) Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or
create a demand for additional housing?
YES MAYBE NO
Explanation:
(13) Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: /
(a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? ✓
YES M IYBE NO
(b) Effects on existing parking facilities , or demand
for new parking? ✓
YES MAYBE NO
(c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? ✓
YES MAYBE NO
(d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or /
movement of people and/or goods? ✓
YES MAYBE NO /
(e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? ✓
YES MAYBE NO
(f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles , /
bicyclists or pedestrians? ✓
YET— MMAYBE N�
Explanation: (a) ()) ) v (L) (ji7H} p. 7o2.J /7 iJ
N71c!P iN-r�t,_ uJi1rl 46E 14-9D/7,Oa/4.} A.)7ss_
(14) Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect +
u on or
upon,result in a need for new or altered governmental services
in any of the following areas :
(a) Fire protection?
YES MAYBE NO
(b) Police protection? ,✓
YES MAYBE NO
(c) Schools?
YES MBE NO
(d) Parks or other recreational facilities? L
YES MMA BE NO
(e) Maintenance of public facilities , including roads?
YES MAYBE WO—
(f) Other governmental services?
YES MAYBE NO
Explanation: G nJ R00,T,v /41be,4,v7 ctJrc�t, QG
�Egu/2E..) !o M 5-ST co o
•
(15) Energy. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? I ✓
YES RTTETE NU—
(b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require
the development of new sources of energy?
j YET— MAYBE
Explanation:
(16) Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new
systems, or alterations to the following utilities :
(a) Power or natural gas?
YES MMAVBE NO /
(b) Communications systems? �/
YES MAYBE ��0 ,
(c) Water? ,//
YES MAYBE NO
-6- •
(d) Sewer or septic tanks? ✓
YES MAYBE NO
(e) Storm water drainage? ✓
YES MAYBE
(f) Solid waste and disposal ? ✓_
YES MAYBE NO
Explanation:•
(17) Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of
any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)?
YET- MAYBE NU—
' Explanation:
( 18) Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of
any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive I
site open to public view? ✓/
YES MAYBE NO
Explanation:
( 19) Recreation.. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the /
quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? ✓
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:
_ I
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 chedklist should
there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part.
Proponent:
name rinte
City of Renton I
Planning Department
5-76
• I